1y ago

Anon talks about Joe Rogan

149 comments

Credulous is the word.
Under the guise of objectivity he gives all fringe opinions equal significance.
Edit: here's a good explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZAQYI_hYp0
- I'm okay with skeptical and verifying but he doesn't challenge all his guests equally. I'm not saying he should be perfect, but there are some really far out ideas that need more questioning before I'm personally satisfied.
  
  he is a cunt, literally lied about how he heard they are putting cat litter into classes so that kids eho identify as cats have somewhere to go, then when called out on it that it's bullshit he just said it's a joke or something.
  the real reason litter was being put into classes was so that if a school shooting happens kids have somewhere to go and it doesn't go everywhere
  it's covered in Some more News' Moral panic video
  https://youtu.be/oAeKAJFrb0w
  
  I will also say it's 2023, some things are past even being sceptical about.
  If you bring on a flatearther you aren't being sceptical, you're a moron.
  
  His show is entertainment first and foremost. That means glorifying stupid bullshit for the entertainment value of it.
  Most hard science is boring. Most fringe theory thinking is dramatic and thrilling.
- His mind's so open his brain fell out
  
  But it was so small nobody could find it
- Nice diction.
  
  Nice diction bro
- I love that though. I want to hear these wack jobs talk. I don’t listen to get smarter, just like I don’t go to McDonalds for a fine cooked meal.
  
  And that's fine, if you understand that these are wack jobs who shouldn't be taken seriously. Most of Rogan's listeners definitely don't

If you told Joe that Apple own a warehouse full of genetically altered chickens that actually laid iPhones he'd stare at you, slack-jawed and wonder why this hasn't been reported in the press. Just a fucking clown from his toes to his eyelashes.
- How did you find out about the iChickens? That's a trade secret.
  
  ahem I think you'll find they are called iHens, actually. Each one has been spliced with Jobs' DNA, so instead of clucking they constantly say 'boom'.
- Is the part above his eyelashes something else or is it just clown top?
  
  Pure, unfiltered and undiluted clown. It is so potent it acts like a reserve when the rest of the body needs to be replenished.
  Joe is, in all actuality, a clown camel.

The apotheosis of what a dumb guy thinks a smart guy sounds like.
The manifested avatar of a crowd of drunk college kids having an uninformed debate.
The patron saint of mansplaining.
- From my knowledge of them (which is sadly non-zero), I think Ben Shapiro fits the first description better.
  
  my favorite Shabibo moment was when he had a "debate" with a famous Tory broadcaster in the UK and got dunked on so hard he called him a leftist.
- So basically he hasn't changed since he was on News Radio.
- Nobody, not even dumb people, think Joe Rogan sounds like a smart guy. They think he sounds like a relatable (dumb) guy who talks to smart guys.

Nah he just a douche
- Joe think you are wrong.

The problem with Rogan is that he doesn't have the knowledge or qualifications to push back against people spewing bullshit on his show, and so he ends up essentially making fringe, pseudo-scientific ideas seem equal to the mainstream expert consensus view.
- And the outspoken wrong on the show people are oftentimes cool and charismatic, so people trust them.
- the problem with rogan is that he agrees with the worst people on his show. he doesn't push back because he doesn't want to. he peaked on news radio.
- YAYUH! What we need is a ministry of truth to protect the public!

I stopped listening to his podcasts when I realised he doesn't know the facts and spews what he believes are facts. I admire him to hold a conversation for as long as he does and keep it somewhat entertaining but beyond that it's nothing more than pseudo science.

One of the best greentext explanations out there

They're not wrong.
- Nah they are wrong, Joe isn't a dumb guy, he's not doing what he's doing because he's some dumb meathead, he's doing it for money, fame, and to finally be part of the in-groups, which means power, he finally has a president(Trump) that accepts him and hob knobs with him.
  Joe has always been a cynical self serving libertarian type, if you went back and listened or watched some of his old standup comedy you would get a better idea of how far Rogan has fallen, he's become a lot of what he hated. There was a time when people used to think that Joe would be the next George Carlin, now he's just a more palatable and successful Alex Jones.
  
  You're reading way too much into it, his original stand up was never clever.
  
  Haha holy shit, it's wild to even see Joe and George in the same sentance. It's like thinking maybe the PT Cruiser could be the spiritual successor to the 1967 Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 😂
  
  I've watched Joe's old comedy and shows he's been on (Opie and Anthony) and don't remember anyone thinking he would be the next Carlin. Lewis Black and Jon Stewart I could see.
  
  He's not an idiot or anything, but he's pretty ignorant about a lot of topics, particularly science. He's quick on the uptake, but he isn't good at understanding how things fit together
  That's fine, it's a fantastic way to do interviews. It's a stand-in for the audience - he says "I'm a dumb guy good at punching, so can you break it down really simple?" People that are sharp don't feel patronized, and people that are actually dumb feel it's much more approachable
  The problem is somewhere along the way, Joe started believing people were there for him and not the guest, and he started doing more talking and less listening when he doesn't agree with what's being said (especially since he has some pretty bad takes)
  
  People always think people they disagree with are more Machiavellian than they usually are.
  
  something something long something something hero, something something villain
  
  Alex Jones is pushing it a bit but I get what you are saying
- We need to know though, how good is Joe with a bow on a horse?
  
  Lol, it kinda reminds me of Joe's whole "we've never seen a gorilla at peak gorilla" take.
  Joe is short, abuses steroids, probably isn't too flexible, I can definitely see him falling off of the horse a lot while trying to shoot a bow from it.
  
  Joe is a thumb and you don't really use your thumb in archery.

This is good shit

That used to be true. He got sucked into the right wing echo chamber real though and he has getting worse as time goes on.

No; he's just a credulous idiot.

Every post that hits /all/ from this comm is either misogyny or casual racism like this.
- Yeah, that's what I noticed about the 4chan-related subreddits, too. It's basically all 4chan has to offer. "haha, we're racist!" or equivalent.
- Because that's what people upvote after all. Rage always gets more engagement.
  
  It's not what "people" upvote, it's what white people upvote, because they're racists.

Thank you for sharing this gift with us

Barbarian Khan
yes the culture that happens to adapt/improve/recruit tech, culture and people from all over the place is the ''barbarian''
- I was always under the assumption that 'barbarian' was specifically the term Romans used to refer to any non Romans north of the empire?
  Still, funny shitpost.
  
  I had thought it was specifically Greeks dunking on Syrian/Arabian because their language sounded like they were just saying, "Bar bar bar."
  Reading up a little more, it sounds more like it was their description of anyone who is not Greek.
  
  North west of the empire.

- How dare you make me see this with my morning tea.
- Man's got tiny soda can nipples

Fuck me this is hilarious Jo Raw Khan

While I understand and respect the dunking in light of his detrimental effect on politics and sanity in general, I feel it's disingenuous to imply he's stupid. He's just smart enough to be dangerous
- Dude has posited to guests on his podcast that he believes in forcing imprisoned people to be medical testing subjects.
  Dude has no idea who dude really is.
  
  I don't think him saying dumb stuff on his podcast is good evidence of a lack of intelligence. The podcast is an entertainment product, not an IQ test. Also, the likelihood of anyone saying something blatantly wrong/stupid is nearly 100% if you record them long enough and make them talk about a wide enough variety of topics.
  I don't even wanna be defending Joe Rogan but it's just obvious that he's not below average intelligence, and pushing that propaganda contributes to the pervasive failure of the left to understand the grievances of the right. It's not as simple as all conservatives being idiots.
- I'd say he's more inquisitive than smart. Of course, that's its own kind of intelligence I suppose.

Listening to the podcast "History of philosophy without any gaps" there's some philosophers, specially in middle age Arabic societies, that had the patronage of warlords, and would change patron for the new warlords who killed their previous one.
- They couldn't exactly keep being patronized by a dead guy.

This isn't greentext.

This is just racism
- Racist against who? 13th century Mongols?
  
  Against Mongols. But it is also incredibly chuavanist in general toward all tribal people.
- Jesus shut the fuck up you absolute raging mong.
  
  eat shit and die

Seems to me a lot of people here pretty hostile to Joe. I can only say he has been more than open and interacted with good faith with guests that I listen to than anyone in "media". His talk with Bernie Sanders and his agreement with certain aspects of Sanders agenda should dismiss the claim that he's a libertarian shill. I try to approach him as a topic in good faith as well.
He's being called a neandertal because he seems to agree with a lot of fringe opinions. I try to think of how I would react if talking to a person who I have no idea about their area of expertise and how I would deal with claims that they make. Sure he gives a voice to cranks, but he also gives voice to people across the spectrum, some that I actually want other people to hear from. That's kind of what free speech is about right there.
- Do not hide behind "freedom of speech" - you are completely misinterpreting why people don't like Joe Rogan.
  The #1 criticism of Joe Rogan is that he gives an equal platform to real science and pseudoscience on the biggest podcast in the world. He's turned plenty of nutjobs with absolutely terrible theories into household names.
  
  Fair enough. I don't feel like I'm hiding behind freedom of speech as much as I'm saying that it's fundamentally important to the functioning of a healthy society. With that comes knowledge that some people out there are going to be dishonest shits. If what I'm saying about it's importance is true, then that should be the starting point for any discussion like this.
  The question is then, who get to decide what is appropriate to talk about? What percentage of the people he talks to have to be agreeable before he comes off as a good actor? I would never have become a leftist if it weren't for information out there that didn't fit the national narratives that we get from existing im the US.
  This whole covid fiasco has been an excellent example of people who were off narrative (lab leak, anti shutdowns etc) being at least partially vindicated by the actual outcomes later in the game. It's not always the case, but it happens and we should be aware of that.
- Sure he has some left-leaning guests, but he also claims that January 6th was instigated by the FBI, and pushes an anti-healthcare agenda. The ire he gets is well earned and justified.
  Do you really trust someone who took numerous traumatic hits to the head to give solid political and health advice?
  
  I'd have to look at those claims to know if that's actually true. It may be, but media/internet hyperbole is so overplayed I'd wager it isn't actually true. Like I said though. I don't know about that specific instance.
  The thing is, if the FBI hadn't framed so many Muslims in the US, during the war on terror or fascilitated the Whitmer kidnapping, maybe claims like that wouldn't gain traction as easily.
- Joe's fundamental problem isn't that he's biased or somehow hostile to leftist critique. Its that he's a shameless sellout far more focused on promoting his sponsors than providing useful information to his audience. Fundamentally, you have to see the Joe Rogan Show as a two hour long advertisement.
  Just like any of those dippy morning shows that feature two drunk New York socialites giggling about the day's news, the primary purpose of the programming is to sell self-help books, nutrition supplements, entertainment, and sleazy investment products. These "open" interactions are ultimately just sponsored content. His guests are overwhelmingly just sales guys making a pitch for their snake oil. And his blank gormless reception of every bow tie nerd and hack fitness guru is the canvas against which these hucksters pitch their product.
  That's kind of what free speech is about right there.
  Its not "free speech" because these people are paying to be here. Rogan isn't talking to these dipshits pro bono. He's taking his cut of all their merch. That's the whole reason he's worth nine-figures.
  Dude's running the toxically masculine version of the Home Shopping Channel.
  
  I haven't heard that people pay to be on his show, if that's true that certainly changes things in my mind.
- Rogan doesn't just talk to any cranks, he gives a voice to incredibly bigoted cranks like Sam Harris, Douglas Murray, and Jordan Peterson.
  These types are more than simple fringe eccentrics, they're outright racist, transphobic lunatics who shouldn't feel comfortable showing their faces in polite society. Nothing can be gained from talking with these people unless we're all laughing at them or we're learning how to identify their type of fascism.
  That would be funny though, if Rogan had these folk on his show specifically to mock them and show everyone what clowns they are, like what Zizek did to Peterson. But Rogan doesn't clown on them. He talks to them as seriously as he does anyone else, and even occasionally agrees with them, so what value does that provide? Should freedom of speech include racist screeds or calls for violence against trans people?
- Sure he gives a voice to cranks, but he also gives voice to people across the spectrum
  That's the problem though isn't it? By giving the same platform to cranks as he would people with expertise in their field while offering very little pushback, he signals to his audience that these fringe, nonsensical ideas are just different opinions being debated.
  It's coverage like that across the media, that has allowed unscientific views like antivax to fester.
  
  Thanks for your response. Are you suggesting that indecisive movement on the part of the media is what causes antivax sentiments to rise? I mean one of the biggest slurs they throw is that you're antivax. I can't remember a time when antivaxing was talked about on the media as a reasonable standpoint. Yet the prevalence of antivax sentiments is increasing. Couldn't it also be attributable to institutional decline?
  Did the CDC behave in a consistent and transparent way during covid? Or did they issue contradictory recommendations, and disinformation regarding lab leak. My point only is, if our institutions weren't failing us on the reg, maybe we'd find it easier to take their word for things.
- Freedom of speech is about not being censored by the government, not private citizens hosting a platform for a spectrum of opinions.
  Compare it to something like freedom of religion: should private citizens engage in a spectrum of religious rituals, including violent rituals of extreme cults?
  The issue isn't how enthusiastic individual private citizens are about the freedoms granted to them from the government. Someone may truly enjoy yelling "fire" in public buildings, but the effect on the public is what causes concern.
  Should you censor a person for this? That's another debate, but I'm just explaining where the concern, assuming you have concern, should be placed.
  
  True, there are limits to freedom of speech. But aren't you disturbed by the control that people in society are exerting on the narratives that we are allowed to question? With or without government involvement. I'm talking about big techmedia here, and the power they have to set the narrative entirely with or without the government involved. I mean the tools that they put into play to stop right wing misinformation (not saying most of it isn't misinformation) can be just flipped over on the left when the left starts threatening institutions down the road.
  
  Freedom of speech is about not being censored by the government, not private citizens hosting a platform for a spectrum of opinions.
  The government can deny someone freedom of speech, but the government isn't the only thing that can deny someone freedom of speech.
- That's kind of what free speech is about right there.
  Nothing you described has anything to do with free speech.
  
  What listening to Joe does to a mf.
  
  Nothing irks me more than 'free speech' troglodytes who have no idea what free speech means.
- I can only say he has been more than open and interacted with good faith with guests that I listen to than anyone in "media". His talk with Bernie Sanders and his agreement with certain aspects of Sanders agenda should dismiss the claim that he's a libertarian shill.
  "He agreed with Bernie on like 2 things (because he just goes along with whatever the last person to talk to him beleives) so all of his comments about covid being fake or Jan 6th being a false flag are irrelevant and he's definitely nit a right wing shill guys. Freeze peach!!"
  
  He endorsed Bernie Sanders in the election, unless i'm confused.
- He’s being called a neanderthal because he seems to agree with a lot of fringe opinions.
  I mean that's just a symptom of the biggest complaint about him. He's really gullible. He's not malicious, but god damn he does not notice a liar when a liar is in front of him. Genuinely I do love his long form content, I love how people can go off topic with him, but some of the people he brings on really should be going in front of Jon Stewart instead.
  Like... here's an example of someone clearly lying, dodging questions, and genuinely being sketchy. He's gotten a bit better but would Joe Rogan push this hard against somebody? If someone dodges his question, how well does he bring the topic back to it? Joe Rogan is great when everyone is there in good faith, but would you want him in your corner if you're stuck in a timeshare conference?
  
  This is kind of where I'm coming from. I'm not a regular listener of his so my views may be outdated. I just think a lot of malice is dumped on him that I don't think is necessarily fair. That being said, he is a public figure so being dumb only gets you so far as an excuse.
  I also like long form stuff, and I like to talk to people who know things, so at least in an ideal sense I'm positive on his format. B
  😂 for the timeshare conference
- He's friends with Alex Jones. Fuck off.
- Idk Joe's podcast helped galvanize my former friend's radicalization to the right so I don't really have much sympathy for a fair look at what he does. He'll say "oh he had Bernie on though" too but meanwhile only talk about how awesome Peterson and Shapiro are.
- Pushing a livestock dewormer as effective protection against COVID puts him about the same level as Gwyneth Paltrow selling pussy candles and whatever other dumb shit she's hawking these days.
  I'm also tired of "libertarian" being a dirty word. Far as I know, classical libertarians aren't the Randian capitalist sociopaths the right fawns over, yet it's another thing the right has co-opted and fucking soiled, much like the Gadsden Flag.
- You're dealing here with mostly teeanagers and bots... they just follow the herd... fairness isn't really something they care about. All they care about is "is he one of us and agrees with every nut job agenda that appears on main stream media".
  It's not a coincidence that the top posts here always agree with all main talking points of mainstream media. You're basically facing the most brainwashed people out there, that have the will to defend everything that makes them miserable. Anyone who says anything against it will be called names and disqualified. Joe Rogan is one of those people.
  They say "dead internet theory" explains all the botting... I think it's just that the majority of dumb people, who have intelligence comparable to basic bots, are now prominent. Let's not forget that half of the people in the world have below average intelligence. So, don't waste your time. Just read and laugh.

149 comments