Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 261: Schiff Happens

(+) Yeah! (+)

Jakyl25 posted...

Is the left actually anti-hunting? Anti-hunting for SPORT, yes, but I think Joe is also anti-that.

Yeah he is anti-sport hunting, but your average vegetarian or vegan is probably Left, and theyre really THE group against hunting.

---

I feel like I'm about to regret this, but what are Joe's thoughts on "identity politics"?

But actually, this isn't actually a criticism or question to apply just to Joe Rogan. You could level it at a lot of these "problematic" leftists too. But in general I think people's perspective on these issues is a major factor on alienating them from "the left" as a whole and causes a lot of confusion and dissention.

---

conservative vegan would be a good blog

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Yeah he is anti-sport hunting, but your average vegetarian or vegan is probably Left, and theyre really THE group against hunting.

I could totally be wrong but that still feels like a subculture on the left.

Like, Rogan is against communism, but I wouldnt feel the need to throw that in there as a leftist belief he disagrees with
---

Also, are the average vegetarian or vegan really against hunting on a government approval level? Most I know are just personally against it but dont want it banned
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

I feel like I'm about to regret this, but what are Joe's thoughts on "identity politics"?

But actually, this isn't actually a criticism or question to apply just to Joe Rogan. You could level it at a lot of these "problematic" leftists too. But in general I think people's perspective on these issues is a major factor on alienating them from "the left" as a whole and causes a lot of confusion and dissention.

I dont know for certain, but I do know that he is aware of and accepts concepts like privilege and systemic discrimination
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Show me some diverse Right people. For example, do you really believe theres more of a difference between SephG and Corrik than me and LotM?

I mean, Corrik having such intense faith in government is certainly not a universal right wing position

---

Rogan's stance against identity politics/"PC culture" is pretty much the reason why he is often falsely labeled as alt-right.

This happens to Ricky Gervais too despite the fact that he is a diehard liberal.

---

You know whats really not politically correct?

Saying USA isnt #1
---

Jakyl25 posted...

I dont know for certain, but I do know that he is aware of and accepts concepts like privilege and systemic discrimination

Yeah I cant remember specifically his thoughts on identity politics, but I have 100% heard him say that the average middle class person has no idea what its like growing up a poor minority, and that we should fix the system so no one starts at a deficit.

---

Ricky Gervais mostly annoys me with his militant atheism
---

Jakyl25 posted...

You know whats really not politically correct?

Saying USA isnt #1

That's old now. After Obama took office it became politically correct to say the US is not #1.

---

Yeah it's basically white supremacy to now claim the US is the best country on earth

---

The difference is that extremist views the left might have like ban hunting or extreme Veganism are frowned upon or not given a platform whereas for conservatives they put up a huge sign and start screaming about it and have shows where they talk about it and how its axtually reasonable and anyone who disagrees is crazy. Show me one leftist tv host who talks about banning hunting entirely. Now Ill name you ten conservative tv hosts that are against gay marriage. And even look at those two extremist views on each side next to each other; you are not going to have a horrible life if you cant do your hobbie of hunting but you might if you cant get married to who you love!

Jakyl25 posted...

Ricky Gervais mostly annoys me with his militant atheism

attack helicopter jokes go, here not to mention the recent vile defense for JK Rowling's TERF shit

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Yeah I cant remember specifically his thoughts on identity politics, but I have 100% heard him say that the average middle class person has no idea what its like growing up a poor minority, and that we should fix the system so no one starts at a deficit.

That seems reasonable, though I'm forced to interpret "fixing the system" to include issues of identity.

When people acknowledge these problems exist but also rail against "identity politics" it really throws people since it's so contradictory. And you mainly see that stuff from right-wingers/centrists. The leftists who make a big deal about disliking it are like the hardcore class-first socialists and they're pretty uncommon to encounter.

---

CelesMyUserName posted...

attack helicopter jokes go here, not to mention the recent vile defense for JK Rowling's TERF shit

UK leftists really struggle with trans issues for some reason
---

So many celebrity people the right likes to paint as leftist heroes like those above are actually hated for something they did by over half of the left while the a celebrity across from them on the right like maybe somebody like Rush will be universally liked by the right. To say the right has more diverse opinions is ridiculously stupid.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik claims to be an isolationist, but he was also perfectly happy with our potential war with Iran because tl;dr the President made the decision he thinks is best.

Those last three things you want are good, but they are offset by your horrific (and confusing) thirst for war.

I see merits to neo-con philosophy while agreeing in a vacuum that being isolationist and not dealing with others problem is the best strategy.

---

SmartMuffins problematic fave is in trouble again

https://twitter.com/seamushughes/status/1220354012505133058?s=21
---

Jakyl25 posted...

UK leftists really struggle with trans issues for some reason

yeap as someone transitioning that's also a fan of british panel shows it can be... disheartening

..,. as was season 10 simpsons I just finished recently, yikes the sudden frequency caught me off-guard

---

Grimlyn posted...

..,. as was season 10 simpsons I just finished recently, yikes the sudden frequency caught me off-guard

What episodes were there? Just curious.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

What episodes were there? Just curious.

Lisa joining mensa, for some reason Wiggum and Lenny/Carl call the crew a bunch of shemales (like why even)

realizing the 2nd shemales joke wasn't season 10 but another episode I bumped into around the same time to be "fair", it was actually season 13 Homer the Moe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmXUKtuD_1c

but the other Season 10 I remember was the season finale with a motivational speaker teaching Springfieldians to save money, that even the beautiful models he got cheap because "they used to be men", to the disgust of the crowd

but yeah after 10 seasons these occurrences were so close it was like wtf (not that the full 10 seasons were perfect, there was also a bit in Season 4 bringing up Homer's cousin Frank who joined a cult and became "Francine")

---

God, I remember the shemales thing now that you mention it.

BTW I'm getting emails from Joe Biden and much like little girls around him, I did not ask for this invasion of my personal space.

---

I was rewatching The Office for like the fortieth time and there is actually a joke in the final season where Dwight claims Dwight Jr. brought home a transvestite with an Adam's apple the size of a baseball and I taken aback because I had completely forgot that joke was even in there. The crazy thing is it was only like five years ago, not twenty or however long ago season 10 of the Simpson's was.

---

Yeah, I think there's a big difference between "jokes about transgender people" and "the joke is that the person is transgendered."

Like I think like any group, you can make jokes about it but it seems like these aren't jokes, they're just "lol they're trannies."

---

yep 20 years, season 10 is '99 so it wasn't that surprising but boy is it ever one of those eyebrow raising scenes of things you didn't realize before

5 years though woof, but yeah sometimes they really aren't that far back at all

---

The hat Bill Kristol is wearing is pretty good:

https://www.presidentpence.com/

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Wang, the common denominator with almost all of the people you mentioned that the left demonizes is that theyre openly bigoted towards various groups, typically Muslims or LGBT

correction here: Islam, not Muslims. the religion, the set of ideas, not the people practicing it. and you do see the irony of picking those two, right? it's not Christianity throwing gays off roofs you know. Christian institutions were at one point heavily anti-gay but over time that's steadily been reforming to more accepting. Islam hasn't had that happen yet and does still need that. pointing out the incompatibility of religion and Western, secular beliefs isn't bigoted, it's a constant that liberals have been doing throughout the 20th century much to everyone's benefit.

Jakyl25 posted...

There is no legitimate debate between pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine stances. The former is just objectively true and the latter is rooted in fearmongering and anti-intellectualism.

And yet pro-vaccine stances seem to be losing in the so-called marketplace of ideas because more and more people are anti-vaxx, and kids are suffering and dying because of it.

they aren't winning though? the percentage is fairly stable at over 90%, though it has issue crossing to 95%+. the same's the case for Europe, which just got to over 90%. it also got a measles outbreak right after. here, from WHO on that in particular:

http://www.euro.who.int/en/media-centre/sections/press-releases/2019/measles-in-europe-record-number-of-both-sick-and-immunized

they aren't winning at all. and logically they can't either since... y'know, they'll either get vaccinated or get sick. here, something in Slate pointing out a bunch of numbers.
https://slate.com/technology/2019/06/measles-outbreak-anti-vaxxers-not-a-growing-crisis.html

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Secondly, this was just addressed last topic, but literally the only non Left beliefs Joe hold are about hunting and transgender people in sports.

Hes literally for gay rights, trans rights (minus sports), Medicare for all, free college, prison room, etc, but hes not actually Left?

This is RINO-tier stupid.

and even then the trans in sports belief he has is the majority across the spectrum, both left and right. this isn't a popular stance within the left though it is an exclusive one. but yes, the phrase "ideological purity" comes to mind with all the people on the left i mentioned since they get bashed for a variety of things but when you examine their beliefs it's like... oh, you're left wing, not right. Rogan is also pro gun though he's in favor of some regulation, just doesn't know what exactly and doesn't support things like assault weapons ban because it's pretty nonsensical when you break it down. technically there's the wage gap too, though only in the sense that the whole 73 cents on the dollar is false and it's more in the 90s. but i think that correction is finally making its way through most of the left, or hope so anyway. it's definitely through the middle already. otherwise yeah, he ends up being super lefty, you forgot pro drug legalization too.

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

I feel like I'm about to regret this, but what are Joe's thoughts on "identity politics"?

But actually, this isn't actually a criticism or question to apply just to Joe Rogan. You could level it at a lot of these "problematic" leftists too. But in general I think people's perspective on these issues is a major factor on alienating them from "the left" as a whole and causes a lot of confusion and dissention.

it is, right now that's one of the most divisive factors. so he accepts the idea of privilege and agrees that some have more of it than others. but he goes a step further and expands it to being positives and negatives for being whatever you are. this is where you get a common split from the fringe that focuses heavily on it and everyone else. there's an acceptance that the concept exists and is true but a disagreement on its impact and importance with the main exception being class. for him and all the "problematic leftists" that's basically going to be the underlying belief; that position isn't objectionable to the center or right either by the way, it's just going further than that where things fall apart. for a clear example, take the way the democratic debates focused on having people of color in it, take the way Kamala complained that part of it's being a black woman, same for Booker and Castro afterwards. that part doesn't fly with anybody outside that circle that fully embraces identity politics.

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

When people acknowledge these problems exist but also rail against "identity politics" it really throws people since it's so contradictory. And you mainly see that stuff from right-wingers/centrists. The leftists who make a big deal about disliking it are like the hardcore class-first socialists and they're pretty uncommon to encounter.

one correction: those railing against it are VERY often on the left too. this is why i'm using "left" and "right" instead of more specific categories like liberal or conservative, the identity politics wing is tiny but it's very loud and has a strong media platform. the center and right tend to see this it as a power grab.

---

whoops meant to respond to this one too.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I think its funny how Wang claims the Right is more diverse, and his examples were a variety of Left-Wing people with wildly different beliefs who share one similarity, that they hold a problematic belief.

Show me some diverse Right people. For example, do you really believe theres more of a difference between SephG and Corrik than me and LotM?

those are the names i picked off the top of my head as people i'm good with listening to. the data is the bigger deal for making the case of being more diverse, the people are just using examples. those names are also people who i "get" and listen to occasionally to a lot. Tucker is also a great source if you want to understand Trump's base and he differs significantly from the rest of the network. if you want another name, one you might be familiar with is Saagar Enjeti. really like the contrast him and Krystal Ball have on Rising.

i also wouldn't say that Jimmy Dore and David Pakman are "wildly different" on beliefs (i think Kyle fits somewhere in the middle but still not that far off). same for Bret Weinstein, his biggest area to differ would be in things regarding biology and that's unsurprising considering that's his wife's field of study. Maher, yeah. for what it's worth, the gap between Tucker and Shapiro is bigger than those. as for the user question...

there's a bigger gap between you and LOTM than SephG and Corrik but that's because there's a bigger gap between LOTM and most of the topic as he's more center-left. for these two right wingers mentioned, former appears to mostly be a neocon, latter fairly typical conservative.

you and Jakyl would be much smaller, though he's notably further on the left than you, which would put you and most of the topic smaller.

---

Wanglicious posted...

correction here: Islam, not Muslims. the religion, the set of ideas, not the people practicing it. and you do see the irony of picking those two, right? it's not Christianity throwing gays off roofs you know. Christian institutions were at one point heavily anti-gay but over time that's steadily been reforming to more accepting. Islam hasn't had that happen yet and does still need that. pointing out the incompatibility of religion and Western, secular beliefs isn't bigoted, it's a constant that liberals have been doing throughout the 20th century much to everyone's benefit.

Here you exhibit the exact same flawed viewpoint that youre decrying elsewhere. Islam is not a monolith just like Christianity is not a monolith, but only the latter seems to be recognized as such by leading conservative thinkers, and many run of the mill conservatives
---

Wanglicious posted...

Tucker is also a great source if you want to understand Trump's base

And yet we've seen how he approaches "debating" somebody he disagrees with.

Is there a reason these people that you're "good with listening to" have being very hateful in common?

---

And yes, some of those on the left absolutely see Christianity and Islam as monoliths too
---

Wanglicious posted...

they aren't winning at all. and logically they can't either since... y'know, they'll either get vaccinated or get sick. here, something in Slate pointing out a bunch of numbers.
https://slate.com/technology/2019/06/measles-outbreak-anti-vaxxers-not-a-growing-crisis.html

From this article

They may not even be the major cause. In the U.S., for example, the number of unvaccinated children has quadrupled since 2001a stat that people love to cite as evidence of a growing anti-vaxxer movement. But the CDC attributes that number to health care inequality, since kids without insurance or who live in rural areas appear to be at greatest risk.

USA #1
---

Since Wang brought him up, Ill mention that I took a psych class taught by Jonathan Haidt like ten years ago. Hes a pretty interesting guy.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Here you exhibit the exact same flawed viewpoint that youre decrying elsewhere. Islam is not a monolith just like Christianity is not a monolith, but only the latter seems to be recognized as such by leading conservative thinkers, and many run of the mill conservatives

part of this is familiarity, i'm way more familiar with Christianity and its subsections. the other part is that when thinking "Islam" people here think the way it's developed in the Middle East more so than Indonesia, although even that one suffers the same issues, just at notably lower figures. that is to say, only one third thing gays should be killed as opposed to two thirds and there's a slight majority against the state being run by religion as opposed to an overwhelming majority for the religion being the state. it's basically what if everyone actually agreed with Leveticus as opposed to the universal rejection it's gotten, taken to a significantly greater extreme.

StealThisSheen posted...

And yet we've seen how he approaches "debating" somebody he disagrees with.

Is there a reason these people that you're "good with listening to" have being very hateful, sometimes outright bigoted, in common?

a guy who interviews people daily and flips out on one means that somehow the thousands of other instances where there's no flip out suddenly means they don't count anymore? you're bringing up one example of literally thousands and acting like that represents the norm.

you're also moving the goalpost on this. the point was exactly what i said: Tucker's a great source if you want to understand Trump's base. and i wouldn't say he, or the others i mentioned, are hateful either. offensive, certainly sometimes. hateful, no.

---

Wanglicious posted...

it is, right now that's one of the most divisive factors. so he accepts the idea of privilege and agrees that some have more of it than others. but he goes a step further and expands it to being positives and negatives for being whatever you are. this is where you get a common split from the fringe that focuses heavily on it and everyone else. there's an acceptance that the concept exists and is true but a disagreement on its impact and importance with the main exception being class. for him and all the "problematic leftists" that's basically going to be the underlying belief; that position isn't objectionable to the center or right either by the way, it's just going further than that where things fall apart. for a clear example, take the way the democratic debates focused on having people of color in it, take the way Kamala complained that part of it's being a black woman, same for Booker and Castro afterwards. that part doesn't fly with anybody outside that circle that fully embraces identity politics.

I honestly can't tell what point you're trying to get across here. Acknowledging that racism etc. is bad is fine up to a certain point but emphasizing it too much becomes identity politics and polarizes people? Where's the line? Using it this way just turns it into an extremist scare phrase.

I'd also disagree with it being a tiny group of people concerned about it because my perspective is that identity plays a large role in American politics. But maybe things like religion, national and state identity, party affiliation, and class don't meet your standards.

---

Tucker not being hateful is absolute bullshit but go off my dude

---

Wanglicious posted...

correction here: Islam, not Muslims. the religion, the set of ideas, not the people practicing it.

Ben Shapiro:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2yAl3bUkAs04lN.jpg:large

Bill Maher:
https://bridge.georgetown.edu/research/factsheet-bill-maher/

In 2017, the Webby-award winning AlterNet news service published a seven minute video of Mahers outrageous statements about Islam and Muslims. Some of the clips include Maher justifying the exclusion of Syrian refugees from the West by stating that their cultures are not like ours. Another clip shows Maher claiming if Muslim men could get laid more, we wouldnt have this problem.

In a May 2010 interview with Anderson Cooper, Maher described Muslims as threatening, bringing that desert stuff to our world, and uncivilized. Cooper asked Maher if he bought the claim by Muslims that Islam is a religion of peace; Maher responded, Yeah they blow you up, theres a piece of you over there, theres a piece of you over there, theres a piece of you over there.

Following the killings at the Charlie Hebdo offices in 2015, Maher claimed that hundreds of millions of Muslims would be supportive of that kind of violence. He continued: I know most Muslim people would not have carried out an attack like this. But heres the important point: Hundreds of millions of them support an attack like this. They applaud an attack like this.

In September 2015, Maher reacted to the arrest of 14-year old American-Muslim student, Ahmed Mohamed, after he brought a homemade clock to school that his teacher thought was a bomb. Politicians and public figures criticized the incident, calling it racial and religious profiling. Maher said: Look, this kid deserves an apology. No doubt about it. They were wrong, butfor the last 30 years, its been one culture that has been blowing shit up over and over again.

Steven Crowder:
https://twitter.com/scrowder/status/904426276898910208?s=21
---

oh the two paragraphs after that are super depressing too, the idea that a second dose of MMR costs a week's paycheck for a family in Madacascar is nuts. like of course it wouldn't be seen as essential at that price. but yeah, contrary to constant media reports, does not seem the idea that anti-vaxxers have gained much traction and it makes sense. logically if they did you'd get more disease which would promptly change some people's minds and any gains become losses, repeat. we're just fighting for that last 10% globally, US a little ahead of most others, and that's a change that's going to be gained a half percent at a time since your issues are going to be all over. hardlined extremists shouldn't the bulk of that, poverty and lack of education should.

---

Wanglicious posted...

a guy who interviews people daily and flips out on one means that somehow the thousands of other instances where there's no flip out suddenly means they don't count anymore? you're bringing up one example of literally thousands and acting like that represents the norm.

You do realize said interview was cut/unaired, implying he's more than ready to simply cut things that don't go his way, and thus "look at all these times he didn't flip out!" is an utterly asinine argument, right?

---

Tucker Carlson:

Our leaders demand that you shut up and accept this. We have a moral obligation to admit the world's poor, they tell us, even if it makes our own country poorer, and dirtier, and more divided.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/03/racism-made-dove-out-tucker-carlson/584746/

In one 2006 recording, Carlson says that although I hate the war I just have zero sympathy for them [Iraqis] or their culture. A culture where people just dont use toilet paper or forks. When his interlocutor says its understandable that Iraqis want Americans off their soil, Carlson responds, They can just shut the fuck up and obey, is my view. And, you know, the second we leave, theyre going to be calling for us to return, because they cant govern themselves.

Asked in March 2008, How you could you salvage Iraq at this point? Carlson replies, If, somehow, the Iraqis decided to behave like human beings. But he doesnt see that as possible. Iraq is a crappy place filled with a bunch of, you know, semiliterate primitive monkeys, he declares in August 2008. Thats why it wasnt worth invading. In 2009, he extends the logic to Afghanistan, which is never going to be a civilized country, because the people arent civilized.

---

So yeah I do agree that Tucker helps us understand Trumps base
---

...have you even seen tucker's show or his segments? when you're saying something is cut/unaired it's basically meaning the same as any interview show that isn't live. and considering that, again, he's got people being interviewed daily and has been for the past few years, you aren't looking at a common occurance. if it was you'd think it would've been mentioned as such but no. and the argument isn't "look at all those times he didn't flip out," it's "you are pointing to something that's happened less than 0.1% of the time and dismissing all of his work because of that." that is asinine. somebody got under his skin, he flipped out, didn't air the segment. not a good look, not a good idea, but has nothing to do with the literal thousands of other times he's done interviews without that and doesn't change the point made at all, which i'll repeat for a third time because you don't seem to be wanting to address it: if you want to get a better idea of Trump's base, watching Tucker is a great way to do it.

---

In other news

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/23/politics/donald-trump-medicare-entitlements-cuts/index.html

The economy is so great, Trump might cut entitlements

Not until after the election, Im sure
---

Wanglicious posted...

if you want to get a better idea of Trump's base, watching Tucker is a great way to do it.

Yes, he helps us get a better idea of how hateful said base is, cool.

---

Tucker is awful based on what I've seen. It seems to be mostly hatemongering and fearmongering. And ridiculing defenseless people.

---

https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-carlson/tucker-carlsons-descent-white-supremacy-timeline

But no, Tucker Carlson isn't hateful.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

In other news

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/23/politics/donald-trump-medicare-entitlements-cuts/index.html

The economy is so great, Trump might cut entitlements

Not until after the election, Im sure

About time. I can't afford to pay social security tax. I think that tax should be eliminated and Mexico and China should pay our retirees their social security through tariffs.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

Yes, he helps us get a better idea of how hateful said base is, cool.

Perfect example of what i mean when i said a the left has trouble understanding Tucker.

And Jakyl, you do realize your examples on Tucker are 11 and 13 years old right. He's calmed down quite a bit from his Crossfire days after Jon humbled the hell out of him.

... Crowder one I'm not sure is making the point you want it to make since he... Defends a Muslim person's ability to not make a cake for religious reasons? And points out that you'll be killed for being gay in Muslim countries due to the religion.

Shapiro's just straight up pro Israel. He's got objections to Islam too but I'd expect most Orthodox Jews to have massive issues with Islam due to centuries of enslavement and murder. That ain't a divide being fixed anytime soon.

And lastly Maher: he does try to split the individual people from the faith. In the examples there, some is dark comedy and not trying to make a real point, some goes a step further. When he's talking culture he's talking religion. I know some of the sections those quotes are coming from, it's a lot more nuanced than the individual sentence, especially the Hebdo one. That was a heavy, heavy criticism of Islam and the left that defends it. That hundreds of millions line came along with data of hundreds of millions who support extremists. There's a spin in these quotes that doesn't exist in the original content.


---