Peterson, Harris, etc....

Classical Mechanic said:
Does it? Isn't it supposed to be the 'intellectual dark web'? PJW isn't an intellectual of any description.
Click to expand...
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.
Adebesi said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Adebesi said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
niMic said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Adebesi said:
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.
Click to expand...

Don't JP and Molyneux have some relations?
 
niMic said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Dnj8xCVXsAAIOJ0.jpg:large


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

Sam Harris does not feature.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
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.
Click to expand...
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?
 
MuFc_1992 said:
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?
Click to expand...

The Blindboy Podcast is great. And will also help you with your extraction from that rabbit hole. Start at episode one.
 
Rogan had that Tim Pool guy on yesterday. He was "debating" Jack Dorsey and Vijaya Gadde (the head of legal, policy, trust and safety on Twitter).

Pool came off like a seriously spoilt little child. Throwing Twitter incidents at Jack and Vijaya and expecting them to know and comment on all the ins and outs right away. Then when they did have the facts on some of the cases he went straight into whataboutery and talking over them. Not surprised now to see him slap bang in the middle of that influence web. Came off like a poor man's Shapiro. Which is saying something.
 
some of those names are hilarious.

sargon of akkad
wife with a purpose
coach red pill
the irish cretin
mister metokur
no bullshit
blockbuster cashier
true facts stated
that guy t
mundane matt
calcium deficient chris
styxhexenhammer666
little bo-peep
chris ray gun
mouthy buddha
epic fecknugget
bunty king
computing forever
banger in the mouth
blonde in the belly of the beast
some black guy
some black guy's cousin
tree of logic



i mean ffs
 
Adebesi said:
Im surprised Milo is so peripheral TBH, he always seems pretty high profile. Has his stock gone down since his Twitter ban?
Click to expand...

He was chewed up and spat out by his own team. In a way, it was inevitable. A flamboyant gay man was always going to be an obvious target for the conservative right, when push came to shove. The paedophilia stuff was just a convenient excuse to kick him out of their gang.
 
Adebesi said:
Looking at that makes me want to never listen to Joe Rogan again.
Click to expand...

Rogan doesn't belong on that list. He's openly stated he leans left. Rogan being on that list, is emblematic of outrage culture in general. If you go to the youtube comments section of any of his political guest episodes, if the guest is right wing, the left is calling him an alt-right apologist. If the guest is left wing, the right is calling him a shill and a sellout and a socialist ****.

He brings people on from all sides of the debate. In one episode he brings on Tim Pool, in another he has Abby Martin, or Tulsi Gabbard. He gives people a platform and offers very little push back, however, he does push back when his guests say idiotic shit, like when Dave Rubin was on, or Candice Owens. In fact, he pushes back on the right wingers far more often than he does than the left. The issue with Rogan is, he isn't a journalist, doesn't consider himself a journalist, and as such, he very rarely has specific knowledge to call people out on. He typically calls people out on shit, when their position flies in the face of common sense. Like when he made Rubin look like an absolute tool over the post office, or when he demolished Candice Owens over science denial.
 
Rogan is by no means perfect but he definitely gives a platform to left leaning people and his podcasts are generally entertaining.
 
Nucks said:
Rogan doesn't belong on that list. He's openly stated he leans left. Rogan being on that list, is emblematic of outrage culture in general. If you go to the youtube comments section of any of his political guest episodes, if the guest is right wing, the left is calling him an alt-right apologist. If the guest is left wing, the right is calling him a shill and a sellout and a socialist ****.

He brings people on from all sides of the debate. In one episode he brings on Tim Pool, in another he has Abby Martin, or Tulsi Gabbard. He gives people a platform and offers very little push back, however, he does push back when his guests say idiotic shit, like when Dave Rubin was on, or Candice Owens. In fact, he pushes back on the right wingers far more often than he does than the left. The issue with Rogan is, he isn't a journalist, doesn't consider himself a journalist, and as such, he very rarely has specific knowledge to call people out on. He typically calls people out on shit, when their position flies in the face of common sense. Like when he made Rubin look like an absolute tool over the post office, or when he demolished Candice Owens over science denial.
Click to expand...
The parts where he dismantled Rubin on the USPS was amazing.
 
Do you guys consider Jocko Willink in this 'right wing' circle? Because if you're putting Joe Rogan in it, then all of them are in it.
 
I've not read or listened to Sam Harris since around Hitchens passing. Is he considered alt-right now? He's always been critical of religion, but until recently that's not been considered a right-wing viewpoint.
 
altodevil said:
I've not read or listened to Sam Harris since around Hitchens passing. Is he considered alt-right now? He's always been critical of religion, but until recently that's not been considered a right-wing viewpoint.
Click to expand...

He is not alt-right at all. The people calling him alt-right or accusing him of spreading racism or whatever honestly have no clue. He's attacked because he has the audacity to believe there's a clear connection between ideas/ideology and actions. He absolutely loathes racism and bigotry.

*Edit: And also because he believes the way to the ideal colour blind society is not by meddling in identity politics, which he sees as detrimental to this end.
 
altodevil said:
I've not read or listened to Sam Harris since around Hitchens passing. Is he considered alt-right now? He's always been critical of religion, but until recently that's not been considered a right-wing viewpoint.
Click to expand...
pierrethesnack said:
He is not alt-right at all. The people calling him alt-right or accusing him of spreading racism or whatever honestly have no clue. He's attacked because he has the audacity to believe there's a clear connection between ideas/ideology and actions. He absolutely loathes racism and bigotry.
Click to expand...

Harris is into race i.q stuff now. He hosted a hour long podcast with Charles Murray.

He is pretty much Michael Palin character from the film Brazil.
 
Sizeable part of his audience is right wing. Doesn’t mean he’s necessarily that way but clearly they like what he says.
 
Sweet Square said:
Harris is into race i.q stuff now. He hosted a hour long podcast with Charles Murray.
Click to expand...

Did you listen to the podcast? He had Murray on to give him a chance to explain himself after becoming pretty much a public pariah, and because he himself didn't even want to touch him when Murray first published The Bell Curve, without even reading it.

Harris consistently states that the questionable difference in IQ between "races" is so small and insignificant that it doesn't have any impact on the individual or societal level, thereby making studies on IQ and race pointless.

If that's considered an alt-right view now, then I frankly don't know what to say.
 
pierrethesnack said:
Did you listen to the podcast? He had Murray on to give him a chance to explain himself after becoming pretty much a public pariah, and because he himself didn't even want to touch him when Murray first published The Bell Curve, without even reading it.

Harris consistently states that the questionable difference in IQ between "races" is so small and insignificant that it doesn't have any impact on the individual or societal level, thereby making studies on IQ and race pointless.

If that's considered an alt-right view now, then I frankly don't know what to say.
Click to expand...
Why was Murray a turned into a public pariah? Because his book was a load of racist shite



If your have race IQ people on for a chit chat I think its fair enough to say your right wing.
 
Last edited:
pierrethesnack said:
Find me a direct source of Harris saying something racist if you want to push this argument.
Click to expand...

Er.........call yourself a fan

Sam Harris said said:
I'm a massive racist

Page 1 of Sam Harris - The Racist Years
Click to expand...

I mean your not one of those people who unless someone screams the N word they can't be a racist ? Harris is right wing and promotes racists ideas because of his views on American foreign, his views on policing and that one time he did a podcast with a IQ racist.
 
Sweet Square said:
Why was Murray a turned into a public pariah? Because his book was a load of racist shite
Click to expand...

Nope, some of it was flawed and the policy implications were highly debatable. But otherwise it didn't fall below the empirical standard adhered to by most work of that genre. It received massived scrutiny, and rightly so, because of the topic.

Sweet Square said:
If your have race IQ people on for a chit chat I think its fair enough to say your right wing.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a chit chat at all. Harris repeatedly asked Murray why he went looking for this information in the first place, knowing it would be used by white supremacists to further their bs agenda.
 
Sweet Square said:
Er.........call yourself a fan
Click to expand...

You know as well as I that in this day and age it would be a piece of cake to find something like that if he had ever said it.

Sweet Square said:
I mean your not one of those people who unless someone screams the N word they can't be a racist ? Harris is right wing and promotes racists ideas because of his views on American foreign, his views on policing and that one time he did a podcast with a IQ racist.
Click to expand...

Of course you can be racist without using the N-word. But I think someone who voted for HRC, wants to raise minimum wage, wants to tax the rich, praises most of the consequences of metoo, thinks having to pay for basic healthcare is unethical, is positive about immigration, and repeatedly talks about a colour blind society as the end goal, etc, isn't really a racist or right wing.
 
Sam Harris is obviously left wing. He just has a few opinions which many vocal left wing people consider sacrilege so they're keen to evict him from "their" group.

The idea that a political stance can be reduced to a handful of controversial issues is tragic but that's our reality and he opens himself up to that attack knowingly, so we really shouldn't care how other people identify him. If you want to know his position you can listen to him talk about it in simple terms many times. Pretty irrelevant in the grand scheme of things but kind of amusing all the same.

He's a good litmus test for how extreme your views are and how you perceive politics in general. The people that want to claim him on the right or eject him on the left are only communicating something about themselves, not about him. Mostly intentionally too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.