Chapo Trap House and the rise of the dirtbag left

don't follow american politics quite as closely as UK but from what I do see the menaker quote does seem quite punchy & posturing given the relative position of the left w/in the dems. sure, they have the candidate, and they have the analysis, but do they have control of the party? genuine qn. from what I gather the dems are likely to line up in 2020 with their centrist have_you_seen_the_other guy analysis behind some sort of bookerberg candidate. from a UK perspective, even if you do have control of the party, wouldn't expect the centrists to bend the knee w/out a fight

establishment Dems' positioning of Perez over Ellison was perceived my many on the left

Serious question: what percentage of Democrats in the US know who the chair of the DNC is, or even know that this position exists, let alone care which of these two people held it?

I just feel like I talk about politics all the time and am around left-wing people who talk politics all the time and people sure did talk about Bernie and Hillary and people sure are talking about the attack on Medicaid and about Trump being a crook but I just didn't hear people talking about this

Twitter is dumb and makes this worse

Rather, it makes _things_ worse

I should know, I'm on it a lot. Subscribe to cat feeds and @corgibot, folks, makes it better by a ton

The interesting bit of potential CTH hypocrisy will be if they fail to mention, or find some way to downplay or excuse, the Ames/Taibbi abuse stuff. Because there's absolutely no doubt that if any noteworthy person to their right had this kind of thing in their past, they'd jump all over it. And people in their Twitter circle have been talking about it recently (e.g. onetime guest Kath Barbadoro), so there's no way they haven't heard about it coming up again.

I can imagine them never bringing it up, though if it reaches some kind of critical mass (eg Taibbi gets sacked) I can't imagine they'd spring to his defense, either. Not exactly Profiles In Courage but he's also not on their payroll

the new one with Tim Heidecker is actually pretty good, off to a slow and somewhat embarrassing start (Matt talking about the "platonic ideal" of fountain sodas), but unlike the first episode with Tim they have good chemistry and there's lots of great riffing on Trump not comprehending humor or metaphorical language, that awful Sully movie, John Kasich's shitty new book...

a slow and somewhat embarrassing start (Matt talking about the "platonic ideal" of fountain sodas)

I loved this.

On that reddit thread about the Taibbi/Ames book there were so many guys saying, "We have to tell Chapo about this." I'm going to guess at least one of the CTH guys has read that book already.

I hadn't read that Taibbi/Ames excerpt before and goddamn it's depressing, where do these people come from whose life is so tightly focused on "look how I'm not an UPTIGHT LITTLE BITCH like SOME PEOPLE", repeated endlessly, an impulse never satisfied

Yeah, I figure part of the reason for the lack of comment (not just on the show, but anywhere) is that they can't credibly claim not to have known about it. In which case their choices are to say nothing, or admit that they knew and didn't think it was a big enough deal to keep them from having Taibbi on the show.

This is an interesting test case for the concept of the "dirtbag left", which I take it is based on the idea that it's possible, and probably better, for the left not be too hung up on PC niceties. We know that, in CTH's case, that means you can be a sincere socialist who calls things retarded, jokes about working at a racism factory, and issues ironic calls to free Jared Fogle. This situation suggests that it also means you can be a sincere socialist while knowingly associating yourself with a guy who bragged about sexually abusing female employees, in the pages of a book where a close colleague bragged about things that were even worse. That's another level of un-PC permissiveness that, clearly, not all of their fanbase is comfortable with.

Meanwhile, of course, right-wingers' sexual pathologies are the key to everything.

I know the book came out a long time ago, but isn't it plausible that they didn't know about it before they had him on? (he guested several months ago iirc) when I bumped this thread it was the first I'd heard of it, and I work in media and read Taibbi and spend too much time on twitter. None of my coworkers were aware of it. I agree that having him on if they knew about this shit would be inexcusable.

or rather, when I bumped the Taibbi thread...

I listened to cum town god help me, seemed abt half as smart, half as funny as cth

We know that, in CTH's case, that means you can be a sincere socialist who calls things retarded, jokes about working at a racism factory, and issues ironic calls to free Jared Fogle.

I wonder if this is a way for them to denude the power of the erstwhile tumblr left's 'crybullying' by plowing through it with irony and counteract this effect: But aside from such direct symbiosis, Nagle suspects — rightly in my view — that the real damage of the “Tumblrization of left-politics” may have been to spur a “brain drain from the left,” as people fled from a political brand increasingly associated with hysteria, witch-hunting, and intolerance of dissent. http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/07/angela-nagles-kill-all-normies-the-alt-right-and-4chan.html

re: taibbi, my suspicion is they turn a blind eye (i) because he is their pal, (ii) he is one of the most credible and high profile left voices in america, and (iii) self-censoring so as not to be seen as 'siding with the enemy'

But that's just it--"the enemy" in this case would have to include some of their own friends and political fellow travelers, no matter what side they take.

Another part of this is that I don't think anyone can honestly say that they know what to do in situations like this. Even if this particular case seems clear, the general questions that it raises--about when to ostracize people for past behavior, when to trust that someone has reformed, how to weigh personal misdeeds against the value of good political work, etc.--are difficult, maybe intractable.

So talking about this at all would be off-brand for CTH for a couple of reasons: because it's not funny, and also because their approach relies on assuming a degree of political/moral certainty, and that's not available here.

Add in the fear of alienating people inclined to defend Taibbi, and Taibbi himself, and you've got a situation tailor-made for them to ignore in the hopes that it blows over. But that would be totally spineless.

I don't entirely get what IIIIII is trying to say, but I feel pretty comfortable claiming that bragging about sexually abusing women will result in a bigger 'brain drain' from a political movement than 'tumblrization'

If they were going to tackle the Taibbi thing I imagine it would be done via Twitter rather than the show itself.

I doubt that any of them have read the book itself (unless one does now) - Felix is pretty specifically only interested in the Middle East and Napoleon, Matt does history, Will doesn't seem to reference much beyond literary fiction, Amber is more social theory-y stuff.

Also they're young as shit. Tweens or not even circa 9/11.

Most of them are their mid-30's, Felix is 27 or 28. You don't remember Will's 9/11 story, when he was a freshman in college?

I thought he said he was a freshman in high school.

nah he was smoking pot in his dorm room

That Nagle quote is dumb. There's not a brain drain from the left, there's a brain drain from arguing about stupid shit on tumblr (or at least there should be).

I knew about Ames/Taibbi, but that's because a friend is a major fanboy and read that book.

I hadn't read that Taibbi/Ames excerpt before and goddamn it's depressing, where do these people come from whose life is so tightly focused on "look how I'm not an UPTIGHT LITTLE BITCH like SOME PEOPLE", repeated endlessly, an impulse never satisfied

Sadly I think this was probably a big part of the reason they went to Russia in the first place. Dudes did some great journalism but basically fuck them.

Enjoyed this episode, including soda fountain talk. Kasich stuff is gold, alt right comedy dude beef got a bit embarassingly Internet Hardman towards the end but the actual excerpts of his stuff were great.

the long-awaited Jeet take on Chapo

https://newrepublic.com/article/143926/dirtbag-left-problem-dominance-politics

I'm not a big Chapo fan, but I'm inclined to take their side on Bend-the-kneegate after seeing who the morons attacking them are.

you're an enabler

I don't think Jeet is a moron tbf

I was talking about the people whose tweets Jeet included in his article

Those people are the Democratic base

ok

lol why did Jeet do this? it's a total filler piece, like he had to make quota... hilarious that he invited himself on the show several months ago on twitter and Will was all for it... I generally like him but this is such a limp-wristed & weak argument... a full-throated criticism of CTH is one thing but this is just completely superfluous.

I haven't read a ton about Taibbi/Ames, some of it sounds bad... is there really no recourse but to make M.T. an Untouchable? I hate to invoke "purity" outside of its revered electoral context, but I just did.

jeet is good, but that piece is bad (not coming at this from a captain save a chapo angle, i actually haven't even been keeping up with the podcast the last month or so).

Clintonites actually are Republicans in most respects, so, <by his own logic> simian displays of dominance are likely to be an effective tactic against them.

also funny

otm. i disagree that 'dominance' is not consonant with liberal/left politics... Matt's bit in the Harvard Crimson interview about politics being 'visceral and libidinal' struck a chord with me... they're also not addressing the vast majority of voters, they're talking about centrist/moderate/Clintonites that double down on "keeping the discourse civil" while the best they can come up with is "I mean, have you seen the other guys?" people want full-throated defenses and arguments for causes they believe in, that doesn't necessarily mean bullying or the kind of dominance that Trump thrives on.

These guys are Napoleon and his clique in Animal Farm. The sooner they go, the better.

animal farm is a metaphor on stalinist totalitarianism, chapo are some guys making fun of libs online

you are a dolt

Also farm animals could never run a farm like that, book is some bullshit

Animal Farm is way more than that -- learn how to think and apply what you read.

People like Chapo are offering the same old shit, just on a different team. There's nothing left or leftist about these guys in any positive sense, just using a moment in time to make some money at the expense of other people, while poisoning the well further, and accomplishing nothing while throwing even more negativity out there.

They're no less center-right free market capitalist blah blah blah than the libs they mock.

xp

Hahaha

what

They're no less center-right free market capitalist blah blah blah than the libs they mock.

― carpet_kaiser, Wednesday, July 19, 2017 12:39 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what

challop trap house

they make good money from the podcast therefore they can't be left-wing anymore because it's hypocritical. i am smart.

I don't like them but I don't agree with that.

They are a backlash to a liberal establishment that had become too scolding, moralistic, and obsessed with cultural issues.

They're popular because people are mad at this establishment for failing to stop Trump, perhaps the most disgusting person to ever seek the presidency.

I think they fall short because they are only increasing the false divisions between people concerned with economic issues and those concerned with ending discrimination of all forms. These goals are related, not opposed, a fact that is obscured as long as liberals and "bernie bros" go meaninglessly back and forth about petty shit that had more to do with social media than American politics.

a truly tweet worthy take

Xp to the Kaiser