This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I just said the other day I was feeling lukewarm on Trump. But now I'm feeling different. I thought the podcast was awful. Couldn't make it past ten minutes. I might have to try again now that people say the first hour was rough.
It was Trump rambling at its worst. Rogan asks about winning the race in 2016, and next thing I know Trump is talking about how Lincoln was melancholy instead of depressed, cuz his kid died.
Sometimes I feel I would love Trump if it weren't for Trump.
It's not a good interview. Trump is a very boring person to listen to. It would be more interesting if someone who knew more about politics and economics would interview him and challenge more of his assertions, but that might just get hostile and he might refuse to answer. He used every opportunity to go off topic and avoid answering direct questions.
Here's Cenk Uyger's take, which seems pretty positive for someone who pretty clearly isn't suffering from pro-Trump derangement.
More options
Context Copy link
De gustibus nil est disputandum. shrug
More options
Context Copy link
It's a bit spooky how much he's being glazed up-thread.
Some of this is just ridiculous.
The thread you linked has people describing an inflection point where Red Tribe gets enough of a breach in the establishment firewall to actually have a go at producing good things outside the stranglehold of the present consensus. It's obviously quite optimistic; I think it's a reasonably open question whether optimism is inherently ridiculous at this late date.
The more probable outcome is that no matter who is declared the winner, trust declines precipitously, possibly to the point that credit cards stop working. I observe that there are multiple forms of doom converging rapidly on our present position, most of which even people here show no awareness of. Rockets and unrestrained Can-Do might thread the needle. It seems unlikely to me that your general prescriptions can. Or maybe I'm wrong; how does the future go in your view?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Some people will cling to the counterfactual no matter how aggressively the world beats them over the head.
More options
Context Copy link
Wishful thinkers tend to reinforce each other.
No idea whether it's the case though. I couldn't bring myself to watch that Interview.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I’m not Trump fan, or a Rogan guy. I thought the first twenty minutes were pretty tedious. But it gets much much better. It is actually quite enjoyable and insightful. I am saying this as a guy who has only ever sat through 1 other full Rogan show and never listened to a trump speech I. Full outside of a debate.
He does very well, his style works well in this format and once you settle into his ideoayncracies he’s still long winded , but it is very clear that he stays on topic in a particular way. He answers a lot of important questions that reveal his way of thinking. And there’s also a lot of fluff.
My favorite part was trump not really being interested in Joes alien obsession.
More options
Context Copy link
Joe asked Trump how he felt when he entered the White House on his first day. Trump tells a story about seeing the Lincoln Room and having the reality of the presidency set in. He saw all the details of Lincoln’s real life, like the bed that was custom-made because he was too tall, and the small photo he kept of his son who tragically died. Lincoln was no longer a mythical figure but a real person, who lived in this real room, occupying the same job as himself.
I guess this is rambling but at what point is rambling just good story-telling? I mean, Homer rambled. Trump talks like a wise old East Coast relative who has lots of good stories. I also think there’s an element of Irish American conversational style he inherited from his mother’s side. Trump’s mom was born in the Outer Hebrides in a Gaelic speaking household, people forget this.
I posted a comment the other day about the impressive social skills and conversational abilities of my grandmother and her brother's amazing storytelling ability. Her entire family and that of most of the people in the community she grew up in were from the Outer Hebrides. Many of them, including their parents, spoke Gaelic as a first language.
It might be worth noting that she was known for making things up if it made for a better story.
It’s funny — during the interview Trump basically admitted to bullshitting to make the story a bit better.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Did he? I've only read him in translation, but he's never seemed particularly rambly to me.
The list of ships is some of the most rambling verse I've ever read.
This is a little bee in my bonnet for me, but the more I read about Ancient Greece, the more I agree with my old Classics prof claiming the list of ships was in a way the most important part of the Iliad. Not to us, of course, but to the Greeks that list of ships was how each city and region could claim its connection to the political founding myth of Greek civilization. Think of it less like part of the narrative and more like Revolutionary War memorials in New England towns.
I had a teacher assert something similar. That naming of people and households was important because the people listening to the story could claim some of those were their ancestors. So there ends up being 1000+ named people almost all of whom are (from a narrative point of view) pointlessly mentioned in passing.
And that teacher claimed a bit of improvisation in oral retellings was allowed. An ancient bard or traveling storyteller could add in a few mentions to local families. As though their ancestors were battling at Troy.
Rather off topic, but is that why there are a lot of genealogical texts in the Bible? It seems like a similar idea a way to connect all the places that exist. Or maybe I’m not understanding something.
The Bible is like this because a lot hinges on the descent of the person in question from the right person. Shower thought: why is the term "Y-chromosomal Adam" and not "Y-chromosomal Noah"?
More options
Context Copy link
My understanding is that the genealogical passages are about establishing Jesus as the descendant of David. But I'm not an expert and I could well be mistaken.
I know what you're thinking of, but the Matthew/Luke passages aren't the only lists of random irrelevant people. The Old Testament has plenty of excessive detail (there's a reason people cite Leviticus and Deuteronomy but more rarely Numbers; Numbers is called that because it's almost an accounting ledger).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
That's an interesting concept. When you say important, do you mean narratively important, culturally important, or something else?
I think what my prof was saying was "important to the average Greek listening to the Iliad." It's the bridge between the distant characters of the Iliad and the flesh and blood, the soil and city of the audience. Maybe a mild exaggeration given the different ways passages can be important, but imo a reasonable argument nonetheless.
Knowing the names of my five ancestors aboard the Mayflower, listening for their names during a Thanksgiving narrative is more exciting.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I would certainly not describe the Iliad or the Odyssey as 'rambling'. They're extremely well-honed texts, refined over generations of repetition and modification.
More options
Context Copy link
I suppose you could consider Homeric Simile to be somewhat rambly? Or the extensive repetitions? It's not how I'd see it, but Homer isn't exactly concise and rigorously structured.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Man I had the opposite reaction to this. Trump was telling the story of his first night staying in the White House, and sharing some of the feelings he was having while standing in the Lincoln Bedroom.
I thought it was a very humanizing story. Trump has kids who he seems to really care about (he talks about them a lot), and he seemed to be connecting how depressed the Lincoln’s were at the loss of their son.
I thought that was a really great story and was one of my favorite moments from the episode.
Whether you liked the story or not (I did not). It was the most rambly part of the interview. It was the only part where Joe got impatient. After this the conversation settled down quite a bit
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I listen to podcasts all the time, including Joe Rogan's. I mainly listen to comedian podcasts. I think they tend to have the best economy of words. Even if they are idiots most of the time, they at least know how to tell a good story and make it entertaining.
To be fair, comedians literally have as a job description "tell narratively-interesting and humorous stories in as economical, effective, and entertaining a manner as possible." It's useful for politicians to also have this skill, but they're not as hyper-selected for this trait as comedians.
Trump just naturally learned to be charismatic. Trump is very flawed, but I found it interesting how Rogan as a comedian saw and respected Trump's oratory. The timing, the way to hold a crowd. It's great when people see something in their own craft in the craft of others.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I think it helps if you try not to parse it like high density scientific style communication (much of the diet of most people here) or usual focused politician/PR boilerplate.
It's more like two guys smoking weed and shooting the shit, but one of them has to periodically say some campaign related bullcrap.
It's all over the place, Trump goes on these asides, but I was enthralled with the first ten minutes or so - it's easy to listen to, shockingly focused for his reputation, and charismatic as hell (this is coming in as someone who hasn't really heard him do anything long form before).
My suspicion is that most of the people here who didn't like it were already pretty anti-Trump or very logic brained. Both of those are totally fine, but it's worth considering a more "typical" person might be more directly buying what he's selling here. This is very much one of the ways high end charisma can manifest itself, and in one of Joe's post-game type things he even talks about how hard it is wrangle Trump, which is interesting given how proficient of an interviewer JR clearly is.
I listen to a bunch of podcasts. Joe Rogan is probably in the top ten. But everyone above him that I listen to are also comedians and guys just shooting the shit. Matt and Shane's, Tim Dillon, Two bears one cave, Flagrant (which i think had trump too?), Stavy's world, etc.
I think I was more annoyed because I like listening to Joe Rogan. I tend to not like guests that speak over and monopolize the conversation. They are on the "Joe Rogan Experience", not the "Guests of Joe Rogan". The whole point of the podcast is that an everyday man is injected into this position of having a conversation with important, famous, and knowledgeable people. It ruins the ambiance to just talk over him.
Probably should have realized this would be my reaction. I couldn't watch much of his convention speech either. Got like 5 minutes in and quit.
I'm not saying this as someone that is very anti-trump. It would be nice to like trump. He appeals to some of my contrarian instincts. I just also have standards of entertainment. He talked about the apprentice a bit in the beginning as well. I was never interested in that show. Maybe its like many other fads, I'm just the wrong target audience. Whether the fad is MAGA or TDS, I'm just missing out. I don't get it.
Interesting. Again I don't think it's invalid to not be about Trump, but I did find it very entertaining - Joe is a great interviewer but it felt like he was on the Trump ride and at times sitting there going "wow." The anecdote about the Lincoln bedroom isn't particularly interesting, but the fact that it was Trump saying it and the way he said it was.
If I want to hear about the technical details of Space X I want an engineer, if I want to hear Elon do his thing I want to hear Elon. Talking over Joe, being hard to pin down. That's part of the Trump experience.
And again, no problem if you don't like that or aren't about it in this situation because you want to see Joe nail him down on the JFK stuff.
From a campaign perspective you have Trump sitting down and seeming more or less normal, with it (despite media push about that) and reasonable (despite reputation about that) for multiple hours.
Someone else called it relatively boring but if I'm Trump that's what I want to be here given that so many people have heard me called senile Hitler.
Also for what it's worth I know some people who have met him, and this interview matches what casual interactions with him are supposedly like. Don't know if there is anything else under the hood however.
More options
Context Copy link
If yoh listen to dozens of podcasts but can't listen to Trump talking about the Lincoln bedroom... it sounds like you like slop. I guess that's your perogative.
This is pointless antagonism. It adds nothing but heat to the conversation. Your AAQCs get you some leeway, but that leeway is not infinite.
Three day ban.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link