Peterson, Harris, etc....

[nimic]

Nah, that's nonsense. Look at the convo with Eric Weinstein in the comments, that's far from a Nazi characterization of Jews (which, it has to be noted, aims at extermination). He's a right wing troll, full-on tribalist, and massive asshole though, and he doesn't care that his words are dangerous and harmful.

Should also be noted that the tweet is from 2011, but since he doesn't backtrack on it, it doesn't matter too much.

It's not nonsense, though. Something can be Nazi propaganda without aiming at extermination (which mostly came after WW2 began). Talking about the "Bad Jews" as opposed to the "Good Jews" is a very common tactic in white supremacist circles, and it can be traced all the way back to 1930s/40s Nazi propaganda.

Admittedly I didn't notice that it was from 2011, though as you say since he hasn't backtracked it doesn't really matter.

 

[Synco]

It's not nonsense, though. Something can be Nazi propaganda without aiming at extermination (which mostly came after WW2 began). Talking about the "Bad Jews" as opposed to the "Good Jews" is a very common tactic in white supremacist circles, and it can be traced all the way back to 1930s/40s Nazi propaganda.

Admittedly I didn't notice that it was from 2011, though as you say since he hasn't backtracked it doesn't really matter.

First of all, sorry for my opening line, that was unnecessary. I try to explain how I see it, spoilered because it's a bit longer.

Spoiler

True, an obsession with "Jewish king's evidence" existed and still exists. But Nazi antisemitism worked categorically different from what Shapiro did there (disgraceful as it is).

Tactical shenanigans aside, in its essence Nazi antisemitism did not seperate between "Good Jews" and "Bad Jews". That's an absolutely fundamental point. There were just Jews, rotten in nature as a collective, and every single one of them. Mankind has to be saved from them in an apocalyptic last stand. That inner logic of Nazi antisemitism (eventually leading to physical extermination) goes back further than the Holocaust, and even Nazism.

Shapiro on the other hand speaks from the standpoint of a virtual Jewish collective and the "Good Jews". That standpoint is incompatible with Nazi antisemitism, where "the Jew" is always an alien. Shapiro basically attacks supposed traitors from his own group, who allegedly undermine collective security, including their own. A better fitting historical comparison might perhaps be the Red Scare and its persecution of "un-American" activities. It's something right out of the authoritarian playbook - Erdogan does it, the Israeli right does it, many others did it and still do. But it's very different from the racial antisemitism of the Nazis.

As I said, read the exchange with that Weinstein dude underneath, I think that makes it clear.

The problem is, when that kind of authoritarian paranoia is acted out in an inner-Jewish context, the rhetoric can quickly resemble antisemitic tropes. There's a ring to "Bad Jew" that "Bad Turk" or "Bad American" doesn't have. Shapiro, attention-seeking demagogue that he is, deliberately played on that ambiguity in this tweet, which is both detestable and dangerous.

So to me, polemical references to antisemitic conspiracy theories (like in many of the twitter comments, or from berbatrick above) can be a very appropriate response to that kind of shit. But serious comparisons beyond that don't work, imo.

 

[nimic]

First of all, sorry for my opening line, that was unnecessary. I try to explain how I see it, spoilered because it's a bit longer.

Spoiler

True, an obsession with "Jewish king's evidence" existed and still exists. But Nazi antisemitism worked categorically different from what Shapiro did there (disgraceful as it is).

Tactical shenanigans aside, in its essence Nazi antisemitism did not seperate between "Good Jews" and "Bad Jews". That's an absolutely fundamental point. There were just Jews, rotten in nature as a collective, and every single one of them. Mankind has to be saved from them in an apocalyptic last stand. That inner logic of Nazi antisemitism (eventually leading to physical extermination) goes back further than the Holocaust, and even Nazism.

Shapiro on the other hand speaks from the standpoint of a virtual Jewish collective and the "Good Jews". That standpoint is incompatible with Nazi antisemitism, where "the Jew" is always an alien. Shapiro basically attacks supposed traitors from his own group, who allegedly undermine collective security, including their own. A better fitting historical comparison might perhaps be the Red Scare and its persecution of "un-American" activities. It's something right out of the authoritarian playbook - Erdogan does it, the Israeli right does it, many others did it and still do. But it's very different from the racial antisemitism of the Nazis.

As I said, read the exchange with that Weinstein dude underneath, I think that makes it clear.

The problem is, when that kind of authoritarian paranoia is acted out in an inner-Jewish context, the rhetoric can quickly resemble antisemitic tropes. There's a ring to "Bad Jew" that "Bad Turk" or "Bad American" doesn't have. Shapiro, attention-seeking demagogue that he is, deliberately played on that ambiguity in this tweet, which is both detestable and dangerous.

So to me, polemical references to antisemitic conspiracy theories (like in many of the twitter comments, or from berbatrick above) can be a very appropriate response to that kind of shit. But serious comparisons beyond that don't work, imo.

That seems more or less reasonable.

 

[freeurmind]

Alex Jones is back on the JRE.

 

[Ødegaard]

 

[Eboue]

Spoiler: nsfw

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Silva]

very normal

 

[freeurmind]

 

[freeurmind]

 

[duffer]

Speaks the truth...

 

[freeurmind]

We listened to an hour of that Jones podcast on Rogan today at work and it was just pure comedy gold.

 

[nimic]

feck Rogan for giving this terrible human being a platform.

 

[Eriku]

feck Rogan for giving this terrible human being a platform.

He’s a solid gold mate, Nim! Once you get to know him...

 

[Eboue]

 

[Eboue]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Adebesi]

Hey, what is the relevance of the post above? Am I missing something?

 

[Mogget]

He's an alt-right moron complaining about a restaurant's menu and portion sizes. A restaurant he chose to eat at. And he's "trolling" them by buying some of their most expensive items.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Shinjch]

Watson is a very strange man indeed. His constant anger at everything is quite something. Alex Jones taught him well in the art of lunacy.

 

[Adebesi]

Oh if the point is PJW is a complete bellend Im totally on board with that. Still not entirely sure of the relevance to the thread, unless we are saying "Harris, Peterson etc" is synonymous with "alt right"? That seems a little unfair to me.

But yeah, PJW, what an arse.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Oh if the point is PJW is a complete bellend Im totally on board with that. Still not entirely sure of the relevance to the thread, unless we are saying "Harris, Peterson etc" is synonymous with "alt right"? That seems a little unfair to me.

But yeah, PJW, what an arse.

Trying to conflate a populist windbag like PJW with the likes Peterson and Harris etc to discredit them I would have thought.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

Oh if the point is PJW is a complete bellend Im totally on board with that. Still not entirely sure of the relevance to the thread, unless we are saying "Harris, Peterson etc" is synonymous with "alt right"? That seems a little unfair to me.

But yeah, PJW, what an arse.

The ‘etc...’ covers all the other right wing loons/ online blowhards.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

The ‘etc...’ covers all the other right wing loons/ online blowhards.

Does it? Isn't it supposed to be the 'intellectual dark web'? PJW isn't an intellectual of any description.

 

[Adebesi]

And Sam Harris isnt even right wing. He's a liberal. I mean, you might not like him, you might not like his opinions. And yes, he is critical of the left. But he does it from a standpoint of being on the (centre) left.

 

[Borden]

For some people anyone who is to the right of Bernie Sanders is right wing.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

Does it? Isn't it supposed to be the 'intellectual dark web'? PJW isn't an intellectual of any description.

In 70 pages of this thread it’s already strayed
to Molyneux, Charles Murray and what not, doesn’t feel all that ‘IDW’ to me. More like a place where all the controversial socio-political Internet personalities are discussed.

And Sam Harris isnt even right wing. He's a liberal. I mean, you might not like him, you might not like his opinions. And yes, he is critical of the left. But he does it from a standpoint of being on the (centre) left.

That’s why I included online blowhards. I very much doubt he’d be so liberal with ‘profiling is necessary’ and ‘pre-emptive nukes is legit’ if it carries real life consequences.

At the end of the day they are just a bunch of academics dickriding each other for money and fame. ‘The Four Horsemen’ was one of the most pathetic intellectual masturbation practice ever.

 

[Adebesi]

In 70 pages of this thread it’s already strayed
to Molyneux, Charles Murray and what not, doesn’t feel all that ‘IDW’ to me. More like a place where all the controversial socio-political Internet personalities are discussed.


That’s why I included online blowhards. I very much doubt he’d be so liberal with ‘profiling is necessary’ and ‘pre-emptive nukes is legit’ if it carries real life consequences.

At the end of the day they are just a bunch of academics dickriding each other for money and fame. ‘The Four Horsemen’ was one of the most pathetic intellectual masturbation practice ever.

Fair enough. Charles Murray presumably came up because of the Sam Harris interview. But Molyneux is similar to PJW so you are right that this thread has ventured away from IDW specifically.

Still thought that post was a bit random though, just thrown out there with no explanation.

 

[nimic]

And Sam Harris isnt even right wing. He's a liberal. I mean, you might not like him, you might not like his opinions. And yes, he is critical of the left. But he does it from a standpoint of being on the (centre) left.

I mean... in much of the world, liberals belong on the right (or centre right), many European countries included. Hell, in the UK the liberals have sided with the Tories over Labour recently. So it's no undisputable fact that Sam Harris isn't right wing. He might be on the left for the US, simply because he's not a religious conservative.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

In 70 pages of this thread it’s already strayed
to Molyneux, Charles Murray and what not, doesn’t feel all that ‘IDW’ to me. More like a place where all the controversial socio-political Internet personalities are discussed.

Fair enough. That said, Its a pretty weird tweet to post. PJW is correct about the ludicrousness of the dishes he was served, even if he has to express everything through the filter of his bitter political views.

 

[Adebesi]

I mean... in much of the world, liberals belong on the right (or centre right), many European countries included. Hell, in the UK the liberals have sided with the Tories over Labour recently. So it's no undisputable fact that Sam Harris isn't right wing.

Putting labels aside, if you listen to him regularly it is pretty clear he considers himself to be centre left, and that he pretty much is. Its messy these days, he doesnt fit as neatly into that bucket as some due to controversial views on various things, but if you have to assign him either left or right, he is left. He talks about the problem of wealth inequality all the time, he talks about the need to find a way to redistribute wealth, he talks about the corrupting influence of money in politics.

If he didnt bang on about identity politics as much as he does I dont think this would be up for debate.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

Fair enough. That said, Its a pretty weird tweet to post. PJW is correct about the ludicrousness of the dishes he was served, even if he has to even express everything through the lens of his political bitterness.

I work in the kitchen for the last 6 years and while I disagree with how increasingly more pretentious the industry has become, it doesn’t make him right. There are plenty of mom and pop shops he could’ve gone to if he was after a hearty meal. The higher end establishments charge top prices because of the quality of service and labour involved in serving those pretentious nibbles, you are paying 10+ people not with minimum wage to prepare the ingredients manually. Of course some practice their trade in bad faith and ship in ready-made dishes and decorate them but they tend not to last long.

 

[berbatrick]

Fair enough. Charles Murray presumably came up because of the Sam Harris interview. But Molyneux is similar to PJW so you are right that this thread has ventured away from IDW specifically.

Still thought that post was a bit random though, just thrown out there with no explanation.

Don't JP and Molyneux have some relations?

 

[MuFc_1992]

I mean... in much of the world, liberals belong on the right (or centre right), many European countries included. Hell, in the UK the liberals have sided with the Tories over Labour recently. So it's no undisputable fact that Sam Harris isn't right wing. He might be on the left for the US, simply because he's not a religious conservative.

If you are going with that arguement than you might want to look into Liberal party in Australia. Sam Harris is mostly liberal except he's not into the identity politics. You cannot just label him a conservative because he as an atheist is against a religion such as Islam that has resulted in so much bloodshed.

 

[Adebesi]

Don't JP and Molyneux have some relations?

I have no idea to be honest, I dont pay much attention to either of them.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

This has probably been posted before. AIN might be better collective acronym than IDW for Shapiro et al.

Sam Harris does not feature.

 

[Eboue]

this started as the shapiro thread and has since been turned into the right wing blowhard thread even though shapiros name has been edited out of the title for some reason

 

[Adebesi]

Looking at that makes me want to never listen to Joe Rogan again.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Looking at that makes me want to never listen to Joe Rogan again.

He’s surprisingly peripheral to the circle jerk with all the main players in the middle (considering the sheer volume of content he produces). So glad I’ve never fallen down that particular youtube rabbit hole.

 

[MuFc_1992]

He’s surprisingly peripheral to the circle jerk with all the main players in the middle (considering the sheer volume of content he produces). So glad I’ve never fallen down that particular youtube rabbit hole.

I was totally knee deep in that rabbit hole at one point but I'm currently on the process of getting out. Still can't fall asleep without listening to the an episode of Joe Rogan Experience thoug. Does anyone have any suggestions on any replacements?

 

[Fosu-Mens]

I was totally knee deep in that rabbit hole at one point but I'm currently on the process of getting out. Still can't fall asleep without listening to the an episode of Joe Rogan Experience thoug. Does anyone have any suggestions on any replacements?

Phileas Club.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I was totally knee deep in that rabbit hole at one point but I'm currently on the process of getting out. Still can't fall asleep without listening to the an episode of Joe Rogan Experience thoug. Does anyone have any suggestions on any replacements?

The Blindboy Podcast is great. And will also help you with your extraction from that rabbit hole. Start at episode one.