Dan Carlin's Hardcore History: Show 40 - (BLITZ) Radical Thoughts
December 22, 2014 8:00 AM - Subscribe
Using the two 20th Century "Red Scare" eras as case studies, Dan looks at the fear that can be generated by potentially dangerous ideas and examines the way such powerful mass emotions can cloud human judgment. (2:37:38)
I'm halfway through this episode after listening to this podcast for the first time yesterday, when I plowed through all four hours of "The American Peril". (Which was great - I never knew how much I never knew about Cuba and the Spanish-American War.) I'm starting to get a picture of Dan Carlin's political slant here, although it's not clear yet. For those who have listened to more of this podcast than I have...would you call him a conservative? I couldn't help but notice a sneer in his voice when he talked about Emma Goldman. Or was he just getting into character as a 'status quo' defender?
posted by confabulous at 8:14 PM on December 22, 2014
posted by confabulous at 8:14 PM on December 22, 2014
I haven't only because I quail at the idea of having so much to digest.
I know, I'm still working my way through the hours and hours of the WWI series. Which I do find very interesting, but I just don't often want to listen to historical podcasts, I guess.
posted by smackfu at 9:58 AM on December 23, 2014
I know, I'm still working my way through the hours and hours of the WWI series. Which I do find very interesting, but I just don't often want to listen to historical podcasts, I guess.
posted by smackfu at 9:58 AM on December 23, 2014
This isn't the most recently posted podcast, it's the oldest available (for free).
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:16 AM on December 23, 2014
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:16 AM on December 23, 2014
Right, I meant I don't want to stop the WWI one in the middle.
posted by smackfu at 10:36 AM on December 23, 2014
posted by smackfu at 10:36 AM on December 23, 2014
For those who have listened to more of this podcast than I have...would you call him a conservative?
I've listened to all of the free HH podcasts (I haven't listened to Common Sense), and I get the impression that he doesn't like extremists/radicals. He's fascinated by them, but he doesn't like them.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:27 PM on December 23, 2014
I've listened to all of the free HH podcasts (I haven't listened to Common Sense), and I get the impression that he doesn't like extremists/radicals. He's fascinated by them, but he doesn't like them.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:27 PM on December 23, 2014
Are you interested in more posts? We have a dozen to get caught up on, and then do them as they come out.
What is a schedule that works for you?
posted by the man of twists and turns at 4:06 PM on December 23, 2014 [1 favorite]
What is a schedule that works for you?
posted by the man of twists and turns at 4:06 PM on December 23, 2014 [1 favorite]
For those who have listened to more of this podcast than I have...would you call him a conservative?
I wouldn't. He's very skeptical of embedded power structures, and he understands that the nature of systemic problems is to be unfixable from within the system -- these are attitudes that I usually don't find conservatives displaying.
posted by So You're Saying These Are Pants? at 1:16 AM on December 26, 2014
I wouldn't. He's very skeptical of embedded power structures, and he understands that the nature of systemic problems is to be unfixable from within the system -- these are attitudes that I usually don't find conservatives displaying.
posted by So You're Saying These Are Pants? at 1:16 AM on December 26, 2014
oh and in terms of actual political views, he's "independent" as you'd expect, but typically ends up with conclusions that are in line with mainstream metafilter views : )
posted by So You're Saying These Are Pants? at 1:17 AM on December 26, 2014
posted by So You're Saying These Are Pants? at 1:17 AM on December 26, 2014
For those who have listened to more of this podcast than I have...would you call him a conservative?
Certainly not by American standards, I wouldn't. I tend to avoid Common Sense, as that kind of thing isn't my bag, but I would say he fits into a fairly recognisable American political sub-type. Certainly not libertarian, nor technocrat, though elements of both. For me, I guess I would say his worldview is mostly governed by what I'd think of as Realism. I suspect he and Mearsheimer would have much in common, and that... avenue of thought has a long precedence in American culture, I'd argue, right back to its founding even.
That said, I don't think he's a "lock and step" kinda guy, if you know what I mean.
posted by smoke at 2:14 AM on December 27, 2014
Certainly not by American standards, I wouldn't. I tend to avoid Common Sense, as that kind of thing isn't my bag, but I would say he fits into a fairly recognisable American political sub-type. Certainly not libertarian, nor technocrat, though elements of both. For me, I guess I would say his worldview is mostly governed by what I'd think of as Realism. I suspect he and Mearsheimer would have much in common, and that... avenue of thought has a long precedence in American culture, I'd argue, right back to its founding even.
That said, I don't think he's a "lock and step" kinda guy, if you know what I mean.
posted by smoke at 2:14 AM on December 27, 2014
This podcast covers a time when our civil liberties were thrown out the window to supposedly protect us from the Red Menace. Right now we're in a period were our civil liberties are still thrown out the window, only now it's to supposedly protect us from terrorists. The War on Drugs has also been a steady source of civil liberty defenestration.
I think Dan Carlin missed an important point. He spoke of the red scare maybe seeming reasonable at the time when viewed in the light of people's fear of an imminent and possibly existential threat, they not having the benefit of hindsight. What seems obvious to me is that the people who want to run roughshod over our rights are always happy to use whatever excuse they can to cow the American people into compliance. These are the same people who say "the constitution isn't a suicide pact" and "desperate times call for desperate measures." Maybe the average American was afraid of communism back then. Maybe the average American is afraid of terrorism now. There's always some excuse. There's always a J. Edgar Hoover or John Ashcroft ready to leap on the opportunity.
Dan Carlin didn't come right out and say that, though he did do a good job of painting J. Edgar Hoover as a paranoid nut and the FBI as out of control. I think he does a good job of presenting a neutral viewpoint. Maybe he couldn't say what I just did for fear of unbalancing that presentation.
posted by double block and bleed at 12:14 PM on December 27, 2014
I think Dan Carlin missed an important point. He spoke of the red scare maybe seeming reasonable at the time when viewed in the light of people's fear of an imminent and possibly existential threat, they not having the benefit of hindsight. What seems obvious to me is that the people who want to run roughshod over our rights are always happy to use whatever excuse they can to cow the American people into compliance. These are the same people who say "the constitution isn't a suicide pact" and "desperate times call for desperate measures." Maybe the average American was afraid of communism back then. Maybe the average American is afraid of terrorism now. There's always some excuse. There's always a J. Edgar Hoover or John Ashcroft ready to leap on the opportunity.
Dan Carlin didn't come right out and say that, though he did do a good job of painting J. Edgar Hoover as a paranoid nut and the FBI as out of control. I think he does a good job of presenting a neutral viewpoint. Maybe he couldn't say what I just did for fear of unbalancing that presentation.
posted by double block and bleed at 12:14 PM on December 27, 2014
Perhaps the most major recurring theme in "Common Sense" is that of the craven using whatever current menace is out there to curtail liberties, and how impossible it is to get them back afterwards. One of his common statements is that the country couldn't survive another 9-11 simply because of the ferocity by which we'd rip apart our last remaining ideals and freedoms afterwards.
So no, I wouldn't describe him as conservative, per se.
posted by Navelgazer at 6:14 AM on January 30, 2015
So no, I wouldn't describe him as conservative, per se.
posted by Navelgazer at 6:14 AM on January 30, 2015
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
When I see an episode of Hardcore History drop, it's like receiving a new, thick book in the mail: I think Yay, something new! Damn, now I need to find time to read this!
When I am done listening I am sad that it's over, but when one arrives I am glad I had so much time off.
Do you listen to his other podcast, Common Sense? I haven't only because I quail at the idea of having so much to digest.
posted by wenestvedt at 7:40 PM on December 22, 2014