Destiny: The Edge of Debate

its impressive that one can speak so confidently on a topic when they cant see past their nose due to their own bias. almost every claim youve made about destiny's procedure and others is actually much more evident in your own post. again this is due to the clear lack of engagement with the issue in good faith on your part. your comment about the ICJ ruling WRT 'plausibility' and what that word actually means in context is the most clear example

M. Erxxx

I just realized this thread was from a month ago. So maybe I'm the outrage brain 😅

Zelda Hershy

The moral grand standing about the situation in Palestine is tiring. It's not your favorite podcasters' job to sooth your anxiety about bad things happening in the world or to address every issue in a way that centers your preferred flavors of political narratives and moral intuitions about an 80 year conflict that most people only started to really really care about 9 months ago. I'm a fairly new to this pod, but it seems to me that they have been doing their thing in a ideologically consistent and good faith manner since before Oct 7. This podcast is not primarily about the political or moral ideologies of the hosts, but their politics seem well within the window of acceptability for modern liberal societies (I say that descriptively, not normatively). If you actually think that they are morally culpable for anything to do with the Palestine conflict, you've probably been guru-brained elsewhere or your moral scale is is being thumbed by group membership in a group that is drunk on its own moral outrage. In a couple years, when your Palestine flag is gathering dust in the corner and you've moved on to evaluating all media based on some new moral wedge issue, this pod will likely still be here doing their thing and maybe you will be able to enjoy the show once again.

Zelda Hershy

It's always amazing to see who is stuck in their epistemic bubbles and just can't be bothered to actually notice what's happening due to the rhetoric that's infected them. And when I say amazing, I mean heart breaking.

The Jerg

I genuinely appreciate your responses and that there's no personal animosity here. I'm not looking for an endorsement of Ryan Grim or Finkelstein, I certainly wouldn't give either an unqualified thumbs up. I first subscribed to your patreon to understand what the hell was going on with a family member who had fallen into the Joe Roganverse and was suddenly advocating far-right political positions that I'd never heard them even tangentially touch on before. Listening to you helped me understand the concepts floating around there, the ways these gurus appealed to a heightened sense of unique individuality, etc. and how all that funneled during the pandemic into antivax extremism and lab leak conspiracism. Your excellent work interviewing experts like Dr. Howard and Dr. Andersen was icing on the cake. Despite not being virologists you did a fantastic job orienting yourselves and your audience to the issues involved. Obviously it's a difference of opinion here but I would have hoped for the same approach when incitement to genocide came up. That's something that even more than antivax material demands attention. Obviously you aren't historians or genocide scholars, but you don't have to be to seriously grapple with this issue. I think you have an obligation with so many of the people you cover diving into this topic to at least point your audience towards reality instead of leaving it at a nonspecific disapproval of the fantasy lands that Harris, Destiny, Musk, et al. inhabit. I think with Destiny in particular your own unfamiliarity with the history and scholarship made you susceptible to his rather empty rhetorical techniques which are sufficient to take down MAGA racists but bear a striking resemblance to antivax pseudo-science when he applies them to complex social phenomena like 100 years of conflict in the Middle East. Destiny's grand conclusion to his Piers Morgan interview was the emptiest platitude about compromise with each side giving something up to arrive at a two-state solution, without any apparent realization that in the current conflict the Israeli government is adamantly opposed to that, while Hamas has stated they will disarm and become a simple political party if two-states on 1967 borders are implemented. Please bring on an expert for the sake of your audience. It shouldn't be a firebreather like Finklestein. I'm sure you can find a genocide scholar to walk the audience through the ICJ case, what is genocide, why did the court find it plausible and what are the US/Israeli arguments against. Or bring on a scholar of antisemitism to discuss the rabid reactions of the US and German governments to criticism of Israel and/or the way some more traditional antisemites like Alex Jones / Nick Fuentes are trying to take advantage of opposition to Israel's slaughter. I mean the fact that Elon Musk is simultaneously embracing extreme antisemitic conspiracies while being promoted by the ADL is sure as hell something to decode. Anyways, I'm probably spitting into the wind, but you've responded to many of my comments even when I've been rude. I greatly appreciate your science communication and feel frustrated by what feels an unnecessary shortfall when it comes to history, sociology, and politics, in a situation with incredibly grave life and death implications. edit: It's secondary, but to highlight my point Chris actually rated Noam Chomsky (1.7) as more of a guru than Destiny (1.6). Just something to think of in calibrating the gurometer.

David Moore

Yeah, I just strongly disagree with the notion that we did not challenge Sam's rhetoric on Palestine. I also do not think that outlining Ryan Grim's position was particularly important; if I had, I would have been more critical because I think he has very clear differential standards that are strongly influenced by his political positions and beliefs. This is as apparent in his coverage of the Israel-Gaza conflict as it is in his coverage of the lab leak. And yes, I agree you can be critical of the state of Israel and its military campaigns without being antisemitic AND that the Israeli government is certainly not above hyperbolic claims and propaganda. Acknowledging that does not, however, mean you must agree with Ryan Grim's assessments. I think Destiny has a clear pro-Israel bias, but I think he is also more willing than "dedicated partisan hacks" to criticise the Israeli government. I'd contrast that with someone like Douglas Murray, who is a partisan hack and propagandist for Israel. Destiny is an edgy streamer who thinks that Israel is unfairly maligned and the Palestinian cause is treated with too much reverence. He's good at debating, but in most cases, he is just repeating points raised by other academics/historians, so in general, there is very little he presents that rests on his credentials. In the Harari episode, we did not praise US militarism; we indicated our agreement with Harari that rules-based-internationalism is preferable to isolationist nationalism. That you take that as endorsing US militarism when we mentioned the Iraq war as an example of the US sidestepping international approval since the war was not sanctioned by the UN seems a rather inaccurate summary. Moreover, I think there is a common tendency amongst certain 'anti-imperialist' folks in the US to interpret everything in the world as revolving around the US; that is not how I interpret politics or approach the UN and NATO. The US has a lot of influence and a lot of military power, but it's not the only country that matters. I think you similarly don't really follow our criticisms of Finkelstein, but c'est la vie. In any case, it sounds like you feel strongly about these issues, so it's totally reasonable to head off for new pastures. Good luck out there and cheers for the previous support!

Christopher Kavanagh

Repeatedly now on your show, people have made statements drawn from the traditions of antisemitism or filled with basic factual inaccuracies regarding the slaughter of Palestinians with little to no push back or elaboration. I understand in the Harris discussion that it was live and there was no time for fact-checking but he repeatedly lied about the genocidal statements of the Israeli government. When he says he thinks all those religious zealots talking about Amalek are too close to government he hides that it is the prime minister Netanyahu calling Gaza Amalek, or that the Minister of the Interior Ben Gvir is a convicted terrorist and ardent advocate of Jewish supremacy. When he claims that Hamas are worse than the Nazis (though to be fair this is mostly in his own podcast), he does so by erasing well documented Nazi crimes, a form of holocaust denial. With Destiny, you chose the clips so there's a bit more responsibility on your part for what's presented. Regarding October 7th you frame Ryan Grim as an atrocity denialist and proceed to Destiny ranting about how that's claiming that "the Jews" are making this up. Again it is a classic claim of both antisemites and Zionists that Israel is Judaism and that Jews are Zionists, erasing the very large number of Jewish people opposed to Israel's crimes and even existence. The established fact that many atrocities initially claimed by Israel and uncritically repeated by media and politicians (Biden lying repeatedly about seeing photos of beheaded babies comes to mind) were later debunked, does not mean Hamas was innocent or that actual civilians were not killed. The point isn't to litigate every minute of ~3+ hr discussions but to point out that you and Matt have clear political biases that shape your coverage, I don't think you'd deny that. Destiny has expanded his repertoire from dirtbag streamer / debate bro to current events pundit on Piers Morgan etc., precisely as a well spoken partisan hack for Israel, able to do his own research and marshaling the full force of wikipedia summaries to "debunk" the UN and other longstanding experts. With the vaccines and the pandemic you had the advantage of taking the time to examine the objective evidence and supporting your audience in critically examining the competing claims. Here you do not. In the Harari episode you praise the "rules based international order" and your support for US militarism through NATO, AUKUS, etc. I can't help but suspect the reason you generally keep the question of Palestine to background vibes instead of evidence, e.g. liking that Destiny is not as rude as Finkelstein despite knowing significantly less, is that the current massacre of children in Palestine is prescribed and armed by the "moderate" proponents of imperialism you admire like Biden, Starmer, etc. I sincerely doubt that even if you examined all the evidence that you would agree with me, but if you took the time for a more detailed examination of this crucial issue your subjects orbit around, I might learn something or at least not feel obligated to direct my $5, as little as it is, elsewhere.

David Moore

Thank you for my special shoutout Chris! It was worth the wait🥰

Lillie

Yes afraid we are going to have to agree to disagree David. I think the difference between our position and Sam’s is obvious and that there is very little ‘between the lines’ reading necessary because we explicitly stated it when talking to Sam and about his views. But we aren’t likely to spend more time on the issue. With Destiny, I also outlined in some depth why I think he’s wrong to argue that dropping a nuke on Gaza wouldn’t be a genocide… and have repeatedly acknowledged that there are plenty of documented cases of atrocities or, at absolute best, very low levels of concern with civilian casualties by the IDF. I do, however, also disagree with the tendency of critics to portray the IDF as a modern day incarnation of the Nazi military. I find those comparisons to be very unconvincing. Lastly, if you think we have been unclear in condemning calls to genocide, I don’t know what to tell you. I’d think we are pretty clear in our stance on that kind of thing. My parting advice for you, would be maybe don’t presume to lecture others about moral courage. It’s quite possible people take different stances than you, for reasons other than lacking your moral courage. I don’t know your background or life experience David but I don’t find it takes much courage to make statements that have little impact and will be cheered on by your political allies.

Christopher Kavanagh

This is where I duck out. I've enjoyed a lot of your content and will probably listen from time to time, but you keep avoiding any serious approach to when the people you cover explicitly endorse ethnic cleansing or outright genocide in Palestine. I know it's not your area of expertise and I'm not looking to you for trenchant political insight, but I wish you would hold yourself to the same standards as when you cover gurus who support lab-leak or anti-vaxx positions. Bring on experts who can discuss coherently and direct your audience to the relevant information. Sam Harris supports ethnic cleansing and engages in some holocaust denial and you simply leave it as an exercise to the reader to know why he's wrong. Destiny explicitly calls for genocide and engages in wild conspiracism about how Palestinians are faking the massacres and it gets basically a "boys will be boys" aside. You don't take that approach when gurus praise Putin and cover up his crimes, yet Israel is out there openly conducting war crimes that would make Putin or Assad blush. But because Israel has the backing of NATO and the "rules based order," the sheer magnitude of slaughtered children is treated by you as an unfortunate faux pas. To cite one recurring example, Chris finds that argument that the Israeli military would not order the murder of Palestinian civilians because it would make them look bad to be very convincing. Please read a book on how the holocaust was carried out, and in particular note how many people were massacred without direct orders from the Nazi leadership. A favorite canard of holocaust deniers is to point out that there aren't even written orders from Nazi leadership for the creation of extermination camps, or they point to the regular conflicts between the Wehrmacht and the local Einsatzgruppen to claim that it was only a few wild extremists instead of the overall Nazi war machine that carried out the slaughter. When the Israeli prime minister calls for the slaughter of every man, woman, child, and beast of burden in Gaza, when the Defense minister calls for preventing food, water, and electricity from reaching the "human animals" in Gaza. They are creating the conditions for the mass graves we're witnessing today. In short, get some moral courage and at least take a clear stance against incitement to genocide. Even if you don't think Israel is currently committing genocide, the statements of Harris and Destiny are horrifying and worth 'decoding.'

David Moore

You completely misunderstood my point. I was objecting to Chris and Matt's praise of Destiny as some sort of moderate leftist. He's not. He's an arrogant, unpleasant and sexually degenerate douchebag who says intentionally provocative and outrageous things to get attention.

SHOUNAK SARKAR

I'm not sure how his sexuality, polyamory, or his personal familial relationships have anything to do with his guru-ness. None of these things are relevant to discuss, and the fact that you think they are maybe shows some bias on your end.

A Nyelvészet A Legjobb

Destiny reacts on his stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ntk_6PsItWk Enjoying your podcast Matt and Chris! Would be interested in a decoding of Jack Kornfield and/or some of the Western Buddhist types that make a LOT of money selling courses and teacher training programmes.

Bran

Finally got around to listening to this, and its really not worth much, but I too am somewhat surprised by how charitable I thought you guys were. I can't help but feel like that he is 'openly' kind of a scumbag rather than obfuscating it did a lot to placate a more critical read of him. Personally, I'm more dubious of those who unabashedly behave badly than those who claim to see themselves as "the good guy" as I see the former as more manipulative than the latter, but that's just me.

Sanya Obeysch

There are some of us lol! I am proudly a double critic of both Destiny and Harris.

SHOUNAK SARKAR

well....that was weird......I almost gave up, until the rant at around 33 .00 which was epic. Then I listened to the whole thing. Still not sure what to make of it, but it was a great decoding.

STEPHEN CARLTON

For our non-Australian members, Matt is confirming he is not, in fact, a kangaroo.

Ymirsdreams

So sorry to learn about your son, Christopher. I wish you the best.

Linda Sears

As someone who had only seen a few clips of Destiny before this, I agree with a lot of the comments here in that I thought you were way too charitable in analyzing his content - the dude is a terminally online sociopath. Right from the get go it was obvious Chris just likes Destiny's style, so I wasn't surprised when he said he sees Destiny as similar to himself. I won't repeat much of what was already said in these comments, but I hope Destiny isn't someone DtG continues to "check in on" in the same way as JP, Weinsteins, etc. (Though it seems a "right to reply" is inevitable). All that said, I enjoyed the episode regardless!

Ryan Goss

Finally a shout out, after like 2 years. I feel blessed as it was sooner than most and I didnt have to hassle Chris.

Ema Corro

As for what kind of asshole - he is definitely the second kind, I'd call him an asshole's asshole. My own decoding of Destiny is he is quick and abrasive Type A personality, high on empathy, but low on sympathy, given his backstory he values highly self-reliance and independence. Basically he is understanding enough to figure out what can hurt you, smart enough to figure out how to do it, socially uninhibited enough to do it when he feel justified. But he also seems to be very patient, does not hold a grudge and obsessively self-reflective with compulsively high bar for truthfulness and transparency. Being clearly successful charismatic and a maverick of whole new entertainment industry, he is kind of the definition of not-a-team player, he keeps attracting and repelling people constantly in his social circle. People often call him sociopath or psychopath, being a borderline personality myself, I think he is not. However his work, lifestyle, personality and communication style make him exceedingly unrelatable on prima vista for the average person. Thus his positions would sometimes appear almost alien even though they usually are on consistent moral ground (as far as his moral framework at the time goes anyway). He has shown he is willing to cut out audiences, friends, personal and business relationships that have hurt him financially, his public image, or his influence. This isn't unprecedented in the drama infested streamer world, but he does it not over emotional outbursts, but over deliberately considered principled positions, which is as hard as you can be in the world of clout chasing demons. In a weird way the worst there is of Destiny are the clips, the more you watch the more reasonable he seems.

Mbot

Matt’s comparison of Destiny’s obscene rants with Martin Luther’s obscene rants is fascinating. My abhorrence of any kind of rude, language almost led me to not listen to this, but I’m so glad I did. Destiny certainly is a curious combination of things…..

Lucy

Well to explain there are a few aspects I have to cover briefly: 1. Origin and history: I was around for this one and it's all about gaming 12-15 yeas back. In short the attraction of game streaming logic is similar to watching professional sports vs playing them. But with games you can play 5-10-20 hours in a hardcore session and that became particularly prominent with the rise of online games. So you have a group of pros, semi-pros or amateur entertainers and an audience who is predisposed to be 'terminally' online. 2. Parasociality. It's forming an attachment to a online personality that you interact with. It's not new, people form it with celebrities, but the virtual availability makes this more prominent. Think of it as you mother talking to the TV, but with streaming it's on steroids - you can interact and the TV speaks back, donate to get that interaction prioritised. 3. Community. The in-group aspect of these communities is extremely strong. High degree of alignment on a particular set of values makes people feel connected and a sense of belonging that's unique in a modern atomic world. Gamers/'termnially online' people are already set up for that , but with covid this became something that normal people can relate to and a reason to participate. Now in Destiny's case he has somewhat abandoned gaming as prime content over the years, and created the genre of the streaming political punditry. So it's 8 hours of an amalgam of content - react, research, discussion, interaction with chat, debates and so on. People tune in and out, often just listening in while at work, it's not deliberately planned or structured, but you basically 'keep in touch'.

Mbot

And also, on your point above -- so what kind of asshole is Destiny?

apetrash

since you mentioned that misrepresentation is unavoidable given the nature of his work (which I agree with), what's even the point of an 8 hour stream? Like, I've never been on twitch, so this a completely foreign world to me. And who listens to these? Is there anyone who's listened to all of his content?

apetrash

that is not a visual I needed just before dinner. :-(

S Garvey

(Tumblr is like cool-Facebook for the 2010's, isn't it? I'm outing myself by admitting having missed it - ah well -- does that mean streamer communities are the cool Tumblr? Will the 2020's be characterized by streamer culture?)

Tom Allison

Just got back from the audiologist and they confirmed my two year old son has partial hearing loss and that’s why he’s not speaking. This confirmation, and you, inspired me to quit wasting my time and I canceled my subscription! Still have it through April. Correcting internet randos is such a poor use of my time, especially when my son needs all of the attention I can give him. Thanks for planting the idea in my head Jovan! Much love.

Christopher McLaughlin

Id say its pretty relevant considering the person you’re covering. I will delete out of respect, but this is not a minor issue where we can ‘agree to disagree’

Niels De Boer

I’d hope that Chris as an Irish Catholic would be slightly more sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians…

Niels De Boer

Not a place for such heated rhetoric.

Christopher Kavanagh

Niels De Boer

Yeah i think wog is definitely a shortened form of golliwog (a racist doll caricature of African people i think) in the UK. Matt was 100% right though, as in Australia wog is used as an insult towards Mediterranean and Middle Eastern people. Less socially acceptable now thankfully.

SHOUNAK SARKAR

I am a left-center American Democrat who voted for Biden in 2020 and will do so again this November happily and I found this fellow's behavior appalling. I find almost everyone you cover to be reprehensible and Destiny no exception. The n-word is a very powerful racially charged word in American culture. The R-word is no longer used in everyday speech in America as it is also became a slur here. The misogyny and hatred of women is simply inexcusable. He calls for the extermination of Palestinians. I honestly don't get your take at all.

Mike Nelson

The rant at 33:40 was music to my ears

scottymfg

Oof, wog is definitely a slur against black people here in the UK. It is thought to be derived from golliwog. In 1976 Eric Clapton famously once yelled 'Throw the wogs out. Keep Britain white', in the middle of a concert he was performing. Though admittedly he potentially meant all foreigners, rather than a specific group, it wasn't very coherent. Funny how things have such different impact across cultures. But I would definitely caution against using that word anywhere near the UK.

Matt

I never once even opened Tumblr, whereas FB was THE communication channel for most of my family and friends for many years - a little surprising how sharp the edges of these social media fragmentations can be despite the sense of universal access and wide popularity…

Tom Allison

I don’t think he will use his right of reply and I don’t think if he did there would be any screaming.

Christopher Kavanagh

Yeah, I think you are missing the point if you think are opinion of Destiny relate to him being pro-Biden. If he was anti-Biden and had the same approach he would get the same report.

Christopher Kavanagh

Sam Harris critics seem to not overlap too much with Destiny haters.

Christopher Kavanagh

You listen at X2.5 by PRACTICE!

Christopher Kavanagh

It was bound to happen sooner or later 😉

Christopher Kavanagh

Ah I think the feedback has been pretty balanced in the Patreon!

Christopher Kavanagh

Probably as impactful as Tumbler and Facebook back in the day.

Christopher Kavanagh

Nah, I was an asshole myself, I got triggered by the emotional appeal to parenthood, and was making a meta point about the transition of rational > emotional > violence in your comment. My final point about Destiny - he is an asshole, but to me there is a difference between being and asshole to appeal to an audience and being an asshole because you don't care to appeal to people. Anyway, thanks for the conversation, no hard feelings.

Mbot

Thanks for the great write up. If we’re assuming authenticity is real and achievable, I’ve always thought there’s a contradiction between being a branded individual (as all these streamers and gurus are) and being authentic, as the personality is always in dialogue or relation to the maintenance of the brand, creating a sort of ‘penned in’ cycle of personality development. If it would be authentic to destroy the brand then that would be impermissible from the pov of personal branding (and stable employment also!), and the authentic action wouldn’t happen. Same thing for inauthentic actions that help build the brand. Personally, I’m not convinced authentic being is possible at all, but the power it has as a rhetorical tool and performative position is certainly evident in Destiny and others.

Method Addict

Cheers!

Anna J

Hmm right I see, thanks Chris. Sounds like Ball and Kulinski have softened their views of Biden recently then. As Kulinski famously sat out the 2020 election, while Ball is on record trashing the Democrat Party establishment on numerous occasions. I also recall Kulinski berating mainstream Democrats in the past, stressing the need for a "Tea Party of the Left" movement of social justice Democrats. So, I am glad to hear that this has changed recently. Actually, in my original comment, I should have said that they are more drawn to "populism" rather than Trumpism. My bad. Pakman is definitely a lot more of an incrementalist in comparison.

SHOUNAK SARKAR

Chris and Matt — as a long-time fan of both Destiny and DtG, this felt like two worlds colliding in a very good way. So maybe I'm biased, but I still don't take it lightly to say I think this is your magnum opus. It's what the podcast has been building to this whole time.

Daz

I’m sorry Shounak but to say Ball and Kulinski “hate Biden and are more drawn to Trumpism” is patently false. I watched them debate Briahna Joy Gray recently and all they did was defend Biden’s record. Biden’s Infrastructure Bill, the stimulus, his industrial policy, Biden’s support of a strong NLRB, his withdrawal from Afghanistan, the crux of the argument they were making against Gray was that Biden had outperformed their expectations and that voting for Cornell West instead of Biden would be indefensible because they view Trump as an existential threat to American democracy. They also agree with Pakman on most policy positions, though they may differ on tactics at times.

Christopher McLaughlin

Nah Pakman is very moderate and pragmatic, so much so that many DSA types and radical progressives actually despise him, call him a shill for the Democratic Party establishment. Kulinski and Ball on the other hand are very far-left.

SHOUNAK SARKAR

Yeah I’m a big fan of Pakman. He’s a pretty pragmatic progressive; good on foreign policy and pretty moderate on domestic policies as well as in rhetoric. Krystal Ball and Kulinski, I don’t follow anymore as they are actual populist far-leftists who inhabit the horseshoe; as in they hate Biden and are more drawn to Trumpism.

SHOUNAK SARKAR

Just about to watch his reaction now haha

Erin

Gonna eat some crow here. I shouldn’t post before listening to the whole episode! Like Matt, I find the streamer world unpleasant, and Destiny’s particular motormouth edge-lord energy almost unbearable. That said, when you contrast him others of his ilk, he does seem much more serious and, particularly heartening, more curious. My denigrating his reading habits was unfair; this corner of the internet just gives me a skin rash.

Jesse Rimler

Come on man, you were being completely reasonable then you had to say something like “they don't care as much strongly about the hundreds of thousands that have died in Syria, Yemen, or central Africa.” We can do better than that, can’t we? I’m also not here to debate the killing of civilians in Gaza, lots of Americans really seem to enjoy that debate (like it’s a sport) but I don’t. At this point the only opinion I care about in the United States is Joe Biden’s, and he’s trying to negotiate a ceasefire. Just being honest about wanting to lay one on Destiny after he said that. In regard to these debates I’m more interested in what’s going on psychologically. We’d all be a lot better off if we understood how much opinion we’re smuggling in with what we think are The Facts. It’s motivated reasoning all the way down. Thanks for not being an asshole, that’s probably more than I can say for myself!

Christopher McLaughlin

I'm completely on board with the reasonableness of what you put forward. I guess, maybe optimistically, I would expect the audience of a podcast that habitually examines the patterns of snake oil salesmen that sway the masses to be somewhat less sway-able and have higher standards when forming and espousing informed opinions. I would expect a fan of DtG to be questioning enough, even if they are a parent, like me, that if they care for "the killing of tens of thousands of Gazan children" to ask themselves why they don't care as much strongly about the hundreds of thousands that have died in Syria, Yemen, or central Africa. That if they are naturally inclined to sympathise with Palestinians, like me, they would be self-reflective enough to realise that a call for immediate ceasefire without conditions is not a simple matter of moral right, but a politically charged statement that strongly endorses the desires of only one side of conflict that no one can untangle for nigh a century. (Which was the point of that rant by Destiny). And if violence is the answer to what people find offensive then there is little point to speech online or otherwise.

Mbot

Those people are social democrats. None of them are “nato bad/us fault”. I don’t need to defend any of their positions, I was listing examples of sane people on BreadTube who have huge followings because we recently decoded Breadtubers Hassan and Destiny and neither of them sounded very serious or sane.

Christopher McLaughlin

You forgot to include the caffeine, Chris!

Linda Sears

Thanks for clarifying, Matt. If you were a boomer, I’d be part of the silent generation!

Linda Sears

This subculture that you are currently covering is initially fascinating -- but seems very distorted by the dynamics of the medium in which it is in enacted. Ultimately, it seems to skew weird, edging toward unsavory. Do we have any idea/hints as to how substantial/potentially impactful the discourse that takes place on these platforms is, in the end?

Tom Allison

multi-tasking means you're listening at x2.5 speed while teaching...

Roland Weber

Dgger here, I think you guys did a great and honest job trying to break down the massive character that Destiny is. Sorry that anti fans will probably flood these comments for a bit

Heron

I hear what you’re saying, and there’s certainly truth to it, but lets zoom way in. A fan of DtG tunes in to this episode and twenty minutes in hears Destiny reply to “We shouldn’t want the war to stop?” with the retort “you’re a pedophile who is jerking off to dying Palestinians”. For many of us our number one want is to stop the killing of tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians. For parents like me the killing of tens of thousands of Gazan children feels deeply personal. For simplicity’s sake lets say stopping Hamas from being the administrator of Gaza is our number two want. Is it reasonable to ask a DtG listener to compartmentalize and move on in an even tempered manner from there? Maybe. Is it also reasonable for a listener not to move on, to forgive and forget, to reset from subjective to objective (and in my 40 years on this planet I’ve never met anyone who is remotely as objective as they think they are)? Yes, I think that’s reasonable. If Destiny said to my face what he said to that fan, it would be very difficult not to punch him in the kidney. That’s the way my ape brain works. The fact that Destiny said those words on some random date after streaming for thousands of hours doesn’t change too much the way my brain reacts to it.

Christopher McLaughlin

Ugh, I just removed my original comment. After listening to the whole podcast, I finally disagree wholeheartedly with the Decoders!! Way, way too tolerant on this one!

Nancy Carrozza CaraDonna

But other than Packman those people are the ones that do the bad takes…

Chris Snyder

I think Dan was a bit more measured than Jordan, but agree mostly.

Chris Snyder

Those people are super super far left though? My idea of a good faith left wing person hinges on their position of the Ukraine conflict. If they are “nato bad/us fault” then I don’t think those people are worth while on the vast majority of their commentary.

Chris Snyder

My wife listens to saner lefties on BreadTube every night: Krystal Ball, Kyle Kulinski and David Pakman. Granted the only time they stream is during special events, but they still create a shit-ton of content. At the moment all three of them have significantly more followers on YouTube than Destiny, though I guess he probably has a big Twitch following.

Christopher McLaughlin

Oh no, he's never heard the podcast - only seen the subreddit, that's not going to help his opinion of this space 🤣

Paul Sees

2/ Also another counterpoint guys; you both agreed and sympathised with Destiny’s characterisation of overbearing progressives and him breaking the lefty stereotypes & showcasing a “sane left wing” person to the hyper online right. This description is quite self-serving; because in many ways Destiny actually embodies the worst excesses of the hyper-progressive left. The lack of sexual mores, the vulgar degeneracy, the embrace of polyamory, broken familial relationships, gay escapades with men (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=__cgZzi_cEQ) and lack of religiosity for example! This would have been good to point out. There are way better examples of saner & more moderate lefties out there.

SHOUNAK SARKAR

Hey guys, good decoding. You really went in-depth with Destiny, appreciate the time invested in doing research and compiling all the clips together from various episodes / streams. With regards to Destiny himself, man, I was aware that the guy was a degenerate but the decoding revealed a deeper and darker level of degeneracy than what I was expecting. What the hell is going on with these hyper-online weirdos of the streaming world like Destiny, Vaush and Hasan? Are they all like this? Surely there must be a few exceptions. Destiny is one of those characters, where even though he is politically pretty close to me, I would still not associate with him or listen to his content. The guy is such a douchebag. A smug, arrogant, vulgar and sexually degenerate man child who is completely insufferable! And even more trashy than Love Island lolz (if such a thing is possible).

SHOUNAK SARKAR

https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/knowledge-fight/id1192992870?i=1000641663113

Shane Partington

How the hell do you listen to Destiny at 2.5 speed?!?

elcid

Oh no, I understand that, he can be hateful at times. I've been familiar with Destiny's work on and off for 10+ years and I'd say all of those are fair characterisation on occasion and some possibly in general. But I'm referring to mainly two types of people - some that seem unfamiliar but write screens-long condemnations based on a few clips or those that clearly familiar and determine to dislike the guy. What I find 'deranged' is the strength of the conviction of the first and the absolute inability to accept any positive traits being attributed by the second.

Mbot

I can't find this can you link it? I've tried searching YT.

Anna J

It’s not the norm. It’s just norm in the man children sphere.

Tobias nilsson

He seems abusive and bullying--to audience members and to romantic partners. I'm not surprised he's divorced. Regarding his openly contemplating murdering the DDoS kid: It could be rational if the idea was to scare the kid into stopping. The kid might think, "Uh oh, he's seriously considering killing me." I think though that Destiny probably just enjoyed arguing a taboo position.

Daniel

By “honest question” it seems like you meant “passive aggressive question”

Yoloswag42069

Don’t go all Sam Harris and call honest reasonable critiques “deranged”. Did you listen to the clips of Destiny used in this episode? If those clips were your only exposure to Destiny it is perfectly reasonable to characterize him as an asshole, edgelord, misogynist, even a sociopath. Destiny is not a household name and most people have zero preconceptions about him.

Christopher McLaughlin

I’ll share the secret: multi-tasking, x2.5 speed, insomnia. Academics vary a lot in their workload but I teach 11 courses a year.

Christopher Kavanagh

“If Jordan Peterson was on stream talking about his ability to give head”. Thanks Chris, my day is ruined.

Kelley

You’ll be better off for it my friend. I don’t listen to podcasts of a political nature much anymore, unless they’re outrageously funny, and that’s rare to nonexistent! If you read and have good media literacy, there’s little to be gained listening to the hastily arrived at “takes” of some asshole flying by the seat of their pants blissfully unaware of their own motivated reasoning. It’s just sports for the talking heads, and if you’re not having fun or gaining something you value then stop listening and do something better with your time. For fucks sake I’m ignoring my two year old son right now writing this! Holy shit am I about to cancel my subscription too?!? Nobody but Chris will ever say on their deathbed “I wish I spent more time listening to podcasts.”

Christopher McLaughlin

I mean, I guess it depends if you arrive at your pro Israel position after an honest and thorough look at the facts and history etc. I would argue that it's difficult to be staunchly "pro Israel" in the face of the material evidence if you have "liberal" values. I mean, even if we discount the war in Gaza for the moment. If you believe in liberal/enlightenment type principles it is very difficult to justify the ongoing occupation and violent oppression in the occupied West Bank. Even before October 7, the 18 months prior to that had been the most deadly in the West Bank for Palestinian civilians in decades. Since Oct 7, hundreds of West Bank Palestinians have been killed by IDF or settlers. Hundreds. That figure includes many children. That is simply unacceptable. But anyway. I find the issue is many people start with either being pro Israel or pro Palestine and then just work back. I definitely think Destiny has done this. For myself, I'm actually Jewish via my maternal line (albeit an athiest from a secular family). I've been to Israel and have been following the IP conflict my entire life. Up until a few years ago I was relatively pro Israel, and felt they were held up to an unfair standard comparatively to other nations in the region (not really appreciating that this was largely because they call themselves a democracy and are seen as western). I've always been a "zionist" in the sense that I think the founding of Israel was, if not wholly justified, a necessity for the safety of European jews.. I dislike how the idea was executed though. And I think the state of Israel has a right to exist (although not in its current form). But over the years, the more I read about the history and also current events the more I found I could not ignore the apartheid and all that came with it. It was quite distressing, but I couldn't handle the cognitive dissonance of my liberal principles and being on the side of what I was coming to see as an oppressive, racist state that utilised constant violence, extrajudicial punishments, and apartheid as a method of control. Are Palestinians perfect victims? No, but they don't need to be. And I think it's perfectly defensible to be more concerned by the breaking of international law by a supposed democracy with all the power (Israel), than the violent resistance of the oppressed.

Anna J

You doubt he'll scream at you, or use his right to reply?

Kyle

I work a day-job, barely make rent, and in my very limited spare time I work on my own projects, which inch along at a snail’s pace. Two of my favorite podcasts are Decoding the Gurus and Sean Carroll’s Mindscape — in both cases the hosts are academics who somehow manage to produce a large body of podcast content, go on other podcasts, write books/papers for more popular audiences, cook, ski... In Chris’ case, he listens to hundreds of hours of this sociopathic streamer in prep. My conclusion: either being an academic is a pretty light workload, or I am extremely lazy.

Jesse Rimler

Is it possible to be pro-israel, and also intellectually honest?

Yoloswag42069

I have so, so many issues with Dr K's medical ethics (relating to his online streams where he pretends to not do therapy while doing therapy). I look forward to the episode.

Anna J

Certainly not for everyone!

Christopher Kavanagh

I doubt it.

Christopher Kavanagh

Lots of people who hate streaming and I think it’s absolutely not for everyone.

Christopher Kavanagh

We need a break from degeneracy. Next is an academic… then Dr.K.

Christopher Kavanagh

Not a Destiny fan really at all, although I think he's good in certain scenarios, but since he has been medicated for his ADHD he does read books, to be fair to him.

Anna J

He’s always spoken that quickly, to the amusement of his followers and critics. It’s simply part of his personality, like Ben Shapiro. He is a compulsive, fast-talking know-it-all, and only very recently accepted his ADHD diagnosis.

Talent Pun

I wish the podcast hosts the best of luck as I think their mission is one of great importance, I hope that they maintain their aspirations in decoding the "rhetorical tactics used to make a case in the absence of substance." They are intelligent and have the best intentions, I encourage anyone reading this to subscribe, but, unfortunately, it is not for me. Best of luck.

Jovan Popov

I've been a casual fan of Destiny for years and I think you guys did a really great job breaking down some of his appeal and flaws. I was really impressed with the number of clips you guys managed to sift through while giving good context for each one. I honestly could not agree more with your criticisms around the drama content he takes part in, I typically try to avoid that side of his content as much as possible lol

Cooper21

Dan was as good as ever and mostly fair but I think in those circumstances he is a little bit back seat driving. Which is understandable. I think the need to repeatedly signal to their audience they don’t like Destiny seemed a bit heavy handed.

Christopher Kavanagh

After listening to this I clicked on a random Destiny YouTube video...and he was talking about this podcast strangely enough (although he called you "the Decoding Gurus"). He seems open to coming on the show. https://youtu.be/65TtZAvi8W8?si=7_sTcFkLg7rxaZvy&t=90

everythingism

What's for sure is he is definitely not doing it for the money, that is not taking up the majority of his energy. /s

Jovan Popov

Maybe what wasn't fully conveyed in this episode is that Destiny actually is a very good debater. And overall he tends to make reasoned arguments and cite evidence for his points much more than his opponents. So while there are self-indulgent and tabloid-ish aspects to his show, he is ultimately bringing a rationalist perspective to discussions that would otherwise be dominated by Hasan Piker or Nick Fuentes type characters. Maybe that can explain Chris and Matt's sympathy for him without appealing to "centrist liberal politics", although arguably these things often overlap to some extent.

everythingism

That's interesting, let me know if anyone knows which video it was (although I guess it would be difficult to find at this point among the thousands of three to four hour long videos of people screaming at each other).

everythingism

He seems to be able to adapt and be in tune with the times, idk how, but as someone who is older than him and used to watch him in the dawn of streaming. I'm shocked how on the pulse he is with these younger communities and can engage with them, where I'd dismiss them them as teenage idiots. There is also something that didn't get touched on in the decoding, and definitely didn't come through in the clips, it's the insane level of patience he has talking to people he fundamentally disagrees with. He would spend hours talking to people who are complete intellectually lost and still be interested in the conversation somehow.

Mbot

Thanks for the insights. His life seems like a circle of hell to me, but he appears to thrive in it. I wonder how much longer he can keep it going.

Linda Sears

Yep, Mert is spot on. And not only his lifestyle, but his personality is a pretty extreme outlier and it's kind of his blessing and his curse. It allows him to sit there in person arguing with a room full of MAGA fanatics while they heckle, boo, and scream insults at him, while he enjoys himself and just riles them up more. And I think it's also a major factor in his turbulent interpersonal relationships that generate all the reality tv style relationship drama that plays out on his stream. He does partake in some recreational drug taking off stream, but pretty much never on stream from my knowledge, except maybe in his very early days like pre-2016

RipleyV

He has been streaming up to 10 hours a day, for nearly 15 years, streaming is most of his life. He has always spoken super fast, id argue since getting medicated for ADHD, he has calmed down a bit. It is a wild way to live, which I find to explain a lot of his oddities

Mert

Just stop. He literally reads books on stream.

martha clayton

Jesse Rimler

Well put

Lee Kebum

Matthew, since you’re familiar with this territory, could you explain how much of the time he is streaming? And does he seem to be on speed or is the fast speaking just his way?

Linda Sears

Excellent sourcing of content. I spent the episode vacillating between feeling sympatico (or even administration) and then disgust. The disgust coming not so much from the carnal details as the pettiness of the drama. As a blue-city, red-state resident, I connect with both his frustration at the throat clearing required to talk to conservatives and the damage the far left does to mainstream Dems' electoral appeal.

Trees

What did you guys think of Knowledge Fights’ commentary on the great debate with Alex, Destiny and the rest of the panel?

Shane Partington

@apetrash I'm not saying these "misrepresentation" are due to bad faith or lack of charity, just lack of the depth and breath of context. Some of these topics have a ridiculous amount of history behind them, especially the streamer social/personal relationship ones. Destiny speaks in a charged way often and gets clipped often for it, it's a fair criticism to say "represent yourself better". But people forget that these are not carefully crafted statements, there are 1-2 minute clips from sometimes hours-long conversations on often 8+ hour long daily streams. No one can withstand that kind of scrutiny and exposure and "care" to change personally based on every possible criticism. But when he bitches about "mischaracterisations" of his positions it's usually because it's done by people who make strong statements based on 1-2 minute clips that others have created to often deliberately load with bad faith arguments. Which at his level happens en mass to scale of thousands on twitter and ticktock. Does he open himself to it? Yes, definitely. Is it avoidable given the nature of the media and environment he operates in? I don't think so, because it happens to people with a lot less exposure as well.

Mbot

There's two things that come to mind in terms of influence he might be having. One is that he obviously thinks that his positions are correct, but if there's anything he wants his audience to take from him, it's how he arrives at that position. Two would be activating his audience to take proactive political action e.g. organising canvassing events.

Anikulapo

Loved this deep dive guys, one of the best episodes imo. What about a decoding on Vaush? Lollicon/horse porn aside, I think he would be an interesting subject for the streamer season.

Dominic Horner

I can definitely hear Helen saying that in my head

Guruspod 2

NOT a boomer (technically, that is: I’m just out of touch)

Guruspod 2

@Par The ddos kid is an extended argument he keeps having with a layer that has takes place over probably 10 hours at various times (at least that I've seen). It is a unhinged position on its face, and once you get into the details it's not a position I agree with on general principle. But in essence the argument is that it's an extremely permissive aspect of self defence where an extra legal means should be allowed when the deliberate harm of denying one party's ability to make a living rises to the level that it constitutes defence of property under the US legal system. And the argument for immediate thread is weighed against the fact that the legal system's inability to act on any reasonable timeframe. I don't think it's a good argument or morally correct, but I can see how you can construct a moral framework to make it work. Oddly enough I don't think it's consistent with Destiny's moral framework, but I think it's a personally charged issue that he is actually inconsistent on.

Mbot

Also saying retard is very often frowned upon and another very famous player from the time when destiny came up in StarCraft 2, famous player Idra got kicked out in time for using less colour language than destiny. I still watch streams everyday and very few uses language or is as hostile and vulgar as destiny. I have no idea why anyone would want to listen to that kind of shit everyday.

Tobias nilsson

@Roland yeah that's a fair point. I think one thing that DTG got right about Destiny is that he is sort of the same in all contexts. Still, it would be very Dr K like to start throwing out differential diagnoses based on his streams haha.

Anna J

You don’t need a rigours process to change political opinion. For example be for abortion all of a sudden could be you made someone pregnant and don’t want kids. Or very common in republican circles. Get a gay kid and all of a sudden be in favour of gay rights.

Tobias nilsson

I think you missed the point about "being" vs. "trying to be".

Roland Weber

I only know him from this episode, but my understanding is not that his streams are "essentially performances". Not if that implies he's actually a different person in real life. His point about being authentic is that he's not playing a role online, but presenting his actual self, isn't it? Sure, he shows different manners in different contexts, but everyone does that.

Roland Weber

Thanks for this background info! 👍😃

Roland Weber

I've been listening to/watching Destiny for nearly 8 years now, and been a semi-regular listener of DtG for a couple years, and I've been hoping this episode would happen since I first discovered you guys. And I wasn't disappointed. I thought this was a very accurate summation of Destiny's good and bad points, especially considering how deep the lore is to his career and how much insane tens of hours of context there is to many of his drama arcs. I think one of the reasons some "normie" listeners of the pod are just completely dumbfounded as to how Destiny has any appeal to an audience is a missing cultural context. You both touched on it briefly, and that's Destiny's beginnings within the hardcore/competitive gaming world. In 2016 when Destiny first started political debating, the terminally online world of gamers and youtubers was so insanely right wing, where misogynistic and ethno-nationalist ideas were normalised, with almost zero progressive voices, and those few there were (like Feminist Frequency) would quickly be bullied en masse out of online spaces. Into this context came Destiny, who would go into these 6 hour debate deathmatches where if you didn't insult back as hard as you got you immediately looked weak to the mostly right wing audience, where there was basically no other progressive voice because of this, 1v8ing people like Fuentes et al and coming out on top. It was such an incredible breath of fresh air for left wing gamers like myself who felt isolated within the online world. He's far from perfect, and while there are many things I think he gets right, he also does and says a lot of things I disagree with, sometimes even hate. So none of this is to excuse his bad takes, or sometimes slightly sociopathic behaviour towards others. But when he says he nearly single handedly (probably excepting ContraPoints) forced open a space for progressives in the streaming/gaming/youtube world, I don't think it's self aggrandizement. And this context, in addition to his authenticity, as you guys discussed, is important I think to explaining why somebody so abbrasive to "normies" commands such a loyal and active fanbase.

RipleyV

Been a Patreon for a while now and I think that this was one of my favorite episodes of DTG. The Sam Harris haters will come here to cry, but regardless, this was a well done and very enntertaining episode.

rick yifrach

Ok the whole "misrepresentation" thing really got on my nerves. This dude explicitly said that he didn't care enough what people thought of him to change. But at the same time he keeps screaming about being constantly "mischaracterized". Then maybe do a better job presenting yourself.

apetrash

Warning! Turn your Sam Harris settings off when Destiny is the subject…. Micro Machine Man flashbacks have set in. .

Smudge

Been a listener since episode one, and this is the first episode I struggled to finish and the first one where I think I legit came out of it hating the subject under review. Perhaps as American stuck in Trump's world every day for ten years, I have no tolerance left for sociopath blowhards regardless of their politics. This is the first "guru" where it felt to me more like an apologia for the subject's sociopathic behavior because you agreed on their centrist politics. The sociopathy, misogyny, racism, doxing, baiting his followers to attack others, and free use of the r-word shouldn't be excused because you like his political world view. First episode where I really came away completely disappointed.

Mike Nelson

I also didn't hear candor, I heard a sociopath.

Mike Nelson

I've got 45 minutes to go still. This is the very first episode of DtG I'm considering to not finish. Not because it's not a well-done episode. Far from it. Much respect for sifting through so much shit to put this together. I just find myself utterly bored by this dude. This whole streaming thing is not interesting at all to me... Makes me realize, I kinda like the pseudo profound nonsense of the "real" gurus. At least something to laugh about... Guess I'm just old... So old that when I hear "young Turks", my brain omits "young" and immediately thinks of Reno, Tseng and Rude. Let's see if anyone gets this reference.

Chomagerider

Haven't finished yet. But imagine if Destiny's uses his right to reply. He's going to scream at you both.

Kyle

Yeah the lack of empathy - not to get all Dr K on him but I find that Destiny has an extremely limited ability to empathise with anyone, just generally. I'm not calling him a sociopath or accusing him of high functioning ASD...(idk maybe I am haha) because it would be a bit silly to try to do this from his streams which are essentially performances, right? Still, there's enough there to give me pause I guess. But yeah, Destiny just wants to win. Debate is blood sport to him. Agree with others who have said that what you're witnessing isn't really a dogged search for truth, at least not consistently.

Anna J

What did they mischaracterize about the ddos kid?

Par

Where you guys find Destiny's candour refreshing, I find it sliiiiightly sociopathic.

David Noble

I'm saying that when you make that argument you unintentionally cede the ground that it would be justified if enough options were exuaghsted. That's not ground you have to cede.

James Smith

Good episode overall and as reasonably correct as can be expected without becoming Destiny lore masters. There were a few mischaracterisations - like the self-defence against ddos-kid, the whole Lav context and the Daisy child support comment. But overall the characterisation of Steven is fair, accurate, even generous in some cases. Unfortunately however so many deranged comments here from people trying to validate their preconceptions and engaging in exactly the misrepresentation and misunderstanding that Destiny usually rails against.

Mbot

?? Are you saying there were not other options before murder?

Par

What a roller coaster of an episode! Appreciated it. It didn't make me a Destiny fan (far from it...I was trying to think about if I were recorded in convos and online 24-7 I'd probably have some bad takes out there, too, but not like...I dunno, sharing nudes of exes, or, oh, calling for genocide), but I learned a lot, as always. Plus I actually liked hearing how he (re)considers his own takes, and I appreciate people who say yes, we can change our minds. Stereotyping a bit here, I realize, but if someone said they were a fan/regular listener of his I'd feel like we could have interesting convos (as opposed to meeting an uber fan of, say, Piker, Peterson, or truly even Rogan, all of which would make me lean towards meh and/or byeeee).

Monica B.

Thanks for sharing? 🥴😆

Par

This episode was the first and last time I will ever hear this person. There is nothing deep about him: He's an edgelord a**hole.

Mike Nelson

Scientific knowledge update alert. Destiny apparently has 'Phimosis', which is a condition where the foreskin will not peel back when the penis is erect. Every day, one learneth new info.

john statham

Matt: 'He won't get Jordan Peterson to discuss how good he is at giving head.'

john statham

Matt: 'What's Cornhub, Chris?' That's easily Top 3 in the Mattrix hall of fame.

john statham

A female streamer on destiny; 'he's got a really weird dick.' His response: 'Apparently you've steamed your pussy.'

john statham

I sometimes write reviews of these episodes and I tempted to venture forth on this one. Highlights so far:

john statham

I didn’t like the same aspects of Destiny that you did, Lee, but I didn’t feel that Matt and Chris were being unduly charitable towards him or excusing his behavior. Rather, they were explaining it. For example, I now know that streamer culture is not my thing because such language and behavior is the norm, and that is a norm that is unpalatable to me.

Linda Sears

Just to be clear, I think all of the content and clips are telling of Destiny’s character. Also in terms of parallels in personality, it’s specifically what I said: obsessiveness and frustrations with misrepresentation/evasiveness/obacurantism. It’s not in terms of our moral judgments or concern about others 😉.

Christopher Kavanagh

Agreed. Many of us, myself included, are one health care crisis away from severe debt or worse. Such a situation can make people feel disposable, desperate, and likely to believe weird QAnon type stuff.

Linda Sears

I’m an oldster, so this culture is very alien to my sensibilities. When I hear someone call another person subhuman, I think of the Rwandan genocide.

Linda Sears

One of the few episodes that I could not finish. I didn't like how forthcoming the hosts were to Destiny, and how quick they were to excuse behaviour as "just streamer culture". I felt as I was being groomed into liking this streamer that I really viscerally dislike. His awful comments about genocide or labeling chat members as retards left and right are deserving of criticism, and the fact that that criticism for once was left out was strange to me.

Lee Kebum

Hard to even know where to start. Some not so well put together thoughts-Streaming culture requires personality types who are highly confident and seem to not care about creating or maintaining healthy boundaries. The power dynamic between streamer and followers is inherently unequal because the follower has little opportunity to clarify their position before being booted out. I better understand why so many of my students are afraid to interact with each other in person and/or struggle with their mental health because this is a big part of the world they live in. Having strong empathetic emotions/being overly sensitive or prone to feelings of guilt or shame is a deficit in this culture, which is why someone like Destiny can become so popular because he does not appear to have those traits. I can relate to Matt’s mum.

Linda Sears

Thanks Anna, that’s important context. My wife is a nightly BreadTube watcher (Krystal Ball, Kyle Kulinski, David Pakman, etc) and I can confirm everything you just wrote about Destiny. His lack of empathy for Palestinian civilians is nauseating.

Christopher McLaughlin

Well said my friend. I have the same concerns over the false binary of authentic vs inauthentic. In my experience the more authentic someone is the less likely they are to tell you how authentic they are.

Christopher McLaughlin

Oh, he is very much pro abortion now, you and I can fault Destiny for many things but his whole political journey is laid bare to the world. When I mentioned that Destiny was pro-life at the time I am talking about ~13 years ago. He has since become pro choice and has altered his views on many subjects which I find commendable and shows his rigorous process at changing his views that Matt and Chris described in this episode. And on the matter of language Linda, I fully agree. But then again we are probably not his target audience nor part of the subcultures he is a part of. I know youngsters who are just as likely to speak and act like him. I guess a part of growing up online and holding the job he does means benefiting greatly from being provocative and 'edgy' as they have dubbed it.

Stained glass window

Thanks, sorry if I'm a bit short tempered in this community. Destiny really triggers me. I often think of DFW and how he would interpret the new media landscape. I think he would have a lot of prescient things to say but I imagine it would be pretty dark.

Jovan Popov

Matt's not actually a boomer is he? (60+ years old?) If so, drop the skincare routine😅😅 But anyway, funny getting an older person's perspective on this and I totally agree about the love island comparison, when I watch Destiny on YouTube, it's similar to how I watch reality (which I enjoy)

Erin

I don't particularly like Hasan but I would say for an American a little bit of far left politics can be useful as the average tax-paying citizen lacks healthcare, reasonable vacation time, a nationalized transportation system, and most social benefits that you probably enjoy in Australia, Ireland, or in fact most western countries. All of which, thanks to inflation, has made it nearly impossible to escape the never-ending cycle of debt, dependency, and depression that ravages your average American citizen in the new post-occupy (the last movement that really spoke about workers' rights) epoch of the American empire. Not to say that these are the talking points that Hasan is arguing for - I have a feeling he is more consumed about identity politics than workers' rights - but at least for an American there is a very real battle for a sustainable social net that even the neo-liberal center-left (which more resembles the Western European right) has abandoned at this point and which the right has abandoned long ago for fear-mongering and racism. Just my two cents as an American.

Jovan Popov

I enjoyed the real life application of DFW. Thanks

Adam Sher

Sorry, one more thing... I think the reason he doesn't do the whole self-aggrandising thing and absurd over-inflation of self importance, is because he doesn't have that wounded narcissistic character. I still think he comes across as having a superiority complex, but one actually grounded in (rational) self-confidence rather than insecurity. Which makes him look a lot more "normal" than most of the gurus who are compensating drastically for wounded narcissism (I think Destiny will score relatively lower on the grievance-mongering compared to a Weinstein, for eg)

Paul Bowman

Too much to say, as usual. Got to start with the line about people spunking on the carpet over dead Palestinian kids though. Mainly because behind the deliberately shocking crude sexual imagery there was something that wasn't picked up. The perversion was masking an inversion, to coin a phrase. It's Destiny who is defending the IDF slaughter of those children - and his opponents on that are not turned on by the dead kids, they're horrified by them. That's the point. So Destiny is projecting here and to me the use of "outburst/abuse mode" reveals that he feels unease (in more normal people I might even say guilt) on this position. More generally, I definitely agree that Hasan is not remotely in the same league as Destiny. Destiny has correctly identified his key skill and role as a rhetorician, as you say. And he is a master of his craft. That ability to speak that rapidly, while still being clear enough to be understood and simultaneously think that fast, in real time, is a hell of a skill and Chris is right that most people vastly overestimate their ability to come anywhere close to that. Where I do think Chris gets it wrong is seeing a reflection of his own character in Destiny. To my ear Destiny comes across as a chilling sociopath, unencumbered by anything resembling a conscience. Whereas Chris appears to me to be a fairly normal empathic person with regular Irish (ex-)Catholic conscience. Seems like a case of projecting the qualities you admire onto a person and not seeing all the other less admirable qualities in the reflection. Finally, I think there's a danger of falling into a false binary of fake persona vs authentic character, as being the only two options. Not that fake personas don't exist and are often patently visible in the guru-sphere (e.g. Huberman). But just because Destiny is not using a fake persona, doesn't mean that his "controlled affect mode" (which, although he calibrates to match different audiences, he does use pretty consistently across the board) is his authentic character - because that would mean that his "outburst/abuse mode" is somehow less revealing of his personality, and I don't think that's a defensible assumption. Like I say, he leaves a strong impression on me of being a sociopath, and it's not clear how our assumptions of "authenticity" or "sincerity" being somehow virtuous really applies to sociopaths. Not that sociopaths are not human, but I think they can challenge some of our heuristics around personality. (Great article in the Guardian recently about sociopaths as regular humans, but different... https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/apr/08/patric-gagne-sociopath-fighting-urges)

Paul Bowman

Anna J, thank you! I don't know Destiny beyond this DtG episode (and don't plan to get to know him more). This all fits with the episode's take of him as kind of a liberal mainstream democrat at heart though, as this is pretty party line : /

Monica B.

This same word came to mind for me — I found myself thinking 'hmmm how would I define an edgelord, oh it's THIS GUY'

Monica B.

“We shouldn’t want the war to stop?” That was the question Destiny’s fan asked him, to which he responded with the colorful language about “a pedophile jerking off to dying Palestinians”. Excellent debate tactic bro.

Christopher McLaughlin

What's sexist about calling that woman sub-human?

teixeira

Doing a DTG on Vaush next would really compete the circle.

Sam Mountjoy

Destiny is an excellent example of the “cult of authenticity.” This type of person (Trump does it too) insists that they are “being authentic” by expressing their views in the most aggressive and rude way possible. It’s abusive in the sense that they are behaving objectively inappropriately but insist that the problem is with *you* because they are just “being real.” It strikes me as maybe something we Americans might be prone to given our individualistic culture?

Jonathan Crymes

If times get tough and dtg heads in the love island, orbiter drama direction, I’ll be here to support it! I’d like to hear Helen Lewis call Chris a cuck just once.

Austin Stillwell

W/R/T authenticity, there is a lively debate between authenticity vs sincerity and it is my belief that using words like "authentic" while describing influencers or podcast hosts is a slippery slope because they (the podcast-influencers) are attempting to sell sincerity masked as authenticity and people often confuse the terms. Obviously there is no way to "determine" actual authenticity or sincerity of a human being as I am not a god, but there have been books written about "ascertaining authenticity rhetorically" and compare it to the much nobler ideal of sincerity. There was a cultural movement called the New Sincerity which began in the nineties. It can be found in music (Neutral Milk Hotel, Conor Oberst), literature (DFW, Franzen), and film (Miranda July, Wes Anderson) and my thesis is this movement has been co-opted by influencers and podcast hosts since Joe Rogan. Keep in mind I put all of these people in one large huckster basket - which is why I think decoding them is such a crucial mission in our time. The New Sincerity, of which authenticity was a key component, was characterized by "single-entendre principles" (Wallace, David Foster. E. Unibus Pluram: Television and U.S. Fiction. ) But authenticity as an ideal becomes truly difficult in practice. How do we achieve authenticity and how do we distinguish it from performance (which would betray "single-entendre principles")? One way of doing this is by comparing authenticity to sincerity and understanding the deep rhetorical differences between these two qualifiers. Along with Wallace’s “single-entendre principles” I'll use Trilling's definition of authenticity as “a congruence of avowal and actual feeling.” (Trilling, Lionel. Sincerity and Authenticity.) Trilling went on to differentiate the two terms by adding an addendum to sincerity, citing Polonius’s famous advice to Laertes in Hamlet (emphasis on the much less famous last line): This above all: to thine own self be true And it doth follow, as night the day Thou canst not then be false to any man. Trilling goes on to describe the crux of Shakespeare’s formulation of sincerity as “truth to the self…conceived of as means of ensuring truth to the other.” What is important in this concept of sincerity vis-a-vis authenticity is the outward that “the moral end in sincerity implies a public end…the correct fulfillment of a public role.” That it's not just you talking to yourself but there is a dialectic search for truth in which the public sphere is emphasized to the point that it's much more important than the self - sincerity (a very difficult thing to achieve) is not characterized by the individual's rhetoric but on its reception. That the speaker is more concerned with you than he is with himself. Now, what has been happening in the culture at large for the last 15 years is there has been an increase in performative authenticity masked as sincerity. Which, funny enough, would be (in my opinion) the MO of cult leaders or gurus - how often have you heard ex-cult members describe their cult leaders as "real/authentic" etc. People listen to Joe Rogan because they feel he is authentic, people listen to Hasan because they think he is authentic, people listen to Destiny because people think he is authentic - but authenticity is not the same thing as sincerity. What makes it even more difficult for people to distinguish is the fact that it is a simulacrum of a dialogue so indistinguishable from real life that it would make Baudrillard gasp in awe - but that is what it is, a simulated reality of a conversation in which the influencer/podcast host gives the appearance (the performance) of authenticity to try to convey sincerity (the two way "means of ensuring truth to the other" as defined by Trilling). But you, the paying customer, are not on an equal footing in the pursuit of truth and this pursuit of truth is the farthest thing from the influencer/podcast host's mind. Instead the goals are self-interest, capital, influence, or, in Destiny's case, winning. (In a recent stream, he said he didn't even really care about the I-P conflict.) The only authenticity of these podcasters/influencers is in the performative, perhaps best displayed (imo) by Destiny. When Norm Finkelstein blew up in the debate I would call that authentic - there was a complete "congruence of avowal and actual feeling." NF was actually pissed and everything he communicated was congruent to his true inner feelings - remember authenticity does not mean "winning," i.e. it's not always "good," in fact I'd say it often is quite ugly. When Destiny blows up on camera he is doing so for the spectacle and performance - not because he is actually angry. When Destiny grasps his face and screams in psychic pain, it's not because his opponents arguments are literally causing his brain to hurt, it's a performance for his paying customers who want to see him writhe in pantomimed horror because his opponents arguments are just so vehemently stupid. Of course there is nothing medical, realistic, or authentic in this display - it is pure performance in order to garner capital and influence and thus betrays Trilling's definition of authenticity as a "congruence of avowel and actual feeling" and Foster Wallace's "single-entendre principles." If Destiny had a true "congruence of avowel and actual feeling" we would see the ugly (as we did with Norm Finkelstein) not in the service of "winning" (what people pay Destiny to do) but in the service of his actual feelings. What you get from Destiny, like any great cult leader, is manipulation masked as authenticity in order to obtain self-interested goals - money, influence, women, all of which he unabashedly admits. I don't really think he would disagree with this statement in fact, I just don't think he realizes that he is even actually doing it.

Jovan Popov

I guess I find calling another human a subhuman piece of shit really disturbing regardless of what that person is doing. My thinking is that there was much more to that dynamic than we will ever know. My husband’s narcissistic ex-wife used her children in a similar way, but I would never call her subhuman even though she has done serious harm to many people in her orbit, including my husband and his son. Just my 2 cents.

Linda Sears

The peek of Destiny

Donkey kong

Destiny Deep Dive

Linda Sears

Maybe he should not sit on stream and be against abortion then.

Tobias nilsson

I agree with everything you say. Truth seeking is not about working backwards especially when it's dialectic (which Destiny is constantly feigning he is attempting). Just look at his notes for the I-P debate, there's nothing about a mutual search for truth. It's about how can I win.

Jovan Popov

Hoping back in to add, I'm honestly kind of shocked by his misogyny and how popular he is, like most healthy well adjusted men don't talk about women and relationships the way he did in clips.

Anonymous ethicist, not a serial killer at all, just asking questions.

On the matter of the woman seeking child support; I personally don't know Destiny's fully fleshed out position but I am aware of the situation at hand. Destiny is addressing a woman whom he perceives to be willing to bring a child into the world with the sole purpose of financially benefiting from the man in question without any regard for the child. In the messages she has shown online she was telling the less than scrupulous man in question that she is looking forward to bearing the man a child, not even considering abortion, and was revelling in the fact that he had gotten her pregnant. According to him she was more concerned with what that might mean for her future; An appartement paid for by the man in question, a possible entry into the United States, etc. As most of us are, Destiny is quite touchy about children and infants and has always openly told his audience that if he could make a choice now his son might have been aborted, had he not been such a staunch pro-life conservative at the time. I do not particularly condone his speech, but I do find the woman in question to also be quite reprehensible. Considering everything we've seen, and heard from her has been all about her potential gain from this child and not about the circumstances in which the child will be born.

Stained glass window

Interesting episode, even if I found much to disagree with you about haha. I think you handwaved some stuff - the condemnation wrt Destiny's fairly severe and regular misogyny and general vicious treatment of other humans was a bit too gentle, but anyway. The Gaza conflict is a good example of Destiny not being as intellectually serious / rigorous and good faith as your episode has made him out to be. Destiny for whatever reason had decided he didn't like the Palestinian cause prior to Oct 7, and had voiced this on stream. This was in the context of, at that time, being completely uninformed about the conflict and history (by his own admission). Then Oct 7 struck and Destiny, almost immediately became a vocal pro-Israel proponent. All his "research" after this seemed to be with the aim of confirming his already decided upon position. The above is all circumstantial so I'll give some examples relevant to the episode that substantiate it. Destiny accepting that IDF were wrong to kill aid workers is extremely weak evidence against the accusation of him being an israel / idf apologist. The killing of the aid workers was so unequivocably egregious, incompetent, negligent (possibly criminal.. we shall see). Like, anyone denying this or downplaying this event sounds... insane, and Destiny knows that. You can still condemn this one obviously awful action and generally still be an IDF apologist and let many other less wrong things slide. So him admitting to this is not evidence of anything behind him not being a completely unhinged propagandist for the IDF (low bar...). Also his refusal (on same stream but you didn't play this part in the episode) to entertain the idea that the three consecutive strikes on the aid workers could have been a deliberate targeting, and the characterisation of anyone who thought this way as a "child" also shows so much motivated reasoning. Is it so inconceivable that in the context of the well documented lack of discipline in the IDF in Gaza, + chaos on the ground in Gaza, that the commander who gave the order (incidentally a religious nationalist right wing settler who had previously signed a letter calling for depriving Gaza of aid..make of that what you will) knowingly targeted the aid workers with the aim of dissuading further aid and starving Hamas +/- Gazan civilians of supplies? Why? Blowback? It didn't have any real consequences, as usual. Yes fingers were wagged but the money and weapons tap is still on. Hell the US has just vetoed recognition of a Palestinian state. Status quo continues, even after multiple foreign national civilians killed by the IDF. Another example from episode re the aid worker strikes: "Even if a hamas member was on board, that cannot be the calculation...that's unhinged" - Destiny. I mean, he's perfectly fine with this calculation when it is innocent Gazan children or Palestinian aid workers or hospitals being bombed because the IDF think there are Hamas members amongst them. Why is the "its not the IDFs fault its Hamas' fault for using the aid trucks as human shields" argument (that Destiny is a proponent of) not applicable here? This shows at the very least a lack of consistency in his reasoning, and imo reveals his biases, essentially an a priori belief that Palestinian lives are not quite as innocent as or equivalent to Western lives. So yeah, the idea that Destiny is happy to "punch in both directions" wrt Israel Palestine is just a misrepresentation of his positions. He constantly minimises and rationalises IDF actions, and demonises actions of Palestinians. He has been on stream lately accusing unarmed Palestinians of courting IDF attacks so they can be killed on camera for propaganda (for example). He will push back against settlement expansion but that's about it wrt criticising Israel.

Anna J

Actually I wrote "shelling" because I misspelled "selling" and it was 3 am so I believed I wrote "shilling" as well. I would have much rather used a more neutral signifier like "selling." W/R/T authenticity, there is a lively debate between authenticity vs sincerity and it is my thesis that using words like "authentic" while describing influencers or podcast hosts is a slippery slope because they (the podcast-influencers) are attempting to sell sincerity masked as authenticity and people often confuse the terms. Obviously there is no way to "determine" actual authenticity or sincerity of a human being as I am not a god, but there have been books written about "ascertaining authenticity rhetorically" and compare it to the much nobler ideal of sincerity. There was a cultural movement called the New Sincerity which began in the nineties. It can be found in music (Neutral Milk Hotel, Conor Oberst), literature (DFW, Franzen), and film (Miranda July, Wes Anderson) and my thesis is this movement has been co-opted by influencers and podcast hosts since Joe Rogan. Keep in mind I put all of these people in one large huckster basket - which is why I think decoding them is such a crucial mission in our time. The New Sincerity, of which authenticity was a key component, was characterized by "single-entendre principles" (Wallace, David Foster. E. Unibus Pluram: Television and U.S. Fiction. ) But authenticity as an ideal becomes truly difficult in practice. How do we achieve authenticity and how do we distinguish it from performance (which would betray "single-entendre principles")? One way of doing this is by comparing authenticity to sincerity and understanding the deep rhetorical differences between these two qualifiers. Along with Wallace’s “single-entendre principles” I'll use Trilling's definition of authenticity as “a congruence of avowal and actual feeling.” (Trilling, Lionel. Sincerity and Authenticity.) Trilling went on to differentiate the two terms by adding an addendum to sincerity, citing Polonius’s famous advice to Laertes in Hamlet (emphasis on the much less famous last line): This above all: to thine own self be true And it doth follow, as night the day Thou canst not then be false to any man. Trilling goes on to describe the crux of Shakespeare’s formulation of sincerity as “truth to the self…conceived of as means of ensuring truth to the other.” What is important in this concept of sincerity vis-a-vis authenticity is the outward that “the moral end in sincerity implies a public end…the correct fulfillment of a public role.” That it's not just you talking to yourself but there is a dialectic search for truth in which the public sphere is emphasized to the point that it's much more important than the self - sincerity (a very difficult thing to achieve) is not characterized by the individual's rhetoric but on its reception. That the speaker is more concerned with you than he is with himself. Now, what has been happening in the culture at large for the last 15 years is there has been an increase in performative authenticity masked as sincerity. Which, funny enough, would be (in my opinion) the MO of cult leaders or gurus - how often have you heard ex-cult members describe their cult leaders as "real/authentic" etc. People listen to Joe Rogan because they feel he is authentic, people listen to Hasan because they think he is authentic, people listen to Destiny because people think he is authentic - but authenticity is not the same thing as sincerity. What makes it even more difficult for people to distinguish is the fact that it is a simulacrum of a dialogue so indistinguishable from real life that it would make Baudrillard gasp in awe - but that is what it is, a simulated reality of a conversation in which the influencer/podcast host gives the appearance (the performance) of authenticity to try to convey sincerity (the two way "means of ensuring truth to the other" as defined by Trilling). But you, the paying customer, are not on an equal footing in the pursuit of truth and this pursuit of truth is the farthest thing from the influencer/podcast host's mind. Instead the goals are self-interest, capital, influence, or, in Destiny's case, winning. (In a recent stream, he said he didn't even really care about the I-P conflict.) The only authenticity of these podcasters/influencers is in the performative, perhaps best displayed (imo) by Destiny. When Norm Finkelstein blew up in the debate I would call that authentic - there was a complete "congruence of avowal and actual feeling." NF was actually pissed and everything he communicated was congruent to his true inner feelings - remember authenticity does not mean "winning," i.e. it's not always "good," in fact I'd say it often is quite ugly. When Destiny blows up on camera he is doing so for the spectacle and performance - not because he is actually angry. When Destiny grasps his face and screams in psychic pain, it's not because his opponents arguments are literally causing his brain to hurt, it's a performance for his paying customers who want to see him writhe in pantomimed horror because his opponents arguments are just so vehemently stupid. Of course there is nothing medical, realistic, or authentic in this display - it is pure performance in order to garner capital and influence and thus betrays Trilling's definition of authenticity as a "congruence of avowel and actual feeling" and Foster Wallace's "single-entendre principles." If Destiny had a true "congruence of avowel and actual feeling" we would see the ugly (as we did with Norm Finkelstein) not in the service of "winning" (what people pay Destiny to do) but in the service of his actual feelings. What you get from Destiny, like any great cult leader, is manipulation masked as authenticity in order to obtain self-interested goals - money, influence, women, all of which he unabashedly admits. I don't really think he would disagree with this statement in fact, I just don't think he realizes that he is even actually doing it.

Jovan Popov

Did not expect a Zherka appearance. It’s so strange hearing old clips of him contrasted with where he ended up now.

Oskar Dramdal Gunbjørnsen

*sigh* I find myself once again feeling the need to defend Hasan haha. Yeah I really do think you miss some depth and a genuine mix of good and bad content with Hasan. He has some issues to be sure (coloured by America bad way too much, too impulsive when it comes to his takes on breaking news, others), but for example his takes on Israel Palestine have been, with some exceptions, well substantiated and he is well educated on the material facts and root causes of the conflict, and he has also been advocating for Palestinian rights for many years and raised just under a million dollars for Gaza. Interestingly in terms of the timing wrt your podcast on Destiny, he (Hasan) has actually just done a segment defending criticisms of him just reading twitter headlines (lol), and also outlines his criticisms of Destiny's intellectual approach to the Gaza conflict. It's worth a listen if you can be bothered - very relevant to this podcast too. https://youtu.be/7INUAMgHIRQ?si=6TFGBUc3QuseDAXZ

Anna J

There's a Norm Macdonald bit where he would tell a story to an unsuspecting guest about a serial killer, going into great detail about all the gruesome acts they committed. And right at the climax of the story, he would turn to the guest and say, 'I mean, this guy... this guy was a real jerk.' Obviously, it's not completely analogous, but I think I felt a similar disconnect between the things described and the framing. At the end of the episode, it's - 'a mixed bag and it doesn't mean you can't be critical [...] of going to kill a young child [laughs].' If inconsistency/hypocrisy is considered a 'red flag,' how should we describe a very consistent belief that murdering teenagers and their fathers is justified if they interfere with our income? I think there's either a major halo effect going on, or people don't actually believe the words that he's saying, and it would take something like his fan murdering their boss for getting fired for it to really sink in, similarly to how the outlook on Alex Jones changed with the Pizzagate shooter and Sandy Hook.

Tomek Krzesiński

Perhaps this is just another example of how the gurus are the new evolution of religious cult leaders. And have the same type of hypocritical behaviours.

Emma

I think the first Destiny content I saw he was arguing about feminism, and he was taking the pro feminist side... but in doing so he was manterupting and mansplaining feminism over the top of his female allies. I feel like I sort of recognise his type. I mean he is more extreme then anyone I know IRL. But I move in pretty far left circles. And I've known a number of men who really get off on virtue signalling what amazing male feminists/woke blokes that they are. And there rhetoric is fine. But then there behaviour is wildly out of tune with their professed beliefs. I know some women consider this is a just a cynical ploy to get laid. And no doubt it is for some. But then for others I really think they are sincere in their beliefs. But they just completely lack self awareness about their own unconscious biases and how those biases are actually negatively impacting the women in their lives, for instance their junior female colleagues. I mean I guess it's no different from the very well known phenomenon of fire breathing conservative religious leaders with their smorgasbord or sexual scandals.

Emma

Edging with destiny

Sam Mountjoy

Great ep as always. I love Cum Town PH D. thanks soldiers!

Jordan

If the women seeking child support was abusing her kids you might. The point is, he never called someone seeking child care a sub human piece of shit because they are seeking child support.

d669

Do it

Guruspod 2

Vaush (who was Destiny fan in the past) commented once on incongruence between Destiny’s pro-trans stand and transphobia. If I recall correctly, Vaush concluded that Destiny arrived at good politics intellectually, but doesn’t care about anything than intellectual honesty and that’s why he presents psychopathic level of rationalism.

aneladgam_varelse

Destiny is living internet history and definitely an intellectual type, so I expect DtG to show that and tell full story. On the other hand Hasan is activist-entertainer and you can find funnier clips, more interesting segments, better opinions or worse tankie moments, but there isn’t much depth to it or variety, either you like it or not.

aneladgam_varelse

Agree! The casual sexism from these brosephs is so telling : /

Monica B.

Destiny is being edgy, too. I've learned a lot reading the comments to this episode. Time to move on.

Dan

I don't understand what seems suspect to you? Red Scare's whole thing is trying to be edgy so they're making a concerted effort to put it in, Destiny is part of gaming culture so it comes effortlessly. You could say one is immoral and the other amoral, regardless they are clearly delivered in different contexts with different intent.

Mark Vaughan

Saying "retard" is more "genuine" when Destiny says it from a gamer perspective vs Red Scare seems suspect. When Red Scare did it, it was "oh wow, so transgressive". Destiny, "that's his culture. Martin Luther would be proud". Edit: canceled. He is "trying to be clear" about how he wants genocide. what a joke.

Dan

I think ‘drama content’ is an apt name for some media. Charisma and edginess seem to trump measured commentary. I haven’t a clue what the remedy is for the entertainment over content issue. But Destiny does seem more self aware and research savvy than some. Thanks again for a interesting episode

Shane Partington

I am on the same trajectory. Finish the Rogan ep, and part way through the DtG destiny ep now. I skipped 2 hours in the middle of Rogan. I just couldn't go round in circles with them. I found a site that had the time stamps so I jumped around a bit. I don't the the Rogan episode is worth doing the whole way through.

HustleTron9000

Thanks Leon!

Guruspod 2

Destiny: The Retarded Edge of Debate? 🙃

Kristen Cartmer

I quietly wish I could address certain 'remedial dipshits' with the same gentle, remedial ranching approach as Destiny.

Kristen Cartmer

As a Destiny fan, when you bring up the Child Murder thing make sure not to make the "he could have done plenty of other things before resorting to that" argument. I've seen too many people lose the argument on stream by accidentally ceding that ground (which, critically, the lawyer in the clip doesn't) Loved the ep, sorry for the unsolicited advice!

James Smith

jfc can they make that harder to find! haha thank you

Casey Marshall

I mean you don’t have to engage with me but you offered up the opinion that he doesn’t take himself seriously and it’s all for show so to speak and I just don’t see evidence for that. And I don’t really see a non-pejorative way to read “capitalistic propagandists shilling their product.” You also claimed you had ways of determining actual authenticity so I figured you had some kind of examples to share.

Andy

Sure thing. The Hasan ep was a more a causal one, because of the pirate thing he released so we thought we’d cover it specifically. I can’t say for sure, but from what I’ve seen and what others have said, a more complete look at Hasan wouldn’t reveal much more depth to him. Even people defending him tend to say, “yes he’s a bit of an idiot, but he’s arguing for a good cause (global socialism or whatever)”.

Guruspod 2

Always Sunny is DTG-approved!

Guruspod 2

Fair! Perhaps it felt like we underplayed his poor behaviour because we try not to set ourselves up as moral judges (although we’re human, so we can’t help it a bit). So with Huberman, whatever we think of his character, from a guru perspective the key thing is whether he’s being upfront and truthful. It’s the inconsistency with his wholesome clean living personae and his behaviour that’s a red flag in guru land. Likewise, if KK presented himself as a pure polemical RW partisan, then we can’t really criticise him on guru grounds for that. So with Destiny, it’s not that we condone his behaviour, it’s more that he appears to be exactly what he presents himself as.

Guruspod 2

Thanks Daniel! Chris does most of the work ofc, but I do a little bit too ;)

Guruspod 2

Very different facets to him

Guruspod 2

Ofc i was left a bit nonplussed too! I guess gurus are like any issue. Sometimes the diagnosis is clear-cut, somethings it’s not.

Guruspod 2

This is my favorite episode so far, have to comment after around 6 months of lurking here. Extremely fair and even handed decoding, 2:04:25 is I feel the true deep point of insight to be learned here.

Leon White

It might have come across during your research, but an interesting similarity in a position you had with Destiny is on Lab leak vs zoological origin. My memory is a little fuzzy but he went over a paper describing the merits of each based on analyzing the virus under a microscope.

Ajmal Sohail

Are we in a court of law? How people talk on the internet! I know that Destiny is a multi-millionaire who lives in a high-rise penthouse in Miami and I don't believe it's a career in timeshare which has placed him in this position. You are focusing on the pejorative connotations of one word I used to explore the black and white dictionary definition of the signifier I used. Do you want to speak on authenticity vis-a-vis guru rhetoric or anything else of substance?

Jovan Popov

Thanks for the feedback!

Christopher Kavanagh

Destiny is definitely less guruesque than I expected! Destiny is more annoying edgelord than a guru

aneladgam_varelse

I don’t think I have a theory of mind for someone who supports liberal/social justice politics yet will defend extra-judicial murder and casually call a woman seeking child support a “sub-human piece of shit”. To me that does lend weight to the theory that it’s all a game to him and not based on ethical principles. He comes across as reasonable and level-headed in many of the clips where he’s talking about substantive issues, but I have to wonder how much of that is just an act

Erik Fast

Long time Destiny viewer. I really appreciate the level headed approach you guys took to his content. The perspective of our little insane corner of the internet from an academic/non American perspective is really interesting. I particularly appreciate seeing the reaction of all the drama stuff. Seeing it with new eyes is pretty illuminating and definitely helps me figure out what parts of my psyche enjoys the stuff. Working my way through the rest of your backlog. Already really enjoying the Weinstein breakdowns.

AzurePropagation

Loool the correct answer is at 01:55:21 (for a bit anyway)

Dr Badmouth

Listening to the first hour of this has made me realise I entirely avoid the version of destiny I consider toxic. He's very annoying in casual streamer mode

Níall Faughnan

I hope one day we can get a live stream with Destiny from the onsen

HustleTron9000

What evidence do you have that Destiny is shilling anything? If anything it seems like he has a distinct lack of profiteering and that he repeatedly takes stances that cause people who might otherwise be sympathetic to really dislike him.

Andy

I heard about this podcast from Destiny and I became a patron to hear it early. This was great. The amount of effort you guys put in to make sure everything was factually correct and fairly presented was clear. Many of your criticisms are also quite popular ones among the Destiny fanbase as well. Thanks!

Daniel Del Giovane

I completely agree. Hasan and Destiny are two sides of the same coin, they are both capitalistic propagandists shelling their product to make lots of money, but they treated Destiny much nicer, with many more benefits of the doubt because I imagine they agree with his politics or something. I really don't understand the constant appeal to authenticity like Destiny is doing any of this but to garner more capital and influence. Please read Trilling or Foster Wallace if you want to understand how authenticity or sincerity can be correctly ascertained rhetorically. Destiny ain't it.

Jovan Popov

As someone well-versed in Destiny lore, you did an amazingly thorough job researching him, and I found this very enjoyable. However, as I finished listening, I did get the feeling,difficult to put into words, that some of the disturbing aspects were slightly underplayed and perhaps held to a different standard than they usually would be, especially when contrasted with how damning Chris considered the Huberman article to be. I think this might be due to the fact that Steven is an extremely charismatic and funny person, who can be found in unhinged streams arguing about the appearance of his penis - it makes it hard to preach to someone like that about the importance of decorum, ethical boundaries, or responsibility in messaging (a similar dilemma as with someone as wacky as Alex Jones). But then you realize he's on Piers Morgan, has a massive audience, and is one of the most influential people online in the world of culture wars/politics. It's definitely all confusing, as Matt said. I find the DDoS kid story—and the public threatening to leak nudes of another stream girl, which I don't think was mentioned in the episode—to be fascinating. In part, because it's emblematic of how an impressionable audience can soak up the beliefs of its idol—a significant percentage of his audience agrees that killing a teenager and his father is a justifiable response to an income being cut off (as they stand by the threat of leaking of the nudes). But I also find that story fascinating because I have rarely heard people being as disturbed by it as I would expect. Most of the time, the vibe I'm getting is that it's edgy, quirky, controversial—just Destiny being Destiny. Maybe it's because the internet has become desensitized to such statements, but to me, it feels like it should be a bigger deal than it is perceived to be. If a real-life acquaintance confessed that he planned the murder of a teenager and his father for the act of cutting off his internet connection (source of income) and that he stands by it and feels it is absolutely justifiable, I think everyone would no longer feel safe associating with that person, or at the very least, that would majorly shape the perception of that person forever. I would agree for the most part that he is good-faith, certainly more than most in the sphere. I think your assessment that he views debates as a video game is spot-on, as he treats them as a competitive endeavor where he plays to win, reevaluates, gets better, wins more (and is rewarded for it with popularity and money). However, sometimes this gets the better of him, so when conceding a point appears as 'losing,' he will not budge and will be uncharacteristically poor in argumentation. He does this, for example, when debating veganism and recently with the Daisy drama where, despite evidence, he continues making the same deranged claims. So, I don't think he views good-faith as a value in itself, rather as a means to an end. I think he has cultivated an audience that expects blood/drama and will be disappointed if it doesn't get it, which creates a very dysfunctional feedback loop.

Tomek Krzesiński

I guess my point is that you should, and excuse me for this term, try to “steel man” *shudders* these guru types. It seemed like you all went out of your way to present a diverse mix of Destiny content and it would have been nice to see some Hasan material that came off better. But I’m also a bit bias. Not really a Hasan fan, but I find a lot about Destiny gross. I have a hard time excusing the platforming Nazi stuff

Michael

I really enjoyed this episode but I has left a little uncertain about Destiny's effect on his audience. Like I didn't much of a picture of his influence on his fan base (other than that they are a large group).

Allan Malcolm McPherson

As a self described Destiny fan, I thought this was a very fair breakdown. He is equals parts Maury Povich and sober center-left political commentator

Revilo

Yeah I’ll gladly admit we covered Hasan more casually. I knew next to knowing about him, heard him carrying on like a idiot, and gave my 2c. If we did him wrong, he was just having a bad day, and there’s other content showing him to be in-fact well-informed, intelligent and reasonable, that would sure be interesting to know. We put more effort into Destiny. But it’s incorrect to say that we were hedging because he might exercise his right to reply, or we’re worried about being brigaded by his fans. My ambivalent feelings about him are very genuine.

Guruspod 2

No I think you characterized Hasan mostly accurately. He’s pretty shallow and boring imo. No need for a deeper dive because there’s no depth to dive into. I just remember you putting a much finer point on how Hasan enforces conformity by lashing out at his audience whereas with Destiny you were more like “well, he’s performing all day every day, surely he gets tired of seeing people criticize him in ways he disagrees with etc etc”. It struck me as a double standard. I loved this episode btw. It has supplanted your first Sam Harris interview s my new favorite episode. I appreciated the charity you showed Destiny and agree you did a good job not mischaracterizing him. I’m a fan of his (with many caveats, I hate how sycophantic his fans can be) and you exceeded my expectations with how accurate your representation of him is. I now realize I should have expected no less from my favorite podcast!

Andy

I’m familiar with Hasan’s content and imo Hasan is fairly one-dimensional. Our decoders gathered representative sample

aneladgam_varelse

This is streamer world…

Christopher Kavanagh

That happens to me a lot!

Christopher Kavanagh

The difference is based on seeing a genuine mixture of good and bad in the content. And the degree to which dynamics are admitted. In Hasan’s case we wanted to do a specific episode on the Houthi interview because it was so terrible and illustrative of the shallowness of his approach. We didn’t do a deep dive on his content but would you argue we are missing significant depth?

Christopher Kavanagh

Awww gonzo Love Island <3 also finally someone sold to me It’s sunny in Philadelphia

aneladgam_varelse

I agree with this. If you contrast how they presented, for example, the way they attack their own audiences, it’s night and day. Way more benefit of the doubt for Destiny, either because they think he might come on and talk or because they’ve come in with a more positive disposition toward him because of seeing him in debates like with Jordan Peterson.

Andy

It was a big one!

Guruspod 2

Not if he joins with his mainstream media manners.

Roland Weber

Undoubtably. You can count on it

Andy

The Destiny of Debate?

Roland Weber

So you're saying to expect a stream where Chris and Destiny shit talk the threesome they had off stream

Adam Sher

Wow, what an effort that must have been to select all those clips and produce this episode! I still can't believe that I managed to listen through it in one go.

Roland Weber

You mean an RSS feed? On the webpage, go to the "Membership" tab and scroll down to "Quick Links".

Roland Weber

Ive said for awhile that Chris and Destiny are somewhat similar and I enjoy the same things about the two of them and hearing Chris say so himself (with some caveats) was extremely validating. Great episode guys! Been waiting for this one for awhile

Andy

It did feel like you were all going out of your way to paint Destiny in a positive light by pulling many different clips, whereas Hasan was 1 clip from an improvised interview. It’s not a defense of Hasan, but it felt you made with this with the expectation Destiny is going to come on for the right to reply

Michael

Interesting point about debate -- the issue is almost always whether 'we' are debating essences or qualities. It's very common for one 'side' to be debating as to the essence of a thing, whereas the other seeks to debate the qualities of a thing. When this happens the debate is almost always futile, as the essentialist will insist upon a (usually) ideological or faith driven interpretation, whereas the qualitative will always want to fine grain the various distinctions ("is it really true that most X are Y? Are we sure about the Y-ness of the X?"). Debates between two essentialists tend to either lead to agreement (or a circle ehem) or almost immediately fall into shouting matches as there are too many fundamental disagreements to even debate. Debates about qualities can be really useful, naturally. I've found if I'm ever banging my forehead against a keyboard due to peer review or watching someone talking at me while their eyes see through the back of my skull it's been over essentialist claims.

Ymirsdreams

It really should be "DTG vs DGG"

Dr Badmouth

Steven, it is your Destiny.

Adam Sher

I've been saying for a while that Destiny is 'internet Sam Harris' (but does the research)

Dr Badmouth

is there a member feed for normal pod apps anyone know ?

Casey Marshall

I've never had a harder time listening to someone I mostly agree with. Insufferable.

Anonymous ethicist, not a serial killer at all, just asking questions.

Diving into Destiny? That sounds more like a trashy romance novel, though.

Linda Sears

Flint Dibble taking Graham Hancock out in the Archeological trenches.

john statham

Will say nothing will beat the guy who got to use "My Date with Destiny" that was a fantastic title

Daas Nahk

Out of curiosity, what is worth listening to over 4 hours of JRE for?

Saksaas

When my kids tell me about fat loads of cum, I'll at least know where they got it from. FML

Adam Sher

Thank goodness

Ethan Milne

I can’t handle screaming at me

aneladgam_varelse

Mr. Borelli DESTROYS His Fans with 10% of His Brain

Adam Sher

Wonder if this is the time the «right to reply» arrangement will backfire horribly.

Oskar Dramdal Gunbjørnsen

Haha good call — it gets worse

Guruspod 2

If anyone thinks of a better title, please let us know!

Guruspod 2

thanks for decoding Destiny, will listen to it right now.

Jovan Popov

New rules!

Christopher Kavanagh

I generally consider DTG to be "safe listening" but had to to quickly turn down the volume at "horse cock loli con" lmao. This is not a criticism just thought it funny

Scott Cooper

I kinda enjoyed the whole thing this time — it does happen!

Guruspod 2

You already know the answer 😈

Daas Nahk

that place is about to be a radioactive warzone lmao

Daas Nahk

The dilemma, should I be a good dog and grade essays or be bad dog and listen?

Linda Sears

Oh boy

Oskar Dramdal Gunbjørnsen

I love intro to streamers & academics season

aneladgam_varelse

This is going to be a wild ride

aneladgam_varelse

Excited for the episode, and also excited to not look at the subreddit for ~2 weeks while the fans and anti fans hash it out :)

Ethan Milne

4:30 hours of JRE yesterday and 3:15 of DtG tomorrow. This week the universe has given me good reasons to ignore my friends and family.

Quietscheentchen

Woooo

Jake Lawrence

Ooh this is gonna be good!

FolkSong

So does Destiny like One Piece?

Adam Sher

Woo! over 3 hours 🔥

Lindsay McCutcheon

How long till Matt doesn't want to listen any longer?

Dr Badmouth

Yay, its here! Excited to see the decoding

Mert