!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
Joe Rogan is a clueless buffoon, and admits such, and leans libertarian. He also thinks he’s a neutral philosopher and doesn’t recognize his subjectivity.
A lot of uneducated people think they’re enlightened by listening to him but most of the time the show’s material is not really based in reality.
He’s a “libertarian” in the sense that like most libertarians…
he’s a conservative that’s too afraid to commit to the bit.
Libertarian has become just a code word for pushing conservative views to people who dismiss conservatives.
Mostly agreed. It's also a label that conservatives who are not evangelical Christians and/or like drugs will apply to themselves. In that one sense, they can sometimes be easier to deal with on a day-to-day basis, but their entire political mindest is still a variation on "I got mine, fuck everybody else."
There's usually a healthy added spice of "and particularly fuck anybody who thinks studying a lot in college and putting in long hours at a finance-bro job where everybody looks like me means anything other than I'm a self-made man."
I don’t know but if someone told me they listened to Joe Rogan, I would assume, the best case scenario is they are Libertarian. Worst case is Qanon nut job.
Yup, 100%. People don't realize...
I immediately assume that once someone brings up Joe Rogan they are easily susceptible to authoritarian propaganda and should be avoided.
Rogan brings on guests who argue in bad faith for topics which they are unqualified to comment upon. They provide no evidence and Joe immediately agrees with whatever random bullshit they spew out. Doing this creates the image of credibility (big podcast man agreed with psycho, maybe I should agree with psycho), and since perception is reality that image has value.
He is a right wing extremism gateway. Also an antivaxxer, but I repeat myself.
He wasn't originally. He examined some pretty neat subjects. Such as aliens and effects of marijuana and other recreational drugs. Amongst many doctors and experts on niche subjects that were interesting.
But somewhere around episode 500 shit started getting wonky. I just stopped enjoying his podcast.
This is exactly what happened to a friend of ten years of mine. Exactly; he was the gateway drug to this: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2023/aug/02/everything-youve-been-told-is-a-lie-inside-the-wellness-to-facism-pipeline
Well first his show is one of the biggest podcasts in existence and spent a lot of time at the #1 spot - it’s not just a new thing.
Compared to other career interlocutors we might name from old media like Barbara Walters or Michael Krasny, Joe Rogan is a major step down on intellect. He doesn’t really prepare for interviews - reading the subjects book or whatever. He just wings it and spends a lot of time nodding and saying “wow.”
This is a problem when he invites on guests who spew misinformation. Joe doesn’t know it’s misinformation because he doesn’t research. And in fact he seems to think he’s a rebel journalist who hosts people that others want to silence. And he himself falls for many conspiracy tropes, frequently throwing out phrases like “they don’t want anyone to know this.”
So you’ve got a big dumb show full of misinformation that reaches a lot of young people. This is a problem for a lot of folks.
Others love Joe and find his lack of intellect relatable. He’s just a “regular Joe” to them. Maybe they don’t want a fancy interviewer who’s read all the books. Maybe they want someone just as uninformed as them so the information conveyed in the interview arrives at their level.
Sadly, Joe’s now hosted many of the top minds in the world. People like Neil DeGrasse Tyson just see him as a podcast host who’s popular with the youths. So why not go on his show. These people have boosted his numbers even more and legitimized him. Then he brings on a vaccine denier and it all goes to shit. He seems to thrive in the criticism, too, doubling down on the fact that he wants to investigate the things everyone else wants to bury (when his critics say he’s just giving the worst people in the world a platform).
The connotation is that Rogan is an idiot who might be a decent guy, but he will say and do anything to prevent his guests from being pissed at him. This includes, but is not limited to, agreeing with some of the most toxic, misogynist, people you probably know.
Joe Rogan is a bigot. If your friend subscribes to bigot content, they probably harbor some bigoted beliefs. Any sane, non-bigoted person would recognize the fucked up shit that gets platformed on Joe Rogan content, and promptly unsubscribe.
The connotations are that they aren't too bright. Joe Rogan is a comedian turned political influencer of sorts, and this same dude once said, on set, "I am an idiot. I don't know shit. Nobody should take anything I say seriously."
Joe Rogan is in the business of making reactionary content for people who respond (regardless of whether that response is good or bad) to reactionary content. A bit more advanced that YouTube videos of prank fake bank robberies or filling a car with cement. But still in the same vein. He says things about hot button issues that I don't necessarily think he believes just to be controversial. He also tries to legitimise those opinions (even ones he doesn't believe in), and his fans believe him and therefore hold him in high esteem.
There is the potential for the person you know to like him or his show because it's absurdist in content. However it's more likely that they like it because it feeds certain biases of theirs. A world view that they embrace that doesn't necessarily match reality. The politics in your country may not be the same. But the politics in the US definitely have an effect on just about every other country in the world. Not all of Rogan's takes are political. He spreads a lot of general misinformation. I wouldn't be surprised if your acquaintance was just looking for validation in his content.
In the way that white middle class housewives watched Oprah, white fitness bros tend to like Joe Rogan for all the same reasons:
Its where they get their news, their political misinformation, their performance enhancement drug info, and their pseudoscience wellness products.
Politics aside I would say the connotation here is that this person isn't very intelligent. I don't mean that as a statement on their intelligence but instead that Joe Rogan falls into the category of anti-intellectual, low bar entertainment. I'd consider Joe Rogan to be the equivalent of a tabloid paper but for people who listen to podcasts.
Rogan has 2-3 hour interviews with people from every walk of life but got obsessed with COVID misinformation.
Rogan has explicitly supported gay rights/marriage, drug legalization, prison reform, and other leftist positions, but recently appears to have become swayed by right-wing talking points to the point that he is unnecessarily confrontational.
He has some amazing podcasts in the bank with amazing people, and has some newer podcasts that are garbage. He has like 1500 3-hour podcasts.
So look up some of the athletes, the biologists, the astronomers, geologists, a lot of interesting non-political podcasts before covid happened and you'll probably learn a bunch of interesting things.
But anything remotely political in the past few years is pretty rough to the point that I haven't listened to any of his podcasts since.
Lot of unhelpful answers here. I'll try my best.
In a nutshell, Joe was a UFC commentator who also avidly practices various martial arts. He's also a successful stand-up comedian. Being personable and well connected, he started his podcast interviewing friends, comedians, and celebrities.
It should be fairly obvious how he appeals to people interested in masculine personalities. In particular teenagers, young men, and people who aren't very secure in their masculinity tend to like him.
He had/has a rule of letting nearly anyone on the show so long as he felt he could have an interesting conversation with them. To massively simplify, this ultimately led to him having some questionable political provocateurs on the show, many right wingers. Combine this with Joe's non-combative interview style, and his show ended up being a platform for some pretty out-there political theory. The way he talked about COVID struck many people as pretty irresponsible, for example.
Eventually, many who are left-of-center were scared of even associating with him. That's a problem for your public image if you claim to be a centrist, as Joe does. Or at least he did, I haven't kept up with him in a while.
TL;DR: if you listen to Joe Rogan's podcast people might think you're overly concerned with your masculinity or that you're being indoctrinated into extreme right-wing politics.
For me, it kind of depends. If Rogan is interviewing an actor, comedian, or MMA/UFC fighter, he’s more in his element, and the interview can be alright. The problem is he’s kind of an “all sides” show and he doesn’t really understand all the stuff some of his guests pedal. This is problematic when he has folks on pedaling stuff where he doesn’t recognize and call out the potential toxicity. A good example is someone like Jordan Petersen. A guy whose credentials would seem to indicate he knows what he’s talking about. In reality, a lot of the MRA-adjacent BS he spews sounds somewhat reasonable, if a bit “edgy,” on its surface. Petersen knows it isn’t actually backed up by any research (which is where his credentials are), it’s just his musings that he’s found an audience, and quite a bit of money, espousing. This is a problem because Rogan doesn’t usually call this stuff out for the dog whistle that it is, and he has a massive audience.
FWIW, I haven’t listened to him in years, and didn’t listen to him very long to begin with.
Guys a tool and gives an audience to losers who don't deserve one, but in all honesty his interview with Brian Cox is magnificent. Though, that has got more to do with Brian than joe whose role was to be the subject of the ELI5's.
I'll try to give an unbiased answer. Joe Rogan podcasts aren't just political, but they do discuss political topics frequently in conversation. The connotation for a regular listener is that they are very likely to be misinformed, plain and simple as that. As many have already said, it's likely that they are libertarian at best or into conspiracy theories and alt-right at worst. I'll explain why:
He brings in a lot of different guests to his podcasts. These guests could be celebrities, athletes, book authors, researchers, actors, etc. Sometimes he would have politicians, from left and right. He would also bring in people who spread conspiracy theories, aka "qanon" types.
He never confronts any of his guests. Some people hate him for it, others listen to him precisely because of that.
Rogan gives a platform equally to all of his guests and presents and treats them all as if on the same level of legitimacy. This means, today he interviews a scientist who is an eminence in their field, with 30 years experience in research... and next week he brings in some influencer on the same topic, who doesn't understand the science behind what they say. Both guests sound equally knowledgeable to the average listener.
The problem with this is that this spreads misinformation, and if you as a listener are not already well informed on the topic then you are likely to fall for it. Most people don't question everything they hear, let alone understand in depth anything discussed superficially over a podcast. This is evident with science, but it gets really hairy when you add politics and personal values/morals to the mix.
I hope this helps you understand better.
"He never confronts any of his guests. "
This is false as of the past year or two (post-Covid). Now whenever he has a scientist on, he'll argue and disagree with them, especially if the topic is Covid, vaccines, or climate change. He really likes the gish-gallop argument method where he spews a bunch of long since discredited claims on the topic.
Yeah he does confront his guests (though not any of the alt-right or qanon ones). It's pretty clear he has an agenda, despite everyone claiming he's just some kind of enlightened centrist.
Ask them their stance on apes. If they stay an ape could mess a dude up theyre probably just into martial arts. If they say something racial they are probably racist. And maybe you shouldn't be friends with them.
To my knowledge the Rogan community is strong advocates of the idea that most other great apes can beat us up.
A lot of the comments above are super creepy in how neutral they are on Rogan, who is well known to be a far right conspiracy crank who mostly platforms other cranks and super bigoted people and credulously spreads their claims as accurate.
He very rarely has actual decent people on and, frequently when he does so, tries to argue with them that they're wrong. Especially if they're scientists.
His whole thing has been that of being a skeptic for many years, whether it's in legitimacy of certain combat sports, whether pumping your body with TRT will have any negative effects, or in what medical professionals push. This seemed all fine and dandy when the political landscape was sane, and when society didn't need people to follow medical advice.
Like many, he's realised that his fans will follow anything he says, and he's become more vocal towards his own views. For lack of a better term, he's an influencer, and his views influence people. From a MMA perspective, many would say that this has had an effect on his ability to call the sport he's an expert in, because his analysis is often pretty poor - even compared to commentators with minimal knowledge of the professional sport.
The connotations for Rogan is that fame corrupts. The connotations for your friend are that he might be exposed to utter bullshit and assume it's correct because "Rogan brings experts on the show".
Just Asking Questions
Otherwise known as a JAQoff