Post: #1

Link to his article on Infowars

Infowars is sort of like drudge except with pictures in that most of the site is just links to articles on other sites that Alex or his staff happens to like enough to link to.

Anti-feminism, government corruption, and predictions since 2008 that the economy is going to implode in the next 6 months, are reoccurring themes.

There is definitely some hyperbole on the site, but they have a huge audience, so, this is only a good thing. Plus, I think taking the good with the bad, Infowars is on the side of good.

Roosh should try and get on the show to promote his book tour.

Post: #2

Infowars is a site with 80-90% truth, then some hyperbole and sprinkled with crazy stuff.

They moved into anti-feminism a while ago.

Roosh would certainly get fair treatment there, but I don't know whether he wants to be associated with them.
Personally I would recommend it and just stay on the topics that he covers anyway.

Infowars invited plenty of alternative MDs, conventional MDs who deviated from the mainstream, scientists, celebrities, ex-political advisers, politicians etc. They have probably millions of listeners worldwide - ROK and Roosh would likely profit from it. Infowars is completely in line with the Red Pill with regard to a more traditional family life and anti-feminism. I don't think that it would have negative repercussions on Roosh's perception in the mainstream.

Post: #3

well...now I have proof. Both info wars and the glen beck show this year seemed to be picking up anti feminism articles and issues a few days to a few weeks after they hit ROK, or ever RVF threads. I guess someone is reading.

Post: #4

(05-12-2015 04:23 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Infowars is a site with 80-90% truth, then some hyperbole and sprinkled with crazy stuff.

They moved into anti-feminism a while ago.

Roosh would certainly get fair treatment there, but I don't know whether he wants to be associated with them.
Personally I would recommend it and just stay on the topics that he covers anyway.

Infowars invited plenty of alternative MDs, conventional MDs who deviated from the mainstream, scientists, celebrities, ex-political advisers, politicians etc. They have probably millions of listeners worldwide - ROK and Roosh would likely profit from it. Infowars is completely in line with the Red Pill with regard to a more traditional family life and anti-feminism. I don't think that it would have negative repercussions on Roosh's perception in the mainstream.

I think a Roosh and Paul Joseph Watson interview would absolutely KILL!!

Post: #5

QC, I'd keep your distance from Alex Jones if I was you, he comes across as a bit unhinged:

Post: #6

Alex Jones would look like a raging monkey if he got flippant with QC. QC is a very high level thinker and a classy scholar. He does not have to sink down to anyone else's level. I don't think an Alex Jones interview would go poorly in the first place. If QC gets an offer, I say take it if he is willing. He could not only get more twitter followers but I think it could help us as a group within the Manosphere, command the stage on masculinity, traditional values, and political matters as well. It could also serve as a practice run for us to raise the level of discourse on these matters, and take the misogynist/caveman false view out of it.

Post: #7

(05-12-2015 04:23 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Infowars is a site with 80-90% truth, then some hyperbole and sprinkled with crazy stuff.

The 80-90% truth comment above seems like hyperbole to me to start out with.

There are a lot more credible sources to discuss the issues on Infowars, without engaging with Infowars.

Similar to the ROK style posts about the Elliot Rodgers shooting being a conspiracy, these types of approaches actually hurt the cause of RVF, red pill, neomasculinity, etc. since so little of it is grounded in reason and empirical evidence.

I hope that QC stays clear.

Post: #8

(05-12-2015 06:45 PM)LeBeau Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 04:23 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Infowars is a site with 80-90% truth, then some hyperbole and sprinkled with crazy stuff.

The 80-90% truth comment above seems like hyperbole to me to start out with.

There are a lot more credible sources to discuss the issues on Infowars, without engaging with Infowars.

Similar to the ROK style posts about the Elliot Rodgers shooting being a conspiracy, these types of approaches actually hurt the cause of RVF, red pill, neomasculinity, etc. since so little of it is grounded in reason and empirical evidence.

I hope that QC stays clear.

I'm with LeBeau on this one. Infowars has a bad rep with the mainstream community and if we want to break in with the average joe this isn't the way to do it. It might hurt to actually be associated with him. I'm of the opinion that by pushing the RoK brand in and of itself it might be a better way to propel the arguments.

By siding with Alex Jones and going on his show it does low key assume that RoK and/or QC is aligning themselves/himself with Alex. It's one thing if QC likes Alex himself, but if not I suggest staying clear regardless of how much Alex Jones is right or wrong on what he believes(I myself am unsure as whether he is right or wrong too.).

Post: #9

Going on someone's show is not agreeing with them.

Roosh does not agree with Dr. Oz.

Alex Jones has a large audience and lots of mainstream people have gone on his show including Tucker Carlson, (who I think is a douche) Rand Paul, (US Senator who is leading the Republican primary for President in New Hampshire), and boatloads of others.

Paul Joseph Watson is more intelligent than Jones, but it doesn't bother him to be associated with him, because people aren't perfect.

Alex has built a media empire with more listeners than all the shows on MSNBC and CNN combined, when the larger media is controlled by less than six corporations who routinely exclude certain topics for debate including the main tenets of feminism, modern monetary policy, among others.

People like Peter Schiff, Alex Jones, the Young Turks, basically the alternative media, should be embraced, rather than shunned, because these people, whether on the left or right, are the heirs to the media because the Mainstream Media hasn't been a free exchange of ideas and reflective of the culture of 90% of Americans for literally decades.

Post: #10

(05-12-2015 07:17 PM)KorbenDallas Wrote:  Going on someone's show is not agreeing with them.

Roosh does not agree with Dr. Oz.

Alex Jones has a large audience and lots of mainstream people have gone on his show including Tucker Carlson, (who I think is a douche) Rand Paul, (US Senator who is leading the Republican primary for President in New Hampshire), and boatloads of others.

Paul Joseph Watson is more intelligent than Jones, but it doesn't bother him to be associated with him, because people aren't perfect.

Alex has built a media empire with more listeners than all the shows on MSNBC and CNN combined, when the larger media is controlled by less than six corporations who routinely exclude certain topics for debate including the main tenets of feminism, modern monetary policy, among others.

People like Peter Schiff, Alex Jones, the Young Turks, basically the alternative media, should be embraced, rather than shunned, because these people, whether on the left or right, are the heirs to the media because the Mainstream Media hasn't been a free exchange of ideas and reflective of the culture of 90% of Americans for literally decades.

Thing is he would go up there it would be on friendly and good term basis. Not something as antagonistic as the Dr. Oz show, but I'll agree to disagree with you on that one.

Post: #11

The hilarious thing about Infowars is how often it is proven correct, just not in the way it intends.

Post: #12

(05-12-2015 07:22 PM)hwuzhere Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 07:17 PM)KorbenDallas Wrote:  Going on someone's show is not agreeing with them.

Roosh does not agree with Dr. Oz.

Alex Jones has a large audience and lots of mainstream people have gone on his show including Tucker Carlson, (who I think is a douche) Rand Paul, (US Senator who is leading the Republican primary for President in New Hampshire), and boatloads of others.

Paul Joseph Watson is more intelligent than Jones, but it doesn't bother him to be associated with him, because people aren't perfect.

Alex has built a media empire with more listeners than all the shows on MSNBC and CNN combined, when the larger media is controlled by less than six corporations who routinely exclude certain topics for debate including the main tenets of feminism, modern monetary policy, among others.

People like Peter Schiff, Alex Jones, the Young Turks, basically the alternative media, should be embraced, rather than shunned, because these people, whether on the left or right, are the heirs to the media because the Mainstream Media hasn't been a free exchange of ideas and reflective of the culture of 90% of Americans for literally decades.

Thing is he would go up there it would be on friendly and good term basis. Not something as antagonistic as the Dr. Oz show, but I'll agree to disagree with you on that one.

I hate to say it but I gotta agree with Korben 100% on this one. The Infowars people hold a large segment of similar thinking audience. (Libertarians mostly) Libertarians are the closest group, politically at least, to red pill as red pill gets. There is an opportunity to present our values and work to a group that is not a very hard sell in the first place. What is easier to do? Speak to Infowars subscribers about red pill values and masculinity? Or approach disaffected youth burned by mean bitches. I will take Infowars people every time, in terms of ease. Long term wise, the other youth has the best potential, but you have to do a metric fuckload worth of work to get them to even take a purple pill. Think of every black person 100% locked into Obama and the Democrat party I talk to, but they have the exact same fucking complaints every black dude on this forum has. It's maddening but I remember being just like them, even worse I once worked in the Dem party. High ceiling, but high effort.

Low hanging fruit like the Infowars crowd could be a layup so to speak. The only thing about them is that the more MGTOW/MRA sector of the Manosphere seem to like them the most. Maybe a handful are willing to make the switch over. MGTOW seems to be a holding pool for newly minted redpil/purple pill men that are not quite ready to embrace full on masculinity and traditional values. They are in the Linkin Park stage and want to be left alone, but they should eventually grow out of it.

Anyway, it cannot hurt to kick the tires on it at least.

Post: #13

There's a video somewhere of Jones at the Republican National Convention asking random senators/congressmen in his trademark confrontational style, "Are you part of the New World Order"? Great vaudeville.

Several theories point to Jones being a shill to get the tinfoil cap wearing crowd worked up.

He predicted millions in the US would be living in FEMA camps by now. Hasn't happened. Jones is a clown, yet entertaining in his own right.

Post: #14

(05-12-2015 08:10 PM)Eskhander Wrote:  The hilarious thing about Infowars is how often it is proven correct, just not in the way it intends.

What do you mean? (I don't watch his show so I have no idea what you're talking about)

Post: #15

I think infowars is the way it is because of Alex Jones being the personality he is. His personality is very joe plumber, which a broad spectrum of people can relate to. If it was a more "intellectual" show all of the time it wouldn't have as broad an audience...it would be like those specialty programs on NPR.

Think about WWE wresting...Alex Jones bridges the gap between conspiracy theory and the macho man. People love that for the same reason that southern preachers are more popular than lesbian methodist ministers. Entertainment plus a message.

Post: #16

(05-12-2015 05:19 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  Alex Jones would look like a raging monkey if he got flippant with QC. QC is a very high level thinker and a classy scholar.

Like this...




I respect Infowars as a news source and what AJ has built for himself. I used to listen to his show a lot at night on the graveyard shift. But I believe he likes to be a bloviating entertainer first and foremost. In this case perception is reality. Having them link to ROK articles is one thing, but to sit and align yourself with AJ on his show would be a bad idea even though he shares similar philosophies. Associating with a radio show host who frequently has on David Ike as a guest would do no good for our credibility and reputation. The mainstream Communists would have a field day with that.

Some of the people who call into his show you can just tell are not the sharpest tools in the shed. It would be good to have more RoK articles linked to infowars to drive more traffic and get the message out there. We're all on the same side a the end of the day. But Jones is hard to take seriously half the time even if he is preaching some truths.

Post: #17

(05-12-2015 08:31 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 07:22 PM)hwuzhere Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 07:17 PM)KorbenDallas Wrote:  Going on someone's show is not agreeing with them.

Roosh does not agree with Dr. Oz.

Alex Jones has a large audience and lots of mainstream people have gone on his show including Tucker Carlson, (who I think is a douche) Rand Paul, (US Senator who is leading the Republican primary for President in New Hampshire), and boatloads of others.

Paul Joseph Watson is more intelligent than Jones, but it doesn't bother him to be associated with him, because people aren't perfect.

Alex has built a media empire with more listeners than all the shows on MSNBC and CNN combined, when the larger media is controlled by less than six corporations who routinely exclude certain topics for debate including the main tenets of feminism, modern monetary policy, among others.

People like Peter Schiff, Alex Jones, the Young Turks, basically the alternative media, should be embraced, rather than shunned, because these people, whether on the left or right, are the heirs to the media because the Mainstream Media hasn't been a free exchange of ideas and reflective of the culture of 90% of Americans for literally decades.

Thing is he would go up there it would be on friendly and good term basis. Not something as antagonistic as the Dr. Oz show, but I'll agree to disagree with you on that one.

I hate to say it but I gotta agree with Korben 100% on this one. The Infowars people hold a large segment of similar thinking audience. (Libertarians mostly) Libertarians are the closest group, politically at least, to red pill as red pill gets. There is an opportunity to present our values and work to a group that is not a very hard sell in the first place. What is easier to do? Speak to Infowars subscribers about red pill values and masculinity? Or approach disaffected youth burned by mean bitches. I will take Infowars people every time, in terms of ease. Long term wise, the other youth has the best potential, but you have to do a metric fuckload worth of work to get them to even take a purple pill. Think of every black person 100% locked into Obama and the Democrat party I talk to, but they have the exact same fucking complaints every black dude on this forum has. It's maddening but I remember being just like them, even worse I once worked in the Dem party. High ceiling, but high effort.

Low hanging fruit like the Infowars crowd could be a layup so to speak. The only thing about them is that the more MGTOW/MRA sector of the Manosphere seem to like them the most. Maybe a handful are willing to make the switch over. MGTOW seems to be a holding pool for newly minted redpil/purple pill men that are not quite ready to embrace full on masculinity and traditional values. They are in the Linkin Park stage and want to be left alone, but they should eventually grow out of it.

Anyway, it cannot hurt to kick the tires on it at least.

True it can't hurt to get exposure all exposure is good exposure if people actually read the message out, but as much as I am a fan of Libertarian ideals I can't get behind a guy so lambasted by people as a means to get a message. Just consider it a personal bias of mine.

I'm of the opinion on working with the youth because a good chunk(say 50-60% of guys I end up speaking too even strangers in my age group as well as some older guys) tend to agree that there is a lot of fucked up things going, that things aren't necessarily fair for dudes, marriage isn't a good idea, fat acceptance is bullshit, social justice crap is bullshit, the need to start a successful business, as well as the shittiness of American women(but who cares they are sluts and they are hot and this is college/life). Getting these guys to embrace things whole sale is the ideal.

I'm of the opinion that the message gets out with guys like Tuth writing comedic clickbait articles, QC with his scholarly wisdom, Athlone/Excelsior with the cultural break down, et al that makes up the central RoK articles.

Post: #18

I will say that leadership is not based upon the men around you but for the presence you bring. Talking to Alex is not representing him. The pressure would be on QC to demonstrate effective leadership in the way he would present his points. Same goes for roosh or anyone else on an interview. Roosh got alot of praise for his calm demeanor in the OZ show for a good reason. That's part of leadership and frame control.

The content will need to match the presence for maximum effectiveness. So again this is an opportunity to lead. To lead even Alex himself.

Post: #19

(05-12-2015 09:14 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  I will say that leadership is not based upon the men around you but for the presence you bring. Talking to Alex is not representing him. The pressure would be on QC to demonstrate effective leadership in the way he would present his points. Same goes for roosh or anyone else on an interview. Roosh got alot of praise for his calm demeanor in the OZ show for a good reason. That's part of leadership and frame control.

The content will need to match the presence for maximum effectiveness. So again this is an opportunity to lead. To lead even Alex himself.

Fair enough and logically I see it. I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt, but again I'm a bit stubborn on this point it just really doesn't sit well with me. I'm just a young kid with a bad gut feeling. C'est la vie.

Post: #20

When I listened to his show religiously when I was a teen I didn't get laid, it gives young guys (especially white) a way to unplug and listen from someone not your annoying communist, feminist, English teacher.

He is funny too. The Piers Morgan interview was one of the most hilarious interviews I've ever watched.

I agree with Alex on most things, but listen to him most when I don't have a girlfriend or am unhappy. It's just not a show you want to bother with as much when you are happy.

So, even though liberals piss me off, I do agree with the moderates on here that it isn't a healthy sign if you're TOO into politics, especially politics that's true and unmasks the powerful day in and day out. It jades you.

Stare into the abyss and you may become the abyss or whatever that quote is.

Post: #21

(05-12-2015 08:44 PM)CJ_W Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 08:10 PM)Eskhander Wrote:  The hilarious thing about Infowars is how often it is proven correct, just not in the way it intends.

What do you mean? (I don't watch his show so I have no idea what you're talking about)

The first two minutes of this.

Post: #22

Alex Jones wrote the book on click bait. This will only lead to wider distribution of your content. Win win.

Post: #23

Guys - you are missing the point with Infowars:

1. Red Pill / Manosphere will never ever be allowed to become mainstream - forget about any negative mainstream associations - they are selling us as off-the-charts crazy as the most outrageous stuff Alex Jones ever said
2. Listeners of Infowars would profit from Red Pill and Game - we are in line with that

While I know that plenty of 'sphere guys are practically mainstream on everything except for feminism and gender-idiocy, there are many many credible sources which run completely counter to that. Norman Dodd (congressional Reece commission on foundations), Alan Watt (researcher), Carroll Quigley (historian CFR), Antony Sutton (Princeton historian), Anthony Migchels (money reformer), Ezra Pound (money reformer), Charlotte Iserbyt Thomson (Reagan administration - educational researcher and reformer) - those individuals are extremely far away from "crazy" and can back it up with facts all the way.

If you want to believe in CNN and our university lore, be my guest - see how that works out for you long-term.

As far as my personal opinion on Infowars - I think that it seems to be a good disinformation channel to lead the people into dead-end solutions. Ron Paul was such a disaster, libertarianism and Tea Party is another venue - maybe there will be other such things in the future. What you won't see at Infowars is real potential change that people could stand behind. And frankly if that was the case and a guy like Anthony Migchels had Alex Jones' popularity and tried to create a large interest free currency in the US, then he would likely be already dead.

Still - it would not hurt to talk about anti-feminism and Game with Paul Joseph Watson and reach more men to at least unplug with the Red Pill. All that fearmongering about becoming "discredited" with the CNN-monkeys is not necessary.

Post: #24

I think Alex Jones could very well be telling us a much closer version of the truth (albeit exaggerated) than the MSM does. Otoh, he needs to start lifting and lose some weight!

Post: #25

(05-13-2015 06:13 AM)Guitarman Wrote:  Otoh, he needs to start lifting and lose some weight!

No homo.