CLUB RECAP: Dick jokes, AI, and antidepressants w/ Joe Rogan + Theo Von

Curiosity, unfiltered chaos, and Christopher Columbus: lessons from 3 hours spent with American's darlings

Welcome back to UNASB! This newsletter serves as a recap of our last meeting. As a reminder, here at UNASB, we listen to conservative-leaning podcasts, analyze their messaging and themes, and brainstorm actionable ideas for how the Democratic coalition can strengthen its own approach.

---

UNASB dove into the crossover event of the quarter: Joe Rogan’s latest interview with Theo Von (published April 2). In case you missed it, Rogan and Von both played a huge role in Trump’s 2024 victory. In the last year or so, they’ve occasionally expressed frustration with the administration but have been quick to move on to whatever topics keep them feeling content with their previous decisions. In this episode, you’ll hear the podcaster-comedians cover a wide range of issues: the war in Iran, Christopher Columbus, ICE, woke ideology in comedy, AI/Palantir, gun laws, fraud in California, Epstein files, Netanyahu, the rise in autism rates, and Von’s new movie. For anyone looking to dive into the manosphere, this is a “great” place to start – it exemplifies how so many Americans process information about politics, culture, society, and more.

This episode is messy. It’s nonlinear. It’s offensive. And it’s worth paying attention to.

Below are some messaging styles used throughout the episode, and why these styles might resonate with the listeners of the most popular podcast in the country and people looking for an ideological home.

Instead of a specific enemy, a constant, but undefined, “they”

Rogan and Von repeatedly gesture toward a vague but powerful force shaping events, not by specific names or political parties. In fact, Trump, MAGA, or the Democrats are rarely named directly, but alluded to as a big, unnameable “they”.

“They” might be:

• The government

• Elites, or “people with horns”

• COVID-era decision makers

• Corporations

• “The woke mob”

• Something harder to name

The lack of specificity is the point. It allows listeners to feel that the speakers are independent thinkers, and therefore, the listener is able to define their own “they.” This approach makes the narrative feel personal and widely applicable, and empowers the listener, rather than feeling like propaganda for one party.

“Facts” are now sponsored by AI

Rogan frequently turns to his brand sponsor, Perplexity (an AI search engine), to “fact check” during the conversation. From the history of Christopher Columbus to CIA secret projects to placate populations, Perplexity had all the answers (or most of them).

This approach of asking questions to an AI search engine gives the impression of journalistic credibility, allowing listeners to trust Rogan. However, often the answers reinforce what Rogan has already claimed, or the AI allows him to reword the questions until Perplexity delivers the answer that Rogan and Von want to hear.

The effect is less about accuracy and more about giving the audience the impression that this is credible information and that we are all learning and figuring things out together.

Humor as both a bridge and a shield

Given that both host and guest are comedians, this episode leans heavily on humor and prompted UNASB members to wonder what role comedy should play in the Left’s strategy moving forward. In this episode, we recognized that jokes made controversial ideas easier to introduce or discuss. They softened disagreement and allowed conversation to flow instead of becoming antagonistic, and they provided cover – “it’s just a joke, man” – when ideas were questioned or challenged.

A recurring undercurrent of fear and uncertainty

Despite the humor, both men do exhibit some vulnerability, which feels in contrast with the “strong man” image we often associate with right-leaning media. Both men share openly about their anxiety about the state of the world, distrust of institutions, and concerns about health, tech safety, and the future.

At one point, Von openly shares feeling overwhelmed and scared. It’s one of the more grounded moments in the episode, and one that resonated strongly with UNASB listeners and drives home a takeaway that’s come up a lot in the last few years. Emotion sticks more than facts, and Democrats need to bring fewer whitepapers and more emotion to the fight.

The uncertainty seems to have no possible resolution, as they’re unwilling to name who is currently in charge. With gas and grocery prices continuing to rise, unpopular wars in the Middle East nowhere close to ending, AI claiming jobs from hardworking Americans, and the unresolved Epstein files scandal — this uncertainty could represent the mindset of many Americans. We should think about the best way to connect with those not ready to name why they’re feeling insecure in their livelihoods and identities.

Key Takeaways

Manosphere podcasts present an entry point for those looking for a political home and are still drawing people to the right.

Compared to more structured, ideological voices we’ve listened to in UNASB like Matt Walsh or Michael Knowles, this conversation is less overtly political, less religious, less polished, more casual and conversational. It doesn’t present itself as authoritative. It presents itself as relatable, which keeps people listening, coming back, and feeling comfortable sharing. And, not coincidentally, if you have questions about the status quo, the “just asking questions” – and more importantly – “go ahead, say it, we’re not going to judge” vibe allows Americans, even those who may not naturally find themselves voting conservative, a surprising home on the right.

Throughout the episode, Von challenges the current power structures, but Rogan is quick to pivot the conversation back to wokeness, bureaucracy, and fraud — something he heavily associates with left-leaning leadership.

Whether you like it or not, Rogan’s format feels casual and inclusive

Rogan is so popular in part because he’s unscripted, non-judgmental, and, in many ways, inclusive of different ideas and perspectives. Even when he and Theo disagree, it never comes across as shaming or professorial. Rogan can simply offer another point of view, maybe a joke, and the conversation flows on.

Being curious as a host not only allows Rogan to avoid taking any accountability, but also allows ideas (regardless of accuracy) to enter the conversation with ease, and feels fresh and different from so much of the “us vs. them” we hear in other media.

The episodes bring listeners in instead of lecturing to them. It feels like we are part of the conversation instead of part of the audience.

Points of agreement?

UNASB members actually identified several overlapping topics discussed on the show that could act as a “bridge” to foster conversations with friends, neighbors, and family who might listen to Rogan or Von for the entertainment value and sense of belonging. Many UNASB members said they could imagine themselves saying, “I was listening to Joe Rogan the other day, and I really agreed with his take on…”

• The problematic concentration of wealth and power in this country

• Large institutions not acting with their customers’ best interests at heart

• Public health and food systems being controlled by insurance companies

• Not wanting to spend our money and send our – and more specifically other people’s less educated, connected, more blue collar – kids to war

• AI efforts being led by a small subgroup of people who are vocally antisocial

Even if they’re framed differently, these themes show up across political lines, and maybe by saying you heard it on Joe Rogan, you can have a conversation rooted in common values instead of politics.

A few practical approaches for left-leaning people…

Avoid over-intellectualization.
Conversations that feel natural and emotionally grounded landed more effectively than overly polished or academic language.

Feel human.
It’s ok not to be perfect and to express emotion. Say that you’re scared, tired, overwhelmed, angry, etc. Be vulnerable – feelings change people’s minds! In fact, people often remember (and repeat) how something felt, not just what was factually correct.

Use humor.
Making the joke lets everyone put their guard down. It can open conversations and also reduce friction when points of view differ.

Instead of pointing fingers, find shared ground.
When you take the “us vs. them” out of the conversation, you’ll uncover small points of agreement that can create space for deeper dialogue. It may be hard, but saying “I agreed with Joe Rogan when he said [insert shared belief]” may just get you somewhere. You may not only shock right-leaning people by admitting that you’ve listened to his podcast, but also build a bridge for deeper conversation.

Recognize how dynamic people (including YOU) are.
Some newer UNASB members pointed out several hypocrisies that came up throughout the episode. One example: Theo expressing an interest in healthy food, but then vaping all in the same breath. That’s because the overwhelming majority of people –one could argue everyone – do not exist in a monolith or in a perfect “red” or “blue” box. The point is this: Notice areas of agreement and disagreement between you and whoever you’re talking to. That’s your starting point to build conversation.

WHAT UNASB MEMBERS ARE READING

• Tradwives, sugar babies and OnlyFans: Euphoria’s misogyny feels like the manosphere’s wet dream

• Stop trying to ‘educate’ people into changing. Science proves it doesn’t work

• The ‘Make America Healthy Again’ Movement Is Cooling on Trump and Republicans

• What Democrats Keep Missing About the “Manosphere”

• The Right Successfully Coins a Lot of Insults. The Left Has ‘Chud.’

Thanks for reading! Want to get involved? Click here.