As a long time Destiny fan and someone who has been enjoying the doomscrollpodcast ever since your interviews with JJ McCullough and Jreg popped up in my feed, this was a wonderful and unexpected surprise! Just wanted to say I really love how you conceptualize and explain things, and you've introduced me to a lot of ideas I'd never considered or heard before. I also really appreciate your ability to engage honestly and in good faith, even if I don't always agree.This made for a really great episode and it was a treat hearing you three talk!
Big fan. Why does what I'm calling the new left public intellectuals come off as toothless in conversations with those to their right? Im thinking of people like yourself and 1dime, and their are others. I found almost no points of contention in this conversation. Is it just in the context of trying to have decent conversation? Is it out of a broader coalition building that you see as necessary or an attempt to understand them and avoid debate bro vibes? I would compare this to old left media figures like Chris Hedges and Richard Wolf, who probably would enjoy sinking their teeth into a Destiny or a JJ McCullough. It feels like a centrist impulse. Destiny alludes to this, saying he "can't" go on a right wing show and be contentious because ... Line gotta go up??? I don't get it. But with Destiny it makes sense. Centrist. Would you talk to a Chris Hedges or Brianna Joy Gray or someone like that? I feel like you would somehow have more points of contention than you do with Destiny. Not trying to say your not left enough, but I do think you might be signaling something more than you actually are that thing. I almost feel like you've been pulled to the center through osmosis by being exposed to extremism. You mention that the leftists you take seriously think Joe Biden was bucking neo-liberalism and vehemently pro labor. This feels like a very academic take, and to be honest feels quite flimsy. You also act like distrust in institutions is not well earned. Do you not notice yourself sliding center? Is this just a media question or are some of the theory leftists just not going to make popular arguments? Does this not call in to question your political identity if by the very praxis of your media engagement you remain consistently agreeable with your ideological doppelgangers?
0:00 - Introduction 0:36 - Guest Introduction 1:15 - Academia vs. Contemporary Issues 6:56 - Alternative Media and Accountability 15:38 - Truth: Instrumental or Intrinsic? 26:12 - Market Dynamics and Planned Obsolescence 38:54 - Institutions and Alternative Models 47:30 - Social Democracy vs. Democratic Socialism 1:08:46 - Global Influence on Social Democracy 1:15:54 - Balancing Self-Interest and Community 1:30:48 - Future of U.S. and Global Financial Power 1:37:03 - Fukuyama’s "End of History" and Its Relevance Today 1:45:22 - Social Media’s Role in Society and Governance 1:53:19 - Populism and the Search for Identity 2:03:41 - Misinformation, Emotional Rhetoric, and Populist Appeal 2:12:26 - Labor Movements, Right-Wing Populism, and Media Responsibility 2:22:48 - Institutional Failures of the Democratic Party 2:31:15 - The Difficulty of Building Bridges Across Divides 2:41:03 - Hope, Imagination, and the Future of Society
On the consumer part of the conversation. I thought when the lady said something like "well you can't have things built to last, because consumers dives the economy" and it was about cars. I was born in 1955, and car companies prided themselves on building a car that could last 20 years if properly maintained. The wealthy or well off always bought every new model the following year or two years so they could flaunt their wealth. In those years a kid just starting out could buy one of those well made used cars for a few hundred dollars, get to school and go to work and then trade that car in for his/her new car if they took care of it. This idea of having planned obsolescence and buying the same thing over and over has not been a good thing for our economy or environment. Frankly, supporting that kind of approach is a privilege for the privileged in my opinion.
Thank you for sharing your experience! I think the audience here tends to skew pretty heavily towards folks in their 20s, so we've never really lived in an economy in which products weren't designed to be replaced within just a few years.
No lie I think this was possibly one of the best podcast episodes ive ever listened to How did this come out of bridges? Whatever yall fixed DO NOT TOUCH IT
i genuinely think that one of the only reasons destiny criticize the far lefties that he does is precisely because most of them havent actually engaged/infomed themselves on the subjects like this dude clearly has...there could be so many more interesting conversations if people would just expand their horizons beyond just Das Kapital (if even that)
@@godlyoblivion We all know the Adam Friedland show is the biggest center left comedy show on the internet. With Destiny being the biggest center left girls name, there is almost no space for disagreements.
Extremely awesome that Destiny had Joshua Citarella here, one of the few internet leftists that actually has read up on leftist theory and critique of political economy. It's not just an aesthetic for him, as he actually cares to understand what actually being a leftist is about: a ruthless, yet good faith critique and articulate discussion of political-economy. They say politics is downstream from culture, but ultimately, economics is upstream from culture, politics, and even our personal relationships with one another. The Neoliberal, capitalist logic that the Friedman's & von Hayek's of the world that overthrew the Keynesian, post-WWII economic consensus has been a disaster and, when zooming out to look at the big picture, explains soooo many of the social ills, cultural malaise, and political disfunction that we all suffer from to varying extents. From privatized prisons, widespread opiate addiction, increasing mental health problems, the ongoing housing & cost of living crises, the post-modern nihilism, sense of a loss of meaning, loss of community & loneliness, and even the hostile takeover of the GOP by Trump... All of these are largely rooted in the economic shift that has brought about these things. That's why conservatives, starting with the Tea Party and still under Trump, have done all they can to divert attention to culture war BS and handwave away any real economic change with their typical Neoliberal assumptions and sloganeering, that basically assert that "gubberment BAAAD, business GOOD, no matter what...!" Trump exploited this underlying feelings woth rhetoric, but he and the rest of the Republican party's power brokers, elected officials, and judiciary appointments STILL subscribe to this toxic dogma that enabled corporate domination upon us all. They need to be attacked on this fact in the coming years, and I think if Trump goes through with his most insane proposals like massive, indiscriminate tarriffs, deregulation and deportations may present a unique opportunity for Democrats to do just that and crush them all. These are going to inflict pain and hardship on 90% of us in a very clear and obvious way that must be exploited, calling them out for being the actual libtards that blow up the economy, wreak havoc on peoples lives, make the world more unstable & unsafe, start new wars, explode the national debt, and, ultimately has been, and will actually will eventually destroy America, and this is what they do everytime they get their hands on power, and can be objectively asserted all the way back when Ronald Reagan was president, to Donald Trump's rise to the presidency.
I took a two-part Econ class in my mpp program on taxation and market failures and what categories of stuff are best managed as govt vs private. Ex: Army = gov monopoly, water & power utilities: local monopoly; soda pop= regulated private, clothing p2p resale: unregulated private, etc etc. , insurance gets very complicated, and there’s a lot of best practices pretty well tried and true for most but not all of these categories. So I don’t think we’re completely lost, but also I think the weird wal-mart kluge quasi monopoly machine creates a really really interesting category to chew on to explore this stuff. Good listen so far, I’m halfway through.
One more thing about clothing: market does a very bad job at providing clothing. It has to turn to exploitative practices, and still provides clothes people are not happy with. The quantity over quality, unrepairable or not repair worthy junk is not good for anyone but those making bank on it.
1:30:00 Finland actually has a fairly strong military and has for a while. They routinely spend a higher percentage of their GDP on defense than China, and are generally one of the most competent and well equipped militaries in Europe. I don’t think you can argue that social democracies only exist under the good graces of a global superpower.
Nice podcast and nice guest. My big quip is using “eastern” as synonymous to “centralized.” It’s literally just China and North Korea. When we talk about a multipolar world between the West and the East, please remember that at least in 2024, literally every rich and developed country is still strongly or loosely “West” aligned. And between Japan, Korea and Taiwan, we are not only at parity with the EU in terms of geopolitical influence, we’re more dependable partners of Western values than a lot of the “West” itself. Signed, a Taiwanese.
It’s a relic of the dipolar world (USA/USSR) that happens to holds true geographically to the major economic engines of today (USA/China) I think the fact they get often jumped between both of those eras made the shorthand term more useful in conversation
@ I get your point, but what I am more hinting at is that China at its current state is not the Soviet Union. It doesn’t exert outsized influence to half the globe. We need to remind ourselves that liberal geopolitical institutions are still dominant and China would have to become a lot bigger to meaningfully challenge this status quo. You should never underestimate your rivals but neither prophesied their rise to power.
@@Jombozeus More so than not they're part of the liberal geopolitical institution. As far as their domestic politics, they're an authoritarian regime, sure. But on the international stage they operate pretty much identically to any other large world power. Spreading their investment and influence to smaller nations in exchange for political capital over an area large than their official territory Russia is a better example for a truly anti-liberal regime. It just gets overlooked nowadays because...Well, it's a global laughing stock.
As a Japanese, I don't know what you are talking about. Japan and Korea are largely centralized masking as western. Japan, Korea, and Taiwan hold almost no geopolitical influence compared to EU. Whereas China is exerting its influence on more of the globe than the US currently.
My brother has started a youtube channel specifically for reaching over the gap between your regular person and academia - he saw the same potential issue that you guys do. He has lots of ideas and thoughts and then will try to look into them and convey them in bite-sized bits. He's still new, so has lots of practice and experience to get through, but I think this is the kind of thing more academics need to do if they want to promote nuanced conversations and push back against the proliferating black and white viewpoints people are having
Casually asking someone if they're read Wheel of Time is wild. Wheel of time is over 4.9m words. That is more words than every Game of Thrones and Harry potter book, the bible, War and Peace, and all LOTR books combined
Yeah but they're some of the best-selling fantasy novels of the 90s. If you're into the genre and in your 30s there's reasonable odds that you've already read at least some of the series.
@jacobfox4379 I wasn't old enough in the 90s to really remember. I feel like wheel of time is overrepresented online, I've never met a single person irl who has read any of the books, but I know countless people who read LOTR and game of thrones
that kinda makes me sad..id never heard of this Citarella dude before, but I really enjoyed the conversation and a lot of what he said, so much so that I am going to go consume more of his content
@@wavez01well in his substack newsletter he said “he greatly admires Hasan” and purposefully didn’t bring up topics here that they would vehemently disagree with. As a follower of Josh for years I can tell you he’s more politically aligned with Hasan than destiny so don’t get too excited now you lil sycophant.
@p.e.7747 thankfully it's possible to disagree with someone but still enjoy other ideas they have. If he agrees with Hasan that doesnt mean his opinions don't have value
I think Kayla hit the nail on the head around 2:40:00 with her idea on workers disdain for democrats. My dad is in his late 50s and hates democrats, he sees them as preachy assholes. I can sell him on democratic policy pretty easily, but he still hates them because of their cultural affect.
This feels pretty close to the spirit of what they wanted bridges to be but even then you still have that feeling they were still holding back their power level a bit
@SoullessEngineer I do as well, ultimately, but destiny's entire personality seems to be a construction of "well actually ☝️" Which is fine, me too. But as someone who grew beyond that (like a well rounded person), it's hard to watch
The history of the Corn Flake guy, Kellogg, is actual wild. Dude was serious about his anti-self pleasure crusade. Some of the tortuous 'remedies' he promoted were insane.
1:06:00 I disagree harshly (and I think a lot of other people will as well) with Destiny about the topic of clothing being effectively handled by market forces, and maybe that was just an example that he doesn't really care about, but I think it's clearly a bad example. Is the market demand being supplied? Yeah, it's extremely rare that someone cannot clothe themselves, but that clothing is qualitatively worse and the process is less sustainable, which I think are meaningful factors not being addressed, nor will they be without a regulatory intervention. Clothing is a perfect example of a dogshit consumer sector.
2:53:52 Not only did he touch on a common critique I've had of the Left [as a leftist] for years, in that they're stuck in the 20th century in how they frame this entire discussion [this was much earlier in the episode, don't got the timestamp], but he also says what I've been saying to my fellow Lefties for YEARS that we need to have short-term goals and long-term goals. I fully believe in a decommodified, anti-capitalist framework for an economic structure, but this will not and cannot be achieved in even a lifetime - big goals should rekindle the imagination, and GUIDE current decisions in the hopes of plotting the course for that end-goal. It's why I would vote for a Harris over a Trump, as a small example of this, because I don't believe in the idea that fascism will plot that course over neoliberal policies. This was the best episode of this podcast, by far, and finally glad that Destiny has someone on the Left that he can talk to who is knowledgeable about the nuances of these issues.
The idea that planned obsolescence is acceptable because economically not doing it is not viable doesn't make sense to me. Increase prices and scale back production and it's the same effect. It's just waste for wastes sake, we build a bigger factory to produce more things and we need to sell more things to pay for the bigger factory and larger work force so we plan their obsolescence. This is literally a drive 15 miles for cheaper gas moment, just make good shit holy fuck. That's not to mention that inherently it's a doomed idea as in, if we continue this approach our society will collapse.
Good show guys, this episode seemed relatively more focused which I think worked out really well. 2:45:00 I particularly enjoyed Kyla's segment on pacifism here, incredibly well put together.
The only thing I can say is that the education system has failed a lot of people. These people are not very well-educated, and they don't understand the world around them or even how to begin to understand the world. They haven't been taught how to critically analyse content online and how to consume media responsibly. Changing this would involve creating better schools. Smaller classrooms, take media literacy seriously. This will be extremely difficult in today's climate since Republicans have no interest in creating good schooling in the country since they know that bad schools benefit them immensely. To get these people to swing back would require the equivalent of a cult deprogramming expert to kidnap people and try to bring them back to reality.
@Mandelasmind it is a partisan issue. One party wants to actively defund education and destroy curriculums with creationism and the other party is more than happy to throw money at the issue.
I’m pretty blackpilled on this issue. I don’t think this is a problem with the educational system. We all learned from school the same things: how to read and write a paper, how to do research, what is a reliable vs unreliable source, the scientific method, etc. But at the end of the day, as soon as we aren’t forced to do it, it falls back into irrelevancy in our day to day life. People aren’t made to critically analyze stuff, because that requires effort, which most people are not willing to put in when they return from school or from work. We just want to consume media and scroll mindlessly. They aren’t paid to do their research, and even if they do, it doesn’t impact their lives significantly, so there is no incentive to care. You actually have to be interested in challenging yourself by digging deeper than the headlines, which requires you to be naturally curious, which I think is something that’s innate unfortunately.
@@aviciistsn77 School doesn't really reward you for asking "why" questions unless it pertains to a specific assignment. Also, reliable vs unreliable sources are far too black-and-white of a method to truly fact-check. True academics understand nuance and the potential for new evidence that could point to different outcomes.
Most people fail to see the bigger picture. Nature has always managed this through the cycle of new generations replacing the old. Over time, institutions become rigid and stray from their original purpose. Like politics, they need a rebirth-everything redesigned from the ground up, integrating the knowledge we've gained over the last 200 years. But it’s like replacing an engine while driving down the highway.
I liked the part about science communication. As well as the philosophical debate about truth telling, and the hidden conflict of sharing ant establishment messages on Facebook. But at the one hour mark, I found some discrepancies around the presentation of right to repair and planned obsolescence. Plasma screens were the benchmark of image quality from their inception in 1997 to the early 2010s. They had issues like burninn, high energy consumption and weight. But even in 2014 they were a viable alternative, and a Pioneer Kuro or Panasonic ZT from the 2010s would still stand it's ground today, 15 years later. Technological advances have slowed down after 2010. If we would have frozen the quality of service, and only optimized efficiency, we would be in a much better place. 2010 had PS3, GTX 480 with Call of Duty: Black Ops. iPhone 4, Samsung Galaxy S with a FHD super Amoled Screen. So much more people could have access to that technology, with so much less waste if we stopped cramming in more cores higher clock speeds, and developed stuff intensively instead of extensively.
If you really believe in what you do and spread it far enough, even if you never see the fruits of it yourself, that work could have a solid chance to inspire change in ways very different from your intended effect.
The truth conversation breaks my brain. For me, the argument seems pointless to define whether truth is inherently good or bad, so im inclined to agree with Destiny, but the way he explained suggests that some truths are naturally good?
Truth is always good. Because from there we can make good decisions, or even just ignore the truth when it's not needed. Like for example, I believe free will doesn't exists, but I think peraonal responsibility and good decision making is very important. In my mind these don't conflict anyways. Also cheating thing, it's fine in theory if you eatablish setting where that doesn't happen again. But in real world, someone that does it once is probably way more likely to do it again after getting away with it vs someone that hasn't cheated. Till we get automatic heavenly contract that happens after cheating to stop it from happening, I think knowing is better. Though, I said ignore it, but I think I misspoke, you have to handle it in some way. Maybe then you ignore it.
33:57 The dynamic is a bit different and roughly as follows: Traditional media and alt media both wear the aesthetics of trustworthiness and objectivity. The audience, however, holds them accountable to exactly the extent it perceives(!) a specific source to exert power over other people's opinions. It's mostly this perceptual component that accounts for disestablishmentarian content to be held to a lower overall standard.
Joshua absolutely murdered it on this episode. His critiques of capitalist ideology are spot on, particularly in his analysis of how market socialism can be used to perpetuate inequality under the guise of free market reforms. The way he challenges the myths surrounding socialism is refreshing. Leaders of societies entrenched power structures reduce socialism to simplistic tropes or caricatures. Props to Steven and Kyla for having Joshua on - he's a game-changer.
He didn't really say anything new. And he did acknowledge the pitfalls that Destiny brought up. There's no reality where socialism works with democracy and Joshua knows that. Any solution that relies on benevolent authority isn't a real solution. It's a fairytale.
No this is an old argument and it died for a reason, Hayek socialist calculation problem was an argument of statistics or more acutely the basis of statics and science. Market socialism died because it couldn’t solve it.
@@TheWiggum123I understand Hayek's argument, but I think you're misrepresenting the socialist calculation problem. It's not a reason market socialism died, but rather a challenge to socialist planning. Many proponents argue that advanced forms of planning, like decentralized or democratic planning, can address the issue. The idea that market socialism couldn't solve it is simplistic. Some countries, like Norway's mixed economy or Nordic social democracies, have successfully implemented market-oriented socialist policies. Rather than dismissing market socialism, let's have a nuanced conversation about its potential and limitations. Joshua's critiques of capitalist ideology are spot on.
@ I’m not misrepresenting the problem, the issue is people don’t know the actual basis of the problem, it starts in statistics or econometrics, that’s why it’s referred to as the calculation problem, it’s an argument that specific phenomena are so complex that amount of data or sample size needed to satisfy the strong law of large numbers is so great that you cannot capture it, both because it’s to difficult to capture that amount or there is not enough data in existence. Given Market socialists need a stable mean in order to be able run these price simulations or to forecast,in economics the phenomenon is so complex, it is impossible for them to do so or claim they can. That’s the real argument and if you don’t believe me there is a video of Hayek and Leo Rosten (part 3 between 8 and 15 min mark) where they discuss this. They discuss it more in terms of the social sciences as a whole if you continue watching. Advance planning cannot work because of this problem and worker coops etc. have the problem of self restricting access to resources to stabilise as they grow. As to the Nordic countries to convince me further you wouldn’t have issue with scaling and complexity, as they are combined a population of 27.5M, how do you know that they will work for a population of 320M or greater as the complexity doesn’t scale linearly. Especially considering that the more complex the greater problems you have with the calculations.
@@TheWiggum123 I understand your point about the calculation problem and its implications for socialist planning, but I still think it's oversimplifying the issue to say market socialism couldn't solve it because of this challenge. You're right that Hayek and others argued that advanced forms of planning face difficulties due to complex statistical phenomena, but this doesn't mean those challenges are insurmountable or unique to socialist systems. In fact, many economists and policymakers have proposed solutions to address these issues through innovative planning methods, such as decentralized or participatory budgeting. The idea that complexity can be managed with scaling is not inherently flawed - in Norway's mixed economy, for example, the government has implemented policies that successfully balance social and economic goals within a relatively smaller population. Regarding worker co-ops, you're correct that they may face challenges in accessing resources as they grow, but this doesn't necessarily preclude their potential benefits. In fact, many successful worker-owned cooperatives have found ways to overcome these limitations through innovative financing models or strategic partnerships. I'd still like to see more nuance in the conversation around market socialism's limitations. Rather than dismissing it outright, let's explore the complexities and trade-offs involved in implementing such systems. I agree with Joshua that critiquing capitalist ideology is essential, but we should also acknowledge the ongoing efforts of socialists to address issues like inequality and environmental degradation through alternative economic models. Regarding the Nordic countries' scalability, you're right to point out the challenges of scaling complex systems. However, it's not clear to me why the experience in Norway or Denmark wouldn't be instructive for larger populations - after all, human societies have developed and adapted over time to meet similar demands. I'd love to see more research on this topic, rather than simply assuming that complexity won't scale linearly. Thanks for engaging with me on this issue! I think there's still much to discuss and learn.
35:20 You got me thinking about it and I think it makes sense to me now. I like looking at things through the lens of game theory, specifically identifying cooperative play and competitive play. Said another way, how we identify someone as an 'us' or a 'them'. Identifying someone as an 'us' makes you inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, but identifying someone as a 'them' makes you inclined to distrust everything they do. Right wing media first and foremost aims to get identified as an 'us', then they backdoor lies. Our institutions, even when we talk about them, come across as very 'them', with language like 'ivory tower' and all that 'othering' language. People talk about right wing media to be like 'he's like your crazy uncle' which makes them very 'us', and when we talk about institutions we emphasize how they are different from us, with their credentials and experience. They are not us. They are them. I think that's why they have very different barriers.
The best episode so far, specifically on a high level of exchange with the guest. I’m not a commie but this guy and Zizek interest me with the way they speak on many topics. Perspective alone. Similar to Balaji that he commented on at one point. I’m not a fan but love to hear a certain few minds that think different than me. He does get a major component of this correct. Be afraid if the technocrats they do plan to accelerate the absolution of society as we know it is it into a cyber punk dystopia to most and utopia for the handful of new elite others.
Governments feedback loop is much much weaker as voting or killing the leader only take place so often and in developed countries, the person voted in has no direct responsibility for any chaos they create
I didn't catch this the first time around, but Destiny didn't really engage with the growing right-wing intellectual movement, backed by a shitload of SV capital, toward these sovereign patchworks, and away from the nation-state as a relevant organizing principle.
Can poor people be single issue voters? Of course they can, and many people are, but that's only because most ppl don't have the time or resources to even participate in politics. Table issues do matter, but the majority of people do not believe they can vote their way to a better life. Money and corruption in politics have basically made majority of people give up or not even bother in the first place. Look at every majority of ppl in politics, most are wealthy business owners or retire old fucks who have the time or resources to go door knocking and campaigning. 1:59:07
Men store aromatase enzymes, what converts test into estrogen, in atipose (fat) tissue. Higher BMI with lead to more conversion. IMO this contributes most of the decline of test. Worrying about phytoestrogens is much more salacious unfortunately.
Oh boy the "truth machines" line is back again. I get it makes sense to say it in a conversation with a new person, but I've heard it way too often at this point. Maybe try to phrase it differently at least? Like "people don't value truth, they value feeling good (about themselves)".
Because the “Woke” killed of that movement. Nobody on the left can comprehend they are completely in a populist mindset. Market socialists reject the concept of false consciousness or structures of oppression idea which is the underlying ideology of Woke. Market socialists never sounded like Hasan, Vaush etc They were pragmatists, like Oskar Lange and Abba Lerner. However they lost the Socialist calculation debate to the Austrians, which as the left lost ground in academia it became more radical like you see now.
Because it was killed of by the radicals after they lost the socialist calculation debate. Traditional market socialists are pragmatists, they don’t sound like Hasan, Vaush and Wolff.
seriously...this was the first time I have heard someone confidently explain and address some of the biggest issues I have with socialism/post capitalism.....its almost to the point where I feel that people like hasan are just right wing ops designed to squash any realistic/pragmatic discussions on topics that are further left
5:19 the love of my life and genuine soulmate and partner for 12 years has never looked at me like the way Erudite is looking at lil bro yammering. 🧢, but also no 🧢
How do you do fellow kids?
As a long time Destiny fan and someone who has been enjoying the doomscrollpodcast ever since your interviews with JJ McCullough and Jreg popped up in my feed, this was a wonderful and unexpected surprise! Just wanted to say I really love how you conceptualize and explain things, and you've introduced me to a lot of ideas I'd never considered or heard before. I also really appreciate your ability to engage honestly and in good faith, even if I don't always agree.This made for a really great episode and it was a treat hearing you three talk!
Big fan. Why does what I'm calling the new left public intellectuals come off as toothless in conversations with those to their right? Im thinking of people like yourself and 1dime, and their are others. I found almost no points of contention in this conversation. Is it just in the context of trying to have decent conversation? Is it out of a broader coalition building that you see as necessary or an attempt to understand them and avoid debate bro vibes? I would compare this to old left media figures like Chris Hedges and Richard Wolf, who probably would enjoy sinking their teeth into a Destiny or a JJ McCullough. It feels like a centrist impulse. Destiny alludes to this, saying he "can't" go on a right wing show and be contentious because ... Line gotta go up??? I don't get it. But with Destiny it makes sense. Centrist.
Would you talk to a Chris Hedges or Brianna Joy Gray or someone like that? I feel like you would somehow have more points of contention than you do with Destiny. Not trying to say your not left enough, but I do think you might be signaling something more than you actually are that thing. I almost feel like you've been pulled to the center through osmosis by being exposed to extremism. You mention that the leftists you take seriously think Joe Biden was bucking neo-liberalism and vehemently pro labor. This feels like a very academic take, and to be honest feels quite flimsy. You also act like distrust in institutions is not well earned. Do you not notice yourself sliding center?
Is this just a media question or are some of the theory leftists just not going to make popular arguments? Does this not call in to question your political identity if by the very praxis of your media engagement you remain consistently agreeable with your ideological doppelgangers?
what are your thoughts on incest
@@clutrike7956 Incredible duality.
Joshua is my husbando.
0:00 - Introduction
0:36 - Guest Introduction
1:15 - Academia vs. Contemporary Issues
6:56 - Alternative Media and Accountability
15:38 - Truth: Instrumental or Intrinsic?
26:12 - Market Dynamics and Planned Obsolescence
38:54 - Institutions and Alternative Models
47:30 - Social Democracy vs. Democratic Socialism
1:08:46 - Global Influence on Social Democracy
1:15:54 - Balancing Self-Interest and Community
1:30:48 - Future of U.S. and Global Financial Power
1:37:03 - Fukuyama’s "End of History" and Its Relevance Today
1:45:22 - Social Media’s Role in Society and Governance
1:53:19 - Populism and the Search for Identity
2:03:41 - Misinformation, Emotional Rhetoric, and Populist Appeal
2:12:26 - Labor Movements, Right-Wing Populism, and Media Responsibility
2:22:48 - Institutional Failures of the Democratic Party
2:31:15 - The Difficulty of Building Bridges Across Divides
2:41:03 - Hope, Imagination, and the Future of Society
3 HOURS WITH CITARELLA BABYY
On the consumer part of the conversation. I thought when the lady said something like "well you can't have things built to last, because consumers dives the economy" and it was about cars. I was born in 1955, and car companies prided themselves on building a car that could last 20 years if properly maintained. The wealthy or well off always bought every new model the following year or two years so they could flaunt their wealth. In those years a kid just starting out could buy one of those well made used cars for a few hundred dollars, get to school and go to work and then trade that car in for his/her new car if they took care of it. This idea of having planned obsolescence and buying the same thing over and over has not been a good thing for our economy or environment. Frankly, supporting that kind of approach is a privilege for the privileged in my opinion.
Thank you for sharing your experience! I think the audience here tends to skew pretty heavily towards folks in their 20s, so we've never really lived in an economy in which products weren't designed to be replaced within just a few years.
One of the best Bridges episodes yet, keep it up 👍
Actually kinda solid yo
Yoooo love your Satisfactory content, cool to see you in this part of YT :)
No lie
I think this was possibly one of the best podcast episodes ive ever listened to
How did this come out of bridges?
Whatever yall fixed DO NOT TOUCH IT
1:14:38 as an amazon delivery driver, youre welcome for the part i play, now help us get a union. They keep firing everyone who tries.
Well, I mean thats an easy one right? Stop trying and you wont get fired. /s. Ez
I root for amazon
Have you contacted the ALU yet?
Top 1 bridges episode
Wasn't expecting Joshua here, actually hyped! Doomscroll is a great podcast, highly recommend his other work
what is his other work?
@@dempfer9037you know, the other stuff
@@dempfer9037 yeah currently doomscroll, do not research project, and his art. i saw 2 of his exhibits in poland, they were fresh
Holy shit that was one of the quickest 3 hours podcasts I've ever listened to. I would keep listening for another 3 hours easily.
After all this time destiny finally found a lefty who read the books they talk about.
so many good book recommendations added to my list.
Meanwhile Kyla cites Sapiens 🤮
@@5kribbles Harrari is such a fraud, but as we ssaw in this election cycle most people are cattle
i genuinely think that one of the only reasons destiny criticize the far lefties that he does is precisely because most of them havent actually engaged/infomed themselves on the subjects like this dude clearly has...there could be so many more interesting conversations if people would just expand their horizons beyond just Das Kapital (if even that)
@@wavez01 I can assure you most leftists have not read Das Kapital.
@@0xbugati Chris Hedges or Richard Wolf would tear Destiny to shreds. You people are disgustingly sycophantic.
This was a really good episode
Michael Jamal Brooks would have been electric in this conversation. RIP
Thanks!
If Doomscroll interviewed Matty Healy then we are one step away form having Matty Healy on Bridges.
Ick
One step away from Destiny and Adam Friesland debate
@@aibrainlet8041no.
@@godlyoblivion Debate? In what universe? They are both centrists. Am I missing something?
@@godlyoblivion We all know the Adam Friedland show is the biggest center left comedy show on the internet. With Destiny being the biggest center left girls name, there is almost no space for disagreements.
Extremely awesome that Destiny had Joshua Citarella here, one of the few internet leftists that actually has read up on leftist theory and critique of political economy. It's not just an aesthetic for him, as he actually cares to understand what actually being a leftist is about: a ruthless, yet good faith critique and articulate discussion of political-economy.
They say politics is downstream from culture, but ultimately, economics is upstream from culture, politics, and even our personal relationships with one another. The Neoliberal, capitalist logic that the Friedman's & von Hayek's of the world that overthrew the Keynesian, post-WWII economic consensus has been a disaster and, when zooming out to look at the big picture, explains soooo many of the social ills, cultural malaise, and political disfunction that we all suffer from to varying extents.
From privatized prisons, widespread opiate addiction, increasing mental health problems, the ongoing housing & cost of living crises, the post-modern nihilism, sense of a loss of meaning, loss of community & loneliness, and even the hostile takeover of the GOP by Trump...
All of these are largely rooted in the economic shift that has brought about these things. That's why conservatives, starting with the Tea Party and still under Trump, have done all they can to divert attention to culture war BS and handwave away any real economic change with their typical Neoliberal assumptions and sloganeering, that basically assert that "gubberment BAAAD, business GOOD, no matter what...!"
Trump exploited this underlying feelings woth rhetoric, but he and the rest of the Republican party's power brokers, elected officials, and judiciary appointments STILL subscribe to this toxic dogma that enabled corporate domination upon us all. They need to be attacked on this fact in the coming years, and I think if Trump goes through with his most insane proposals like massive, indiscriminate tarriffs, deregulation and deportations may present a unique opportunity for Democrats to do just that and crush them all.
These are going to inflict pain and hardship on 90% of us in a very clear and obvious way that must be exploited, calling them out for being the actual libtards that blow up the economy, wreak havoc on peoples lives, make the world more unstable & unsafe, start new wars, explode the national debt, and, ultimately has been, and will actually will eventually destroy America, and this is what they do everytime they get their hands on power, and can be objectively asserted all the way back when Ronald Reagan was president, to Donald Trump's rise to the presidency.
Shout out to the matrix Baudrillard pfp and also what a fantastic TH-cam comment
Thank you for reminding everyone that communism is about the art of evading responsibility.
Nick Fuentes loved this pod
Oh hell yeah, I was gonna request this guest
I took a two-part Econ class in my mpp program on taxation and market failures and what categories of stuff are best managed as govt vs private. Ex: Army = gov monopoly, water & power utilities: local monopoly; soda pop= regulated private, clothing p2p resale: unregulated private, etc etc. , insurance gets very complicated, and there’s a lot of best practices pretty well tried and true for most but not all of these categories. So I don’t think we’re completely lost, but also I think the weird wal-mart kluge quasi monopoly machine creates a really really interesting category to chew on to explore this stuff. Good listen so far, I’m halfway through.
One more thing about clothing: market does a very bad job at providing clothing. It has to turn to exploitative practices, and still provides clothes people are not happy with. The quantity over quality, unrepairable or not repair worthy junk is not good for anyone but those making bank on it.
I am so glad Destiny laughed when he said your mom. The internet has poisned our minds to the point that just saying your mom makes you laugh
This guy is so cool to listen to.
1:30:00 Finland actually has a fairly strong military and has for a while. They routinely spend a higher percentage of their GDP on defense than China, and are generally one of the most competent and well equipped militaries in Europe. I don’t think you can argue that social democracies only exist under the good graces of a global superpower.
Nice podcast and nice guest. My big quip is using “eastern” as synonymous to “centralized.” It’s literally just China and North Korea.
When we talk about a multipolar world between the West and the East, please remember that at least in 2024, literally every rich and developed country is still strongly or loosely “West” aligned. And between Japan, Korea and Taiwan, we are not only at parity with the EU in terms of geopolitical influence, we’re more dependable partners of Western values than a lot of the “West” itself.
Signed, a Taiwanese.
Skibidi toilet... rizz
Signed, a sigma
It’s a relic of the dipolar world (USA/USSR) that happens to holds true geographically to the major economic engines of today (USA/China)
I think the fact they get often jumped between both of those eras made the shorthand term more useful in conversation
@ I get your point, but what I am more hinting at is that China at its current state is not the Soviet Union. It doesn’t exert outsized influence to half the globe. We need to remind ourselves that liberal geopolitical institutions are still dominant and China would have to become a lot bigger to meaningfully challenge this status quo. You should never underestimate your rivals but neither prophesied their rise to power.
@@Jombozeus More so than not they're part of the liberal geopolitical institution. As far as their domestic politics, they're an authoritarian regime, sure. But on the international stage they operate pretty much identically to any other large world power. Spreading their investment and influence to smaller nations in exchange for political capital over an area large than their official territory
Russia is a better example for a truly anti-liberal regime. It just gets overlooked nowadays because...Well, it's a global laughing stock.
As a Japanese, I don't know what you are talking about. Japan and Korea are largely centralized masking as western. Japan, Korea, and Taiwan hold almost no geopolitical influence compared to EU. Whereas China is exerting its influence on more of the globe than the US currently.
My brother has started a youtube channel specifically for reaching over the gap between your regular person and academia - he saw the same potential issue that you guys do. He has lots of ideas and thoughts and then will try to look into them and convey them in bite-sized bits. He's still new, so has lots of practice and experience to get through, but I think this is the kind of thing more academics need to do if they want to promote nuanced conversations and push back against the proliferating black and white viewpoints people are having
What's it called?
Might as well put the channel name here, now that you brought it up
www.youtube.com/@KarellKing/videos
Excellent podcast
This guy is smarter than any professor I’ve ever had
Casually asking someone if they're read Wheel of Time is wild. Wheel of time is over 4.9m words. That is more words than every Game of Thrones and Harry potter book, the bible, War and Peace, and all LOTR books combined
Yeah but they're some of the best-selling fantasy novels of the 90s. If you're into the genre and in your 30s there's reasonable odds that you've already read at least some of the series.
@jacobfox4379 I wasn't old enough in the 90s to really remember. I feel like wheel of time is overrepresented online, I've never met a single person irl who has read any of the books, but I know countless people who read LOTR and game of thrones
Bridges has become such an amazing podcast. Literally every episode is great.
bro the image quality is insane
Joshua is only allowed to appear in 4K
Finally someone destiny disagrees with. Great show as always guys
First and only bridges ep I’ll watch. Citarella hive!
that kinda makes me sad..id never heard of this Citarella dude before, but I really enjoyed the conversation and a lot of what he said, so much so that I am going to go consume more of his content
@@wavez01well in his substack newsletter he said “he greatly admires Hasan” and purposefully didn’t bring up topics here that they would vehemently disagree with. As a follower of Josh for years I can tell you he’s more politically aligned with Hasan than destiny so don’t get too excited now you lil sycophant.
@p.e.7747 thankfully it's possible to disagree with someone but still enjoy other ideas they have. If he agrees with Hasan that doesnt mean his opinions don't have value
Best episode so far
best episode so far. 2 thumbs up
asides the marxist parts tbh
I think Kayla hit the nail on the head around 2:40:00 with her idea on workers disdain for democrats. My dad is in his late 50s and hates democrats, he sees them as preachy assholes. I can sell him on democratic policy pretty easily, but he still hates them because of their cultural affect.
This feels pretty close to the spirit of what they wanted bridges to be but even then you still have that feeling they were still holding back their power level a bit
Good episode Kyla :)
Good god destiny is so off-putting I can't even watch this without my blood pressure rising. Josh, you are truly a legend for enduring this man
Mf drinkin starbucks lmao
When Destiny said "What's the extent of your education" I had to tap out right there
I felt like this was a pretty friendly and productive conversation on both sides.
@SoullessEngineer I do as well, ultimately, but destiny's entire personality seems to be a construction of "well actually ☝️"
Which is fine, me too. But as someone who grew beyond that (like a well rounded person), it's hard to watch
@@shiro.t.poison interesting observation can you point some things in particular that you disliked from his side in this conversation?
The history of the Corn Flake guy, Kellogg, is actual wild. Dude was serious about his anti-self pleasure crusade. Some of the tortuous 'remedies' he promoted were insane.
I've not finished this yet, but this seems like a really great guest and I really hope we get more episodes touching on similar topics.
1:06:00 I disagree harshly (and I think a lot of other people will as well) with Destiny about the topic of clothing being effectively handled by market forces, and maybe that was just an example that he doesn't really care about, but I think it's clearly a bad example. Is the market demand being supplied? Yeah, it's extremely rare that someone cannot clothe themselves, but that clothing is qualitatively worse and the process is less sustainable, which I think are meaningful factors not being addressed, nor will they be without a regulatory intervention. Clothing is a perfect example of a dogshit consumer sector.
2:53:52
Not only did he touch on a common critique I've had of the Left [as a leftist] for years, in that they're stuck in the 20th century in how they frame this entire discussion [this was much earlier in the episode, don't got the timestamp], but he also says what I've been saying to my fellow Lefties for YEARS that we need to have short-term goals and long-term goals. I fully believe in a decommodified, anti-capitalist framework for an economic structure, but this will not and cannot be achieved in even a lifetime - big goals should rekindle the imagination, and GUIDE current decisions in the hopes of plotting the course for that end-goal. It's why I would vote for a Harris over a Trump, as a small example of this, because I don't believe in the idea that fascism will plot that course over neoliberal policies.
This was the best episode of this podcast, by far, and finally glad that Destiny has someone on the Left that he can talk to who is knowledgeable about the nuances of these issues.
whatttt let's go insane crossover
The idea that planned obsolescence is acceptable because economically not doing it is not viable doesn't make sense to me. Increase prices and scale back production and it's the same effect. It's just waste for wastes sake, we build a bigger factory to produce more things and we need to sell more things to pay for the bigger factory and larger work force so we plan their obsolescence. This is literally a drive 15 miles for cheaper gas moment, just make good shit holy fuck.
That's not to mention that inherently it's a doomed idea as in, if we continue this approach our society will collapse.
Thanks Joshua, I was trying to figure out ehat to write my masters thesis on! Dont be mad if i dont give you credit ❤️
Good show guys, this episode seemed relatively more focused which I think worked out really well.
2:45:00 I particularly enjoyed Kyla's segment on pacifism here, incredibly well put together.
The only thing I can say is that the education system has failed a lot of people. These people are not very well-educated, and they don't understand the world around them or even how to begin to understand the world. They haven't been taught how to critically analyse content online and how to consume media responsibly. Changing this would involve creating better schools. Smaller classrooms, take media literacy seriously. This will be extremely difficult in today's climate since Republicans have no interest in creating good schooling in the country since they know that bad schools benefit them immensely. To get these people to swing back would require the equivalent of a cult deprogramming expert to kidnap people and try to bring them back to reality.
The fact that you made it a partisan issue lol
@Mandelasmind it is a partisan issue. One party wants to actively defund education and destroy curriculums with creationism and the other party is more than happy to throw money at the issue.
@@Mandelasmind republicans have an ideology and you should probably learn what it is.
I’m pretty blackpilled on this issue. I don’t think this is a problem with the educational system. We all learned from school the same things: how to read and write a paper, how to do research, what is a reliable vs unreliable source, the scientific method, etc. But at the end of the day, as soon as we aren’t forced to do it, it falls back into irrelevancy in our day to day life. People aren’t made to critically analyze stuff, because that requires effort, which most people are not willing to put in when they return from school or from work. We just want to consume media and scroll mindlessly. They aren’t paid to do their research, and even if they do, it doesn’t impact their lives significantly, so there is no incentive to care. You actually have to be interested in challenging yourself by digging deeper than the headlines, which requires you to be naturally curious, which I think is something that’s innate unfortunately.
@@aviciistsn77 School doesn't really reward you for asking "why" questions unless it pertains to a specific assignment. Also, reliable vs unreliable sources are far too black-and-white of a method to truly fact-check. True academics understand nuance and the potential for new evidence that could point to different outcomes.
Search costs is the econ concept of driving 30 minutes to get slightly cheaper gas.
one of the best episodes
Thumbnail is much better. Also no cannibalising smaller vids. Great improvement!❤
Most people fail to see the bigger picture. Nature has always managed this through the cycle of new generations replacing the old. Over time, institutions become rigid and stray from their original purpose. Like politics, they need a rebirth-everything redesigned from the ground up, integrating the knowledge we've gained over the last 200 years. But it’s like replacing an engine while driving down the highway.
Don't miss out! People are going to watch something from the Bridges Podcast.
Best Guest xd!!
When we getting a Louis Rossman Bridges podcast?
Maan what an amazing convo
I liked the part about science communication. As well as the philosophical debate about truth telling, and the hidden conflict of sharing ant establishment messages on Facebook.
But at the one hour mark, I found some discrepancies around the presentation of right to repair and planned obsolescence.
Plasma screens were the benchmark of image quality from their inception in 1997 to the early 2010s. They had issues like burninn, high energy consumption and weight. But even in 2014 they were a viable alternative, and a Pioneer Kuro or Panasonic ZT from the 2010s would still stand it's ground today, 15 years later.
Technological advances have slowed down after 2010. If we would have frozen the quality of service, and only optimized efficiency, we would be in a much better place. 2010 had PS3, GTX 480 with Call of Duty: Black Ops. iPhone 4, Samsung Galaxy S with a FHD super Amoled Screen.
So much more people could have access to that technology, with so much less waste if we stopped cramming in more cores higher clock speeds, and developed stuff intensively instead of extensively.
This was a good podcast
god this was a fucking riveting conversation.
Would love for them to run this back post-election. Some “I guess we’ll see what happens” moments are pretty interesting now.
Hey guys id highly recommend putting Joshuas name in the title i had no idea this was him haha
If you really believe in what you do and spread it far enough, even if you never see the fruits of it yourself, that work could have a solid chance to inspire change in ways very different from your intended effect.
The truth conversation breaks my brain.
For me, the argument seems pointless to define whether truth is inherently good or bad, so im inclined to agree with Destiny, but the way he explained suggests that some truths are naturally good?
its just self-masturbatory in my opinion. debatelord slop
Truth is always good. Because from there we can make good decisions, or even just ignore the truth when it's not needed.
Like for example, I believe free will doesn't exists, but I think peraonal responsibility and good decision making is very important. In my mind these don't conflict anyways.
Also cheating thing, it's fine in theory if you eatablish setting where that doesn't happen again. But in real world, someone that does it once is probably way more likely to do it again after getting away with it vs someone that hasn't cheated.
Till we get automatic heavenly contract that happens after cheating to stop it from happening, I think knowing is better.
Though, I said ignore it, but I think I misspoke, you have to handle it in some way. Maybe then you ignore it.
The cross over I never expected
9:37 the bundling aka "cut the cord", back to bundling aka Hulu, Disney ESPN, + Showtime, or Netflix and FX.
33:57 The dynamic is a bit different and roughly as follows: Traditional media and alt media both wear the aesthetics of trustworthiness and objectivity. The audience, however, holds them accountable to exactly the extent it perceives(!) a specific source to exert power over other people's opinions. It's mostly this perceptual component that accounts for disestablishmentarian content to be held to a lower overall standard.
Joshua absolutely murdered it on this episode. His critiques of capitalist ideology are spot on, particularly in his analysis of how market socialism can be used to perpetuate inequality under the guise of free market reforms. The way he challenges the myths surrounding socialism is refreshing. Leaders of societies entrenched power structures reduce socialism to simplistic tropes or caricatures. Props to Steven and Kyla for having Joshua on - he's a game-changer.
He didn't really say anything new. And he did acknowledge the pitfalls that Destiny brought up. There's no reality where socialism works with democracy and Joshua knows that. Any solution that relies on benevolent authority isn't a real solution. It's a fairytale.
No this is an old argument and it died for a reason, Hayek socialist calculation problem was an argument of statistics or more acutely the basis of statics and science. Market socialism died because it couldn’t solve it.
@@TheWiggum123I understand Hayek's argument, but I think you're misrepresenting the socialist calculation problem. It's not a reason market socialism died, but rather a challenge to socialist planning. Many proponents argue that advanced forms of planning, like decentralized or democratic planning, can address the issue.
The idea that market socialism couldn't solve it is simplistic. Some countries, like Norway's mixed economy or Nordic social democracies, have successfully implemented market-oriented socialist policies. Rather than dismissing market socialism, let's have a nuanced conversation about its potential and limitations. Joshua's critiques of capitalist ideology are spot on.
@ I’m not misrepresenting the problem, the issue is people don’t know the actual basis of the problem, it starts in statistics or econometrics, that’s why it’s referred to as the calculation problem, it’s an argument that specific phenomena are so complex that amount of data or sample size needed to satisfy the strong law of large numbers is so great that you cannot capture it, both because it’s to difficult to capture that amount or there is not enough data in existence. Given Market socialists need a stable mean in order to be able run these price simulations or to forecast,in economics the phenomenon is so complex, it is impossible for them to do so or claim they can. That’s the real argument and if you don’t believe me there is a video of Hayek and Leo Rosten (part 3 between 8 and 15 min mark) where they discuss this. They discuss it more in terms of the social sciences as a whole if you continue watching. Advance planning cannot work because of this problem and worker coops etc. have the problem of self restricting access to resources to stabilise as they grow. As to the Nordic countries to convince me further you wouldn’t have issue with scaling and complexity, as they are combined a population of 27.5M, how do you know that they will work for a population of 320M or greater as the complexity doesn’t scale linearly. Especially considering that the more complex the greater problems you have with the calculations.
@@TheWiggum123 I understand your point about the calculation problem and its implications for socialist planning, but I still think it's oversimplifying the issue to say market socialism couldn't solve it because of this challenge. You're right that Hayek and others argued that advanced forms of planning face difficulties due to complex statistical phenomena, but this doesn't mean those challenges are insurmountable or unique to socialist systems.
In fact, many economists and policymakers have proposed solutions to address these issues through innovative planning methods, such as decentralized or participatory budgeting. The idea that complexity can be managed with scaling is not inherently flawed - in Norway's mixed economy, for example, the government has implemented policies that successfully balance social and economic goals within a relatively smaller population.
Regarding worker co-ops, you're correct that they may face challenges in accessing resources as they grow, but this doesn't necessarily preclude their potential benefits. In fact, many successful worker-owned cooperatives have found ways to overcome these limitations through innovative financing models or strategic partnerships.
I'd still like to see more nuance in the conversation around market socialism's limitations. Rather than dismissing it outright, let's explore the complexities and trade-offs involved in implementing such systems. I agree with Joshua that critiquing capitalist ideology is essential, but we should also acknowledge the ongoing efforts of socialists to address issues like inequality and environmental degradation through alternative economic models.
Regarding the Nordic countries' scalability, you're right to point out the challenges of scaling complex systems. However, it's not clear to me why the experience in Norway or Denmark wouldn't be instructive for larger populations - after all, human societies have developed and adapted over time to meet similar demands. I'd love to see more research on this topic, rather than simply assuming that complexity won't scale linearly.
Thanks for engaging with me on this issue! I think there's still much to discuss and learn.
That thumbnail is wild lmao.
Good episode though.
great convo, also first time hearing someone mention Bratton's book
Watching Erudite keep it together while Destiny did a paid ad read was real content
35:20 You got me thinking about it and I think it makes sense to me now. I like looking at things through the lens of game theory, specifically identifying cooperative play and competitive play. Said another way, how we identify someone as an 'us' or a 'them'. Identifying someone as an 'us' makes you inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, but identifying someone as a 'them' makes you inclined to distrust everything they do. Right wing media first and foremost aims to get identified as an 'us', then they backdoor lies. Our institutions, even when we talk about them, come across as very 'them', with language like 'ivory tower' and all that 'othering' language. People talk about right wing media to be like 'he's like your crazy uncle' which makes them very 'us', and when we talk about institutions we emphasize how they are different from us, with their credentials and experience. They are not us. They are them. I think that's why they have very different barriers.
To the camera folks: Camera shutter speed is way too high. Stick to 180ish degrees. Solidarity forever!
The best episode so far, specifically on a high level of exchange with the guest.
I’m not a commie but this guy and Zizek interest me with the way they speak on many topics. Perspective alone. Similar to Balaji that he commented on at one point. I’m not a fan but love to hear a certain few minds that think different than me.
He does get a major component of this correct. Be afraid if the technocrats they do plan to accelerate the absolution of society as we know it is it into a cyber punk dystopia to most and utopia for the handful of new elite others.
Governments feedback loop is much much weaker as voting or killing the leader only take place so often and in developed countries, the person voted in has no direct responsibility for any chaos they create
www.patreon.com/BridgesStudio For Early Access to Videos
omg wheel of time references yessss
Love love love 😊😊😊😊
I love/hate Destiny doing ad reads. Keep up the good work yall!
I didn't catch this the first time around, but Destiny didn't really engage with the growing right-wing intellectual movement, backed by a shitload of SV capital, toward these sovereign patchworks, and away from the nation-state as a relevant organizing principle.
No mention of Technofeudalism?
Destiny needs to bring on C. Thi Nguyen on to discuss the problems of expert knowledge and how to solve the epistemic problems we face in society.
Funny enough Destiny loves his work, I wonder if he's reached out
he looks a bit like de niro in taxi driver cmon chat you have to give me this one
absolutely terrible sponsor break at 3:20
Take a drink, whenever Steven says he is frustrated with people
can we have him on more pls
Can poor people be single issue voters? Of course they can, and many people are, but that's only because most ppl don't have the time or resources to even participate in politics. Table issues do matter, but the majority of people do not believe they can vote their way to a better life. Money and corruption in politics have basically made majority of people give up or not even bother in the first place. Look at every majority of ppl in politics, most are wealthy business owners or retire old fucks who have the time or resources to go door knocking and campaigning. 1:59:07
Men store aromatase enzymes, what converts test into estrogen, in atipose (fat) tissue. Higher BMI with lead to more conversion. IMO this contributes most of the decline of test. Worrying about phytoestrogens is much more salacious unfortunately.
now we need destiny in doomscroll.
53:08 see lightbulb consortium
truth is what it is, it's not inherently good or bad. But facts and truths don't lead to inherently good outcomes or responses.
Oh boy the "truth machines" line is back again. I get it makes sense to say it in a conversation with a new person, but I've heard it way too often at this point. Maybe try to phrase it differently at least? Like "people don't value truth, they value feeling good (about themselves)".
why couldn't this guy be the lefts biggest creator instead of hasan? this guy's downright reasonable to speak to.
answered your own question
He should be, and is well on his path to becoming it I think
Because the “Woke” killed of that movement. Nobody on the left can comprehend they are completely in a populist mindset. Market socialists reject the concept of false consciousness or structures of oppression idea which is the underlying ideology of Woke.
Market socialists never sounded like Hasan, Vaush etc
They were pragmatists, like Oskar Lange and Abba Lerner. However they lost the Socialist calculation debate to the Austrians, which as the left lost ground in academia it became more radical like you see now.
Because it was killed of by the radicals after they lost the socialist calculation debate. Traditional market socialists are pragmatists, they don’t sound like Hasan, Vaush and Wolff.
seriously...this was the first time I have heard someone confidently explain and address some of the biggest issues I have with socialism/post capitalism.....its almost to the point where I feel that people like hasan are just right wing ops designed to squash any realistic/pragmatic discussions on topics that are further left
oh shit they got the guy who got the guy from the adam friedland show
Ice Spice?
Lmao
Brace Belden is pretty entertaining I reckon. He has an interesting history
@@dahalofreeek brace could beat destiny in a debate through sheer commitment to the bit.
I feel like Destiny would really enjoy the book "Liars and Outliers" by Bruce Schneier.
oh no, they brought back the girl
5:19 the love of my life and genuine soulmate and partner for 12 years has never looked at me like the way Erudite is looking at lil bro yammering.
🧢, but also no 🧢
Markets are like ai learning. Yeah its a really good process to achieve results organically, but without guardrails weird shit happens.
Citarella?!
let's fucking gooo
aura>incogni
Can you PLEASE stop bumping the table D man? That shock is so obnoxious