Joe Rogan Rants About the Current State of Politics

Joe Rogan Rants About the Current State of Politics

Messi do you see a way in which this political epic comes to an end the only hope that I have is through reasonable dialogue becoming an accepted and appreciated thing a celebrated thing and that this is possible that people can realize there's some stupidity to this team mentality that we have right this right versus left which is almost all a good percentage of it he's assumed identities right these are these predetermined patterns that get adopted in order to as we first started talking about this in order to establish yourself as someone who's in a group right you get accepted by this group and you see it left and right I mean I don't want to name any names but there's a bunch of people that do it blatantly you see them and I've even seen them switch teams and you see them switch teams and I don't buy their rationalizations when it comes to ideology but I think is what they're doing is they're switching teams because they realize there's an in on this team right and they can just say this is the problem with the team I used to be on those fucking losers and they're really Benedict Arnold right and like like they probably have as much of an affinity to the ideas of one side as they do the other side they just go all in on one side to get acceptance from the group right you just no way people change their opinions that much over two years or something like that or you know it's like they just decide this group makes more sense now and I've been attacked by people on the left so I'm gonna go to the right or vice versa and usually what it is is meaning when even when they say they've been attacked like oh you fucking baby there's 300 million people just in this country alone if you put something out there publicly and a thousand people attack you don't act like you're being persecuted okay you have an idea you've you've you've launched that idea out into the zeitgeist and people took a big shit on it you know whether it's people on the right or people on the left you gotta be able to argue your point one way or the other and not just immediately jump ship on someone who shares ideas with you decides that your idea sucks and maybe they're wrong and maybe you're right but you got to argue that through but this idea of these partisan patterns that people just seem to automatically fall into they're so detrimental to die they're so detrimental to us under really understanding each other and really having some sort of a sense of community right this is a giant community of 300 million people that's supposed to be yeah and this idea that it's this group is trying to fuck it up and they're trying to turn us all Muslims and this one wants everybody to be gay and this one wants everybody to fucking have free food on this and is this is nonsense this is nonsense we need better understanding and what and you know the word better education gets tossed around a lot but it also means better social understanding right better social education like an appreciation of who we are and why we think the way we think and calling out weasel's on both sides of the pattern like calling out weasels on the right that are pandering that are just trying to like get up you know the repeating a lot of these like accepted beliefs cuz they know that they can hit this frequency and a lot of people sing along or the same thing that our people are doing on the Left they're doing it on both sides I think most reasonable people have a collection of ideas that they share from both the right and the left and most reasonable people are reasonably compassionate and I think that's one of the things that we're missing some a reasonable sense of not just ethics but an appreciation for each other for all of us as a group and this that I think if we can celebrate reasonable conversations and celebrate an understanding of other people's perspectives right like be able to just look at how you're looking at things and have empathy okay let me see where you're coming from with this okay let me put myself in your shoes okay instead of just immediately like fuck you you cook and fuck you you this and instead of thinking about it that way if we just just tried to just everybody exercise a little bit more so we're a little bit more calm right and come at this from a rational place and try to like realize like the entire exclusion I've been experimenting with a very dangerous idea which is I keep hearing about chief inclusion officers and you know I thought about something for me from Ecclesiastes you know to every season there's a purpose under heaven so if there's inclusion there also has to be exclusion right and like deep platforming or unplowed forming somebody is an act of exclusion and very often it's very interesting that the people who are for inclusion are very focused on the need for deep platforming which is an act of exclusion so should we have chief exclusion officers that both monitor who is being excluded including you know somebody like James d'amour at Google like is it ethical to exclude him or are there certain voices that need to not be at some tables in order for something to make progress because if you always have the voice that's the most extreme that doesn't accept the game then it's very hard to move forward within the game if you're constantly being reminded you know so we have we have a series of situations in which it seems like some perspective that very few people hold terrorizes majorities or you know group of people who sort of can more or less get along with each other and keeps pushing us into this very divided landscape and I was just curious you know in terms of our group of people that we talk and hang out with in common where you see the high leverage is that we've just finished the midterm we've got this 2020 election it looks to me like Hillary is kind of I and whether she wants to get back in the game this Trump thing has completely you know it's like it's like the dress is it black and blue or white and gold for like it could be eight years right yeah and I just have you thought about how this ends well I would never be so presumptuous to think that I have any idea how this ends okay I have I've proposed various scenarios to myself and I don't like any of them I don't like where it's going because I would I worry about and this is also again hypocritical that because I think you probably should burn down and be rebuilt from the ruins we're not going to get such a clear thing it's not gonna be clean I know no this isn't very clean either though honestly it's that guy one it's not clean I mean if this is he loves Putin you know this is ain't clean you know the whole thing is weird it's at the bankers having the amount of influence they have the fact that there's two lobbyists what is it what's the number like two lobbyists to every member of Congress or two lobbyists to every senator for the pharmaceutical industry by the way the number of people that have influence over the way our laws are shaped it's it's so fucking bananas right now right so so off the rails is that what it is twelve what I didn't type in specifically but there's a 23 registered lobbyists for every member no I think from the pharmaceutical industry they were saying not twenty just I think it's two for every member of Congress in the pharmaceutical industry yeah the question you started out with like D platforming people I think we're impatient and I think we're we're we really want to make sure that this vetting of ideas happens quickly because we see the answer we we see the solution we see that this is incorrect and we see these people that think the world is flat or idiots and we think that these people that this think this and think that we think they're all wrong and so we want to stop them from talking but that doesn't work it just works for now it it oftentimes feeds those ideas and it also it it you have to question like why are you so sure why are you so sure that you are correct that you want what you don't just want your side to be heard exclusively you want to you want to silence these are the other people's ability to participate in this argument even if they're totally wrong I think that's dangerous because I think that the way to fight off ideas that aren't good is to introduce ideas that are good and you're gonna you're gonna have a bunch of people that agree with ideas that are bad but I think that that's a part of this whole figuring things out like you need to have bad ideas floating around there to appreciate good idea so all the ideas are good like what do we do get it out against right it's not bad to have these bad ideas broadcast what's bad not have someone say hey these are bad ideas okay but I need to see the pitfalls of racism we need to see the pitfalls of crime we need to see the pitfalls of corruption we need to see it in action all right it's like stock markets Wendling I think in a lot of ways it's important we need to understand that this is a pattern that people fall into continually over and over again when they have control over the money when they have control over that we then move the numbers what do I do this how about if I tell you that this is going to go down and then you invest some money and I put some money in your bank and we work together let's make some money is what people do right if they just fucking do it over and over and over again right should you punish them yes absolutely but I think it's kind of important to see some fucked up behavior just because we're not done we're still in some sort of emotional and psychological and even physical evolution we're in the middle of this thing and I think that bad ideas facilitate comprehension like these really shitty ideas that a lot of people have what they do is they facilitate a comprehension of why we think dumb shit and sometimes you don't know why people think dumb shit until you see someone over and over again that thinks dumb shit and you get to see that whether it's Alex Jones or whether it's who fill in the blank okay what guy do you want deep player but I don't okay so here's my thing I want a lot of our leading experts deep platformed okay well you're going deep we just spray paint the fucking big a on Tucker Carlson's driveway yeah well well if I think about who the great danger is is it alex jones you know who veers towards tinfoil hat land with some frequency or is it the people who were selling you know weapons of mass destruction in iraq as a response to 9/11 or you know the people let's assume that you're a reasonable person on immigration you neither think that borders should be open or closed then you start hearing professors say you know the great thing about immigration is is that it has absolutely no costs and all of them are better than all of our people because you know they're highly trained they're highly motivated they're young you're thinking like okay what kind of thing has all benefits and no costs right you're not even entering into irrational description and now we're hearing like all these trade deals that got negotiated yeah that kind of wasn't true all those things that we were telling you that if you if you question these things you were a backward protectionist and you were just you were stuck in the old world you couldn't embrace the new yeah that was all bullshit what I think is we have a a crisis and expertise institutional expertise is at an all-time low nobody really trusts any of our institutions to be an authoritative source of ground truth it's not to say that everything that the institutions say is wrong or everything the experts say is wrong far from it it's just that there are almost no experts or institutions that aren't willing to distort facts in order to pursue institutional polls that that's a giant issue right right and so I don't actually want to deep platform these people but I do have the very strong sense you know when I when Ilan came on your show and Peter Thiel my friend and boss came on Dave Rubin show I thought that was quite a moment where this alternate network of distribution which is not under centralized control started to be seen as comparably powerful and important and I think some of the noises that Tucker Carlson just made to Dave Rubin about well hey you're doing this out of your garage and you have the freedom to do anything I'm beholden to the structure in which I live yeah word a very interesting place with respect to what is this thing and this alternate distribution network for ideas that's unpleased by the institutions and you know I think I've been convinced in the last two days that I need this is advice that I got from you at the beginning he said you need to start a podcast I think I need to start a podcast I think you need to start a podcast just keep going on on about the Hopf thing until people figure it out but we have to we have to return to some kind of stable sanity that I'm positive that the institutions can't return us to because the the institutional interests really have to do with the fact that certain kinds of growth on which they're predicated their existence is predicated have evaporated so all of these institutions are extremely vulnerable to corruption at the moment and the real revolution is I'm seeing it is that high agency individuals are out competing traditional institutional structures in terms of mind share and some of those high agency individuals are irresponsible you know they're like Milo types that are kind of trying to light things up and some of them are extremely responsible and some of them you know we'll do a few interval things but will self-correct and this new world that is being born is a huge check on the institutions but it's still largely separate like am i right that you don't do a lot of network television I don't do anything yeah anymore but I used to I mean that's how I became famous in the first place right you know but yeah I don't do it anymore but it's also because there's nothing fun out there like this like there's no place for this right other than this this is the only place you could do this but isn't it interesting to you that we still have not like Jordan had to be dealt with by the mainstream because the book was too big his effect was too large I think his effect on the Internet is bigger than the book I think the the YouTube videos and the debates that he has the one that I was telling you the recent one the interview with GQ interesting it's really good the woman's very smart but she gets trounced and it's because he's been in the trenches with this stuff for a long time I mean he he's he's fighting a very strange fight of dialogue and of interpretation and of discussion and and the freedom of intellectual sovereignty you know there's a lot of people that want you to think a very certain way and use certain words and say certain things and it doesn't matter whether or not you're in fact racist or sexist or homophobic or whatever there's a weird battle of control going on that it's a part of it as much as it is a battle of inclusion and diversity and strengthening our overall progressive mindset there's a little bit of – but there's also an undeniable game that's being played and people want to win their scores they're being scored there's points on the board the throwing in new agents they have teams going at it and whenever Jordan goes on one of these conversations these video interviews and there's a feminist and Jordan Peterson like there's a fucking game going on we're watching a soccer match we're watching a wrestling match this is jiu-jitsu they're playing intellectual jiu-jitsu and Jordans really good at tapping people he's really good at and they're getting pissed they keep sending in new chicks they sending that Kathy Newman lady it's like so what you're saying is that didn't work either she's got devastated she got rocked and this is what's happening over and over and over again because whether you appreciate what he's saying or not he has some facts that are undeniable he has some positions that are based on a rich understanding of history and of Marxism and of communism and a lot of the problems with people with compelled thoughts if you're compelling people to behave a certain way compelling people to talk a certain way and we're not talking about you know compelling people to not commit crimes or violence we're talking about weird things like compelled pronouns and so if I take if I take your analogy because you brought it up that he's like doing jujitsu yes so in some previous era and I thought your description of the early days of MMA was fascinating that we just didn't know what fighting was mm-hmm so we didn't know who would win or what systems worked and if you think about the mainstream media is like a Aikido yes some system that maybe has some valve elyda tea in some very rarefied context and it comes into general-purpose fighting systems and it's it's dismantled very quickly so now we have this weird situation that we've got this new world of kind of rule Laden anything-goes discussions more or less and the mainstream world doesn't want like the Aikido world doesn't want to acknowledge that this weird UFC type thing is happening mm-hmm how long does that go on it goes on for as long as it takes and then this is similar do I think that what's happening intellectually and this is one of the reasons why I don't think you should stop people from expressing these bad ideas there's one thing for stopping people to say hey we need to kill black people stopping people said we need to kill white people we need to kill fill in the blank whatever the group is yeah that's that's different you're you're clearly stepping outside of the realm of civilization and into war and violence and we could all collectively decide and we should all collectively decide we should have ethics together like whether it's right or left or in the middle we should all decide hey you can't do that because what you're doing is you're you're calling for violence against someone who's not committing any vine can I pause you right there because I think there's a really interesting point okay let's assume that we know that that behavior needs to be down regulated in some way okay you can try to silence the person where we just physically duct-taped them so they can't say anything right you know we put them in jail and we won't don't give them access to the media etc etc or we can shame them or we can kind of take them aside at what layer of this sort of communication stack it's a very good question we shouldn't because I think one of the things that we haven't done is to positively say we agree with you that the speech is offensive and it is potentially dangerous but we think it should be down regulated differently than the deep platforming option well the deep platforming option the real issue is there's only a few different avenues for these people to express themselves publicly okay right and the the argument that's really strange is should these be regulated like a utility or should they be thought of as private businesses get to decide what's on their their channel essentially like it's almost like a private NBC that everyone can broadcast what if it's none of the above what if the problem is we're trying to pretend is it like a dinner party is that the public square is it a utility and it's none of these things I think these ideas what I was discussing that like there's there's a reason why good ideas and bad ideas should go to war is the same reason why even though I kind of knew that most kung fu was bullshit before the UFC right I want those guys to get in there and try oh you got some death touch hey come on in I want to only introduce you to a guy you know this is his name's Cain Velasquez and you're gonna try your death touch and he's just gonna arrest with you the ground beat your fucking brains in okay right but that's not gonna happen cuz you know death touch good luck and you let them Duke it out and that is that that's what the other ideas but it is a little no no but but when you deep platform people that's when it's not out I agree with you

24 thoughts on “Joe Rogan Rants About the Current State of Politics

  1. i like how many of these "left sjw´s" are far more conservative than my grandma^^
    guess someome should teach em the meaning of freedom.
    i want my hippies back.

  2. While this talk is important and I myself agree you guys are correct I find myself in the position of devil's advocate. The thing is, this confrontational position is a pysicological male in mindset: the desire to bring a conflict to a confrontational climax so it can be "resolved" in order to stabilish a new "status/peace/truth". This is how things have being done by humankind so far because in our history this role fell to men. Humans present the greatest dysmorphism between sexes among the primates, our big heads and very specialized and powerful brains cause human females to endure the most physical demanding labour found in nature, but this circunstance doesn't limit itself to the act. In order to make such ordeal possible the skull of newborns is flexible and undeveloped, making them extremely vulnerable and dependent as infants, so after birth intense care is also needed, to the point it is inviable do so while providing sustainance at the same time. To counter act this, or rather those that by chance toke a route that counteracted this, our specie also came to hold the title of the most resilient of the planet, although this is not something we realy think about enouth or give the deserved gravity. Slavery is so viable to the point there is no culture without some history of it because men are the last word in beasts of burden, our ancestours hunted by running prey into exaustion, and our nomadic nature favored those capable of traveling far and while in the search of resources, to the point we reached all corners of the world before such thing as civilization came to be. We are so similar that to discount the gravity of our differences seems like the polite thing to do, in order to protect nascent ideas from forming, in fact we can even say the capacity for such is the quality of a "superior man", "as a man even if I am good doens't mean to be man is to be good". The selfcruelty to scrutinize ones nature and motivations, even if it cause duress in order to achieve goals, even if this means that I am not chosen by God or fate, but a bald ape strudging against my own mediucrity, the capacity to take things as they come, this quality build this paradise we live in now, shielded from the misery that was once so present to be seem as part of our existecial nature and allowed us to give space and voice to those who would otherwise be fodder. Ironicaly here lies the problem of our century, the careless colision of the "men's world" with the divorced "women's world". Women are not born to be beasts of burden, they not only feel more pain but also suffer more from it, both in the sense they are more sensitible and that they are less mentaly stable. To "do a man's job" is to sell yourself in order to finance one's subsistency, to toil without emotional investment, and endure coexistence beside other beasts that search to outperfom you for their own gain; despite the new generation of men open rejection to fill this role since they don't have anything the value enouth to sell themselves for(incels), young women are lied to with promisses of glorious "carriers" that only a minority have any real aptitute and talent to reach. The result is evident, more than half don't want to return to a "rat's race" once they experience life outside it but those that openly raise such consernes are branded traitors, with labels such as "internalized mysoginy", the dismissal and disdain selfproclaimed champions of womenkind have for those women who voted for Thrump is all one needs to see to understand this truth. The tyrany of the women's world, where all members of the sisterhood need to be striped of agency and personality in order to be molded as a brick in the monolith of the matriarchy is a clear sign reason why men are overepresented in public offices of democratic nations, this is the best, most safe, and subtle those women disaffected by the matriarchy to express their displeasure. They do things different there, language is more a tool to smooth social interaction, not scalate conflit is a nonviolent maner, in fact to they words are far more hurtful than to men and since we live such blessed lives to many they are the primary source of stress(Joe has a interview were is discussed how social media is causing damage to young girls far more than to boys) and our society is geared toward to diminishment of pain and restrain of animal malice… of men since they were for so long the ones holding the reins. Wheter women can take the responsability of self determination will shape how the next century will roll but menkind is being clear that as a coletive they have reached the treshline of compromisse, as Joe said in here to watch Jordan Peterson is like intelectual Jeujutsu and they will have to win this fight and take it if they want anything from now on. What we actualy can do is having the sensibility and openess to realize this is no longer our fight, in a sense the protagonism really was sifted to womenkind, if they can "stand up to their harpy sisters" and restrain and come with terms with feminine malice and nature the same way menkind did will shape the future. Our role now is more of coachs, and the golden rule is that this will be a batle that will be fought as women, so this aproach of open confrontation is the worse, more traumatic and ill suited for them; no diferent than orienting a explosive and high impact martial arts for women in general. This is agravated by the fact most of those qualified to develop this new aproach are ideologicaly possessed by the matriarchy. Womenhood need its champions but I am no Chion, as man I feel like a paratlegic trying to teach someone how to become a olimpic runner.

  3. The media have stopped reporting facts and are now marketing facts. Our opinions and prejudices are being skillfully catered to and reinforced. They are generating ratings selling anger. The objective news reporting days of Walter Cronkite are over. News is now a consumer product “designed” to agree with everything you think. Using the WWE wrestling model and demonizing the other, has dangerous consequences.

  4. Republicans elected a repugnant ignorant criminal as President. There is no "both sides" in the fuckery of this country.

  5. If the wall works, and stops the Mexicans drug exports, itl be YOU americans, tryina cross the border for your next hit… Think about your lil secret addictions, before you go quickly shutting mexico out, wheres ya drugs gunna come from… Didn't think bout that one. oh hell, America is truly guna be fcked in the ass when 10 million crack heads cant get their drugs anymore

  6. What happened to the United States?! I remember the 1990's and 2000's as a teen and young adult, since I am a Generation X guy, decades that still had some common sense among republicans and democrats.. there was a MIDDLE GROUND! and Common sense! Common sense now is DEAD! its all about being TOO FAR to each side and there is no common ground… Who the hell doesn't want a SECURE border? Who thinks we can just afford FREE HEALTHCARE for everyone? Who wants to give up all their Guns and burn the 2nd Amendment?! WTF?! What happened to the middle of the debate…. I want my guns, and "affordable" healthcare, I don't expect it to be FREE!? I want myself and my family and future generations to be FREE…

    Okay I am done ranting…. I hope my KIDS generation can save us all….

    ALL YOU HAVE to do is study the FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.. 2,000 years ago. WE ARE FALLING THE SAME WAY!!

  7. Liberal Hollywood is so disgusting I can’t watch any tv and haven’t for years. Sad things is the millennials are so convinced that whatever comes out of the tv or movie screen is real and true. Very disturbing.

  8. Its hilarious how triggered conservatives get when talking about politics i see all the comments are saying joe switches sides, yet ive never heard him claim to be liberal or conservative in any of his podcasts maybe hes just having an open minded conversation with people regardless of their political views?? Im not political either way i think denying climate change and saying theres more than 2 genders are both retarded as fuck, but without surprise conservatives go all “snowflake” because joe brought this up, you guys are overly proud of pressing a button every few years thats just cringey as fuck, guess thats all u got to talk about living in shitty small towns

  9. Can people have evolving thoughts, or even epiphanies? Why are so many people running Joe Rogan down? People that have their beliefs set and have no capacity for processing new information are killing our planet

  10. Shut down the internet, shut down MSM, problem solved.

    Just look how people converse on the internet…

    1st time in human history where we can all speak to one and other, no matter the culture, race, social status, background etc etc… we was never going to get along, and it just shows the territorial nature of humans. Throw in the fact our species is now more knowledgeable than ever due to information in our palms. It’s all clear to me as to why all this shits going on…

  11. Part of the issue is… People choose sides to put themselves on a platform as if they are more powerful. Not one of them even seem to take care of themselves besides the fact that they could afford stuff. They are bums with the knowledge of how to lie and stand firm. Just look, we hired a chunky womanizer as president.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *