JOE ROGAN VS. CARLOS MENCIA... FITE!!!

Mencia was born “Ned Arnel Mencia”, the seventeenth of eighteen children in San Pedro Sula, Honduras. His father, Roberto Holness, is from Honduras, and his mother, Magdelena Mencia, is from Mexico. He was raised in East Los Angeles, California by his aunt Consuelo and uncle Pablo Mencia. "out of respect for his father", he went by the name Ned Holness as a boy.

http://68.media.tumblr.com/13d46273e4c9069f73c615d5b9d3309a/tumblr_opjrj1p13Z1uc3ovio1_1280.jpg

hmm

https://www.facebook.com/hermano/videos/10214723690180350/

Tie-dye t-shirts with big streaks of black in them are one of my favorite genre of tie-dyes.

i don't understand how he can believe this and still be "friends" with alex jones. is he just opportunistic or really fucking dumb?

why not both

it's just kinda weird.

i'm not a "de-platforming" guy and i have nothing in principle against him having these alt right figures on his podcast (he has had everyone from milo to gavin mcinness to alex jones and, most famously, jordan peterson). but in his conversations with these people he barely pushes back on their ideas, if at all. he is probably as responsible as anyone else for jordan peterson's rise. if he really wants to build a more compassionate society, and if he really cares about the welfare of refugees at the border, he should be more skeptical of these people (to put it lightly)

think it's been a while since he was tight with jones, voiced skepticism about lol sandy hook truthery. the thing you learn with rogan is he'll mostly go along with whoever he's got on (that tie dyed video, i assume from the voice duncan trussell was the guest), so, like last week? it was bari weiss and then killer mike, so you've got clips of him on the war on poverty with killer mike and then he's got a clip with bari weiss on "anti-semitism by progressives." some intellectual darkweb guys are so dumb that majority report can pull clips of him dunking on jp or dave rubin by just picking at the seams of their arguments. but he's usually very credulous, so depending on the guest, he might be getting horrified by the treatment of white south african farmers or all aboard board with medicare for all. i mean, overall, despite his preoccupation with free speech and welcoming alt-right guests, he has the fairly moderate libtard opinions expected from a 50something coastal elite dude + very mild conspiracy theory stuff (more fbi assassinations of radical leaders and less chemtrails these days).

yeah, "credulous" is a better word for what i'm talking about than "dumb." he does seem to look for the "best" in his guests, which is a good personality trait i suppose, but it's weird when it leads him to giving pretty egregious right wing figures the chance to prove that they too can hang

idk but isn't his thing that he DOESN'T push back?

I'd never actually seen or heard him till recently (though I knew he was famous for the podcast I hadn't seen anything until maybe two months ago). From what I've seen he just kind of agrees with whichever guest he has on, maybe the only real consistency around the idea of "free speech" - which I don't think of as exclusively a 'modern right wing thing'.

he has a big audience, if he's saying stuff like this he either believes it or thinks enough of his audience does, or both?

i think his audience are mostly liberals or else vaguely apolitical libertarians. i've gotten texts from friends asking me to help them formulate reasons why jordan peterson is wrong. they know he's wrong, but they're kinda turned around after hearing the podcast where rogan agreed with the stuff he was saying and made it seem like common sense.

full disclosure: that happened one time. i don't why i made it plural.

i actually don't think rogan is any dumber or more credulous than the average american newsmedia personality, though, and probably less reactionary and definitely less cold-blooded. i also i think his working class roots show (how lame that sounds writing it on ilx in this spirited defense of joe rogan!), like he was set by 30 but still grew up the kid of a single mom, raised in newton mass, didn't go to college etc.

it's ridiculous to suggest he's being taken advantage of by right wing grifters but intellectually he's quite often bullied; he has that anti-intellectual streak that makes america great, where he'll express an idea, like, why would you go to college and major in history when you can just listen to dan carlin's hardcore history? or, why would a kid go a hundred grand into debt getting a humanities degree when the great lectures are on youtube, ted talks, jordan peterson lecturing on the hero's journey and jung! he'd rather grapple with ideas from his own perspective and knowledge, which leaves him vulnerable to the elite-level sophistry of, say, candace owens or jordan p (if you put him against a neanderthal reactionary like owen benjamin or 2019 nick dipaolo, he does fine). he does push back! but it's usually ineffective.

great posts dylann

Yea i agree—good analysis. There is something charmingly populist about him and I understand why the podcast is popular. But yeah, he is a good mark for the peterson’s of the world

he does seem pretty consistent on a few other issues though, such as "fat people are gross" and "forced diversity ruined Star Wars"

Lol

being friends with Dana White probably messes up your brain

credit where credit's due, rogan played a key role in destroying elon musk's career

i think his audience are mostly liberals or else vaguely apolitical libertarians.

The youtube viewers are all young white dudes on the alt-right pipeline (ala everything else on youtube)

Really?

all I use Youtube for is 70s albums and bootleg audiobooks and I still get Jordan Peterson videos in my Up Next

dylann otm

also i think politically his audience might be somewhat diverse, might skew male for sure but i think some people who might want to hear the interview w/ a mycologist or a neuroscientist from uc berkeley talking sleep might not be the same people who listen to the mma bullshit or the comedian interviews

dylann nailed it

I enjoy his show, particularly when he has comedians/his friends on. I like whenever they talk about a comedian's creative process at length - at once totally foreign to me, but as an artist, interesting and familiar and sometimes fascinating. he makes otherwise intolerable or uninteresting personalities interesting to me - Burr, Fitzsimmons, Segura, Papa, Christina P... I'd rather listen to a comedian talk about the process and just have a conversation rather than listening to or watching their act.

and because the show is so successful you get these amazing one-offs - Roseanne, Elon Musk, Alex Jones - where Rogan is in on the joke. the rightwing "intellectual" episodes are insufferable because as dylann said, Rogan defers to them. fawning over JP is one thing, but Dave Rubin? Seriously?

He's going to have Jack from Twitter on this Friday.

Awesome

The youtube viewers are all young white dudes on the alt-right pipeline (ala everything else on youtube)
Really?

― Trϵϵship, Monday, January 28, 2019 12:01 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

all I use Youtube for is 70s albums and bootleg audiobooks and I still get Jordan Peterson videos in my Up Next

― We were never Breeting Borting (President Keyes), Monday, January 28, 2019 12:09 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

so i just realized i had these too in my up next. what the fuck

Some of it's really broad reasoning, I blocked an advertiser on Facebook or Instagram and under the reasons why I was seeing it was just 'men in the southern US' basically.

If Youtube/Google knows your demographic information, it just runs with the "males between 25-49 in the United States watch a ton of Jordan Peterson clips."

The youtube viewers are all young white dudes on the alt-right pipeline (ala everything else on youtube)

it's worth noting that even if you have no data/history for YouTube to scrape, it still suggests an entire platter of Joe Rogan videos right on the front page.

Lol Alex Jones said "Rogan IS the Deep State"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9p6jRHDZ0E

rogan and jones in happier times

god yes for all the whining about "liberal" algorithms you really cannot click a single one of these videos without getting flooded with "JOE ROGAN TAKES ON NEW GILLETTE COMMERIAL" or "BILL BURR DESTROYS FEMINISM IN 6 MINUTES!!!" for the next 2 months

credit where credit's due, rogan played a key role in destroying elon musk's career

― maxwell’s silver hang suite (bizarro gazzara)

elon musk played the most key role in destroying elon musk's career, he still sucks

and yeah i installed a dodgy russian chrome plugin just so i wouldn't have to see youtube recommending me jordan peterson and joe rogan videos, now everything i do on the internet is probably going directly to some russian oligarch or another but at this point i trust russian oligarchs more than i trust youtube's recommendation engine

If you ever click on anything but music or channels you subscribe to, go in and delete the videos from your Youtube history. That's kept me Rogan/feminazi destroyed-free for months now.

lmao if you didn't think Russian oligarchs could see all that anyway rusho

I purposefully reject every Jordan Peterson suggestion I get and yet they still keep coming. I click on "I don't like this" but it never stops

its called courtship, ums

i watched one bill burr video like 4 years ago and my suggestion algorithm is basically diarrhea now

haha yeah I think I watched a ton of Norm McDonald on talk show appearances and also watched a few Rogans after I started with Leia Remini breaking down the weird ass Scientology shit she went through (which was actually really interesting)

Surprised so many ppl are bothered by YouTube recommendations

YouTube has become a quiet powerhouse of political radicalization in recent years, powered by an algorithm that a former employee says suggests increasingly fringe content. And far-right YouTubers have learned to exploit that algorithm and land their videos high in the recommendations on less extreme videos.

Its weird how out in the open that is but still easy to overlook

More leftists should probably try to go on rogan. Seems like a pretty easy way to get your ideas out there.

He's had a few - Kyle Kulinski on a couple of times, Jimmy Dore and Tulsi Gabbard. I wonder if AOC might go on

Not that she exactly needs the platform or profile boost but its a guest-friendly format for sure

lol Dore and Gabbard's leftist credentials are uh questionable iirc

Kyle Kulinski on a couple of times, Jimmy Dore and Tulsi Gabbard

ignorant of kulinski but a pizza-gater and an anti-gay, clash of civilizations crusader are not a particularly good representation of "the left"

Bernie Sanders would be good on that show imo

So its a loose definition of left! I won't argue with that. Dore is a clown and Gabbard is massively questionable at best (though I didn't know she was anti-gay!) - I'm not suggesting the merits of these are good

though I do think Kulinski is actually very good

bernie for sure

more leftists shouldn't go on Rogan, Rogan should just stop having political guests and go back to workout magic and psychedelics

I can't stand the political "regulars" he has on (aka the intellectual dark web LOL), but one-offs where he's less credulous like Candace Owens are good imo because the format lends itself really well to showing how much of a fucking idiot some of these people are. everyone is used to the canned 7-10 minute talk show interview or radio appearance, and a freeform unstructured 2-3 hour conversation is completely different. I hate to use the "sunshine is the best disinfectant" cliche but in many cases it's been true - look at the effect his podcasts with Alex Jones and Elon Musk had on their respective careers.

I don't have anything against the idea of AOC or Sanders going on Rogan tbh

i watched one bill burr video like 4 years ago and my suggestion algorithm is basically diarrhea now

― A-B-C. A-Always, B-Be, C-Chooglin (will)

you got him confused with bill bonds too, eh?

Twitter Jack on Rogan

4.7K upvotes
28k downvotes

damn - dont know if the ratio is against rogan or jack though

doing a quick look at random other guests of all different types, and they're all the other way around

David Pakman on today apparently

Cornel West! only seen first half or so, good rapport

watched this Michael Brooks clip about the interview, only had positive things to say. stopped paying attention to Rogan's podcast whenever that IDW shit started. don't think he's a charlatan, just gullible.

Agree with that. He's definitely not a charlatan. There's legitimate criticism of fact he doesn't really kick back or challenge his right-wing grifters guests (tho he did with Rubin and Candace Owens, and effectively too). He has fixations on certain things (on campus free speech stuff), but his gullibility does have net effect of also giving his good guests room

bernie

I gotta give him credit for pushing back on Andy Ngo harder than anyone in the mainstream media did but it's incredibly stupid to have him on in the first place

I guess that's what they call, "The Joe Rogan Experience"

I don't know, I think having those kind of people on means when he has Bernie on (or Cornell West), he's reaching those people too. I don't know if its stupid or not, Rogan's stance is just to have people on and let them talk, I don't know if thats so bad - they already have huge platforms

Rogan is definitely overly credulous and not exactly smart, but he does push back on guests more than people think (candace owens and dave rubin both came off badly), and their guard is down because Rogan isn't looking for the gotcha

Lol, Joe says he had requests from Biden, Warren and Mayor Pete to come on and he turned them all down

I don't think podcasts are Biden's best medium

Biden-Rogan would be incredible

Truly the Frost/Nixon we deserve

Bidens best medium is sleep

tbf I think Rogan missed a trick. He takes a lot of shit (some deserved) for never pushing really pushing back, but pushing back doesn't work! and some guests just walk right off a cliff by themselves, without Rogans help (not that thats what he's about)

He's had Bernie, Tulsi and Yang on. And was positive about Bernie and Tulsi. I guess he just wants his guests to be real (I'm well aware he has a bunch of right wing grifters on but wgaf? they're all grifters thats just how it is)

Lol, Joe says he had requests from Biden, Warren and Mayor Pete to come on and he turned them all down

When you can't even win over Joe Rogan it's time to pack it in.

Go on Mencia's show th o wate

Does he not like Yang? I know he was the first candidate to go on his show.
― flappy bird,

Not clear, he has had him on, but not mentioning him when he mentioned Bernie and Tulsi seemed to tell its own story, unless he just forgot

on paper he's 100% yang gang but I'd be shocked if he wasn't at the very least sympathetic or liked him more than the others

the others meaning everyone he's rejected

Well he had Yang on so he must have been somewhat predisposed to him, so either he didn't like the podcast with him on or he's seen something in him he's disliked since (or he just forgot, equally likely!)

Joe doesn't seem to the brightest of guys (though this actually helps his show), which means he's unable to see through some terrible grifters, but he does value authenticity even if he can't always see it. Obviously Pete, Warren and Biden don't really have any of that, which he thinks wouldn't make them good guests. I think he has to think he'll like his guests on some level, he's not setup for it to be otherwise

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-KjcOQPVeI

Rogan's own take on it (and on his own past comments)

That doesn't mean he's going to be a great president. I don't know what's required to be a president. I really don't. Maybe we're better off with Trump; maybe we're better off with someone else.

makes u think

And so he doubles down, of course:

It's very bad for the cause if you have a transgender woman that doesn't disclose she's transgender and is beating the fuck out of biological women. The ones who get fucked over are biological women.

Can't get over that the Fear Factor comedian did a bunch of DMT and became the Rush Limbaugh of the new millennium

ah yes love this vacuous piece of shit

I had no idea who this guy was 2 weeks ago.

On the Media has a good segment on him and his appeal this week. (There's also a mention, re cancel culture, that America just spent a week mourning a rapist.)

I'll watch a chunk of a Rogan video if he's interviewing someone I'm already interested in/by, who's gonna have something smart to say no matter what. His interviews with Henry Rollins and David Lee Roth, for example, were both good, even if I didn't make it through all 14 hours. And I think his point about the transgender fighter is a valid one. As far as the whole Bernie endorsement deal, if Bernie's the nominee I'll vote for him. And if Rogan's endorsement can get a few hundred thousand sponge-brained knuckle-walkers to vote for Bernie if he's the nominee, good. Votes are votes. I don't think Sanders is gonna suddenly develop a huge interest in MMA or any of Rogan's (and his audience's) other pet issues, so it's clearly a win.

I think his point about the transgender fighter is a valid one.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5357259/

(There's also a mention, re cancel culture, that America just spent a week mourning a rapist.)

― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Saturday, February 1, 2020 7:05 AM (thirteen minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

this sucked ass too for the record

must be nice to think bullshit points are valid unperson

god my blood is boiling, why even fucking say that

my s/o's gym has been going through this with a trans member whose been barred from competing. they did a bunch of protests at competitions where everyone timed out

but the point being that even though she was within the normal range of hormones as accepted by the IOC standards and was not in fact dominating competitions is still barred, it has no basis in fact

that was honestly so out of line unperson you should be ashamed

I've been wrong about things before; I'll be wrong about things again. Settle the fuck down.

i dislike Rogan because Fear Factor, UFC, his dumbass podcast logo, and that intro "What's up Freak Bitches!!" or however it goes. what a fucking dork.

I'll watch a chunk of a Rogan video if he's interviewing someone I'm already interested in/by, who's gonna have something smart to say no matter what. His interviews with Henry Rollins and David Lee Roth, for example, were both good, even if I didn't make it through all 14 hours. And I think his point about the transgender fighter is a valid one. As far as the whole Bernie endorsement deal, if Bernie's the nominee I'll vote for him. And if Rogan's endorsement can get a few hundred thousand sponge-brained knuckle-walkers to vote for Bernie if he's the nominee, good. Votes are votes. I don't think Sanders is gonna suddenly develop a huge interest in MMA or any of Rogan's (and his audience's) other pet issues, so it's clearly a win.

― shared unit of analysis (unperson)

hi, i'm trans, thanks for throwing me under the bus

and thanks for telling me to "settle the fuck down", that really makes me think better of you

must be nice to be able to let shit like this just roll off your back

That point re: transgender competitors was the same position that JK Rowling got dragged for FWIW.

This actually underscores an important point, which is that there are many people who think Rogan "sounds reasonable" enough because they don't actually know anything about the topic at hand

unperson go put yourself in a corner and think about what you've done

"calm down, i've been wrong, am wrong, and will be wrong, so i never have to take responsibility for thinking something hateful"

you're supposed to be a writer, do some fucking research before you agree with a baseless and fucked up assertion. LEARN from being wrong

Oh, you assbags are my fucking teachers now? Settle the fuck down.

your incuriosity about things that are not your own dumbass opinions led you down this path, and i'm sorry for that, but also fuck you

i'm not interested in teaching anybody who's not willing to listen or learn. fp time i guess.

i'm not interested in teaching anybody who's not willing to listen or learn.

I freely admit that I have plenty to learn...but not from you. fp away.

unperson, you do get why your stance might be particularly hurtful to someone for whom this isn't just an abstract intellectual debate?

sigh. this is the hill you're going to die on, huh? longtime respected poster and you're going to go out defending joe rogan.

well, he's a longtime poster at least

unperson, you do get why your stance might be particularly hurtful to someone for whom this isn't just an abstract intellectual debate?

Of course. But I think my "stance" is being mischaracterized.

longtime respected poster and you're going to go out defending joe rogan

I dispute that description, and I suspect plenty of other ILXors would, too. But the point is, I'm not defending Joe Rogan. What I heard him say, about this one particular trans MMA fighter competing against overmatched biologically female fighters, seemed to make sense to me. Now, that's not a reflection (in my mind) on trans people competing in athletics generally. To me, it was about that one case. And if Rogan's wrong about that, and I'm wrong for accepting his version of events, I'll own it.

i would literally douse you with gasoline and light it then kick you into an active volcano while flipping you off

I remember back when everyone Would go get drinks together after lighting each other on fire and kicking each other into volcanos.

Man, Rogan’s sidekick is probably the only human who makes him look smart in comparison

And if Rogan's wrong about that, and I'm wrong for accepting his version of events, I'll own it.

― but also fuck you (unperson)

as long as you don't actually have to listen to any trans people while doing so, sure

What I heard him say, about this one particular trans MMA fighter competing against overmatched biologically female fighters, seemed to make sense to me.

Regarding Fallon Fox, Rogan's exact words were 'You're a fucking man. That's a man, OK? I don't care if you don't have a dick any more.' Is this the episode you're referring to?

Of course. But I think my "stance" is being mischaracterized.

a couple options here.

1. you're not communicating effectively and the best stance would be to try and figure out why what you're saying is making so many people angry or upset
2. everybody else on this board is a screaming snowflake. (why are you still here?)
3. you are communicating effectively, you're just an asshole.

I dispute that description, and I suspect plenty of other ILXors would, too.

in fairness maybe i'm confusing you with unregistered. regardless you've been here a while and before just now you've not incurred my ire, and i'm a complete namby-pamby snowflake, though admittedly a namby-pamby snowflake with a poor attention span. i try to assume the best of people even when there's no real reason to do so.

a couple options here.

It's a little bit of 1 and a whole lot of 3. And I am very clear on why what I said made two or three people angry and upset. I have accepted that I was wrong and I am about to move on with my day.

(it suddenly struck me that there are people here for whom this is a very personal issue and are sensitive to it, and i regret my sarcasm, also shitting up the thread. fwiw i have dealt with severe substance abuse and i often see junkies derided online to little resistance and i get defensive, and aggressive, and didactic...)

i feel you there rvw

rvw fwiw i don't have any issues with what you said, mind you i also didn't take it as sarcasm

Regarding Fallon Fox, Rogan's exact words were 'You're a fucking man. That's a man, OK? I don't care if you don't have a dick any more.' Is this the episode you're referring to?

fwiw unperson is obviously responding to Rogan's commentary in the recent video above, in which he addresses trans listeners to apologise for offence caused, express his love, and separately from causing offence, make a blanket statement that "[I] definitely shouldn't have used those words," about the quote you're citing.

(He apologises in a dumbass way and says plenty of other dumbass things throughout, but also says a) that "I'm a moron" and nobody should be seeking guidance or wisdom from him, and b) that he thinks it's unhelpful in all matters to excise the most provocative pull quotes and wave them around to try and inflame debate, which)

also now I'm gonna have 80% Rogan recommendations in my youtubes for the next six months bcz I played that embed, FPing anvil and everyone else in this thread

Go into your history and delete it. Deleting anything that’s not a music video has become an ingrained habit and it’s been at least a year since I’ve gotten the BILL BURR DESTROYS FEMINISM recommendations.

i'm done trying to teach youtube not to recommend me evil shit, i installed a dodgy plugin to block all recommendations from them and it's doing ok so far

(He apologises in a dumbass way and says plenty of other dumbass things throughout, but also says a) that "I'm a moron" and nobody should be seeking guidance or wisdom from him

― don't care didn't ask still clappin (sic)

mmm. and you find that statement exculpatory?

because i don't. i strongly suspect it to be a dodge, a fairly typical dodge employed by people who want to be influential and powerful but don't want to be held responsible for the things they say. look at the way the president halfheartedly disowns nazis, and the nazis, you know, they don't seem to mind, they don't seem to think he's _really_ disowning them. i have a hard time believing that all of joe rogan's fans are fundamentally misunderstanding him. to me it seems a sop to those poor people, against all evidence, are unable to free themselves from the compulsion to see everyone as a fundamentally _reasonable_ person.

when people say the sorts of things about trans women that joe rogan has said about trans women, i find those statements extremely compelling. because my experience? most cis people aren't going to say that shit in the first place. most cis people, quite frankly, they just don't give a shit about my gender one way or the other. i think it's reasonable for me to thus conclude that people like joe rogan, people like j.k. rowling, _really fucking hate_ trans people, and no amount of "oh i was misunderstood" is going to convince me they've changed their minds.

tldr: not especially, but I was just saying that unperson was more likely talking about the video that revived the thread, five posts above his first post today, than about a 2013 podcast episode that he recalled clearly. if we're gonna tear each other apart let's do it in good faith!


tlbriylsya:

To be fair, he doesn't say "oh i was misunderstood," he says "I said something that anyone could reasonably take as offensive, which I regret. if any listener took this phrase and a half as representing the entirety of my attitude towards trans people, that is entirely my fault, due to the way I expressed myself, and wish to assure them that it doesn't." And he's not issuing it as a thought-out cover-up, he's extemporising in his usual dumbass way, in response to an even dumber ass (Normand keeps noting that he's never voted and doesn't comprehend anything about how politics relate to real people's lives).


mmm. and you find that statement exculpatory?

My apprehension is that Rogan is a doofus who is too credulous and stoned and non-bright to have a coherent worldview on most matters, too macho-masculine for me to personally be interested in listening to him talk on topics that genuinely engage him, and far far too tediously unconcise in his mental processing to listen to an hour or two of him seven years ago talking to Brian Redban, ffs, just to find out what he said about Fallon Fox. Let alone then find out anything about Fallon Fox myself, whose name I read for the first time afaik a few posts up, to gather context. Let alone form an opinion regarding the exact level to which I would condemn Rogan for his dumb offensive rant. Let alone listen to however many hours of him talking to queer people, or touching on queer issues, in the subsequent seven years, that it would take to ascertain how sincerely I should assess his claims to have "nothing but love" for trans or queer people as a whole, and then to evaluate whether his statement in that video is sufficently exculpatory against the level to which I had condemned him.


On the whole I think it's good that being called out, again, for this March 2013 rant in January 2020 has led him to express love for trans people and praise a trans person as one of his favourite guests of all time. (Citing a person who has very publicly changed how they define themselves, over three decades of internationally-famous life, also bodes well for Rogan seeing value in changing his own opinions over time, too). A large proportion of his audience are likely to be influenced by him making clear statements like this.

I also think it's probably unfortunate that he went on to specify the circumstances in which he was distrustful of Fox, and assume he's likely inaccurate or missing important nuance in his summary of her situation at the time of her second professional fight. But for those of his audience who are receptive to being told not to hate trans people, this is underlining that Rogan's thoughts about MMA are a bugbear, and one presumes that he has rants about individual MMA fights or rules or competitors multiple times every week.

sic i don't want to be rude, but i am a little frustrated. why do you feel like you have to watch hours of joe rogan videos in order to make an informed judgement on this issue? like it only counts if you go back to the primary source? why is it that trans people are apparently not considered trustworthy on issues affecting them?

look i'm not into going around randomly declaring people to be class enemies or anything like that, but if somebody goes out there and says racist shit i at least know that whether or not i personally am willing to forgive them or think of them as "misunderstood" shouldn't matter, because i'm white and therefore i'm not the one who's affected by that. i mean wanting to have healing, reconciliation, understanding, these are all very fine things, but my feeling here is when that someone says transphobic shit it's the people who are the victims of transphobia who need to be at the center of that healing process.

My apprehension is that Rogan is a doofus who is too credulous and stoned and non-bright to have a coherent worldview on most matters, too macho-masculine for me to personally be interested in listening to him talk on topics that genuinely engage him, and far far too tediously unconcise in his mental processing to listen to

i dislike Rogan because Fear Factor, UFC, his dumbass podcast logo, and that intro "What's up Freak Bitches!!" or however it goes. what a fucking dork.

i worry the discussion has moved past this but, with fallon fox, she was not, as rogan described, like, waking in there like the hulk and crushing opponents. (there's not even video of most of the fights.) even the infamous fight, she caught her opponent with knees, which is a great way to break orbital bones, and, these fights, even with a commission involved, are barely a step above bar fights in the talent of the fighters. fallon fox met someone with talent, she got smoked. she stopped fighting years ago.

rogan falling for transgender panic stuff is one of the least likeable things about him. the trt and hgh keeps him looking youthful but the show is 95% boomer talk radio shit.

Rogan's appeal is pretty much the same as Marc Maron's or any interview/conversation podcast, casual talk without being a Tonight Show promo for a new movie (even Maron has more of that) and devoid of the NPR monotone, with an aspirational overtone from all the fitness bullshit.

He got in early on the podcast boom (like Maron) and has reaped the benefits in terms of audience.

sic i don't want to be rude, but i am a little frustrated.

I'm sorry; either bear with me for one more reply, or just do tldr it this time.

why do you feel like you have to watch hours of joe rogan videos in order to make an informed judgement on this issue?

why do I feel like I... ought to be informed in order to make an informed judgement?

like it only counts if you go back to the primary source? why is it that trans people are apparently not considered trustworthy on issues affecting them?

you didn't ask if I trust trans people on issues affecting them - you asked whether I personally assessed Rogan's words in the 16-minute video excerpt posted ITT earlier today to be exculpatory of his outbursts in eight minutes of a possibly-three-hour-long podcast from seven years ago, additionally taking in his interactions with queer guests he's had on, and other things he's said on queer-rights-adjacent topics, as in that 16-minute video excerpt he suggested that these are important contextual matters to consider when assessing whether he is personally, inherently hateful.

I answered your direct question to me in detail because I respect you, and your feelings, and the place you're in on your journey. I don't care for Joe Rogan enough to follow his general entreaty to put in work to assess exactly where he sits on the spectrum of 'hateful menace' to 'extremely insensitive clod who fails to see how his words and thoughts are often still hurtful despite his stated efforts to learn and develop his language.'


...need to be at the center of that healing process.

Yes: in the Bernie thread, iirc, a few people were wishing for Contrapoints to go on Rogan (though you, Kate, I think have expressed disdain for her?). One fervently hopes that trans speakers and PRs for trans personalities and thinkers have spent the last two days hitting him up for bookings in light of his "nothing but love for trans people" lines in that excerpt. As discussed by others, the credulous openness that makes it dangerous for him to platform pellet-brained Ben Shapiros and Jordan Petersonses also makes him ready to consider and endorse the plain moderate ideas of a Bernie Sanders, after a single conversation. Having public non-confrontational chats about life and politics and jokes and trans rights issues should demonstrate his sincerity, if it exists, expand his empathy, and counter the deleterious effect upon the susceptible elements of his audience of whatever he's said about non-athlete trans women.

I agree that forgiveness and reconciliation are wasted on the hateful. My impression is that Rogan himself has shown propensity to have some of his attitudes and behaviours changed, and can regardless provide a valuable platform that's worth taking advantage of, when it's on offer.

I thoroughly regret clicking on the video upthread, and spending so many subsequent hours thinking about Mr Rogan at all, let alone going beyond my default of "oh there's a Joe Rogan video in that sidebar: I am not interested in listening to what he says." Sorry for party rocking ILXing.

I think it’s good for Rogan to be critiqued for his comments on trans athletes and other uncomfortable aspects of his podcast, like how it launched the careers of a number of right wingers and conspiracy theorists. If nothing else, he is not - a part of the left—especially not today’s left, and doesn’t say he is.

One thing I don’t like is this idea that he is a credulous, knuckle dragging moron who doesn’t know what he is saying. He plays into that idea—as did jon stewart back in the day—but it’s stupid. He created this massively popular podcast where he interviews leading psychologists, journalists, nutritionists etc in addition to the mma guests. He’s responsible for the things he says and if he wants to defend them, he should, and not dodge by saying he is a moron. And the critics and half-assed defenders shouldn’t say he is brain dead either bc he is obviously of at least average intelligence.

As if politicians, journalists and social media pundits are that much smarter than an mma commentator with a knack for marketing. It’s not an intelligence issue, it’s a matter of different values and ideas

I know he did that dumb restore sanity rally or whatever but otherwise I’m not squaring your remembrance of Jon Stewart with reality.

And the critics and half-assed defenders shouldn’t say he is brain dead either bc he is obviously of at least average intelligence.

George Carlin: "Think about how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of 'em are stupider than that."

Just in terms of deflecting responsibility for his influence by saying he is “just a comedian.” Stewart was a liberal so he’s not like Rogan in other ways.

xp

Stewart was expressing discomfort with people treating him like a journalist. I don't think he was pretending to not know what he was talking about.

That’s true—and a difference. Not the main point of my post though, let’s just leave it out.

He, true, sorry. Never include asides in an ilx post :)

I'm sorry; either bear with me for one more reply, or just do tldr it this time.

we're cool, i don't feel it's my _responsibility_ to talk about this stuff but i honestly do really like it when i get the opportunity to do it, if someone's treating me with kindness and respect (which you are) and listening i am perfectly happy to talk :)

honestly it's an interesting conversation because i haven't spent a lot of time watching joe rogan's videos or listening to the stuff he said, so i'm learning a lot by listening to you talk about your experiences. i appreciate you taking that bullet.

i think your approach to these is sort of how i used to view the world and that's sort of changed over the past few years. i'm starting to understand the limits of objective analysis, the assumptions implicit in it. i used to be fairly adamant that you should pay attention to what people say, and not how people say it, that presentation and personality are distractions from the central message. nowadays, i think there are preconditions for successfully conducting rational discourse, that if those preconditions, which for me personally are kindness and respect, aren't met then that discourse is not going to be effective.

i don't know that much about joe rogan. maybe he just is a wet noodle with no personality of his own who will parrot whatever the last person he's talked to said. i know there are a fair number of people like that. (and imo jon stewart sure as hell isn't one of them - he was one of the best interviewers on late night, thoughtful, critical, incisive)

and i don't think that's good enough. i mean, someone like that, i just fundamentally can't trust them. they say the right things now and is that going to stay? i guess that depends on if they ever talk to a transphobe again in their life. it's not about sincerity, it's about the fundamental shallowness of the conversion experience. even more so than people who are actively malicious, somebody who can be led by the nose into saying or doing literally anything is about the most dangerous thing i can imagine.

i don't see any benefit in listening to or engaging with what that person says because... to get wonky about my day job, there's all this push in data analysis about more data, more data, more data. despite "garbage in garbage out" being a long-established principle of data processing, a surprising number of people seem to operate on the principle that the solution to bad data is more data (or, to put it another way, that the solution to hate speech is more speech). that's not how i operate. i'm more interested in data quality than data quantity, and maybe deliberately ignoring everything the joe rogans of the world have to say makes me less informed than those who listen, i'm certainly not an objective judge of that, but my personal belief tends more towards the opposite.

as far as natalie wynn goes, i wouldn't say i have "disdain" for her, but again, i don't trust her. i don't think she does a very good job speaking for the trans community, and i'm frustrated at the extent to which well-meaning cis people take whatever she says as representative of the larger trans community.

apparently wynn and rogan are very different people - natalie is completely brilliant and comes off as kind of a control freak - but the thing they have in common is this underlying Influencer nature. they are powerful people. what they say counts more than what the rest of us say. and people who are in power nowadays... they seem to spend a lot of time disclaiming any responsibility for their actions. and so we arrive at this imbalance, where "influencers" have power but no responsibility, and the rest of us have responsibility but no power. i would like to correct that imbalance.

And the critics and half-assed defenders shouldn’t say he is brain dead either bc he is obviously of at least average intelligence.

I know plenty of people of average intelligence and I can’t imagine wanting to listen to them host a multi-hour podcast show while half-baked.

No argument there

I can't imagine wanting to listen to intelligent people host a multi-hour podcast.

https://www.ladbible.com/entertainment/celebrity-joe-rogan-made-30-million-last-year-as-a-podcaster-20200204.amp.html

$30 mil for being dumb + smoking weed w tesla 😎👽

can we kill this thread

i don't think so, lemme check...

sorry, no

how about falling on the sword, taking the thread's place....

Forbes numbers are a half-step up from celebritynetworth.com aren't they?

Unless all your money is visible in Microsoft stock or something

Rogan going Spotify exclusive is going to decimate the FEMINIST GETS OWNED YouTube recommendation ecosystem.

what am I going to do without my Roganmendations, bruh (shovels palmful of protein powder into gaping maw)

Did Rogan actually do a better job than Andrew Neill in handling Ben Shapiro?

The flounce on Neill was theatrical but he didn't concede or backtrack on anything at all. He had nowhere to go and couldn't do his usual react to the tone thing, because thats not how Rogan works

Seen some fat-shaming clips from his show that annoyed the shit out of me but that David Choe interview I enjoyed immensely, it was pretty stunning.

Joe Rogan was NOT ready for that 😭 pic.twitter.com/DdBr3gvySM

— ً (@wtfdoik) September 2, 2020

I mean, I don't know if "he was NOT ready for that" but it was a nice pwn by Miley.

lol Miley 27 going on 50 there.

No one could have foreseen this:

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/550532-spotifys-joe-rogan-says-healthy-young-people-dont-need-to-worry-about-getting

Joe Rogan is basically an entertainer who talks a lot of shit. People who see him as smart or thoughtful are essentially people who have an even shakier, less informed basis for thinking about the world than Rogan does, because at least Rogan reads things sometimes, just so he'll have something to talk about.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/5693031001

Hope this meathead dies.

i'll take carlos mencia

It doesn’t work as well as Ivermectim

I would watch a 3 hour JRE of him trying to manually extract this

Brazilian viper venom shows promise as drug to combat Covid https://t.co/zgDB9e33oE pic.twitter.com/BkYnoL4cea

— The Hill (@thehill) September 2, 2021

We probably won't see Josh Zepps on Rogan's podcast for a while 😂 pic.twitter.com/Eyff4FJn6p

— Borrachinha Depot (@FullContactMTWF) January 13, 2022

its wild to watch how, when hes confronted with clear evidence that he was wrong, how quickly he goes through the process of "this doesnt apply to what we were talking about" --> "who even said this, whats the source" --> "there must be underreporting". whats the term for that conspiracist thought process where contrary evidence just proves their point further?

yeah so my older brother is a huge JoeBro and sometimes he really gets into it about something fucking dumb and I find you can actually pin him down on something specific and point out how they're wrong and sometimes they will accept it and move on. BUT then they watch one more episode of the Rogan podcast and they're back on it again

one example - he thinks that Covid deaths are greatly overreported, and buys fully into that "if you get shot in the face while you have Covid, it's a Covid death" talking point. I tell him okay, lets look at the deaths per capita rate and see if there's an increase, because if deaths per capita are notably going up, then it's concrete evidence that *something* is killing a bunch more people. (Anyway, he sends me a chart and tells me it dismantles my argument, and he gets real cocky about it too. The problem: his chart ends at 2019. When you look at 2020 and 2021, then yes indeed a LOT MORE PEOPLE ARE DYING. He then invents some weird bullshit about how these charts aren't really accurate for a few years anyway (??) but that yes, his chart does not prove anything. HE HAS SENT ME THIS CHART FIVE TIMES NOW. There is no reasoning with these people.

It's amazing how many people get the order wrong wrt "gather data--->form a hypothesis"

will never ever ‘get’ this dude. tbf the only time I listened to him for more than a 3-5 minute clip is a good bit of the David Lee Roth interview. he didn’t really say much, just let DLR rip (smart move). but he’s not even funny? and he was a standup? (tho I did I love Newsradio and enjoyed his character). if you’re not a already firmly in this zeitgeist-y right-leaning, online conspiracy prone, masculinity in cRiSiS bro shit, I simply can not wrap my head around the appeal.

and yet! I’ve got like 3 friends, early-to-mid 40s, pretty liberal, definitely Democratic voters, who I understand listen, at least on occasion. maybe even semi-regularly, depending on guest? and only one seemed even a touch embarrassed. what am I missing?

idk I think he's just good at portraying that free thinker/"I do my own research" persona. he's also like, a living mancave. all he really knows about is UFC & getting fucked up. I get the appeal I guess but the fact that people spend like 4 hours a week listening to him is insane. he's just so remarkably dull and dumb

Nothing.

Kinda wild to look back on how his Newsradio character incorporated his actual love of conspiracies, and how differently that dude would come across now.

xp

He was into conspiracies when it was still cool!

the fact that people spend like 4 hours a week listening to him is insane

I think he's on about 15 hours a week

Ego entanglement is a helluva thing

its such a perfect distillation of the way that mainstream podcasting has devolved into this total glass-eyed void of content-free nothingness. makes the listener feel smart without asking them to do or think anything, presents conversations with standups and things that are adjacent to comedy without actually being funny, etc. just sort of presents an endlessly reassuring self-serving mantra to listeners: "you are smart... you are normal... you are smart... you are normal..."

the parody that Tim Heidecker did was so fucking otm on that, to the extent that it was almost kind of hard to watch. they get so close to saying something interesting but never do. it's brilliant

he's also like, a living mancave.

that's the most i've ever seen of joe rogan, he seems like an idiot

Well maybe they should. pic.twitter.com/Z3HX0XSik0

— chy (@TapeFlip) January 15, 2022

Thank you media for introducing me to the Joe Rogan podcast. I didn’t really listen before but I’m a full time viewer.

— Kevin Sorbo (@ksorbs) January 15, 2022

going back to what frogs said about his brother above, I mean, you can see clear as day that 500,000+ more people died in the US from 2019 - 2020 and that this type of increase of that significance had not happened in modern times...but it doesn't matter.

one of those same clowns was arguing with Howard Forman that deaths actually increased more in 2004-2006 and he replied basically "the hell are you talking about, the increase was way lower, I'm looking at it right now". they don't care.

and there comes Rogan.

You don’t even need fake reports from thinktanks

Maybe covid just made them all die of other things, like heart attacks and lung failure and cancer and stuff, faster, think about that. Or maybe all those other years they just undercounted by 500k or so.

That Sorbo Tweet is killing me.

“They can have [Joe] Rogan or Young,” Neil Young wrote in a letter to his manager and label, “Not both." Young demands Spotify remove his music over "false information about vaccines" https://t.co/f1u4bDAu1L

— Rolling Stone (@RollingStone) January 24, 2022

Continuing the never-ending cycle of reactionaries discovering that old white musicians aren't necessarily on their side.

I would not have predicted 15 years ago that either one of these dudes would have high enough of a profile for me to care about their impact on society

I am laughing at this bit in Mencia's Wikipedia page though

Mike Byoff of Gawker said of Mencia, "Not only does he steal jokes from classic comedians but he's needlessly racist and had [sic] no sense of comedic timing whatsoever."[17]

mostly because it implies that there are comedians who are necessarily racist

tbf, some comics built their whole careers out of being racist, so it's necessary for them

On Joe Rogan's Spotify podcast -- Jordan Peterson claims Michael Eric Dyson is "not Black"

Rogan replies: "Unless you are talking to someone who is like 100% African from the darkest place where they are not wearing any clothes all day ... the term Black is weird." pic.twitter.com/Wyk00WHwus

— Alex Paterson (@AlexPattyy) January 25, 2022

clips from this are all over Twitter, it's like an even crazier version of the Tim Heidecker parody

Gotta be nude to be Black, it’s a natural fact

Two guys proving they are nice

It is somehow exactly what you'd expect of Rogan-Peterson and worse than you'd expect, which is still exactly what you'd expect.

Gotta be nude to be Black

in the right measure

lmao

I was trying to figure how to make that work, but yeah you got it

Joe Rogan apologizes for resurfaced podcast clips of him using the N-word.

Spotify has reportedly removed 70 episodes of The Joe Rogan Experience that see the comedian using racist slurs. pic.twitter.com/2DqmH7ISmJ

— Pop Crave (@PopCrave) February 5, 2022

Uhhh 70 is quite a few

I get what he's saying about, I dunno, saying the name of a Richard Pryor album (that's as far as I made it, because fuck Joe Rogan) or quoting Huck Finn or whatever and having that taken out of context, reduced to just the use of the word, but there is no way all 70 of those mentions had a similarly defensible context. Either way, what made him make this pseudo-apology is that video going around of someone documenting every single one of his uses of the n-word, which is fitting, because even if he *had* a good defense for all 70 of those documented uses, well, that means he's been the victim of ... misinformation. Which shows how it works once you recklessly (or intentionally!) release shit into the wilds of the internet. You reap what you sow, Joe.

There must be 70 ways to say a racial slur.

Name a Pryor movie, Lucy.
Quote Huck Finn, Lynn.

Read some Lovecraft, Taft

Sing some Anthrax, Ajax

Jack London Square, there’s no there there.

Establish an exculpatory context, Rex

wait Anthrax what?

S.O.D., maybe....

Put on some Costello, fellow.
Just play some Ice Cube, dude.
Listen to Axl, asshole.

lads

I had to look into that, was unaware of the SoD - Anthrax connection. I saw an interview where Scott Ian says they were “mocking” the bigotry. Aside from the fact that 4chan completely laid that ‘ironic’ bigotry thing to rest, the dudes I knew who were into SoD back in the day were not getting the irony.

I watched half of the n-word clips video. Seemed like he was always talking about the word and not using it directly.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FK7YrNKUcAAjlcz?format=png&name=900x900

xpost That's what I meant, I understand his "context" defense, but that alone shows how dangerous it can be to have a platform that streams misinformation and other bullshit all the time: it's too easy to distribute and proliferate it out of context. Anyway, I'm no expert on this turd, but he's done plenty of horrible "just sayin' ... " type stunts over the years. Like hosting Alex Jones, or the Proud Boys lead asshat, or Milo, or all kinds of indefensible people with bad takes or horrible positions. Plus there are plenty of people linking to other clips of this asshole giving platform to other racially dubious shit. It's basically the Morning Madhouse strategy of throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks, only in an era when far too many people focus on the shit sticking and less on the fact that it's still shit.

It’s also a standard right wing troll tactic to constantly test the boundaries of acceptable vs derogatory language and offer a disingenuous retraction when called out. Just sayin. Why are we giving these asshats the benefit of the doubt, at all? There’s no good faith discourse with them, fuck that.

The next step will be him going further or fully to the right and blaming liberals for forcing him to do it.

Yep, victim blaming. Definitely on my mental list of standard right wing rhetorical tricks. Guess I’ll have to make “toeing the line” #5.

This take is also remarkably accurate.

I haven't stopped thinking about this take on rogan since I read it pic.twitter.com/80fiqyF9Bh

— natalie 🐑🌺 (@sheepcouch) February 6, 2022

It used to be that he'd always challenge a guest once, no matter what side they were on, then after they responded he'd continue to go along with them. I listened to some recent clips on the decoding the gurus podcast episode covering him, and he seems to be completely far right now.

wait Anthrax what?

― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Sunday, February 6, 2022 9:59 AM (three hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

S.O.D., maybe....

― he's very big in the region of my butthole (Neanderthal), Sunday, February 6, 2022 11:01 AM (two hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

Anthrax drops an n-bomb in Keep It in the Family, an anti-racist song.

Dont' even try to tell me what you think is right/when to you blacks are [n-words] and jews are [k-words]

Play Patti Smith, Gwyneth

Hear some David Allen Coe, Joe

Although the song was poorly thought out, I do think there’s a significant distinction between Anthrax using the term derisively in 1990 and Rogan platforming it hypothetically in ~2015. The context of the SoD does make it seem a lot more icky tho.

But if we’re going to call them out for that, Ian Mackaye definitely deserves a scowl. Especially considering he was literally a skinhead at the time.

Although the song was poorly thought out, I do think there’s a significant distinction between Anthrax using the term derisively in 1990 and Rogan platforming it hypothetically in ~2015.

Yes, but we were also talking about Richard Pryor albums...

Not sure what level of snark you’re going for there tbh. Aside from difference in the dates, there’s a major distinction in terms of intent (and yes this is almost entirely subjective). The likely songwriter, Scott Ian, was Jewish. He said the song was about the brutal murder of Yusuf Hawkins by a large gang of white youths. I think he genuinely intended to take an anti-racist stand but expressed himself very poorly. As opposed to Rogan, again just effectively acting like some lazy right wing troll discretely throwing out some bait for a circlejerk of hate. All with plausible deniability of course.

If you want we can take apart all the horrid SoD lyrics tho. What I distinctly remember from hearing them decades ago was that they were viciously homophobic.

Sing Randy Newman, Newman

xp: You're overthinking this. It was all part of a joke about a Paul Simon song.

I think the last white person to get away with saying the n-word "in context" was Louis, pre-cancellation, who used it in his routines and on his show.

After that, it became a real hard line (hard r line?) in the sand

https://quillette.com/2019/06/27/publicly-shaming-a-musician-for-calling-a-composition-by-its-name/

But once that attitude of respect is acknowledged, how should the festival’s decision be viewed? Canceling Leach’s appearance was meant to support the festival’s claim that Leach was in the wrong for calling the compositions by their titles. But canceling the concert also was a direct act of recourse against a 70-year-old composer who, one can only assume, has been marginalized over the course of her career by virtue of her gender. The OBEY Convention not only effectively labeled her as a racist, but silenced her artistic voice. To say that this action was sexist and/or ageist strikes me as far less a leap in logic than to say that Leach is racist for speaking the title of a composition. It is far less a leap in logic to label this as institutional censorship.
By canceling the performance, the festival organizers also demonstrated that they are willing to silence one voice to appease another.

I wonder if they still stand by that. (This isn’t an ILX regular is it?)

I wouldn't know where to look to find this information, so I'm curious: I know Rogan has had Gavin MacInnes, Milo, Jordan Peterson, Chuck Johnson and a bunch of other right-wing toads on his show, but aside from Bernie Sanders has he had very many avowedly left-wing guests?

the Young Turks guy was on there at some point

I think it's mostly people on the center left that most of you guys don't seem to like, Bari Weiss, Tulsi Gabbard, Kyle Kulinski, Matt Taibbi, Jon Stewart, Andrew Yang, Jimmy Dore, Krystal Ball, Ana Kasparian, Henry Rollins, Abby Martin, Lee Camp. I started listening to the podcast years ago because I like stand up, and his conversations with certain comics I love are golden. I skip the MMA ones and so many others but recently the Jewel conversation was really something to hear. I never thought I wanted to hear Jewel talk for 4 hours but I had no idea about her story.

people on the center left that most of you guys don't seem to like, Bari Weiss

lolololol

He had Cornell West too iirc

yes, the radical centrism of Bari Weiss, Andrew Yang, and Tulsi Gubbard.

Phrenology is more fun when you're tripping balls while you break out the calipers.

#Canceled: The Radical Centrism of Bari Weiss, Andrew Yang, and Tulsi Gubbard is the name off the podcast Karl and I will co-host.

If I'm wrong about those guys being center left, please correct me. I don't usually view people through a left/right spectrum, unless that's their deal. I think it's boring and unimaginative.

Bari Weiss and Andrew Yang are boring and unimaginative.

they're trolls. So is Tulsi Gabbard. Their fanbase encompasses Andrew Sullivan types.

I don't usually view people through a left/right spectrum, unless that's their deal. I think it's boring and unimaginative.

Are you sure you're not Bari Weiss?

Bari Weiss spent a lot of time trying to get people who support Palestinian rights fired—so yeah, pretty much a moderate lib

Blink twice if you've dated a SNL cast member.

That list is a good lineup to illustrate how his reactionary spiral really started with freaking out about trans people and getting push back on that. Pseudo-left voices overly concerned with trumped up culture war/"""free speech""" nonsense (except for Rollins... which wasn't a political episode IIRC from five years ago) who've mostly circled the drain toward conspiracy mongering. Dore's most brilliant idea IIRC was for BLM to ally with fascist militias.

I remember hearing that Rogan’s team was talking about having Michael Brooks as a guest (a few years ago of course) but that Rogan nixed it because Brooks had said too many mean things about his IDW friends.

I don't usually view people through a left/right spectrum, unless that's their deal. I think it's boring and unimaginative.

Ooh, lookit this guy, floating above us on a cloud of his own smugness...

Is “I don’t see ideology” the new “I don’t see race”?

I don’t care if you’re left right or purple…

yeah, lets or instead we pretends the other is who?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st5OGffTp6s

folks, listen, as soon as we find out who’s responsible for approving that contract, boy let me tell you, that person is in for it https://t.co/ghrrjUd2Mg

— kilgore trout, cryptopolice chief (@KT_So_It_Goes) February 7, 2022

I like Henry Rollins, My War rules

That list is a good lineup to illustrate how his reactionary spiral really started with freaking out about trans people and getting push back on that.

Exactly, and applies to Jordan Peterson just as well. In fact it’s like the two of them formed this echo chamber of YouTube transphobia that really helped drive a lot of folks towards this horseshoe theory reactionary stance.

Since so much politics is centered around issues of social justice and identity now, what “I don’t see left or right” typically means is that they are so privileged that they can allow themselves to feel above any concerns of social justice, systemic discrimination etc.

Has Taibbi also dug himself into the transphobic backlash or some other form of diet bigotry? I forget.

Taibbi is just doing low-cal Greenwald stuff

“horseshoe theory”

isn't the trans stuff how Jordan Peterson got famous in the first place? iirc he was arguing that people were literally going to go to prison for using the wrong pronouns or something, which caught a lot of attention cuz people didn't really know how fucking nuts he was back then

yeah, JP's entire deal was that he was doing his goofy book thing and being a shitty professor/therapist, and then he misrepresented a canadian policy propsal re: trans people

you can hear at the end he says "but god, is that really true?" because it was too difficult for him to look at this guy's history and know ahead of time he was going to say something like this.

Here's a small part of what they deleted. Chuck is explaining to Joe Rogan that black people have a gene that makes them "predisposed to violence." pic.twitter.com/A5uSePdIKT

— Charles Johnson (@Green_Footballs) February 6, 2022

"black americ- you know blacks, you know Africans"
what a scholar

“horseshoe theory”

― concentrating on Rationality (the book) (will), Monday, February 7, 2022 3:20 PM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

If you have a better shorthand for the left-right crossover of Greenwald, Taibbi etc then I'm all ears.

substackin' cheese

i don't know i would just like to be able to have a killfile for that specific phrase

for real

sorry that’s my own little off-topic axe to grind. to me it seems like an overstated liberal Twitter bogeyman, particularly when regressive centrists (or “fishhook theory” if you prefer) in Democratic leadership (incl Biden, Harris, Pelosi et al) and the NYT/ WaPo op ed are still far more dangerous, ruin far more lives, and (currently) hold tons more sway. this is not to provide cover for contemptible trolls like Greenwald et al, which I realize are the primary subjects here in the Rogan thread. apologies for the off-topic rant, and absolutely not attributing this to you viborg. but for as many creepy “post-Left” IDW-hugging weirdos as I see online, I still think they are outnumbered and certainly out-powered by millionaires and billionaires who are just a little too eager to blur these lines in an attempt galaxy brain non-MAGA voters into believing that M4A or making corporations pay taxes is actually bad and also probably racist, misogynistic, etc

My 2018 Joe Rogan Experience appearance was CENSORED by @Spotify. He didn't use any racial slurs in the episode. I RAILED against Saudi Arabia in it and Spotify just happened to expand into the Saudi market at the exact time that coincides with the banning (1/2) pic.twitter.com/R0bZxDvVEf

— Secular Talk🎙 (@KyleKulinski) February 7, 2022

xp
I don't know much about Taibbi, but Greenwald was never "far left" imo—I can't recall him ever really being socialist in any way, let alone communist. He's always basically been a libertarian, no? It's just that in the Bush era, he was worried about the state trampling on civil liberties, and now he's concerned about college students and twitter "mobs" or whatever.

Not to underplay whatever fascist shit he's up to on Fox now, I don't really care about him anymore.

yeah I’ve got no idea what he’s doing, other than effectively monetizing troll-hood. p sure I got temp banned from Twitter for replying to him something along the lines of how ‘hilarious’ it’s going to be when he comes out in favor of Bolsanro to own the libs, “you peeled potato-ass looking bitch”

so, as you can see, I am Part of the Problem

Lmao you Pringle.

xpost

Right rob, fair point about Greenwald, I probably just think of him as left-adjacent because there was that willingness on the left to platform some libertarians during the Bush years. Taibbi is basically a 'Bernie bro' and that's some of what I had in mind, the democratic socialists who scorn idpol but are happy to casually spout corny AAVE memes with zero consideration of the context of social justice or cultural appropriation. That's relatively minor though granted.

but for as many creepy “post-Left” IDW-hugging weirdos as I see online, I still think they are outnumbered and certainly out-powered by millionaires and billionaires who are just a little too eager to blur these lines in an attempt galaxy brain non-MAGA voters into believing that M4A or making corporations pay taxes is actually bad and also probably racist, misogynistic, etc

― concentrating on Rationality (the book) (will), Monday, February 7, 2022 5:12 PM

The IDW is definitely an extreme version of that Bernie bro line of thought. (And I really appreciate you taking the effort to explain yourself there, tbh the ILX scare quote shitpost can be a little off-putting in response to an effort post, but I know that's just how we do it.)

What really gets to me though is the leftists who do things like crap all over the Mueller report. I'd say stanning for Xi and the CCP is similar, but at least China is still nominally socialist ('with Chinese characteristics'). I've never encountered the term "horseshoe theory" on Twitter, I generally try to tune out most liberals there. But I most likely did pick it up from Reddit, which is also where I've seen quite a few folks claiming to be leftist and shitting on Mueller etc. There were also some old kind of weird lefty blogs I used to follow that went the same route but I can't even remember the name right now.

The point about the manipulation of discourse by the owning class is spot-on tho, seems safe to assume most online discussion is largely manufactured now, unless it's just your favorite musician riffing on their pet issue. It's likely there are a significant number of Bernie bros who have been swayed by the manufactured discussion on Reddit to actually buy into Jordan Peterson, ancap, or whatever the bullshit du jour is.

I don’t know much about Kulinski and I’ve never heard any kind of Dore insanity attributed to him but my god how does anyone dedicate hours of their day listening to a guy who goes by “secular talk”?

“It’s likely” is doing a lot of work there. The ‘Bernie coalition’ was younger, more queer and less white than Democratic voters as a whole.

It's not like I have any evidence to back my shit up, but is there support for that claim? In my personal experience the cis het white guys are more likely to go for Bernie, women and minorities are less likely to. The plural of anecdote is not data, I know.

(But also Reddit is a special case.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYm-CehOzEA

IDW-hugging weirdos

Hey man, I love Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles reprints and Transformers-meets-My Little Pony crossovers.

They lost the license for young reader Marvel titles. :(

r.i.p.

https://www.readthepresentage.com/p/joe-rogan-spotify

Kind of blowing my mind that the guy posting about the right-wing maniac Charles Johnson appearing on Rogan is also named Charles Johnson and is someone I remember as a virulently Islamophobic right-wing maniac in the Bush years.

yeah i remember when little green footballs was the worst place on the entire internet

Isn’t there some indie rock Chuck Johnson too?

he's an ambient pedal steel dude

He floats above it.

yikes

In another old clip posted online, Rogan responds to a guest who has a Black dad and a white mom by saying, “Powerful combination genetic-wise, right? You get the body of the Black man and then you get the mind of the white man all together in some strange combination. That doesn’t mean, by the way, that Black people don’t have brains. It’s a different brain.”

This is your periodic reminder that Chuck C. Johnson is NOT ME.

— Charles Johnson (@Green_Footballs) February 6, 2022

Charles Johnson from Little Green Footballs has quite the resume:

1976 School Days with Stanley Clarke
1977 I'm Fine, How Are You with Airto Moreira
1977 Reach for It with George Duke
1977 Easy Living with Sonny Rollins
1976 Garden of Love Light with Narada Michael Walden
1978 Don't Let Go with George Duke
1978 Don't Ask My Neighbors with Raul de Souza
1979 Follow the Rainbow with George Duke
1979 Future Street with Pages
1980 Nielsen Pearson with Nielsen Pearson
1980 Rocks, Pebbles and Sand with Stanley Clarke
1981 Pages [1981] with Pages
1982 Dream On with George Duke
1983 Not the Boy Next Door with Peter Allen
1984 In London with Al Jarreau
1984 Live in London with Al Jarreau
1987 All In the Name of Love with Atlantic Starr
1988 Guitar Workshop: Tribute to with Otis Redding
1989 One Passion with Michael Paulo
1993 Art & Survival with Dianne Reeves
1994 L.A. with Hiroshima
1995 Piel Ajena with Eduardo Capetillo
1996 George Duke Greatest Hits with George Duke
1996 Is That the Way to Your Heart with Kazu Matsui
1998 A Song a Day
2000 When I Hold You in My Heart with Clay Mortensen
2000 Rare Collection with Jaco Pastorius
2001 Pages [2001] with Pages
2003 Punk Jazz: The Jaco Pastorius Anthology with Jaco Pastorius
2003 In Between the Heartaches with Phyllis Hyman

Why should I change my name? He's the one who sucks.

thx for that Rogan trans wrap-up, C. Grisso

Lmao at him clarifying he doesn't think black people don't have brains. Cmon that'd be ridiculous, he just thinks they have shitty ones.

Yeah, Rogan's defense for saying racist things seems to be "I didn't mean that horribly racist interpretation, I meant the still pretty racist interpretation"

imagine being Joe Rogan and having Serious Thoughts about someone else’s brain being ‘different’

Oh look at Bill Maher & Joe Rogan hanging out pic.twitter.com/ufpqiGngaT

— Aaron Stewart-Ahn (@somebadideas) April 13, 2022

these guys are such stooges

Oh my God. Joe Rogan tried to say Biden is unqualified by claiming he said something that TRUMP said.

He got fact checked in real time. This is amazing.

(h/t @Mediaite) pic.twitter.com/qlY9xvPhOS

— No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen (@NoLieWithBTC) December 22, 2023

lol @ all the dickriders saying this is how it shows Rogan is more transparent than mainstream media, by allowing himself to be corrected in real time (as opposed to actually fact-checking it before he ran with it in the first place)

"that's the thing about media these days, you gotta look into it"

amazing how the tone shifts from "someone needs to get him out of there" to "well he clearly misspoke" once it's revealed who it actually is

Discovered this guy’s channel last night and binged most of his videos. Pretty hilarious takedown of JR with an editing sophistication of Adam Curtis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EuKibmlll4

A clip from that special showed up on Instagram - I had the sound off so no idea what he was saying but Rogan has morphed into a 5'6" version of Dana White, just two red sweaty girthy penises in ugly clothing.

That is very rude to sweaty girthy penises

Choad Manifest

that takedown was amazing, almost felt like a Vic Berger thing but with narration

Joe talking about how he types his jokes like he's slipping into some other dimension is so hilarious

I do believe comedy really is an art form so what he's saying here is pretty valid to me but like as applied to the jokes he's doing it's just lmao

this guy's channel is fucking amazing wow

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiX5Nn4X-4Q

holy shit rogan and dana white are different ppl and ive only just realised it

"delicate, flowing, mustard blouse" killed me

Oh man I’m dying at that Dan Carlin Oatmeal War video

The part where they play Rogan's bit over file footage of Mussolini at a rally was ... *chef's kiss*

Incredible video, dude really did his homework wow

I listen to JRE maybe 2-3 times/month because of select guests. Joe is largely intolerable but sometimes quiet enough. What I’d absolutely support would be a Joe-less listen. Anyone here so inclined to edit him out of the conversations?
The No Rogan Experience!

there's other podcasts

like Red Scare

username fails to check out

It’s mad how people would insist that this shit for brains was apolitical or didn’t have a clear slant. So glad I never listened to anyone saying his shit was good. Inadvertent dunk on the “great and powerful” clown in front of the curtain.

The great and powerful @elonmusk.
If it wasn't for him we'd be fucked. He makes what I think is the most compelling case for Trump you'll hear, and I agree with him every step of the way.
For the record, yes, that's an endorsement of Trump.
Enjoy the podcast pic.twitter.com/LdBxZFVsLN

— Joe Rogan (@joerogan) November 5, 2024

if you are paying for Spotify then you are paying for this guy

I’ve got bad news for you about ethical consumption under capitalism and the mainstreaming of fascism by the main media platforms m8

Wonder what Musk said, guess I'll never know.

I am dark gothic MAGAAAAAA!!!

Rogan endorsing at the 11th hour isn't going to do a thing

also he is a piece of shit

Rogan trying to make up for suggesting Trump hire the Kill Tony guy

Rogan endorsing at the 11th hour isn't going to do a thing

Honestly I'm not so sure. Not just Rogan but Trump did a circuit of similar large audience podcasts in the immediate run in to the election - and then looking at demographics where Trump overperformed relative to 2020, I think its possible it did have an effect

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVl9xXG1pbk

Also covered here in Tempe, albeit briefly

There was a longer clip talking to younger voters in line but I could only find this one

Can someone with higher tolerance for bullshit than me listen to the Rogan interview with Trump and give me the rundown? I tried to do it the other day, "for science," but I noped out when Joe was setting up his first question like "You've been the most attacked person, that I've seen, probably ever in history" 🙄🙄🙄

Yep, here’s your summary

it’s always 2 dumb bitches telling each other “exactlyyyyy” pic.twitter.com/53PIuERfV7

— ✨ Mikey ✨ (@mikey_almeida) June 21, 2023

I know the timelines don't line up at all, but I want to post something about the world we could be living in if only Brynn would have married a different NewsRadio cast member.

I hate to use the "sunshine is the best disinfectant" cliche but in many cases it's been true - look at the effect his podcasts with Alex Jones and Elon Musk had on their respective careers.

― flappy bird, Thursday, January 31, 2019 1:01 PM (five years ago) bookmarkflaglink

Lol

New Elephant Graveyard video. Long but awesome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewvRS3NwIlQ

yeah it's incredible, I know it's a minor thing but using bits of the Seinfeld theme to bleep out swear words makes me crack up every single time

yikes some of the old post in this thread

I watched the Elephant Graveyard video because ppl are talking about it and I can’t say I understand what’s so great about it. It’s like one decent point (The Austin comedy scene runs itself like some famous death cults) just beaten into the ground for 90 minutes as a … parody of Adam Curtis movies?

This thing turning a barely-funny gag into something people find “insightful” is like the leftie version of those Sam Hyde “these people want you broke, dead, your kids raped and brainwashed, and they think it's funny” videos

I know it's a minor thing but using bits of the Seinfeld theme to bleep out swear words makes me crack up every single time

Easily the best part of this. The video felt far more Craig Baldwin/Sub-Genius than one of Adam Curtis. Felt like the conclusion was coming home at the 40min mark then suddenly realized holy fuck I'm not even halfway through this?