Intellectual Dark Web
- Started
- Last post
- 199 Responses
- PhanLo1
- Hahahahajmckinno
- those damn plumbers!BonSeff
- LolMorning_star
- 1:18 LOLHayzilla
- kingsteven2
- https://i.imgur.com/…Gnash
- Made by a sensitive little millennial easily offended rat kinset
- Nothing more dangerous than the group collective.Hayoth
- you made this, set?imbecile
- Hayoth: the words group and collective mean the same thing, what you just said is like saying you love dog canines lolset
- What is tautology?deadsperm
- The science of keeping your ballbag tautset
- Hayoth loves using words and terms he has no understanding of, especially when he's uber-triggeredmonospaced
- Hayoth, what about communism, is that not worse? Or socialism? Or fascism? What about atheism, isn't that THE worst?monospaced
- it's not wrong to say 'group collective,' since it is a collective of disparate groups. each group vying for supremacy over the other.Gnash
- Agreed. Atheism is definitely THE worst.Morning_star
- lolmonospaced
- Morning_star-4
I wonder how this is gonna pan out for Cambridge University.
Not well, I guess.
Peterson was invited to be a visiting fellow at Cambridge Uni. The the invitation was rescinded due to the reaction from the Student Union. Who said..."Peterson isn’t welcome at Cambridge because it’s an ‘inclusive environment’.
I was under the impression that a university IS the place to challenge ideas.
- best part is cambridge inferring that it was peterson who made the requestGnash
- can't really blame them. it must be exhausting to be nursing all the traumatized kids endlessly.Gnash
- puppy rooms aren't cheapGnash
- Imagine someone challenging your ideas....the horror.Morning_star
- although, JP has to take responsibility for nurturing a brand that thrives on the controversy.Gnash
- I'm not sure he'd agree with that. It's only seems controversial because of the Left's stubborn adherence to dogma and ideology. The inability to reflect...Morning_star
- ...analyse and adapt is disheartening.Morning_star
- yet he does things like the Lobster Collection. Not for the money, but to (very successfully) wind-up the left and get them tweeting about him.Gnash
- It quite devious actually. the herd are all having this "gotcha" moment and he's just playing with them. That signals to me that he's kinda working it.Gnash
- Not that he shouldn't, but in context of, cap. "A", Academia, the cambridge situation isn't that surprising.Gnash
- Agreed. I've seen him deny that he's a provocateur. But, the lobster stuff and some recent appearances would suggest he's getting a little more 'playful'.Morning_star
- I've read from people at Cambridge that it wasn't just a case of stroppy students insisting he be no-platformed.Fax_Benson
- Dish the dirt Fax, what do you know?Morning_star
- don't know anything - just that Divinity SU is one part of one of 30 colleges that make up the university and not as simple as Cambridge bans JPFax_Benson
- someone at Cambridge was saying the offer was hastily given then withdrawn on review. I agree banning academics from Unis is dumb as rocks, just to clarify.Fax_Benson
- JP's views aren't controversial. I'm honestly baffled. He's a boring Canadian professor. The world has gone mad if this is the enemy.inteliboy
- Though the left love eating themselves alive. This is why the right have that
'smug' look, deservedly so.inteliboy
- Morning_star-3
If you get a moment, have a listen to this. Just the first 10 minutes, where Harris explains how he, Peterson and Murray are being blamed for the recent massacre in Christchurch.
It's astonishing.
- tho isn't Sam Harris a leftist meditating intellectual?inteliboy
- Add 'Athiest' to that and i think that's accurate.Morning_star
- i'm hung up on the part where biometrics are necessary for Twitter ffs.MrAbominable
- Sam Harris, the real victim of the massacreyuekit
- Honestly I like Harris alright, but I also like Greenwald and Mehdi Hassan. I don't think he is being fair in describing them as bad faith actors. They justyuekit
- happen to have a view a different view of Islam. Perhaps one lesson of a tragedy like this is that people should try to be a little less absolutist in theiryuekit
- views, particularly when it comes to topics where you are generalizing about large groups of people.yuekit
- Have you read Murray's book?Fax_Benson
- I can't find a lot of sympathy for Murray - although he's whining for it again in the Spectator.Fax_Benson
- Out of curiosity I went and read the Intercept articles that Harris was complaining about. They actually didn't blame him for the shooting. Theyyuekit
- simply mentioned him briefly (one sentence in each article) as one of many people who have contributed to a hysteria against Muslims as a whole.yuekit
- If the journalist wasn't trying to make a connection or promoting guilt by association the why mention Harris et al at all? That's 'bad faith' if you ask me.Morning_star
- I don't see how it's bad faith, it's just their opinion. Should it be off limits for them to give their opinion that there is too much blanket criticism ofyuekit
- Muslims, and to name specific people who are engaged in this? Seems like a perfectly legitimate topic for discussion in light of what happened.yuekit
- I'd agree if it wasn't such a low blow. The articles title is "Politicians and Pundits Must Stop Their Anti-Muslim Rhetoric". Harris etc don't criticise...Morning_star
- ...Islam. As i've mentioned before, opinion and discussion of ideas is fantastic, when you start to criticise people it's not helpful.Morning_star
- Amend: "Harris etc don't criticise Muslims they criticise islam."Morning_star
- OK but if people buy into this view of Islam as an existential threat to Western civilization, do you really expect them to take a tolerant view of individualyuekit
- Muslims? I think you may be expecting a level of nuance that does not exist, particularly in the kind of people who are drawn to these topics.yuekit
- I think, especially with Harris, that they are perfectly capable, and go to great lengths to make it clear that they talk about Ideas, not people. We have to..Morning_star
- ...be able to talk about the ideas, the policies, the ideologies and this is what the IDW do.Morning_star
- they should therefore be able to discuss the idea that people can and do use their legitimate discussions as justification for extreme behaviourFax_Benson
- You're making it sound like a completely neutral forum for ideas. When in reality there is a distinct slant towards anti-Islam views, anti-immigrant views.yuekit
- Open discussion is a great thing of course, including ideas that are deemed "off limits." But when you consistently feature people who mass generalize aboutyuekit
- an entire religion, who say we're being overrun by immigrants, Western civilization is under threat etc, that goes way beyond just having an open-minded debate.yuekit
- @Fax Are you suggesting we shouldn't talk about 'difficult' subjects?
@Yuekit. You hear what you want to hear.Morning_star - what? No, I'm saying Murray in particular is happy to discuss any subject until it becomes difficult for him.Fax_Benson
- he can't just duck out now. he has a responsibility to discuss how and why his book has become a such a crutch for these people.Fax_Benson
- Sorry, misunderstood. I agree.Morning_star
- Morning_star, just one example...Lauren Southern who is the proponent of this "great replacement" theory about how whites are being wiped out by immigrantsyuekit
- is given a positive and sympathetic interview on Dave Rubin's show. The interview currently has about half a million views on YouTube.yuekit
- The New Zealand killer's manifesto is literally titled the exact same thing and about the same conspiracy theory.yuekit
- So.Morning_star
- Now who is this chick, is she some kind of intellectual? No she's a 23 year old who managed to become a mini celebrity promoting these far right theories.yuekit
- I guess you're against free speech and platforms for idiots to broadcast their obviously flawed ideas.Morning_star
- Really has nothing to do with free speech, it's more of an editorial decision about who you're going to have on your show and how their ideas are presentedyuekit
- (completely uncritically in this case -- and comments to the video are 99% positive).yuekit
- I'm listening to it now. All she seems to do is repeats the 'web facts' that support her fears. Like you.Morning_star
- Hmmm so your response to me pointing this out is that I'm against free speech and I'm afraid? lol.yuekit
- My point is that you can't on one hand pose as this high-minded debating society while again and again featuring people like this. Bit of a disconnect there.yuekit
- Who's posing as a high-minded debating society? And you say 'people like this', people like what? You exaggerate their political tendencies to the point of...Morning_star
- ...of untruth. If i believed everything you suggest then these people are all members of the Nazi party.Morning_star
- Didn't say Nazi. But I think it's fair to say there's a big far right movement out there spreading hysteria and fanatical views about immigrants and Muslims.yuekit
- I mean we should be able to agree on this basic fact by now right? I'm not saying they are all equally extreme or should be banned, but surely when you haveyuekit
- people expressing the same worldview as the guests you featured on your show committing mass murders, it's time for a little critical self-examination?yuekit
- I wouldn't agree with that at all. I think the hysteria is with the far left who are labelling everyone slightly right of centre as far right.Morning_star
- I dunno man...when people talk about "the death of Europe" and "the collapse of Western civilization" that seems pretty hysterical to me.yuekit
- If you take titles of books as the max resolution of someones extensive and nuanced opinion then i guess you're right. I suggest you're doing yourself no...Morning_star
- ...favours by having such a dishonest interpretation. If you can't be bothered to step out of the echo chamber and dig a little deeper, I think you're a fool.Morning_star
- How it is dishonest? Sam Harris chose to title his latest podcast with Douglas Murray "Is this the End of Europe?" Harris starts off by referring to "the likelyyuekit
- destruction of Europe." I didn't make this up, they really do talk in these apocalyptic terms. And this is very common language among the anti-immigrant crowd.yuekit
- That is not to say there is no nuance to their argument. But being able to talk at length about a topic does not excuse you from reaching such a hyperbolicyuekit
- conclusion when it is not supported by the evidence. Europe survived two world wars, I'm pretty sure it will survive the current wave of immigration.yuekit
- europe also survived the plague without vaccines. how is that an argument?Gnash
- You're just making my point for me Gnash. Europe has survived plague, war, actually being conquered by Muslims, communism, more wars, etc. The idea that it'syuekit
- doomed because of some demographic changes or issues assimilating immigrants seems a little silly in comparison.yuekit
- I get that. I wasn't suggesting that immigration effects were akin to the plague, though.Gnash
- only the general posit that being able to resit catastrophic adversity is argument against examining a topic that may not have similar outcomesGnash
- Not an argument against discussing it, just an argument against framing it in these extreme terms that reinforce the worldview of the far right.yuekit
- ya, the hyperbole gets in the wayGnash
- renderedred6
- whoa!Krassy
- Cryptocurrency lolmonNom
- < his other maps are great also.MrAbominable
- uan0
the knowledge is available, he describes where we are at and hopefully will go as 'humanz'.
- Morning_star-3
Jack Dorsey talks to Sam Harris.
It's very good and insightful. Listen to it. Go on.
- tried this. haven't found the right hook to enjoy Harris yet but more importantly couldn't listen to Twitter whinge about being Twitter. had to bail.MrAbominable
- There's a bit in Rogans latest podcast with Harris where he talks about the interview. Harris seems to think that Dorsey is an artful question dodger.Morning_star
- ^ maybe i'll try via that. i agree. the bit i caught was a sort of mea culpa about how Tw can do better. Yeah ok.MrAbominable
- listening now. my vote is still out on Harris. He's a bit too much like me in temperament which i usually hate. still working on it.MrAbominable
- ^The Tim Pool #1242 is my favorite of the Tw analysis.MrAbominable
- inteliboy2
I'm finding myself listening less and less to these guys.
There's only a certain number of times I can hear Rubin and co complain about university campuses. You start to form this world view that we're in some kind of neo-liberal feminist cultural crisis.
When in the reality, it's the right and 'far right' that are in control of todays political climate across the world. Not a bunch of annoying pink haired twenty somethings on twitter.
Though do still tune in occasionally to Harris and Rogan - they seem to be the only guys that explore other shit like AI, consciousness, science and tech.
- i tend to agree, Rubin and Shapiro annoy the shit out of me, they seem to think less in favour of provocation. I can't get enough of the Weinsteins. With...Morning_star
- +1BonSeff
- ...regard to the pink haired twenty somethings, i think they need to grow a set and start engaging with those that disagree with them.Morning_star
- Rogan is dark web?monospaced
- YepMorning_star
- meet the IDW ;) . https://www.nytimes.…Morning_star
- IDW if a format not an ideology, mono.MrAbominable
- ^ isMrAbominable
- Thank you, MrAbominableBonSeff
- hrmmmmonospaced
- Rogan is a podcast host no? I thought this was an intellectual movement no, that happened to use new media as a channel.fadein11
- Christ I quite like Rogan as well, thought the whole point was he didn't know who to agree with.fadein11
- Yeah Rogans pretty neutral, he does a great job examining and exploring all sides, he changes his mind a lot too which is great._niko
- I find that on a long enough timeline, people will eventually say something that turns you off of them._niko
- yep. he had Brian Cox on last week hafadein11
- Neither do the other members of the IDW. That's the point, open and challenging public thought and discussion.Morning_star
- As long as they all kind of agree on the foundations. Where are all the women?fadein11
- Heather E. Heying, Christina Hoff Sommers.Morning_star
- Cool, will check them out. Was worried oprah may be included as rogan is hafadein11
- ifn i'm not wrong, morning_star, wouldn't it be correct to say that 'most' of the IDW identify as Left?MrAbominable
- I believe Sommers does. I know Rogan and Petersen do.MrAbominable
- @MrAbomonable. I believe you’re right. However when asked Peterson and Harris, among others, have claimed they aren’t political.Morning_star
- ^I suggest that a lot of the criticism against IDW is that it's largely Left being open to critique against Left ...which is abhorrent to Progressives.MrAbominable
- Morning_star-2
@yuekit, you said...
— A great example would be Dave Rubin's recent comment (while interviewing a far-right, anti-immigrant Canadian politician) that because the left is so terrible, he can't blame people if they embrace actual ethnonationalism.
I assume this is the interview with Maxime Bernier? Who isn’t a far right politician or anti-immigration. So why would you say he is? He’s a conservative who wants an open discourse about immigration policies.
I asked for an example of your claim that the IDW is normalising far right views. What you’ve given isn’t that. If you want to have a discussion about the dangers of polarising political views and the absence of a forum where these views can aired, without knee jerk reaction and left or right leaning toddlers chucking their toys out of the pram, then maybe here is as good a place as any. I’m ready when you are, sincerely.
— That is a completely absurd view, but it perfectly captures the skewed framing that goes on with many of these guys -- painting the left in the harshest terms possible, while giving a sympathetic platform to extremes on the other side.
It’s not absurd. Considering the destruction of the centre ground and both left and right leaning organisations and individuals doing their utmost to paint their opposition as extremist, it is a fair point. If there is no centre and the only other places are the far right (as suggested by the left) or Communism (as suggested by the right) what are voters meant to do? The moment they get pissed off with their traditional political alligences being portrayed as super crazy vegetable soup it IS understandable to look for answers elsewhere and if the only places to seek solace are harbouring extreme ideas then the choice seems to be made for them.
This is not just a problem for the left or the right, it’s the whole political landscape that’s under attack from incredibly destructive identity politics. I heard Eric Weinstein the other day talking about how ‘identity’ is a financially cheaper and polarising way to win votes rather than traditional ‘labour’ focussed policies. He might be right.
- re "normalizing" i shuddered at that earlier. largely these IDW people are uneasy about calling themselves Liberals. Now reflexively "Classic Liberals".MrAbominable
- Hmmm I guess we're not going to agree on this. The idea that the ENTIRE left is so extreme that your only choice is between communists and Nazis does seemyuekit
- quite absurd and silly to me.yuekit
- It's easy to lose track of the actual numbers when you are focused on the latest outrage. But in reality, there is barely a majority of Democrats that evenyuekit
- identify as liberal in the U.S. So the idea that they are all commies seems a bit ridiculous, to say the least.yuekit
- Can you not see that in painting Maxime Bernier, a sitting MP in the Canadian parliament, as far right you are instrumental in perpetuating the problem...Morning_star
- ...you are complaining about.Morning_star
- I think you have made it pretty clear where your sympathies life. He's not "anti immigration" he's a "conservative who wants an open discourse about immigrationyuekit
- policies." Same as Trump and Le Pen I guess -- they just want an open discourse? lol.yuekit
- Meanwhile the left is all "neo communists." Honestly, look in the mirror before accusing others of being biased.yuekit
- https://www.thestar.…yuekit
- Ask yourself why you are so eager to defend someone like that, while assuming the worst about the left. The far left is not sweeping to power across the worldyuekit
- as right wing authoritarians are. I have trouble seeing them as the bigger threat.yuekit
- go yuekit +1fadein11
- I have asked myself why i think it's necessary to hear what people say rather than judge them on a false perception. This is the second time you've tried to...Morning_star
- ...imply that i have far right opinions and you couldn't be farther from the truth. You won't engage in discussion but choose to hide behind a self generated...Morning_star
- ...smoke screen of false comparison and lies. You are exactly the the reason why people have such a shitty perception of the left.
Also, that Star article...Morning_star - ...supports the conclusion i came to about Bernier. He's a conservative who wants a discussion about immigration. The article even claims this is just his way..Morning_star
- ...of appealing to those rejecting Canada's SJ obsession, A vote winner if you like.Morning_star
- Do you honestly think Trump and Le Pen are the same ?Morning_star
- I think it's fair to say that Trump, Le Pen and this guy in Canada all attract a far right audience. Sorry if this is an unpopularyuekit
- Don’t be sorry. That’s a fair analysis of the situation.Morning_star
- Morning_star-5
A link below to an article which discusses analysis of YouTubers political preferences and some illumination of the untruths perpetuated into mainstream media and politics.
It doesn’t surprise me that this is one of the conclusions.
“The harmfulness of a video seems to be a factor of the viewer’s politics more than the video itself.”
It goes on to suggest that the truth about a YouTubers political position is largely ignored in favour of the veiwers uninformed perception and prejudices.
...“There seems to be a higher proportion of reactionary anti-social justice content compared to other platforms, and many YouTubers focus on the most extreme actions of progressive activists — unfairly labeling this as indicative of “the left.”
Despite this, calls for censorship... are intolerant, partisan, and extreme. Their targets include centrist and mainstream right commentators (e.g. Joe Rogan, Ben Shapiro, Dennis Prager) and they offer no viewpoint-neutral rules of what an acceptable YouTube video is. The justification offered is that their videos are “harmful” — a concept that has crept so far that it is almost meaningless.”...
It goes some way to illustrate that the outrage of social justice fans, left-leaning dogooders and neocommunists is based in ugly fantasy rather than reality.
Beauty is truth. Truth is beauty.
- How does one objectively classify whether someone is right wing or far right?yuekit
- This gets to the heart of what annoys me about the "IDW" movement -- there seems to be an effort to normalize far right views while pretending that the left isyuekit
- super extreme due to a handful of crazy feminists. That is not logical or reasonable.yuekit
- ^ re your question. You have obviously managed to classify what views are far-right -- and therefor those that hold those views are so.Gnash
- How have you done that objectively?Gnash
- There is not a clear cut definition, but at one point most people agreed Breitbart (the publication Ben Shapiro edited) was far right -- now according to theyuekit
- article Morning_star linked, Shapiro is a "centrist" or a "mainstream conservative." His site literally had a section devoted to "black crime" and he reportedyuekit
- to Steve Bannon every day -- is that mainstream in your view? And same thing with the efforts of IDW shows like as the Rubin Report to present the views ofyuekit
- open racists such as Stefan Molyneux without criticism, while droning on about how terrible the left is.yuekit
- Regardless of whether there is a bright line in terms of what is far right or not (and of course there isn't), I find that pretty reprehensible.yuekit
- @yuekit. I’ve responded to you in a separate post.Morning_star
- If you think Prager is a centrist, your calibration is waaaaayyyy off.BonSeff
- Rogan is more of a pragmatist
Shapiro is a straight up grifter, as is Rubin.BonSeff - All of the above tho have women issues.
Isn't Prager the only one who is married? To his like third wife?BonSeff - So all the good left people have never been divorced? and divorced men are all right-wing misogynists? so objectiveGnash
- no, they are divorced as well, but don't go around shilling for their book interpretation of the bible. feel me?BonSeff
- Last time I checked Christian marriage vows are a personal contract to God.BonSeff
- Last time I checked Christian marriage vows are a personal contract to God.BonSeff
- Plus Prager promotes women begrudgingly sexing up their man, because the bible.BonSeff
- Hardly centrist was my long way around the cul de sac of making an observation. Sorry, just got off a very long flight.BonSeff
- I listen to conservative talk radio here in Texas because it's so wack. I get probably, maybe four hours of Prager's show a week. Dude is nuts.BonSeff
- so if you find out that shapiro seems to be happily married to his only wife, you'd concede he has no problem with women? since he's neither divorced or xtianGnash
- I will concede. lucky for him there is a contingent of women down with umpaloopas. i'm sure their marriage is dandyBonSeff
- OH! Curious about your takes on Candice Owens? Is she down with IDW?BonSeff
- not heard of owens, I'd have to google her.Gnash
- Seriously?BonSeff
- is that bad?Gnash
- ok, just googled her. she looks familiar but don't know anything about her. but I'm not american and I don't watch foxGnash
- Yeah dude, she is the black Tomi, down with nationalism, getting in Hitler's head. bananasBonSeff
- *looks up, Tomi*Gnash
- Morning_star-3
@yuekit
— How does one objectively classify whether someone is right wing or far right?
Why do you need to? It becomes quite obvious from what the say and how they act. Assuming guilt by association is a disturbing and destructive feature of dictatorial, oppressive, fascist, communist, racist, totalitarian, regimes. Your assumptions generate an opinion based on false information. It’s valueless.
— This gets to the heart of what annoys me about the "IDW" movement -- there seems to be an effort to normalize far right views while pretending that the left is super extreme due to a handful of crazy feminists. That is not logical or reasonable.
In that last comment Yuekit you demonstrated exactly what the research claims to show. Rather than start a discussion or challenge the creators you paint something as ‘harmful’ or ‘far right’ without any rational analysis. I’ll challenge you to bring one example of your claim that the members of the IDW are normalising far right views. (My suspicion is that your definition of ‘far right’ is so broad as to tarnish those that are merely attempting to open up a discussion in good faith)
It seems the only thing that you’ve managed to extract from the article after dismissing the conclusions (why?) is a largely irrelevant point about the content of Shapiro’s website. You seem happy enough to group people together and judge them with unsophisticated stereotyping if they don’t fall comfortably into your political safe space but you claim racism and discrimination when someone makes a similar point about the issues faced by, for example, black communities or gender based groups.
We need to be able to discuss these issues openly and in good faith. Nothing should be taboo. How do you expect to address the problems of sexual harassment or equal opportunity or violent crime when many won’t engage because of a misguided and prejudiced ‘group think’ assumption.
- A great example would be Dave Rubin's recent comment (while interviewing a far-right, anti-immigrant Canadian politician) that because the left is so terrible,yuekit
- he can't blame people if they embrace actual ethnonationalism.yuekit
- That is a completely absurd view, but it perfectly captures the skewed framing that goes on with many of these guys -- painting the left in the harshest termsyuekit
- possible, while giving a sympathetic platform to extremes on the other side.yuekit
- this might be an interesting dialogue if the troll knob was dialed waaaay down.MrAbominable
- @yuekit. Replied in another post.Morning_star
- monNom0
I saw an excerpt from this interview and he made a really interesting point. Maybe the polarization we are seeing has a lot to do with the things you just can't talk about in polite company anymore. And because you can't talk about them, nobody does and there's a big vacuum in the middle where the nuanced ideas would normally be. All you are left with are the ideas way out on the fringes that get spouted by antisocial people.
Probably a bad paraphrase, but I think there's something to that.ttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VUD...
- https://m.youtube.co…monNom
- Stephen Pinker on Joe Rogan podcastmonNom
- much of it is self perpetuating. The intellectual dark web is just the web renamed for marketing purposes. The sense of victimhood is overplayedFax_Benson
- @fax. No it's not. The IDW is a name given to a group of people including Harris, The Weinsteins, Perterson, Hoff-Somers etc as a joke and it stuck.Morning_star
- https://en.wikipedia…Morning_star
- not literally - I mean that joke tag has been adopted as a marketing ploy. The whole rebel outsider, too hot for the mainstream silliness.Fax_Benson
- Morning_star-6
[-5]
@Yuekit
What puzzles me most is how you are certain you know more about what Dave Rubins political position is than he does. In the video below Rubin explains, in no uncertain terms, what he thinks and how he is Libertarian at heart but has some ideas that run contrary to that position, like a more social approach to Healthcare and Education.
Could you explain why you are so focussed on portraying anybody with a political opinion in the centre or to the right of that, as far right, even when they explain, at length, where they sit politically. Or similar assumptions of far right tendencies because they appear in a photo with someone with questionable ideals. It's not reasonable or logical. That to me is the definition of ‘dishonest framing’.
It may be because the left has moved so far left that it can only operate in polarised terms, in the echo chamber of irrationality, misinformation and ad hominem attacks. The left is continually edging closer to extreme ideals (equality of outcome for fucks sake), whilst closing it’s mind to the insanity and horror of what those ideals mean to a country, community, family and individual. Just because the left isn’t down with the individual it doesn’t mean it can eject it’s responsibilities as a group.
- * let's add some art in the background in order to appeal liberals.... lolSalarrue
- So within two years this guy went from being a liberal talk show host to a "libertarian" pundit to praising people like Trump and Bolsonaro.yuekit
- Amazing that you would take him seriously. Of course the whole reason he felt the need to make this video is because so many people figured out his nonsense.yuekit
- all Dave Rubin does is complain about the left. boring af. oh, and advertise guns.inteliboy
- Anyone aligning with Dennis Prager can suckit.BonSeff
- Morning_star-6
@BonSelf
Why?
The briefest of checks shows a tweet in the last few hours from Shapiro denouncing this racist prick. Your assumption of guilt by association is just plain lazy.
- why was he there in the first place? this "denouncing" thing is pretty stupid in my view. he seems happy in the picture.renderedred
- the briefest of checks could've told shapiro NOT to hug it out with that guy ;)renderedred
- Actually Shapiro wrote several articles defending him, saying the left made up him being racist etc...when it was obviousyuekit
- ^ even better LOLrenderedred
- https://www.dailywir…yuekit
- This racist prick has always been a racist prick. This isn't breaking news.BonSeff
- It is to me. I’m not in the US so his political ideals are new to me. What is troubling is that a majority of his state must have voted for him.Morning_star
- @yuekit. could you point to an article in which Shapiro defends him because in that one you posted he doesn’t.Morning_star
- But you are quick to pile on me and defend these jackasses.BonSeff
- I’ve never defended Shapiro. He comes across as a winery entitle arse.Morning_star
- Reread your post! Jesus Christ.BonSeff
- Morning_star the entire article I posted is him defending Steve King. Maybe try reading instead of just Googling and skimming things.yuekit
- He only posted the update at the top once it became completely untenable to defend him anymore.yuekit
- @yuekit. 'several articles'... I have read, very carefully, the article. He doesn't defend King he merely offers a more charitable interpretation of his..Morning_star
- ...uterrences. He has updated the article today with an statement agreeing that the guys a racist fuck. So where are the articles defending Kings racism?Morning_star
- @ BonSelf. I f you want to call that a defence so-be-it. All i did was a quick search on the article and found a very recent tweet denouncing his...Morning_star
- ...interpretation as you must have too, but decided to ignore.Morning_star
- What I said is that Shapiro repeatedly defended Steve King against charges of racism, when it was obvious the whole time that he actually is a virulent racist.yuekit
- He's been using the same rhetoric and buzzwords as white nationalists for quite a while now.yuekit
- If you don't see how that's a problem fair enough, but the whole "he didn't say exactly that" schtick isn't that convincing.yuekit
- I guess Shapiro has a lot of practice pretending people aren't racist considering he used to work for Steve Bannon.yuekit
- yea, I absolutely chose to ignore. He is backpedaling hard. Now throwing King under the bus because it no longer suits his grift.BonSeff
- @Yuekit & BonSelf. We could go round the houses here forever doing the 'he said, she said' bullshit, which is why, where possible i've tried to focus on the...Morning_star
- ...ideas being promoted and not the characters that promote them. If you want to criticise the ideas we can have a productive conversation. It just seems...Morning_star
- @BonSelf. Agreed. He is a 'backpedlar' extraordinaire. FWIW i don't like the dick, at all.Morning_star
- Wasn't race (and Marxism, or something) one of the ideas you wanted to discuss originally?yuekit
- Not really interested in discussing race. There is more diversity within racial grouping than between them. And so discussing differences is largely..Morning_star
- ...unproductive. If you want to chuck an idea out there i'd gladly discuss what ever you want.Morning_star
- Not sure why it's off limits to talk about the people involved in this movement given that a lot of time they are expressing their views and influencing people.yuekit
- If they are arguing in bad faith or acting as apologists for far right then surely that's worth noting.yuekit
- agreed, yuekit.BonSeff
- Once this administration collapses on itself, a lot of people are going to have a trail of regrettable positions. I hope they never recover from it either.BonSeff
- It's not off limits to talk about the people, it's just not helpful because the diversity of opinion within the IDW is huge. And as this thread is about the...Morning_star
- ...the IDW i thought to discuss the ideas would be more productive. I'm not a fan of talking about the people because, as we've just seen with Shapiro, you...Morning_star
- ..imply that if you stand next to a person in a picture you must necessarily share their ideologies. Also, taking snippets and soundbites out of context just...Morning_star
- ...leads to bickering and subjective judgements about what the person 'actually' means. As they aren't here to defend themselves it seems that...Morning_star
- ...the ideas are a far better target for discussion. It also means that we eject some of the media manipulations and personal bias.Morning_star
- hard to separate the free exchange of ideas from the personas.BonSeff
- People like Shapiro and Rubin spend all day attacking their "enemies" (i.e., Democrats and the left) on social media. Seems like fair game to me.yuekit
- @yeukit. If you look at Rubins YouTube channel and the content your claim about him attacking 'demoncrats' and the left is just not accurate. The fact that...Morning_star
- ...the iDW spans both left and right idealogies is testament to that. You seem to have this compulsion to simplify the issue to left vs right. It's puzzling.Morning_star
- I'm amazed that anyone could watch Rubin's show and not pick up on the fact that it promotes conservatism. Why do think it's funded by Republican donors?yuekit
- Or just read his Twitter feed. It's almost all criticizing one side.yuekit
- He's gay, he's married, he describes himself as Libertarian. His guests are an incredibly broad mix subject specialists. His last 20 tweets show no promotion...Morning_star
- ...of the right. He is measured in his opinion and interview style. Lets assume that your observations are not inaccurate (which they are)...so what? Why is...Morning_star
- ...it a problem if he promotes views from the right as well as views from the left. Can you describe why that is a problem?Morning_star
- I dunno, to me the show seems to exist to convert people to a conservative viewpoint. Which would explain the partnership with conservatives like Dennis Prageryuekit
- who is basically a George Bush style religious conservative, and the Koch brothers who are the biggest Republican donors.yuekit
- Sure they have people "from the left" on but it's mostly in the context of critiquing the left, whereas far right and even alt right guys like Stefan Molyneuxyuekit
- goes largely unchallenged. Of course if he wants to be conservative that's fine. What a lot of people find problematic is the dishonest framing of him being ayuekit
- centrist or even a liberal.yuekit
- @ Yuekiu. hope you don;t mind but I'm gonna reply to you in the thread as this sidebar discussion limits content.Morning_star
- BonSeff0
- The master race is 5'1"?BonSeff
- And Jewish.Morning_star
- Wasn't referring to Shapiro here, just using him as a measuring stick.BonSeff
- Apologies for getting your message wrong. Who'd have thought that misunderstanding comments, snippets and soundbites could be such a minefield. :)Morning_star
- BonSeff0
- <The man actually believes in the White Genocide Theory and has been part of a UK Channel 5 doc and isn't someone identified as part of the IDW. Your point Bon?Morning_star
- Did you hold a vote with your boys and exile him?BonSeff
- Yes. We all sat round and, at length, discussed Jungs interpretation of the racist architype and decided he shouldn't be allowed in the neopatriarchyMorning_star
