The Conducting of Proper Political Discourse

Or "A Meta-Political Discussion"

I have been fascinated by the discussions of  Eric Weinstein, Dave Rubin,  Jordan Peterson, and Ben Shapiro.

Here is a round table with three of them. https://youtu.be/Li2J4GxZ6iM?t=1h51m57s

I like the question at the end Dave asks: "Is this a political movement? Is this the beginnings of a political movement?" (1:53:05)

Jordan

No...it's the conducting of proper political discourse.  ... A political movement to foster the conducting of proper political discourse... I political movement that is focusing on process rather than content. ...
Our constitutional principles in the political domain, no...a meta-political discussion.
...
Turning Point USA..(Candice Own, Charlie Kirk) in Dallas. I recommended that instead of concentrating on the content of their ideology, (they are branding themselves as a conservative movement) that they devote themselves to educating themselves as much as they possibly can. They are going to produce a much bigger impact by becoming better individuals than by promoting conservative doctrine...
I don't think that the fundamental movement necessarily is political. Because the political is part of the problem.

Eric

I think we are the advance group sent to take a hill for the healthy political discourse that follows us.
...
Turning point USA. I was shocked to be invited by them. I said, "you do understand who I am?" I am very confused by it. I find that a lot of the rhetoric that comes out of that to be absolutely unpalatable. And the private discourse is much more sympathetic, much more understanding. 

Dave

I think we can move those guys. Just for the record, we they invite me to speaking gigs, Charlie said to me from day one, "I disagree with you on a ton of stuff, but I want to invite you here to speak." I go up there and I talk about being gay married and pro-choice and anti death penalty and all these things and they give me a standing ovation. 

Eric

Then the problem is that no one can figure out why I am talking to Candice Owens because she's going in read meat conservative mode [after the interview]

Jordan

I don't think it is the same person, exactly. There is a fractionation there. 

Eric

There is not yet a niche. This came up with Douglas Murray. It is a very important point. In general, people are in a restrictionist mood on immigration. They want more protection in respect to trade.
Why does no politician take up immigration without going real far right or completely open borders? Either it is ethno-nationalism or it's "all people are equal. why should we discriminate people from other countries?"
The sensible positions are uninhabitable. The question is why?
...
We have to take the ground for the middle. Get rid of the crazies at both ends. 

Jordan

At least stop the crazies from taking out the reasonable people. 

Eric

I have learned that I have more in common with what would now be called center-right than I do with radical left. Reach across the aisle and say, "you take out your trash, I'll take out mine."

What I love about this group (or movement) is that they are independent of any other group. They are funded by their followers. They are free to speak clearly. And they are not looking for ratings they want a society that works, even with all the infinite range of opinions.

The only place that they seem to all agree on is that they should approach each other based on the strongest form of the argument from the other side (steel-man) and that you give all opportunity to clarify a mis-interpretation of a position. (even if it take 3 hours or 9 three hour sessions to do it)

What excites me most is the medium of the long form (interview), the willingness to do it. The willingness to watch it and willingness to donate money to ensure it continues.