EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2053
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10881 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26760 Posts
On January 24 2020 21:01 Nebuchad wrote: Sounds like it's part of the attack on Bernie, my guess is this one has more to do with libs trying to stick accusations of sexism on him or his vicinity. Although the phenomenon that you describe, which Contrapoints is currently in the middle of, also exists, and I don't want to minimize that How’s she end up in such a controversy? Sometimes I feel I miss out by not being on Twitter in terms of being informed, although my sanity is greatly bolstered. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
I mean if Bernie is going to become main candidate he will get support from a lot of people you might not like given your 2 options political structure. But if they support him because they think universal healthcare and reduced education costs are good things and they recognize he's consistently plead for those for decades, then what does it matter what personal beliefs they hold on other matters? Those beliefs are not part of Bernie's platform? | ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12451 Posts
On January 24 2020 21:50 Wombat_NI wrote: How’s she end up in such a controversy? Sometimes I feel I miss out by not being on Twitter in terms of being informed, although my sanity is greatly bolstered. A group of nb people have issues with some of what she said. Sometimes there is valid criticism and sometimes it's nonsense imo. Either way it got amplified to a ridiculous point. Her last video was about that drama and did a good job of covering it, quite fairly I think. If you have two hours to spare on something that probably doesn't deserve two hours. | ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
On January 24 2020 21:54 farvacola wrote: I despise Joe Rogan and think he actively harms the various dialogues he partakes in, but I have no problem whatsoever with Bernie accepting his endorsement. anything specific with Rogan that you disagree with? I stop in on his podcast and I like him well enough, curious as to your take? | ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
 | ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
On January 25 2020 00:01 farvacola wrote: Let’s just say that I have a really big problem with his approach towards the use of substances, particularly psychedelics ah, understood | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26760 Posts
On January 24 2020 23:49 Aveng3r wrote: anything specific with Rogan that you disagree with? I stop in on his podcast and I like him well enough, curious as to your take? I think he steps over the line between giving certain thinkers space to discuss their points, which I do like as a vague approach but then he’s not a critical enough questioner. It’s a double edged sword, on one hand interesting figures with good radical ideas get exposure to a big audience they might otherwise have not, on the other hand complete quackery can get something of the same platform. You see this broad alignment where certain figures get this coverage by allying along free speech grounds, with figures who hold similar views in that singular domain and then using these platforms as a pulpit for their own agendas. Not that Rogan is the only one here who gives platforms in this rather uncritical way. I’ll namecheck Jordan Peterson who has built this career and slavish following, by basically being continually allowed to frame himself as a martyr for free speech and slam on the entire social sciences as being Marxist somehow. I don’t thing Rogan does this particularly deliberately either for the record. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23930 Posts
Then you have the pundit class upset because everyone knows that Rogan saying "yeah I'm probably voting Bernie in the primary" or whatever is a way bigger deal than the NYT WarKlob endorsement. It is also a crap argument because Biden and Democrats generally have been playing footsie with white supremacy forever to "court moderate/reasonable Republicans". They're just mad Sanders is better at it/more liked. | ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
On January 25 2020 00:30 Wombat_NI wrote: I think he steps over the line between giving certain thinkers space to discuss their points, which I do like as a vague approach but then he’s not a critical enough questioner. It’s a double edged sword, on one hand interesting figures with good radical ideas get exposure to a big audience they might otherwise have not, on the other hand complete quackery can get something of the same platform. You see this broad alignment where certain figures get this coverage by allying along free speech grounds, with figures who hold similar views in that singular domain and then using these platforms as a pulpit for their own agendas. Not that Rogan is the only one here who gives platforms in this rather uncritical way. I’ll namecheck Jordan Peterson who has built this career and slavish following, by basically being continually allowed to frame himself as a martyr for free speech and slam on the entire social sciences as being Marxist somehow. I don’t thing Rogan does this particularly deliberately either for the record. I don't see any of that as something specific to Rogan, I feel like everyone with a podcast does this. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12451 Posts
| ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5121 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23930 Posts
On January 25 2020 00:50 Nebuchad wrote: Rogan is also not great on trans issues so I understand a reluctance there. Farv's reaction is the correct one imo. Yeah. I should have mentioned trans people/allies were rightfully upset that their concerns were disregarded in Bernie's promoting of the endorsement. But I doubt that is what Velr was seeing. Velr was probably seeing Warren staffers and supporters realizing her campaign is over now that her early pivot to the center has her out flanked by Bernie among Progressives and whatever we're calling Rogan listeners. The NYT lied us into Iraq, publishes race science, and interviews Nazi's to "get their side" so the people upset about Rogan probably voting for Bernie but not the NYT endorsement of their candidate expose themselves imo. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
On January 25 2020 00:52 Uldridge wrote: What's wrong with using psychedelics in particular? You think he's too meme-y about it? Nothing wrong with taking psychedelics, the problem relates more to situating psychedelic experiences with reference to the “big questions” of life while being mindful of the dangerous risks of ego-centrism. That’s all I’ll say here, feel free to PM me for more | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23930 Posts
TIME gave it this headline: Hundreds Gather in Baghdad to Demand American Troops Leave | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12451 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
| ||
| ||
