7 ms·

I closed out of the article at the suggestion that the likes of Joe Rogan, Ben Shapiro, and Dave Rubin are "radicalizing" anyone. The New York times is such un

I closed out of the article at the suggestion that the likes of Joe Rogan, Ben Shapiro, and Dave Rubin are "radicalizing" anyone. The New York times is such unbelievable garbage.

lwelyk 7y ago
Joe Rogan and Dave rubin just have casual chats with stefan molyneux on their shows where they give him attention and let him just talk. They just give a platform to a literal white supremacist.
- mistermann 7y ago
  I would be interested in seeing you make a case for him being literally a white supremacist. A convincing case would be: 1. a specific, authoritative definition of white supremacy 2. an example of a video demonstrating these specific (not approximate) beliefs Is downvoting a request for evidence for an extraordinary claim (to be clear: this is not an assertion, so you "downvoting to express disagreement" is not valid) consistent with the HN guidelines?
  - dang 7y ago
    Please keep these wretched ideological flamewars off HN. Think of it as an experiment in not having literally every internet forum burn with the same rage. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - mistermann 7y ago
      Hi Dang, I doubt you have the time or any remaining patience to care, and I can hardly blame you, but I would like to point out what I think is an important point: while this discussion may seem like just another ideological disagreement, if you look at my participation in it I hope you could see that I was approaching it from an epistemological perspective, not (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20150162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20150162) an ideological perspective. I have a theory that a large percentage of seemingly ideological disagreements (same set of facts, but difference of opinion) are in fact rooted in epistemological problems of perception. This is why my counterpart was unable to provide evidence for what he (genuinely, and with good intentions) believed were facts. My intentions were not malicious (I think this is observably plausible based on my words and tone, or at least I hope so) in the conversation - I wasn't trying to score a "win" for "my side", I was genuinely trying to see if it is possible to get someone who believes something not-absolutely-factual to examine the foundation of those beliefs. "Defending" Stefan Molyneux was probably not the wisest place to do such a thing, but it is almost always topics related to "-isms" where these sorts of cognitive behaviors manifest themselves, so it is almost always going to look "obviously stupid" to have chosen the specific subject when taking such experimental stands. Personally, I wish more people would try (if no one ever does anything, how will the problem stop getting worse) to figure out what is going on with the increasing polarization of opinions between people and try to figure out a way to fix it. But at the end of the day, even if I am completely correct in this theory, perhaps there's nothing that can be done about it (although, among all the downvotes and flags, one person maintained objectivity: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20148991 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20148991), and expecting HN mods to tolerate the messiness is a bit much to ask. So, my sincere apologies, I will try to refrain/minimize such behavior going forward. But at the same time, I think it is fair to point out that in such disagreements, it takes two to tango, and perhaps the person holding the popular but technically not-objectively-correct position might be deserving of a warning as well. To me, dishonesty is a much more toxic and harmful behavior than disagreement.
      - dang 7y ago
        I believe you. But I think the mistake is here: > if it is possible to get someone who believes something not-absolutely-factual to examine the foundation of those beliefs. That's extremely unlikely to happen, especially on the internet, and you can do a lot of damage in the process—especially if the way you go about it isn't obviously distinguishable from simply arguing the opposite side.
        mistermann 7y ago
        > That's extremely unlikely to happen, especially on the internet True, and perhaps "common sense", but I think questioning common sense now and then isn't a bad idea. My theory was, when you find yourself in a situation like this, if you remain cordial and repetitively bring the conversation back to the same question over and over, eventually it will be ~impossible for them to not realize what is happening. I now realize I executed poorly on this until the very end, where it may have suddenly become easily distinguishable that I wasn't just arguing and what was actually going on, but by then it was too late. As always, I will work on improving my behavior, but my sense is that this general problem continues to grow, here and elsewhere. Censorship has an upper bound of effectiveness, something lower average quality communities are grappling with now. I worry that kicking the can down the road might ultimately not be a good idea.
  - lwelyk 7y ago
    Stefan Molyneux? Are you serious? Here's a video from him where he says he can't "argue with the facts" about white nationalism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWYFU7OMw58&feature=youtu.be&t=4683 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWYFU7OMw58&feature=youtu.be... Here are choice quotes with sources: “The whole breeding arena of the species needs to be cleaned the fuck up!” —Podcast FDR2740, “Conformity and the Cult of ‘Friendship’,” Wednesday call-in show July 2, 2014 "Screaming 'racism' at people because blacks are collectively less intelligent...is insane." —YouTube video, The Death of Europe | European Migrant Crisis, October 4, 2015 “You cannot run a high IQ society with low IQ people…these immigrants are going to fail...and they're not just going to fail a little, they are going to fail hard…they're not staying on welfare because they’re lazy...they’re doing what is economically the best option for them...you are importing a gene set that is incompatible with success in a free-market economy.” —YouTube video, The Death of Europe | European Migrant Crisis, October 4, 2015 “...white people will bend over backwards to accommodate you, but when they finally get that they’re just being taken advantage of...you will see a backlash, and that backlash will be quick, decisive, and brutal.” —YouTube video, The Death of Germany | European Migrant Crisis, September 16, 2015 “...skills and abilities have not been distributed evenly by mother nature between various ethnicities and what that means is that when the shit hits the wall it hits some ethnicities a lot harder than others and then you get endless screams of “racism”...this is one fundamental reason why America is having trouble solving these problems is that everybody knows that if you cut spending which community is it going to be hit the hardest? Hint: it’s not Korean…if you cut social spending in America it’s going to hit the black community the hardest ...the black and Hispanic communities don’t end up acting the same as the white population or the Asian population...the media are compliant and willing to scream “racist” at anyone who points out basic fact-based differences between ethnicities…[and] you can’t deal with the situation until Obama’s out or until people understand that ethnicities in America and all around the world tend to act differently [collectively]...collectively ethnicities tend to act differently, they tend to have different incomes, they tend to have different rates of marital stability, they tend to have different rates of criminality...” —YouTube video, The Impending Collapse of Western Civilization, November 15, 2015 “One of the biggest questions in America is ethnic crime rates...and y’know the [Asians] are the model minority…[while] the American blacks and blacks around the world have truly shockingly high levels of criminality and the general explanation is y’know slavery plus racism plus poverty, whatever it is which creates this unholy brew...but as far as I understand it there are significant contributions that your field can make to help people untangle [why] there are such differences in ethnic positive and negative behaviours in society...American blacks have roughly a standard IQ below whites... ” —YouTube video, Genetics and Crime: Interview with Kevin M. Beaver, May 28, 2016 “If we could just get people to be nice to their babies for five years straight, that would be it for war, drug abuse, addiction, promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases. Almost all would be completely eliminated, because they all arise from dysfunctional early childhood experiences, which are all run by women.” —Speech at International Conference on Men’s Issues, St. Clair Shores, Michigan, June 26 - 28, 2014 Even his wikipedia article has links to most of this stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux

I closed out of the article at the suggestion that the likes of Joe Rogan, Ben Shapiro, and Dave Rubin are "radicalizing" anyone. The New York times is such unbelievable garbage.

lwelyk 7y ago

Joe Rogan and Dave rubin just have casual chats with stefan molyneux on their shows where they give him attention and let him just talk. They just give a platform to a literal white supremacist.

mistermann 7y ago
I would be interested in seeing you make a case for him being literally a white supremacist. A convincing case would be: 1. a specific, authoritative definition of white supremacy 2. an example of a video demonstrating these specific (not approximate) beliefs Is downvoting a request for evidence for an extraordinary claim (to be clear: this is not an assertion, so you "downvoting to express disagreement" is not valid) consistent with the HN guidelines?
- dang 7y ago
  Please keep these wretched ideological flamewars off HN. Think of it as an experiment in not having literally every internet forum burn with the same rage. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - mistermann 7y ago
    Hi Dang, I doubt you have the time or any remaining patience to care, and I can hardly blame you, but I would like to point out what I think is an important point: while this discussion may seem like just another ideological disagreement, if you look at my participation in it I hope you could see that I was approaching it from an epistemological perspective, not (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20150162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20150162) an ideological perspective. I have a theory that a large percentage of seemingly ideological disagreements (same set of facts, but difference of opinion) are in fact rooted in epistemological problems of perception. This is why my counterpart was unable to provide evidence for what he (genuinely, and with good intentions) believed were facts. My intentions were not malicious (I think this is observably plausible based on my words and tone, or at least I hope so) in the conversation - I wasn't trying to score a "win" for "my side", I was genuinely trying to see if it is possible to get someone who believes something not-absolutely-factual to examine the foundation of those beliefs. "Defending" Stefan Molyneux was probably not the wisest place to do such a thing, but it is almost always topics related to "-isms" where these sorts of cognitive behaviors manifest themselves, so it is almost always going to look "obviously stupid" to have chosen the specific subject when taking such experimental stands. Personally, I wish more people would try (if no one ever does anything, how will the problem stop getting worse) to figure out what is going on with the increasing polarization of opinions between people and try to figure out a way to fix it. But at the end of the day, even if I am completely correct in this theory, perhaps there's nothing that can be done about it (although, among all the downvotes and flags, one person maintained objectivity: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20148991 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20148991), and expecting HN mods to tolerate the messiness is a bit much to ask. So, my sincere apologies, I will try to refrain/minimize such behavior going forward. But at the same time, I think it is fair to point out that in such disagreements, it takes two to tango, and perhaps the person holding the popular but technically not-objectively-correct position might be deserving of a warning as well. To me, dishonesty is a much more toxic and harmful behavior than disagreement.
    - dang 7y ago
      I believe you. But I think the mistake is here: > if it is possible to get someone who believes something not-absolutely-factual to examine the foundation of those beliefs. That's extremely unlikely to happen, especially on the internet, and you can do a lot of damage in the process—especially if the way you go about it isn't obviously distinguishable from simply arguing the opposite side.
      - mistermann 7y ago
        > That's extremely unlikely to happen, especially on the internet True, and perhaps "common sense", but I think questioning common sense now and then isn't a bad idea. My theory was, when you find yourself in a situation like this, if you remain cordial and repetitively bring the conversation back to the same question over and over, eventually it will be ~impossible for them to not realize what is happening. I now realize I executed poorly on this until the very end, where it may have suddenly become easily distinguishable that I wasn't just arguing and what was actually going on, but by then it was too late. As always, I will work on improving my behavior, but my sense is that this general problem continues to grow, here and elsewhere. Censorship has an upper bound of effectiveness, something lower average quality communities are grappling with now. I worry that kicking the can down the road might ultimately not be a good idea.
- lwelyk 7y ago
  Stefan Molyneux? Are you serious? Here's a video from him where he says he can't "argue with the facts" about white nationalism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWYFU7OMw58&feature=youtu.be&t=4683 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWYFU7OMw58&feature=youtu.be... Here are choice quotes with sources: “The whole breeding arena of the species needs to be cleaned the fuck up!” —Podcast FDR2740, “Conformity and the Cult of ‘Friendship’,” Wednesday call-in show July 2, 2014 "Screaming 'racism' at people because blacks are collectively less intelligent...is insane." —YouTube video, The Death of Europe | European Migrant Crisis, October 4, 2015 “You cannot run a high IQ society with low IQ people…these immigrants are going to fail...and they're not just going to fail a little, they are going to fail hard…they're not staying on welfare because they’re lazy...they’re doing what is economically the best option for them...you are importing a gene set that is incompatible with success in a free-market economy.” —YouTube video, The Death of Europe | European Migrant Crisis, October 4, 2015 “...white people will bend over backwards to accommodate you, but when they finally get that they’re just being taken advantage of...you will see a backlash, and that backlash will be quick, decisive, and brutal.” —YouTube video, The Death of Germany | European Migrant Crisis, September 16, 2015 “...skills and abilities have not been distributed evenly by mother nature between various ethnicities and what that means is that when the shit hits the wall it hits some ethnicities a lot harder than others and then you get endless screams of “racism”...this is one fundamental reason why America is having trouble solving these problems is that everybody knows that if you cut spending which community is it going to be hit the hardest? Hint: it’s not Korean…if you cut social spending in America it’s going to hit the black community the hardest ...the black and Hispanic communities don’t end up acting the same as the white population or the Asian population...the media are compliant and willing to scream “racist” at anyone who points out basic fact-based differences between ethnicities…[and] you can’t deal with the situation until Obama’s out or until people understand that ethnicities in America and all around the world tend to act differently [collectively]...collectively ethnicities tend to act differently, they tend to have different incomes, they tend to have different rates of marital stability, they tend to have different rates of criminality...” —YouTube video, The Impending Collapse of Western Civilization, November 15, 2015 “One of the biggest questions in America is ethnic crime rates...and y’know the [Asians] are the model minority…[while] the American blacks and blacks around the world have truly shockingly high levels of criminality and the general explanation is y’know slavery plus racism plus poverty, whatever it is which creates this unholy brew...but as far as I understand it there are significant contributions that your field can make to help people untangle [why] there are such differences in ethnic positive and negative behaviours in society...American blacks have roughly a standard IQ below whites... ” —YouTube video, Genetics and Crime: Interview with Kevin M. Beaver, May 28, 2016 “If we could just get people to be nice to their babies for five years straight, that would be it for war, drug abuse, addiction, promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases. Almost all would be completely eliminated, because they all arise from dysfunctional early childhood experiences, which are all run by women.” —Speech at International Conference on Men’s Issues, St. Clair Shores, Michigan, June 26 - 28, 2014 Even his wikipedia article has links to most of this stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux