Haninia won me over on this one. I used to think "disparate impact" was placing an employment ad in a white suburb when the employer was located in the inner city. I had no idea it had gone this far
George H W Bush signed into law the "Civil Rights Act of 1990," which made "disparate impact" in racial headcounts illegal. The Bush family has been about as bad for America and the modern Democrats.
Great talk. Long form is def the way to go! When I have to step away from my business responsibilities and my app development passion project and do household chores, I like to be mentally stimulated with people who’ve deeply thought through a lot of main stream topics. If I can suggest a guest for the future, Charles Eisenstein.
Timestamps are below + check out @InTheArenaPodcast (00:00) Episode preview (05:40) Richard on Vivek (07:20) Diversity and corporate interest (12:10) Wokeness is subsidized by government (15:20) Recommended podcast: In The Arena @InTheArenaPodcast (18:00) Wokeness as a paper tiger (22:00) Liberal media and Conservative media (31:00) What should the Republican strategy be? (40:00) What is a positive vision rooted in conservative values? (48:00) What are the winning issues for conservatives? (51:00) Crime (01:10:00) Blank Slatism, Charles Murray, and the EA movement (01:14:00) Richard’s geopolitical worldview (01:25:00 Physiognomy of Conservatives and Liberals (01:28:00) Why are we polarized? (01:33:00) Dynamic divide between liberals and conservatives (01:34:00) Richard on Elon (01:40:00) Feminism (02:00:00) Richard on other contemporary intellectuals, including Tyler Cowen, Robin Hanson, Scott Alexander, and more
"People are pretty good at finding that meaning" Holy shit, i couldn't disagree more. Currently it certainly seems like we arent. Specifically young men
Hanania almost exclusively cites the same small body of rigorously debunked research for his "human biodiversity" nonsense. Anyone that wants to engage with his ideas seriously should probably take at least a cursory look at this rather than being credulous Erik
From his original article (which you should read): “On the Republican side, when it comes to newspapers, the most relied upon source is The Wall Street Journal (11%). On the Democratic side, 30% read The New York Times, and 26% read The Washington Post. Democrats even read the WSJ more than conservatives do, and are just as likely to report The New York Post as a source! On both sides, only a minority reads any particular newspaper, but having half of your supporters read something instead of 15%, or whatever the exact numbers are, creates a completely different culture. On the conservative side, 19% got their information from Hannity, and 17% from Rush Limbaugh. There are no equivalent personalities on the left, although liberals do listen to radio in the forms of NPR and the BBC. Yet those outlets are very different from Hannity and Limbaugh; although biased, they have apolitical content and should actually be considered more news than sources of entertainment. I think if you want to find a Hannity equivalent on the left it would be someone like Keith Olbermann, who is nowhere as influential.”
Haninia won me over on this one. I used to think "disparate impact" was placing an employment ad in a white suburb when the employer was located in the inner city. I had no idea it had gone this far
George H W Bush signed into law the "Civil Rights Act of 1990," which made "disparate impact" in racial headcounts illegal.
The Bush family has been about as bad for America and the modern Democrats.
Great talk. Long form is def the way to go! When I have to step away from my business responsibilities and my app development passion project and do household chores, I like to be mentally stimulated with people who’ve deeply thought through a lot of main stream topics. If I can suggest a guest for the future, Charles Eisenstein.
Timestamps are below + check out @InTheArenaPodcast
(00:00) Episode preview
(05:40) Richard on Vivek
(07:20) Diversity and corporate interest
(12:10) Wokeness is subsidized by government
(15:20) Recommended podcast: In The Arena @InTheArenaPodcast
(18:00) Wokeness as a paper tiger
(22:00) Liberal media and Conservative media
(31:00) What should the Republican strategy be?
(40:00) What is a positive vision rooted in conservative values?
(48:00) What are the winning issues for conservatives?
(51:00) Crime
(01:10:00) Blank Slatism, Charles Murray, and the EA movement
(01:14:00) Richard’s geopolitical worldview
(01:25:00 Physiognomy of Conservatives and Liberals
(01:28:00) Why are we polarized?
(01:33:00) Dynamic divide between liberals and conservatives
(01:34:00) Richard on Elon
(01:40:00) Feminism
(02:00:00) Richard on other contemporary intellectuals, including Tyler Cowen, Robin Hanson, Scott Alexander, and more
Goblinoid physiognomy.
The study of Hanania starts and finishes with this incontrovertible truth.
Are you the one that asked about Epstein?
"People are pretty good at finding that meaning"
Holy shit, i couldn't disagree more. Currently it certainly seems like we arent. Specifically young men
Hanania almost exclusively cites the same small body of rigorously debunked research for his "human biodiversity" nonsense. Anyone that wants to engage with his ideas seriously should probably take at least a cursory look at this rather than being credulous Erik
conservatives watch more tv? uhm so why are there 5+ liberal tv channels and 1 for conservatives
From his original article (which you should read):
“On the Republican side, when it comes to newspapers, the most relied upon source is The Wall Street Journal (11%). On the Democratic side, 30% read The New York Times, and 26% read The Washington Post. Democrats even read the WSJ more than conservatives do, and are just as likely to report The New York Post as a source! On both sides, only a minority reads any particular newspaper, but having half of your supporters read something instead of 15%, or whatever the exact numbers are, creates a completely different culture.
On the conservative side, 19% got their information from Hannity, and 17% from Rush Limbaugh. There are no equivalent personalities on the left, although liberals do listen to radio in the forms of NPR and the BBC. Yet those outlets are very different from Hannity and Limbaugh; although biased, they have apolitical content and should actually be considered more news than sources of entertainment. I think if you want to find a Hannity equivalent on the left it would be someone like Keith Olbermann, who is nowhere as influential.”
The amount of TV watched is not related to the number of TV channels.
Not all conservatives watch news all day long.
Just think about it for literally two seconds
There are far more liberals than there are conservatives (which is why conservatives support voter suppression).