Meh Sam has terminal TDS and he can’t seem to have any conversation without falling into an epileptic fit of it. He’s not worth DC’s time. He has no credibility anymore.
It’s not that I disagree with Sam Harris that makes him not worthwhile, it’s that he brings nothing to the table. His entire schtick was that we need to return to liberal enlightenment type values, that we don’t need religion or tradition and instead can rely on rational thought and education, on reason and logic, as the foundation of our societies. Then Harris proved that he himself cannot even live up to this standard because he is not rational in his dislike of Trump he’s an emotional lunatic. (It is entirely possible for someone to be rational in their dislike of Trump, I don’t like Trump, but Harris doesn’t fall into this category.) So Harris himself is proof that his worldview fails. How can a society be built upon enlightenment values of using reason and logic when even the most fervent apologists of the worldview can’t live up to it? If highly educated and well respected Sam Harris can fall into emotional mush and throw out those sacred enlightenment values the minute he gets mad about something then how are we supposed to believe that an entire society can be guided by them? If the best example and apostle of the worldview cannot live up to it the moment things get mildly difficult then what’s the likelihood that those with far less education and devotion to those values will live up to them? There’s simply nothing that Sam brings to the table that is worthwhile or unique.
I think Sam Harris has articulated his views on why he thinks Trump is an existential threat to the American democracy. He used a lot of logic and reasoning to get to his position. Whether you agree with that position or not is up to you. He’s also an atheist. His position on classic liberalism is guided by how that school of thought was fundamentally formed by western philosophy and modern democracy.
I have heard his so called articulations and disagree that it has anything to do with logic and reason. He’s turned into a hysterical fool and tries to use logic and reason to justify his hysteria. He’s the perfect picture of why liberal enlightenment values have failed, why they have actually brought us to our current predicament, and why such failures are inevitable. On one hand he will lament the fall of the MSM as failing in their duty to provide unbiased information to the people and then he turns around and falls for the propaganda when it’s about Trump. He was also a hysterical fool in his response to Covid. So he’s been worthless and emotionally driven for probably the two most important domestic issues in the last decade.
Don't think atheist is the right descriptor. I used to listen to Sam a lot, one of the first podcasts I got into. When he talks about his journey through meditation to find the Self, he ultimately said there is nothing at the core of consciousness. That it is a self-fulfilling bootstrap. That sounds like nihilism to me. A classical liberal bases their moral code on what is good for individuals. If you don't think the Self is real, how can you respect individuals?
Sam Harris sort of cherry picked the areas of DC’sTucker interview and Twitter threads that went sideways, and labeled DC an amateur historian - which I guess DC technically is. I also think there was a Stanford historian on the Free Press Honestly podcast that was a little dismayed by some of DC’s takes on WWII, Sam Harris is also a Stanford guy. I think DC takes his work seriously enough that he shouldn’t just be dismissed as a fringe conspiracy theorist by academics. However, he does go down some paths that I and others seriously disagree with.
Seems fair, thanks for saving me a couple hours boss!
I also think the tone of the conversation matters. Daryl and Tucker were kind of playing devil's advocate / kind of having a hot take for fun. It doesn't mean anything he said were wrong but I don't think the mainstream is taking them in accordance with the tone they were spoken...if that makes sense
Skip Sam Harris, go chat with Brett Weinstein instead. He is a great guy, I listen to him every week. BUT, he did hear all of your OVER THE TOP negative publicity last week and he expressed concern with your message. I, on the other hand, had previously listened to your WHOLE TWO HOUR Tucker interview and I knew that the criticism against you was, ‘The lady doth protest too much, methinks’. I think Brett would resonate with your message, once he hears you.
Listened the whole thing. Nothing too controversial, a little surprised at the end DC leaned into stop the steal. But maybe that’s more the Twitter side of him coming out.
I actually think they’d agree on quite a lot of things. It’d be interesting, probably doable if DC wants to since Jocko knows Sam via the JRE connections.
yes they definitely do agree on a lot, i'm saying it would be more interesting to hear them debate topics they disagree on. I don't think there would be any point debating their views on religion, but I think it would be a good conversation on which side broadly is the lesser of two evils (Sam obviously hates Trump, while Darryl rants about scandals of the left). May need Jocko to mediate
DC is very well read in areas of history and philosophy he focuses on. However, Sam has more expertise in a broader swath of science and humanities - really a self-taught historian vs. a classically trained academic. Sam also takes hard principled stands on certain things. I think the largest area of disagreement would be Sam’s general trust in large global and national institutional reform vs DC’s somewhat libertarian approach which is inherently skeptical of the purpose large institutions and the impact of globalization. Sometimes I think DC assumes deconstruction of institutions is the lesser evil than reform of institutions. However, that approach could unleash a worse chaos than the current status quo. I think the US will be pulling back from its role in maintaining global security through its economic and military power. It will be up to the world what’s next, but no guarantee it will be better than what was before. I don’t think DC takes this into account enough.
Hi Darryl! I have a question. In terms of your analysis of immigrants or refugees, I don’t hear a lot of the why they are refugies in the first place. What about the fact that the British colonized India or the US has blown up Iraq, Siria, Libya, and is still funding the genocide in Palestine. If the folks that are refugees had safe homelands, they would not likely need refuge. And the western foreign policy has caused so much violence and destruction in order to rob the developing world of resources and wealth. What do you say to the idea that Brits should open their doors to their homeland because they destroyed other’s homelands. And the values of Christianity are valid, and if followed by the political class historically they would not have pillaged and destroyed the immigrants original places of origin. Perhaps a British culture so void of moral values as exemplified by its colonial foreign policy could use some South Asian family values in its culture. And I would say the same if for example it was Saudi Arabia colonizing Britain or the West for 100s of yeas, and Brits needed to move there for safety and prosperity. It’s their karma. Your thoughts?
So the elite of a country make dumb decisions ravaging other countries. And the answer to that is to subject the population of said country to an ethnic replacement by the affected peoples?
Interesting frame. Let’s look at an example. Almost every hospital, school and building is bombed in Gaza, an area in the country of Palestine. Bombs supplied by US and the West including the UK. Now imagine you lived in Gaza. No one was there to protect you. And imagine you found a way to get to the UK or the US. How would you like to be treated? I think of the story of folks burning a hotel that had refugees in it in the UK just a few weeks ago. Ok, so who is responsible for selling weapons and bombing? Not the people, I get that. And for me that is one dimensional. The West allows the deeper system of capitalism, patriarchy and violence to rain. I believe the people are benefactors in the system of oppression. How else can we all get an iPhone with cobolt mined by African slaves at a relatively good price? My perspective is that deeper spiritual values need to rise up and that humans at home do have some responsibility. Or I can justify anything as it wasn’t me. We are all brothers and sisters so how do we create a culture of acceptance and love for one another? I don’t have the answer, just more questions.
You have to understand that mass immigration is not done out of kindness for the immigrants. It is done with malice towards the native population. Also, not a small point here, the west is not a patriarchy.
Same thing that happens to civilians on all sides of this. Leadership makes self-serving idiotic decisions, and the populace bears the brunt of the repercussions. See Israeli justifications for bombing population centers because 'they support Hamas.' Support for the Iraqi invasion was far from universal, there were massive protests beforehand. Problem is that this system is no longer representative. As far a Britain goes, they kicked the can down the road to keep their decaying empire...so fuck em. But maybe that's just cause I'm Irish.
DC - THANK YOU for your thoughtful analysis, both here, in this interview, and that analysis that resulted in the Tucker interview, which is how I found you.
I have listened closely to both. but I still am looking for an answer to a question that I am still trying to understand. “What is the motivation, or what are the motivations behind ‘this One Generation of Elites’ IMPORTING SO MANY ILLEGAL ALIENS in to fundamentally remove Western Nation States from the map??????? (WHY IS THIS BEING DONE??!)
Could you please prepare a discussion where you speculate as to their motives?
It's not a conspiracy it's out in the open. I'm from the UK and so can answer this.
1. Treasury view- The Treasury tells the politicians "If you want to increase money for nurses/reduce the deficit/ cut taxes you need to have more taxes. We have an ageing society, look at the long run liiabilities. Don't raise taxes, just increase immigration".
2. Anti Racist Coalition- This is the huge number of NGOs, newspapers, think tanks etc which make up our cultural ecosystem. They have decided that discriminating between natives, nationals and non nationals in the UK is racist and evil. Therefore when people talk about the natives being a minority (it's obviously never brought up) or any sense that the culture should in anyway be preserved. it's shouted down. So the answr is "Why not have high levels of immigration, what are you racist".
Business Community- Business wants more customers and workers and always has done.
Politicians- Something many non Brits may not know is that the Conservative Party which has run the country for the past 14 years has just lied to the people. They have said they would bring the Net Migration number down to the tens of thousands for the past 14 years. It has doubled since the Brexiit Referendum in 2016 to nearly 700,000 every year. They just lie about it.
Elites are jealous of the China model. Which requires a huge powerless population to rob labor of any traction. White, brown, or purple, they don't care, as long as they're subservient.
Enjoyed that podcast and the fact your cat made an appearance made me laugh. Oh yeah I did give you a very loud shout out during a live Tucker show last week!
This is great. Your rambling interviews are the best, and your depth of knowledge is astounding. I was one of those middle-of-the-road people in 2015: a normiecon or cringe Lolbertarian. The insanity of the Left over the last nine years has radicalized me.
Trying to force me to take an untested gene therapy or lose my job would be one way the left has radicalized me. The biggest military embarrassment since 1812? Gender affirming care for children? Shall I go on?
Great interview. I really loved the section discussing Christian values and the implication of love the enemy dictum.
I believe it is fundamental to being a godly person but Christian's tend to assume it automatically means you have to be nice to everyone including enemies, while in reality it could mean both letting them kill you and killing them is the correct choice.
Looking forward to the episode. Sam Harris gave you a shout out in his Pod. Maybe a sit down with him the future would be good. Or not.
Meh Sam has terminal TDS and he can’t seem to have any conversation without falling into an epileptic fit of it. He’s not worth DC’s time. He has no credibility anymore.
I think it’d be interesting for DC, but up to him. Just because you disagreed with someone doesn’t they’re not with talking too.
It’s not that I disagree with Sam Harris that makes him not worthwhile, it’s that he brings nothing to the table. His entire schtick was that we need to return to liberal enlightenment type values, that we don’t need religion or tradition and instead can rely on rational thought and education, on reason and logic, as the foundation of our societies. Then Harris proved that he himself cannot even live up to this standard because he is not rational in his dislike of Trump he’s an emotional lunatic. (It is entirely possible for someone to be rational in their dislike of Trump, I don’t like Trump, but Harris doesn’t fall into this category.) So Harris himself is proof that his worldview fails. How can a society be built upon enlightenment values of using reason and logic when even the most fervent apologists of the worldview can’t live up to it? If highly educated and well respected Sam Harris can fall into emotional mush and throw out those sacred enlightenment values the minute he gets mad about something then how are we supposed to believe that an entire society can be guided by them? If the best example and apostle of the worldview cannot live up to it the moment things get mildly difficult then what’s the likelihood that those with far less education and devotion to those values will live up to them? There’s simply nothing that Sam brings to the table that is worthwhile or unique.
I think Sam Harris has articulated his views on why he thinks Trump is an existential threat to the American democracy. He used a lot of logic and reasoning to get to his position. Whether you agree with that position or not is up to you. He’s also an atheist. His position on classic liberalism is guided by how that school of thought was fundamentally formed by western philosophy and modern democracy.
I have heard his so called articulations and disagree that it has anything to do with logic and reason. He’s turned into a hysterical fool and tries to use logic and reason to justify his hysteria. He’s the perfect picture of why liberal enlightenment values have failed, why they have actually brought us to our current predicament, and why such failures are inevitable. On one hand he will lament the fall of the MSM as failing in their duty to provide unbiased information to the people and then he turns around and falls for the propaganda when it’s about Trump. He was also a hysterical fool in his response to Covid. So he’s been worthless and emotionally driven for probably the two most important domestic issues in the last decade.
Don't think atheist is the right descriptor. I used to listen to Sam a lot, one of the first podcasts I got into. When he talks about his journey through meditation to find the Self, he ultimately said there is nothing at the core of consciousness. That it is a self-fulfilling bootstrap. That sounds like nihilism to me. A classical liberal bases their moral code on what is good for individuals. If you don't think the Self is real, how can you respect individuals?
I can't really listen to Sam anymore, but I'm still interested to hear, what did he say about dc?
Sam Harris sort of cherry picked the areas of DC’sTucker interview and Twitter threads that went sideways, and labeled DC an amateur historian - which I guess DC technically is. I also think there was a Stanford historian on the Free Press Honestly podcast that was a little dismayed by some of DC’s takes on WWII, Sam Harris is also a Stanford guy. I think DC takes his work seriously enough that he shouldn’t just be dismissed as a fringe conspiracy theorist by academics. However, he does go down some paths that I and others seriously disagree with.
Seems fair, thanks for saving me a couple hours boss!
I also think the tone of the conversation matters. Daryl and Tucker were kind of playing devil's advocate / kind of having a hot take for fun. It doesn't mean anything he said were wrong but I don't think the mainstream is taking them in accordance with the tone they were spoken...if that makes sense
Yea, I also think Tucker is in hot alert 🚨 for the other side to throw bombs at. DC probably should have been aware of that before free styling.
I agree, not a Sam fan.
Skip Sam Harris, go chat with Brett Weinstein instead. He is a great guy, I listen to him every week. BUT, he did hear all of your OVER THE TOP negative publicity last week and he expressed concern with your message. I, on the other hand, had previously listened to your WHOLE TWO HOUR Tucker interview and I knew that the criticism against you was, ‘The lady doth protest too much, methinks’. I think Brett would resonate with your message, once he hears you.
Listened the whole thing. Nothing too controversial, a little surprised at the end DC leaned into stop the steal. But maybe that’s more the Twitter side of him coming out.
would love to see Sam & Darryl chat with each other, particularly debating ideas where they definitely disagree.
I actually think they’d agree on quite a lot of things. It’d be interesting, probably doable if DC wants to since Jocko knows Sam via the JRE connections.
yes they definitely do agree on a lot, i'm saying it would be more interesting to hear them debate topics they disagree on. I don't think there would be any point debating their views on religion, but I think it would be a good conversation on which side broadly is the lesser of two evils (Sam obviously hates Trump, while Darryl rants about scandals of the left). May need Jocko to mediate
DC is very well read in areas of history and philosophy he focuses on. However, Sam has more expertise in a broader swath of science and humanities - really a self-taught historian vs. a classically trained academic. Sam also takes hard principled stands on certain things. I think the largest area of disagreement would be Sam’s general trust in large global and national institutional reform vs DC’s somewhat libertarian approach which is inherently skeptical of the purpose large institutions and the impact of globalization. Sometimes I think DC assumes deconstruction of institutions is the lesser evil than reform of institutions. However, that approach could unleash a worse chaos than the current status quo. I think the US will be pulling back from its role in maintaining global security through its economic and military power. It will be up to the world what’s next, but no guarantee it will be better than what was before. I don’t think DC takes this into account enough.
"Better the devil you know" has resulted in the emergence of some gargantuan devils.
Is that Chamberlain ’38
We all know it would just devolve into another Israel shitslinging match.
Hi Darryl! I have a question. In terms of your analysis of immigrants or refugees, I don’t hear a lot of the why they are refugies in the first place. What about the fact that the British colonized India or the US has blown up Iraq, Siria, Libya, and is still funding the genocide in Palestine. If the folks that are refugees had safe homelands, they would not likely need refuge. And the western foreign policy has caused so much violence and destruction in order to rob the developing world of resources and wealth. What do you say to the idea that Brits should open their doors to their homeland because they destroyed other’s homelands. And the values of Christianity are valid, and if followed by the political class historically they would not have pillaged and destroyed the immigrants original places of origin. Perhaps a British culture so void of moral values as exemplified by its colonial foreign policy could use some South Asian family values in its culture. And I would say the same if for example it was Saudi Arabia colonizing Britain or the West for 100s of yeas, and Brits needed to move there for safety and prosperity. It’s their karma. Your thoughts?
I mostly agree! But a full answer requires more space, so I’ll make this question #1 in the upcoming Q&A.
Thank you! ✌🏽❤️
So the elite of a country make dumb decisions ravaging other countries. And the answer to that is to subject the population of said country to an ethnic replacement by the affected peoples?
Interesting frame. Let’s look at an example. Almost every hospital, school and building is bombed in Gaza, an area in the country of Palestine. Bombs supplied by US and the West including the UK. Now imagine you lived in Gaza. No one was there to protect you. And imagine you found a way to get to the UK or the US. How would you like to be treated? I think of the story of folks burning a hotel that had refugees in it in the UK just a few weeks ago. Ok, so who is responsible for selling weapons and bombing? Not the people, I get that. And for me that is one dimensional. The West allows the deeper system of capitalism, patriarchy and violence to rain. I believe the people are benefactors in the system of oppression. How else can we all get an iPhone with cobolt mined by African slaves at a relatively good price? My perspective is that deeper spiritual values need to rise up and that humans at home do have some responsibility. Or I can justify anything as it wasn’t me. We are all brothers and sisters so how do we create a culture of acceptance and love for one another? I don’t have the answer, just more questions.
You have to understand that mass immigration is not done out of kindness for the immigrants. It is done with malice towards the native population. Also, not a small point here, the west is not a patriarchy.
Same thing that happens to civilians on all sides of this. Leadership makes self-serving idiotic decisions, and the populace bears the brunt of the repercussions. See Israeli justifications for bombing population centers because 'they support Hamas.' Support for the Iraqi invasion was far from universal, there were massive protests beforehand. Problem is that this system is no longer representative. As far a Britain goes, they kicked the can down the road to keep their decaying empire...so fuck em. But maybe that's just cause I'm Irish.
Thoughtful, smart take
“not to get all libertarian and gay...” as I slowly put away my Rothbard book.
That line made me laugh. Great podcast Cooper
That stance is the one thing I really disagree with Cooper on.
Whoa, a 3hr interview? What a treat!
It was only 2 hours, but it was a damn good interview!!
My Bad - yes! This 3-hour interview was great. The Tucker interview was very good as well, only 2 hours.
DC - THANK YOU for your thoughtful analysis, both here, in this interview, and that analysis that resulted in the Tucker interview, which is how I found you.
I have listened closely to both. but I still am looking for an answer to a question that I am still trying to understand. “What is the motivation, or what are the motivations behind ‘this One Generation of Elites’ IMPORTING SO MANY ILLEGAL ALIENS in to fundamentally remove Western Nation States from the map??????? (WHY IS THIS BEING DONE??!)
Could you please prepare a discussion where you speculate as to their motives?
Thank you!!!!!!!!!
Ek
It's not a conspiracy it's out in the open. I'm from the UK and so can answer this.
1. Treasury view- The Treasury tells the politicians "If you want to increase money for nurses/reduce the deficit/ cut taxes you need to have more taxes. We have an ageing society, look at the long run liiabilities. Don't raise taxes, just increase immigration".
2. Anti Racist Coalition- This is the huge number of NGOs, newspapers, think tanks etc which make up our cultural ecosystem. They have decided that discriminating between natives, nationals and non nationals in the UK is racist and evil. Therefore when people talk about the natives being a minority (it's obviously never brought up) or any sense that the culture should in anyway be preserved. it's shouted down. So the answr is "Why not have high levels of immigration, what are you racist".
Business Community- Business wants more customers and workers and always has done.
Politicians- Something many non Brits may not know is that the Conservative Party which has run the country for the past 14 years has just lied to the people. They have said they would bring the Net Migration number down to the tens of thousands for the past 14 years. It has doubled since the Brexiit Referendum in 2016 to nearly 700,000 every year. They just lie about it.
Elites are jealous of the China model. Which requires a huge powerless population to rob labor of any traction. White, brown, or purple, they don't care, as long as they're subservient.
We like Darryl, but we love the animated version.
Just getting started on this, but you are articulating thoughts that have been kicking around unformed in my head for a long time.
Man, the concept of the so-called elites knowing they frauds as part of the reason they engage in more and more deviant behavior hit me
See Puff Daddy
Great interview
Enjoyed that podcast and the fact your cat made an appearance made me laugh. Oh yeah I did give you a very loud shout out during a live Tucker show last week!
This is great. Your rambling interviews are the best, and your depth of knowledge is astounding. I was one of those middle-of-the-road people in 2015: a normiecon or cringe Lolbertarian. The insanity of the Left over the last nine years has radicalized me.
The insanity of the Left?
Every single Trump speech is literally deranged.
What horrible things did the Left do over the last 9 years that radicalized you?
You saw nothing pernicious, criminal, negligent, cruel, violent, corrupt in the behavior of Trump and his supporters for the past nine years?
Trying to force me to take an untested gene therapy or lose my job would be one way the left has radicalized me. The biggest military embarrassment since 1812? Gender affirming care for children? Shall I go on?
Hi Jack, I don’t believe you’ve been radicalized. I believe that they’ve shifted the left way way way way far out there, to the left!
Trust me, Jack has been radicalized
Based
Great interview. I really loved the section discussing Christian values and the implication of love the enemy dictum.
I believe it is fundamental to being a godly person but Christian's tend to assume it automatically means you have to be nice to everyone including enemies, while in reality it could mean both letting them kill you and killing them is the correct choice.
I would say almost everyone in the 1900's till now used, or have used at least part of Edward Bernays "Propaganda" from 1928
This interview was as if Matt Gaetz haircut got its one true wish
I enjoyed it
Just as I was looking for something to listen to before I spend the rest of the day shredding and mowing.
Yes, thank you, will listen