Joe Rogan, The N-Word, Cancel Culture, Free Speech, and Social Protocol
Due to everyone’s radar for cultural trends and what’s the latest hot topic to gossip about and engage in the newest outrage hustle is aligned with the 24-hour news cycle, the whole debacle with Joe Rogan being exposed for saying the forbidden n-word (as in “no”, LOL) back in February has come and gone, like a guy’s interest in a girl right after post-nut clarity.
Nonetheless, I will give my late take on this.
I don’t need to explain who Joe Rogan, mystic podcaster and comedian who’s an MMA fanatic (and serves as a commentator for UFC) and also a huge supporter of psychedelics and DMT. His world-famous podcast has on just about anyone famous to talk about… just about anything.
A Boomer who still has the mental residue of the countercultural spirit his generation was imbued with, Rogan has been incorrectly labeled by many media pundits and far-left zealots as “far-right”, a “spreader of misinformation” and a dangerous influence on vulnerable young men. All of these claims are salacious and if Joe Rogan was anymore rich, I wouldn’t be surprised if he sued for defamation.
Like a lot of people who disapprove of the culture war in America that’s escalated ever since Trump stuck his Cheeto head into the political discourse, and left stains that could never be cleaned up, Rogan is a center-left liberal who doesn’t associate with the traditional left anymore because he believes they’ve abandoned their traditional platform, based around fighting political correctness, fighting the man, the “machine”, being anti-corporation and corporatism and in compliment of that, supporting workers’ rights.
Now the Democrats and the other groups in their neoliberal coalition are the part of Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity while being wildly hypocritical about what they stand for whenever they need to own Trump or the Republicans or said far-right extremists. That’s the altar they knee and pray on, that’s the God they’ll die for, wage jihad for.
Now I must clarify this: within any system or paradigm, dominated ideologically by any doctrine, left, right, center, up, down, all the way around, there will be repression. There will be stigmatization, ostracization, and ultimately censorship of people, famous figures, actors, ideas, and doctrines that dissent against the zeitgeist. That’s inevitable. It’ll be culturally enforced and enforced by the powers of the state, the regime in charge as we see today.
And they’ll go after anyone, even people who appear to be independent of the system and have “Fuck You” money. Roughly, Joe Rogan falls into that camp.
There were critics of his that have been gunning for his reputation for years now, but the attacks and slander on his character have seemed to multiply ever since he cashed in big and signed a 100 million+ contract with music streaming giant Spotify back in 2020.
The deal is now for 3 years, and because of that, all-new episodes of the Joe Rogan Experience will be streamed exclusively on Spotify. More importantly, that gives Spotify close to exclusive control over Rogan’s brand and the content he produces. Don’t be mistaken: the “powers that be”, whoever that refers to, view Rogan as a threat to the system more than ever. Rogan isn’t fully aware of the power of his platform, but Spotify and his fans certainly do.
All of this has become very apparent as Joe Rogan has had more and more podcasts talking with guests and experts to address the most common claims and assertions about the COVID-19 virus and pandemic.
The most controversial podcast he’s had in this regard has been with Dr. Robert Malone, one of the original inventors and scientists who revolutionized the mRNA technology that’s a staple of the Moderna vaccine, one member of the trinity of vaccines being offered as the elixir to COVID-19. Malone has been adamant about standing firmly against the medical establishment and the narrative they’ve propagated about COVID-19. The medical community and mainstream media have thoroughly denounced him and painted him as an “anti-science” quack who’s promoting conspiracy theories about the true agenda behind the COVID-19 pandemic and a plot led by a global cabal whose ultimate aims are depopulation, an enhanced surveillance state, and a New World Order. Whether all of those things are just merely conspiracy theories, I think are still up for debate.
From Dave Smith to Malone to famous journalist Alex Berenson to Maajid Nawaz, Joe Rogan has torn apart every fabric of the mainstream narrative on COVID. In response, 270 “doctors, physicians, and science educators” signed an open letter, demanding that Spotify do more to silence Rogan and fight against “misinformation” on their platform. Employees that work for Spotify (members of the laptop liberal upper-middle class) have expressed their discomfort with the deal Spotify has made with Rogan, whining to the top of their lungs. Even Neil Young, a famous rockstar who hit the creative “wall” long ago, has made it clear he doesn’t stand for the “hate” Joe Rogan is supposedly enabling.
On January 24th of this year, he asked that his musical catalog be deleted from Spotify.
“I am doing this because Spotify is spreading fake information about vaccines — potentially causing death to those who believe the disinformation about them,” wrote Young. “They can have Rogan or Young. Not both.”
At first, it seemed that Spotify chose Rogan and subsequently decided to delete many songs out of Young’s catalog.
“We regret Neil’s decision to remove his music from Spotify,” they said in a statement, “but hope to welcome him back again soon.”
Other artists, most notably Joni Mitchell, have since followed Young’s lead, asking that their music be taken off of Spotify in protest as well. But, eventually, Spotify went rogue. In early February, overnight, more than 100 episodes, many featuring right-wing conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones and Milo Yiannopoulos, were quietly deleted by Spotify overnight. The removal is the latest development in an ongoing battle between Spotify, Joe Rogan, Neil Young, and Joni Mitchell over the role of corporations in stopping the spread of misinformation.
Entire days’ worth of Joe Rogan content had disappeared. The fascistic boot of the system must come down to lay the law of the land. Joe Rogan is pushing boundaries and he’s pressing the wrong buttons.
The dagger in the heart of this entire matter was launched with R&B singer India Arie. In an Instagram post she posted, Arie called out Rogan for the “problematic language” he used around “race”. This was in reference to a recent interview on Rogan’s podcast in which he made offensive comments about African nations and said it was “weird” to use the term “Black” as an identifier. Lots of celebrities, too many to list, hopped on this bandwagon of taking their material off of Spotify and disowning Rogan for his offensive comments.
Arie took things up a notch by posting various clips, most of them shown out of context, from various podcasts Rogan has recorded and released over the years where Rogan said the infamous n-word and made other inflammatory remarks about race, specifically talking about Black people.
This is where we get to my central commentary on cancel culture and free speech.
Should Joe Rogan have apologized in the 6-minute long Instagram video that he posted? No. Why not? Because 1.) as I believe generally when it comes to free speech, you can say WHATEVER you want to WHOMEVER you want, minus threats of violence or terrorism or unreasonable slander and defamation and 2.) these clips are from podcasts recorded at least 6–7 years ago.
When it comes to reason #1, what I wrote previously is my general outlook on free speech. The protections that a guarantee like ‘free speech’ is supposed to ensure are meant for dissidents and people whose ideas someone else might not like and might want to suppress. More importantly, the protections ‘free speech’ offers are meant to ensure uncomfortable truths can be heard and spoken.
But I will say this again. Free speech is not ‘free’ and there’s repression and canceling of peoples and ideas in EVERY system. What I mean by free speech is not free is that being an active citizen who participates in society, bound by the invisible social contract, is that you might come across someone that might want to punch you, kick you, bite you, spit on you, burn your house down, get you fired from your job or even murder you because of something you’ve said.
That’s a potential consequence you have to accept. Whether we’re talking about divine law or the law of man, the right to be a wisecrack or edgelord like people do on Reddit, Discord or 4Chan isn’t an inalienable one in regards to anyone and everyone you might come into contact with. Evildoers and malignant, malicious characters lie on every corner of this Earth, and unless you’re Thanos, you’re not going to be able to make all of them vanquish.
If you say something slick, you might get hit. Am I saying that’s just? No, not necessarily (really, it depends upon the incident). Do you deserve to die because you hurt someone’s feelings or say something mean or uttered a racial slur? No. That’s why I believe the Charlie Hebdo tragedy should’ve never happened. I have respect for Islam, its perennial nature, and its concise moral consensus that isn’t as flabby as its religious counterparts can be. But the righteous fury many of its followers act upon is quite destructive and oftentimes is incompatible with neighbors that don’t share the same beliefs.
Getting back to the original point, although I don’t encourage people to turn every point of conflict, every confrontation into a WorldStar moment (pure n*gga shit), I am of the opinion that a lot of the issues plaguing modern society and modern political discourse could be solved if structured, legalized violence UFC style was permitted in more spaces. Simply put, in our inverted, paradoxical world, the smallest acts of violence, which in developing countries, “third-world shitholes” and other societies don’t even get a blink of the eye, are overpoliced, over-punished, and highly scrutinized. A perfect example of this was the infamous slap at the woeful Oscars by Will Smith who attacked Chris Rock onstage while he was doing his job as a host by roasting members of the Academy in the crowd.
You can argue that the whole incident was staged or a part of an elaborate humiliation ritual that Will Smith was compelled into to be able to win his award. Who knows; I wouldn’t put it above Hollywood to do something like that, especially since their ratings have tanked over the last decade. But what pissed me off more beyond belief were the asinine takes I saw on social media of people condeming Will for slapping Chris and saying he should’ve been arrested and locked up for a millennia, as if he’s a mass shooter or was grooming children (the latter is still undetermined).
With all the turmoil and chaos that Will has been dragged through, having his reputation smeared in feces, and being embarassed by his trifling Jada, he damn sure should’ve slapped someone. I believe he slapped the wrong person. He should’ve had strength for August Alsina and demanded that he keeps his schlong out of Jada’s mouth.
See, violence DOES solve problems. Too many people, both left and right, have been psy-opped into believing in doesn’t due to either the recklessness and greedy, war-time profiteering of the military-industrial complex or indoctrination by the ephemeral feminine imperative.
Muslim countries are right to a degree in the idea that if you commit certain heinous crimes, you should have your hands chopped off or be stoned to death. Only an overly idealistic person with a bleeding heart believes restorative justice circles and mental health counselors can repair every criminal’s software and cleanse their minds of the demons that linger within those walls. For a lot of them, especially the worst, not even 20 years in jail gets them to see the light of day.
Now, should solving problems with violence be instinctual to you the way it is for someone in the ghetto or an indigenous tribesman? No, but when your flight-or-fight response kicks in, you need to recognize when it’s time to fight and take the attack to the enemy, literally.
This is how I conceptualize social protocol and in society’s current state, I believe social protocol should be rewritten to incorporate these ideas. Patriotic Americans (not saying it’s bad to be patriotic, far from it) and avowed Constitutionalists get their panties in a bunch when you suggest that words scribbled on a document don’t have this divine, eternal value that can never wither. Words are words, and they only have power if they convey intent that we take action upon, that we have the resources, the manpower, the brainpower, and the institutional support to preserve and enforce their legitimacy and influence.
Power, and not deontological ethics, defines law, and more importantly, the laws that govern society, the laws that hold weight in society, and the laws you can go to prison for violating. Any counter-response to try and refute this is just pure cope and a pitiful rationalization for being subordinate, being inferior, being weak, and not being able to exert will to power. Your commitment to rationalism will only get you as far as being rational and having the right ideas and a good heart is worth any type of tangible currency. The Founding Fathers certainly caught my drift.
So if you’re on the run, if you have to hide and dodge politically or ideologically motivated witchhunts, you need to shift your mindset. Your mindset needs to be one of an athlete, and not of an intellectual seeking truth like the hottest girl he’s ever seen, going wherever she goes. You need to be about winning, plain and simple. Historians who track and analyze and write about this present time centuries ago, trying to piece together the past might be kind to your cause and your reputation, but is seen on the right side of the history doesn’t make you any less pathetic if you didn’t win while you were alive. Greatness can be recognized after it’s long dead and gone (like Van Gogh), but people will still be of the opinion that they should’ve been known, had power, had influence over minds and hearts while they still had a pulse.
I’m against Cancel Culture, woke-ism, diversity for the sake of artificial and forced diversity. I’m against people losing their jobs, livelihoods, and reputations for the most part because they said a politically incorrect joke or criticized a protected class.
But conservatives who are the victims of this modern-day crusade nonetheless carry some really horrendous misconceptions on ‘freedom of speech and its importance.
A distinction needs to be drilled into people’s minds, properly framing the dichotomy between “what you should say” and “what you can say”. Freedom of speech comprises “what you can say” and is subjectively defined according to ideological slant, but objectively enforced. “What you should say” is situational awareness that we all learn and mold our behavior by as we grow, get older and participate in real-life situations.
Whether it’s about a girl you like, your ex, your boss, your goals and future plans, your friends or family’s opinions on any of those matters or something else, opinions on science, art, history, politics, medicine, food, etc. (it could literally be anything)., we all are going to have an opinion on these things.
Good parents who do right by their children drill this dichotomy into their kids’ brains. Just because you can say something doesn’t mean you should. Can I call a Chinese person a c*ink, a black person a n***er, a Jew a k**e, an Arab a sand n***er, a Latino a spic, or a wetback? Yes. Should I? No, unless I’m in a heated argument with them or I respond out of impulsive frustration to some wrong deed an individual member of that demographic committed against me. This is the nuance EVERYONE is overlooking because all that matters today is owning your ideological opposite and winning at all costs in the political Coliseum.
If you had that kind of parents, and you said something slick or disrespectful to them, trying to be a wisecrack, you got slapped or beaten by hand or with a belt. Why? Because we operate in two modes for dispensing punishment, words or violence. If one has exhausted its tank of fuel, then the other needs to be put into use. It’s not either/or and any decent justice system recognizes this bimodal distribution.
Joe Rogan said it in an interview when he was discussing the controversy over the N-word. He said that we have words to use to convey intent, 100% right. Why? Because words are intrinsically linked to action. You are what you do, and what you say should align with the former. That’s why old-school cats say if you can’t back up what you say if you’re trying to be a tough guy and punk people out when challenged, then don’t say it to begin with. And that’s a fine and dandy rule.
You utter a racial slur or epithet at any individual of any group, be willing and prepared to stand your ground and put up if somebody asks you to square up. Don’t be an edgelord whose entire sense of humor is perpetually drowned in sarcasm and humor. Too many fools today move like this because they spend too much time on the Internet (I do too LOL), so in their eyes, the entire world is the Wild Wild West and social protocol is also in a constant state of upheaval. Words are slingshots used to throw water balloons in these people’s eyes, and you can tell how anon figures online think, like 9-year olds, by their scrupulous and nebulous rhetoric.
I’m all for jokes and humor. I was racially made fun of just as much as any black person. But there’s humor and then there’s disrespect. There’s also disrespect that masquerades itself as humor. It’s important to distinguish the three and act and think accordingly. Disrespect should never be tolerated and always corrected quickly.
And I should bring this up as well. Sorry conservatives, but I have to say this. Kneeling for the national anthem is freedom of speech. Freedom of speech you may disapprove of or dislike, but still freedom of speech under your definition. Is it rude and disrespectful for the flag of the country you live in, are a citizen of and benefit immensely from? Yes, but it is your right as the Founder Fathers enshrined it to be able to constructively criticize said country.
Besides, if you think about it, kneeling for the flag is the least disrespectful thing players in the NFL, NBA or any other major sports league could do. They didn’t spit toward the flag or on it. They didn’t turn their back to it, leave the stadium, burn it, put their hand over their eyes, stick their middle finger at it or simply exit the stadium. In any other context, kneeling for something demonstrates deference and subservience to a higher power/authority. So that whole schtick that sports teams have been doing in support of the Black Lives Matter movement and other related left-leaning social causes is ill-conceived and quite literally reeks of ignorance.
But… it’s still free speech. If you disagree, you’re just a partisan ideologue and you’re not much better than your enemy in that aspect. At least be honest about that.
Everyone has a voice in today’s hyper-saturated attention economy. Everyone, including every fraud, charlatan, and scam artist who takes immense pride in their art and outrage grifter, similar to the likes of India Aries or an Ibram X. Kendi. What does that lead to? More delusion, more ideological pollution, more stupidity, more mundanity, more Idiocracy.
In the case of India Arie, she’s a black female musical artist who peaked a long time ago and isn’t as relevant in popular culture as she would like to be. She’s mad and in her feelings, so she sees an opportunity to attack another celebrity’s reputation and gain another cheap 15 minutes of fame. It just happens to be that Joe Rogan is a marshmallow-sized white guy.
People like her are bitter. They can’t accept their lot in life, so they lash out. What they really should be doing is staying humble, minding their own business, and saying less. We can all learn to internalize that lesson. Amen.
Additional link to an article that further exposes the fake virtual signaling of the liberal elite.
