Speaker 1: So we have to have a conversation about something not so good that's happening
on the I guess I would call it the online left media in the online left media world,
which is a level of pettiness that at this point should concern every single one of us
that actually wants to get some things done and make some progress and maybe not see
Democrats completely crushed in the November midterm elections. And what I'm talking about
is a very toxic subculture that's taking place among many in the audience of shows like mine,
in which there is just a completely counterproductive, self-destructive argumentation
happening constantly about which show is better. Who's a shill? This show's bad. That shows bad
pac-man's terrible. This, that. The other thing and the reason that I sort of came across this
is a couple of people sent me over the now over the weekend over the last few days as I
was getting back from my trip, some links to some of subreddit discussions and discord discussions
where my name comes up in the context of a my one of the good guys or am I one of the bad guys?
Why am I terrible? And you can find lots of reasons why I'm terrible, including I'm terrible
because my YouTube titles are clickbait or because I'm not doing enough deep foreign policy analysis
or because, you know, I have a bonus show. Speaker 3: Oh, the bonus show where you want
to make money and everybody else that makes money to fund themselves as bad or whatever.
Speaker 1: And this stuff is all happening supposedly among people on the left who share
like 95% of the same goals. So let's just sort of like start at the middle and work our way out,
right? So let's take the criticism. My show is bad because I do this type of show and not that
type of show. I don't do deep foreign policy analysis. Listen, every show has a different
niche and a different goal. The point of this show is to be a popularizer of being informed,
of thinking about how political choices impact the world we live in, to be a show that inspires
people to actually at minimum vote if not do more, which nearly half the country doesn't do.
And to warn people about the horrifying reality of the scourge that is right wing extremism and
reactionary politics and authoritarianism. And to make sure everybody remembers, this is not a both
side situation in the United States. We really have one side that is completely out of their mind
and another side that's just not quite left enough for me. And those are two very different things.
We talk to interesting, smart people from different fields to expose people in the audience
to the fact that all of these different fields exist. And if one of them piques your interest,
then you can do deep dives into that. Find books five find podcasts to deep dove into any
particular topic that interests you, create a like minded, a community of like minded people to come
together through the show itself and our discord and our subreddit and all these different things.
And then you can say, Well, I really care about education. So in addition to listening
to the Batman podcast, I'll listen to podcasts about education, for example,
or I care about climate change, so I'll add some climate YouTubers, science climatologist YouTubers
to my subscriptions or whatever. And that is really the point of this particular show. So yes,
this is not a show that is exclusively long form foreign policy analysis. That doesn't mean that
this show is any better or any worse than a different show. Now. Yes, different shows have
different levels of production quality. Different shows have different levels of, you know,
experience for the hosts or whatever the case may be. But this sniping thing that I see
so many people in my audience and in other audiences engage in about, oh, Sam Cedar's bad
because of his view on this one issue or t is good better than Pacman because of this or Pacman shows
that this is extraordinarily petty and self-destructive and the right doesn't
do this. The right does a lot of horrible things, which we criticize, but the right just looks at.
Is. Are these people basically helping our movement or are they basically hurting our
movement? Is this someone who we mostly agree with? And that's kind of the starting point. And
unfortunately, I continue to worry that this level of pettiness and sniping on the left is going to
be very, very bad for the movement. Apply the analogy to books, right? I don't read political
memoirs. I didn't read, you know, Obama's book. Speaker 3: Oh.
Speaker 1: No, I didn't read the Kushner book. I didn't read Hillary's book. I just have other
things I prefer to read. It doesn't mean that as a genre, the political memoir is bad. I mean,
some are bad, some are poorly written. It's a niche and there's a need for it. And that's great.
But it would be weird for me to say, Well, I think narrative nonfiction is better than political
memoirs. How do you even compare those things? And so let's all take a step back. Let's understand
who is generally advocating for the right things, the things that we believe in,
the things that will improve the country and the world in which which we live. And let's not
inflict this kind of circular firing squad of self-inflicted damage. It's just very bad.
And pettiness is really the best way that I can describe it. Let me know what you think.