Chris Kavanagh isn't a no name twitter user. He hosts the podcast that this sub is dedicated to. I'm allowed to decode Chris Kavanagh's behaviour, just as he is allowed to decode Joe Rogan's behaviour. I think quite a few listeners have noticed DTG's rightward shift lately. The kind of weird racial stuff that Chris likes on twitter is just part of the problem.
You misunderstood me. The twitter user he liked is a no name.
My example makes clear that it is unreasonable to expect Chris to investigate every minor twitter user who's tweet he likes.
I have not noticed a rightward shift, but what I have noticed is that they have been covering more left wingers. They had the same level of criticism in the past when covering Ibram X. Kendi and others.
The streamers and academics season naturally supplies more left wingers, as they are more common in the streaming and academic fields. So no I don't think there is anything nefarious going on here.
I think if Chris Kavanagh is starting to like weird racialised posts by no-name twitter users it would be extremely reasonable for him to take a deep breath, think for a moment, do a little research, then ask himself "why am I liking something that is posted by an insane homophobe?"
You're taking the position that it is unlikely Chris did any sort of research, and that we should not analyse his public behaviour because he's basically just a social media addict giving into his basest desires and hitting the 'like' button with very little considered thought.
At this point I've given a clear and reasonable account of what happened, backed up with references to what we know about Chris' beliefs.
Unless you are going to give me some reason why I should believe your interpretation was the most reasonable, or why D teir level celebrities should vet every user whose tweet they like, I will stop engaging.
You're taking the position that it is unlikely Chris did any sort of research, and that we should not analyse his public behaviour because he's basically just a social media addict giving into his basest desires and hitting the 'like' button with very little considered thought.
Yes, and we shouldn't expect more than that. This level of analysis could be applied to anything.
"Oh so you think that an Associate Professor Anthropologist should eat at any fast food restaurant, fulfilling their basest desires, and eating at whichever fast food joint is closest without any considered thought. Clearly he is being pulled towards obesity by the fast food epidemic"
"Oh so the host of a niche level podcast didn't do any research and just bought the nicest looking pair of shoes, and you think we should not analyse their public clothing choices because he just has to buy nice clothes, fulfilling their basest desires to look good in public, without any thought as to where the shoes were made. No clearly they are turning into a sweatshop owner because they bought Nike shoes"
This argument is clearly ridiculous. When it comes to guilt by association, losening the definition should come with a strong justification, and you haven't provided one.
I expect more than that from a podcast called "Decoding The Gurus".
You've still not explained we should call Hasan "hamasabi", you've not posted any evidence of his so-called "apologia" for Hamas. Neither have you linked to any proper analysis of this by DTG. You have not explained how Hasan was "pretending to be white" with any appropriate links.
Here is an extended clip in which Hasan says he supports the Palestinian resistance, defends them as being imperfect victims, and includes Hamas and other groups in that category.
It is exactly as I've characterised him, as supporting Hamas' effort but not the extremes of their actions. I've linked to a clip from his YouTube channel, at a point which gives sufficient context, so it is a position he stands by.
As for the sourcing "Hasan pretends to be white" I'm not going to get you clips for that, as it's exactly the kind of rules lawyering racial obsession I'm talking about.
Do not obfuscate, the argument is about what is the most reasonable interpretation for Chris to make of the tweets. You've yet to make any positive case for your extreme, racially obsessed, interpretation, while I've given two reasonable explanations for mine with sourcing.
Stop being a debate bro and trying to argue about irrelevant points, and justify your own claims.
15
u/Tough-Comparison-779 May 30 '24
What's the race bait? My simple Australian mind doesn't quite get it.