#201
my girlfriend is going on cum town
#202

littlegreenpills posted:

my girlfriend is going on cum town


catchphrase

#203

littlegreenpills posted:

my girlfriend is going on cum town



most trump-era socialist thing ive ever heard tbh

#204
https://www.patreon.com/posts/learning-that-25263823
#205
someone post it in the secret mp3 forum so i can find out what his voice sounds like and laugh at his voice.
#206
I finally got around to finishing an episode of Chapo (the one on CPAC) and thought it was wildly entertaining, but I had tried listening to the pod around a year ago and it didn't catch me.

Other than that I've only heard their bit on the troops BBQ restaurant. I'd say around 70 percent of the white guys where I live open palm slap a VHS copy of Lone Survivor every morning and then do the moves alongside Mark Wahlberg, so I can relate.
#207
There's a new podcast about called "You Can't Win," has anyone listened?
#208
I just had an amazing fart, a momentous ripping of ass. My roommate felt it through the floor on the other side of the living room. The dog is scared. Anyway that's all I know about podcasts
#209

ilmdge posted:

There's a new podcast about called "You Can't Win," has anyone listened?


its got some clown called 'don huge' on it.. seems like a made up name to me, not a fan

#210
The Loosing Zoo Crew, with Don and the Baby (soundboard baby going "aw-ouw")
#211

littlegreenpills posted:

my girlfriend is going on cum town


let me talk to her

#212
Big Physical aka Donny Huge
#213
#214
First episode they were kind of getting their feet under them. Second episode was pretty much better. Third episode was tough to stomach because it was about politics, which means the listener is subjected to Fat Tom's overwhelming nihilism and defeatism on that subject along with his barely concealed scorn for everyone who actually cares, upon whom he's projecting this tremendous cynicism that it's a "hobby" or a phase or an identity, that for instance people don't actually care about abortion, or that because the US is unlikely to actually invade Venezuela or Iran, people that object to those things are being performative or deluding themselves, and so on. It's just heaping portions of contrarianism and superiority as it relates to people that are (or were) in his social and political circles online. But I guess I knew that about Fat Tom going in, and as someone who's had long-term deeply held political beliefs I'm meant to be "challenged" on these things by this episode. I did not feel like it ever engaged with somebody like me remotely honestly however. I believe things but I don't use the things I believe to define myself, even as much as Tom does with Islam. I'm also not encouraged by the description for Episode 4, which looks to be another heaping of being scolded for caring. Sorry Donald! Hopefully Episode 5 will just be shooting the shit about baseball.
#215
I've never interacted with or seen Tom's political views outside of the podcast so I wouldn't have a clue if he was trying to address me or something outside of getting into really stupid political debates with people online with absolutely no benefit whatsoever (because I really have done that, haven't we all?). Most of the obviously silly stuff that Tom said I just sorta shrugged off, sort of like his "just because it's a red flag instead of an American one doesn't mean it's a solution" because I'm pretty sure most left-wing politics isn't some sort of Soviet Union-era industrialism that eats up entire lakes anymore. The comment about the U.S. not invading Venezuela just seemed more like a comment on people overreacting to me, which was fine, I've seen it happen before, and I think it flows into the whole climate doomsday prophecizing that they talked about before where we'll all die or something. To me, that's a good point, because when you mix that into an ideology which really doesn't have any punching weight on the ground (and a premise that might just be flat out false I.E. capitalism cannot fix climate change) then it's a recipe for disaster for people who really might care but are nonetheless surrounded by a toxic narrative. In these cases, it's either acting like you're marching toward triumphant victory, political anxiety, or "oh well we might as well die lol". Makes me think about all the peasant revolutionary groups in Russia that failed spectacularly for decades but accepted that as part of the job. Or did they fail? Because 1905 happened. 1917 happened, where many of the factory workers had grown up in communal villages with knowledge of the Narodniks and SRs.

Overall, thought-provoking. Episode 4 not so much because some of their points aren't very clear and they moved on too quickly. Still entertaining to listen to before bed though.

Edited by serafiym ()

#216
i liked the part where tom was talking about playing red orchestra
#217
i really didn't wanna like chapo
but
i kinda like chapo?
#218

serafiym posted:

I've never interacted with or seen Tom's political views outside of the podcast so I wouldn't have a clue if he was trying to address me or something outside of getting into really stupid political debates with people online with absolutely no benefit whatsoever (because I really have done that, haven't we all?). Most of the obviously silly stuff that Tom said I just sorta shrugged off, sort of like his "just because it's a red flag instead of an American one doesn't mean it's a solution" because I'm pretty sure most left-wing politics isn't some sort of Soviet Union-era industrialism that eats up entire lakes anymore. The comment about the U.S. not invading Venezuela just seemed more like a comment on people overreacting to me, which was fine, I've seen it happen before, and I think it flows into the whole climate doomsday prophecizing that they talked about before where we'll all die or something. To me, that's a good point, because when you mix that into an ideology which really doesn't have any punching weight on the ground (and a premise that might just be flat out false I.E. capitalism cannot fix climate change) then it's a recipe for disaster for people who really might care but are nonetheless surrounded by a toxic narrative. In these cases, it's either acting like you're marching toward triumphant victory, political anxiety, or "oh well we might as well die lol". Makes me think about all the peasant revolutionary groups in Russia that failed spectacularly for decades but accepted that as part of the job. Or did they fail? Because 1905 happened. 1917 happened, where many of the factory workers had grown up in communal villages with knowledge of the Narodniks and SRs.

Overall, thought-provoking. Episode 4 not so much because some of their points aren't very clear and they moved on too quickly. Still entertaining to listen to before bed though.


Sounding off against the US invading Venezuela may be an overreaction, but on the other hand, the US is already attempting a very real coup, and is doing very obvious saber-rattling, so even though further intervention is a lot more likely to be done via something like a dirty war, or just continued sabotage and economic strangulation, you can easily see why some people might be denouncing a seemingly unlikely invasion. That's not acknowledged, and of course that's because Venezuela (and Iran) were only mentioned offhand as part of a discussion on a different theme, but that was also my big issue with the theme: it never acknowledged the possibility of people holding good faith political beliefs and engaging in good faith activism, in a world where the really is a lot of injustice and harm being done. The gist (to me) basically amounted to someone having a look at people trying to do some politics and judging them. "This is why all these obsessive people are so misguided."

One thing that's kind of interesting is that the ethos of the show might well be that politics is for perverts and losers, but that doesn't prompt You Can't Win to ignore politics and talk about other stuff, which politically invested people could easily enjoy. Instead they're doing a kind of active anti-politics, where people's political engagement is being interrogated and questioned. As a zzoner I'm not sure if I'm completely outside of the target audience, or if I'm exactly who they're trying to reach.

#219

psychicdriver posted:

i really didn't wanna like chapo
but
i kinda like chapo?


They are legitimately very funny guys. I enjoy them at times, although at other times I find myself wondering what I’m doing listening to people dunk on Glenn Beck for example and how deeply pointless it is if they’re not cracking me up

#220
it's okay to like chapo. you're wrong, but it's okay to be wrong.
#221
the only good podcast is Hollywood Handbook? ending that sentence with a question mark so that people who disagree can’t yell at me
#222
an insider's guide to achieving your showbiz dreams from two A-List it-boys who are living theirs. Hayes and Sean provide an exclusive VIP backstage pass into Tinseltown politics, answer questions from unsuccessful listeners, and bring in famous guests to discuss their craft and how they became what they are (famous)
#223
chapo is okay, if not particularly useful most of the time. better than listening to the radio once i leave the broadcast area of the low power community radio station that has a weekly bob avakian lecture hour, local hip hop show, and the european electronica set with a russian-speaking dj
#224

ultramega posted:

i liked the part where tom was talking about playing red orchestra


I like that game. There's a new one coming out from the same devs called '83 that takes place in a Cold War gone hot.

I'm basically this but with the Soviets:



Anyways I like Age of Napoleon.

#225

serafiym posted:

I've never interacted with or seen Tom's political views outside of the podcast so I wouldn't have a clue if he was trying to address me or something outside of getting into really stupid political debates with people online with absolutely no benefit whatsoever (because I really have done that, haven't we all?). Most of the obviously silly stuff that Tom said I just sorta shrugged off, sort of like his "just because it's a red flag instead of an American one doesn't mean it's a solution" because I'm pretty sure most left-wing politics isn't some sort of Soviet Union-era industrialism that eats up entire lakes anymore. The comment about the U.S. not invading Venezuela just seemed more like a comment on people overreacting to me, which was fine, I've seen it happen before, and I think it flows into the whole climate doomsday prophecizing that they talked about before where we'll all die or something. To me, that's a good point, because when you mix that into an ideology which really doesn't have any punching weight on the ground (and a premise that might just be flat out false I.E. capitalism cannot fix climate change) then it's a recipe for disaster for people who really might care but are nonetheless surrounded by a toxic narrative. In these cases, it's either acting like you're marching toward triumphant victory, political anxiety, or "oh well we might as well die lol". Makes me think about all the peasant revolutionary groups in Russia that failed spectacularly for decades but accepted that as part of the job. Or did they fail? Because 1905 happened. 1917 happened, where many of the factory workers had grown up in communal villages with knowledge of the Narodniks and SRs.

Overall, thought-provoking. Episode 4 not so much because some of their points aren't very clear and they moved on too quickly. Still entertaining to listen to before bed though.


Same. I'm going to listen to episode IV of You Can't Win but I don't have any strong opinions about Tom's apolitics because from my perspective he just seems to see the world in a very different way than me -- and what can I say about that? There was a moment when he said that religion and specifically Islam allowed him to connect things about the world together (half-remembering this) in a way that made sense to him. I don't think I've ever thought that way myself but I am really hesitant to tell other people they are "wrong" or whatever.

I relate to their talk about how people can fall into thinking of themselves as being on a mission or a quest to transform themselves and the world. And then you conscript other people into your own personal mission / apocalypse / etc. You can justify leading other into believing the world is going to end unless they get on board even if the fundamentals are false or deceptive in various ways -- like climate change will make things really shitty for a lot of people but things are already pretty shitty for a few billion people right now.

But this is something of a dilemma because all big political projects seem to have something like this serving as the primer, and the socialist project has -- we don't like to admit this -- involved a great deal of coercion whether you're dealing with scabs or trying to enforce discipline in various ways. The rubber doesn't meet the road unless you're working as a unit. I watched this East German film glorifying the KPD and Ernst Thälmann and there was this hilarious scene where this column of hundreds of workers led by the KPD link arms and just stomp their way through a police line: your class is taking on its role as the driving force in history! Once your arms are linked there's no going back. But you can also see how this can become really terrifying and go horribly wrong, and this is embedded in the left (as well as on the right, center, etc.):

Edited by trakfactri ()

#226
I don't think it's fair to harp on the tremendous girth of former posters or even the way that the shocks on an automobile squeal in protest when they enter. In Heaven, there will be no gravity other than the 2013 hit movie, which will be available for checkout at all hours in the library basement.
#227

serafiym posted:

I've never interacted with or seen Tom's political views outside of the podcast



ilmdge is making fun of his affected apathy because he has.

#228
by the way I disagree with Petrol, the Bernie Sanders Hour is boring trash and it's not okay to waste your time on that crap, it's extremely lame and will eat away at your brain like hydrochloric acid
#229

trakfactri posted:

and the socialist project has -- we don't like to admit this --



Who is we. Quit this bullshit forever, and stop listening to garbage radio shows that feed you lines like this one about yourself

#230

ilmdge posted:

Sounding off against the US invading Venezuela may be an overreaction



There's no way that Washington hasn't put professional killers into that country already to "facilitate transition", which by itself qualifies as an invasion in context of their current attempts to overthrow Venezuela's government. We went through all of this with Syria and certain people on this forum until the Obama administration admitted it had sent special forces in months ago, and then those posters scattered.

You know as well as I do how this goes, I think, how a certain type of person tries to be a contrarian by claiming that there's no way the U.S. government has done X, and then when they've obviously done X, well, then they didn't do Y, and when it's known beyond a shadow of a doubt they did Y, the wannabe contrarian goes silent until they can start the whole thing all over again.

It's a weird hobby and I don't really understand the point of being constantly wrong and humiliated for it. They should at least join a Trot party so they can have people praising them for being dumbasses.

#231
so under no circumstances should i let those fuckers gaslight me about what's reeeally going on in venezuela
#232
?
#233

psychicdriver posted:

so under no circumstances should i let those fuckers gaslight me about what's reeeally going on in venezuela


to me its real weird to use the term gaslighting here. like its just some guy having an opinion on a topic. its not like the state department is 'gaslighting' people when they say a bunch of dumb crap about whichever country theyre trying to topple this week, that's just the things they say.

#234
yeah that part doesn't start until up to an entire day later when they begin to cite as evidence for their claims a news story based on their own anonymous statements to the writer the day before
#235
on that topic i highly recommend Matt Taibbi's latest article, a chapter from his book released early in honor of the Russia bullshit drying up and crumbling apart.

don't get grumpy on my behalf for the part of that article that reads exactly like my posts on the topic from 3 days after Trump took office, right down to the structure. Though I honor the lurker, Taibbi does not have the characteristic lurker's chin nor his slope of brow, and I am entirely sincere when I say there is really only one way to connect the dots on events whose meaning would prove obvious to anyone without an agenda that prevented it. Also, I'm not even mad.

instead, take note of the DSA podcast-orbit melvins that eagerly pushed that Russophobe line while many of the rest of them just shushed anyone who said otherwise, and notice how now that it's been destroyed, they're smearing the people who had it correct as double-secret right-wingers. Anything to prove yourself a good little Democrat I suppose, gotta lock down that Harrington-style sinecure before you've been completely discredited among the young audience you once dreamed would float your retirement.
#236

trakfactri posted:

serafiym posted:

I've never interacted with or seen Tom's political views outside of the podcast so I wouldn't have a clue if he was trying to address me or something outside of getting into really stupid political debates with people online with absolutely no benefit whatsoever (because I really have done that, haven't we all?). Most of the obviously silly stuff that Tom said I just sorta shrugged off, sort of like his "just because it's a red flag instead of an American one doesn't mean it's a solution" because I'm pretty sure most left-wing politics isn't some sort of Soviet Union-era industrialism that eats up entire lakes anymore. The comment about the U.S. not invading Venezuela just seemed more like a comment on people overreacting to me, which was fine, I've seen it happen before, and I think it flows into the whole climate doomsday prophecizing that they talked about before where we'll all die or something. To me, that's a good point, because when you mix that into an ideology which really doesn't have any punching weight on the ground (and a premise that might just be flat out false I.E. capitalism cannot fix climate change) then it's a recipe for disaster for people who really might care but are nonetheless surrounded by a toxic narrative. In these cases, it's either acting like you're marching toward triumphant victory, political anxiety, or "oh well we might as well die lol". Makes me think about all the peasant revolutionary groups in Russia that failed spectacularly for decades but accepted that as part of the job. Or did they fail? Because 1905 happened. 1917 happened, where many of the factory workers had grown up in communal villages with knowledge of the Narodniks and SRs.

Overall, thought-provoking. Episode 4 not so much because some of their points aren't very clear and they moved on too quickly. Still entertaining to listen to before bed though.

Same. I'm going to listen to episode IV of You Can't Win but I don't have any strong opinions about Tom's apolitics because from my perspective he just seems to see the world in a very different way than me -- and what can I say about that? There was a moment when he said that religion and specifically Islam allowed him to connect things about the world together (half-remembering this) in a way that made sense to him. I don't think I've ever thought that way myself but I am really hesitant to tell other people they are "wrong" or whatever.

I relate to their talk about how people can fall into thinking of themselves as being on a mission or a quest to transform themselves and the world. And then you conscript other people into your own personal mission / apocalypse / etc. You can justify leading other into believing the world is going to end unless they get on board even if the fundamentals are false or deceptive in various ways -- like climate change will make things really shitty for a lot of people but things are already pretty shitty for a few billion people right now.

But this is something of a dilemma because all big political projects seem to have something like this serving as the primer, and the socialist project has -- we don't like to admit this -- involved a great deal of coercion whether you're dealing with scabs or trying to enforce discipline in various ways. The rubber doesn't meet the road unless you're working as a unit. I watched this East German film glorifying the KPD and Ernst Thälmann and there was this hilarious scene where this column of hundreds of workers led by the KPD link arms and just stomp their way through a police line: your class is taking on its role as the driving force in history! Once your arms are linked there's no going back. But you can also see how this can become really terrifying and go horribly wrong, and this is embedded in the left (as well as on the right, center, etc.):


here's my political advice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00ySZOPPDD4

#237
here's mine

https://youtu.be/jVOZeT2W6Bo
#238
I think You Can't Win is actually not very good and I don't even like getfiscal's twitter (99:1 ratio of ultra-triple-strength irony to great posts is not my thing anymore) but getfiscal is an excellent thinker and brilliant guy and I wish him success and happiness.
#239

cars posted:

instead, take note of the DSA podcast-orbit melvins that eagerly pushed that Russophobe line while many of the rest of them just shushed anyone who said otherwise, and notice how now that it's been destroyed, they're smearing the people who had it correct as double-secret right-wingers. Anything to prove yourself a good little Democrat I suppose, gotta lock down that Harrington-style sinecure before you've been completely discredited among the young audience you once dreamed would float your retirement.


who do you mean when you say this? I saw a blue-check twitter guy say the same thing and when people asked him who he meant he was like "you know, mother jones." seemed to me that the actual DSA-types mostly had the right line on russiagate, the people who went in on it were all pure libs

#240
(not to imply that deserves any great credit in that the DSA-types are really more of a media-criticism fandom than an actual political tendency so one would fuckin hope they'd be able to made such an easy layup within their core competency)