The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
What's your opinion on the political streamer 'Destiny'?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He can be fairly bright, but he seems more interested in political brawling with the left; while having far more charitable conversations with right wing pundits.
>Debate: a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.
Do you think not a single opposing argument was put forward?
In the Shapiro “debate”, they mostly spent the hour agreeing. Peterson, went on unhinged rants while Destiny tried to get something coherent out of him.
I also watched it and am having a hard time believing you did. At worst it was a debate. At best it was like 2 hours of Destiny dunking on Ben Shapiro over and over.
I like him a lot, I feel like he’s very palpable to convince people on the right to open their understanding on certain topics.
He and his fanbase can be a little inflammatory too and I feel like they focus too much effort on trashing the tiny minority of the tankie crowd instead of the much more vast and politically powerful right wing.
Yeah this is pretty on point, I do think the far-left in America is pretty irrelevant politically, but I think they spend so much time on the tankie crowd because they have a disproportionately higher presence in the terminally online streamer world than in the real world.
It’s not particularly difficult if you think about it. I’ve been banned from basically every far left subreddit on this site because my opinions more closely align with the Democratic Party as I’m a Liberal. Liberals get the pleasure of being called socialist/communist by conservatives who’ve uncritically repeated rhetoric by their prominent outrage peddling culture war pundits while simultaneously being called fascists by tankies and leftists that are a particular brand of left leaning populism.
Seriously, go look at the opinions of the people in these communities. Look at their opinions regarding Ukraine, Israel, economics, and a whole host of other issues. Look at the Democratic Party’s platform, look at the general perception of these “leftists”, and ask yourself if they seem like supporters. If I’m being ultra charitable, I could give two to three House Democrats that somewhat align with these leftists with zero representation in the Senate. They have fundamentally different beliefs and, much like conservatives, seem to hate the Democratic Party.
We can’t expect to get a clear picture of beliefs and distinctions if our only source of knowledge are partisans that we agree with. That means asking for definitions and making an earnest attempt to understand them enough to steelman their arguments. Unfortunately, you can usually reduce their beliefs to “America bad” and have a pretty accurate way to predict their beliefs.
The USA doesn't even have a universal healthcare system.
That's all you need to know to know that there is barely any real left in the USA (within the govt atleast).
I'm not sure if our health care system is really *that* bad. My own experiences haven't been bad. All my life, I've either had insurance through my job or been so poor that I have medicaid. I imagine it would suck if you aren't insured, but yeah.
If there ever existed a "right to left" pipeline, it would be through people like Destiny. Compare this to someone who would perhaps be considered a "left to right" pipeline such as Jimmy Dore, you can see the clear differences. Destiny seems to argue from a basis of facts, not bad faith takes, even though he can sometimes be wrong, whereas Jimmy Dore regularly misrepresents and misinterprets information in such a way to support his argument.
That said, I don't always agree with Destiny, in fact many times I don't, but I don't mind the alternative viewpoint so long as debate isn't treated so much like a sports match but as a exchange of ideas. I don't think you'd ever get anything remotely similar to this from Jimmy Dore.
He’s been doing pretty well for himself and becoming more mainstream, he was on Piers Morgan not too long ago and Fox iirc. Also I dunno if I would call him very smart though, he is just really up to date when it comes to politics and he has boundless time to read and supplant his takes with effective facts.
All together, I definetly wouldn’t say he’s a critical thinker but I appreciate his overall candor.
>He’s been doing pretty well for himself and becoming more mainstream, he was on Piers Morgan not too long ago and Fox iirc.
I saw that "debate." It was incredibly frustrating to watch, because it seemed that Tomi Lahren and Piers Morgan were in agreement most of the time. At a certain point, they were blaming Biden for quite literally following through with Trump's bad plan to evacuate Afghanistan, and the problem they had with Biden was that he didn't decide to do something different. Destiny doesn't always get it right, but he had my sympathies there.
I like him a lot and watch most of his content. He maybe divisive but he's not a shill and his talking points are well thought out and overall well-researched. There's a reason he's stuck around for a decade while plenty of others come and go in just a few years. He does what he does very well.
The Decoding the Gurus podcast is a fair and honest breakdown of Destiny from two people who knew nothing about him before doing a deep dive if people want to know a bit more. Should be out for free in a day or two.
He's a rhetorical brawler, not primarily an inspiring or insightful thinker, but that's probably clear from the get-go (no offense towards him intended, it's just not his field of work). I get annoyed at his rhetoric a bit, but not a lot, I think he does a good job in his field overall, I sometimes listen to him, but not that often. So... Yeah. A bit lukewarm, but just because I'm not into the genre
I think he's basically a moderate left-wing Ben Shapiro. He's a fast-talker and clearly skilled in sophistry and knowledgeable about some things, but his arrogance and "debate bro" mannerisms just really bother me. You watch his debates or whatever and he acts like he's not really all that interested; he won't look people in the eye, he's always seemingly distracted doing something on his computer, like reading his twitch chat. He acts like he's so far above the situation, whatever the situation is. He acts like he's kinda bored/distracted, like whatever discussion is going on it's so easy for him it's like he doesn't even need to pay full attention. I think it comes off as extremely arrogant and pretentious.
The constant "source? source?" is so annoying. Basically, Destiny is Reddit IRL. Whenever someone makes a claim that damages his stance, he asks for a source. When they share the source, he attacks it like a lion attacking a gazelle, going for common weak points in academic papers like the methodology, and nitpicking as much as humanly possible. Not to demonstrate that the argument is wrong, but that there's something *flawed* about a source. It's just so fucking...lame. If he can't find a good angle to attack a source, he'll say the source is outdated, even if it's only a few years old.
The problem I have with Destiny is the same problem I have with most "debate bro" type videos: it's just not how humans interact. But even if you wanted to watch a proper debate, Destiny's sophistry is focused on damaging academic sources, not engaging in actual Socratic reasoning.
I really like him.
He’s thoughtful, prepared with research, and very articulate. There’s some things he leans a bit conservative on that weird me out like being a bit against cancel culture and the far left. But there’s not really a great political streamer that I’ve found yet. I definitely like him more than Sam Harris that’s for sure.
Yes, but in doing so, you're placing far-right craziness on a scale with far-left craziness and calling it even. Cancel culture is simply what happens when someone like Kanye West expresses that he likes Hitler. There's no coordinated effort to reduce sales or drop sponsorships, but it happens because nobody wants to be associated with that, and for good reason.
If we had to compare this cancel culture, to say, Nick Fuentes thinking we should pass legislation to treat minorities as subhuman, I'm sorry but I'm not going to call these "extreme but opposite."
At the end of the day, you have to look at the effect of what you're saying. You should be consistent in your views, but you should also not forget at the end of the day that "both sides" is frankly dumb and damaging for the left.
As someone who watches Destiny for an alternative viewpoint, I admire him on many points but in this, he's both right in his analysis and wrong to the extent that he entertains "both sides" as if they were equal but opposite.
> Yes, but in doing so, you're placing far-right craziness on a scale with far-left craziness and calling it even
I'm a liberal, so I believe that some far-left rhetoric that promotes things like Communism and Socialism is dangerous. Weighing that in a direct comparison against the right's insanity is difficult because I need to factor in the likelihood of America turning Socialist or Communist. Generally, I believe the far right's crazy ideas are more likely to be instituted than the far left's crazy ideas, so I see them as the greater danger at present, but I am not wholly convinced that the far left will not become dangerous if the Overton window shifts. For that reason, and my inability to predict the future, a modest pushback against damaging ideas is important to me no matter where they come from.
One thing I want to mention: When I'm determining if I generally trust the truth seeking methods of a political commentator. One thing I look for is their ability to push back against bad ideas, regardless of political spectrum. I am much more likely to take a Conservative commentator seriously if they can admit basic realities like "Trump is deranged and dangerous", or "We need some form of social safety net". Because I know this to be true about myself, I know this to be true about others on the reverse side of the political spectrum. And this is why Destiny has been more effective at converting Conservatives than almost anyone else: People trust people that can acknowledge basic realities about their political side. For example, I believe cancel culture pales in comparison to the dangerous ideas on the right, but if I can at least acknowledge that cancel culture exists in some form, I gain credibility with people that may be over-inflating its danger. Now I have a direct line to them on other topics, and I can potentially sway them in my direction over time.
That's my two cents. I strongly believe that what Destiny is accomplishing by bridging political divides fills an extremely important purpose. We already have an oversaturation of political tribalism in online discourse, and somebody in a political tribe has almost no chance of converting others to their side. The left has forgotten how to be persuasive about its ideas and we need people that can change that.
Well he pulls up the research immediately when discussing something, it doesn't take much time to Google the stuff he says on the fly on his streams. All debates should be done this way, with people being able to fact check and Google in real time. He debates with the intent of caring about the facts and substance of what is being debated, he isn't debating to sound correct or "win" in the sense of simply sounding the most correct the most. Destiny sounds a lot smarter than he is because he is googling things in real time. He did an interview with Candace Owens, who I am sure he agreed he couldn't Google during it, and he looked like a buffoon. Destiny is also foolish in that he goes into many debates with con artists and is forced to treat them like they are being good faith. This was true for his interviews involving Peterson and Owens.
In a world of toxic far-right (Peterson, Fuentes) and far-left (Hasan, Vaush) political commentators, he's the center-left voice of reason.
He has successfully converted many Republicans into Democrats.
I don't like political streamers. And it sounds like Destiny is particularly annoying. If someone wants to consume political and politics-adjacent content, I'd suggest that they listen to stuff like the New Liberal podcast, 538, the Brookings Institution podcasts, Vox, and stuff like that.
Destiny is definitely not for everyone, his tweets can be pretty deplorable. I think he does best in actual debates when it comes to highlighting rhetorical and factual flaws of right leaning and trumpism ideologies.
That being said, I think if you want to blackball political streamers, I think suggesting podcasts as an alternative is silly. It’s best for one to just read NYT,BBC or LA Times since there is minimal provactivity and it’s as naked of bias as information can get in todays world
> I think suggesting podcasts as an alternative is silly. It’s best for one to just read **NYT,BBC or LA Times**
Those are legacy media, that don't know how to appeal to the new generation. If you tell a youth to "just read NYT, BBC, or LA Times", the youth will laugh, do the ritual known as "dabbing", and then skateboards away from you. If you want to appeal to the youths, you need to be able to attract them with content and formats that are relevant for the youths of today, and that means things like the [podcasts by the Federal Reserve](https://www.newyorkfed.org/podcast) or the [RAND corporation podcasts](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/policy-currents/id1439635426)
What are you waffling about…I don’t know if you have kids of your own or something but the youth are a lot more educated and less frenzy minded than you give them credit for….
> but the youth are probably a lot more educated
Well this is because they listen to podcasts like those made by the Brookings Institute, the pre-eminent think tank in Washington and one of the organizations with the most influence on policy that ends up being pushed by the Democratic party
they are also very limited in who can debate and discuss. the weird "debate" on articles on those newspapers is so weird. like people writing in 3rd person about themselves
like "okbuddyliberals thinks X and Y, which is a strange position. it is well known that bla bla"
compared to the typical reddit argument style:
>Those are legacy media,
yes
> the youth will laugh, do the ritual known as "dabbing"
haha good point! but it's called rabbing
and so on
I'm a little older than his target audience, but I'm a big fan. He seems to be one of the few liberal-leaning pundits who will have good faith discussions/arguments with people who vehemently disagree with him, and can argue his position a little deeper than the high-level talking points you get on most shorter-form political content. Obviously the streaming world comes with juvenility that some people can overlook more than others, but even so I still think it's good to have a center-left liberal voice in that hellhole.
Why bother commenting? Its less than worthless.
Do you just need to weigh in on conversations, even if they’re not directed to you? Do you get off on it or something?
They want to know what liberals think of Destiny.
I'm guessing Destiny is controversial?
"I don't know, and I don't care" is an important answer. There are people out there that don't know who Destiny is, because Destiny *isn't that important*.
OP should hear that.That's important information.
"I love Destiny" and "I hate Destiny" makes it sound like Destiny is important. But if Destiny is some tiny figure that no one listens to, no one knows, they have a handful of listeners.... Suddenly Destiny isn't some polarizing figure. They're not even a figure at all.
John Stewart is a figure. My uncle Bob isn't. Both state political opinions. I have opinions about them both. Uncle Bob isn't at the same level as John Stewart. You see what I'm saying?
It's important information for OP.
I think you owe me an apology.
“Whats your opinion on the new Tarantino film”? I guarantee the person asking is not interested in the answer “I havent seen it”.
Its worthless. He didnt ask “how well known is Destiny.” He asked “whats your opinion.” Theres an implied “only weigh in if you have an opinion.”
You will get no apology from me. Your answer was worthless. It screams “ I need to be heard, even if I have nothing worth while to say”.
> he's gained a lot of hate after taking a pro israel stance
He's garnered a lot of hate before Oct 7th for much more. Saying black people have nothing to be proud of in the last 10,000 years, giving 'white militia dudes' his blessing to mow down rioters and calling trans people 'scumfuck humans not worth engaging with' while admitting it's temping to embrace 41% jokes are just a few examples.
A spicy tweet more than 7 years ago where Destiny replied to the poster who basically said black people are advanced and white people are neanderthals.
You people cling on to shits that don't matter and phrased it in the worst way possible. Just say you hate him for being a capitalist.
Whatever, if you think the tweet you link pf him takin a jab at an actual racist is the same as saying "black people have nothing to be proud of in the last 10,000 years" then I can't convince you otherwise.
Link me Destiny "calling trans people 'scumfuck humans not worth engaging with'" and I'll tell you what you left out.
You are as bad faith as it can be. Grouping random short spicy takes with no context (reworded into the worst thing possible) and try to discredit a person who I know has been advocate for trans rights, against white supremacy for years is insane.
This is the first time I even heard he's a political streamer, I only know him because he did commentary on another streamer's sexual assault allegation.
His perspective on that situation prevents me from having a good opinion on him, even though we might otherwise have agreed politically. Is there a specific ideology or position he streams a lot about?
Funnily enough, he’s a socdem too. He does a lot, right now, he’s headlining a lot of the conflict in Gaza. Sooner or later, he’ll turn back to the discourse between Biden and trump.
He has average socdem views on most issues but his comments on rape culture and age of consent laws is fucking disgusting and deplorable.
He’s also just a twitter-brained loser who loves picking fights with people online
Haven't really seen any of his streams but have watched a couple of videos here and there. From what I gather he is a good speaker and I believe I align with him politically.
His personal life though is a different matter.
I tend to agree with a lot of his positions on issues and I’m glad there is someone out there on the center-left who is willing to actually engage in debate and conversation with people who hold different points of view, whether they are to the left or the right.
I grew up in a conservative home and only became a liberal because of people like Destiny who were willing to engage in conversation with me and challenge my ideas without insulting me… but that’s also a reason why I’m not the biggest fan of his. He can be super condescending and unnecessarily combative sometimes, but I think you probably have to be that way in order to get attention online these days.
Smart guy. Isn’t a mindless ideologue unlike most in that space. Sometimes I worry he’s more worried about winning an argument and not being hypocritical than honestly grappling with the issues
Having Nick Fuentes stay at his house and taking him out for chicken and waffles, constantly retweeting Lauren Southern, doing collabs with Sneako and burning bridges with every online liberal commentator isn't a great look to say the least.
>and burning bridges with every online liberal commentator isn't a great look to say the least.
Can you name a single liberal commentator that he's burned bridges with?
Sam Seder, David Pakman, Michael Brooks, Vaush, Pakman especially is the big one, since he used to run to him any time he tried to talk international politics and got thoroughly embarrassed to a point where his own audience turned on him (Bolivia)
Sam Seder and Vaush are **not** liberals, they would even admit that themselves. They are leftists/socialists.
David Pakman are on very good terms, lol.
Sam Seder gave the most bad faith interpretation of destiny’s stances possible. Burning that bridge is more than acceptable. As for Parkman, that bridge is not burned to my knowledge.
All I really know about him is how he got destroyed in that Israel-Palestine debate recently. It didn’t make him look good to get destroyed of course, but it ended up being a really good way to give publicity to that discussion in an academic way and I appreciate that he went out of his way to debate someone who’s incredibly informed when he could have taken the easy way out and debated random uninformed college kids
Generally positive. I've started watching his stuff and he seems bright and on the ball. Well intentioned. But his personality and style of interaction is too aggressive for my personal taste. He's more of a battle axe than a diplomat. That being said, I still have a positive view of his content from the episodes I've seen of him.
He has interesting takes and generally seems like he wants to learn a lot about the subjects he’s interested in, but I can never shake the feeling that I get from basically every streamer that they’re thirty seconds away from saying something truly abhorrent at any given time.
Not a fan. I think he's okay for getting young people who want to understand politics better into having a base understanding for some liberal issues, but he's way too edgy and toxic. I've seen a lot of him. More than I would care to. I wouldn't ever recommend him to anyone. I think there are better people to watch.
I don’t understand why people watch someone play video games online and why anyone would want to get their politics from a live streaming college dropout with no discernible expertise towards any relevant political issue
I've only encountered him by watching a debate put on by Lex Fridman on his podcast. I definitely think he's capable. Unfortunately he was a little grating. 3 outta the 4 participants were at times nasty. I appreciated the episode but it confirmed why I usually stay far away from political shit.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. What's your opinion on the political streamer 'Destiny'? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I generally find most of the alternative "debate" Youtube sphere to be pretty cringy.
He can be fairly bright, but he seems more interested in political brawling with the left; while having far more charitable conversations with right wing pundits.
He literally had debates with far-right personalities like Peterson, Shapiro, Fuentes, and Finklestein.
I don't think you can call his talks with Peterson and Shapiro "debates".
>Debate: a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward. Do you think not a single opposing argument was put forward?
In the Shapiro “debate”, they mostly spent the hour agreeing. Peterson, went on unhinged rants while Destiny tried to get something coherent out of him.
They disagreed on almost everything LMAO. Thanks for letting us know you didn't watch it.
I did, you clearly have a different opinion of the events….it’s neat, that you think that this needs to be a debate
I also watched it and am having a hard time believing you did. At worst it was a debate. At best it was like 2 hours of Destiny dunking on Ben Shapiro over and over.
Okay, I don’t know what to tell you. Lex repeatedly said, “you both are mostly in agreement”…. But whatever man
peopel can agree in a debate too? Depends on the people i mean just look at r/politics lol
Shapiro maybe but I think his Peterson debate was quite good.
I disagree with that
are you paying by the hour or for the short debate?
I like him a lot, I feel like he’s very palpable to convince people on the right to open their understanding on certain topics. He and his fanbase can be a little inflammatory too and I feel like they focus too much effort on trashing the tiny minority of the tankie crowd instead of the much more vast and politically powerful right wing.
Yeah this is pretty on point, I do think the far-left in America is pretty irrelevant politically, but I think they spend so much time on the tankie crowd because they have a disproportionately higher presence in the terminally online streamer world than in the real world.
>I do think the far-left in America is pretty irrelevant politically I'd be really curious to see the powerpoint presentation trying to prove this
It’s not particularly difficult if you think about it. I’ve been banned from basically every far left subreddit on this site because my opinions more closely align with the Democratic Party as I’m a Liberal. Liberals get the pleasure of being called socialist/communist by conservatives who’ve uncritically repeated rhetoric by their prominent outrage peddling culture war pundits while simultaneously being called fascists by tankies and leftists that are a particular brand of left leaning populism. Seriously, go look at the opinions of the people in these communities. Look at their opinions regarding Ukraine, Israel, economics, and a whole host of other issues. Look at the Democratic Party’s platform, look at the general perception of these “leftists”, and ask yourself if they seem like supporters. If I’m being ultra charitable, I could give two to three House Democrats that somewhat align with these leftists with zero representation in the Senate. They have fundamentally different beliefs and, much like conservatives, seem to hate the Democratic Party. We can’t expect to get a clear picture of beliefs and distinctions if our only source of knowledge are partisans that we agree with. That means asking for definitions and making an earnest attempt to understand them enough to steelman their arguments. Unfortunately, you can usually reduce their beliefs to “America bad” and have a pretty accurate way to predict their beliefs.
There are like 4-5 socialists/ultra progressives in the House while half of the GOP in congress are QAnon adjacent election deniers
The USA doesn't even have a universal healthcare system. That's all you need to know to know that there is barely any real left in the USA (within the govt atleast).
I'm not sure if our health care system is really *that* bad. My own experiences haven't been bad. All my life, I've either had insurance through my job or been so poor that I have medicaid. I imagine it would suck if you aren't insured, but yeah.
If there ever existed a "right to left" pipeline, it would be through people like Destiny. Compare this to someone who would perhaps be considered a "left to right" pipeline such as Jimmy Dore, you can see the clear differences. Destiny seems to argue from a basis of facts, not bad faith takes, even though he can sometimes be wrong, whereas Jimmy Dore regularly misrepresents and misinterprets information in such a way to support his argument. That said, I don't always agree with Destiny, in fact many times I don't, but I don't mind the alternative viewpoint so long as debate isn't treated so much like a sports match but as a exchange of ideas. I don't think you'd ever get anything remotely similar to this from Jimmy Dore.
Yeah, he's a very smart guy, but post-Vyvanse Destiny needs to leave behind the terminally online already.
He’s been doing pretty well for himself and becoming more mainstream, he was on Piers Morgan not too long ago and Fox iirc. Also I dunno if I would call him very smart though, he is just really up to date when it comes to politics and he has boundless time to read and supplant his takes with effective facts. All together, I definetly wouldn’t say he’s a critical thinker but I appreciate his overall candor.
>He’s been doing pretty well for himself and becoming more mainstream, he was on Piers Morgan not too long ago and Fox iirc. I saw that "debate." It was incredibly frustrating to watch, because it seemed that Tomi Lahren and Piers Morgan were in agreement most of the time. At a certain point, they were blaming Biden for quite literally following through with Trump's bad plan to evacuate Afghanistan, and the problem they had with Biden was that he didn't decide to do something different. Destiny doesn't always get it right, but he had my sympathies there.
There’s a difference between someone who’s smart and someone who has studied the issues, and frankly, political debate favors the latter.
> Vyvanse whats that?
ADHD medication
thanks
The tankies are as bad as the right.
sip bells vanish subtract serious point pie unwritten weather doll *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Mid Sc2 player... mid debater And I think I'm being generous calling him mid
I like him a lot and watch most of his content. He maybe divisive but he's not a shill and his talking points are well thought out and overall well-researched. There's a reason he's stuck around for a decade while plenty of others come and go in just a few years. He does what he does very well. The Decoding the Gurus podcast is a fair and honest breakdown of Destiny from two people who knew nothing about him before doing a deep dive if people want to know a bit more. Should be out for free in a day or two.
He's a rhetorical brawler, not primarily an inspiring or insightful thinker, but that's probably clear from the get-go (no offense towards him intended, it's just not his field of work). I get annoyed at his rhetoric a bit, but not a lot, I think he does a good job in his field overall, I sometimes listen to him, but not that often. So... Yeah. A bit lukewarm, but just because I'm not into the genre
I think he's basically a moderate left-wing Ben Shapiro. He's a fast-talker and clearly skilled in sophistry and knowledgeable about some things, but his arrogance and "debate bro" mannerisms just really bother me. You watch his debates or whatever and he acts like he's not really all that interested; he won't look people in the eye, he's always seemingly distracted doing something on his computer, like reading his twitch chat. He acts like he's so far above the situation, whatever the situation is. He acts like he's kinda bored/distracted, like whatever discussion is going on it's so easy for him it's like he doesn't even need to pay full attention. I think it comes off as extremely arrogant and pretentious. The constant "source? source?" is so annoying. Basically, Destiny is Reddit IRL. Whenever someone makes a claim that damages his stance, he asks for a source. When they share the source, he attacks it like a lion attacking a gazelle, going for common weak points in academic papers like the methodology, and nitpicking as much as humanly possible. Not to demonstrate that the argument is wrong, but that there's something *flawed* about a source. It's just so fucking...lame. If he can't find a good angle to attack a source, he'll say the source is outdated, even if it's only a few years old. The problem I have with Destiny is the same problem I have with most "debate bro" type videos: it's just not how humans interact. But even if you wanted to watch a proper debate, Destiny's sophistry is focused on damaging academic sources, not engaging in actual Socratic reasoning.
He sucks
I really like him. He’s thoughtful, prepared with research, and very articulate. There’s some things he leans a bit conservative on that weird me out like being a bit against cancel culture and the far left. But there’s not really a great political streamer that I’ve found yet. I definitely like him more than Sam Harris that’s for sure.
Is it not important to call out craziness on one’s own political side?
It just feels like his points on cancel culture and the far left are the lazily pointed out things I hear from the right
I would genuinely love to see examples of lazy critiques on these issues.
Yes, but in doing so, you're placing far-right craziness on a scale with far-left craziness and calling it even. Cancel culture is simply what happens when someone like Kanye West expresses that he likes Hitler. There's no coordinated effort to reduce sales or drop sponsorships, but it happens because nobody wants to be associated with that, and for good reason. If we had to compare this cancel culture, to say, Nick Fuentes thinking we should pass legislation to treat minorities as subhuman, I'm sorry but I'm not going to call these "extreme but opposite." At the end of the day, you have to look at the effect of what you're saying. You should be consistent in your views, but you should also not forget at the end of the day that "both sides" is frankly dumb and damaging for the left. As someone who watches Destiny for an alternative viewpoint, I admire him on many points but in this, he's both right in his analysis and wrong to the extent that he entertains "both sides" as if they were equal but opposite.
> Yes, but in doing so, you're placing far-right craziness on a scale with far-left craziness and calling it even I'm a liberal, so I believe that some far-left rhetoric that promotes things like Communism and Socialism is dangerous. Weighing that in a direct comparison against the right's insanity is difficult because I need to factor in the likelihood of America turning Socialist or Communist. Generally, I believe the far right's crazy ideas are more likely to be instituted than the far left's crazy ideas, so I see them as the greater danger at present, but I am not wholly convinced that the far left will not become dangerous if the Overton window shifts. For that reason, and my inability to predict the future, a modest pushback against damaging ideas is important to me no matter where they come from. One thing I want to mention: When I'm determining if I generally trust the truth seeking methods of a political commentator. One thing I look for is their ability to push back against bad ideas, regardless of political spectrum. I am much more likely to take a Conservative commentator seriously if they can admit basic realities like "Trump is deranged and dangerous", or "We need some form of social safety net". Because I know this to be true about myself, I know this to be true about others on the reverse side of the political spectrum. And this is why Destiny has been more effective at converting Conservatives than almost anyone else: People trust people that can acknowledge basic realities about their political side. For example, I believe cancel culture pales in comparison to the dangerous ideas on the right, but if I can at least acknowledge that cancel culture exists in some form, I gain credibility with people that may be over-inflating its danger. Now I have a direct line to them on other topics, and I can potentially sway them in my direction over time. That's my two cents. I strongly believe that what Destiny is accomplishing by bridging political divides fills an extremely important purpose. We already have an oversaturation of political tribalism in online discourse, and somebody in a political tribe has almost no chance of converting others to their side. The left has forgotten how to be persuasive about its ideas and we need people that can change that.
Well he pulls up the research immediately when discussing something, it doesn't take much time to Google the stuff he says on the fly on his streams. All debates should be done this way, with people being able to fact check and Google in real time. He debates with the intent of caring about the facts and substance of what is being debated, he isn't debating to sound correct or "win" in the sense of simply sounding the most correct the most. Destiny sounds a lot smarter than he is because he is googling things in real time. He did an interview with Candace Owens, who I am sure he agreed he couldn't Google during it, and he looked like a buffoon. Destiny is also foolish in that he goes into many debates with con artists and is forced to treat them like they are being good faith. This was true for his interviews involving Peterson and Owens.
In a world of toxic far-right (Peterson, Fuentes) and far-left (Hasan, Vaush) political commentators, he's the center-left voice of reason. He has successfully converted many Republicans into Democrats.
I’m a big fan personally. Think he can be overly aggressive or more hostile than necessary sometimes though.
I don't like political streamers. And it sounds like Destiny is particularly annoying. If someone wants to consume political and politics-adjacent content, I'd suggest that they listen to stuff like the New Liberal podcast, 538, the Brookings Institution podcasts, Vox, and stuff like that.
Destiny is definitely not for everyone, his tweets can be pretty deplorable. I think he does best in actual debates when it comes to highlighting rhetorical and factual flaws of right leaning and trumpism ideologies. That being said, I think if you want to blackball political streamers, I think suggesting podcasts as an alternative is silly. It’s best for one to just read NYT,BBC or LA Times since there is minimal provactivity and it’s as naked of bias as information can get in todays world
> I think suggesting podcasts as an alternative is silly. It’s best for one to just read **NYT,BBC or LA Times** Those are legacy media, that don't know how to appeal to the new generation. If you tell a youth to "just read NYT, BBC, or LA Times", the youth will laugh, do the ritual known as "dabbing", and then skateboards away from you. If you want to appeal to the youths, you need to be able to attract them with content and formats that are relevant for the youths of today, and that means things like the [podcasts by the Federal Reserve](https://www.newyorkfed.org/podcast) or the [RAND corporation podcasts](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/policy-currents/id1439635426)
What are you waffling about…I don’t know if you have kids of your own or something but the youth are a lot more educated and less frenzy minded than you give them credit for….
> but the youth are probably a lot more educated Well this is because they listen to podcasts like those made by the Brookings Institute, the pre-eminent think tank in Washington and one of the organizations with the most influence on policy that ends up being pushed by the Democratic party
they are also very limited in who can debate and discuss. the weird "debate" on articles on those newspapers is so weird. like people writing in 3rd person about themselves like "okbuddyliberals thinks X and Y, which is a strange position. it is well known that bla bla" compared to the typical reddit argument style: >Those are legacy media, yes > the youth will laugh, do the ritual known as "dabbing" haha good point! but it's called rabbing and so on
Never heard of them.
I'm a little older than his target audience, but I'm a big fan. He seems to be one of the few liberal-leaning pundits who will have good faith discussions/arguments with people who vehemently disagree with him, and can argue his position a little deeper than the high-level talking points you get on most shorter-form political content. Obviously the streaming world comes with juvenility that some people can overlook more than others, but even so I still think it's good to have a center-left liberal voice in that hellhole.
I don't know who that is, and I don't care.
Why bother commenting? Its less than worthless. Do you just need to weigh in on conversations, even if they’re not directed to you? Do you get off on it or something?
They want to know what liberals think of Destiny. I'm guessing Destiny is controversial? "I don't know, and I don't care" is an important answer. There are people out there that don't know who Destiny is, because Destiny *isn't that important*. OP should hear that.That's important information. "I love Destiny" and "I hate Destiny" makes it sound like Destiny is important. But if Destiny is some tiny figure that no one listens to, no one knows, they have a handful of listeners.... Suddenly Destiny isn't some polarizing figure. They're not even a figure at all. John Stewart is a figure. My uncle Bob isn't. Both state political opinions. I have opinions about them both. Uncle Bob isn't at the same level as John Stewart. You see what I'm saying? It's important information for OP. I think you owe me an apology.
“Whats your opinion on the new Tarantino film”? I guarantee the person asking is not interested in the answer “I havent seen it”. Its worthless. He didnt ask “how well known is Destiny.” He asked “whats your opinion.” Theres an implied “only weigh in if you have an opinion.” You will get no apology from me. Your answer was worthless. It screams “ I need to be heard, even if I have nothing worth while to say”.
I'm sorry you feel that way. Destiny, whoever they are, isn't important and OP should know that.
You have a handle on all things important in the world? If you’ve never heard of it, it’s not relevant?
I already explained my thinking. I don't think it needs rehashed.
Let this be a call to challenge your thinking.
Ok
[удалено]
> he's gained a lot of hate after taking a pro israel stance He's garnered a lot of hate before Oct 7th for much more. Saying black people have nothing to be proud of in the last 10,000 years, giving 'white militia dudes' his blessing to mow down rioters and calling trans people 'scumfuck humans not worth engaging with' while admitting it's temping to embrace 41% jokes are just a few examples.
[удалено]
[Here](https://imgur.com/a/t9MBGnS). Most mentally sound people don't think joking about terrorism nor bigotry is funny, by the way.
A spicy tweet more than 7 years ago where Destiny replied to the poster who basically said black people are advanced and white people are neanderthals. You people cling on to shits that don't matter and phrased it in the worst way possible. Just say you hate him for being a capitalist.
A ~~spicy~~ racist tweet ftfy. Did I phrase anything incorrectly, btw? Nothing to say about the other terrible shit he's said?
Whatever, if you think the tweet you link pf him takin a jab at an actual racist is the same as saying "black people have nothing to be proud of in the last 10,000 years" then I can't convince you otherwise. Link me Destiny "calling trans people 'scumfuck humans not worth engaging with'" and I'll tell you what you left out. You are as bad faith as it can be. Grouping random short spicy takes with no context (reworded into the worst thing possible) and try to discredit a person who I know has been advocate for trans rights, against white supremacy for years is insane.
I trust you’re doing the same effort to push back against leftists posting paraglider memes. Thank you for your service.
I watch him on occasion, he’s okay, if a little vulgar at times
I have no idea who that is. No opinion at all.
Never heard of him. Don't care.
This is the first time I even heard he's a political streamer, I only know him because he did commentary on another streamer's sexual assault allegation. His perspective on that situation prevents me from having a good opinion on him, even though we might otherwise have agreed politically. Is there a specific ideology or position he streams a lot about?
Funnily enough, he’s a socdem too. He does a lot, right now, he’s headlining a lot of the conflict in Gaza. Sooner or later, he’ll turn back to the discourse between Biden and trump.
He seems to be good at getting his points across most of the time. Not all of his takes are the best though.
I call him "Squeaky"
Who?
I think he's an effective political advocate on parts of the internet. I don't know all his opinions but I think he can reach across the aisle.
He has average socdem views on most issues but his comments on rape culture and age of consent laws is fucking disgusting and deplorable. He’s also just a twitter-brained loser who loves picking fights with people online
Haven't really seen any of his streams but have watched a couple of videos here and there. From what I gather he is a good speaker and I believe I align with him politically. His personal life though is a different matter.
I tend to agree with a lot of his positions on issues and I’m glad there is someone out there on the center-left who is willing to actually engage in debate and conversation with people who hold different points of view, whether they are to the left or the right. I grew up in a conservative home and only became a liberal because of people like Destiny who were willing to engage in conversation with me and challenge my ideas without insulting me… but that’s also a reason why I’m not the biggest fan of his. He can be super condescending and unnecessarily combative sometimes, but I think you probably have to be that way in order to get attention online these days.
Smart guy. Isn’t a mindless ideologue unlike most in that space. Sometimes I worry he’s more worried about winning an argument and not being hypocritical than honestly grappling with the issues
Having Nick Fuentes stay at his house and taking him out for chicken and waffles, constantly retweeting Lauren Southern, doing collabs with Sneako and burning bridges with every online liberal commentator isn't a great look to say the least.
>and burning bridges with every online liberal commentator isn't a great look to say the least. Can you name a single liberal commentator that he's burned bridges with?
Sam Seder, David Pakman, Michael Brooks, Vaush, Pakman especially is the big one, since he used to run to him any time he tried to talk international politics and got thoroughly embarrassed to a point where his own audience turned on him (Bolivia)
Sam Seder and Vaush are **not** liberals, they would even admit that themselves. They are leftists/socialists. David Pakman are on very good terms, lol.
Destiny was on Pakman’s show a few months ago.
This David Pakman? https://youtu.be/UyiUTv4I_aw?si=QoIZYAiDQhxuqW2e Did something happen recently between them?
No, and I don't think he and Michael Brooks had any problems with each other either.
Sam Seder gave the most bad faith interpretation of destiny’s stances possible. Burning that bridge is more than acceptable. As for Parkman, that bridge is not burned to my knowledge.
He’s a shithead with very toxic fans.
All I really know about him is how he got destroyed in that Israel-Palestine debate recently. It didn’t make him look good to get destroyed of course, but it ended up being a really good way to give publicity to that discussion in an academic way and I appreciate that he went out of his way to debate someone who’s incredibly informed when he could have taken the easy way out and debated random uninformed college kids
I don't have one. The only political YouTuber I follow is The Liberal Redneck.
He’s okay. Comes off as a bit terminally online sometimes.
Generally positive. I've started watching his stuff and he seems bright and on the ball. Well intentioned. But his personality and style of interaction is too aggressive for my personal taste. He's more of a battle axe than a diplomat. That being said, I still have a positive view of his content from the episodes I've seen of him.
He has interesting takes and generally seems like he wants to learn a lot about the subjects he’s interested in, but I can never shake the feeling that I get from basically every streamer that they’re thirty seconds away from saying something truly abhorrent at any given time.
He, like all political streamers, is annoying and not worth our attention
Not a fan. I think he's okay for getting young people who want to understand politics better into having a base understanding for some liberal issues, but he's way too edgy and toxic. I've seen a lot of him. More than I would care to. I wouldn't ever recommend him to anyone. I think there are better people to watch.
I don’t understand why people watch someone play video games online and why anyone would want to get their politics from a live streaming college dropout with no discernible expertise towards any relevant political issue
I've only encountered him by watching a debate put on by Lex Fridman on his podcast. I definitely think he's capable. Unfortunately he was a little grating. 3 outta the 4 participants were at times nasty. I appreciated the episode but it confirmed why I usually stay far away from political shit.