15 ms·

Wait, Joe Rogan is considered a right wing youtuber? I listen to his show all the time and I'm a pretty big liberal and while he sometimes does the whole "every

Wait, Joe Rogan is considered a right wing youtuber? I listen to his show all the time and I'm a pretty big liberal and while he sometimes does the whole "everyone is sooooo PC now" thing, he also talks negatively about Trump, the GOP and right wing politics constantly. I also listened to the James Damore episode, and while I thought James did a good job of making his point and Joe did an AWESOME job of interviewing him while not taking sides, it felt like James was pretty disingenuous and lacked a general understanding of how to behave in a workplace as well as how to treat other people.

mistermann 9y ago
> it felt like James was pretty disingenuous and lacked a general understanding of how to behave in a workplace To be fair, it can be difficult for some people on the autism spectrum to work in environments where you have to run objective reality through various "politically correct" adjustment filters before reacting to it.
- ryguytilidie 9y ago
  So it sounds like you agree with me that he lacked an understanding of how to behave in a workplace?
  - mistermann 9y ago
    I agree only in a sense similar to how people in a wheelchair lack the capability to access public spaces in the same way as non-disabled people do. It's funny how even in a highly logical technical community the conversations on certain topics are the same as you'd find elsewhere.
    - ryguytilidie 9y ago
      To be clear, your analogy is that this fellow lashing out at certain groups of his coworkers can be attributed to their mental disorder you've diagnosed and you've then decided that this is the same as a person in a wheelchair being unable to access certain areas? I'm understanding this correctly? You're sure this is an analogy you think is passably decent let alone one that can be be followed up with you mocking other people afterward...? What are we hoping to accomplish here?
      - mpweiher 9y ago
        > lashing out at certain groups of his coworkers Please explain where he was "lashing out" and who those "certain groups of his coworkers" were. Try to be specific.
        ryguytilidie 9y ago
        Ah! The old obtuseness defense. Fun.
        mpweiher 9y ago
        You misspelled Socratic Method.
      - mistermann 9y ago
        I wonder if you have any inkling of how you're demonstrating my point.
- lurr 9y ago
  It's not about being politically correct, it's about not implying that your female coworkers don't deserve their jobs. before someone says "He didn't do that, you obviously never read it", I did and I still believe it's a conclusion that he leads the reader to. Not sure it was intentional. Also the whole "too neurotic for leadership" bit. WTF was he thinking with that.
  - matmusmeows 9y ago
    I read Demores paper and I didn't get the impression that he thought that about female co workers. To me his main point seemed to be that women by number arnt as interested in tech as males are. On your second point it's easy to look back on the paper and pick at the way some of it comes across but I don't think he ever imagined it becoming the published and the political hot potato it became. Maybe he would have been more careful with the wording if he could have seen into the future, unfortunately we don't have that skill yet.
  - jacksmith21006 9y ago
    Totally agree. How in the world could you have Damore on a team with women after the memo is out and people know he wrote it? I have never bought into this is some social political thing but rather just basic human decency. Never understood how the right wing got a hold of this and my only guess it was Damore or someone from the right wing that wanted this rather obvious HR issue as some social political issue. It is not in reality. Any company would have diciplined Damore including firing. A manager is responsible for everyone including the women.
    - sintaxi 9y ago
      Google expects people to work with people who openly hate white men. Just take a look at some of their twitter feeds. Damore expressed no such opinion of women he just has a broader explanation for under-representation in tech other than sexism.
      - jacksmith21006 9y ago
vowelless 9y ago
As I mentioned, I don't disparage "right wing". I actually enjoy Joe Rogans podcast, and also Dave Rubin and Jordan Peterson. All three of them are solidly classical liberal, which is probably right of center today (individualism vs. collectivism, equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome, etc). But AFAIK, damore never came to the young Turks, Chapo trap house, which are leftist podcasts. I could be wrong.
- ar-jan 9y ago
  Do you think any of those would have had him on?
- ng12 9y ago
  Would you go on the Young Turks if you were him? It'd be like walking before a firing squad.
  - gizmo686 9y ago
    I would go on a 1 on 1 interview with Cenk Uygur.
    - folknor 9y ago
      And you've watched the one he did with Sam Harris?
      - gizmo686 9y ago
        Yes. What is wrong with that interview?
        folknor 9y ago
        Well, it has been a few years, and it's a very long interview, so I hope you understand I'm not going to be very specific. These are the things that I came away with after watching it, to the best of my recollection: - Cenks inability to be charitable towards his guest - Cenks inability to let his guest make a point without challenging it repeatedly, and please note the that the word "repeatedly" is key - Cenks way of deflecting analysis of an apple by saying "but what about this orange?!" - Sams amazing patience and calm Anyway, that's how I remember feeling after having watched it years ago. And I've never watched Cenk before or after that interview, so I have no other points of reference for his character or abilities as an interviewer. I'm not going to go watch it again, so there's nothing to discuss here - it just amazes me that anyone would want to be interviewed by Cenk, considering how negatively I viewed his interaction with Sam. So, I guess I should not have engaged you at all, because I have nothing to discuss, and no factual arguments to make. I would delete my first comment if I could, but I can't.
hsod 9y ago
If you spend a lot of time railing on "SJWs", and comparatively little time advocating for an alternative path to a more egalitarian social order, I think you can be considered right wing. Supporting pot legalization doesn't erase that.
- ryguytilidie 9y ago
  "If you spend a lot of time railing on "SJWs", and comparatively little time advocating for an alternative path to a more egalitarian social order" I mean, if you want to debate, I'm happy to do so, but I'd prefer the debate be rooted in reality and not hyperbole.
  - hsod 9y ago
    What hyperbole are you objecting to? On net, do you think Rogan's political commentary favors the status quo or a more equal society? Imagine you think fire trucks are an eyesore, so you start an advocacy campaign trying to ban them from the road. Someone might accuse you of not caring if people's houses burn down. You might reply that deep in your heart you are 100% against houses burning down and you're just weighing in on the way fires should be fought. And maybe you're being honest that in your heart of hearts you don't want houses to burn down. But that's only relevant to you. From everyone else's perspective, your politics are pro-houses-burning-down.
    - ryguytilidie 9y ago
      "What hyperbole are you objecting to?" Your entire first post. 1) He doesnt "spend a lot of time railing on SJWs". 2) He absolutely talks, with almost every single guest, about how to potentially change the world for the better. 3) I never indicated that I thought he wasn't right wing because of how he felt about legal pot, yet, you throw that in there anyway, i guess to belittle an argument I never made? Fun... So yeah, two sentences and every single point is either incorrect or not useful. That's not exactly how one starts a useful debate. Also wow that is an atrocious analogy.
      - 9y ago
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
psyc 9y ago
He absolutely is not. He’s (moderately) liberal. The absurdly polarized social media scene has moved the window.
cholantesh 9y ago
Yeah I think it's unfortunate that Rogan gets cast that way. His interview with SargonOfAkkad is pretty telling in that regard. He pulls no punches there and says pretty emphatically that he doesn't identify with a lot of what he says.
Helmet 9y ago
Any living male with a pulse is generally considered to be "right-wing", particularly if they ask questions or exhibit any skepticism towards mainstream liberal culture.
lawnchair_larry 9y ago
So was he disingenuous, or did he lack understanding? Pick one.
- ryguytilidie 9y ago
  Are you operating under the belief that humans can only assign a single emotion to another...? I said that he was a bit disingenous about some thing and then said that he "lacked understanding about...", yet, sure, cut that off, rip out the context in the interest of being snarky to a complete stranger. Why not?

mistermann 9y ago

> it felt like James was pretty disingenuous and lacked a general understanding of how to behave in a workplace To be fair, it can be difficult for some people on the autism spectrum to work in environments where you have to run objective reality through various "politically correct" adjustment filters before reacting to it.

ryguytilidie 9y ago
So it sounds like you agree with me that he lacked an understanding of how to behave in a workplace?
- mistermann 9y ago
  I agree only in a sense similar to how people in a wheelchair lack the capability to access public spaces in the same way as non-disabled people do. It's funny how even in a highly logical technical community the conversations on certain topics are the same as you'd find elsewhere.
  - ryguytilidie 9y ago
    To be clear, your analogy is that this fellow lashing out at certain groups of his coworkers can be attributed to their mental disorder you've diagnosed and you've then decided that this is the same as a person in a wheelchair being unable to access certain areas? I'm understanding this correctly? You're sure this is an analogy you think is passably decent let alone one that can be be followed up with you mocking other people afterward...? What are we hoping to accomplish here?
    - mpweiher 9y ago
      > lashing out at certain groups of his coworkers Please explain where he was "lashing out" and who those "certain groups of his coworkers" were. Try to be specific.
      - ryguytilidie 9y ago
        Ah! The old obtuseness defense. Fun.
        mpweiher 9y ago
        You misspelled Socratic Method.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      I wonder if you have any inkling of how you're demonstrating my point.
lurr 9y ago
It's not about being politically correct, it's about not implying that your female coworkers don't deserve their jobs. before someone says "He didn't do that, you obviously never read it", I did and I still believe it's a conclusion that he leads the reader to. Not sure it was intentional. Also the whole "too neurotic for leadership" bit. WTF was he thinking with that.
- matmusmeows 9y ago
  I read Demores paper and I didn't get the impression that he thought that about female co workers. To me his main point seemed to be that women by number arnt as interested in tech as males are. On your second point it's easy to look back on the paper and pick at the way some of it comes across but I don't think he ever imagined it becoming the published and the political hot potato it became. Maybe he would have been more careful with the wording if he could have seen into the future, unfortunately we don't have that skill yet.
- jacksmith21006 9y ago
  Totally agree. How in the world could you have Damore on a team with women after the memo is out and people know he wrote it? I have never bought into this is some social political thing but rather just basic human decency. Never understood how the right wing got a hold of this and my only guess it was Damore or someone from the right wing that wanted this rather obvious HR issue as some social political issue. It is not in reality. Any company would have diciplined Damore including firing. A manager is responsible for everyone including the women.
  - sintaxi 9y ago
    Google expects people to work with people who openly hate white men. Just take a look at some of their twitter feeds. Damore expressed no such opinion of women he just has a broader explanation for under-representation in tech other than sexism.
    - jacksmith21006 9y ago

vowelless 9y ago

As I mentioned, I don't disparage "right wing". I actually enjoy Joe Rogans podcast, and also Dave Rubin and Jordan Peterson. All three of them are solidly classical liberal, which is probably right of center today (individualism vs. collectivism, equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome, etc). But AFAIK, damore never came to the young Turks, Chapo trap house, which are leftist podcasts. I could be wrong.

ar-jan 9y ago
Do you think any of those would have had him on?
ng12 9y ago
Would you go on the Young Turks if you were him? It'd be like walking before a firing squad.
- gizmo686 9y ago
  I would go on a 1 on 1 interview with Cenk Uygur.
  - folknor 9y ago
    And you've watched the one he did with Sam Harris?
    - gizmo686 9y ago
      Yes. What is wrong with that interview?
      - folknor 9y ago
        Well, it has been a few years, and it's a very long interview, so I hope you understand I'm not going to be very specific. These are the things that I came away with after watching it, to the best of my recollection: - Cenks inability to be charitable towards his guest - Cenks inability to let his guest make a point without challenging it repeatedly, and please note the that the word "repeatedly" is key - Cenks way of deflecting analysis of an apple by saying "but what about this orange?!" - Sams amazing patience and calm Anyway, that's how I remember feeling after having watched it years ago. And I've never watched Cenk before or after that interview, so I have no other points of reference for his character or abilities as an interviewer. I'm not going to go watch it again, so there's nothing to discuss here - it just amazes me that anyone would want to be interviewed by Cenk, considering how negatively I viewed his interaction with Sam. So, I guess I should not have engaged you at all, because I have nothing to discuss, and no factual arguments to make. I would delete my first comment if I could, but I can't.

hsod 9y ago

If you spend a lot of time railing on "SJWs", and comparatively little time advocating for an alternative path to a more egalitarian social order, I think you can be considered right wing. Supporting pot legalization doesn't erase that.

ryguytilidie 9y ago
"If you spend a lot of time railing on "SJWs", and comparatively little time advocating for an alternative path to a more egalitarian social order" I mean, if you want to debate, I'm happy to do so, but I'd prefer the debate be rooted in reality and not hyperbole.
- hsod 9y ago
  What hyperbole are you objecting to? On net, do you think Rogan's political commentary favors the status quo or a more equal society? Imagine you think fire trucks are an eyesore, so you start an advocacy campaign trying to ban them from the road. Someone might accuse you of not caring if people's houses burn down. You might reply that deep in your heart you are 100% against houses burning down and you're just weighing in on the way fires should be fought. And maybe you're being honest that in your heart of hearts you don't want houses to burn down. But that's only relevant to you. From everyone else's perspective, your politics are pro-houses-burning-down.
  - ryguytilidie 9y ago
    "What hyperbole are you objecting to?" Your entire first post. 1) He doesnt "spend a lot of time railing on SJWs". 2) He absolutely talks, with almost every single guest, about how to potentially change the world for the better. 3) I never indicated that I thought he wasn't right wing because of how he felt about legal pot, yet, you throw that in there anyway, i guess to belittle an argument I never made? Fun... So yeah, two sentences and every single point is either incorrect or not useful. That's not exactly how one starts a useful debate. Also wow that is an atrocious analogy.
    - 9y ago

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

psyc 9y ago

He absolutely is not. He’s (moderately) liberal. The absurdly polarized social media scene has moved the window.

cholantesh 9y ago

Yeah I think it's unfortunate that Rogan gets cast that way. His interview with SargonOfAkkad is pretty telling in that regard. He pulls no punches there and says pretty emphatically that he doesn't identify with a lot of what he says.

Helmet 9y ago

Any living male with a pulse is generally considered to be "right-wing", particularly if they ask questions or exhibit any skepticism towards mainstream liberal culture.

lawnchair_larry 9y ago

So was he disingenuous, or did he lack understanding? Pick one.

ryguytilidie 9y ago
Are you operating under the belief that humans can only assign a single emotion to another...? I said that he was a bit disingenous about some thing and then said that he "lacked understanding about...", yet, sure, cut that off, rip out the context in the interest of being snarky to a complete stranger. Why not?