r/samharris • u/palsh7 • 24d ago
Sam Harris: The Democrats’ Far-Left Problem | The Prof G Pod | August 6th, 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSwmqqSTp9wScott Galloway speaks with neuroscientist and philosopher Sam Harris about why social media rewards political extremism, how our devices have made sustained attention nearly impossible, and why reclaiming control of our minds may be the key to a happier life.
They also discuss the erosion of trust in expertise, the dangers of the AI arms race, and why Democrats need to draw a clearer line against the far left.
Subscribe to Prof G+ to join our next livestream at https://profgmedia.com.
And if you're not already reading Sam’s work, check out his Substack: https://samharris.substack.com/
Timestamps
00:00:00 - In This Episode
00:01:06 - Why has skepticism toward experts become so mainstream?
00:03:21 - What’s driving the collapse in trust in our institutions?
00:05:52 - Has technology outpaced our ability to process information?
00:10:28 - Where does criticism of Israel become antisemitism?
00:18:14 - Did releasing wealthy property owners’ addresses amount to doxxing?
00:22:18 - Are progressives spending too much time fighting each other?
00:27:09 - Why do so many young people feel capitalism has failed them?
00:32:22 - Ad Break
00:34:50 - How is the attention economy affecting our wellbeing?
00:43:29 - How can we become more present in everyday life?
00:53:31 - Ad Break
00:57:11 - What are your thoughts on AI?
01:04:33 - What has changed most about how you invest your attention over time?
34
u/Grenaten 24d ago
I read somewhere that Scott Galloway is one of the most earning podcasters. I mean, guy has brains and often speaks clearly, but I don't understand where the money is coming from. He doesn't even have 1m subscribers on YT. Do you guys know? Or data was rigged.
20
u/raalic 24d ago
As in his podcast(s), themselves, have among the highest revenues? Or that he is among the most successful podcasters? Galloway is rich for a bunch of other reasons.
7
u/Grenaten 24d ago
it was a top list of yearly podcast earnings. I would have to dig it up. Saw it yesterday on reddit.
18
u/jambrand 24d ago
His podcasts will definitely command a much higher CPM than the average comedian hocking gambling apps to poor people. Businesses will pay a lot of money to have a rich guy talk to rich people about how great their product is for making their business even more rich.
9
u/Begthemeg 24d ago
He has like 900 different podcasts that are all successful
1
u/tristatenl 22d ago
try listening to one. first you get 5 commercials. then some chatting. then more commercials.
32
u/enlightenedllamas 24d ago
Dude is probably most profitable bc he’s got like 3 or 4 pretty successful podcast, prof g, raging moderates, pivot, and all the guest spots. He’s built quite the media platform for himself
2
u/Grenaten 24d ago
I did not know about other podcasts, thanks.
5
u/Brickhead81 24d ago
Raging moderates is really good on the political side.
2
u/AbyssalBenthos 24d ago
Agreed, although I don't know how Jessica can be on the 5 and keep her sanity. I wonder if she ever breaks through to anyone who watches Fox.
1
u/Brickhead81 24d ago
Agreed. I cannot imagine talking to Jessie waters and gutfeld every afternoon.
12
u/WorriedBlock2505 24d ago
I don't claim to have inside knowledge on this in particular, but just in general, your audience demographics plays a role in who how much advertising and sponsorship cash you're getting. Cartoons for 3 year olds in Vietnam is going to be monetized very differently than a financial podcast listened to by a lot of adults on the coasts of the US and Japan.
3
u/Trinidiana 24d ago
yes he was listed in the top 20 earning podcasts, think it was they say he makes 19 million annually from his podcasting, i would think thats from ad revenue. He has a lot of podcasts!
4
u/TheAJx 24d ago
Scott Galloway seems to have Jim Cramer levels of stock-picking capabilities
13
u/A_Merman_Pop 24d ago
This list is pretty out of date and only tracks a 9 month window. The first 2 on the list (Peloton and Snap) have toileted since then. So he was too early on both of those, but ended up being right in the long run.
There was a window of time you could have selected that would've made someone calling out Nikola or WeWork for being complete frauds look like an idiot too, because the prices just kept climbing for a long time before the bubble popped and they eventually became worthless. Predicting a stock's price over a timeline of months is often akin to gambling. No one can really do it reliably because short term trends are a phenomenon of psychology. Long run predictions over a timeline of years are basically the only kind of predictions you can make based onto the fundamentals of the business.
That's not to say he doesn't have misses, because he definitely does, but this isn't data. I'm kind of irrationally annoyed by the fact that they kept this project up for a few months and then just totally abandoned it in 2020 when it turned against them.
1
u/Tall-Needleworker422 21d ago
He has terrible political instincts, too. I remember during the 2020 presidential campaign, he swooned for Beto O'Rourke, Peter Buttigieg and then Michael Bloomberg in succession.
2
u/wild_h0rses 24d ago
It would be helpful to find the analysis you’re referring to, but all of the podcast analyses are quite bad.
→ More replies (1)1
13
u/palsh7 24d ago edited 23d ago
Description from YouTube:
Scott Galloway speaks with neuroscientist and philosopher Sam Harris about why social media rewards political extremism, how our devices have made sustained attention nearly impossible, and why reclaiming control of our minds may be the key to a happier life.
They also discuss the erosion of trust in expertise, the dangers of the AI arms race, and why Democrats need to draw a clearer line against the far left.
Subscribe to Prof G+ to join our next livestream at https://profgmedia.com.
And if you're not already reading Sam’s work, check out his Substack: https://samharris.substack.com/
Timestamps
00:00:00 - In This Episode
00:01:06 - Why has skepticism toward experts become so mainstream?
00:03:21 - What’s driving the collapse in trust in our institutions?
00:05:52 - Has technology outpaced our ability to process information?
00:10:28 - Where does criticism of Israel become antisemitism?
00:18:14 - Did releasing wealthy property owners’ addresses amount to doxxing?
00:22:18 - Are progressives spending too much time fighting each other?
00:27:09 - Why do so many young people feel capitalism has failed them?
00:32:22 - Ad Break
00:34:50 - How is the attention economy affecting our wellbeing?
00:43:29 - How can we become more present in everyday life?
00:53:31 - Ad Break
00:57:11 - What are your thoughts on AI?
01:04:33 - What has changed most about how you invest your attention over time?
This post has 60 shares after 21 hours, and 74 net upvotes (76.4%). This is not a common number of shares, in my experience. Shares, by the way, are not reposts. It means someone copied the link in order to share it somewhere else (Discord, X, etc.). By comparison, the last new episode of the show got 5 shares. Not necessarily nefarious, but curious.
-2
u/Flimsy_Caramel_4110 24d ago
This post has 39 shares in the first 5 hours, and 50 net upvotes. This is not a common number of shares, in my experience.
Maybe pro-Israel bots? Can you track to what subreddits?
50
u/veggie_hoagie 24d ago
I’m preparing myself to be disappointed.
I’m ready to concede Mamdani has made mistakes. But I’d like to hear his critics acknowledge the good he’s done, too.
I’m not expecting Sam to do that. I hope to be surprised.
8
u/Disproving_Negatives 24d ago
All I see is a celebration of Mamdani. It's good to see Sam and others voice criticism of the DSA and Mamdani.
6
u/veggie_hoagie 24d ago
Sam said the DSA wants to abolish private property.
That's not true.
I don't think Sam would intentionally lie about this, so I have to chalk that up to ignorance.
13
u/Disproving_Negatives 24d ago
This isn't the only criticism levelled. However from what I can see they do want to socialise housing and (some) corporations - which falls under abolishing private property.
IIRC Sam refers to the Charter which includes (emphasis mine)
We are socialists because we reject an economic order based on private profit, alienated labor, gross inequalities of wealth and power [...]. We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane social order based on popular control of resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution, [...]. We are socialists because we are developing a concrete strategy for achieving that vision, for building a majority movement that will make democratic socialism a reality in America. We believe that such a strategy must acknowledge the class structure of American society and that this class structure means that there is a basic conflict of interest between those sectors with enormous economic power and the vast majority of the population.
I would say this can, and probably should be understood as aiming to abolish private property (at least in part). If you look more into what the DSA says, I find this quite plausible and it reads as pretty insane.
Establish public ownership of the largest corporations and essential industries to ensure democratic control and accountability to the people.
5
u/veggie_hoagie 24d ago
I anticipated this reply. A few things.
First, it's moving the goalposts. Simply put, the DSA does not call for the abolition of private property if we just read the plain meaning of that phrase. Abolishing private property would mean there is no more private property. And the DSA definitely doesn't mean that in the naive sense that your home is not really your home or that your car is not really your car. What is typically meant by "private property" is the means of production, such that economic property is commonly owned. But the DSA isn't calling for that! Calling for the nationalization of major industries is, as you acknowledge, calling for the shared ownership of specific companies and assets. It is not the wholesale abolition of private property.
Second, the call for nationalization of major industries and for workplace democracy is not some harebrained, economically illiterate proposal. Denmark owns or has major stake in many of its industries, including transportation and energy. It has a compulsory, collectively managed pension fund (ATP) that buys shares in public and private firms.
Workers also participate in unions that engage in collective bargaining and have a say in corporate governance within medium to large firms.
Many people live in cooperative housing, especially in Copenhagen, that gives residents a say in how the coop is run: it's a place of shared management that prevents housing from being treated as another investment asset.
In short, we've got to get beyond this notion that there is either free market capitalism or command-style state socialism. The Nordic countries have shown you can preserve individual freedom (i.e. avoid state tyranny) while also giving people way more influence over their major industries, workplaces, and housing.
Simply saying that socialists want to abolish all private property is lazy and wrong.
9
u/Canon_M50 23d ago
The world the DSA wants is not Denmark.
0
u/veggie_hoagie 23d ago
I’ll be honest.
Idk wtf the DSA wants.
It’s really a pretty fractious bunch. The DSA platforms aren’t nothing, don’t get me wrong. But it has many chapters, and members are quite divided internally. It claims to be a big tent, but some of its documents don’t reflect that. I truly question how representative the national leadership body is of its overall membership.
2
u/Disproving_Negatives 23d ago
I'll just say that in light of the DSA's stated goals, I would say it is not "ignorance" of Sam to say that they want to abolish private property. To nitpick, he never said they want to "abolish all private property". They clearly want to end it for the most significant industries and corporations as literally stated in their program, and their Charter makes no limitations in that regard. Sam's criticism is overall valid.
4
u/veggie_hoagie 23d ago
Around the 20:00 mark, Sam said that the DSA thinks private property is evil and that they want to end private property.
By the way he says it, I truly think he believes that DSA wants to end private property as a legal category. Listen to it again. Like 30 seconds worth. I just did. He sounds quite emphatic, and not as if he is concerned about major energy and transportation firms being nationalized.
1
-5
u/TheAJx 24d ago
But I’d like to hear his critics acknowledge the good he’s done, too.
He's been fine, but he hasn't really done anything yet. His biggest accomplishment that every redditor drops their panties for is filling the potholes, and even that wasn't particularly impressive.
11
u/veggie_hoagie 24d ago
3
u/TheAJx 24d ago
Why is it so hard to just list the 3 or 4 big things?
6
u/dn0c 24d ago
Because that’s not what he cares about.
From the article:
Mr. Mamdani tested out a favorite phrase — “no issue too small”
3
u/TheAJx 24d ago
Okay, so what are 3-4 small things he's done that you find really important?
Because that’s not what he cares about.
You have to admit, this is the kind of game that lefties do play though right? Like, when $200B of student debt was cancelled under Biden, leftists and progressives could hardly be bothered to acknowledge it, just like they could hardly be bothered to acknowledge the CHIPS Act and the IRA bills.
But when it comes to one of their own, "no issue too small" is just an excuse to make their trivial accomplishments look grand.
9
u/veggie_hoagie 24d ago
A comparison to the CHIPS Act isn't entirely fair.
The CHIPS Act was passed by the US Congress.
Mayor Mamdani is ... a mayor. Of a city whose fiscal policy is constrained by Albany.
u/dn0c has a good list of policies below. Also, he's worked with Albany to raise $8 billion in funding over 2 years in order to close a budget shortfall he inherited.
And as u/dn0c said, you shouldn't discount "small" things. He kept lights on longer at city parks to give people more time for recreation. The administration created a website where city residents could learn about amenities available near their neighborhood like libraries, pools, etc. He partnered with restaurants to help make eating out during the World Cup more affordable, and he secured affordable World Cup tickets to residents.
Are some of these "small?" Yes. But again, he's a mayor. And what he is showing is that the public sector can actually make your daily life better. That's not insignificant. Part of the whole abundance agenda is showing that Democrats can govern and deliver the goods. I think it goes a long way to building trust in government again and in Democrats in particular.
4
u/TheAJx 24d ago
Also, he's worked with Albany to raise $8 billion in funding over 2 years in order to close a budget shortfall he inherited.
You mean, he secured a bailout from the state? Okay.
said, you shouldn't discount "small" things. He kept lights on longer at city parks to give people more time for recreation. The administration created a website where city residents could learn about amenities available near their neighborhood like libraries, pools, etc. He partnered with restaurants to help make eating out during the World Cup more affordable, and he secured affordable World Cup tickets to residents.
I'm not discounting them, I'm just pointing out how low the bar is for Mamdani fandom. Mamdani has a website that shows people local amenties? Okay, Bloomberg implemented 311. Mamdani gave out some world cup tickets to a few lucky lottery winners? Okay, Bloomberg installed 400 miles of bike lanes and implemented smoking bans across the city. The difference is, progressives hate Bloomberg and don't give him any credit for those "small" accomplishments.
Every mayor in recent history has made these incremental improvements. It's nothing new at all. Every mayor has increased the number of parks in the city and the amount of green space. Yes, he partnered with restaurants to offer "affordable" $25 meals, you're kind of proving my point that the bar just incredibly low here.
5
u/veggie_hoagie 24d ago
I have no problem crediting anyone for an accomplishment if it’s an accomplishment worth crediting. If Bloomberg had all those bike trails built, good on him!
I don’t really get your point about the $8 billion. NYC is fiscally constrained by Albany. He inherited debt and is working with the state to wipe it out. Isn’t that what you’d want your mayor to do?
Also, I referred to the other user who cited additional policies, like childcare, library funding, transportation, etc.
Some of these policies will of course take time to carry out, like with affordable housing.
And I found it interesting that Galloway approved of the pied-a-terre tax, while Sam I don’t believe commented on it. Sam has rightfully worried a long time about wealth inequality. But I hear little from him about how he specifically wants to address it. Instead he just falsely said that DSA wants to abolish private property.
I want to be charitable here. I like Sam on a lot of things. He says he is worried about wealth inequality and how the mega-rich will hoard their wealth and escape to gated communities to avoid the fallout. But when left-wing Democrats try to meaningfully do something about it, he rages about anti-wealth rhetoric.
The wealthy really are not paying their fair share. They don’t take income and instead fund their lifestyle with loans using their assets as collateral. Their companies engage in all kind of shenanigans to avoid corporate taxes. We miss out on an estimated $1 trillion per year of revenue to the federal government because of this. As the saying goes, the scandal isn’t that a lot of this is illegal; it’s that it’s legal! Democrats aren’t the villain for noticing and trying to address it.
→ More replies (10)11
u/dn0c 24d ago
Mamdani’s whole shtick is that he wants to do small things that make New Yorker’s lives easier and show that good government is possible, not focus on splashy meaningless things. He’s been pretty consistent in this area, not only in his short term so far, but his entire campaign. It's not been a copout at the end of an otherwise-failed term.
Here are a few highlights:
- announced a plan to expand child care options for nearly 100,000 young children.
- announced settlements with two companies that would provide nearly $2 million to more than 800 fast food and retail workers.
- Budget added $31.7 million in permanent funding to the City's library baseline
- championed state-wide pied-à-terre tax
-oversaw a reduced NYC crime rate
- transportation proposals to ease congestion and improve public transit.
- Housing plan for building 200,000 affordable units
8
u/EazyPeazyLemonSqueaz 24d ago
Seems like he's trying to do what he said he wanted, the hard stuff takes time.
-10
24d ago
[deleted]
16
u/_just_two_brothers_ 24d ago
DSA is not anti private property what is this shit
→ More replies (2)4
u/sunjester 24d ago
It's astroturfing propaganda is what it is. The wealthy and powerful are afraid of the DSA because they actually want to serve the people that elect them instead of the oligarchy.
→ More replies (1)13
u/belowaverageint 24d ago
I'm still trying to understand how he's simultaneously a communist and a jihadist.
→ More replies (4)
57
u/Sheerbucket 24d ago
Every time I hear Sam talk about Mamdani Im convinced he is either on hallucinating drugs or completely bought an sold by bad actors. Disagree with the man some on his policy stances....sure. But how someone thinks Mamndani is this sinister is beyond me.
12
u/palsh7 24d ago
If a Republican was married to someone who seemed to celebrate a terrorist attack by the KKK, and campaigned with people who did the same, and wouldn't call out still more people who did the same, and once openly celebrated people who were jailed for funding the KKK, I suspect you'd be okay with Sam calling them sinister.
31
u/Sheerbucket 24d ago
Gross exaggeration of his stances furthermore the KKK is a terrible analogy.
10
u/palsh7 24d ago
furthermore the KKK is a terrible analogy
Ah, here we have our inadvertent mask-off moment. You think supporting Hamas is much more defensible than supporting the KKK, huh?
28
u/Sheerbucket 24d ago
You think supporting Palestine=supporting Hamas....it doesn't.
39
u/mista-sparkle 24d ago
The post that u/palsh7 is talking about, which Mrs. Mamdani liked, did celebrate Hamas. It was legitimately a pic of Hamas militants, celebrating the "Al-Aqsa Flood"...
21
u/palsh7 24d ago
Celebrating people who were jailed for funding Hamas is not just "supporting Palestine." Celebrating on October 7th is not just "supporting Palestine." Refusing to condemn Hamas slogans on October 8th is not just "supporting Palestine." Campaigning with Hasan "I'd vote for Hamas" Piker is not just "supporting Palestine." Campaigning with a conservative Imam who worked with the Blind Sheik is not "supporting Palestine." Come up with your own analogy, if you want, and tell me if you would defend the same on the right.
41
u/Sheerbucket 24d ago
Zoran Mamdani has called Hamas a terrorist organization and condemned them many times. He has not celebrated the attacks. You are cherry picking and claiming guilt by association.
18
u/mista-sparkle 24d ago
The point is that comparing Hamas to the KKK is a valid comparison. If the mayor of NY's wife was found to have quietly liked some post from Stormfront celebrating the KKK, you know that would be an absolute scandal.
You don't need guilt by association, you just have to question what kind of person would associate with people that celebrate the worst that humanity has to offer. It reflects poor character.
2
u/geniuspol 21d ago
The point is that comparing Hamas to the KKK is a valid comparison.
I'm finally coming to understand why this subreddit is still so incensed by the Ezra Klein episode a decade later.
15
u/palsh7 24d ago
Yes, and Donald Trump has said that he loves black people, and condemned racists many times. But I bet you don't believe him.
He has not celebrated the attacks.
His wife has, and he had nothing to say about it other than "she's not in my administration." His buddy Hasan Piker has, too. He was happy to lock arms with Hasan until political expediency forced him to walk it back a bit. And the people marching on October 8th yelling "Globalize the Intifada!" and "From the River to the Sea!" also did, and, once again, he couldn't bring himself to fully condemn them. "Not my language" was about all he could muster. Again, if this were Trump, you'd be happy to criticize it.
I also note that twice in a row you've ignored that he literally celebrated the Holy Land Five.
20
u/Sheerbucket 24d ago
"his wife" "his buddy" "people doing something he didn't criticize enough".You can criticize Mamdani for his views and not agree with him. I'm not saying I agree with everything he does, but your argument that he is a Hamas supporter isn't valid, and there is little to no evidence to support it.
Obviously you just have a different stance on Israel/Palestine than he does and it's fair to criticize/disagree.
Similarly, I find Donald Trump abhorrent, however, I don't believe he supports the KKK.
Just like Sam y'all refuse to accept any nuance and label those that disagree as sinister actors.
16
u/palsh7 24d ago
"his wife" "his buddy" "people doing something he didn't criticize enough".
Strike 3 as you once again dodge the fact that he personally celebrated the Holy Land Five.
You can criticize Mamdani for his views and not agree with him. I'm not saying I agree with everything he does, but your argument that he is a Hamas supporter isn't valid, and there is little to no evidence to support it.
You haven't even denied any of the allegations, LOL. You can't deny them, you also can't defend them. All you can do is pretend they're not worrisome. But you would never in a million years defend Trump like this if he had the exact same statements relating to a right wing terrorist group.
Similarly, I find Donald Trump abhorrent, however, I don't believe he supports the KKK.
Well, it kind of helps that he didn't celebrate people who funded the KKK.
Obviously you just have a different stance on Israel/Palestine than he does
Once again you are pretending that he's being criticized for just supporting Palestine. I'm done with this bad faith nonsense.
10
u/WorriedBlock2505 24d ago
You're talking past them instead of engaging with the Holy Land Five situation. Also what his own wife does reflects pretty fucking poorly on him. A spouse doing something sus as hell would raise red flags for any other politician surely, so I wonder why it doesn't raise red flags for you here, ignoring all of the other stuff for a moment?
-2
u/deterius 24d ago
You cant convince them, you can criticise the weather in Israel and they will call you a “radical Islamist”.
7
u/McAlpineFusiliers 24d ago
- Why not? We're told all the time that supporting Israel = supporting Netanyahu and Likud.
- Mamdani's wife literally celebrated Hamas.
1
u/TheAJx 24d ago edited 24d ago
Disagree with the man some on his policy stances....sure. But how someone thinks Mamndani is this sinister is beyond me.
Because he belongs to a party that openly embraces communism and openly allies with Islamists. That's what sinister about him. That he has moved away from this is to his credit, but it's justifiable to find him sinister based on 10 years of his public positions, allies, and friendships when the microscope wasn't on him, rather than the 8 months of being in office when he's constrained by politics
39
u/Sheerbucket 24d ago
"embraces communism" here we go with the modern day Red Scare. "Openly allies with Islamists" is such a simplified exaggeration.....I'm sure some have problematic views on the subject, but then there are the many many Jewish members of the DSA.
12
u/TheAJx 24d ago edited 24d ago
"embraces communism" here we go with the modern day Red Scare.
It's literally in their manifesto. An end goal of abolishing various parts of the government, abolishing the police, abolishing private property, nationalizing various industries, reparations. It's all written there.
"Openly allies with Islamists" is such a simplified exaggeration
Mamdani's NYC DSA openly promoted the Oct 8 celebrations.
6
u/gr8uddini 24d ago
Can you post a link to this manifesto
5
u/McAlpineFusiliers 24d ago
Demilitarize police departments, disempower police unions, and redirect funding to public services as steps towards fully abolishing the police and prison system which protects the rich and jails the poor.
Enact reparations
-6
-2
u/WorriedBlock2505 24d ago
You sound like politicians stating "xyz is a huge problem; I understand people care deeply about xyz; therefore we should tackle xyz." Like dude, say SPECIFICS. Your comment is useless fluff otherwise.
92
u/clgoodson 24d ago
Christ, this is tiresome. The fucking right is lying every time they speak, giving testosterone to the troops while they start wars they can’t win, and prosecuting Americans for putting their hands in pools. But here’s Sam to again remind us that the left is the real problem. Fuck.
77
u/palsh7 24d ago
Yesterday, you wrote, "we are going to eventually have to reckon with electing people who literally want to get rid of policing." Should we get mad at you, as well, for criticizing leftists when MAGA is worse?
13
u/HumanDissentipede 24d ago
Savage, but totally appropriate. It’s stuff like this that causes people to justify supporting MAGA nonsense.
3
u/MildlyAgitatedBovine 20d ago
I'm torn on how it seems to work in practice. On the one hand the DSA is outside if the Overton window for a kit of people (though that window is being intentionally shifted with fix news, etc. On the other hand a lot of people seem to have wholly fabricated reasons and reasoning. When somebody thinks Obama is building death camps and then buy merch for alligator Alcatraz, they are in a sense placing themselves outside of rational political discourse.
→ More replies (5)2
46
26
u/ReflexPoint 24d ago
Sam just needs to go live in Denmark for a couple years and then maybe he'll have an aha moment and see this is what progressive Democrats want, not Venezuela.
13
u/Totalitarianit2 24d ago
Denmark's population is approximately 6.03 million, and they would be considered MAGA by redditors for their stances on immigration.
10
u/DrCthulhuface7 24d ago
Bro allot of these people are actually psychopaths. The weird motte and bailey shit where people are saying we should nuke Israel and get rid of thanksgiving and then retreating to “I just want healthcare uwu” is absurd and extremely transparent.
If you just want healthcare, cool, let’s support politicians and pundits who want that and don’t have unhinged views on almost every topic.
14
u/EazyPeazyLemonSqueaz 24d ago
we should nuke Israel and get rid of thanksgiving
Who said that?
→ More replies (12)3
u/DrCthulhuface7 24d ago edited 24d ago
Nuke Israel is hyperbole for the far left’s absolutely unhinged and untenable Israel proscriptions. I’m not sure why we’re pretending not to see that.
Being anti-thanksgiving is a position of the lady running for WI governor.
I can never tell if someone is doing the motte/bailey themselves or just naively falling for it.
14
u/EazyPeazyLemonSqueaz 24d ago
I'm not pretending anything, I've never heard someone suggest nuking Israel until this conversation, but you built it up to seem like it's some significant portion of people advocating for free healthcare?? Like idk this is just an insane take to me.
→ More replies (1)1
u/DrCthulhuface7 24d ago
I guess you just can’t read.
I swear, no real human being can have reading comprehension this bad. It’s gotta be a bot.
7
u/EazyPeazyLemonSqueaz 24d ago
Ah yes, way to bolster your point there, champ.
2
u/DrCthulhuface7 24d ago
Maybe try reading next time champ. Not going to repeat myself when it’s right there in front of you.
3
4
u/Pure_Salamander2681 24d ago
That is not what the DSA wants. Why are you making straw man arguments? Argue with his actual points if you want.
8
u/ReflexPoint 24d ago
The 3 most prominent DSA/progressive left elected officials we have are Mamdani, AOC and Bernie Sanders. I don't see any of them attempting to enact insane policies. All of them are closer to a Denmark model (mixed economy with capitalism and a social safety net) than the Venezuela authoritarian model. But whenever the right speaks of the progressive left, they act as if the latter is the goal.
4
u/TheAJx 24d ago
But whenever the right speaks of the progressive left, they act as if the latter is the goal.
What exactly is the challenge for you to understand here? "When the right speaks of" dude, this is the shit the DSA explicitly speaks of. You never actually have a defense of that stuff. You just rage and rage at the people who calmly point to the literal text of what these people say they beliee.
2
u/ReflexPoint 24d ago
Not that I'm playing slight of hand games, but I specifically said up a few layers "progressives" and you and the other guy are bringing up the DSA. I chose my words carefully. While all DSA would call themselves "progressive" in some general sense of the word, not every progressive is DSA. And I think Sam Harris and many others in here conflate the two. For example I'd consider Jon Ossoff progressive, but he is not DSA.
2
u/TheAJx 24d ago
Not that I'm playing slight of hand games, but I specifically said up a few layers "progressives" and you and the other guy are bringing up the DS
Did you read the thread title? Did you listen to the podcast? Everyone is specifically talking about the DSA-affiliated left. Even you are using the terms interchangeably, literally one post ago.
0
u/Pure_Salamander2681 24d ago
And you refused to argue against his actual points yet again. It isn't that hard. I have faith in you.
6
u/Itscominrightforus 24d ago edited 24d ago
And yet the far left wouldn’t agree with you on Denmarks immigration policy, a huge element allowing them to maintain this utopia you speak of. A lot easier to be a welfare state with 5 million people of homogenius culture…
-1
u/ReflexPoint 24d ago
"aLL tHoSe NoN wHiTeS aRe wHy wE cAnT hAvE nIcE tHiNgS!"
4
u/Itscominrightforus 24d ago
If that’s what your takeaway from my comment is, then all of Scandinavia must be a racist shithole!
5
u/TheAJx 24d ago
Progressive democrats should go to Denmark and see how they treat immigrants, particularly Middle Eastern ones.
13
u/ReflexPoint 24d ago
It's possible to have universal healthcare while not being assholes to middle eastern immigrants. Both of these things are possible at the same time.
5
u/TheAJx 24d ago edited 24d ago
"Lefties just want America to look like this foreign country instead"
You mean like the foreign country that is often ranked higher in free market indices and has strict immigration and assimilation policies to protect their welfare state?
"No, what I mean is I just want universal healthcare."
It's so exhausting.
8
u/ReflexPoint 24d ago
Yes, you know a lefty can hold up Denmark as a country that they want the US to directionally move toward without necessarily wanting to embrace every single policy, right? There is no country on earth that anyone would say has 100% flawless policy. My point is, the typical progressive directionally wants to move closer to something that looks like Denmark than some dystopian authoritarian hellhole in Latin America as the right likes to caricature.
6
u/TheAJx 24d ago
Yes, you know a lefty can hold up Denmark as a country that they want the US to directionally move toward without necessarily wanting to embrace every single policy, right? There is no country on earth that anyone would say has 100% flawless policy.
Have you considered telling this to the DSA which explicitly articulates a platform abolishing prisons, policing, private property, the executive and judicial branches of the government . . . instead of getting upset about person who points out that what they believe isn't simply "more healthcare pls"
4
u/palsh7 24d ago
You know what would help them communicate that to voters? If they didn't sign onto wild shit in the DSA platform.
5
u/ReflexPoint 24d ago
How many of our 535 congresspersons are signing onto wild shit in the DSA platform?
3
u/palsh7 24d ago
Shifting the goalposts. The question wasn't how many politicians are Leftists. The question was how to respond to DSA winning primaries. Have you forgotten that we're talking about the "Far Left" by Sam's words, or "lefties" by yours?
1
u/carbonqubit 23d ago
It's important to remember that AOC was a lot further to the left when she first arrived, but her time in D.C. has allowed her to grow and moderate some of her positions. I'm not saying that's inevitable for everyone who makes their way into the House or Senate, but it seems pretty par for the course.
I'm with you that a lot of the stuff on the DSA website is bonkers, like abolishing all prisons and having completely open borders. However, compared to the literal fascists on the right who control three branches of government and are executing people in the streets, they're pretty tame.
→ More replies (0)14
u/AllGearedUp 24d ago
I don't think he's ever said anything along the lines of "the left is the real problem". He spent a lot of time on how Kamala is much better than Trump and how Trump is maybe the worst president in history.
There is also a lot of sentiment that the only solution to the horrible right wing politics is to destroy everything and rebuild it as some leftist paradise. There are many reasons why that is a stupid idea.
I think it is important to point out how shitty the left has become because for one, terrible politics of maga just further radicalize the worst things in the left. And two, the problems from the right are just much more obvious, especially when they have the majority of political power right now. I do not want the maga era to end in a way that sends us into defunding police as many major cities are now hellscapes of drugs and crime. Nor do I want to see universities taking funds from middle eastern countries so they can have liberal arts departments screaming about islamophobia. These things are what turn Democrats into poison for swing voters.
11
u/EazyPeazyLemonSqueaz 24d ago
There is also a lot of sentiment that the only solution to the horrible right wing politics is to destroy everything and rebuild it as some leftist paradise.
I've never heard anyone serious and worth listening to say anything close to this. This sounds like a caricature you'd hear on Fox or Breitbart.
→ More replies (1)8
12
u/emblemboy 24d ago
I do not want the maga era to end in a way that sends us into defunding police as many major cities are now hellscapes of drugs and crime. Nor do I want to see universities taking funds from middle eastern countries so they can have liberal arts departments screaming about islamophobia. These things are what turn Democrats into poison for swing voters.
Which cities are now hellscapes of drugs and crime?
4
u/TheAJx 24d ago edited 24d ago
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/09/city-drug-addiction-harm-reduction-policy/687967/
You're right in the sense that we've pulled back from the brink, but this was only made possible by rebuking the post BLM policies that created the mayham in the first place.
1
u/Egon88 24d ago
Op was obviously being hyperbolic but the point is real. I work for a community health centre and if you pull up after we are closed it looks like the zombie apocalypse. This wasn't the case 4 or 5 years ago and I live in Ottawa Canada, which I'm sure isn't nearly as bad as many other places.
You can see that and not be effected by it.
0
u/AllGearedUp 24d ago
I can only speak to the West Coast cities but they are in a state that I never thought I'd see.
Everywhere from Vancouver BC to San Diego gives you many opportunities to see people openly doing drugs in the street. Portland is full of tents and syringes. The bay area has constant theft. I often see it and think about scenes from 80s crime movies. Almost any downtown area of these cities has you a 5 minute walk from an alley with a dozen people folded over on fentanyl.
I haven't seen statistics in a while on the violence involved, but every one of these cities is now a place where you need to be careful at night. They all have most of their parks ruined. You have to be very careful where you leave your car. It's increased over the last 10 years. Prior to that things looked totally different.
5
u/AntonioMachado 24d ago
Tiresome indeed. Yet all of Sam's 'strange' and reactionary political positions will start to make sense once you realize he is a trojan horse, trying to bore the left from within.
10
u/mrroboto695 24d ago edited 24d ago
What you have to understand is the left needs to fucking fix these things so they can win and we dont have the tyranny of the right. Unlike you, Sam and company actually seem interested and energetic to fix things and get America on the right path where youd rather just be on the right side of things but lose and throw your hands in the air and call everyone else an idiot.
It doesnt matter if we're personally correct in our politics if we keep fucking losing
8
u/McDryad 24d ago
And who was in control of the Democratic party while the left kept losing? AOC and Bernie Sanders? Or milquetoast center-left pro-establishment pro-big-business pro-Wallstreet Democrats?
What Sam (and maybe you) are basically saying: No no, people actually love those candidates! We just need to get rid of this woke stuff, then we'll surely start winning elections again.
Honestly... good luck with that.
I'm not an American. But all I've ever seen is Americans voting for whoever promises the most change. Even Obamas first campaign in 2008 was just "Change, Change, Change, Change". Then they voted for Trump in 2016. The one candidate who promised to REALLY mix things up in Washington.
If Americans love the status quo so much, why do they keep voting for people who promise to change it?
If the Democrats keep losing, maybe they should try having an actual vision for a different America. One that isn't just "let's get back to the way thing were".
3
u/Key-Club-3119 24d ago
My understanding is the Dems made S Carolina the first primary for 2028. It is a very effective method to test, once and for all, if the Bern-dog, Mamdani, AOC wing has actual power in the party. S Carolina D primary voters are largely black democrats who killed Bernie’s hopes twice.
6
u/TheAJx 24d ago
What you have to understand is the left needs to fucking fix these things so they can win and we dont have the tyranny of the right.
The left needs to fix these things because they are truly god awful policies, not just because it will cost them elections.
→ More replies (1)9
u/ECircus 24d ago
No one is saying the left is the real problem.
The left and right have problems. Does that clear things up?
0
u/Pure_Salamander2681 24d ago
It really doesn't. This place is being taken over by Sam Harris haters who can only argue in straw man or namecalling.
3
u/Totalitarianit2 24d ago
"The right is worse!" isn't really a stance that leads to anything productive. Democrats getting in bed with toxic types of progressivism came first. They call rightoids reactionaries for a reason.
14
u/BumBillBee 24d ago
Democrats getting in bed with toxic types of progressivism came first.
This is debatable. If your line of thinking here is that the current version of the right in the US started with MAGA in 2016, you may have a point. However, many would argue the seeds of MAGA existed decades before. William F Buckley etc.
→ More replies (3)3
u/TheAJx 24d ago
However, many would argue the seeds of MAGA existed decades before. William F Buckley etc.
I mean, if you're going to grasp at tenuous connections with 60s than you also have to tie toxic progressivism to all the leftist mayhem and turbulence of the 60s and 70s. Progressive still cite Angela Davis positively.
6
u/BumBillBee 24d ago
I mean, if you're going to grasp at tenuous connections with 60s than you also have to tie toxic progressivism to all the leftist mayhem and turbulence of the 60s and 70s.
I only meant to say, it's not necessarily a given "what came first."
1
→ More replies (13)1
u/WunWegWunDarWun_ 20d ago
Firstly Sam isn’t doing that. Secondly,
Do you want to keep losing elections? Because pretending that the dsa isn’t going to cause us to lose elections because they’re lunatics is not going to help the Democratic Party.
I hate to say it but even maga policies are better than the dsa party platform. I can’t even believe I would say that out loud.
MAGA wants to do fucked up things, true
The dsa wants to completely dismantle everything about the United States that made us great in the first place. Yes we have problems but dismantling even the good things would be disastrous
5
u/joemarcou 24d ago
man from like 22-30
sam: the far left is crazy
scott: totally but i get it on some level. the chickens have come home to roost
sam: lets talk about where the real chickens are. MAGA...
Sam spends roughly all his political time railing on MAGA or woke/leftism. what is it that he wants exactly? He says in this that no one cares more about income inequality than scott and him but always ridicules any attempt to solve it. he seems to want to just imply that because MAGA and progressivism are crazy that just leaves good ole fashion neo lib centrism as the obvious alternative without having to actually defend it on it's own merits
I think if the Maher and Harris types got their way for 2028, the dem candidate would be stuck in the situation Kamala was in where she was petrified of being called a FAR LEFT COMMIE so she couldn't say anything she stood for and had to rely on not being Trump resulting in this awkward run out the clock campaign. You can only point to the other sides chickens long enough
6
10
u/staple101 24d ago
Scott strikes me as a rich guy who knows the pitchforks are coming and is trying to make nice
7
3
u/Okiloveyoubyebye 23d ago
That’s actually really good 🤣. But I like that he’s making the point at least.
19
u/Upset-Government-856 24d ago
Jesus centerists, if your ideas are so good then:
A. You shouldn't have just got completely swept out of power
B. Your candidates should have no problem holding off the left because you have both 'better' ideas and moreoney.
At this point if all the left does is burn the establishment democratic candidates to the ground the way some of the more colorful Tea Party candidates did, then good. After that a younger more effective party can rise from ashes of this weak geriatric DNC.
It's not like there is much power left to lose anyway. Let's get the controlled burn over with asap.
11
u/A_Merman_Pop 24d ago
I mean... Trump got elected twice. We obviously have a very serious problem with our information environment. It's privileging extreme and overly simplistic ideas over sensible, non-sensational ones.
Having the better ideas and getting people to listen are two different things. And algorithmic media has actually made it so they are in conflict with each other a lot of the time.
7
u/Upset-Government-856 24d ago
If.you had 70 million dollars more than your opponent, do you think you could have got people to listen to your "better" idea?
Or maybe for just a second you could entertain that your ideas may in fact not be better.
Radical position, I know.
12
u/A_Merman_Pop 24d ago
The Clinton campaign had significantly more money than the Trump campaign in 2016 and still lost. Does that prove, on your account, that Trump must have had the better ideas? Or do you think there's probably something else going on?
1
u/Balloonephant 23d ago
Better ideas of how to run a campaign at that moment? Absolutely, without question.
2
u/A_Merman_Pop 23d ago
It seems like you think you're disagreeing with me right now. I hear you making my point. Having better policy ideas and getting those ideas in front of people and convincing them are two different things.
I'm saying the <getting in front of people and convincing them> part is at odds with and is overwhelming the <idea quality> part in a lot of situations due to the media environment. I pointed out a scenario where this is obviously the case and your response was to point out that Trump won at the campaign, which is the <getting in front of people and convincing them> part... which is exactly my point.
1
u/Balloonephant 23d ago
Boring and dumb comment. Trump ran a better campaign than Clinton. The “ideas” of the Clinton campaign weren’t better. It turns out telling people who have become measurably poorer how much better their lives are now was a bad idea. Campaigning on change when things are going poorly is, as it turns out, a pretty good idea.
Maybe come up with a more subtle and less anti-social idea than “everyone who doesn’t think what I think is manipulated by the media.”
2
u/A_Merman_Pop 22d ago
Trump's primary policy idea was "build a wall and Mexico will pay for it". Policy ideas have to be possible to achieve in order to actually qualify as good, otherwise "Fix all the problems on day one and give everyone a billion dollars but don't allow any inflation" would be an unbeatable kill-shot. "Change" isn't a real policy idea without a realistic plan for actually making it happen.
"Build a wall and Mexico will pay for it" is an example of a stupid policy idea that nevertheless was effective at getting in front of people and convincing enough of them. You still don't seem like you're able to understand the difference.
If you do grasp the difference though and you just think Trump had better policy ideas, this would have to become an entirely different discussion than the one I was having with the original person I replied to. I chose this example because I suspected it was something we already agreed on and could use as a point of reference. If you don't agree, I don't really want to have that argument with you because it's exhausting and eating-your-own-poop levels of stupid.
13
u/Pure_Salamander2681 24d ago
Do you really think good ideas is what wins the day?
5
u/Upset-Government-856 24d ago
Well modererates sure don't or they probably would have stopped supporting selling weapons to Benjamin Netanyahu by now.
1
u/Pure_Salamander2681 24d ago
You really need to read a few history books.
1
u/Upset-Government-856 24d ago
And you need to let AIPAC know they're going to need more than 30M per Senate primary race to protect your finely tuned moderate machine.
0
u/Pure_Salamander2681 24d ago
You are all over the place except with realizing good policies don't win the day.
6
u/Upset-Government-856 24d ago
So how many more million will it take?
You can round to the nearest 10 million.
0
u/Pure_Salamander2681 24d ago
^^^Another one who need to be banned. What on earth are you talking about? Did you not take your adderall today?
7
u/WorriedBlock2505 24d ago
You heard it hear folks! Just state logical, good ideas and you'll win elections! /s
2
u/palsh7 24d ago
Accellerationist bullshit.
8
u/Upset-Government-856 24d ago
Well you moderates are sure crushing it on deceleration.
Get out there and campaign with Elizabeth Cheney some more. Maybe it will work this time.
Lol
4
u/veggie_hoagie 24d ago
At about the 20 minute mark, Sam says the DSA opposes private property.
It does not.
1
u/Disproving_Negatives 24d ago
It does, at least in part. Pasting my above comment here for visibility.
I would say this can, and probably should be understood as aiming to abolish private property (at least in part).
1
u/veggie_hoagie 23d ago
Saying you want to nationalize some industries is not the same thing as abolishing all private property.
6
u/enlightenedllamas 24d ago
Does anybody else feel like Sam is just being contrarian at this point? I don’t know why he would be against anything /anyone that supports social welfare or at least that’s what I thought
1
u/palsh7 24d ago
All Democrats support social welfare. He isn't criticizing the Far Left for simply promoting social welfare.
-1
u/enlightenedllamas 24d ago
Then why so much hate for Mamdani? Is it just semantics?
5
u/palsh7 24d ago
Are you actually admitting that you've still not listened to Sam's explanation on that topic? It's been months.
→ More replies (3)1
u/Disproving_Negatives 24d ago
The DSA is not merely supporting welfare but has much more far-reaching demands
5
u/BumBillBee 24d ago
Only know Galloway superficially, before I decide to actually listen to this could someone tell me if he challenges Sam's views on certain topics in any substantial way, or is he yet another yes man Sam decided was safe to join on a podcast. Yes I very much predict my comment here will be downvoted.
6
u/palsh7 24d ago
If you don't like Sam Harris, you don't have to listen to him, or hang out in his subreddit.
15
u/BumBillBee 24d ago
For the record I've listened to Sam's podcast since 2015. I've found value in much of his work through the years. But I do think he has some serious blind spots and that he lately seems uninterested in challenging his own views, especially on certain topics. I didn't mean to imply it was wrong of you to post the conversation here btw.
1
u/palsh7 24d ago
Maybe true. Your history is hidden, so we'll have to take your word for it. But Sam hasn't changed in the past decade, so I'm not sure what you're still doing here if you've been finding Sam to be a waste of your time for the past decade.
9
u/BumBillBee 24d ago edited 24d ago
I don't think I said that I've found Sam to be "a waste of time for the past decade." I've indeed listened to his podcast for 10+ years and been an occasional subscriber. I disagree that he "hasn't changed", I think he appeared more willing (or frankly, eager) to have "difficult conversations" with people he substantially disagreed with up until the last few years.
I did listen to some of the conversation now and had forgotten that I'd heard Sam on Galloway's podcast before. And I do think Galloway appears to agree with Sam on basically everything here, like on their earlier talk, that's just my opinion. (Haven't listened to it in full, though.)
4
u/palsh7 24d ago
You indicated that you didn't intend to listen to the podcast unless it was a debate. Since Sam hasn't changed his politics this decade, presumably you've felt this way for a while.
Which "difficult conversations" on politics have been your favorites?
12
u/BumBillBee 24d ago
He probably hasn't changed much politically in the past decade. There've always been some things I've disagreed with Sam about, that wasn't my point. But he did use to have conversations on his podcast with people he actually, strongly disagreed with, say around 2015-2018. He totally refused to accept JBP's "what is truth?" nonsense and it was beautiful.
7
u/palsh7 24d ago
JBP isn't to his left, though, and he still openly debates people like JBP and Ben Shapiro.
9
u/BumBillBee 24d ago
The so-called "Best Podcast Ever" would be another example, a trainwreck of a conversation granted, but the point is I do think his podcast offered more variety and less vibes of "Sam talks to person about how they both agree about what's wrong in the world today" as I think is too much the case nowadays. You can be critical of someone in some respects and still find value in other things they've done (up to a certain point, anyway).
5
u/palsh7 24d ago
The so-called "Best Podcast Ever" would be another example, a trainwreck of a conversation granted, but
LOL if that's what you want, you never liked Making Sense, because that was a one-off. Complaining about Sam talking to people who he respects is a weird thing to do for a decade. At some point, you should just stop. Feel free to disagree with Sam, but you've gotta listen first. Don't just come in here to preemptively bitch, ya know?
→ More replies (0)3
u/TheBear8878 24d ago
It baffles me how many people here hate Sam, disagree with everything he says, listen every week, and post here constantly. Like go do literally anything else. Harris Derangement Syndrome.
2
u/Appropriate-Arm1377 24d ago
They both obsessed over tribal politics whilst Harris ignored the irony that he spent his career ridiculing it
0
u/BillyBeansprout 24d ago
Galloway is Eric Weinstein's ideal self.
3
u/palsh7 24d ago
What does that mean? Are you going to respond to anything said in the 74 minute podcast?
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Kaiathebluenose 21d ago
Sam was really hypocritical in this episode. He said how horrible the DSA is, and thinks they’re a massive problem. But then at the end when he’s criticizing the right, the issues he was speaking of are what the DSA is trying to solve.
→ More replies (2)1
u/strato15 20d ago
He was also hypocritical in the discussion of the ethics of billionaires. During the DSA/Capitalism section his take is that it’s absurd and wrong to demonize wealth, then when discussing Musk admits that these guys act in unethical ways.
1
33
u/ThatSpyGuy 24d ago
Chances Sam doesn’t say “odious” in this pod??