The thing i loved about this podcast is that even though you talked about a lot of sensetive political things with risky answers , you still articulted it in such a way that everyone is very civil in the comments.
I can not contain my lack of interest: 1. Politics 2. Olympics 3. 29-year old influencers “glowing up” and becoming the main character of their own lives.
Really appreciate the no bullshit talk on our current media and political landscape. I know I'm a little more plugged in than I probably should be but I also realize that none of the political propaganda that's happening on either side during election years are worth getting bent out of shape over. I'll cast my ballot on election day and move on.
Great episode! It offers a fascinating discussion of politics from both tech and historical perspectives, while highlighting significant milestones in human development. I'll definitely be swapping out my news consumption for more history books.
Lucky to be so privileged. The ad in this episode is for preemptive health assessments costing thousands of dollars at a time when people have died from not receiving basic health care due to political decisions. You are lucky to have the cash to buy your way out of trouble, but many aren't, and the political decisions made sometimes have enormous consequences for their lives. I really hate this "I'm all right, Jack" attitude, and if anyone else doesn't have the resources to be well off, that's their problem.
when you say nobody is paying attention, you are talking about what the News is covering and/or social media not what politicians and governments are actually DOING. We have federal agencies curing cancer; there are state governments working to have companies and jobs coming into their state; there are city governments making sure that crime goes down. Problem is that the dull everyday upkeep is 'boring' - someone has to do the dishes!
I get the gist of this- but the whole system is broken. No don’t there are earnest people genuinely wanting to improve the world. However, they are met with layers of red tape until they get too exhausted to fight any longer. Also, we have federal agencies curing cancer…?
Hey, maybe this is something you've discussed in the past and I know have touched on throughout episodes, but I'd love to learn more about interpersonal effectiveness. Human interaction is a fundamental and important part of life. And interacting with difficult people or being that difficult person (if realizing it or not) is inevitable. Thanks!
6:44 I agree with you 10000%, that we should care about America first. We’re a deteriorating country. However, OUR POLITICIANS need to do that- not us. Do you understand that those in charge spend their lives scheming for power and money? They go abroad and start tragedies in our name with our money. Come on, Mark.
I've read your book and I'm following you for years now, but you simple don't understand what it's at stake in these elections. "If you're not turned onto politics, politics will turn on you." --Ralph Nader. Regards.
Policy is important, but the job of president is enhanced if they are competent. Many important decisions pop up, like an epidemic, disasters like Katrina, national security.
As always, really learnt something on this weeks podcast, I have question though as something kept popping up that I would very much appreciate you commenting on at some point, not sure if this is the right place to add this… so do you think some of the topics you talked about particularly related politics and to the shift in gender ideology, particularly in the US, is that there is only 2 party politics?? How much do you think the fact there is only a choice between 2 parties plays into the shifts in society? Historically do you see a different outcome where there is more than 2 parties impacting on the politics, changing demographics / ideologies?? Would be interested to hear your thoughts.
I suggest a different way of looking at and judging politics and politicians at the national level. Every administration makes 1 or 2 really good or really bad decisions that actually matter (which decisions they are and how you feel about them depends on your values and beliefs). Presidential character, etc. only matter if they have a direct impact on those 1 or 2 big decisions. Examples of big decisions whose effects we still live with, years later: Johnson -- The Great Society, Nixon -- Ending the Vietnam war and establishing better relations with China, Carter -- not much, Reagan -- "winning" the cold war, and so on.
Wouldn't following history in order to influence how we feel about the current/future scenarios be, technically, illogical? For example, sure, we all expect and act as if the sun will rise tomorrow because it has for all of human history, but the fact that it has for thousands of years + isn't actually evidence that the sun will, in fact, rise tomorrow, right? Likewise, if we followed history alone, would that lead to progress or just stagnation? What about slavery, which throughout human history has "always" occurred...until we decided that our history is not the way we wanted to continue in the future? Same applies to women voting. Women had never had to the right to vote for as long as the idea of a democracy has been around, but collectively, we decided that just because this idea has always been, doesn't mean it must be moving forward. If we simply followed what we have always done (i.e. history), what of slavery and women's right to vote (and countless other examples)? I definitely agree that watching "current news" isn't a good place for information, because of the narratives and/or agendas being pushed through today's media "sources." However, isn't history "written by the victors?" How is that not also a schewed view of actual events? I guess, between the two, i'd much rather we be informed more by history than by today's media, but I started thinking about whether or not following history would be properly logical or not, and so, here we are (or here I am, at least, haha)...
Well, through history, you learn more about the pattern of human nature and how societies work, that way we can choose to avoid the mistakes our ancestors made, basically, its self awareness for society, like how talking about past traumas in a therapy liberates u from those taumas.
Political vitriol was negatively affecting my mental health. New standard: does it *DIRECTLY* pertain to my life, my situation and immediate surroundings? Then cautiously observe. With that being said, I live in the bluest state in the US. My opinion makes no difference here. I'm a 67-year-old, mostly retired female, and occasionally scared shitless about my future. I have to be more like those chicks interviewed on the boardwalk in Venice. They know nothing and are all the better for it.
I have question : youtube kind of works the same way as tiktok as in it suggests you videos based on your previous watches, then y is it not as polarizing/radicalizing as tiktok? Is it because youtube has mostly long form content which is higher in quality and more nuanced?
I think just because genocides happened in history it doesn't mean we shouldn't care about the ones that are happening now. There's also a difference between conflicts happening within countries between its own people and their government VS conflicts that are happening somewhere else in the world and backed by your government. But I agree that as an individual there's very little we can do about it. And that people may be spending too much energy on things like that when their own neighbours are in deep shit.
Well, if you focused more on your local problems, it will make your country better, which in turn will make ur government better so that they don't do bad things .
There are a lot of interesting ideas. I agree with much of what you said about history, but I wouldn’t underestimate the role individuals play in shaping it. Look at the history of post-Soviet countries like Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus, and how they ended up with very different types of governments. What Trump did to the Republican Party is something new in American politics. He turned it into a loyal, spineless institution that could lay the groundwork for personal autocracy
6:39 oh boy, Mark. I was hoping for something more enlightened. How can you say it’s insane to care about the plight of other people around the world….but even more surprising- how could you say it has nothing to do with us? And we can’t influence it? We ARE doing it. We are funding and paying for everything with our own tax dollars. Perhaps because you don’t have any f*cks to give…is why you don’t fully get it.
I‘m a bit confused why Mark says we live in the best time, when 1) economical inequality is huge (and it was better before), 2) military spending and therefore risks are all time high. 3) Not to mention the climate change.
@@ferkokovac317 I disagree that there is nothing wrong with inequality. Not being able to afford a house, healthcare, education and decent living so that rich can be extremely rich is not acceptable. I’m also not so sure there is only poor and rich or everyone poor.
I will not do that as i don’t think it’s necessary in this context. „There is drastic improvement happening in all sectors of society“ says Mark. Do I really need to reference anything to disagree with this, when it’s clearly not the case?
Yep and RUclips censors in similar ways to Wikipedia... Look up Jimmy Dore for example... They lied about him and he can't even edit it.. WTF it's him, why didn't he get access? Meanwhile a war criminal gets whitewashed on Wikipedia m
Ok hi, on your "gendered politics theory" ...like, it's an interesting hypothesis, that the global shift in women's political perspective is "driven by TikTok's fyp". Sure, maybe social media has been enabling people of similar opinion to gather together a bit more, okay. ...but i can't help feeling you're missing some *extremely vital bits of information*. I mean, don't you think that maybe the whole "MeToo" movement might have had an impact "on some level" on women's political outlook, in general...? You know, that time when women discovered on a global level that the generations of trauma and shame they were carrying were not actually their own fault? Where women talked to each other on a scale that had never happened before, and realised that there was a whole system of destruction aimed directly at them, that it wasn't just individuals having isolated experiences... you don't think that might be just a bit relevant? That time where women realised, on a global scale, that they could speak out loud about their horrific experiences of gendered violence, and then they discovered that "men" - in general - would tend to be defensive, dismissive and denialist about it, rather than open or supportive. i was listening to your podcast in my car, and i really felt the need to come here and see if anyone else was maybe questioning your idea a little. You said, Mark, that you noticed women were listening to you a bit less, and i wonder if it's maybe because you have not been "listening to women", in a general sense...? I don't know, i haven't listened to your podcast before, so i don't want to generalise about you. i've read some of your articles, and you seem to have a creative perspective.. but on this point, you seem to be *really missing the point*, imo.
6:39 oh boy, Mark. I was hoping for something more enlightened. How can you say it’s insane to care about the plight of other people around the world….but even more surprising- how could you say it has nothing to do with us? And we can’t influence it? We ARE doing it. We are funding and paying for everything with our own tax dollars. Perhaps because you don’t have any f*cks to give…is why you don’t fully get it.
The thing i loved about this podcast is that even though you talked about a lot of sensetive political things with risky answers , you still articulted it in such a way that everyone is very civil in the comments.
When you mention books in the podcast would you list their titles and authors in the description please? I would find that so helpful. 😊
I remember when it was considered bad manners to talk about how much money you made and who you voted for. It now makes total sense to me.
I can not contain my lack of interest:
1. Politics
2. Olympics
3. 29-year old influencers “glowing up” and becoming the main character of their own lives.
Really appreciate the no bullshit talk on our current media and political landscape. I know I'm a little more plugged in than I probably should be but I also realize that none of the political propaganda that's happening on either side during election years are worth getting bent out of shape over. I'll cast my ballot on election day and move on.
Great episode! It offers a fascinating discussion of politics from both tech and historical perspectives, while highlighting significant milestones in human development. I'll definitely be swapping out my news consumption for more history books.
Lucky to be so privileged. The ad in this episode is for preemptive health assessments costing thousands of dollars at a time when people have died from not receiving basic health care due to political decisions. You are lucky to have the cash to buy your way out of trouble, but many aren't, and the political decisions made sometimes have enormous consequences for their lives. I really hate this "I'm all right, Jack" attitude, and if anyone else doesn't have the resources to be well off, that's their problem.
when you say nobody is paying attention, you are talking about what the News is covering and/or social media not what politicians and governments are actually DOING. We have federal agencies curing cancer; there are state governments working to have companies and jobs coming into their state; there are city governments making sure that crime goes down. Problem is that the dull everyday upkeep is 'boring' - someone has to do the dishes!
I get the gist of this- but the whole system is broken.
No don’t there are earnest people genuinely wanting to improve the world. However, they are met with layers of red tape until they get too exhausted to fight any longer.
Also, we have federal agencies curing cancer…?
Hey, maybe this is something you've discussed in the past and I know have touched on throughout episodes, but I'd love to learn more about interpersonal effectiveness. Human interaction is a fundamental and important part of life. And interacting with difficult people or being that difficult person (if realizing it or not) is inevitable.
Thanks!
6:44 I agree with you 10000%, that we should care about America first. We’re a deteriorating country.
However, OUR POLITICIANS need to do that- not us.
Do you understand that those in charge spend their lives scheming for power and money? They go abroad and start tragedies in our name with our money.
Come on, Mark.
I wish people cared more about Congress.
An administration can't do much if Congress is controlled by the opposing party.
But when it comes to war funding or bailing out the banks, both parties are cool with it.
Both parties work for the same fkin thing.
Where can i watch marks bbc episode?
Pron hub
I've read your book and I'm following you for years now, but you simple don't understand what it's at stake in these elections.
"If you're not turned onto politics, politics will turn on you." --Ralph Nader.
Regards.
I care about local politics but I have no idea what's going on. National News is free but local news is expensive.
Policy is important, but the job of president is enhanced if they are competent. Many important decisions pop up, like an epidemic, disasters like Katrina, national security.
As always, really learnt something on this weeks podcast, I have question though as something kept popping up that I would very much appreciate you commenting on at some point, not sure if this is the right place to add this… so do you think some of the topics you talked about particularly related politics and to the shift in gender ideology, particularly in the US, is that there is only 2 party politics?? How much do you think the fact there is only a choice between 2 parties plays into the shifts in society? Historically do you see a different outcome where there is more than 2 parties impacting on the politics, changing demographics / ideologies?? Would be interested to hear your thoughts.
I suggest a different way of looking at and judging politics and politicians at the national level. Every administration makes 1 or 2 really good or really bad decisions that actually matter (which decisions they are and how you feel about them depends on your values and beliefs). Presidential character, etc. only matter if they have a direct impact on those 1 or 2 big decisions. Examples of big decisions whose effects we still live with, years later: Johnson -- The Great Society, Nixon -- Ending the Vietnam war and establishing better relations with China, Carter -- not much, Reagan -- "winning" the cold war, and so on.
Wouldn't following history in order to influence how we feel about the current/future scenarios be, technically, illogical?
For example, sure, we all expect and act as if the sun will rise tomorrow because it has for all of human history, but the fact that it has for thousands of years + isn't actually evidence that the sun will, in fact, rise tomorrow, right?
Likewise, if we followed history alone, would that lead to progress or just stagnation? What about slavery, which throughout human history has "always" occurred...until we decided that our history is not the way we wanted to continue in the future? Same applies to women voting. Women had never had to the right to vote for as long as the idea of a democracy has been around, but collectively, we decided that just because this idea has always been, doesn't mean it must be moving forward. If we simply followed what we have always done (i.e. history), what of slavery and women's right to vote (and countless other examples)?
I definitely agree that watching "current news" isn't a good place for information, because of the narratives and/or agendas being pushed through today's media "sources." However, isn't history "written by the victors?" How is that not also a schewed view of actual events?
I guess, between the two, i'd much rather we be informed more by history than by today's media, but I started thinking about whether or not following history would be properly logical or not, and so, here we are (or here I am, at least, haha)...
Well, through history, you learn more about the pattern of human nature and how societies work, that way we can choose to avoid the mistakes our ancestors made, basically, its self awareness for society, like how talking about past traumas in a therapy liberates u from those taumas.
Political vitriol was negatively affecting my mental health. New standard: does it *DIRECTLY* pertain to my life, my situation and immediate surroundings? Then cautiously observe. With that being said, I live in the bluest state in the US. My opinion makes no difference here. I'm a 67-year-old, mostly retired female, and occasionally scared shitless about my future. I have to be more like those chicks interviewed on the boardwalk in Venice. They know nothing and are all the better for it.
I have question : youtube kind of works the same way as tiktok as in it suggests you videos based on your previous watches, then y is it not as polarizing/radicalizing as tiktok?
Is it because youtube has mostly long form content which is higher in quality and more nuanced?
It's because RUclips censors too but for major corporations that Mark identifies with. I can't believe that Mark thinks Bush had integrity...
I think just because genocides happened in history it doesn't mean we shouldn't care about the ones that are happening now. There's also a difference between conflicts happening within countries between its own people and their government VS conflicts that are happening somewhere else in the world and backed by your government.
But I agree that as an individual there's very little we can do about it. And that people may be spending too much energy on things like that when their own neighbours are in deep shit.
Well, if you focused more on your local problems, it will make your country better, which in turn will make ur government better so that they don't do bad things .
There are a lot of interesting ideas. I agree with much of what you said about history, but I wouldn’t underestimate the role individuals play in shaping it.
Look at the history of post-Soviet countries like Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus, and how they ended up with very different types of governments.
What Trump did to the Republican Party is something new in American politics. He turned it into a loyal, spineless institution that could lay the groundwork for personal autocracy
6:39 oh boy, Mark. I was hoping for something more enlightened.
How can you say it’s insane to care about the plight of other people around the world….but even more surprising- how could you say it has nothing to do with us? And we can’t influence it?
We ARE doing it. We are funding and paying for everything with our own tax dollars. Perhaps because you don’t have any f*cks to give…is why you don’t fully get it.
What about Ukraine?!
I‘m a bit confused why Mark says we live in the best time, when 1) economical inequality is huge (and it was better before), 2) military spending and therefore risks are all time high. 3) Not to mention the climate change.
There's nothing wrong with economical inequality. If everybody's poor, economical equality is high, but I doubt you'd like to live in such a society.
@@ferkokovac317 I disagree that there is nothing wrong with inequality. Not being able to afford a house, healthcare, education and decent living so that rich can be extremely rich is not acceptable. I’m also not so sure there is only poor and rich or everyone poor.
@@kolyakravchenko7086 Please give sources when stating something, Mark did it by stating the book by Steven Pinker
I will not do that as i don’t think it’s necessary in this context.
„There is drastic improvement happening in all sectors of society“ says Mark. Do I really need to reference anything to disagree with this, when it’s clearly not the case?
@@philvandamusic also, Mark doesn’t give any specific data. It the same way I’m referencing the „internet“🤓
Feels weird that Mark and Drew are sitting in different chairs
Wikipedia, unfortunately, has long become another political platform for the biased editors. There is always "that guy", if you know what I mean.
Thank you, I was going to post a similar comment
Yep and RUclips censors in similar ways to Wikipedia... Look up Jimmy Dore for example... They lied about him and he can't even edit it.. WTF it's him, why didn't he get access?
Meanwhile a war criminal gets whitewashed on Wikipedia m
awesome episode
Ok hi, on your "gendered politics theory" ...like, it's an interesting hypothesis, that the global shift in women's political perspective is "driven by TikTok's fyp". Sure, maybe social media has been enabling people of similar opinion to gather together a bit more, okay.
...but i can't help feeling you're missing some *extremely vital bits of information*. I mean, don't you think that maybe the whole "MeToo" movement might have had an impact "on some level" on women's political outlook, in general...?
You know, that time when women discovered on a global level that the generations of trauma and shame they were carrying were not actually their own fault? Where women talked to each other on a scale that had never happened before, and realised that there was a whole system of destruction aimed directly at them, that it wasn't just individuals having isolated experiences... you don't think that might be just a bit relevant? That time where women realised, on a global scale, that they could speak out loud about their horrific experiences of gendered violence, and then they discovered that "men" - in general - would tend to be defensive, dismissive and denialist about it, rather than open or supportive.
i was listening to your podcast in my car, and i really felt the need to come here and see if anyone else was maybe questioning your idea a little. You said, Mark, that you noticed women were listening to you a bit less, and i wonder if it's maybe because you have not been "listening to women", in a general sense...?
I don't know, i haven't listened to your podcast before, so i don't want to generalise about you. i've read some of your articles, and you seem to have a creative perspective.. but on this point, you seem to be *really missing the point*, imo.
If USA did not take an interest in events 5k miles away and Putin took over Europe then at some point in the future that would not be good for you !
6:39 oh boy, Mark. I was hoping for something more enlightened.
How can you say it’s insane to care about the plight of other people around the world….but even more surprising- how could you say it has nothing to do with us? And we can’t influence it?
We ARE doing it. We are funding and paying for everything with our own tax dollars. Perhaps because you don’t have any f*cks to give…is why you don’t fully get it.