Chapo Trap House and the rise of the dirtbag left

Lol. Hm, I guess you're right, these three twitter dudes really do have better credentials when it comes to winning elections.

what is the point of you

Oh FFS. The context of that quote is from the post-Labour election episode, explicitly about how Corbyn did far better than anybody expected and was shit upon by the more neoliberal types. and how the point was that coming right out and fully embracing more progressive positions actually had electoral results. It was a response to the more Establishment types who go for the bloodless, non-ideological data science and polling who hold that its the only way to win.

I posted the link upthread more from a sense of bafflement at the kinda thinking that would invoke ManBunKen in this

kingfish OTM, i can't believe how hysterical everyone is getting over this. it was taken completely out of context, "we" does not mean "chapo trap house," he was talking about the left & progressives immediately after the UK election.

Chapo is successful because FINALLY the left has something visceral like Limbaugh.

You sound like that isn't the worst thing ever.

having something visceral and impassioned instead of the lifeless and toothless tone of the DNC? yes it's great

also corbyn recently said he got his ideas for campaigning from bernie which warms my heart tbh

Not because of celebrity worship or whatever but just that like taking your unabashedly populist message to people and saying what you want to do seemingly works

There are, like, other political institutions than Rush Limbaugh and the DNC. It's not an either or. And if you're taking your clues from Rush Limbaugh, I'll doubt how deeply felt your leftist convictions are. And how smart your strategy is. It's not as if the right are doing that well at the moment.

The right has controlled discourse and policy for like 45 years, not sure what exactly you are talking about

Politics isn't reducible to policies. When you try that, you lose. Of course, when you speak to a bunch of soybean growers, you'd better be in favor of price supports, and when you speak to bankers, you'd better be in favor of financial deregulation, but both sides know that much already. Once that's out of the way, the emotional juices had better flow in your favor.

And if you're taking your clues from Rush Limbaugh, I'll doubt how deeply felt your leftist convictions are.

lmao this is amazing. don't be dense. i'm not talking about his politics, i'm talking about his style. I would put Howard Stern and Bob Grant in the same category, visceral & impassioned.

I got that it was his style, and my point still stands. You think you can separate his style from his lack of ethics, morals, his willingness to lie and manipulate, his hate mongering, etc?

yes

style = passionate broadcasting

I don't hear Rush in their DNA at all, there's more George Carlin.

Sure. They have a lot in common with Bob Grant, though I doubt they ever heard him. Felix is the only Stern fan I think, but I think there's a similarity in candor there.

George Carlin was funny tho

Biddle & Max Read are responding to this thread with similar points:

Dirtbag Left might consider showing up more than once every 4 years to complain about the DNC and vote 3rd partyhttps://t.co/myxH7C3Zvf

— Jim Ray (@jimray) July 15, 2017

I don't think it's fair to compare that to tea party-ism. The bending they're referring to is universal healthcare.

— Sam Biddle (@samfbiddle) July 15, 2017

They have created a scorched earth climate where "centrist" is an epithet.

— Buzz Andersen (@buzz) July 15, 2017

I don't think it's scorched earth, I think it's demanding more from the only not-GOP choice we have

— Sam Biddle (@samfbiddle) July 15, 2017

A strong, organized, vocal left is the only way centrists will ever get what they say they want

— Max Read (@max_read) July 15, 2017

"Showing up every four years" - glad the super lazy are just repurposing their Nader talking points.

Also, as we talked about last year, Chapo is filling the gap that some Gawkers did when their platform still existed.

If the Tea Party were what it claimed to be (grassroots rather than astroturfed), it would hardly be a horrible thing for Democrats to have - managed to get a fair number of people elected IIRC.

Yeah, they sound like what I imagine a Hamilton Nolan podcast would (and his voice couldn't be worse than Matt or Felix).

Pareene was on the Diggcast

the "bend the knee" comment was a slightly brusque but understandable reaction when for years and years, as centrists have lost ground and accomplished modest gains at best, they've also lectured the left about how "unrealistic" and "out of touch" they are. if it's an ovecorrection it's not an unfair one imo

i wouldn't even say it's an overcorrection so much as an intentionally silly hyperbole because chapo is still - get this - a comedy podcast.

i swear it's like someone had a monkey's paw and wished for a more vibrant left media and the unintended consequence was creating the worst discourse on the internet

So it goes.

centrists have lost ground and accomplished modest gains at best

As timid as it might seem to single-payer diehards (myself included), the ACA was much more than a modest gain.

^this^ is true.

Chapo is successful because FINALLY the left has something visceral like Limbaugh.

― flappy bird

nobody remembers bob lassiter.

imagine if, like, kevin williamson had written shit like that, they'd probably do a 'reading series' of it

this is otm, flopson otm upthread too. i feel like CTH has become a weird stand-in for "the left" on twitter for moderates; they are really eager to take it down even though, like I said upthread, CTH is not even that popular. I honestly just wish moderates would at least try to do stick it to Chapo with humor and ridicule instead of "how dare these dirtbags!" moralizing, which gets super-annoying.

xpost i agree w/that and i have no interest in them or cum town as podcasts but whenever reactionaries use that to smear the faint revival of actual (diverse) leftist energy i feel like going to war for them

Also this feels otm to me, as shown by the fact that there were like 4 separate explanations of what Will meant on this thread, even though it was pretty easy to understand from the Macleans article. fwiw i think the "bend the knee" quote makes him sound like a dipshit LARPer with psychosexual dominance issues, the exact type of dude they LOVE to mock, even if i think he's right on the merits.

and fwiw I think Will's twitter thread shows the CTH guys have a far better understanding of the place of their place the "far left" than their critics do. it feels weird that their critics are always coming at them like these podcast dudes are a gigantic threat or something.

If the Tea Party were what it claimed to be (grassroots rather than astroturfed), it would hardly be a horrible thing for Democrats to have - managed to get a fair number of people elected IIRC.

― El Tuomasbot (milo z)

yes, the end goal is to get people _elected_, who gives a shit whether or not they can actually _govern_?

fwiw i think the "bend the knee" quote makes him sound like a dipshit LARPer with psychosexual dominance issues, the exact type of dude they LOVE to mock, even if i think he's right on the merits.

lmao nailed it

i think chapo is one hell of a lot better than left Rush Limbo tbh. that would be like if idk, counterpunch or some of the leftish parts of zero hedge had a podcast. chapo are still fundamentally grounded in reality

makes him sound like a dipshit LARPer with psychosexual dominance issues

from my perspective, to be fair, almost everybody who performs politics on Twitter sounds this way, all those chapo guys to be sure, but peter daoouou and adam parmashenko and etc and etc. (and of course thousands of right-wing goons) it's pretty fucking depressing

wow really doing a close reading of (What appeared to be) an off-the-cuff remark on a comedy podcast.

anyway, Will's right. if the Dems want to keep 'compromising' with a bunch of corporatocrats and white nationalists AND KEEP LOSING not sure why 'the Left' should come to heel

I still haven't heard this podcast, would the people on it make fun of an off-the-cuff remark

yes, the end goal is to get people _elected_, who gives a shit whether or not they can actually _govern_?

I don't get the "they can't govern" stuff anyway - we fundamentally disagree with how the right governs but they're still doing it. All across the country they've been highly effective at pushing their agenda - that's "governing."

imagine if, like, kevin williamson had written shit like that, they'd probably do a 'reading series' of it
― global tetrahedron, Saturday, July 15, 2017 2:11 PM (three hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Well yeah, they'd find that way of speaking laughable when used in defense of ideas they find laughable.

I don't get the "they can't govern" stuff anyway - we fundamentally disagree with how the right governs but they're still doing it. All across the country they've been highly effective at pushing their agenda - that's "governing."

― El Tuomasbot (milo z)

yes. so much winning. if only we could win like they are winning.

so much winning. if only we could win like they are winning.

If you don't see the ways they are winning ground for their agenda, you just aren't looking very closely. Trump's incompetence and the stalemate over ACA repeal are only single pieces of what the right wing has done to US and state policies and is still doing all across the country.

their "agenda" at this point - and i agree with you that they have been tremendously successful at implementing it - seems to be the accumulation of power for power's sake and the systematic dismantlement of democratic norms and institutions. i don't spend a lot of time looking at the american right wing and asking myself why we aren't doing what they're doing.

this is not to say that i don't think winning elections is _important_ or that we shouldn't learn tactical lessons from the way the republicans have twisted american democracy to fit their beliefs, only that such things are necessary but not sufficient.

That someone apparently believes Dems are compromising with white nationalists and asking the left to "come to heel" probably a good indication the discourse is of shit right now.

"if the Dems want to keep 'compromising' with a bunch of corporatocrats and white nationalists AND KEEP LOSING not sure why 'the Left' should come to heel"

asking the left to "come to heel"

establishment Dems' positioning of Perez over Ellison was perceived my many on the left that they weren't willing to make any concessions to the Sanders wing, I don't think it's that much of a leap to get to this