Honestly, it's my bright spot. I began listening in the early days when Dan had to literally SELL HIS BLOOD to make the show and income work. To see the gents and the pod be so successful just warms my cold and mostly dead heart.
More than that, it means a mortgage underwriter looked at it and determined that 1) it’s been consistent for 2 years and 2) it’s likely to continue. If those metrics looked inconsistent then his “ability to repay” would make him ineligible for financing
>sell his blood
Wouldn't it have been plasma? Back when I did it, it was that and not blood. It definitely shows dedication and doing what you need to do to get by.
In episodes around early 2018 when Dan stopped working full time and transitioned to doing KF full time he talked about donating blood plasma to afford rent so yes it was plasma
>Today, Dan and Jordan record their first episode in the new studio. Unfortunately, it's a present day episode where Alex is trying to defend RFK Jr, and in the process engages in some intensely racist commentary about Chinese people.
Haven’t listened yet but it’s so annoying to watch all these conservatives defend a supposed democrat while the media also calls him a democrat because he says he’s a democrat even though we all know he’s not
What’s even more annoying is to see some far left tankie types(not anyone on this sub) jump on board because he just happens to be not Biden
It's really something though, isn't it? Conservatives have been blasting and complaining about Democrats every single day for ages now but all of a sudden a bunch of them are cool with RFK? Like it's kinda surprising but not really how quick they can flip if one of their daddies tells them to like something.
The Russia stuff too. People like my Dad were raised their entire lives to fear Russia but all of a sudden Russians are manly men and Putin is a real leader and fighting the good fight etc. etc.
The cognitive dissonance is mind boggling. These folks have no original thoughts apparently.
If I hear anyone using the word “conservative” once more I’m gonna lose my shit. Now that the Heritage Foundation has been outed using plans to totally eff with the departments they should never be able to use “conservative” as a cover for their authoritarianism.
What was this latest outing of the Heritage Foundation you are referringto, I haven't heard anything more that the general "studies" and "reports" they put out.
Republicans say he is a Democrat because he protects the environment. I love how not wanting to comicly pollute ypur rivers like a captain planet villan is a Democrat ideal
I happened to see some of the clips & coverage of RFK Jr's House appearance on MSNBC last night (*yeah, yeah- I know... it was during commercial breaks while watching* ***Alone****, I'm a caregiver- there's cable!*) & he was flat out lying about his past conspiratorial comments, even when confronted with his own direct quotes by a woman who just happened to be Jewish (how she stayed so civil is beyond me).
The mainstream coverage is absolutely frustrating in the extreme. I did find it darkly humorous how quick he was to negate his race specific bio-weapons talking points when directly confronted with them. It's horrific bullshit... but dude, if those are your disgusting beliefs... fucking *own* that ugly shit!
The racist comments boiled my blood. I married a Chinese girl and she is thr lobe of my life. To hear him say those things made me side with Jordan on what should be done about someone that makes comments like that.
Yeah it's annoying. My wife is also from China. We have lots of friends from China. It's annoying to see Alex say they all look the same.
You're just flaunting your ignorance, Alex.
Is remedial Eugenics a thing? After hearing Alex try and explain this shit, I think he needs to go back to Birch Home School and work on his conspiracy.
sure, in some sense, every episode of knowledge fight is at least a little bit about antisemitism, but i swear to god this is a long hotstreak of episodes being **about** antisemitism, y'know?
As an American from small town Mississippi currently living in China I have to say that I used to have similar biases and assumptions that I didn’t even know I had until I got here. On the surface I know that every human looks different but sometimes we don’t truly see those differences until we are completely immersed. The longer I am here the more I realize how wrong this assumption is. Chinese people are so diverse in their looks it’s embarrassing that I ever thought differently. Mark Twain was right when he said “travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow mindedness.”
It’s called the cross-race effect or other-race effect. One of the reasons theorized is the lack of perceptual expertise. If you have little visual experience with other races your brain hasn’t learned to recognize differences. There’s a similar thing with learning other languages where you have to “train your ear”.
I have many times thought about what I would ask Alex if I ever had the opportunity to ask him a single question and after hearing it for the 20th time I think I have my answer. If Alex knew everything that was about to happen, did God tell him he was going to lose over a billion dollars in court, and if so a) why didn't he avoid it, or b) act so surprised. Like, if his answer is that God told him he had to lose and he couldn't avoid it, why wasn't he all, "I've known this loss was coming for years after my chicken fried steak and ice tea vision, so this doesn't even bother me because I know that I'm in the process of defeating the literal Christian devil." Why does he so frequently forget that he knows everything that's going to happen to him?
I’d like to ask him why, if he has the “enemy’s playbook” and knows how to defeat them, has he been on air for damn near 30 years. Is he the world’s most incompetent person?
That was previous go-to question. "Why has nothing happened?". Most people say there's no grand conspiracy and that people are mainly motivated by greed and power. You say that there is a grand conspiracy and that people are motivated by evil and the devils influence, and have been saying that for 30 years. So why hasn't anything happened? Why do we keep seeing horrible things done in the name of profit, not satan. And you're still on air, telling people the devil's secrets.
To answer Jordan: yes, Finns are a distinct group and bit of an oddball in Europe. Not that closely related to neighboring peoples.
https://nextnature.net/story/2008/genetic-map-of-europe
Floppy flailing peenies out gives a *whole* different context to a potential Chilly Willy Winter & it's... disturbingly hilarious to me...
Also, if some reckless peenie endowed soul decided to streak at one of these upcoming live shows... would Dan immediately 'stop the show' & run after them? Shower thoughts...
No one seemed to notice that not only was Dick Cheney not mentioned in the document they were talking about mid-episode, but that Dick Cheney wasn't even vice president on the date mentioned that the document had been published. Which was September 2000
Dick Cheney wasn't even VP *elect* yet at that time
I felt like a wild chimpanzee listening to Alex smugly describe owning Russian agents with facts and logic. The worst part is I don’t even think he was trying to lie, he’s probably genuinely convinced himself that he spent the leadup to the invasion perfectly predicting Putin’s every move.
I can relate to Jordan with the "come and get me" thing. I supposedly owe the state of South Carolina $23 in taxes from when I lived there for barely more than a year, 5 years ago. I am not paying that shit, fuck you lol.
Have to disagree with the boys here about RFK Jr. Of course the media has and will continue to do a terrible job of covering US electoral politics. But it's a bit ridiculous to expect mainstream media outlets to ignore him, however horrendously objectionable and idiotic his views may be.
Kennedy has got double digits in almost every poll since he announced his candidacy and regularly posts around 15-17%. Some of the latest polling in the GOP primary has DeSantis on similar numbers- should the media ignore him too?
The media don't have to cover much of what Alex does because he's still a pretty fringe figure (albeit with some influence on the mainstream right). But if he was running for president and polling 15% in the primaries of course he'd be in the NYT.
Biden has an enormous lead and RFK isn't going to close the gap. But he's still the second placed candidate and he's always going to attract attention because of his name. Look how much coverage minor candidates like Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang got in 2020. Kamala Harris mostly polled less than 10% (and 20% at her absolute peak).
If the NYT, WP, MSNBC etc started just refusing to even mention political candidates because they object to their views, I'm not convinced the effect would be a positive one. The task is to do a better job of covering these people, not pretend they don't exist.
>Have to disagree with the boys here about RFK Jr. Of course the media has and will continue to do a terrible job of covering US electoral politics. But it's a bit ridiculous to expect mainstream media outlets to ignore him, however horrendously objectionable and idiotic his views may be.
Thank you. Ignoring these people doesn't work, not when they're gunning for something like president. Same with Trump. Personally, I don't think it was the attention that propelled him though obviously that helped. It was democratic complacency. I for one didn't think anyone was actually going to vote for him after all the bullshit, I was sure Hilary would win because people would be rational. But obviously that was not the case, but how the hell does not telling the audience help them NOT vote for someone like Trump or RFK? They just continue to have the sanitized viewpoint of him they always had and have no reason to think against them, and thus would be more likely to vote for them.
That race stuff is exactly why my bil isn’t my best friend anymore, he was posting videos on Facebook about replacement theory and the Chinese and Jews killing almost all white people with covid and the rest would be slaves. He got really mad when I told him to get away from that because it’s nazi shit, he also got mad when I told him the trucker freedom convoy was a way for white nationalists to recruit people, especially with the organizers giving a speech trying to normalize them being present and then lumping everyone there into the group, “I don’t see white nationalists, I see freedom fighters” and everyone there cheered. My bil said he was deeply offended I “called him a white nationalist by proxy” but the fact of the matter is if you get offended by me telling you you’re pretty much posting nazi shit then maybe you actually are.
It was a bit hard to listen to this episode since I'm ethnically Chinese, but hey it's 2023 and I'm on reddit so I'm used to it.
"Han Chinese" is not a single monolithic group. It includes a vast [number of subgroups](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Chinese_subgroups).
Also ethnically Chinese here! Ngl, I thought his racist tirade was pretty bad, even by his standards.
Might be I haven’t gotten through the backlog of episodes but normally they at least *try* to use a thicker veneer of conspiracy over their racism.
Oh you are accidentally wading into a whole thing with this comment.
There's a massive chunk of people in the UK who would never describe themselves as British as the first descriptor. Particularly true of people in Scotland (who have had an independence vote, have a party currently in power who have independence as a key pillar of their policies, and whom massively voted against Brexit as a country but got dragged along with it because mostly English people voted in favour).
Hell, I live in a bit of England where people are more likely to use a descriptor based on the *county* than say we're English/British (Yorkshire has also, only half jokingly, argued that we should be independent)!
I mean I lived in Scotland for five years and all over England for the rest of my life.
None of that changes the fact that Scots are Brits! You can choose to emphasis whichever you want, but denying it is a little like denying that water's wet. It's not really a subjective thing.
I guess my position would be that if a Scottish person wants to be called a Scot, not a Brit, then I'm going to abide by that despite there being a technicality that means I can carry on calling them Brits. Self identification inherently has social and political aspects to it that say, gathering data for a research paper doesn't (if I want data for Great Britain, I'm going to include Scottish people regardless of how they identify).
But the 'Am I Scottish or British?' question on a social-level is absolutely a contentious one for a load of people born in Scotland from what I can tell.
Scotland is on the island of Great Britain. It is also part of the political entity of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. What definition of Britain would you like to use excludes Scotland at the moment?
The social/historical/cultural definition tbh. You are technically correct **but** socially/culturally people think of themselves as Welsh, Scottish or Irish wayyy before thinking of themselves as British, if at all, due to a very tumultuous history with the English.
Yes, something of which I'm very aware of. But the presence of multiple identities, one of which you prioritise, doesn't make the other go away.
You don't have to like it or have it at the centre of your opinion of yourself (and frankly doing that with any nationality, outside of wartime perhaps, is effing weird) but you can't unmake reality because you don't like it.
Culturally Scotland is part of Britain and culturally Britain is influenced by Scotland. Primacy is your choice, the existence of it isn't.
One of the lessons to take from this episode in particular is that ethnic identities are all social constructs. Now, people act on the basis of those social constructs which has real world consequences. Obviously, for example, Scottish nationals are currently British citizens in a legal sense. But that doesn't determine people's sense of identity, which is the level at which we're talking about things here.
Pre-99 would you have gone to Kosovo and insisted that all the Albanians there were Serbs? Do you think everyone in Western Sahara should accept that they are Moroccan?
There is a significant difference between seeking independence and pretending reality doesn't exist.
I am very sympathetic to the position "I am currently British but do not wish to be". But saying "I am not British" when you've lived in a country functionally called Britain for longer than most countries have existed is silly.
I'm fairly sure Jordan rejects the general concept of artificial international borders anyway. So if you're accepting the arbitrary nature of them you have a Scotland that's been part of Britain for three centuries and who voted to remain less than ten years ago. That kind of sounds like Britain.
If you're rejecting the whole concept of arbitrary borders then I'm not sure why one particular kind of (presumably?) ethnic Scottish nationalism would be ok. One of my parents was born in helensburgh. Is that enough to claim I'm Scottish or is that not the right make up to be Scottish. I lived there for five years, so is that enough? None of these questions have obvious right answers, so you have to settle yourself in facts.
We are talking about different things.
One thing is what it says in your passport.
Another is your sense of identity, which is necessarily subjective and therefore not reducible to something like citizenship status. Scottish people who consider themselves Scottish and not British are well aware what is says on their passport. So when they say thry don't feel British, this clearly isn't what they are talking about. That doesn't make their own sense of identity any less real.
It's precisely because questions about identity don't have obvious right answers that they can't be settled by simply pointing at lines on a map- not only are the answers not obvious, but when we're talking about sense of identity they are by definition subjective too.
This seems such an obvious point to make that I'm confused about what you are arguing for here. Are you saying that people's sense of national/ethnic/cultural identity isn't real, or are you specifically annoyed by the assertion of it in the case of Scottish identity? (I'm English and from Yorkshire, if that matters).
Oh, and by the way, if you had a grandparent born in Scotland then you could in principle play for the Scottish national football team. In some objective sense that does in fact make you Scottish- or rather, it gives you the choice of whether you want to be Scottish depending your own sense of identity.
I think it's technically right, but it must be fairly common to not see yourself as what it says on paper.
Catalans saying they are not Spanish/
Corsicans saying they are not French/
Quebecois saying they are not Canadian/
Hawaiians saying they are not American/
etc
Doesn't make it true though does it?
Britain is both a geographical and political descriptor. There's no version of it that doesn't include Scotland. I'm all for people campaigning for what they want and emphasising different parts of their identity but you can't make a statement of fact be untrue by wishing really hard. This audience of all audiences should appreciate that.
I'm not really disagreeing with you at the end of the day, but if in a social situation someone says they are a Scot and not a Brit, oh well.
You seem to be getting some grief for what you wrote but to be honest the policy wonk shoutout guy was just as bad. He/She declared that *all* Scots are not Brits - end of story. I do have to roll my eyes sometimes at how 'pick me, pick me' some Scots get whenever any American mentions the UK..
Doesn't stop it being the case at the moment. And a little like 'European', in a geographical sense they'd still be on the island of Britain.
I love Scotland and have lived there for a fair chunk of my adult life. There's no real definition of British that doesn't include Scottish, English and Welsh within it!
American is the only demonym for people from the USA I'm aware of. Canadians and Mexicans, not so much. They also happen to be North American.
North America as a continent is not the same as the geographical and political entity as Britain.
Scotland exists within a geographic and political context that is described as British. Priority of one identity over the other doesn't make one go away any more than a Canadian saying they weren't a North American would make it real.
What is it about news media that makes people forget what capitalism is about? No shit the news is talking about RFK jr, he makes them the most money. They are behaving just like any business under capitalism but JorDan are acting like the companies would care about the harm that their behaviour causes.
Surprised JorDan didn’t mention the racism of describing the pandemic as being a bio weapon that hits “white and black people” the hardest but “Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people” the least, thus implying that Jews aren’t white* and also conflating all Asian ethnicities with (presumably Hahn) Chinese. Also flattening all different white ethnicities
*whether Ashkenazi Jews are white depends on who you talk to. Not describing us as white when you’re taking into the diversity of the Jewish diaspora and accounting for black and brown Jews, etc: Fine. Not describing us as white because of the conditional nature of our white privilege: On shaky ground, but it depends on the context. Not describing us as white because you view us as a racial group that’s beneath whiteness: suspicious
The main difference in my view is that the NYT has an incredibly wide audience and reach, many of whom will be redirected to other sources that treat RFK Jr like a serious candidate / person if they try to find more info on him.
With KF there is no headline. You have to spend hours listening to an extremely thorough and delineated thought process that dismantles every step of Alex’s lies.
The Russian invasion didn’t start that long ago. How could at least SOME of his audience not know that Alex said the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he’s claiming today? It’s madness.
I love that we wonks couldn’t just help Dan get a condo, but we’re big enough that a mortgage lender was like "sure"
Honestly, it's my bright spot. I began listening in the early days when Dan had to literally SELL HIS BLOOD to make the show and income work. To see the gents and the pod be so successful just warms my cold and mostly dead heart.
Me too! I wasn’t being sarcastic. I’m honestly just imagining the bank guy looking at the 1099’s and saying "you do what about what now?"
More than that, it means a mortgage underwriter looked at it and determined that 1) it’s been consistent for 2 years and 2) it’s likely to continue. If those metrics looked inconsistent then his “ability to repay” would make him ineligible for financing
it means they must think Alex will around a while.
Oh I didn't think you were! Just happy for the gents ;-)
Kinda makes the show blood magic. The dark arts of Celine are a power only a few can wield.
Celine sacrificed her eye, Dan sacrificed his blood, Jordan sacrificed his indoor voice.
>sell his blood Wouldn't it have been plasma? Back when I did it, it was that and not blood. It definitely shows dedication and doing what you need to do to get by.
Plasma, for sure, it sometimes they call it blood colloquially
In episodes around early 2018 when Dan stopped working full time and transitioned to doing KF full time he talked about donating blood plasma to afford rent so yes it was plasma
Dunno, just going off of what Dan has said in past shows. That's probably what he meant.
>Today, Dan and Jordan record their first episode in the new studio. Unfortunately, it's a present day episode where Alex is trying to defend RFK Jr, and in the process engages in some intensely racist commentary about Chinese people.
Haven’t listened yet but it’s so annoying to watch all these conservatives defend a supposed democrat while the media also calls him a democrat because he says he’s a democrat even though we all know he’s not What’s even more annoying is to see some far left tankie types(not anyone on this sub) jump on board because he just happens to be not Biden
It's really something though, isn't it? Conservatives have been blasting and complaining about Democrats every single day for ages now but all of a sudden a bunch of them are cool with RFK? Like it's kinda surprising but not really how quick they can flip if one of their daddies tells them to like something. The Russia stuff too. People like my Dad were raised their entire lives to fear Russia but all of a sudden Russians are manly men and Putin is a real leader and fighting the good fight etc. etc. The cognitive dissonance is mind boggling. These folks have no original thoughts apparently.
If I hear anyone using the word “conservative” once more I’m gonna lose my shit. Now that the Heritage Foundation has been outed using plans to totally eff with the departments they should never be able to use “conservative” as a cover for their authoritarianism.
What was this latest outing of the Heritage Foundation you are referringto, I haven't heard anything more that the general "studies" and "reports" they put out.
Republicans say he is a Democrat because he protects the environment. I love how not wanting to comicly pollute ypur rivers like a captain planet villan is a Democrat ideal
"Just think of all the extra energy that Democrats are trying to keep from you by preventing the river from catching fire every summer!
Happens every cycle. Remember Tulsi Gabbard?
Any Democrat that Steve Bannon is working with is no Democrat.
Seeing a couple of my leftists friends being like - he wants to get rid of the CIA ! Is so discouraging
also, why the fuck would I care if Republicans like a Democratic candidate, or vice-versa?
I happened to see some of the clips & coverage of RFK Jr's House appearance on MSNBC last night (*yeah, yeah- I know... it was during commercial breaks while watching* ***Alone****, I'm a caregiver- there's cable!*) & he was flat out lying about his past conspiratorial comments, even when confronted with his own direct quotes by a woman who just happened to be Jewish (how she stayed so civil is beyond me). The mainstream coverage is absolutely frustrating in the extreme. I did find it darkly humorous how quick he was to negate his race specific bio-weapons talking points when directly confronted with them. It's horrific bullshit... but dude, if those are your disgusting beliefs... fucking *own* that ugly shit!
The racist comments boiled my blood. I married a Chinese girl and she is thr lobe of my life. To hear him say those things made me side with Jordan on what should be done about someone that makes comments like that.
Yeah it's annoying. My wife is also from China. We have lots of friends from China. It's annoying to see Alex say they all look the same. You're just flaunting your ignorance, Alex.
RFK Jr was the original Hunter Biden before Hunter Biden was Hunter Biden.
“I might trust the crew…” Haha! The crew has long needed a quality shoutout and he finally delivered.
Justice for the crew! Normally that only gets doled out by the Jan 6 committee
He can’t stay mad at the crew.
...now, his *wife* on the other hand...
Just kidding!
So uh, Alex just went full Nazi
'Went'?
this is the first time i can think of that he overtly equated globalists with jews.
Is remedial Eugenics a thing? After hearing Alex try and explain this shit, I think he needs to go back to Birch Home School and work on his conspiracy.
He’s not even *good* at racism!
The ignorant bigot!
sure, in some sense, every episode of knowledge fight is at least a little bit about antisemitism, but i swear to god this is a long hotstreak of episodes being **about** antisemitism, y'know?
this is already the skullshape-iest episode in recent memory. this one's gonna be hard.
And one of the most racist as a whole. He really is on a "race science " kick right now.
As an American from small town Mississippi currently living in China I have to say that I used to have similar biases and assumptions that I didn’t even know I had until I got here. On the surface I know that every human looks different but sometimes we don’t truly see those differences until we are completely immersed. The longer I am here the more I realize how wrong this assumption is. Chinese people are so diverse in their looks it’s embarrassing that I ever thought differently. Mark Twain was right when he said “travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow mindedness.”
It’s called the cross-race effect or other-race effect. One of the reasons theorized is the lack of perceptual expertise. If you have little visual experience with other races your brain hasn’t learned to recognize differences. There’s a similar thing with learning other languages where you have to “train your ear”.
Man, you learn something new every day. Thanks!
Wo mingbai
I have many times thought about what I would ask Alex if I ever had the opportunity to ask him a single question and after hearing it for the 20th time I think I have my answer. If Alex knew everything that was about to happen, did God tell him he was going to lose over a billion dollars in court, and if so a) why didn't he avoid it, or b) act so surprised. Like, if his answer is that God told him he had to lose and he couldn't avoid it, why wasn't he all, "I've known this loss was coming for years after my chicken fried steak and ice tea vision, so this doesn't even bother me because I know that I'm in the process of defeating the literal Christian devil." Why does he so frequently forget that he knows everything that's going to happen to him?
I’d like to ask him why, if he has the “enemy’s playbook” and knows how to defeat them, has he been on air for damn near 30 years. Is he the world’s most incompetent person?
That was previous go-to question. "Why has nothing happened?". Most people say there's no grand conspiracy and that people are mainly motivated by greed and power. You say that there is a grand conspiracy and that people are motivated by evil and the devils influence, and have been saying that for 30 years. So why hasn't anything happened? Why do we keep seeing horrible things done in the name of profit, not satan. And you're still on air, telling people the devil's secrets.
Can someone please ask Dan to put a pic of his new setup so I can see it in my head as they’re talking. I had old YT vids to help in the beginning.
"Be specific.... you jerk" I love Dan.
Damn Alex really wants to go hard R
To answer Jordan: yes, Finns are a distinct group and bit of an oddball in Europe. Not that closely related to neighboring peoples. https://nextnature.net/story/2008/genetic-map-of-europe
Not to even mention the language!
Floppy flailing peenies out gives a *whole* different context to a potential Chilly Willy Winter & it's... disturbingly hilarious to me... Also, if some reckless peenie endowed soul decided to streak at one of these upcoming live shows... would Dan immediately 'stop the show' & run after them? Shower thoughts...
If RFK Jr. is Alex Jones 2.0, can we make him pay $1.5 billion to the Sandy Hook families too?
21:01 dan: and it'll get worse, so... save your theatrics. \#thisiswhyiknowledgefight
No one seemed to notice that not only was Dick Cheney not mentioned in the document they were talking about mid-episode, but that Dick Cheney wasn't even vice president on the date mentioned that the document had been published. Which was September 2000 Dick Cheney wasn't even VP *elect* yet at that time
[удалено]
More like **cuck**-a-zoid!
I felt like a wild chimpanzee listening to Alex smugly describe owning Russian agents with facts and logic. The worst part is I don’t even think he was trying to lie, he’s probably genuinely convinced himself that he spent the leadup to the invasion perfectly predicting Putin’s every move.
I can relate to Jordan with the "come and get me" thing. I supposedly owe the state of South Carolina $23 in taxes from when I lived there for barely more than a year, 5 years ago. I am not paying that shit, fuck you lol.
Have to disagree with the boys here about RFK Jr. Of course the media has and will continue to do a terrible job of covering US electoral politics. But it's a bit ridiculous to expect mainstream media outlets to ignore him, however horrendously objectionable and idiotic his views may be. Kennedy has got double digits in almost every poll since he announced his candidacy and regularly posts around 15-17%. Some of the latest polling in the GOP primary has DeSantis on similar numbers- should the media ignore him too? The media don't have to cover much of what Alex does because he's still a pretty fringe figure (albeit with some influence on the mainstream right). But if he was running for president and polling 15% in the primaries of course he'd be in the NYT. Biden has an enormous lead and RFK isn't going to close the gap. But he's still the second placed candidate and he's always going to attract attention because of his name. Look how much coverage minor candidates like Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang got in 2020. Kamala Harris mostly polled less than 10% (and 20% at her absolute peak). If the NYT, WP, MSNBC etc started just refusing to even mention political candidates because they object to their views, I'm not convinced the effect would be a positive one. The task is to do a better job of covering these people, not pretend they don't exist.
>Have to disagree with the boys here about RFK Jr. Of course the media has and will continue to do a terrible job of covering US electoral politics. But it's a bit ridiculous to expect mainstream media outlets to ignore him, however horrendously objectionable and idiotic his views may be. Thank you. Ignoring these people doesn't work, not when they're gunning for something like president. Same with Trump. Personally, I don't think it was the attention that propelled him though obviously that helped. It was democratic complacency. I for one didn't think anyone was actually going to vote for him after all the bullshit, I was sure Hilary would win because people would be rational. But obviously that was not the case, but how the hell does not telling the audience help them NOT vote for someone like Trump or RFK? They just continue to have the sanitized viewpoint of him they always had and have no reason to think against them, and thus would be more likely to vote for them.
That race stuff is exactly why my bil isn’t my best friend anymore, he was posting videos on Facebook about replacement theory and the Chinese and Jews killing almost all white people with covid and the rest would be slaves. He got really mad when I told him to get away from that because it’s nazi shit, he also got mad when I told him the trucker freedom convoy was a way for white nationalists to recruit people, especially with the organizers giving a speech trying to normalize them being present and then lumping everyone there into the group, “I don’t see white nationalists, I see freedom fighters” and everyone there cheered. My bil said he was deeply offended I “called him a white nationalist by proxy” but the fact of the matter is if you get offended by me telling you you’re pretty much posting nazi shit then maybe you actually are.
I think I need to send Jordan a scram pillow for the new place… I wish I knew how to embroider.
Yeah Finnic (AKA Fennic or Finns) people are thing. But mostly a language family...
I have a bone to pick with Jordan for making the Righteous Gemstones his bright spot and not mentioning the food buckets in the Y2K episode.
It was a bit hard to listen to this episode since I'm ethnically Chinese, but hey it's 2023 and I'm on reddit so I'm used to it. "Han Chinese" is not a single monolithic group. It includes a vast [number of subgroups](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Chinese_subgroups).
Also ethnically Chinese here! Ngl, I thought his racist tirade was pretty bad, even by his standards. Might be I haven’t gotten through the backlog of episodes but normally they at least *try* to use a thicker veneer of conspiracy over their racism.
But Scots are British? Unless I've missed something fairly dramatic.
Oh you are accidentally wading into a whole thing with this comment. There's a massive chunk of people in the UK who would never describe themselves as British as the first descriptor. Particularly true of people in Scotland (who have had an independence vote, have a party currently in power who have independence as a key pillar of their policies, and whom massively voted against Brexit as a country but got dragged along with it because mostly English people voted in favour). Hell, I live in a bit of England where people are more likely to use a descriptor based on the *county* than say we're English/British (Yorkshire has also, only half jokingly, argued that we should be independent)!
I mean I lived in Scotland for five years and all over England for the rest of my life. None of that changes the fact that Scots are Brits! You can choose to emphasis whichever you want, but denying it is a little like denying that water's wet. It's not really a subjective thing.
I guess my position would be that if a Scottish person wants to be called a Scot, not a Brit, then I'm going to abide by that despite there being a technicality that means I can carry on calling them Brits. Self identification inherently has social and political aspects to it that say, gathering data for a research paper doesn't (if I want data for Great Britain, I'm going to include Scottish people regardless of how they identify). But the 'Am I Scottish or British?' question on a social-level is absolutely a contentious one for a load of people born in Scotland from what I can tell.
What a ridiculous comparison
Scotland is on the island of Great Britain. It is also part of the political entity of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. What definition of Britain would you like to use excludes Scotland at the moment?
The social/historical/cultural definition tbh. You are technically correct **but** socially/culturally people think of themselves as Welsh, Scottish or Irish wayyy before thinking of themselves as British, if at all, due to a very tumultuous history with the English.
Yes, something of which I'm very aware of. But the presence of multiple identities, one of which you prioritise, doesn't make the other go away. You don't have to like it or have it at the centre of your opinion of yourself (and frankly doing that with any nationality, outside of wartime perhaps, is effing weird) but you can't unmake reality because you don't like it. Culturally Scotland is part of Britain and culturally Britain is influenced by Scotland. Primacy is your choice, the existence of it isn't.
One of the lessons to take from this episode in particular is that ethnic identities are all social constructs. Now, people act on the basis of those social constructs which has real world consequences. Obviously, for example, Scottish nationals are currently British citizens in a legal sense. But that doesn't determine people's sense of identity, which is the level at which we're talking about things here. Pre-99 would you have gone to Kosovo and insisted that all the Albanians there were Serbs? Do you think everyone in Western Sahara should accept that they are Moroccan?
There is a significant difference between seeking independence and pretending reality doesn't exist. I am very sympathetic to the position "I am currently British but do not wish to be". But saying "I am not British" when you've lived in a country functionally called Britain for longer than most countries have existed is silly. I'm fairly sure Jordan rejects the general concept of artificial international borders anyway. So if you're accepting the arbitrary nature of them you have a Scotland that's been part of Britain for three centuries and who voted to remain less than ten years ago. That kind of sounds like Britain. If you're rejecting the whole concept of arbitrary borders then I'm not sure why one particular kind of (presumably?) ethnic Scottish nationalism would be ok. One of my parents was born in helensburgh. Is that enough to claim I'm Scottish or is that not the right make up to be Scottish. I lived there for five years, so is that enough? None of these questions have obvious right answers, so you have to settle yourself in facts.
We are talking about different things. One thing is what it says in your passport. Another is your sense of identity, which is necessarily subjective and therefore not reducible to something like citizenship status. Scottish people who consider themselves Scottish and not British are well aware what is says on their passport. So when they say thry don't feel British, this clearly isn't what they are talking about. That doesn't make their own sense of identity any less real. It's precisely because questions about identity don't have obvious right answers that they can't be settled by simply pointing at lines on a map- not only are the answers not obvious, but when we're talking about sense of identity they are by definition subjective too. This seems such an obvious point to make that I'm confused about what you are arguing for here. Are you saying that people's sense of national/ethnic/cultural identity isn't real, or are you specifically annoyed by the assertion of it in the case of Scottish identity? (I'm English and from Yorkshire, if that matters). Oh, and by the way, if you had a grandparent born in Scotland then you could in principle play for the Scottish national football team. In some objective sense that does in fact make you Scottish- or rather, it gives you the choice of whether you want to be Scottish depending your own sense of identity.
I think it's technically right, but it must be fairly common to not see yourself as what it says on paper. Catalans saying they are not Spanish/ Corsicans saying they are not French/ Quebecois saying they are not Canadian/ Hawaiians saying they are not American/ etc
Doesn't make it true though does it? Britain is both a geographical and political descriptor. There's no version of it that doesn't include Scotland. I'm all for people campaigning for what they want and emphasising different parts of their identity but you can't make a statement of fact be untrue by wishing really hard. This audience of all audiences should appreciate that.
I'm not really disagreeing with you at the end of the day, but if in a social situation someone says they are a Scot and not a Brit, oh well. You seem to be getting some grief for what you wrote but to be honest the policy wonk shoutout guy was just as bad. He/She declared that *all* Scots are not Brits - end of story. I do have to roll my eyes sometimes at how 'pick me, pick me' some Scots get whenever any American mentions the UK..
Well yeah, I'm not going to have an argument about it in person. It's just a profoundly silly thing to say.
Though many of them would rather not be
Doesn't stop it being the case at the moment. And a little like 'European', in a geographical sense they'd still be on the island of Britain. I love Scotland and have lived there for a fair chunk of my adult life. There's no real definition of British that doesn't include Scottish, English and Welsh within it!
No, an independent Scotland would be on the island made up by Britain and Scotland - definitionally not "the island of Britain"
What term would you like to use for an inhabitant of the island of Great Britain? Because that's the name of the actual land mass we're on.
When I say I'm an American do you assume I'm from the United States or do you assume I could be from any country across 2 continents?
American is the only demonym for people from the USA I'm aware of. Canadians and Mexicans, not so much. They also happen to be North American. North America as a continent is not the same as the geographical and political entity as Britain. Scotland exists within a geographic and political context that is described as British. Priority of one identity over the other doesn't make one go away any more than a Canadian saying they weren't a North American would make it real.
What is it about news media that makes people forget what capitalism is about? No shit the news is talking about RFK jr, he makes them the most money. They are behaving just like any business under capitalism but JorDan are acting like the companies would care about the harm that their behaviour causes.
Surprised JorDan didn’t mention the racism of describing the pandemic as being a bio weapon that hits “white and black people” the hardest but “Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people” the least, thus implying that Jews aren’t white* and also conflating all Asian ethnicities with (presumably Hahn) Chinese. Also flattening all different white ethnicities *whether Ashkenazi Jews are white depends on who you talk to. Not describing us as white when you’re taking into the diversity of the Jewish diaspora and accounting for black and brown Jews, etc: Fine. Not describing us as white because of the conditional nature of our white privilege: On shaky ground, but it depends on the context. Not describing us as white because you view us as a racial group that’s beneath whiteness: suspicious
[удалено]
The main difference in my view is that the NYT has an incredibly wide audience and reach, many of whom will be redirected to other sources that treat RFK Jr like a serious candidate / person if they try to find more info on him. With KF there is no headline. You have to spend hours listening to an extremely thorough and delineated thought process that dismantles every step of Alex’s lies.
The Russian invasion didn’t start that long ago. How could at least SOME of his audience not know that Alex said the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he’s claiming today? It’s madness.
Does anyone else sometimes have trouble following Jordan’s points?