Rogan is basically a comedian so I don't view him in the same category as Harris or Peterson. The latter two are neither left nor right since they tend to evaluate ideas on the merits instead of dogmatically follow a decipherable political philosophy.
Peterson, Harris, etc....
- Thread starter prath92
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Rogan is basically a comedian so I don't view him in the same category as Harris or Peterson. The latter two are neither left nor right since they tend to evaluate ideas on the merits instead of dogmatically follow a decipherable political philosophy.
Yeah i agree with that. They are certainly far away from Shapiro and the nuts at Fox News, who represent the repugnant right in my opinion.
Not so sure it that applies to Petersen after seeing his climate change denial tweet yesterday.
most people on the left or even the right evaluate ideas on merits over and over and eventually they realize that they tend to agree with a group of people and society labels those groups as left or right. i didnt sign up for the left wing opinion club where i get a push notification about what my views are four times a day. i just evaluated the ideas on merit and drew similar conclusions to other people.
the notion that peterson is some sort of non partisan ideas man is absurd. did he evaluate the ideas of how wearing lipstick means you are asking to be sexually harassed?
most people on the left or even the right evaluate ideas on merits over and over and eventually they realize that they tend to agree with a group of people and society labels those groups as left or right. i didnt sign up for the left wing opinion club where i get a push notification about what my views are four times a day. i just evaluated the ideas on merit and drew similar conclusions to other people.
the notion that peterson is some sort of non partisan ideas man is absurd. did he evaluate the ideas of how wearing lipstick means you are asking to be sexually harassed?
I don't think they do. They instead evaluate ideas based on whether they jive with their preconceived political or moral preferences, not the other way around.
im literally sitting here telling you they dont. as someone actually on the left im telling you thats not how it works.
Ok, I'll take your word for it that you don't.
I DM Glenn Greenwald anytime I'm unsure, just to make sure I'm being appropriately left wing. I have no idea who that is, I just know Raoul bleats about him.
I wouldn't have Harris down as far-right or even that right at all since his views seem to be mixed on various matters - Peterson however is a staunch conservative and fairly unabashedly right-wing. Rogan I believe has a bit of a libertarian streak if I remember correctly, albeit with some sympathies towards the left.
I think he comes out of this ok. Always good to see someone admit they’re wrong.
he clearly hasnt thought about basically any of the things he says which is why people promoting him as an interesting thinker or whatever or delusional. this an emperors new clothes situation where they dont want to admit that the guy who told them to clean their room might not be a brilliant thinker
Jim Jeffries is great
Better than Dave Rubin anyway. Still bizarre it's the first time I've seen him accept it's probably wrong to go down that road (just let people discriminate), considering it's a real common sense position.
Hurr Durr, the government is always the problem! Blah, blah, blah freedom, freeze peach...
Clip below is a bit long (and it becomes more about regulation than the gay cake thing) but it is one of the most stupid arguments I've heard in a long time and really shows how the libertarian worldview (that he's just rattling off from other people he's spoken to) is childish beyond belief.
If people can't be arsed (and I don't blame you):
- He expects people to just move to a different state if they have a problem with discrimination.
- There's no need for regulation. Everyone has smartphones now - they'll catch any foul play.
- Amazon could easily replace the post office.
- Dave Rubin's gay, incase you didn't know. He's against identity politics and hates that stuff being discussed. But he's gay, incase you didn't know.
Last edited:
dave rubin is gay and he is married. married to a man. who is also gay. they are gay married because they are gay men. both dave rubin (gay) and his husband (also gay)
also amazon couldnt replace the post office. most right wingers dont understand anything about the post office
Sam Harris can be a snide prick, but putting in the title with Peterson is a bit strange. They hold quite different viewpoints.
Didn't Trump himself tweet something spectacularly dumb about amazon/the postal service?
The Libertarian stuff about "the government does nothing good" is particularly fecking stupid coming from Americans, where the states are given a load more autonomy than sub-regions in European countries and end up in ludicrous situations like state capitals going bankrupt when they try and upgrade a fecking rubbish dump.
Generally, I'd agree. But your entire argument falling apart after someone reminds you the Civil Rights Movement happened suggests he hasn't really thought things through.
Yeah but Europe is dying and is a new muslamic caliphate or something (according to these people) so what would Europeans know.
Peterson is clearly right wing and while he's obviously incredibly intelligent I find him very disingenuous. His generalisations of anyone he views on the left and his hysteria over "neo-Marxists" as if that's even an issue is incredibly off-putting. And his stupid voice.
Harris is actually pretty reasonable. He's firmly a centrist although by US standards probably left leaning. I agree that some of the more mainstream liberal ideas towards Islam are quite ridiculous given the conservative positions it inspires among huge portions of the Muslim population. There are ideas to be challenged and criticised by any progressive society.
Harris is actually pretty reasonable. He's firmly a centrist although by US standards probably left leaning. I agree that some of the more mainstream liberal ideas towards Islam are quite ridiculous given the conservative positions it inspires among huge portions of the Muslim population. There are ideas to be challenged and criticised by any progressive society.
Harris is definitely middle of the road (probably left leaning) on most things politically.
I think his thoughts on terrorism and muslims/religion are too simplistic but he's not the worst person to listen to. He's definitely got a lot of right-wingers on his coat-tails as they use him for justification of their racism/bigotry towards muslims as people.
I don't think there's a problem with liberals/left-leaning people refusing to blame (generally) poor nations for being a bit backward about some matters. And most would agree that these countries should progress/reform as time goes on.
Yeah, that's more or less my take on the two of them.
Although I think Harris is caught in that classic trap of making the same reasonable argument so repeatedly that he gradually ends up drifting past the point of reason. I went through something similar when I was urging people to be patient with David Moyes!
The title should be 'Social discourse - public academics' or something.
"Go clean your room, bucko | And other simplistic drivel"
What the hell100% this he is paper thin
And unsurprisingly he was exposed when someone was able to cut the bullshit, rid of him of his short, brief replies, and get him to give a straight and immediate answer. Granted, fair play to him for recognising that instead of digging a hole for himself, but still - hardly paints him in a credible light, even if it shows a hint of humility from him.
What surprised me is that there *is* a standard right-wing defence for this, one he is especially equipped to use.
"Serving blacks does not violate Christian faith in the same way as writing a celebratory message for an abominable wedding."
"Serving blacks does not violate Christian faith in the same way as writing a celebratory message for an abominable wedding."
There's also the pseudo lawyer response of:
"I'm against gay cakes so jews don't have to bake swastikas"
I thought he'll go to the "faith" one because religion is something he feels strongly about.
Jeffrey Donaldson of the DUP here in N.Ireland once compared a christian company having to bake a gay marriage cake (the famous case here) to a catholic on the Falls Road having to bake a Shankill Butchers tribute cake.
Marriage Equality. Tribute to Evil Psychopaths. Totally reasonable comparison.
It's common tactic and it's always ridiculous as it sounds.
EDIT:
Forgot it's on Youtube
cake isnt even good
Gay cake is pretty tasty to be fair. Although it's pretty new and hard to get.
I dont think Joe Rogans political views matter that much. He tends to give his guests a lot of slack to put their view across without getting confrontational about it or trying to pick their argument apart to protect his own views (unless you criticise weed, then he loses his shit)