I know that Louis CK has a pretty bad reputation, but have any of you guys watched Horace and Pete? I think it's a pretty good show that raises a lot of points about how we look at political discussion in general. Whilst ideologically I'm what Noam Chomsky might call a 'true libertarian', I changed the way I look at discourse in general after watching this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iRM1iN-3a4&ab_channel=JosephBryan
What does /pol/ think? Do you honestly think that there can be actual discussion between the left and right that isn't tarnished by ad hominem that's implicitly expressed in the way you look at the other party? Or do you simply regard "politics as sport"?
bumping again
He's a smart guy and the show is better than most of the crap on TV but I feel like he kind of holds back. Instead of watching the show I rather read the youtube comments because I enjoy when people REALLY speak their mind.
>>73978139
>but I feel like he kind of holds back
in what sense?
>youtube comments
isn't there an irony in that given the fact that all of the comments are literally what the bald guy is talking about?
>>73977410
the CK stands for cuck
>>73978337
you can at least try and read beyond the first 5 words man
It was pretty annoying, I couldn't finish watching it.
>this country isn't a democracy anymore
It never was. These people don't even know about their own country.
>>73978740
you skipped over the part that addresses exactly that anon
I've always liked Louis, OP. I don't understand why /pol/ hates him.
>>73978376
Haven't you heard? Americans have burger breaks after every 5 words. That and he probably couldn't read "reputation".
>>73978792
Nothing addressed it.
>>73977410
>"Do you think this conversation is happening in any other country?"
Umm yeah? Not every other country is fucking Iraq. Some countries (mine) even have more freedoms than America claims to have.
>>73978927
The last 30 seconds of the show address that how people, simply by virtue of being afraid of the unknown relinquish themselves of any form of democratic responsibility by simply passing the buck. This happens when governments offer people power, which they are afraid to take hold of. "Democracy" loses the intrinsic value system that is meant to legitimize it because people don't actively choose based on conviction as much as they do expediency. That in itself absolves governments from the idea of having an 'illegal mandate' whilst nonetheless doing whatever the fuck it wants.
>>73978873
A lot of other Americans have contributed positively though.
>>73978795
Most memes have never made sense to start with, they just are.
But yeah, thoughts about the show/clip/nature of discourse, anon?
>>73977410
I liked his standup back when he was at his peak. He was funny because he was trying something fresh, by applying shock value to unusual or taboo subjects that most people would consider highly offensive.
But that's all he does, and by now he's gotten stale, because he predictable and there's no longer any shock value to be found.
It also doesn't help that he's become a pathetic, whiny cuck.
The clip also shows that a massive fucking hypocrite the guy is. He makes a scene about not stereotyping your political opponents, but the little cunt went on a rant a while ago about how evil and stupid Trump and his supporters are.
>>73978795
I think he made a joke about LITTLE WHITE DICKS. You already know what happened after that.
>>73979455
I kinda get where you're coming at with his stand-up, though I still think he's doing things differently. not necessarily in stand-up, but he's always trying out new stuff. I respect that, but that's my opinion.
>trump
but, you could also argue that he is still somewhat balanced, because he believes that a republican president is what the US needs right now.
>>73978795
Because for all his posturing, he's still just a liberal moron.
He's got the comedic talent to be funny, but when you keep pushing your political agenda into it more and more, it gets really tiring.
It was the same with Carlin. Very funny and a brilliant comedic mind, but the guy was also a left-wing shill. He would insult feminists for being radical and stupid, then make a 30 minute recording where he defends every single feminist theory and call men stupid, violent morons. He was just incredibly narrowminded, because he never actually put any research into the bullshit he was spewing, and he came off just as uneducated and extreme as the people he liked to make examples of. He was a hypocrite.
Then there's Bill Burr, who used to joke about race relations, but became a pussy when he got a black girlfriend. Every time he said something about blacks, he would follow it up with something bad about whites, so that people wouldn't think he was being racist. He's a complete coward.
Richard Pryor is another one. Great comedian, but off-set he was a huge anti-white racist. There's a youtube clip of someone filming him while he's drunk/high and he just goes off on the most insane anti-white ramble.
Chris Rock. Funny guy. Makes a good point about niggers vs black people, but tries to balance it out by literally lying about white people and talking about how much he hates them, and that's all he's been doing for the last 20 years.
>>73979368
>The last 30 seconds of the show address that how people, simply by virtue of being afraid of the unknown relinquish themselves of any form of democratic responsibility by simply passing the buck. This happens when governments offer people power, which they are afraid to take hold of. "Democracy" loses the intrinsic value system that is meant to legitimize it because people don't actively choose based on conviction as much as they do expediency. That in itself absolves governments from the idea of having an 'illegal mandate' whilst nonetheless doing whatever the fuck it wants.
All those stupid words have nothing to do with this being a republic
>>73980008
I haven't watched his new show, but I didn't particularly like Louie.
Regardless, calling Trump Hitler, dangerous and an insane bigot shows that he's lost his mind.
>>73980340
It's not a Greek democracy, that wouldn't work it today's countries considering the fact that city states aren't viable forms of government for the most part.
But, it still does derive it's legitimacy through popular mandate, albeit indirectly. Most 'western democracies' have variations thereof, which are formalized differently (on a centralized level instead of a federal level, no electoral college), etc. Doesn't change the fact that the US federal and state governments derive legitimacy through popular support, which would be the definition of a democracy.
>>73980513
I'd watch the show nonetheless simply because of the nature of the things it discusses. You're obviously free not to just because you don't like the guy, but I personally feel like it's a bit more candid with the status quo in comparison to a lot of other stale TV.
>>73980835
> You're obviously free not to just because you don't like the guy, but I personally feel like it's a bit more candid with the status quo in comparison to a lot of other stale TV.
I might give it a shot. The clip up top wasn't that bad. As for Louis, my primary reason for not liking him is the strong senstation I have of him being a self-hating white stereotype.
>>73980953
sounds good anon
also, you should check out stanhope if you haven't already, he's a comedian I think that might appeal to you
>>73977410
>>73977410
The truest thing in this video is calling this discourse a sport.
That's exactly what it is. People get trophies for that shit. Folks do it for hours and hours on end, and get so fucking perfect. These people would blow your fuckin mind.
And of course when people sit and explain rationale for their general political outlook they will see the understanding of it and find a conclusion through similarities. People don't debate similarities, they agree with similarities. You debate differences of opinion of which there are definitely many. The more convincing the argument, the better.
These characters are clearly just stupid laymen with a general idea of politics. A good opinion is based on observation and if either one had even the most minimal amount of evidence, he would have won the debate.
>also
There is nothing wrong with Liberal or Conservative. They are just personal titles. No one debates personal titles that is fucking stupid. You talk about topics and debate it, just not go on about some fucking general crap.
>>73982171
Granted, there's no dispute in what you've said. But, my question is do you think that people will ever reach a point where they discuss politics due to conviction and an open mind as opposed to simply trying to shit on the other side? Will politics ever be rational discussion? Would you try and actively make it so on a personal level?
Pretty good stuff but ultimately from a liberal perspective. The guy presented as a rationalist nevertheless seeks to get his share and for an end to wars, which is what the liberal wants. At the end of the day if the people seized power not much would probably change, because people would still have to be rewarded based on their contribution, not their existence, and because people would still get bored and demand a good war every few years.
>>73977410
He doesn't have a bad rep, I think his more recent standup is more blue pilled, his older standup is quite frankly a lot better.
I watched all Horace and Pete, it wasn't a comedy really but it was really well put together, something new and different.
More than anything I like that he's going against the grain with the big TV corps, he's making and producing his own shit for very cheap (each ep is a few bux) and it's distributed DRM free through his site. This has to become the norm in future.
>>73982888
lol fuck no.
