This article reminded me of some of the reasons I stopped reading The Nation. The author of this article sure made a lot out about Mangione over a book he put on a to-do list, but never read. The...
This article reminded me of some of the reasons I stopped reading The Nation.
The author of this article sure made a lot out about Mangione over a book he put on a to-do list, but never read.
The criticism of self-help books ( I think they should be criticized FWIW ) was old, myopic, and pretentious in my opinion. Not everything is political. I had a job where I was around a lot of activists. Some of them would have been a lot happier, and more effective if they tried to take care of their mental health or otherwise tried to reach within themselves.
There are very few sources I’m willing to listen to in regards to Luigi Mangione at this time, and most of them are podcasts. There’s just too much political heat to add motive, or ideology, or...
There are very few sources I’m willing to listen to in regards to Luigi Mangione at this time, and most of them are podcasts. There’s just too much political heat to add motive, or ideology, or anything to demonize him.
I saw a post by Robert Evans from Behind the Bastards that I think provided all I need on his motive. It ended:
he posted X-rays of his back surgery
he read multiple books about chronic back pain
he shot a health insurance CEO
he was radicalized by pain
This whole right/left political discussion is the point. It’s changing the topic away from greed and systemic corruption.
This is why I think the argument that other CEOs should be afraid is overblown. There is still somewhat a culture of feuding and vendetta in this country but most CEOs don't blatantly harm a...
This is why I think the argument that other CEOs should be afraid is overblown.
There is still somewhat a culture of feuding and vendetta in this country but most CEOs don't blatantly harm a significant percentage of the general public in ways that are easy to perceive and understand.
The high percentage of sympathy for mangione is not for the most part class consciousness. It's much more specific to health insurance abuse and specific injuries to loved ones or first hand experience of denial of needed care.
Well, that’s a more accurate, mature, reasoned, measured, and disappointing point than I wanted. (Edited to add a proper Oxford comma and:) Joke! Thanks for helping me remember I really don’t want...
Well, that’s a more accurate, mature, reasoned, measured, and disappointing point than I wanted.
(Edited to add a proper Oxford comma and:) Joke!
Thanks for helping me remember I really don’t want to be wishing for more murders regardless of how “smart” or “deserved” or “targeted” they could be.
I'm posting this partly because when I read the book Flow decades ago, I never associated it with improving performance at work in a way that managers would care about. Flow theory spoke to me...
I'm posting this partly because when I read the book Flow decades ago, I never associated it with improving performance at work in a way that managers would care about.
Flow theory spoke to me about how to find hobbies and enjoy them. It felt good to me that an academic was writing about the importance of having fun.
I'm not sure that this author has much of interest to say about Mangione but I thought the thesis was interesting.
Especially since the author focuses on Flow but Mangione never read the book.
This is also just not an accurate way to frame the way he's viewed on the left, imo. When he was first arrested there was a little bit of making fun of his tweets and goodreads reviews, but if...
the left thinks he’s an entitled tech-bro jock
This is also just not an accurate way to frame the way he's viewed on the left, imo. When he was first arrested there was a little bit of making fun of his tweets and goodreads reviews, but if people on the left think that he's an entitled tech-bro jock, they mostly don't care. Every time I've seen a news article that's even remotely critical of Mangione like this (or other recent articles trying to frame his white privilege as a central issue to this case) the replies are full of people on the left posting gifs of the FBI and mocking how biased the media is against the guy. Even if you take a very broad definition of the left to include everyone who isn't crazy conservative, it's mostly divided between people hand-wringing about others supporting murder and people hailing him for having killed an evil murderer.
I similarly think his political views are pretty boring, even though his praxis is anything but. Ideologically his views aren't super coherent, and despite consuming content from right wing sources he doesn't seem to have really fallen into the alt right pipeline very far. If I knew someone with views like his in real life, I'd consider him the sort of person who could probably be radicalized in either direction with a strong enough push.
I'd argue he was definitely radicalized, just not in the more common ways we've seen this far. The recent discourse I've seen has been how the perp walk was incredibly stupid and made him look...
I'd argue he was definitely radicalized, just not in the more common ways we've seen this far.
The recent discourse I've seen has been how the perp walk was incredibly stupid and made him look cooler and that his hair and brows were proof that the inmates in PA were on his side.
Oh I mean I think by the time you're assassinating people you've definitely been radicalized, but I don't think there's evidence he was radicalized into one of the major political camps yet (as...
Oh I mean I think by the time you're assassinating people you've definitely been radicalized, but I don't think there's evidence he was radicalized into one of the major political camps yet (as opposed to just being radicalized against something as he was -- UHC is monstrous enough that it's far from strange for someone to be radicalized against them regardless of their other politics). My impression of him from his social media is that, ignoring what he actually ended up doing, I wouldn't be surprised to have seen him become far right or far left over the next few years. He was already pretty clearly anti-establishment, but I think from his social media he could've gone either way depending on who influenced him.
I've seen about a half dozen of Dr. Huberman's videos and perused his YouTube channel several times. He sticks to health and fitness information. I've never noticed him even mention politics.
he was interested in right-wing and right-coded figures like Joe Rogan and Andrew Huberman
I've seen about a half dozen of Dr. Huberman's videos and perused his YouTube channel several times. He sticks to health and fitness information. I've never noticed him even mention politics.
The term "right-coded" seems to be meaning "hocks diet pills and bad health information while trying to sound scientifically correct" which is honestly pretty common is American Right-wing media -...
The term "right-coded" seems to be meaning "hocks diet pills and bad health information while trying to sound scientifically correct" which is honestly pretty common is American Right-wing media - brain pills and all that.
When framed like that, it comes across like US "politics" is little more than marketing classifications. Because for all the utter crap that is peddled by right wingers, the left has been pushing...
When framed like that, it comes across like US "politics" is little more than marketing classifications.
Because for all the utter crap that is peddled by right wingers, the left has been pushing problematic brands for years. Like right now BetterHelp and Honey are in the spotlight, but there's also been Established Titles, Masterworks and thier own bogus health stuff (air up, genetic tests, metabolic breath tests).
This is not a "both sides" argument to put down or lift up a side. To be honest, I'm actually having a hard time working through this idea because US political discourse is so messy and weird. The mainstream media are classifying a persons political leaning based on advertising when they just killed a millionaire in broad daylight. They can't exactly spin the story.
I've recently seen the right wing network run by Matt Walsh flame out because they tried to paint Luigi as a liberal extremist. At the same time, your "left wing" leadership considers the killing of this CEO a terrorist act. The American people are firmly on one side of this issue. Politicians and business owners are on the other. Hundreds of thousands of people on one side died miserably because of this, leaving suffering families behind. The other side makes millions in dividends and donations.
The Marxist extremist in me is curious what the response would be if the public exploits the only thing these people fear more than death. A nation wide prmium protest. They pushed the number of denied claims up to 30% and the till they somehow get it to 950% and charge you by the heartbeat (there was actually a thing where a local health insurance would "give" you an iWatch and would charge you for not meeting health goals. Imagine the logical end for that). Not to mention the very many things not even covered. If the business model is a practical slot machine, there are cheaper ways to gamble with you life. What are they going to do, force you to pay them (the same way they forced rail workers to not strike).
Honestly, because a lot of political talk happens on social media these days, politics itself has become performative just like practically every other interaction on them. God have mercy on your...
Honestly, because a lot of political talk happens on social media these days, politics itself has become performative just like practically every other interaction on them. God have mercy on your soul if you say what you actually think and feel, as the great follower migration is sure to follow. Because society is only valuable insomuch as a popularity metric, is it not?
I haven't watched Huberman's videos, but he certainly has no qualms about associating with more blatantly right wing figures, which isn't an apolitical thing to do -- he's introducing his audience...
I haven't watched Huberman's videos, but he certainly has no qualms about associating with more blatantly right wing figures, which isn't an apolitical thing to do -- he's introducing his audience to more extreme views than what is present in his videos by appearing with right wing grifters.
I've noticed other content creators who are critical of the right wing appear on Rogan's show. As with them, I just brushed it off as content creators trying to get exposure.
I've noticed other content creators who are critical of the right wing appear on Rogan's show.
As with them, I just brushed it off as content creators trying to get exposure.
He's appeared with more than just Rogan, and I generally think that even if it's just a reach for exposure it still cements you as part of the culture that does not consider these explicitly right...
He's appeared with more than just Rogan, and I generally think that even if it's just a reach for exposure it still cements you as part of the culture that does not consider these explicitly right wing personalities worthy of criticism.
I'm not sure why you're bringing up Substack? I didn't say anything about that site. I'm criticizing him for appearing on shows with people like Jordan Peterson and Tucker Carlson. I think doing...
I'm not sure why you're bringing up Substack? I didn't say anything about that site. I'm criticizing him for appearing on shows with people like Jordan Peterson and Tucker Carlson. I think doing so is worthy of criticism regardless of what his underlying intentions were.
While I have complicated opinions about using Substack too, I think it's on a very different level from actively appearing on podcasts hosted by alt right personalities.
While I have complicated opinions about using Substack too, I think it's on a very different level from actively appearing on podcasts hosted by alt right personalities.
Just because I like Bernie Sanders on the whole doesn't mean I have zero criticism for literally anything he's done. I can also acknowledge appearing on Joe Rogan being a tactical move for a...
Just because I like Bernie Sanders on the whole doesn't mean I have zero criticism for literally anything he's done. I can also acknowledge appearing on Joe Rogan being a tactical move for a politician in a way that affects how I view it as a choice. There's also a difference between appearing on Joe Rogan's show and appearing on Tucker Carlson or Jordan Peterson's imo.
My point was just because a person appears on a show with a right wing moderator does not mean that they are right wing ( or even "political" ) themselves. Getting back to Dr. Huberman I have seen...
My point was just because a person appears on a show with a right wing moderator does not mean that they are right wing ( or even "political" ) themselves.
Getting back to Dr. Huberman I have seen about a half dozen of his videos and have perused his YouTube channel several times. It looks like he doesn't even talk about politics so I think it is unfair to label him as a right winger until he expresses such views.
I have, multiple times in this thread, expressed why I think that it's worth criticizing a figure like this for appearing on right wing figures' podcasts, regardless of what the intent behind it...
I have, multiple times in this thread, expressed why I think that it's worth criticizing a figure like this for appearing on right wing figures' podcasts, regardless of what the intent behind it is. You're just repeating the same points at me that I've already disagreed with you on. You're free to disagree with my opinion on Huberman, but you're not going to change my mind by repeatedly insisting that the things I think are worthy of criticism don't matter.
You said that he's part of the "exposure and members first" crowd. You and @sparksbet seem to agree on this but from different directions. For you, this seems to be something that excuses (if such...
You said that he's part of the "exposure and members first" crowd. You and @sparksbet seem to agree on this but from different directions. For you, this seems to be something that excuses (if such is even needed) the association with those figures. For sparksbet this same behavior and goal of getting exposure above all, is not a redeeming factor.
You may feel this is an incorrect conclusion about the guy in question, but it's opinion and reiterating the same things over and over is not going to help, nor do I think it's necessarily unfair criticism.
If someone hangs out with people I find distasteful, but his friend is like "he's not that bad, you'd like him solo, he only hangs out with those people because it makes him look cool and makes him money" I probably wouldn't feel reassured by that either.
This article reminded me of some of the reasons I stopped reading The Nation.
The author of this article sure made a lot out about Mangione over a book he put on a to-do list, but never read.
The criticism of self-help books ( I think they should be criticized FWIW ) was old, myopic, and pretentious in my opinion. Not everything is political. I had a job where I was around a lot of activists. Some of them would have been a lot happier, and more effective if they tried to take care of their mental health or otherwise tried to reach within themselves.
There are very few sources I’m willing to listen to in regards to Luigi Mangione at this time, and most of them are podcasts. There’s just too much political heat to add motive, or ideology, or anything to demonize him.
I saw a post by Robert Evans from Behind the Bastards that I think provided all I need on his motive. It ended:
This whole right/left political discussion is the point. It’s changing the topic away from greed and systemic corruption.
This is why I think the argument that other CEOs should be afraid is overblown.
There is still somewhat a culture of feuding and vendetta in this country but most CEOs don't blatantly harm a significant percentage of the general public in ways that are easy to perceive and understand.
The high percentage of sympathy for mangione is not for the most part class consciousness. It's much more specific to health insurance abuse and specific injuries to loved ones or first hand experience of denial of needed care.
Well, that’s a more accurate, mature, reasoned, measured, and disappointing point than I wanted.
(Edited to add a proper Oxford comma and:) Joke!
Thanks for helping me remember I really don’t want to be wishing for more murders regardless of how “smart” or “deserved” or “targeted” they could be.
I'm posting this partly because when I read the book Flow decades ago, I never associated it with improving performance at work in a way that managers would care about.
Flow theory spoke to me about how to find hobbies and enjoy them. It felt good to me that an academic was writing about the importance of having fun.
I'm not sure that this author has much of interest to say about Mangione but I thought the thesis was interesting.
Especially since the author focuses on Flow but Mangione never read the book.
This is also just not an accurate way to frame the way he's viewed on the left, imo. When he was first arrested there was a little bit of making fun of his tweets and goodreads reviews, but if people on the left think that he's an entitled tech-bro jock, they mostly don't care. Every time I've seen a news article that's even remotely critical of Mangione like this (or other recent articles trying to frame his white privilege as a central issue to this case) the replies are full of people on the left posting gifs of the FBI and mocking how biased the media is against the guy. Even if you take a very broad definition of the left to include everyone who isn't crazy conservative, it's mostly divided between people hand-wringing about others supporting murder and people hailing him for having killed an evil murderer.
I similarly think his political views are pretty boring, even though his praxis is anything but. Ideologically his views aren't super coherent, and despite consuming content from right wing sources he doesn't seem to have really fallen into the alt right pipeline very far. If I knew someone with views like his in real life, I'd consider him the sort of person who could probably be radicalized in either direction with a strong enough push.
I'd argue he was definitely radicalized, just not in the more common ways we've seen this far.
The recent discourse I've seen has been how the perp walk was incredibly stupid and made him look cooler and that his hair and brows were proof that the inmates in PA were on his side.
Oh I mean I think by the time you're assassinating people you've definitely been radicalized, but I don't think there's evidence he was radicalized into one of the major political camps yet (as opposed to just being radicalized against something as he was -- UHC is monstrous enough that it's far from strange for someone to be radicalized against them regardless of their other politics). My impression of him from his social media is that, ignoring what he actually ended up doing, I wouldn't be surprised to have seen him become far right or far left over the next few years. He was already pretty clearly anti-establishment, but I think from his social media he could've gone either way depending on who influenced him.
Agreed, if it hadn't been this it could easily have been something else.
I've seen about a half dozen of Dr. Huberman's videos and perused his YouTube channel several times. He sticks to health and fitness information. I've never noticed him even mention politics.
The term "right-coded" seems to be meaning "hocks diet pills and bad health information while trying to sound scientifically correct" which is honestly pretty common is American Right-wing media - brain pills and all that.
You don't have to explicitly mention red vs blue to peddle to them.
When framed like that, it comes across like US "politics" is little more than marketing classifications.
Because for all the utter crap that is peddled by right wingers, the left has been pushing problematic brands for years. Like right now BetterHelp and Honey are in the spotlight, but there's also been Established Titles, Masterworks and thier own bogus health stuff (air up, genetic tests, metabolic breath tests).
This is not a "both sides" argument to put down or lift up a side. To be honest, I'm actually having a hard time working through this idea because US political discourse is so messy and weird. The mainstream media are classifying a persons political leaning based on advertising when they just killed a millionaire in broad daylight. They can't exactly spin the story.
I've recently seen the right wing network run by Matt Walsh flame out because they tried to paint Luigi as a liberal extremist. At the same time, your "left wing" leadership considers the killing of this CEO a terrorist act. The American people are firmly on one side of this issue. Politicians and business owners are on the other. Hundreds of thousands of people on one side died miserably because of this, leaving suffering families behind. The other side makes millions in dividends and donations.
The Marxist extremist in me is curious what the response would be if the public exploits the only thing these people fear more than death. A nation wide prmium protest. They pushed the number of denied claims up to 30% and the till they somehow get it to 950% and charge you by the heartbeat (there was actually a thing where a local health insurance would "give" you an iWatch and would charge you for not meeting health goals. Imagine the logical end for that). Not to mention the very many things not even covered. If the business model is a practical slot machine, there are cheaper ways to gamble with you life. What are they going to do, force you to pay them (the same way they forced rail workers to not strike).
Honestly, because a lot of political talk happens on social media these days, politics itself has become performative just like practically every other interaction on them. God have mercy on your soul if you say what you actually think and feel, as the great follower migration is sure to follow. Because society is only valuable insomuch as a popularity metric, is it not?
Thank you.
I haven't watched Huberman's videos, but he certainly has no qualms about associating with more blatantly right wing figures, which isn't an apolitical thing to do -- he's introducing his audience to more extreme views than what is present in his videos by appearing with right wing grifters.
I've noticed other content creators who are critical of the right wing appear on Rogan's show.
As with them, I just brushed it off as content creators trying to get exposure.
He's appeared with more than just Rogan, and I generally think that even if it's just a reach for exposure it still cements you as part of the culture that does not consider these explicitly right wing personalities worthy of criticism.
There are a lot of progressive liberals still on substack. I think of Dr. Huberman as part of that "exposure and members first" crowed.
I'm not sure why you're bringing up Substack? I didn't say anything about that site. I'm criticizing him for appearing on shows with people like Jordan Peterson and Tucker Carlson. I think doing so is worthy of criticism regardless of what his underlying intentions were.
I brought up substack because it is an example of progressives appearing in right wing friendly spaces without being right wing themselves.
While I have complicated opinions about using Substack too, I think it's on a very different level from actively appearing on podcasts hosted by alt right personalities.
Bernie Sanders was Joe Rogan's show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vewjKRorasc
Just because I like Bernie Sanders on the whole doesn't mean I have zero criticism for literally anything he's done. I can also acknowledge appearing on Joe Rogan being a tactical move for a politician in a way that affects how I view it as a choice. There's also a difference between appearing on Joe Rogan's show and appearing on Tucker Carlson or Jordan Peterson's imo.
My point was just because a person appears on a show with a right wing moderator does not mean that they are right wing ( or even "political" ) themselves.
Getting back to Dr. Huberman I have seen about a half dozen of his videos and have perused his YouTube channel several times. It looks like he doesn't even talk about politics so I think it is unfair to label him as a right winger until he expresses such views.
I have, multiple times in this thread, expressed why I think that it's worth criticizing a figure like this for appearing on right wing figures' podcasts, regardless of what the intent behind it is. You're just repeating the same points at me that I've already disagreed with you on. You're free to disagree with my opinion on Huberman, but you're not going to change my mind by repeatedly insisting that the things I think are worthy of criticism don't matter.
I repeated my points because you kept criticizing Dr. Huberman unfairly.
You said that he's part of the "exposure and members first" crowd. You and @sparksbet seem to agree on this but from different directions. For you, this seems to be something that excuses (if such is even needed) the association with those figures. For sparksbet this same behavior and goal of getting exposure above all, is not a redeeming factor.
You may feel this is an incorrect conclusion about the guy in question, but it's opinion and reiterating the same things over and over is not going to help, nor do I think it's necessarily unfair criticism.
If someone hangs out with people I find distasteful, but his friend is like "he's not that bad, you'd like him solo, he only hangs out with those people because it makes him look cool and makes him money" I probably wouldn't feel reassured by that either.