6 ms·

Eric Weinstein Part 1 -the secret seminar

12 points by kgarten 6y ago

lacker 6y ago
A podcast called "I Don't Speak German" that's all about Nazis? I would hope these people are against racial prejudice, so I'm disappointed that the title of the podcast itself is associating "speaking German" with "being a Nazi".
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- kgarten 6y ago
  Yes, I can understand how people can find the title offensive. Yet, honestly I’m German and feel just fine and not offended at all. The podcast itself is quite informative ...
- yokaze 6y ago
  As far as I can see predominantly American Nazis. So the title may be pointing exactly that out.
  - jariel 6y ago
    Peter Thiel and the Weinstein Brothers are not Nazis. Ironically, the very nature of the terminology validates concerns over 'cancel culture' which the podcaster & co. seem to lament. If 'one side' is worried about voices being suppressed, the 'other side' is labelling people 'Nazis' well you can see the problem. I wonder what their reaction would be if Theil had an anti-Communist podcast called 'I don't speak Chinese' which lamented all their interlocutors and those with whom they don't agree as 'Communists'.
    - p1necone 6y ago
      If you read the description for the episode, they are not claiming that he's a Nazi. Podcasts don't have to stick exactly to the literal meaning of their titles 100% of the time. (Also surely you recognize the irony in this kind of nitpicking of someone elses speech while simultaneously bringing up free speech.)
      - jariel 6y ago
        I read the title, listened for a bit to it, and some of their other podcasts. The very nature of the podcast is to discuss 'Fascism' and I find including Thiel/Weinstein on the 'target list of Nazi-like people' though 'technically not Nazis' is intellectually offensive, and really defeating the purpose. I don't care about Thiel, Weinstein, Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan etc. or any of these people really but it's troubling when people try to suppress them or try to marginalize them as 'extremists'. There's absolutely nothing these guys are onto that should be remotely problematic in terms of civil discussion.
        kgarten 6y ago
        Have you listend to the second episode? I know it’s a long one and with quite some rambling https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/62-eric-weinstein-part-2-cancel-culture https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/62-eric-weinstein-part-2... At the end the elude to why they did the podcast episodes... check the last YouTube link of Eric .. that video is dangerous and stupid.
        jariel 6y ago
        Is is the 'last link' [1] that you are referring to? If it is, and you think this is 'dangerous' in any way I'm going to have to more than disagree, and suggest that any material issue over this video is probably a hint of something much more concerning. I really hope that wasn't the video you were referring to because I can't fathom any remotely reasonable person saying such a thing about it. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETcq7qqPhow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETcq7qqPhow 'Some Thoughts on Wokeness and Shame in light of events.'
        kgarten 6y ago
        He compares the breaking of glass by protestors to the Kristallnacht. You don’t think that’s stupid or dangerous?
        neilsense 6y ago
    - kgarten 6y ago
      Listen to the episode :) they don’t label Peter Thiel or the Weinsteins Nazis.
stareatgoats 6y ago
Academia has it's own special brand of politics, intertwined with vying and competing for relative scarce positions. That's why it gets personal: sticking labels on people is a favorite past-time. It's a cesspool of accusations and counteraccusations, nothing to do with the matters at hand for millions of people.
- kgarten 6y ago
  Who is sticking labels on whom? They give a lot of context, go into details in the next episode and have also later Becca Lewis on the show to discuss some more about the Weinstein Brothers. I found it quite interesting, to shed light on their claims from another perspective. They didn’t go into name calling or labelling anybody.
  - stareatgoats 6y ago
    > They didn’t go into name calling or labelling anybody. Oh pleez, give it a rest. Eric Weinstein is "part of the current reactionary ecosystem. And what a part he is." In what universe is that not a label? I'm not against categorizing people according to political category, but the more petty and fringe criteria you use , the more it takes on an inter-academic slanderous hue, a politics fixated on (famous) people and who-said-what, not on daily and pressing needs among people living in the slums and piled up in prisons. I'm sure you don't agree, but have a nice day all the same.
    - kgarten 6y ago
      Actually I agree with your sentiment. Yet, I would say Eric and the IDW are not really helping people living in slums or are piled up in prisons. They are more in the intellectual celebrity camp, so I feel that podcast is really highlighting that. I don’t listen to the creators much, I just find it annoying that Eric, Bret and others get so much exposure on hacker news. As there are some rather stupid elements in their argumentation (the podcast makes a good point there...). Personally I’m a big fan of Democracy Now! Amy is doing stuff compared to just making podcast episodes and complaining about Evergreen ;)
finnthehuman 6y ago
A podcast rolling out Eric Weinstien to be their punching bag du jour? Good grief this show sounds wretched. I've never heard of this podcast before. Unless someone wants to make the case that it's much more than it appears to be on the tin, I'm going to write it off as the bland and uninspired "analysis of our enemies" flavor propaganda that it looks like. If someone wants to hate Weinstien, just listen to him and decide that for yourself. You don't need a big-brained podcast to do it for you.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
neilsense 6y ago
> Sometimes we have to cover people like Eric who, while not Nazis, are part of the current reactionary ecosystem. Seriously? The largest 'reactionary ecosystem' is from the left, not the centre-left (Eric and his brother), or the centre-right/right. Has this past week taught you all nothing?
p1necone 6y ago
You freedom of speech people might want to occasionally pop up on threads that aren't about Nazis or the far right. It severely hurts my ability to take you seriously when you seem to care about free speech so selectively. Also as I mentioned in another comment - it's very ironic to claim to care about free speech while trying to shut down someone elses criticism of someone.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- thinkingemote 6y ago
  Free speech allows criticism. Trying to shut down criticism is not saying "you are wrong" on HN. That's not censorship. I agree it makes you feel aggrieved but it won't be a call to arms for the free speech crowd to back you up. But its most likely that I misunderstood. Do you want people to defend your arguments or the ability for you to make your arguments? or perhaps it's about someone else? Your comment was a root level one and was not in response to anything specific so I dont have much to go upon except the reference to another comment which read, to me, like an everyday argument on HN and one where you challenged. thus, this comment about free speech seems strange.
  - p1necone 6y ago
    There were comments on this thread that have since been stealth edited/deleted explicitly claiming that this podcast was somehow an attack on free speech, as opposed to just not agreeing with it - I was referring to those.
- jariel 6y ago
  Nobody on this thread is trying to 'shut down' this podcast, have them arrested, thrown off Spotify, labelling them as 'harmful' or suppressing them in any way. People are just pointing out that it's obviously ridiculous - and that's fine.
graphov 6y ago
I listened to the "secret seminar" part in the beginning and found their arguments really bad. 1. ...who knows what the real story behind this is... Okay, but that can be said against almost any claim uless there is a video or many people are willing to talk about it. If you claim that he is lying, the burden of proof is on you. Also that somehow doesn't stop them from hypothesising about personal tensions with the adviser as an explanation for non-invitation. 2. ...not being invited to a seminar is no biggie, 6 billion people weren't invited.. C'mon, if that seminar is run by your adviser on your topic of interest it is not the same as for the rest of the planet. 3. ...he is already elite of of the elite in a PhD program at Harward... Okay, so what? Put up with corruption? Ignore the fact that the system is rigged and not in your favor? 4. ...It's childish to have a revelation when discovering all this backscratching and deals going behind the scenes in academia... Really? Should a person expect it as normal? Maybe looking for a secret meeting should be the first step one should make in their academic career? 5. Stuff about him being paranoid/having prosecution complex. Making a diagnosis from a several minute podcast clip to conclude with ad hominem argument is beyond the pale IMHO. What of these two episodes strikes you as the most condemning about Eric? Maybe something he did or some abhorrent position he holds or something verifiably false that he said on purpose?
- kgarten 6y ago
  They discuss later Eric Weinstein’s claims towards Carol Greider. they also link to the uberfeminist. although I don’t like the tone, the analysis and take away seems sound. Don’t care if somebody is awful or not, but care about if somebody can backup claims and Eric seems not able to. http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2020/02/eric-weinstein-is-awful-person.html?m=1 http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2020/02/eric-weinstein-is-a... http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2020/03/eric-weinsteins-conspiracy-theories.html?m=1 http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2020/03/eric-weinsteins-con... The uberfeminist seems quite obsessed with the Weinsteins. still the blogposts appear spot on in terms of reasoning. If you find errors or proof for the claims the Weinsteins put out please post. for me personally, the worst was when Eric Weinstein compared BLM protestors to the Reichskristallnacht (link bellow) ... then I just thought he has really no clue what he is talking about. I’m happy to be proven wrong. edit: typos

12 points by kgarten 6y ago

A podcast called "I Don't Speak German" that's all about Nazis? I would hope these people are against racial prejudice, so I'm disappointed that the title of the podcast itself is associating "speaking German" with "being a Nazi".

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
kgarten 6y ago
Yes, I can understand how people can find the title offensive. Yet, honestly I’m German and feel just fine and not offended at all. The podcast itself is quite informative ...
yokaze 6y ago
As far as I can see predominantly American Nazis. So the title may be pointing exactly that out.
- jariel 6y ago
  Peter Thiel and the Weinstein Brothers are not Nazis. Ironically, the very nature of the terminology validates concerns over 'cancel culture' which the podcaster & co. seem to lament. If 'one side' is worried about voices being suppressed, the 'other side' is labelling people 'Nazis' well you can see the problem. I wonder what their reaction would be if Theil had an anti-Communist podcast called 'I don't speak Chinese' which lamented all their interlocutors and those with whom they don't agree as 'Communists'.
  - p1necone 6y ago
    If you read the description for the episode, they are not claiming that he's a Nazi. Podcasts don't have to stick exactly to the literal meaning of their titles 100% of the time. (Also surely you recognize the irony in this kind of nitpicking of someone elses speech while simultaneously bringing up free speech.)
    - jariel 6y ago
      I read the title, listened for a bit to it, and some of their other podcasts. The very nature of the podcast is to discuss 'Fascism' and I find including Thiel/Weinstein on the 'target list of Nazi-like people' though 'technically not Nazis' is intellectually offensive, and really defeating the purpose. I don't care about Thiel, Weinstein, Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan etc. or any of these people really but it's troubling when people try to suppress them or try to marginalize them as 'extremists'. There's absolutely nothing these guys are onto that should be remotely problematic in terms of civil discussion.
      - kgarten 6y ago
        Have you listend to the second episode? I know it’s a long one and with quite some rambling https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/62-eric-weinstein-part-2-cancel-culture https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/62-eric-weinstein-part-2... At the end the elude to why they did the podcast episodes... check the last YouTube link of Eric .. that video is dangerous and stupid.
        jariel 6y ago
        Is is the 'last link' [1] that you are referring to? If it is, and you think this is 'dangerous' in any way I'm going to have to more than disagree, and suggest that any material issue over this video is probably a hint of something much more concerning. I really hope that wasn't the video you were referring to because I can't fathom any remotely reasonable person saying such a thing about it. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETcq7qqPhow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETcq7qqPhow 'Some Thoughts on Wokeness and Shame in light of events.'
        kgarten 6y ago
        He compares the breaking of glass by protestors to the Kristallnacht. You don’t think that’s stupid or dangerous?
        neilsense 6y ago
  - kgarten 6y ago
    Listen to the episode :) they don’t label Peter Thiel or the Weinsteins Nazis.

stareatgoats 6y ago

Academia has it's own special brand of politics, intertwined with vying and competing for relative scarce positions. That's why it gets personal: sticking labels on people is a favorite past-time. It's a cesspool of accusations and counteraccusations, nothing to do with the matters at hand for millions of people.

kgarten 6y ago
Who is sticking labels on whom? They give a lot of context, go into details in the next episode and have also later Becca Lewis on the show to discuss some more about the Weinstein Brothers. I found it quite interesting, to shed light on their claims from another perspective. They didn’t go into name calling or labelling anybody.
- stareatgoats 6y ago
  > They didn’t go into name calling or labelling anybody. Oh pleez, give it a rest. Eric Weinstein is "part of the current reactionary ecosystem. And what a part he is." In what universe is that not a label? I'm not against categorizing people according to political category, but the more petty and fringe criteria you use , the more it takes on an inter-academic slanderous hue, a politics fixated on (famous) people and who-said-what, not on daily and pressing needs among people living in the slums and piled up in prisons. I'm sure you don't agree, but have a nice day all the same.
  - kgarten 6y ago
    Actually I agree with your sentiment. Yet, I would say Eric and the IDW are not really helping people living in slums or are piled up in prisons. They are more in the intellectual celebrity camp, so I feel that podcast is really highlighting that. I don’t listen to the creators much, I just find it annoying that Eric, Bret and others get so much exposure on hacker news. As there are some rather stupid elements in their argumentation (the podcast makes a good point there...). Personally I’m a big fan of Democracy Now! Amy is doing stuff compared to just making podcast episodes and complaining about Evergreen ;)

finnthehuman 6y ago

A podcast rolling out Eric Weinstien to be their punching bag du jour? Good grief this show sounds wretched. I've never heard of this podcast before. Unless someone wants to make the case that it's much more than it appears to be on the tin, I'm going to write it off as the bland and uninspired "analysis of our enemies" flavor propaganda that it looks like. If someone wants to hate Weinstien, just listen to him and decide that for yourself. You don't need a big-brained podcast to do it for you.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

neilsense 6y ago

> Sometimes we have to cover people like Eric who, while not Nazis, are part of the current reactionary ecosystem. Seriously? The largest 'reactionary ecosystem' is from the left, not the centre-left (Eric and his brother), or the centre-right/right. Has this past week taught you all nothing?

p1necone 6y ago

You freedom of speech people might want to occasionally pop up on threads that aren't about Nazis or the far right. It severely hurts my ability to take you seriously when you seem to care about free speech so selectively. Also as I mentioned in another comment - it's very ironic to claim to care about free speech while trying to shut down someone elses criticism of someone.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
thinkingemote 6y ago
Free speech allows criticism. Trying to shut down criticism is not saying "you are wrong" on HN. That's not censorship. I agree it makes you feel aggrieved but it won't be a call to arms for the free speech crowd to back you up. But its most likely that I misunderstood. Do you want people to defend your arguments or the ability for you to make your arguments? or perhaps it's about someone else? Your comment was a root level one and was not in response to anything specific so I dont have much to go upon except the reference to another comment which read, to me, like an everyday argument on HN and one where you challenged. thus, this comment about free speech seems strange.
- p1necone 6y ago
  There were comments on this thread that have since been stealth edited/deleted explicitly claiming that this podcast was somehow an attack on free speech, as opposed to just not agreeing with it - I was referring to those.
jariel 6y ago
Nobody on this thread is trying to 'shut down' this podcast, have them arrested, thrown off Spotify, labelling them as 'harmful' or suppressing them in any way. People are just pointing out that it's obviously ridiculous - and that's fine.

graphov 6y ago

I listened to the "secret seminar" part in the beginning and found their arguments really bad. 1. ...who knows what the real story behind this is... Okay, but that can be said against almost any claim uless there is a video or many people are willing to talk about it. If you claim that he is lying, the burden of proof is on you. Also that somehow doesn't stop them from hypothesising about personal tensions with the adviser as an explanation for non-invitation. 2. ...not being invited to a seminar is no biggie, 6 billion people weren't invited.. C'mon, if that seminar is run by your adviser on your topic of interest it is not the same as for the rest of the planet. 3. ...he is already elite of of the elite in a PhD program at Harward... Okay, so what? Put up with corruption? Ignore the fact that the system is rigged and not in your favor? 4. ...It's childish to have a revelation when discovering all this backscratching and deals going behind the scenes in academia... Really? Should a person expect it as normal? Maybe looking for a secret meeting should be the first step one should make in their academic career? 5. Stuff about him being paranoid/having prosecution complex. Making a diagnosis from a several minute podcast clip to conclude with ad hominem argument is beyond the pale IMHO. What of these two episodes strikes you as the most condemning about Eric? Maybe something he did or some abhorrent position he holds or something verifiably false that he said on purpose?

kgarten 6y ago
They discuss later Eric Weinstein’s claims towards Carol Greider. they also link to the uberfeminist. although I don’t like the tone, the analysis and take away seems sound. Don’t care if somebody is awful or not, but care about if somebody can backup claims and Eric seems not able to. http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2020/02/eric-weinstein-is-awful-person.html?m=1 http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2020/02/eric-weinstein-is-a... http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2020/03/eric-weinsteins-conspiracy-theories.html?m=1 http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2020/03/eric-weinsteins-con... The uberfeminist seems quite obsessed with the Weinsteins. still the blogposts appear spot on in terms of reasoning. If you find errors or proof for the claims the Weinsteins put out please post. for me personally, the worst was when Eric Weinstein compared BLM protestors to the Reichskristallnacht (link bellow) ... then I just thought he has really no clue what he is talking about. I’m happy to be proven wrong. edit: typos