What are you listening to - Podcast Edition?
-
Thanks for the recommendation. I listened. I agree Bannon is not crazy. He seems coherent and principled. One does not have to agree with his principles. He's too hard line nationalist for my taste. I have no issue with H1Bs. Bannon did deny any connection with culture regarding quality of tech workers. He blamed the H1Bs simply on the fact that those workers are cheaper. I'm not entirely sure that's the case. Maybe at some companies, but I doubt at the big tech ones. I think they pay their H1B engineers the same as the native ones.
-
The most recent Sam Harris podcast has Niall Ferguson schooling Sam on some of the positives of the Trump Presidency as well as a realistic assessment of where the US stands in the world - i.e. lacking in fiscal strength and unable to address the myriad challenges it faces. Really well done.
-
Schooled? He had replies, I'll grant you that. But honestly maybe 75% of Ferguson's replies were simple whattaboutisms. Occasionally there would be a broader point to the whattaboutism, (e.g., we've left allies in the lurch before) but most were pretty weak in terms of any broader point being made.
And many of his defenses seemed really inconsistent. Example - when Sam asked his opinion about Trump's plan for ethnically cleansing Gaza, Ferguson mentions that if you read Art of the Deal (which I actually did back in the 80s), Trump likes to stake out a maximalist, even crazy position at the start of a negotiation, so when he finally proposes a more sane option that's still a big win, it gets accepted. Ok fair enough. But Sam asks 'then why give away all the important concessions Putin wants before we even sit at the table? Ferguson changes the subject.
-
I will again point out for the god knows how many'eth time that there is nothing wrong with "whataboutism" arguments, and in fact they are exactly what are called for to combat arguments that make claims about "this political side is especially bad/scary because X". An equal and opposite whataboutism about X logically nullifies such arguments. Of course in any given specific, the whataboutism might be weak, but they have to be judged individually rather than as a class. There is nothing wrong with the class.
And it goes without saying that they are employed relentlessly by both sides of any argument here, often by the same people who will dismiss them as a class of argument when others use them.
You will not find "whataboutism", by that name or any other, in any list of formal logical fallacies.
-
He’s usually quite a bit better than he was on this podcast. My guess is he got a little spooked when JD Vance sniped at him for complaining about Trump’s appeasement, and he wants to make sure he stays in good graces with Musk and the administration’s defenders. Knowing full well about Musk and Sam’s falling out probably factored in also. Basically he knows where his bread is buttered.
As a contrast, listen to him on Bari Weiss’s year end podcast where he was asked to make predictions for the new year. That was his old self.
-
Pushed back but also was very much making the point ‘hey I’m one of you not a ‘globalist’
This podcast came out after the Vance incident as he mentions the exchange with Sam.
