they have some social chauvinist views that are very normalised especially among their generation like shitting on poly folks iirc also saying the r slur now and again but maybe brace has toned that down I haven't listened for a while. kinda related it's not really a direct criticism but i wish they had done a Xinjiang episode at some point it's kind of a noticeable omission to cater to their lib left audience idk
I know you're a different poster but the comparison here for 'political consistency' was another podcaster whose meteoric rise began by giggling his way through racist jokes. The stuff you referred to are jokes. They release a lot of duds I don't like but their material analysis is absolutely consistent. They are also appropriately serious and solemn when the topic calls for it (all the Epstein stuff that is their bread & butter). I agree it's odd they didnt do an Xinjiang episode, they'd probably do a great job diving into the weirdness of Zenz. I would argue that their inconsistency lies in their guests and how they handle them. Recently they let an Iraq vet state uncontested that China is an 'ethnostate' which was baffling based on how Brace talks about China.
Also now that I'm reading the comments again I think the person I replied to was referring to the guest being inconsistent anyway. Not sure tho.
downplaying social chauvinism is an L, it's super easy to not do that! they're not just "jokes", they do harm to marginalised groups. being left wing and doing that is political inconsistency. sure they're some podcasters not revolutionaries but you did ask.
What is politically inconsistent about TA? They’re commies.
is the foremost bisexual maoist
they have some social chauvinist views that are very normalised especially among their generation like shitting on poly folks iirc also saying the r slur now and again but maybe brace has toned that down I haven't listened for a while. kinda related it's not really a direct criticism but i wish they had done a Xinjiang episode at some point it's kind of a noticeable omission to cater to their lib left audience idk
I know you're a different poster but the comparison here for 'political consistency' was another podcaster whose meteoric rise began by giggling his way through racist jokes. The stuff you referred to are jokes. They release a lot of duds I don't like but their material analysis is absolutely consistent. They are also appropriately serious and solemn when the topic calls for it (all the Epstein stuff that is their bread & butter). I agree it's odd they didnt do an Xinjiang episode, they'd probably do a great job diving into the weirdness of Zenz. I would argue that their inconsistency lies in their guests and how they handle them. Recently they let an Iraq vet state uncontested that China is an 'ethnostate' which was baffling based on how Brace talks about China.
Also now that I'm reading the comments again I think the person I replied to was referring to the guest being inconsistent anyway. Not sure tho.
downplaying social chauvinism is an L, it's super easy to not do that! they're not just "jokes", they do harm to marginalised groups. being left wing and doing that is political inconsistency. sure they're some podcasters not revolutionaries but you did ask.
deleted by creator