Majority Rights Radio

Posted by ES on January 16, 2007, 06:37 AM | #

I feel that the two interviews both suck for the reason that the host fixates on himself and almost completely neglects the subject. Soren has much to say, but that should come in his separate interview. In the meantime, the listener has learned almost nothing about or from GW and Nuenke (and certainly theres plenty to learn.)

Posted by Derek on January 16, 2007, 07:03 AM | #

Is there an RSS feed (with enclosures) just for the radio shows? I would like to subscribe using a podcast client, such as iTunes.

Posted by JB on January 16, 2007, 05:34 PM | #

They’re going to make a movie based on Atlas Shrugged with Angelina “let’s hug the UN and adopt africans” Jolie ?

Posted by JB on January 16, 2007, 05:45 PM | #

it’s a good introduction to Matt Nuenke but the sound should be better. I think a phone interview with both persons using Skype would have had a better sound.

Nuenke should be invited back to discuss specific issues or some of the books that he reads.

Posted by JB on January 16, 2007, 05:52 PM | #

Nuenke, you don’t have children ? Have you seen the first scene of the movie Idiocracy ?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=fAYnc_-ddlw

Posted by PF on January 16, 2007, 09:14 PM | #

My personal opinion is that the technique for the interviews has to be improved.

Alot of the questions were either in the form “[Statement X], don’t you agree with me?”, or Yes/No questions, or too vague like “Did anything interesting happen in the 80s?”
Such questions don’t allow the interviewee to expand and elaborate, which is essentially what we all want to hear.

The questions didnt build on each other, and Nuenke wasn’t allowed to control the ‘flow’ of the conversation, instead he was jerked around from topic to topic. For example, we learned that Nuenke was on usenet in the 90s, but we didnt get a feeling for what kind of conversations were going on then or what the climate was like. He wasnt asked to elaborate on anything. “Yeah, I was on Usenet in those days” and - next question.

I think the fact that Soren did 40% of the talking is already indicative of the problem. The interjections about Stalin’s sychofant, Ayn Rand’s Movie with Angolina Jolie, the incident with the Dog, the motor-bike and woman with headphones, the explanation of the BNPs popularity policy, and Oscar Wilde’s quote are all interesting things which have nothing to do with Matt Nuenke. All in all, I think Soren had more anecdotes and stories than Matt did.

Even thinking about naming O’Meara as a counterexample to the very valid point of American/Anglo Empiricism, is thinking in terms of an argument, rather than of an interview. What about asking instead something like “Which is more compelling for you- the Empiricism of the Anglo-American writers or the theory of the European right?” Guessing he would answer the former, one could then ask, “Why is that?” or “Are there any writers amongs the European new rightists that you find particularly interesting?” or “Which Empiricist author/scientist has been most important to you personally?”

I also think that the technique of asking a sarcastic/ironic rhetorical question like the ‘Wasnt all of human history repealed by 20th century social scientists?’ or the reference to Hitler’s quote, I feel such a tactic is disrespectful.

Its disrespectful because its ingenuine, and by being ingenuine, one changes the character of the interview to that of a theater for intellectual grandstanding. Even if Soren and Nuenke are best friends, pretending to ask for confirmation of a ironically-intended rhetorical question basically means we have stopped listening to Matt, who wasnt talking so much anyway, and its time for the interviewer to show off by making a joke.

Basically the question that an interviewer has to pose, each time with different wording, is “Could you please elaborate on that?”.

But regardless of whether everything is artfully done or not, interviews like this are still invaluable in my opinion, thanks to both Soren and Nuenke for putting this out there!

Posted by Matt Nuenke on January 16, 2007, 11:57 PM | #

IDIOCRACY!! Looks like an ad for a new eugenic movement. Very funny—and not very PC. As for breeding, she should have had her eggs frozen when she was young, along with her husband, and used a surrogate mother from that other bunch of losers.

Posted by Robert of the Rohirrim on January 18, 2007, 04:25 AM | #

Good job!  OK, I’m fired up, let’s get the next program out.  Back in the saddle, Giddyup!