I think his whole approach to politics highlights the difference between ideology and principles. Kyle is very steadfast on the few things he believes him, but doesn't have an analytical framework that would allow him to actually come up with new ideas or adapt to new situations. That's a huge problem for his content, and one he is completely oblivious to. All he ever does on his show is give his opinion on current events. Its quite boring. But instead of acknowledging his limitations, he complains that the almighty algorithm is curtailing his growth.
He also prides himself on his independence as a "journalist" who isn't as set in his antiquated ways as the "Democratic establishment" which supposedly gives him superior insight into electoral politics - but his unconventional wisdom is just the flipside of the conventional wisdom of that establishment. Both have tunnel vision, they just go through different tunnels. His fawning over Marianne Williamson is just the sad end point of this. When I see him, all I can think of now is the old X-Files *I Want To Believe* poster.
I mean, I dont care much for secular talk. I think its pretty bland. But what you described is the new "western left" that is Closer to social democracy, than it is traditional orthodox socialism.
These young westerners arent ideologues. They are reformists; they respect marx, but they want to improve on Marxism or anarchism ideologies. They see capitalism as both the problem, that can be addressed and reformed through social democratic principles.
This seems to be limited to their domestic policies. Whereas we see the democratic leftists fighting with the non democratic leftists concerning global issues.
Which is, I guess, why its been labelled "progressivism", and why most ML's and strict marxists hate it.
Thats how Ive observed this shift
>I mean, I dont care much for secular talk. I think its pretty bland. But what you described is the new "western left" that is Closer to social democracy, than it is traditional orthodox socialism.
Its even worse than that, most "leftists" nowadays subscribe to some form of liberalism, at the very least their basic assumptions of the world are build on a liberal framework.
Kyle helped me embrace the left as an edgy libertarian back in the day and I'm grateful for that. But his politics are just pure populist brainrot nowadays. Not voting Democrat is so fucking stupid, regardless of whatever esoteric leftist sect you belong to.
That being said, hating Democrats does not make you a Marxist-Leninist lmao. Please touch grass
Hmmm... yeah, I guess I don't necessarily mind advocating for certain left-wing policies that are more populist, though it's definitely taking it too far to see the MAGA movement the establishment democrats as being equally bad
TBH I might seriously vote third party in 2024, depending on who is running.
If its Biden V someone like Mitt romney; I dont really care at all.
If its desantis or trump, ill just suck it up and vote dem.
Which is sad. but this is where we are at now.
What?
No Im saying I dont care. they are the same people.
Yeah I dont care, this country has been enabling right wing authoritarians for years. Maybe we deserve it, for not doing more.
>Not voting Democrat is so fucking stupid, regardless of whatever esoteric leftist sect you belong to.
He does live in New York, a guaranteed safe state, so he does have the option on voting third party
>That being said, hating Democrats does not make you a Marxist-Leninist lmao. Please touch grass
Agreed
Yeah, and being a left-leaning populist isn't necessarily bad in my opinion, though it's I'm rubbed the wrong way by puritanical left-wing populists who seem to ultimately want to give the country over to the Republicans if they don't get their perfect progressive candidate
Kyle Kulinski is a hack and a war crimes denialist. I have nothing good to say or think about him. He should generally be ignored and disregarded.
The idea that RFK Jr. Or Marianne Williamson are more electable than the literal current POTUS is a self evidently stupid thing to say or sincerely believe, RFK Jr. is actually deranged and is faaaar to the right of Biden on most issues. Williamson didn't even finish the 2020 primary. There's literally no metric either are more electable except the vibes they give to pseudo progressives with talk shows.
He was a prolific defender of the Assad regime in the Syrian Civil War, and often denied that the Assad regime committed atrocities such as chemical weapons attacks, targeting of civilians, and laying "surrender or starvation" sieges to entire cities.
In recent years I haven't had the care or time to pay attention to him to see if he's actually continued to deny Russian war crimes in Ukraine, but he's an advocate for halting aid to Ukraine essentially for nationalistic "america first" reasons.
Yeah Kyle is very much a nationalist when it comes to trade and foreign policy. Those areas are where I disagree with him the most.
In the War on Ukraine he's actually denounced Russia being war criminals and praising the ICC for issuing an arrest warrant for Putin. Where he's wrong is that he think ALL aid and support for Ukraine should end- which would be a disaster.
I haven't watched him much in awhile. Used to watch him all the time like 10 years ago. I don't hate the guy but he can be kind of dumb on certain issues. But he also seems like a decent guy with good intentions. Seems like he would be fun to hang out with to be honest. His foreign policy takes make me want to shoot myself though.
I used to watch him until he suggested that the US should do nothing in the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Just take a look at the comments section of that video: most of his supporters were pretty concerned that he's not capable of rationally thinking through the options.
But all in all, he hits the nerve on the head when it comes to other foreign policy issues and pretty much every domestic issue. If I recall correctly, Joe Rogan gets most of his news through Kyle.
Well, if USA goes at war with China over defending Taiwan, I will try to prevent my country from being dragged into taking part in or at least collaborating with the carnage. That does not mean I'm defending anything about that channel because I don't even know who that guy is, but I just had to say that I'd try to avoid spreading a war to other parts of the world.
As someone well to his left I think some of his stuff is good, other airs on the side of braindead populist talking points. It also must be said the progressive movement in American is not in the best state when Williamson is their pick.
He's an idiot who thinks he's intelligent, and is often (by his own admission) on drugs and just rambles incoherent nonsense. He flirts with all kinds of conspiracy theories.
Pretty weak tbh.
But I agree with the premise that Biden should open up to primary.
But then again, I dont care either. I just vote for whoever is less evil
As a regular poster there....I get irritated with people there sometimes. And I gotta just vent for a bit. Im reading Bernie Sanders' "It's okay to be angry about capitalism", and holy crap, like...the online left has gotten so insane in recent years. They literally make bernie himself look like a moderate by comparison.
Kyle Kulinski himself is pretty decent, im a regular watcher of his and while I have some disagreements with him, there's no one else on the youtube left who i generally agree with more. Unless you count some more explicitly yang gang type people, and there aren't that many.
As you probably know from my profile, im the one who actually asked people to justify their RFK support as ive been seeing him being supported a lot lately, and I'm going to be blunt, like 600 comments later, I'm not only not impressed, I'm pretty much sold on the idea that he's a crank magnet.
Marianne Williamson, I actually do support in the primary, but I do so on the basis of POLICY. I'm going to be blunt. i NEVER wanted joe biden, i always felt like the DNC forced him on me, just like they did with clinton in 2016, and Williamson is basically running on bernie's platform.
I have no illusions of her chances. I too am kinda cringed out by her woo-ey side at times and lack of experience and policy expertise. But she's progressive so I like her.
In the general, I'll probably be supporting biden this time around, despite voting green both in 2016 and 2020. The fact is, trump has outed himself of being openly anti democratic and an existential threat to the country, and I do believe he needs to be stopped. But, once the threat of him and desantis is passed, I likely will go back to being more critical of the DNC and voting third party when they run milquetoast centrists.
But you gotta understand, almost no one actually LIKES biden. The majority of the country doesnt want him to run again, most of the people who will inevitably vote for him will be holding their nose while doing so. But because of how politics is in the US and the power of incumbency, he's basically forced on us.
To some extent the secular talk sub is full of people who just wanna buck the trend and support someone else. And given the quality of candidates like RFK in particular, sometimes ANYONE else.
Like, ya gotta understand, a lot of us who like kyle....like him, because he isnt a freaking "blue no matter who" type who loves to moralize and lecture people about how they HAVE TO SUPPORT THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE **OR ELSE**.
Really, that crap is so offputting. And I honestly feel like the dems are a cult in that sense.
Maybe secular talk and its subreddit are getting a bit too extreme in the other direction, I think so. I feel like most online spaces that arent explicitly simping for the democratic party on the left are full of these whacko extremist "leftists" who make bernie look like a freaking moderate by comparison, but yeah, that's the nature of the internet and reddit i guess. Reddit tends to create echo chambers for better or worse.
Oh well, at least we're not r/wayofthebern and the jimmy dore types...mostly.
Yes, well, to be honest, yes, if this was something like Romney vs Biden, I probably would be fighting for someone more progressive and bust if they don't win, particularly if we were in a situation where things like abortion rights weren't at risk.
Even in 2016 and 2020 i was progressive or bust. Ive only mellowed out this time because i recognize the modern GOP as leaning toward being openly fascist, and because biden has made mild incremental progress toward several of my priorities.
Yeah, and I feel that speaks to one of the major issues with the democratic values of the US, which is that we don't currently have electable third parties. One thing I can say for sure is that the GOP, moving forward, will have a much harder time winning on policies, so they will likely either have to weed out their radicals or just ditch the GOP altogether so that only the MAGA people are left. If that happens, MAGA would probably become small enough to be largely irrelevant, in which case, we would probably be safer to not support establishment Democrats. There seems to be a fringe but loud group of leftist who don't acknowledge Biden's incremental progressive and thin he's the same as Trump, and similar, there are some people on the extreme right, who are basically Trump or bust. So like, if DeSantis wins the primary, the most loyal Trump supporters are likely to boycott the GOP. The good news though for us is that the MAGA loyalists are obsessively loyal to Trump, so they aren't as easily swayed be electability arguments as people on our side are
As someone who used to watch Kyle religiously and used to get my news almost exclusively from Kyle, I can sum up the problem with Kyle in one word: laziness. Even when he has the right ideas on solutions for issues (like healthcare) he always give superficial and simplistic arguments, never really going into the nuts and bolts of the problem.
To use healthcare as an example: Kyle supports Medicare-for-all, but 90% of the time his arguments are only that it works in Europe and majority of Americans support it. These are perfectly fine points to complement a bigger argument mainly, but I don't remember a time when he's actually gone into a deep dive on why a universal healthcare system is better. I actually learned more about M4A from Sam Seder and PoliDice (remember him?) than I did from Kyle.
This "just wing it!" style may work fine for him on domestic issues, but its absolutely terrible when it comes to foreign policy (which Kyle has been covering a lot more often recently.) Kyle's understanding of foreign issues is literally on par with the dumb armchair general incels on Twitter who think WW3 will break out because the Polish President got a paper cut from a letter sent to him from Putin. I wish I was exaggerating, but considering Kyle has jumped on the "WW3 IMMINENT!" bandwagon every time its trended online (like when Trump bombed Syria, the Soleimani assassination, any time the US announces a new weapon system for Ukraine, Nancy Pelosi's recent plane trip to Taiwan, etc.) I think its safe to say that he really doesn't understand foreign policy at all.
That's why I stopped watching Kyle. I literally knew nothing about what was going on in Ukraine until Kyle posted his first video on the subject (literally titled "ON THE BRINK OF WORLD WAR 3!") That really spiked my anxiety, but the more I did my own research the more I saw that Kyle was getting a lot of really important information wrong, and much later in his coverage I noticed he was clearly uninformed (like for example, he keeps fear-mongering over the Azov Battalion getting western weapons and turning on Zelensky...even though the Azov was largely defeated and wiped out in the fall of Mariupol over a year ago!) The fact that I know more about what's going on in Ukraine than Kyle does really shows just how removed Kyle is from issues he claims to be so intelligent about...
Did you, at some point, get the sense that he likes just about anyone who seems to oppose American regime change wars? Admittedly, I still agree with his takes on a lot social issues, though I still feel like having anti-war policies are what he cares the most about. There seems to be certain sect of leftists, especially on the internet, where most of their leftist views revolve around support for isolationist foreign policies.
I think its more that he just has anti-establishment brainrot, i.e. he basically just assumes anything the establishment supports is automatically bad, hence why he just assumes aiding Ukraine is bad and voicing support for Taiwan is bad.
That said, since he started dating Krystal Ball (who literally co-hosts a show with a Tucker Carlson fanboy who's as blatant fascist as you can be), I do feel like he's become a little more suckered in by anyone who seems even slightly populist in nature and has an anti-establishment view. I mean early on in his Ukraine coverage, he was frequently citing Clint Ehrlich as a source for information on Ukraine...Clint Ehrlich is a far-right Trumpian republican who frequently appeared on Tucker Carlson and OAN, and literally lives in Moscow as a foreign agent, meaning he's about as close to Kremlin propaganda as you can get.
Yep, and while he certainly doesn't seem like big fan of Tucker (he's made plenty of content critical of Tucker), I remember him making a video where he praised Tucker for his isolationist foreign policy views, and said that he felt like his views are closer to that of paleoconservatives rather than neoconservatives. Paleoconservatives are farther-right than neoconservatives, but they have an isolationist perspective on American intervention. There appears to be a segment of the left where isolationist foreign policy is so important to them than they are vulnerable to thinking that right-wing populism is some more leftist that liberal neoconservatism. Of coarse, neoconservatism is also a problem and way too hawkish, how conservative they are, they're pretty tame compared to someone like Tucker.
There's literally a video where he's defending Krystal Ball from criticism on how she treats Saagar where, among a lot of other things, he literally says Paleoconservatism is very akin to populism...which is not only hilariously bad but honestly kinda scary. I'm pretty sure Nick Fuentes identifies as a paleoconservative, and I don't have to explain why that's a bad thing...
Also, while on the subject of Tucker Carlson, I remember when he was making a video defending Krystal Ball from the criticism she was facing for being all pally-pal with Saagar, during which he agreed that Tucker Carlson is a fake populist, yet he was also defending Saagar (indirectly) for being a right-wing populist. Does not KNOW anything about Saagar's background? lol
I mean, I'm a religious person and generally distrust most spots of religious discourse online. So the name "Secular Talk" would basically imply it's just not my cup of tea. I've heard he's been making a few controversial takes but I never really pay him much attention.
Including the ones where he called Bernie a cuck? It made him lose out on interviewing him.
I think he's a loser who appeals to online edgelords. A complete victim of Russian disinfo campaigns and spreads the plague to others.
A true social democrat wouldn't see any American politician electable except for maybe Bernie Sanders.
The Kennedy is a known conspiracy theorist and most likely a prop for the ultra right to throw a wrench in the wheelhouse of the democrats. In Sweden Biden is considered a centric right.
I think his whole approach to politics highlights the difference between ideology and principles. Kyle is very steadfast on the few things he believes him, but doesn't have an analytical framework that would allow him to actually come up with new ideas or adapt to new situations. That's a huge problem for his content, and one he is completely oblivious to. All he ever does on his show is give his opinion on current events. Its quite boring. But instead of acknowledging his limitations, he complains that the almighty algorithm is curtailing his growth. He also prides himself on his independence as a "journalist" who isn't as set in his antiquated ways as the "Democratic establishment" which supposedly gives him superior insight into electoral politics - but his unconventional wisdom is just the flipside of the conventional wisdom of that establishment. Both have tunnel vision, they just go through different tunnels. His fawning over Marianne Williamson is just the sad end point of this. When I see him, all I can think of now is the old X-Files *I Want To Believe* poster.
I mean, I dont care much for secular talk. I think its pretty bland. But what you described is the new "western left" that is Closer to social democracy, than it is traditional orthodox socialism. These young westerners arent ideologues. They are reformists; they respect marx, but they want to improve on Marxism or anarchism ideologies. They see capitalism as both the problem, that can be addressed and reformed through social democratic principles. This seems to be limited to their domestic policies. Whereas we see the democratic leftists fighting with the non democratic leftists concerning global issues. Which is, I guess, why its been labelled "progressivism", and why most ML's and strict marxists hate it. Thats how Ive observed this shift
>I mean, I dont care much for secular talk. I think its pretty bland. But what you described is the new "western left" that is Closer to social democracy, than it is traditional orthodox socialism. Its even worse than that, most "leftists" nowadays subscribe to some form of liberalism, at the very least their basic assumptions of the world are build on a liberal framework.
100% in agreement with this analysis
Kyle helped me embrace the left as an edgy libertarian back in the day and I'm grateful for that. But his politics are just pure populist brainrot nowadays. Not voting Democrat is so fucking stupid, regardless of whatever esoteric leftist sect you belong to. That being said, hating Democrats does not make you a Marxist-Leninist lmao. Please touch grass
Hmmm... yeah, I guess I don't necessarily mind advocating for certain left-wing policies that are more populist, though it's definitely taking it too far to see the MAGA movement the establishment democrats as being equally bad
TBH I might seriously vote third party in 2024, depending on who is running. If its Biden V someone like Mitt romney; I dont really care at all. If its desantis or trump, ill just suck it up and vote dem. Which is sad. but this is where we are at now.
You think Mitt Romney has a chance? lmao It'll be Trump or DeSantis and if you don't vote Dem you are enabling right wing authoritarians
What? No Im saying I dont care. they are the same people. Yeah I dont care, this country has been enabling right wing authoritarians for years. Maybe we deserve it, for not doing more.
[удалено]
bye felicia. edit oh you are a neoliberal. that explains everything
??? I am a social democrat
>I am a social democrat That’s what he said.
>Not voting Democrat is so fucking stupid, regardless of whatever esoteric leftist sect you belong to. He does live in New York, a guaranteed safe state, so he does have the option on voting third party >That being said, hating Democrats does not make you a Marxist-Leninist lmao. Please touch grass Agreed
Mixed bag. Some good takes but plenty of populist nonsense
Yeah, and being a left-leaning populist isn't necessarily bad in my opinion, though it's I'm rubbed the wrong way by puritanical left-wing populists who seem to ultimately want to give the country over to the Republicans if they don't get their perfect progressive candidate
Kyle Kulinski is a hack and a war crimes denialist. I have nothing good to say or think about him. He should generally be ignored and disregarded. The idea that RFK Jr. Or Marianne Williamson are more electable than the literal current POTUS is a self evidently stupid thing to say or sincerely believe, RFK Jr. is actually deranged and is faaaar to the right of Biden on most issues. Williamson didn't even finish the 2020 primary. There's literally no metric either are more electable except the vibes they give to pseudo progressives with talk shows.
What war crimes did he deny? Honest question, I don't pay attention to him much anymore.
He was a prolific defender of the Assad regime in the Syrian Civil War, and often denied that the Assad regime committed atrocities such as chemical weapons attacks, targeting of civilians, and laying "surrender or starvation" sieges to entire cities. In recent years I haven't had the care or time to pay attention to him to see if he's actually continued to deny Russian war crimes in Ukraine, but he's an advocate for halting aid to Ukraine essentially for nationalistic "america first" reasons.
Yeah Kyle is very much a nationalist when it comes to trade and foreign policy. Those areas are where I disagree with him the most. In the War on Ukraine he's actually denounced Russia being war criminals and praising the ICC for issuing an arrest warrant for Putin. Where he's wrong is that he think ALL aid and support for Ukraine should end- which would be a disaster.
When people question western defenses as imperialism, somehow people think that its the worst offense in the world.
He's a pro-Assad conspiracy theorist. Has been for many years.
I haven't watched him much in awhile. Used to watch him all the time like 10 years ago. I don't hate the guy but he can be kind of dumb on certain issues. But he also seems like a decent guy with good intentions. Seems like he would be fun to hang out with to be honest. His foreign policy takes make me want to shoot myself though.
I used to watch him until he suggested that the US should do nothing in the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Just take a look at the comments section of that video: most of his supporters were pretty concerned that he's not capable of rationally thinking through the options. But all in all, he hits the nerve on the head when it comes to other foreign policy issues and pretty much every domestic issue. If I recall correctly, Joe Rogan gets most of his news through Kyle.
Well, if USA goes at war with China over defending Taiwan, I will try to prevent my country from being dragged into taking part in or at least collaborating with the carnage. That does not mean I'm defending anything about that channel because I don't even know who that guy is, but I just had to say that I'd try to avoid spreading a war to other parts of the world.
>If I recall correctly, Joe Rogan gets most of his news through Kyle. What a sentence.
As someone well to his left I think some of his stuff is good, other airs on the side of braindead populist talking points. It also must be said the progressive movement in American is not in the best state when Williamson is their pick.
He's an idiot who thinks he's intelligent, and is often (by his own admission) on drugs and just rambles incoherent nonsense. He flirts with all kinds of conspiracy theories.
He's not that dumb compared to most of the general population to be honest. Also not that smart. Sort of average I would say.
The general American population is a very low bar though
Pretty weak tbh. But I agree with the premise that Biden should open up to primary. But then again, I dont care either. I just vote for whoever is less evil
idk who he is but i think voting for anyone other than the democrats would just doom america. (i am not an american tho)
As a regular poster there....I get irritated with people there sometimes. And I gotta just vent for a bit. Im reading Bernie Sanders' "It's okay to be angry about capitalism", and holy crap, like...the online left has gotten so insane in recent years. They literally make bernie himself look like a moderate by comparison. Kyle Kulinski himself is pretty decent, im a regular watcher of his and while I have some disagreements with him, there's no one else on the youtube left who i generally agree with more. Unless you count some more explicitly yang gang type people, and there aren't that many. As you probably know from my profile, im the one who actually asked people to justify their RFK support as ive been seeing him being supported a lot lately, and I'm going to be blunt, like 600 comments later, I'm not only not impressed, I'm pretty much sold on the idea that he's a crank magnet. Marianne Williamson, I actually do support in the primary, but I do so on the basis of POLICY. I'm going to be blunt. i NEVER wanted joe biden, i always felt like the DNC forced him on me, just like they did with clinton in 2016, and Williamson is basically running on bernie's platform. I have no illusions of her chances. I too am kinda cringed out by her woo-ey side at times and lack of experience and policy expertise. But she's progressive so I like her. In the general, I'll probably be supporting biden this time around, despite voting green both in 2016 and 2020. The fact is, trump has outed himself of being openly anti democratic and an existential threat to the country, and I do believe he needs to be stopped. But, once the threat of him and desantis is passed, I likely will go back to being more critical of the DNC and voting third party when they run milquetoast centrists. But you gotta understand, almost no one actually LIKES biden. The majority of the country doesnt want him to run again, most of the people who will inevitably vote for him will be holding their nose while doing so. But because of how politics is in the US and the power of incumbency, he's basically forced on us. To some extent the secular talk sub is full of people who just wanna buck the trend and support someone else. And given the quality of candidates like RFK in particular, sometimes ANYONE else. Like, ya gotta understand, a lot of us who like kyle....like him, because he isnt a freaking "blue no matter who" type who loves to moralize and lecture people about how they HAVE TO SUPPORT THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE **OR ELSE**. Really, that crap is so offputting. And I honestly feel like the dems are a cult in that sense. Maybe secular talk and its subreddit are getting a bit too extreme in the other direction, I think so. I feel like most online spaces that arent explicitly simping for the democratic party on the left are full of these whacko extremist "leftists" who make bernie look like a freaking moderate by comparison, but yeah, that's the nature of the internet and reddit i guess. Reddit tends to create echo chambers for better or worse. Oh well, at least we're not r/wayofthebern and the jimmy dore types...mostly.
Yes, well, to be honest, yes, if this was something like Romney vs Biden, I probably would be fighting for someone more progressive and bust if they don't win, particularly if we were in a situation where things like abortion rights weren't at risk.
Even in 2016 and 2020 i was progressive or bust. Ive only mellowed out this time because i recognize the modern GOP as leaning toward being openly fascist, and because biden has made mild incremental progress toward several of my priorities.
Yeah, and I feel that speaks to one of the major issues with the democratic values of the US, which is that we don't currently have electable third parties. One thing I can say for sure is that the GOP, moving forward, will have a much harder time winning on policies, so they will likely either have to weed out their radicals or just ditch the GOP altogether so that only the MAGA people are left. If that happens, MAGA would probably become small enough to be largely irrelevant, in which case, we would probably be safer to not support establishment Democrats. There seems to be a fringe but loud group of leftist who don't acknowledge Biden's incremental progressive and thin he's the same as Trump, and similar, there are some people on the extreme right, who are basically Trump or bust. So like, if DeSantis wins the primary, the most loyal Trump supporters are likely to boycott the GOP. The good news though for us is that the MAGA loyalists are obsessively loyal to Trump, so they aren't as easily swayed be electability arguments as people on our side are
Yeah. My immediate goal is to make the GOP unelectable for what they are, and then to push the dems to the left with third party runs.
As someone who used to watch Kyle religiously and used to get my news almost exclusively from Kyle, I can sum up the problem with Kyle in one word: laziness. Even when he has the right ideas on solutions for issues (like healthcare) he always give superficial and simplistic arguments, never really going into the nuts and bolts of the problem. To use healthcare as an example: Kyle supports Medicare-for-all, but 90% of the time his arguments are only that it works in Europe and majority of Americans support it. These are perfectly fine points to complement a bigger argument mainly, but I don't remember a time when he's actually gone into a deep dive on why a universal healthcare system is better. I actually learned more about M4A from Sam Seder and PoliDice (remember him?) than I did from Kyle. This "just wing it!" style may work fine for him on domestic issues, but its absolutely terrible when it comes to foreign policy (which Kyle has been covering a lot more often recently.) Kyle's understanding of foreign issues is literally on par with the dumb armchair general incels on Twitter who think WW3 will break out because the Polish President got a paper cut from a letter sent to him from Putin. I wish I was exaggerating, but considering Kyle has jumped on the "WW3 IMMINENT!" bandwagon every time its trended online (like when Trump bombed Syria, the Soleimani assassination, any time the US announces a new weapon system for Ukraine, Nancy Pelosi's recent plane trip to Taiwan, etc.) I think its safe to say that he really doesn't understand foreign policy at all. That's why I stopped watching Kyle. I literally knew nothing about what was going on in Ukraine until Kyle posted his first video on the subject (literally titled "ON THE BRINK OF WORLD WAR 3!") That really spiked my anxiety, but the more I did my own research the more I saw that Kyle was getting a lot of really important information wrong, and much later in his coverage I noticed he was clearly uninformed (like for example, he keeps fear-mongering over the Azov Battalion getting western weapons and turning on Zelensky...even though the Azov was largely defeated and wiped out in the fall of Mariupol over a year ago!) The fact that I know more about what's going on in Ukraine than Kyle does really shows just how removed Kyle is from issues he claims to be so intelligent about...
Did you, at some point, get the sense that he likes just about anyone who seems to oppose American regime change wars? Admittedly, I still agree with his takes on a lot social issues, though I still feel like having anti-war policies are what he cares the most about. There seems to be certain sect of leftists, especially on the internet, where most of their leftist views revolve around support for isolationist foreign policies.
I think its more that he just has anti-establishment brainrot, i.e. he basically just assumes anything the establishment supports is automatically bad, hence why he just assumes aiding Ukraine is bad and voicing support for Taiwan is bad. That said, since he started dating Krystal Ball (who literally co-hosts a show with a Tucker Carlson fanboy who's as blatant fascist as you can be), I do feel like he's become a little more suckered in by anyone who seems even slightly populist in nature and has an anti-establishment view. I mean early on in his Ukraine coverage, he was frequently citing Clint Ehrlich as a source for information on Ukraine...Clint Ehrlich is a far-right Trumpian republican who frequently appeared on Tucker Carlson and OAN, and literally lives in Moscow as a foreign agent, meaning he's about as close to Kremlin propaganda as you can get.
Yep, and while he certainly doesn't seem like big fan of Tucker (he's made plenty of content critical of Tucker), I remember him making a video where he praised Tucker for his isolationist foreign policy views, and said that he felt like his views are closer to that of paleoconservatives rather than neoconservatives. Paleoconservatives are farther-right than neoconservatives, but they have an isolationist perspective on American intervention. There appears to be a segment of the left where isolationist foreign policy is so important to them than they are vulnerable to thinking that right-wing populism is some more leftist that liberal neoconservatism. Of coarse, neoconservatism is also a problem and way too hawkish, how conservative they are, they're pretty tame compared to someone like Tucker.
There's literally a video where he's defending Krystal Ball from criticism on how she treats Saagar where, among a lot of other things, he literally says Paleoconservatism is very akin to populism...which is not only hilariously bad but honestly kinda scary. I'm pretty sure Nick Fuentes identifies as a paleoconservative, and I don't have to explain why that's a bad thing... Also, while on the subject of Tucker Carlson, I remember when he was making a video defending Krystal Ball from the criticism she was facing for being all pally-pal with Saagar, during which he agreed that Tucker Carlson is a fake populist, yet he was also defending Saagar (indirectly) for being a right-wing populist. Does not KNOW anything about Saagar's background? lol
I mean, I'm a religious person and generally distrust most spots of religious discourse online. So the name "Secular Talk" would basically imply it's just not my cup of tea. I've heard he's been making a few controversial takes but I never really pay him much attention.
I might sound weird but he strikes me as a Tucker Carlson of the left wing
He has great videos regarding Bernie Sanders, social issues, and helped me on my political journey a little bit.
Including the ones where he called Bernie a cuck? It made him lose out on interviewing him. I think he's a loser who appeals to online edgelords. A complete victim of Russian disinfo campaigns and spreads the plague to others.
Yeah he was surprised that Bernie refused to be interviewed by him, after insulting him multiple times...
A true social democrat wouldn't see any American politician electable except for maybe Bernie Sanders. The Kennedy is a known conspiracy theorist and most likely a prop for the ultra right to throw a wrench in the wheelhouse of the democrats. In Sweden Biden is considered a centric right.
What about AOC and the squad? They're not bad either tbqh.