51–60 of 61 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're just offering conspiracies and when pressed for a source provided one that doesn't even agree with your statement.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're just offering conspiracies and when pressed for a source provided one that doesn't even agree with your statement.
[flagged]
This article uses terms that de-legitimize certain types of discourse, such as "radicalization", "extremist figures," "hate speech" and "misinformation." Who decides whether the theory that COVID-19 originated in a Chinese lab is a scientific hypothesis to be tested, or "misinformation" to be suppressed? Who decides that Jordan Peterson is an "extremist figure" but RuPaul is not? Why are (generally left-leaning) peop…
What bothers me most about this delegitimization is how it's only ever applied to the right. Left has literal communists pushing an ideology that caused famine, misery and oppresion worldwide, radical feminists tweeting KILL ALL MEN all day... Nobody bats an eye. It's like the right is perpetually scrutinized ever since Hitler but people couldn't care less about the oppression and destruction brought about by Soviet Union style subversion.
I don't even consider "radicalization" and "extremism" to be bad things. "Radicals" are simply those who refuse to compromise on their ideals. There must be a truth out there, we're all seeking that truth and it sure as hell won't be found by compromising on some middle term that neither side is happy about. There must be some kind of resolution.
As someone who Bardfinn would likely call alt right (i think my fanatic support of Israel/Jews makes that untrue) I’m happy to answer questions. Basically nothing in this wiki page is accurate.
What makes you likely alt-right ?
I am not convinced that the proposed “alternative influence network” is much different from any echo chamber with influential figures on social media. Including people like Joe Rogan in the supposed AIN makes this article even less convincing. Joe Rogan has interviewed guests of very varied political leanings, and he himself seems to have a complex not strictly partisan world view. Should one never interview right-le…
To many on the left, this alone is "proof" that Rogan is The Other, which must be censored.
To put another way, this is exactly why Spotify hosting him was so controversial among the bien-pensant. Like the more recent attempted boycott of Hogwarts Legacy, the attempt to relegate Rogan to wrongthink was a miserable failure. Once the HL boycott failed those backing it did their best to rewrite history and claim that they never expected to succeed; did this happen with the Spotify attack?
I'll ask it again. Who is the author of this article?
I'll ask it again. Who is the author of this article?
You can view the history of who contributed what: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/Alt-right_pipe...
Initial version: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alt-right_pipelin...
source reference: https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/10108
who is the author?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. Should we then respect Joe Rogan’s right to host and give platform to controversial (or even reprehensible) guests if he chooses to do so? Does that reflect poorly on his moral character or not necessarily? Also, is there value for society in surfacing reprehensible ideas?
Interesting questions. What do you think?
The conversations are interesting and illuminating, and he is skilled at respectfully interviewing those he does not align with. This is all valuable in our society, and it’s helpful in breaking up echo chambers.
I am not a big fan of Joe Rogan, but I respect podcasters like him or Lex Fridman who facilitate exchange of various ideas without judgement.
Would you disagree?