GTX0 Announcements | RoadmapFeedbackHelp | SandboxNewest Posts | Replies | Hottest
NIFE UpdatesRoadmapRequests | HelpDiscuss Game Worlds


Politics & Religion


World events, politics and whatever (especially whatever)
WARNING: Posts may contain offensive content and red wine
09/11/2001 WE REMEMBER

"Fear is the foundation of most governments." - John Adams

"My family is more important than my party." - Zell Miller


You probably heard of these guys. It’s a group of I guess smart guy anti-politically correct “free thinkers” with a strong internet/YouTube presence. The core group is Ben Shapiro, Sam Harris, Eric Weinstein, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin and Joe Rogan. What do you think of these guys? Personally I thought they were cool for a while, I bought Harris’ book and Jordan Peterson’s book, but I’m worried they’re becoming overexposed and dull. It seems like nowadays they spend their time interviewing and congratulating each other in a gay intellectual orgy. Do I really need to see Rubin interview Shapiro for the 20th time?

settingsOptions
There are 15 Replies

I know some of them from the Joe Rogan podcast.

Sam Harris seems cool, with legitimate gripes about politically correct liberals who are constantly full of outrage.

Eric Weinstein seems similar, I've heard good things from him.

Ben Shapiro is what I imagine a lot of the conservatives here in this forum listen to (too jewish for 85, of course). I personally can't stand his voice, and his whataboutism towards "the left" is aggravating.

Jordan Peterson, his reputation both good and bad precedes him. I'd read his book if I got the chance just to make my own judgement. He definitely seems to have struck a cord with young men who would otherwise look to My Little Pony for their worldview.

Dave Rubin, sounds familiar. Don't know him.

I can't really say Joe Rogan falls into the same political or social beliefs as the rest of these guys. He's definitely sympathetic to some of their ideas and logic, though, and I've noticed he's been letting a few of their misconceptions seep into his own ideas.

Posted July 8th by Agis
Agis
 

I think Harris and Peterson make some good points sometimes.

The others I don't care for.

Ben Shapiro sucks and doesn't know what he's talking about half the time.

Edited July 8th by Temerit
Temerit

Shapiro is the closest thing millennial conservatives have to a Rush Limbaugh type figure.

Rush's secret to success in the 80s and 90s was the authentic rapport he had with his primarily blue collar audience. He spoke their language very effectively. He had, and continues to have, the bearing of a down-on-his-luck slob; sitting at a bar stool at 6 pm, pointing to the television screen and half drunkenly appealing to the bartender with the phrase "Let me tell you what's wrong with this country.". Now, Rush is a lot smarter than that would imply (and most of his audience weren't drunken slobs, just so we're clear on that) but to the working men that listened to him he seemed like one of their own.

Contrast this with Ben Shapiro. Shapiro's catch phrase is "Facts don't care about your feelings.". He's practically tried to brand himself with it. Unlike Rush he's fit, doesn't seem to care about football, and is not entirely disdainful of high culture. He speaks primarily to an audience of under 40s on an internet-age platform. Whereas Rush listeners would catch his show on their way home from work or while they were driving their route, Shapiro fans encounter him on Youtube and Soundcloud while exercising, doing household chores, waiting for their next class, or just browsing the internet from home. And finally, quite unlike Rush, he didn't content himself with being agnostic about the Trump candidacy in 2016. He routinely reminds his listeners that he didn't vote for the current president, though I suspect that he is warming to the idea for 2020. I am not, for what it's worth.

Shapiro's style of debate is something along the lines of "Here are the seventeen reasons why your argument is bad in ascending order of importance, and if you take offense from anything I say that's on you and you probably deserved it anyway.". His matter of fact phrasing and cadence gives off the impression of the dork who got swirlies in high school for opening his mouth to correct the wrong "jock" at the wrong time on some trivial technical matter... and strange as it may seem that is part of his appeal. Shapiro knows how to speak to his people as much as Rush knows how to speak to his, and I am a regular Shapiro listener. He presents his fans of a sort of idealized version of what they think they are. I suspect many of the most successful pundits, left or right, find their voice in this way.



Why do I listen to Shapiro? It's not just because he reminds me of myself, even though he does. I listen to him because he is relentlessly consistent to his stated principles, and because he is not afraid to tell Republicans that they're wrong in compromising their own stated principles for the sake of political expediency and in order to "win", as if victory can ever be found if we become the things we claim to be against. Not many conservatives in this business have the audacity to go to CPAC and end their speech with a warning. "We must always tell the truth." he says, "We can't become tribal." Remember, the point of CPAC is to cheerlead. Who among the Democrat punditry would ever dream of doing this at their own conference? Not bad for a spiritual successor to Rush Limbaugh.

Peterson, on the other hand, is the right man at the right time. The most fascinating thing about him is how much money one can make by merely telling grown men to take care responsibility for themselves. The second most fascinating thing about him is how much he threatens the far left by doing so. I read as many so called "think pieces" as I can just to see the wild dissonance between what Peterson actually argues for and what the left claims he argues for. It has to be seen to be believed.

Edited July 8th by Famov
Famov

Ben Shapiro

Talking so fast that no one can respond doesn’t make someone correct. He uses the same tired cliches and talking points that every right wing talk radio host preceding him used. He just wraps the bullshit (and I think he KNOWS he is full of shit most of the time) behind a veneer of an honest intellectual conversation.

Sam Harris

I feel embarrassed that I once mistook this bored trust fund kid for a legit intellectual in the same boat as Dawkins or Hitchens. Now I just view him as an Israel/imperialism/right wing apologist with too much time on his hands. If I want anti-PC, I will go watch much more entertaining and better presented content from the various edgelord YouTubers, because unlike Harris, they don’t go on to defend the blood imperialism has on its hands just to make a point about political correctness and Islam being bad.

His neuroscience and “philosophy” work are sort of interesting but not as insightful or unique as I once thought. In general he seems like a bit of a fraud. Oh well, at least his mommy’s Golden Girls money was used for things other than drugs and hookers.

Eric Weinstein

Don’t know much about him.

Jordan Peterson

Easily the most likeable of the hip new right wing podcasters and “public intellectuals”. I do think he is good for lonely, confused young men as he gives them direction through age-old mythology and tropes that are still valuable yet somehow largely forgotten in the modern age.

What i don’t like is the way he insinuates that “the left” and “cultural Marxism” are to blame for the problems facing young men today. Idk if he is being paid to do it or what, but he sounds pretty reasonable and well-meaning up until this point where he starts politicizing psychology and people’s personal problems.

Dave Rubin

Lol.

“The left is too radical and PC, therefore I am going to reverse literally everything I believe about economics”

I don’t get it

Joe Rogan

Pretty much the chillest dude ever. I’d smoke a blunt with him.

Posted July 8th by pacman
pacman
 

The common thread I’ve noticed with the “intellectual dark web” is that it’s mostly right wingers pretending not to be right wingers. With massive victim complexes while they complain about liberals having victim complexes.

Posted July 8th by pacman
pacman
 

I feel embarrassed that I once mistook this bored trust fund kid for a legit intellectual in the same boat as Dawkins

Lol

Posted July 8th by Jubei
Jubei
 

I feel embarrassed that I once mistook this bored trust fund kid for a legit intellectual in the same boat as Dawkins or Hitchens. Now I just view him as an Israel/imperialism/right wing apologist with too much time on his hands.

The only way your anti Israel stance could be more deranged is if you finally admitted that you don't believe they have a right to exist. Hitchens would have disagreed, and you would have probably disowned him by now as well, were he still alive and able to offer a realistic perspective on America's (and Israel's) position in the world.

The common thread I’ve noticed with the “intellectual dark web” is that it’s mostly right wingers pretending not to be right wingers. With massive victim complexes while they complain about liberals having victim complexes.

Center and center right commentary will look "right wing" only from the deepest recesses of TYT grade punditry, but you must be able to understand why these folks have a broader audience than Jimmy "All cops are criminals." Dore and Ana "I'm better than you." Kasparian.

Posted July 8th by Famov
Famov

Hitchens was actually pretty staunchly anti-Zionist and anti-Judaism, even through his neocon years toward the end because unlike Harris, he applied his anti-religion, anti-supremacy stance to all religions equally. He and Harris actually had a brief disagreement about this in the Four Horsemen conversstion.

Posted July 8th by pacman
pacman
 

Holy fuck I admit I've had 4 bottles of beer this morning, but the idea that a genius like Dawkins who's contributed greatly to science with his theory of memes, and has expanded on the theory of evolution, written original insightful works like The Greatest show on Earth: Evidence for Evolution, the idea that him and Sam Harris are peers is so absurd hahahahaha

Posted July 8th by Jubei
Jubei
 

Yeah the contrast is STARK when you compare their scientific work. But also, Dawkins is just more intellectually honest and tends not to run his mouth unless he has his facts straight.

Posted July 8th by pacman
pacman
 

a realistic perspective on America's (and Israel's) position in the world.

Do you think warmongers like Bolton and Pompeo have a realistic perspective? Lol.

In general, on foreign policy, whose opinions do you value most?

Posted July 8th by pacman
pacman
 

Any time some one posts a Ben Shapiro quote or any of the dribble from Turning point USA I want to bash my head against a wall. Granted his "facts don't care about your feelings quote" has made me piss several of his supporters lol.

Posted July 8th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

why am i, as a leftist, supposed to get so pissed at jordan peterson? he seems like just another self-help pseudointellectual (like joseph campbell) only with a few right wing opinions. i don't have the energy to care.

i really don't have the energy to care about any of these propagandists, actually.

"cultural marxism"/"cultural bolshevism" is nazi code tho

Edited July 8th by poptart!
poptart!
 

I listen to the Joe Rogan and Waking Up podcast. Both people worth listening to, and I respect Harris as an intellectual (even though I don't always agree). Can't say the same about Rubin, Kermit the Frog, and Ben Munchkin.

What do I think of Jordan Peterson? Why I suppose that depends on what you mean by think. What do you mean by what? What do you mean by Jordan Peterson? If we cannot agree on these deeply philosophical concepts, [insert unintelligible word salad]. In all seriousness, while I think he contributes a lot to the anti-politically correct discourse, I never really understood his intellectual appeal. A fanciful self-help guy who paints his intellectual detractors with a broad brush and misapplies concepts like nihilism and Marxism. I also find Peterson's crusade against post-modernism ironic in light of his own philosophy of truth.

Edited July 9th by Esprit
Esprit
 

Jordan Peterson is an anti-postmodernist postmodernist lol

Posted July 10th by pacman
pacman
 
Reply to: The intellectual dark web

Enter your message here


Site Rules | Complaints Process | Register Complaint Facebook Page
GTX0 © 2009-2017 Xhin GameTalk © 1999-2008 lives on