Joe Rogan Podcast

Hold up, seems like a lot of people are against rogan now except for the usual racist white people / his comedian & mma friends. People really thinking slurs against jews and gay people would have more people against him or specifically more white people against him?
I'm sorry what's your issue with that observation? Because if you're trying to twist it in itself as something anti-semitic or homophobic then we're gonna have a ****ing problem.
 
The sad part is that HE KNOWS its socially unacceptable to use that word

But past events have shown us the way that white person uses it can or cannot get them "cancelled"

Historically the USA doesnt value black people, in turn, we dont value ourselves,

As much as I wanna be outraged, I cant... this aint nothing new... he aint the first and he damn sure aint the last
 
Also the crazy part is.... you can't be black and something else... youre just black

People often distance themselves from being white by saying Im Jewish

Not realizing that you are white... being jewish is a religion... being black is not a religion
 
I'm sorry what's your issue with that observation? Because if you're trying to twist it in itself as something anti-semitic or homophobic then we're gonna have a ****ing problem.
People can go to other threads for anti-semetic stuff. I was genuinely asking why him being against jews or gays would have more people against him. Being in entertainment and known as racist will derail most careers but seems rogan is teflon against anything. This is pertaining to what public opinion would be.
 
Chapelle will lose 65% of his audience.

Nobody wants to admit it….but alot of Dave’s audience is….well you know

:lol:

I believe Dave has an upcoming ASW show. I wouldn't be surprised to see him support Rogan in the name of "comedy" :smh:

That clip from back in the day when Chris Rock was in that room full of white guys discussing the usage of n_ ... wild stuff :lol: :smh:
 
People can go to other threads for anti-semetic stuff. I was genuinely asking why him being against jews or gays would have more people against him. Being in entertainment and known as racist will derail most careers but seems rogan is teflon against anything. This is pertaining to what public opinion would be.
Folks aren't referring to public opinion, but instances where actual administrative actions and deplatforming occur. They just wish that would get extended to all instances.
 
I think Dave Chapelle covered it in his last very controversial comedy special.
It just baffles me how people can get away with saying anything derogatory about black people

call us the N word... kill us...

but say something about a Jew... or a homosexual and the whole world against you
…you know what those two demographics have that blacks don’t…? White people. Which is the land mine Chapelle ran into.
Whats it with some white people wanting to say the N Word so bad...
Culturally, which one makes things cool? Rap is one of the most popular musics and a by product is the word is popular. So in their mind, they think they can say it like that one girl at the Kendrick concert who got thrown off stage.
 
You've really got people here gloating over the possibility of an old White man cutting 100+ Fuhrman tapes without consequence, quoting White Nationalists, and still not realizing that, somewhere along the line, they got turned around. Unbelievable.


Segregation was broadly popular. Were bus boycotts and sit-ins bad? You act like this is some universal principle. It isn't.

call me crazy, hear me out
but I think horror of jim crow is different in kind from Joe Rogan's bad podcasts.

part the problem is trying escalate things you and I may not like to the level of segregation.
imo it's counter productive.


Banning Woolworth's was never going to end racism in and of itself, but establishing economic consequences for racism has always been an important component of creating social change.

These are multifaceted problems requiring multifaceted action. You can't be both "anti-elite" and anti-direct action. Indeed, conservatives constantly whine about how the Warren Court's "judicial activism" got out ahead of popular opinion and was thus anti-democratic.

You keep acting like boycotts and other forms of activism are somehow mutually exclusive, but that is an ahistorical opinion.

I can appreciate that you might want people to aim higher than sanitizing podcast discourse, but, by that same standard, you're just bellyaching about progressives again. What's that accomplishing?\

activism in opposition to real and material harms is different than activism in opposition to symbolic ones.

"Stop complaining about other people's speech!" - Guy complaining about other people's speech.

complain if you want to,
but i don't think all forms of complaints are productive.
activist in basically any protest movements have good faith disagreements about the effectiveness of different tactics.

doing something counterproductive labeling it ""activism" doesn't absolve you from scrutiny.

But you had no problem with CBS firing Don Imus. It's just weird.

Racist speech is bad and you wish people wouldn't do it, but trying to create accountability for it somehow worse because... trust me?


Your repeated descriptions of Rogan as this insuperable juggernaut, whose popularity renders him immune to accountability.

"Sure, Jimmy is a racist bully - but he's also the most popular kid at school. Suspending him would only make him more popular, because then you've made him an outlaw. If you ask me, those of you trying to curtail his freedom of expression are the real bullies. "

suspending jimmy would materially reduce the harm, kicking rogan off spotify imo wouldn't.



Meanwhile, you're up in arms that Spotify might finally and at long last moderate its own original content less strictly than we've moderated our UGC for over two decades - to no complaint from you.

If you suddenly don't like where we've drawn the line, that's your prerogative, but at least we know where it is.


I've been in communities that refused to hold users accountable for hate speech. That's why we started one that would.
The possibility that we might not get it perfectly right was still a vastly preferable alternative to constant denigration and harassment.

I'm not afraid of people pointing out bad content on the forums - I welcome it. We literally ask people to do this using the report button.

NT's rules are productive in the context of a discussion forum.
I don't think they productive in every single context.

Again with the "elites." It's amazing how much this sounds like Fox News' endless populist anti-intellectual resentment grievance. Let them tell it, CRT is "elite indoctrination," a radical fringe view being imposed on our innocent children.


A sentient potato screams racial slurs into a corporate megaphone for years to an audience of millions, and all you can muster is "I wish he wouldn't."

Clover from Williamsburg co-signs India Arie for 13 IG likes and

I don't care what or who it sounds like
I don't how else to describe it, if you don't like elites I can use a different term.

education polarization + the over representation of college educated people
in media production. I just use elites because college education is an important class marker in america.
 
I am aware. I made a post in here about how Joe Rogan became so big. You seemed to agree with what I said too

But that doesn't negate my point. Rogan is an elite by your definition, but having access to his elite friends helped him get so popular.

There is not some elite consensus against him. Elites promoting him help bring attention to his podcast, elites came to his defense.

There is not some elite consensus forming against Joe Rogan.

im talking about college educated people with lots of cultural capital
imposing their viewpoints on speech on expression on the rest of the population.

I call them elite because college education is cultural class marker.
but we can dispense with term if it's a sticking point.

in the pre like 1999 the moral majority and the religious right
used their cultural power to impose their viewpoints on speech, art expression on the rest of the country.

it's a similar dynamic, it's just media production has become more politically uniform.

And there are progressive people that feel different, and the elite also

You are literally in a thread with non-elites complaining about Rogan and their opinion seems to mean little. All along the way you have entered this thread to complain that people's are wrong with how they take issue with Rogan

So you have an issue with a small group of people that you hold a fringe view, cool, but that is not the totality of the issue.

This argument just seems like bad identity politics. "Elites" and progressive with college degrees like it, it must be bad.

Like I must ask, what is do you think is an appropriate way to address Rogan's ****ery, specifically? Because you say it is bad, you think more speech is needed to combat it, but any attempts for people to force Spotify to address the issue is bad to you.

As it really comes off that you think all forms of objection are bad if certain people make it.

if in the end all people want is for Joe Rogan's N word episodes to be removed
and some warnings before the covid kooks come on and some corporate apologies.
and joe rogan can continue podcasting.

some warnings but no total bans, fine, I can roll with that

but it doesn't seem like that's the outcome people were going for.


I don't think all elite opinion is bad, like I said im not some scruffy man of the people.

for example I think that sports bodies should try their best to include trans woman in sports.
to try to find a way to balance fairness and inclusion.

according to polling done by trans sports activist, the public is against this.

I don't have problem with activist trying to do things to get people change their minds on this subject.

I only have a problem is if they try to make this idea shared by large amounts of people
verboten to discuss or disagree with.

through in group pressure and shunning. I think that's counter productive.
 
1644280707970.png


Ezra Klein had a good bit on this subject.
 
1644280707970.png


Ezra Klein had a good bit on this subject.
I actually think this is a good idea

That Spotify should have tried when they first game him the deal and people were yelling that them about Rogan's nonsense, including the racism

Like I said before, this blowup was made possible by Spotify's own negligence

I feel Klein is a must more reasonable and logical thinker than Yglesias but he still has this blindspot of "you guys played it wrong", ignoring all the things that lead up to this point

At least to his credit he is honest about the possible outcomes
 
At this point, Spotify CEO might have to get his Biden on and ask Barack to come to save his struggling *** from "the progressives". The book promo tour is too far away

Because I think Rogan is probably angry. The dude is full of himself, white grievance motivates a lot of his politics, he wants to voice his displeasure of the left coming down on an innocent white guy that made some mistakes. Mans will not want to listen to reason to criticism.

He better hope he has Barry's cell number, because if he calls the house Michelle definitely hanging up on his ***.

I can see his dumb *** in his office like....
monkey-phone.gif


"Please pick up, please pick up, please pick up"
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom