The probably cancelled podcast is probably the most “conspiracy theory” prone Marxist podcast I listen to, but this is a little far. Their claims are the following:

-bill gates’ bunk science “philanthropy” is a front for ibm (who have historically been involved in eugenics) to depopulate the third world (which I believe)

-Fauci doesn’t know anything about the science that would be relevant to fighting pandemics, he was involved in trying to stop good hiv treatment from becoming accessible

-the Covid pandemic may have been planned, suspiciously similar to simulations, intentionally planned to be used for suppressing lefty information (said watch event 201)

-ventilators are difficult to operate, and most people that were being put on them died, so it’s sus they were calling for more

-the common medication used in the US is bad,

-hospitals have monetary incentives to attribute hospitalizations to Covid

-ivermectin is effective at treating Covid, demonized as “horse paste” when it’s actually often used on humans, (which I’m sympathetic to, as it was commonly used in Latin America)

-hydroxychloriquin treats Covid, tests saying otherwise were using intentionally bad methodology

-according to VERS a lot of people are being harmed by Covid vaccines (which I’m very suspicious of, as correlation doesn’t equal causation with vers, but many I listen to too many libs)

-masks are making people sick (which I’m very suspicious of, bc I’ve gotten sick wayyy less since I’ve been wearing a mask daily)

-boosters are a scheme to make more money bc with actual vaccines it’s supposed to develope anti-bodies once and you’ll be fine

-the vaccine causes blood clots etc, (which I’m very suspicious of, but maybe lib debunkings are wrong?)

I would like to know what you, comrades think of these claims.

  • @aworldtowin
    link
    151 year ago

    The podcast itself is terrible. Bringing on Daniel Burke, seriously dude? We are supposed to bring LaRouchites into the movement? Plus anti feminist? Seems closer to Gleen Greenwald than dialectical materialism.

    Also, if event 201 means covid was planned, every pandemic was planned. These pandemic simulations are similar to war game exercises- no one gives them any attention until serious shit is happening. US does war games every year simulating all out war with DPRK but no one here even knows about it. Pandemic simulations are ran very frequently for all types of pandemics. Now if was specifically for this exact coronavirus there may be something there, but it was just for general coronaviruses which have caused pandemics before so it is normal enough. The real story in event 201 and the others is the corruption between the gates foundation/bill gates and our govt.

    • @ihaveibs@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      Yeah bringing on a LaRouchite is enough to think this is an op based on the current issues with these folks creeping into leftist spaces in a very inorganic way

    • QueerCommieOP
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      They are definitely no anti-feminist (just anti-sex industry), and based the majority of the time. I think they are just prone to conspiracy thinking and reaching a cross the political spectrum for information (the guest does mention Glenn Greenwald, though, in support).

    • stasis
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      so it’s a LaRouchite podcast? not surprised

  • I’ll go in order.

    1. Don’t know enough to comment on.

    2. Don’t know enough to comment on.

    3. I have a healthy skepticism of this idea. I have a friend who very strongly believes the Fort Detrick theory on Covid’s origins to be real, and he’s almost convinced me. It’s more likely than the Wuhan Lab theory, though that’s a very low bar, to be fair. People were making the same claim about Monkeypox this past summer, even though there’s been an ongoing outbreak in Africa, especially Nigeria (iirc), since 2017, which is where patient 0 of last summer’s outbreak had recently traveled to. It’s a small world, never doubt that.

    4. I don’t doubt that ventilators are difficult to operate, and that many people who were put on them died. But a medical intervention/treatment doesn’t have to be effective for the vast majority to be effective for some – and therefore a worthwhile investment. The medical industry in the U.S. has been privatized to hell and is therefore driven by profits. But people working in the medical field are by and large decent people who want to help their fellow humans.

    5. Highly, highly doubt.

    6. Highly doubt as well.

    7. Unfortunately, VERS is known to be infested with anti-vaxx shitheads falsely claiming bad side effects. It is not a reliable source.

    8. Total nonsense.

    9. Highly doubt. The way I understand it is that because it’s more common to encounter Covid than, idk, tetanus, it’s necessary to get boosters more often.

    10. This a known, albeit rare, side effect that occurs within a pretty short time frame of having gotten the vaccine – about 2 weeks, iirc.

    I think it’s a good idea to bear in mind that just because something or someone calls themselves a Marxist doesn’t mean they’re based, intelligent, or have good takes. Nazbols exist, after all.

    • QueerCommieOP
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      They seem like a genuine Marxist, just a few bad takes. She’s been recommended by other ML’s, has had people like Xiangyu, and lady izdihar on, and is featured on the crypt pad basic communist reading list that was going around on the ‘grad.

  • Catradora-Stalinism☭M
    link
    fedilink
    111 year ago

    okay these dudes are wacks with a glimmer of sense. Masks are a good measure for conspiracy brains, telling if they are just idiots or really trying to know the real deal.

    • QueerCommieOP
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      Maybe it’s their one bad take. I’m still wondering if the “Covid was planned,” or “ivermectin works” are true, though.

      • Catradora-Stalinism☭M
        link
        fedilink
        121 year ago

        Ivermectin is a sus one, as the chuds in america showed that it doesn’t work nearly as well as one may think. Covid was planned would be strange, since american plans are always for the economy, and this destroyed it and they knew it was going to be destroyed. The broad US government may be more foolish, but engineering a virus is CIA shit, and the CIA are fucking psychotic, but uphold anti-communism and economic growth just as much. I doubt it. The response to covid would have had far better propaganda campaigns prepared (even though the ones here were okay).

        • QueerCommieOP
          link
          fedilink
          61 year ago

          Makes sense, I’m guessing the left-media suppression, expensive pharmaceuticals, demonization of China, and so on were just making a the best of a bad situation for the bourgeoisie

  • @redtea@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    91 year ago

    I can only really talk about John Potash and while most of what I’ll say isn’t relevant to the named podcast/episode, it is perhaps relevant overall.

    Potash wrote a decent book called The FBI War on Tupac Shakur. The chapters on Tupac are very good and are convincing. But the structure of each chapter is problematic, especially the early chapters, e.g. on MLK, Malcolm X.

    These chapters present relevant evidence before Potash concludes that XYZ. Unfortunately, there are cogent, alternative conclusions that could be reached on the basis of the same evidence. These conclusions would still be damning enough of the FBI, but not in the exact way that Potash suggests. It is annoying that he does this.

    The book also states at the beginning something like ‘several FBI people have read the book and publicly stated that they cannot refute the argument’. I can tell you that being unable to refute an argument does not mean the argument is sound. If a writer hedges their bets and adds sufficient qualifications, it will be almost impossible to refute the work. That doesn’t mean it’s correct.

    If I say ‘ABC shows that the FBI may have done XYZ’, it doesn’t mean the FBI actually did XYZ so long as XYZ is one possible conclusion based on ABC. Nobody can argue that the FBI did not do XYZ unless new evidence is presented. The most that one can say without further research is that ‘ABC might also show that the FBI instead did UVW’. But the original argument doesn’t exclude that alternative conclusion, so the original argument remains unrefuted. You can’t use this logic to rely on the claims of FBI agents as evidence that the argument is correct or that the FBI accepts the argument.

    The other problem is that this reasoning relies on a logic of falsifiability (as in, the crux of the scientific method proposed by Karl Popper as a way of rejecting dialectical materialism). That logic is useful in its way, but it raises a lot of questions for dialectical materialists; so it’s not the kind of logic that a Marxist can rely on without addressing some methodological issues.

    Like I said, the chapters on Tupac are stronger, but even here there are problems. There’s some possible rape apologia, for example, arguing that because a jury found Tupac not guilty of rape that he unequivocally could not have done it. We know full well that courts clear rapists all the time.

    Potash documents how the prosecutor appeared to have tried to prosecute for inflated crimes and push for inflated punishments. That could all the true. It could have even been at the behest of the FBI. But even if the FBI tried to use the allegations to attack Tupac, does not mean he was innocent; it could equally mean that the FBI went too far and failed because it tried to claim too much on the basis of the evidence that they had.

    I’m unsure whether Tupac was guilty or innocent. For one thing, ‘not guilty’ does not mean ‘innocent’. It’s irrelevant really; the point I’m making is that the evidence only shows that the prosecutor fucked up, perhaps even because they were pushed by the FBI. But Potash seems to argue for Tupac’s innocence.

    It would be enough to highlight what the evidence proves. But in the way the book is written, the conclusions read like conspiracy theories.

    Then I listened to a podcast with Potash about the new edition of his book. He honestly sounds like a conspiracy theorist. And he goes off on one about marijuana. That bit was so asinine I’ve forgotten the details.

    I went to find more of what he’s written on his website. There’s a video clip of a project he’s been working on, about Covid. Sounds like he might be talking about it in the podcast episode. Again, I thought it was so remarkably daft that I’ve forgotten most of the details. I remember something about how a few families own most of the wealth and that they own big pharma, but said in such a way that implies Covid was a hoax by the haute bourgeoisie to – I can’t recall what.

    It’s like, Potash, mate, there’s enough to criticise here and there’s enough to say about big pharma fucking over the world without implying that Covid must be made up. Writers should only make conclusions that are supported by the available evidence. Little things like this make his work open to criticism. I’d still recommend the Tupac book, but it must be read critically.

    So if you’re asking about this podcast in general, I can’t help. But if you’re asking about this episode with Potash, I’d listen carefully and see if he makes any logical fallacies, etc. He has the knack for making arguments that sound convincing and which appear to be logically coherent but have some holes. I wouldn’t be surprised to find similar issues with his work on Covid.

    Edit: typos and softened some of the harshness in my initial comment.

    • QueerCommieOP
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      Have you read ‘drugs as weapons against us’? That’s another one of his books that I was interested in. I’m wondering if it would be worth it.

      • @redtea@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        71 year ago

        I’ve only read his book on Tupac. And based on that book, I’d suggest it’s worth reading any/all of his work.

        He’s good at investigating and pulling facts and ideas together. I even agree with most of his conclusions on FBI involvement in US radicalism and with Tupac. My main issue is that he sometimes states too much, which weakens the overall argument. If he wrote a little more cautiously about those conclusions or suggested other possible interpretations of his findings I think he’d persuade a lot more people.

        I was perhaps a little too harsh in my previous comment. I just get annoyed when radical writers leave us open to criticisms of ‘conspiracy theory’ (beyond claims about the capitalist class acting as a class to protect it’s interests).

        I’d say, if you have your eyes on his book on drugs, give it a go. It’ll be easy to read and will likely contain some great research, at the least. If the title is indicative of the content, there will be lots to agree with in there. The drug companies are at war against us, after all, whether it’s flogging thalidomide or overcharging for insulin.

  • SovereignState
    link
    fedilink
    61 year ago

    @seanchai@lemmygrad.ml

    Hate to bring you into discourse if you’re not interested comrade, but you did a great job at getting me away from this podcast. I tried to find your comment utterly demolishing any lingering appeal of it I had, but I couldn’t seem to find it.

    If comrade Seanchai does not wish to engage w/ it, I will simply opine that the podcast hosts are going down some dark, transphobic and, as mentioned, LaRouchite roads. “Gender critical” shit etc. I will try to find receipts.

    • QueerCommieOP
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      I don’t think she’s transphobic, she’s had a trans person on to talk about her experience. Though, I can see how some of the stuff could point towards it, as she recently had someone on talking about how natural womanhood needs to be protected from endocrine disrupters and negative social things like demonization of menopause and the poor methodology used by modern doctors for birthing.

      • SovereignState
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        Yeah, I brought that up too. The trans person in question works for an NGO that explicitly works against trans progress IIRC. Comrade Seanchai knows more than I do, but I’ll look into it more and see what I can find.

        • QueerCommieOP
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          Oof, is it possible to link their past comments about it, if they don’t want to write about it now?

          • SovereignState
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            Yeah, sorry for the awkwardness and lack of receipts. They did a really good write up on it but lemmygrad’s being a lil difficult w/ trying to search for it.

            • QueerCommieOP
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              I understand, this site’s search mechanism for comments and posts definitely needs to be improved.