I listened to 170 hours of Joe Rogan’s podcast. Trust me, he hasn’t turned against Trump (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by NomNom@feddit.uk to c/politics@lemmy.world

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 31 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 2 weeks ago

Rogan is a great example of a few things:

The Dunning-Kruger effect
"I'm just asking questions" being used as an excuse to host an unbalanced number of individuals purporting one specific worldview
Toxic masculinity posing as intellectualism

He is extremely popular with one particular demographic. That demographic tends to share the toxic masculinity and the Dunning-Kruger-fueled belief that they can be experts at everything from the armchair.

[-] BillyClark@piefed.social 3 points 2 weeks ago

Speaking of toxic masculinity, I remember Joe Rogan during Covid saying that he decided to stop masking and isolating because it made him "feel like a pussy" IIRC.

It's weird to me because in my view, a strong person doesn't care what other people think of them. Rogan's actions just seem extraordinarily cowardly and weak to me.

Like, he needed to eat elk meat to feel like a man? I understand we all have negative thoughts like that, but to be compelled to act out of your own fears doesn't strike me as masculine in the least.

Is that a part of toxic masculinity? That it's centered around fear of judgment and a low sense of self worth? That they feel a need to project an image that's exactly the opposite of how they really feel?

Because if so, then it seems like even the slightest bit of critical thinking ability would easily steer men clear of it.

[-] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 3 points 2 weeks ago

Every element of the whole toxic masculinity influencer thing is just an expression of weakness and insecurity framed as "manliness".

[-] gdog05@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

It's all performative. Every ounce of it. Goth kids don't put as much effort into appearance. Their version of masculinity is being loud, obnoxious and putting themselves above others. It's a dentist on a $30,000 Harley going 15mph while making 160 decibels, wearing $200 T-shirts and $500 jeans to mimic the hard-earned look of a working man. It's weak, fearful men spouting off constantly about the second amendment and their right to defend their families but wouldn't touch a weapon if it didn't look tacticool enough. Esthetics over everything. They're not brave enough to be original in thinking or appearance. Not strong enough to be the rock of servitude that holds people together in hard times. The embodiment of paper tigers.

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 2 weeks ago

Because if so, then it seems like even the slightest bit of critical thinking ability would easily steer men clear of it.

Absolutely correct, in my view. "Fear of judgment and a low sense of self worth" is also spot on.

Rogan gave national voice to plenty of people who regularly used the term "snowflake" to describe what they saw as weak people who like to complain (I'm speaking from memory here and generalizing; Rogan probably has also used this term himself, but I'm not searching transcripts, so take all this with a grain of salt). By this logic, a "snowflake" is someone who is perceived as weak because they let so much affect them emotionally.

But these toxic men are "snowflakes" in every sense of the term. They go on Joe Rogan to complain about trans people, or gay rights, or "the war on Christmas", or the perceived persecution of "alpha males", or any number of other issues. Some guests are only famous because they complain about such things.

So what is the difference between a toxic "alpha male" on Joe Rogan and one of the "snowflakes" they like to complain about? Absolutely nothing, except that the toxic men believe that anger doesn't count as an emotion, so their insecurity allows them to show it regularly.

(And to be clear, there is nothing wrong with showing emotion or caring deeply about something -- that's not a point I'm trying to make)

[-] AngryRedHerring@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

“I’m just asking questions”

Glenn Beck was (is?) big on that one too.

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, and Tucker Carlson. It's kind of a thing.

The difference is that Beck and Carlson are actually more straightforward with regards to how they lean. Rogan always suggests he's a centrist, sometimes even suggesting he is apolitical, which is patently false.

[-] maplesaga@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Any example of a question?

Do you just mean hard questions, like a classic journalist?

[-] daychilde@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I have a little experience on Glenn Beck.

What sparked that was Glenn Beck asking the first sitting Muslim member of Congress, Keith Ellison: "Now, I wouldn't say this, but some of my listeners might like to ask you: 'Are you working for our enemies?'".

Bear in mind that this was in a time when politicians were not openly working for Russia, so the idea of asking a sitting member of the House of Representatives if he was "working for our enemies" was galling. But it was Beck's technique of "Oh, I'm not saying, this, rather, 'it is being said by some unspecified people'" to weasel out of it being him saying it.

That said, I have avoided Rogan completely, so cannot speak directly to his particular brand of bullshit.

[-] maplesaga@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Thats pretty hilarious, the website I mean.

[-] AngryRedHerring@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

"Is it possible that Hillary Clinton actually was running a pedophile ring out of a pizza parlor basement? I mean, I'm just asking questions here."

Ancient Aliens had more plausible propositions.

[-] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago

It's not the question asked. It's the first. Like hell have rfk on to spout nonsense about vaccines (made up example) and say he's just looking at all views, just asking questions.

Well, if you have questions, ask a scientist that has studied it, not someone with a brain worm that directly caused children's deaths due to misleading campaigns against vaccines on the Pacific islands.

Asking a terf on to talk about gender identity. Climate change deniers to talk about climate change. Asking trump on to talk about anything. It's a way to muddy the waters about who is an expert while also making it unclear as to what the evidence says.

[-] Artaca@lemdro.id 1 points 2 weeks ago

I work with a kid who I know listens to JRE often. He's kind and very smart. What I've found is that he lacks confidence and prefers not to speak even when he thinks he has the right answer, for fear of being wrong. He's depressed, and around this time last year checked himself into a hospital for a week. I know he recently started going to church, likely to try and find answers and support. He seems to mean well. All this to say, listeners of JRE may not be stupid or bad people. Some of them, a lot of them, I'd be willing the guess, are confused young men being brought to bad conclusions because they sound like answers and are wrapped with an "I'm just asking questions," bow.

[-] AngryRedHerring@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

prefers not to speak even when he thinks he has the right answer, for fear of being wrong

One remedy for that is to stop listening to Joe Rogan

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, I agree with that about confused young men. However, at the end of the day, if JRE turns them into toxic men, then they're still just toxic men.

I would hope that doesn't happen. In general I think we as a society need to be kinder to these confused young men before they take that path. It's a more difficult conversation to have and the solution is not very clear.

Either way, JRE is dangerous because it offers propagandistic suppositions as answers to people with big questions.

[-] Bieren@lemmy.today 5 points 2 weeks ago

Rogan is like the Snoop of podcasts. He will do anything for money.

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

So a whore?

[-] GladiusB@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yea. You can't blame a clown for being in the circus. I can blame him for trying to be an intellectual when he's just a dumb fucking tool.

[-] daychilde@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

I listened to 170 hours of Joe Rogan’s podcast

Why would anyone want to torture themselves like that? o.O

[-] stochasticity@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

He has a podcast called the "Know Rogan Experience" aimed at evaluating and understanding what happens on Rogan. Because, like it or not, Rogan has influence.

[-] stochasticity@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

For those asking why the author did this, he has a podcast called the "Know Rogan Experience" aimed at evaluating and understanding what happens on Rogan. Because, like it or not, Rogan has influence.

[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Self torture? Moron.

[-] stochasticity@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

He has a podcast called the "Know Rogan Experience" aimed at evaluating and understanding what happens on Rogan. Because, like it or not, Rogan has influence.

[-] dizzle18@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

God, why would anyone subject themselves to this?

[-] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The podcast is very good, I highly recommend picking out a few episodes that look interesting and diving in.

It's quite remarkable how he launders dumbass galaxy-brain conspiracy theories to his audience and drives the conversation towards PR for billionaires.

Mark Andreson led him around like a bull with a ring through his nose; the guy is one of the most useful idiots in history.

Edit: For people who didn't read the article, I'm talking about the author's podcast, The Know Rogan Experience.

[-] taiyang@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I oddly haven't tuned in yet, but I remember when they started the podcast since Marshall is a regular on atheist podcasts I regularly listen to, like God Awful Movies.

He's always subjected himself to bullshit though; after all, his other work has him interviewing batshit crazy conspiracy folks and scammy snake oil woo folk.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks for the recc. I have a feeling I might like it because I've been pretty into Knowledge Fight for a while. If you didn't know about that one, it's a podcast that covers Alex Jones and people in his sphere, including Joe Rogan on occasion.

[-] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, I need to listen to most recent one; I'm curious how Jones is dealing with the attack on Iran.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I won't spoil it then. Enjoy!

[-] pleaseletmein@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 week ago

New form of masochism?

[-] stochasticity@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

He has a podcast called the "Know Rogan Experience" aimed at evaluating and understanding what happens on Rogan. Because, like it or not, Rogan has influence.

this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2026

39 points (97.6% liked)

politics

28929 readers

403 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News