I listen to him because I learn a lot from him. When I talk to SJWs, it can be easy to get mired down in their guilt trips and emotional blackmail.

What I like about Shapiro is that he believes what he believes, and he is completely immune to shaming language.

He was awesome against Piers Morgan. To be that young and to have the confidence and presence of mind not to be fazed when someone that much older is doing his best to shame you, well, it inspires every time I watch it:






I love how he thinks on his feet here, and doesn't get sucked into an abstract theoretical discussion, he wins by stating the obvious.







It also goes without saying that including Shapiro and Thug Life in one video is instant comedy.

Shapiro is a super bright guy and I agree with him on most issues. But you have to remember that he is also a neocon and that will influence his worldview on Russia, Muslims, foreign interventions and so on. Any major jewish public figure can be seen as an "ethnic activist ". They usually couch their group interests in Universalist terms such as toppling the Iran govt is "good for all" when they really mean "good for the jews."

Quote: (08-04-2017 12:45 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

Shapiro is a super bright guy and I agree with him on most issues. But you have to remember that he is also a neocon and that will influence his worldview on Russia, Muslims, foreign interventions and so on. Any major jewish public figure can be seen as an "ethnic activist ". They usually couch their group interests in Universalist terms such as toppling the Iran govt is "good for all" when they really mean "good for the jews."

Yeah, there is no way he is stating his agenda plainly.

One thing in this interview that sent a chill through my spine was when Shapiro said, "People are suggestible."

Really Ben? Ever studied that concept in depth? Maybe used it to your own advantage?

Quote: (08-04-2017 10:24 AM)kaotic Wrote:  

Honestly the way Shapiro speaks is outright fast, feminine, and annoying.

I don't agree with on the "assault" that happened on that reporter.

He's a very fucking intelligent guy, but I disagree with him on at least of the talking points he made - more specifically things with or around Trump - including the Russian collusion.

His talks on socialism, gender, rights, small government, sjw's, and college I agree with him on a 100%.

Can you clarify what he said on Trump and Russia?

I know Shapiro believes that Russia meddled in the election (because the oh so trustworthy intelligence agencies told us that, the same people who were confident there were WMD's in Iraq) but what did he say on the collusion stuff? Does he actually believe Trump conspired with the Russians?

He is of Jewish Russian ancestry, by the way, just like that faggot Max Boot so TigerMandingo is right ethnic motivations and hatred are at play here.

Quote: (08-04-2017 01:42 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  

Quote: (08-04-2017 12:45 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

Shapiro is a super bright guy and I agree with him on most issues. But you have to remember that he is also a neocon and that will influence his worldview on Russia, Muslims, foreign interventions and so on. Any major jewish public figure can be seen as an "ethnic activist ". They usually couch their group interests in Universalist terms such as toppling the Iran govt is "good for all" when they really mean "good for the jews."

Yeah, there is no way he is stating his agenda plainly.

One thing in this interview that sent a chill through my spine was when Shapiro said, "People are suggestible."

Really Ben? Ever studied that concept in depth? Maybe used it to your own advantage?

I don't think it's nefarious, in and of itself, for him to state that truth. We are on a game forum after all.

I mean, shouldn't we all try to use that to our own advantage (only a very few will actually put the time into trying, and even less will succeed).

My podcast list is Rogan, Shapiro, Gavin McInnis, RadioDerb with a few others mixed in occasionally.

I agree with many of the youtube commenters...Shapiro was soft. I wish he would have not pandered and riffed libertarian and instead taken the more Constitutional conservative perspective where he would have pushed Rogan's buttons. This would have been a good example...

Rogan: I'm pro-gay pro-tranny pro-women.
Should have responded: What does that mean for you though? Does that mean you think a few people on the east coast should decide what the entire rest of the country can and cannot do? The real question isn't whether, say, you are pro gay marriage, it's whether the Feds should force it upon us because 9 guys in DC said so.....and continued into that discussion.

Too many people, and Rogan would be the epitome of this, don't realize how devastating Federal laws are to society (both "you can't allow that" and "you have to allow that") and how divisive mass control of society can be.

Rogan proved again how good he is at interviewing though. He's very good at knowing what topics and what guests to challenge and not to challenge. He adjusts his tone according to his knowledge on a subject relative to his guest. With Eddie Bravo, he disregards ridiculous assertions conspiracy theories. He argues with Crowder about marijuana because he's well versed but respects Crowder (also his worst moment as an interviewer). He questions Shapiro with some, but little, doubt. He just sits there and listens to Jordan Peterson because Peterson is talking on higher level than Rogan thinks.

Shapiro is probably genius IQ. He's been a chosen one since he was a child:

Quote: (08-04-2017 01:55 PM)RaccoonFace Wrote:  

Can you clarify what he said on Trump and Russia?

I know Shapiro believes that Russia meddled in the election (because the oh so trustworthy intelligence agencies told us that, the same people who were confident there were WMD's in Iraq) but what did he say on the collusion stuff? Does he actually believe Trump conspired with the Russians?

He is of Jewish Russian ancestry, by the way, just like that faggot Max Boot so TigerMandingo is right ethnic motivations and hatred are at play here.

As in he thinks something is going on, he mentioned Mueller and the shit show with Comey.

I think part of him at least does because he said he'd go after Trump if he fucked up which he has.

Absotely, he's pro isreal, let the goyim do the work for us, war with Iran and Syria.

Quote: (08-04-2017 02:10 PM)TooFineAPoint Wrote:  

Quote: (08-04-2017 01:42 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  

Quote: (08-04-2017 12:45 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

Shapiro is a super bright guy and I agree with him on most issues. But you have to remember that he is also a neocon and that will influence his worldview on Russia, Muslims, foreign interventions and so on. Any major jewish public figure can be seen as an "ethnic activist ". They usually couch their group interests in Universalist terms such as toppling the Iran govt is "good for all" when they really mean "good for the jews."

Yeah, there is no way he is stating his agenda plainly.

One thing in this interview that sent a chill through my spine was when Shapiro said, "People are suggestible."

Really Ben? Ever studied that concept in depth? Maybe used it to your own advantage?

I don't think it's nefarious, in and of itself, for him to state that truth. We are on a game forum after all.

I mean, shouldn't we all try to use that to our own advantage (only a very few will actually put the time into trying, and even less will succeed).

I was more saying it gave me a weird gut feeling when he said it. Nothing more.

Ben Shapiro may be a clever guy & he may err to the 'right' side of politics (won't say he's necessarily well spoken with that particular style of his).

Yet could I trust Ben Shapiro if I was to share a foxhole with him in a warzone?
Or could I trust Ben Shapiro in a L.A. riots / societal collapse type situation?

The answer is a simple - no.

Quote: (08-04-2017 01:55 PM)RaccoonFace Wrote:  

He is of Jewish Russian ancestry, by the way, just like that faggot Max Boot so TigerMandingo is right ethnic motivations and hatred are at play here.

Correct. Always be skeptical of the agenda pushed by jews who originate from the old eastern bloc. Soros is the most famous example of this but in his situation it's quite a bit worse since he allegedly turned on his own people as a kapo to save his own skin.

These ethnic grudges from decades of oppression blinds them. They are slaves to their own extreme version of abrahamic eye for an eye.

Now that they are in positions of authority in legal, financial, political, and entertainment fields they are coming to collect scalps.

This podcast has me halfway off the Trump train and glorifying Anarchy.

I like a lot of what Shiff says, but he does have the hectoring whiny American Jew voice problem. I can't listen to it for too long.

I liked him a lot better in the video Samseau posted where he talked sense about Charlottesville. He understands why free speech is important, and the difference between emotional screeching and standing on principle. He also understands that the point of Charlottesville was to get us to give up the very last of our rights to the government, not fight racism.

I enjoy what Schiff provokes, and as far as I can tell he's fairly red pill and loves the US Constitution.

That said, Libertarianism goes a little too far with individualism at times, particularly with those that don't have a identification with virtue (great world religions) and are fixated solely on law or negative rights (under the law).

I am more in the camp with Martin Armstrong as far as doomsday Schiff predictions for this country, the US can and will get huge investment due to our central bank being nowhere near as bad as the ECB, and wars aren't starting here before there.

The gold money thing is a really good idea, and I think it's smart to have a percentage of your assets in it as a hedge for a coming correction or more, but it would be a mistake to miss out on another monster run in the markets, which I feel is more likely now but only after what I think is the coming correction.

Another podcast with Jordan Peterson, also featuring Bret Weinstein :

Joe Rogan (unintentionally?) shows how butthurt Kiwis get over things. In case you didn't know, it was semi-big news in NZ media that he "disrespected" the haka(something Kiwis do before sport as part of our culture) in one of his podcasts. Now he does an "apology" (If I thought that many Kiwis would get pissed off ) which Kiwis will probably accept at face value not realising it was also a subtle dig and how easily offended Kiwis are.



An article the previous day: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/art...d=11920873

Quote:Quote:

'You dummies': US TV host Joe Rogan slams haka

Joe Rogan slams NZ Haka saying that 'it seems stupid.'

US commentator and former television host Joe Rogan has slammed the haka as "stupid" in one of his latest podcasts.

The actor and MMA expert took aim at the traditional Maori war cry in an interview with actor Hannibal Buress.

The pair were discussing the ability to control the state of the mind when Rogan questioned why native Americans would perform a war cry before battle.

But they soon took aim at the native Maori Haka.

"The haka, is that a New Zealand thing?" Rogan asked Buress.

"There is the video of them [the New Zealand Basketball team] playing the USA team, they're doing this elaborate thing and just energetic. They cut to the USA team and they looked confused," Buress said.

Joe Rogan then cut in, and asked: "They're doing it in a basketball game?

"This is ridiculous, they're playing basketball. You're playing NBA superstars you f**king dummies... It seems stupid. If you're playing basketball it's stupid.

"It's a performance art. The other players clapped. They're like 'good job children!'.

"It's weird if you do all of that then get your ass kicked."

However, Maori Party co-leader Marama Fox hit back at Rogan's claims, saying the former Fear Factor host is way off the mark.

"Obviously he has no understanding of indigenous culture in his own country or around the world," she told the Herald.

"It shows a very close-minded point of view and I invite him to come to New Zealand and we can show him how to do it properly and give him a lesson on what it really means."

Rogan and Buress pointed fun at the Tall Blacks' performance, questioning their reasoning for doing the haka despite the fact they'd likely get thoroughly beaten by the USA.

Fox rubbished their views on the haka, telling the Herald the traditional Maori war cry was a symbol for many uses and meanings.

"The haka is an expression used for so many things - as a sign of respect, the haka is used to get the blood pumping when you go into battle.

"When you're ready to get out there and play your game and put your best foot forward.

"It's not about trying to intimidate the other team, it's about getting yourself pumped up and being ready.

"Kiwis have made the haka their own. And we perform is with pride. We've been doing it across this nation and across a number of sports for a long time. It's an ownership of the whole nation and it shows the value of Maori culture to everyday Kiwis.

"When it is performed on the world stage as representatives of our nation they are showing what we are all about and embracing Maori culture.

"Everyday Kiwis perform the haka because they love it and it brings pride to ourselves and our nation."

I was talking with an Irish guy who traveled to NZ to play rugby in the 80's, and his team's response to the haka was to join hands, sing "Ring Around the Rosie," and all fall down.

Quote:Quote:

Ring-a-round the rosie,
A pocket full of posies,
Ashes! Ashes!
We all fall down.

Kind of stole its mojo. Lucky for them no internet then.

I used to think Pen Is Mightier Than Sword just meant ideas (over time) carry exponential power over situational violence (or the threat thereof)... but as I get older I think it might have just meant mockery.

Quote: (09-01-2017 09:56 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  

Another podcast with Jordan Peterson, also featuring Bret Weinstein :

I watched the first hour and will go back and finish it off. What was amazing is that what these people are talking about are all the interposed realities that orthodox christianity deals with as challenges in life --- history, biology, falsehood, fallenness and choosing to avert the base instinct of trying to preserve yourself at all costs even though you know you'll die anyway (Weinstein touches on this but I don't think he's aware, yet), collectivism, delusion, the world hating you, etc.

It truly is amazing.

Intersting intervierw

If nothing else. It by & large, was merely refreshing to hear three intelligent men discuss complex ideas without resorting to emotive diatribe or hysterics.

Quote: (09-11-2017 08:03 PM)The Catalyst Wrote:  

Joe Rogan (unintentionally?) shows how butthurt Kiwis get over things. In case you didn't know, it was semi-big news in NZ media that he "disrespected" the haka(something Kiwis do before sport as part of our culture) in one of his podcasts. Now he does an "apology" (If I thought that many Kiwis would get pissed off ) which Kiwis will probably accept at face value not realising it was also a subtle dig and how easily offended Kiwis are.

As an Australian, New Zealand and maybe Denmark are two of the only places I've been that surpass us for left wing liberalism. The nation might just be the white knight capital of the world.

Quote: (09-13-2017 10:01 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  

If nothing else. It by & large, was merely refreshing to hear three intelligent men discuss complex ideas without resorting to emotive diatribe or hysterics.

Agreed. Although Rogan still can't pronounce Bret's surname properly, despite labouring the point. While I still enjoy the podcast, by & large (), I am grateful for the intellectual guests & Rogan's understanding that he needs to shut the fuck up in these situations. Otherwise, he is unbearable now with his constant pushing of the same causes (weed, psychedelics, floties, & all that garbage MMA shit & his useless drug fucked comedy buddies).

Also, 3 hours for James Damore was completely ridiculous. 1 hour max would've done it with him.

Quote: (09-14-2017 12:40 AM)Conscious Pirate Wrote:  

Quote: (09-13-2017 10:01 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  

If nothing else. It by & large, was merely refreshing to hear three intelligent men discuss complex ideas without resorting to emotive diatribe or hysterics.

Agreed. Although Rogan still can't pronounce Bret's surname properly, despite labouring the point. While I still enjoy the podcast, by & large (), I am grateful for the intellectual guests & Rogan's understanding that he needs to shut the fuck up in these situations. Otherwise, he is unbearable now with his constant pushing of the same causes (weed, psychedelics, floties, & all that garbage MMA shit & his useless drug fucked comedy buddies).

Also, 3 hours for James Damore was completely ridiculous. 1 hour max would've done it with him.

Yeah, can't say I've bothered with the James Damore podcast.
I'll quite often gauge the worth of a podcast by the reaction on the Rogan Board; & in that context, softly spoken Damore wasn't getting much praise.
Not much in the way of derision either, just not a great deal of praise.

Peterson is incredible to listen to, I've never listened to anyone so knowledgeable who can pour out and share it in such an articulate way, as people that intelligent/obsessed are often socially inept.

I know he's hardly news to the forum but previously I'd only read some written work by/about him, so watching a video with him in it was very interesting. I'm now hooked.

Rogan still has too many dead-beat guests. Can anyone outside of the MMA world honestly say another Eddie Bravo appearance would arouse their interest?

The best podcasts are the ones with people who are either extremely famous (Bilzerian), extremely intelligent (Peterson) or just a bit of a mad man (Alex Jones).

Quote: (09-14-2017 12:40 AM)Conscious Pirate Wrote:  

Also, 3 hours for James Damore was completely ridiculous. 1 hour max would've done it with him.

He sometimes seems to be sitting there just stunned, like he was on a forum, closed the window, and is now receiving private messages in his head.

It is obvious he follows guys like Peterson and Molyneux, and to be talking to them in an interview, or to Rogan, looks like it fries his circuits sometimes.

Like if you were watching a Youtube video and out of the blue it starting asking you personal questions and pressuring you for answers.

I appreciate what he did, and how he did it. That said, he is not ready to be a public figure.