There is overlap among many different YouTube channels if one considers that they all cover politics and culture (broadly speaking). Additionally, these channels are not traditional media sources. I would dispute the idea that a person’s fans necessarily reflect the ideas that a particular person promotes. Yes, there is a good chance that an audience shares many of the core values that a particular influencer holds but this does not mean the influencer should be linked to other, radical influencers, on the basis that there is possible overlap between audiences.

Styxhexenhammer666 and Sargon of Akkad are both classical liberals (as is Paul Joseph Watson, though he tends to be more right-leaning). Sargon of Akkad and Roaming Millennial (among others) interviewed or debated Richard Spencer and opposed most of Spencer’s core views. I would not simply dismiss them as alt-light or merely repeating ‘watered down version of many of the same alt-right talking points.’ On this last point, I would argue that the reason the NPC meme has exploded in popularity is because the mere repetition of talking points and signaling are problems on the left far more than the right. Lewis’s web of people represents a far greater degree of intellectual diversity than is present on many university campuses or major media outlets.

I watched the short video you linked with Styx talking about the Holocaust. While I think it is quite extreme to suggest that as ‘Holocaust denial,’ I do take issue with some of the points he makes. I must also admit that I have no idea who Peter Norway is.

With regard to Islam and immigration — we need to have an honest conversation about these topics in our respective societies (Europe and the United States). First of all, the views of classical liberal and conservative influencers on these topics are not all the same. Sargon of Akkad’s views are not indistinguishable from those right of him. His views on the topics are not based in racial or ethnic claims. they are based in Enlightenment principles and political realism. Opposition to open borders or even relatively open borders for the sake of maintaining the stability of the nation-state is not a far-right position. Moreover, he does not oppose immigration or argue that ethnicity or religion should be deciding factors as to whether immigrants should be allowed.

Eric Weinstein coined the term ‘xenophile-restrictionist’ to refer to someone who appreciates, even loves, other cultures but does not support radical open-borders policies. This seems to me to be the rational middle way between the extremes of xenophobia and radical leftist open-border arguments.

Tim Pool is a left-libertarian who often voices opposition to authoritarian movements on the left and right (antifa and the alt-right). Just because you found a photo of Tim Pool with a group of people does not mean he accepts and promotes the views of everyone in the photo. (BTW, the okay hand symbol is not a hate symbol. The ADL notes that it is commonly used nowadays as a trolling gesture: I share your dislike of the Alt-Right (the actual Alt-Right, which is much smaller than leftists seem to think). I would also argue that Tim Pool is a positive force for the left because he is calling out extremists on the left who are hurting the Democrats.

I would strongly dispute the notion that Joe Rogan is a gateway to the far-right. The idea that people should not be platformed is a controversial one. Interviewing the likes of Richard Spencer does not mean agreeing with his views or even supporting them. Sargon of Akkad opposes Richard Spencer’s views. His debate with Spencer was not ‘giving him a platform’ but engaging in a debate/discussion.

Alex Jones is a professional conspiracy theorist. One should not take issue with people willing to talk to him on the basis that they are willing to talk to him. Jones is a nut but I did not need some third party to come in and ‘protect’ me from his batshit ideas. The public does not need to be ‘protected’ from conspiracy theorists. Le them talk and reveal their own ignorance. Joe Rogan talks to people from a variety of different backgrounds with different political views.

The imagined part is not the fact that certain people talked to certain other people, it is that there is some far-right conspiracy among the Alt-Right, conservatives, libertarians, classical liberals, and anyone else Lewis doesn’t like. The data in the report is only consistent with what Lewis seems to believe. There are no anomalies as one might expect in authentic research.

The bigger picture seems to reveal a conflict between old and new media, coupled with a disdain on the part of the author (Lewis) for many classical liberal and conservative voices. Lewis’s methodology is deeply flawed, some of the connections in her graph are questionable at best, and many in the traditional media (like Ezra Klein who did interact with Sam Harris) are not included in this web. I know that Lewis is not simply calling a bunch of people ‘Nazis.’ She seems, however, to be in favor of censoring ideas she does not like.

Written by

Artist | Content Creator | Pantheist | Bohemian | Philosopher | Juggler | Anti-Authoritarian, Pro-Decentralization/Localism|

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store