47:22 "If you make it hazardous for reasonable people to discuss controversial ideas, then only unreasonable people will discuss those ideas." Spot on, and an excellent quote that captures what's been going on with western culture over the past decade or so.
I liked these quotes and saved them from this episode “If you make it hazardous for reasonable people to discuss controversial ideas, only unreasonable people will discuss those ideas.” ”Do not dare use the state’s Monopoly on the force of violence to punish me for criticising or proposing an idea.”
Nice analysis, Josh. A useful reference point is being clear about what the law states is 'speech that incites violence.' Does the law include or exclude Musk's tweet 'Civil war is inevitable' or your example, 'Meet me at the Floyd pub Friday at 6pm to find some Muslims to bash', or is it ambiguous on both? If the law if vague, that complicates the debate.
@@stevenponte6655 another layer of complexity! here: www.ag.gov.au/crime/publications/commonwealth-criminal-code-guide-practitioners-draft/part-24-extensions-criminal-liability/division-11/114-incitement#:~:text=(1)%20A%20person%20who%20urges,the%20offence%20incited%20be%20committed.
"(1) A person who urges the commission of an offence is guilty of the offence of incitement. (2) For the person to be guilty, the person must intend that the offence incited be committed."
A breath of fresh air. Couldn’t help noticing the disappointed, even angry, tone of voice when Karvelas noted that “well, they’re saying it now” when Josh spoke about women being banned from Twitter for saying “men aren’t women” and that being defined as hate speech. I suspect both the eSafety Commissioner and Karvelas would happily see such pronouncements prosecuted as hate speech.
Also, the response of the left to the riots in the UK would be easier to understand if they had been consistent with regard to Antifa rioting following the murder of George Floyd. In the latter case, rioting is seen as understandable under the circumstances, but rioting among the white working class is not allowed to be described as understandable. Anyone who dares to suggest that it may be psychologically, sociologically, politically understandable is immediately dismissed as far right and sympathetic to the riotous behaviour.
what about the left wing Just Stop Oil completely peaceful but disruptive protesters which received 5 years jail time? Where does that fit in your hypothesis?
This is a breath of fresh air, I have been doing audio notes for 3 weeks on a group of ideas which looks similar to this but also contains some concepts pertaining to common language, dialectical subversion and political partisanship. The way terms are used are devoid from reality, common parlance and often contain 'dog whistles' or 'virtue signalling'. It should be denounced by both sides and we should have some type of agreeable way to express ourselves across idealogical grounds, time and space. Cheers Josh.
Linda Yaccarino appears to be an extremely interesting woman. Bachelor's degree in telecommunications from the Donald P. Bellisario College. 15 years in the telecommunications and sales business. Head of NBC Universal's advertising sales. Accusations of toxicity. Chair of the Ad Council's board of directors. President Donald Trump appointed her to the President's Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition. Partnered with the Biden administration in 2021 to create a COVID-19 vaccination campaign. Ranked 58th on Fortune's list of Most Powerful Women in 2023. Chief executive officer of X Corp. -> Could be an example of the glass cliff. Fortune listed Yaccarino as one of the CEOs who struggled the most in 2023. Well I don't know what half of that means, but it sounds interesting.
Enjoy your podcasts and like most of the time points of view you put across. In this podcast you refer to uk free speech and in particular the example of a Jewish man trying to pass through a pro Palestinian March. I’m not sure you have seen the whole video of this. The way you framed it sounds like you read what someone had put in a tweet as there was fit bit more to the situation than the simple point you put across. Ask you self who was the person and why was he making such an issue about crossing the March in this spot. Although the policeman could have used better language he was actually being very fair. Please watch the the whole video for better context.
I do find Josh has a few blind spots when it comes to Jewish/Israel (understandably). Theres actually a funny Curb Your Enthusiasm with almost exactly same scenario with the Palestinian Chicken shop.They knew what they were doing.
BORING. DOES THIS GUY EVER LOOK AT THE COMMENT SECTION? THESE "CREATORS" DON'T BOTHER TO CONVERSE WITH THEIR SUBSCIBERS SO WHY SHOULD YOU BOTHER SUBSCIBING TO THEM? THEY DON'T CARE AS LONG AS THEY GET THEM SWEET AD DOLLARS OR SWEET ATTENTION ON OTHER PLACES LIKE TWITTER.
The women in white, made a lovely eye roll when you two were debating. I'm in the centre and like the information people like you and Douglas provide as a balance to the craziness that has taken hold. The internet has been a wild Wild West of words (the beginning of keyboard warriors) since AOL was dominating a dialup nation in the 90's. Governments have ignored it far too long, and now their perspective about what violence is, is ridiculous. Great show today, thank you.
![Christopher Hitchens - Free Speech (2006) [HQ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zDap-K6GmL0/mqdefault.jpg)
![⭐ฮิตในTikTok!! ( หมูเด้ง MooDeng ) Ver. แดนซ์โจ๊ะๆ ReMix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3krsyfWUeHU/mqdefault.jpg)
47:22
"If you make it hazardous for reasonable people to discuss controversial ideas, then only unreasonable people will discuss those ideas."
Spot on, and an excellent quote that captures what's been going on with western culture over the past decade or so.
I wish more politicians were capable of these ideas/conversations, rather than just my favorite podcast hosts
Just Josh are my favourite shows somehow. I still love the interviews but Josh’s commentary is always on point
Brilliant.
I liked these quotes and saved them from this episode
“If you make it hazardous for reasonable people to discuss controversial ideas, only unreasonable people will discuss those ideas.”
”Do not dare use the state’s Monopoly on the force of violence to punish me for criticising or proposing an idea.”
Nice analysis, Josh. A useful reference point is being clear about what the law states is 'speech that incites violence.' Does the law include or exclude Musk's tweet 'Civil war is inevitable' or your example, 'Meet me at the Floyd pub Friday at 6pm to find some Muslims to bash', or is it ambiguous on both? If the law if vague, that complicates the debate.
what about if the "Civil War is inevitable" tweet immediately follows the "Meet me at the Floyd pub Friday at 6pm to find some Muslims to bash" tweet?
@@stevenponte6655 another layer of complexity! here: www.ag.gov.au/crime/publications/commonwealth-criminal-code-guide-practitioners-draft/part-24-extensions-criminal-liability/division-11/114-incitement#:~:text=(1)%20A%20person%20who%20urges,the%20offence%20incited%20be%20committed.
"(1) A person who urges the commission of an offence is guilty of the offence of incitement.
(2) For the person to be guilty, the person must intend that the offence incited be committed."
well said, as always!
Great podcast Josh up there with Sam Harris
lol Sam Harris 🤣🤣
Yes, I'm a fan of both :)
Echo chambers come in various forms. I'm glad you are challenging them.
A breath of fresh air. Couldn’t help noticing the disappointed, even angry, tone of voice when Karvelas noted that “well, they’re saying it now” when Josh spoke about women being banned from Twitter for saying “men aren’t women” and that being defined as hate speech. I suspect both the eSafety Commissioner and Karvelas would happily see such pronouncements prosecuted as hate speech.
gosh! and her body language screamed of "here we go another white man mansplaining....". Very disappointing.
Also, the response of the left to the riots in the UK would be easier to understand if they had been consistent with regard to Antifa rioting following the murder of George Floyd. In the latter case, rioting is seen as understandable under the circumstances, but rioting among the white working class is not allowed to be described as understandable. Anyone who dares to suggest that it may be psychologically, sociologically, politically understandable is immediately dismissed as far right and sympathetic to the riotous behaviour.
what about the left wing Just Stop Oil completely peaceful but disruptive protesters which received 5 years jail time? Where does that fit in your hypothesis?
Such good common sense …
This is a breath of fresh air, I have been doing audio notes for 3 weeks on a group of ideas which looks similar to this but also contains some concepts pertaining to common language, dialectical subversion and political partisanship.
The way terms are used are devoid from reality, common parlance and often contain 'dog whistles' or 'virtue signalling'. It should be denounced by both sides and we should have some type of agreeable way to express ourselves across idealogical grounds, time and space.
Cheers Josh.
Our online csar is an incompetent and highly paid symptom of the cesspit that is politics.
42:40
Linda Yaccarino appears to be an extremely interesting woman.
Bachelor's degree in telecommunications from the Donald P. Bellisario College.
15 years in the telecommunications and sales business.
Head of NBC Universal's advertising sales. Accusations of toxicity.
Chair of the Ad Council's board of directors.
President Donald Trump appointed her to the President's Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition.
Partnered with the Biden administration in 2021 to create a COVID-19 vaccination campaign.
Ranked 58th on Fortune's list of Most Powerful Women in 2023.
Chief executive officer of X Corp. -> Could be an example of the glass cliff.
Fortune listed Yaccarino as one of the CEOs who struggled the most in 2023.
Well I don't know what half of that means, but it sounds interesting.
Enjoy your podcasts and like most of the time points of view you put across. In this podcast you refer to uk free speech and in particular the example of a Jewish man trying to pass through a pro Palestinian March. I’m not sure you have seen the whole video of this. The way you framed it sounds like you read what someone had put in a tweet as there was fit bit more to the situation than the simple point you put across. Ask you self who was the person and why was he making such an issue about crossing the March in this spot. Although the policeman could have used better language he was actually being very fair. Please watch the the whole video for better context.
I do find Josh has a few blind spots when it comes to Jewish/Israel (understandably). Theres actually a funny Curb Your Enthusiasm with almost exactly same scenario with the Palestinian Chicken shop.They knew what they were doing.
BORING. DOES THIS GUY EVER LOOK AT THE COMMENT SECTION? THESE "CREATORS" DON'T BOTHER TO CONVERSE WITH THEIR SUBSCIBERS SO WHY SHOULD YOU BOTHER SUBSCIBING TO THEM? THEY DON'T CARE AS LONG AS THEY GET THEM SWEET AD DOLLARS OR SWEET ATTENTION ON OTHER PLACES LIKE TWITTER.
The women in white, made a lovely eye roll when you two were debating.
I'm in the centre and like the information people like you and Douglas provide as a balance to the craziness that has taken hold. The internet has been a wild Wild West of words (the beginning of keyboard warriors) since AOL was dominating a dialup nation in the 90's. Governments have ignored it far too long, and now their perspective about what violence is, is ridiculous.
Great show today, thank you.