20 episodes

It's time to admit it: when we argue online, we’re not actually trying to persuade anyone. We’re not even trying to ‘win’ a debate. We’re trying to “dunk” on our rivals, “own” our political enemies. We’re just performing for our followers, who are usually people who share our politics, our attitudes, and our biases.That kind of discourse might be entertaining, but it doesn’t get us anywhere. We don’t learn from each other or about each other. We don’t sharpen the arguments we make for our favored policies. All we do is widen the divisions of our politics. We harden our alliances with people like ourselves, while increasing our contempt for people who think differently. We feel even more certain of our own opinions, while becoming even blinder to their shortcomings. It’s an unhealthy, dysfunctional way to approach our disagreements with others. It’s profoundly harmful to our democracy.On this podcast, we aspire to be the opposite of “extremely online.” What does that mean? It means we want to bring people from warring political tribes together to have substantive, respectful conversations about both their common ground and their differences — the opposite, in other words, of a Twitter flame war.Extremely Offline is our small contribution to combating political polarization in America. On this show, we’ll bring together people from the populist left and the identity-based left, the center left and the far right, paleoconservatives and socialists, and every other permutation we can think of. We’ll have far-ranging discussions that do not elide our political differences but that are rooted in mutual respect.

Extremely Offline Zaid Jilani and Leighton Woodhouse

    • Society & Culture

It's time to admit it: when we argue online, we’re not actually trying to persuade anyone. We’re not even trying to ‘win’ a debate. We’re trying to “dunk” on our rivals, “own” our political enemies. We’re just performing for our followers, who are usually people who share our politics, our attitudes, and our biases.That kind of discourse might be entertaining, but it doesn’t get us anywhere. We don’t learn from each other or about each other. We don’t sharpen the arguments we make for our favored policies. All we do is widen the divisions of our politics. We harden our alliances with people like ourselves, while increasing our contempt for people who think differently. We feel even more certain of our own opinions, while becoming even blinder to their shortcomings. It’s an unhealthy, dysfunctional way to approach our disagreements with others. It’s profoundly harmful to our democracy.On this podcast, we aspire to be the opposite of “extremely online.” What does that mean? It means we want to bring people from warring political tribes together to have substantive, respectful conversations about both their common ground and their differences — the opposite, in other words, of a Twitter flame war.Extremely Offline is our small contribution to combating political polarization in America. On this show, we’ll bring together people from the populist left and the identity-based left, the center left and the far right, paleoconservatives and socialists, and every other permutation we can think of. We’ll have far-ranging discussions that do not elide our political differences but that are rooted in mutual respect.

    Wesley Yang and Lee Fang on Being Asian-American in the Age of Identity

    Wesley Yang and Lee Fang on Being Asian-American in the Age of Identity

    Wesley Yang and Lee Fang discuss the identity politics of Asian-Americans.

    • 1 hr 13 min
    Osita Nwanevu and Jesse Singal on "Cancel Culture"

    Osita Nwanevu and Jesse Singal on "Cancel Culture"

    Osita Nwanevu and Jesse Singal discuss "cancel culture."

    • 59 min
    Neil Fligstein and Dylan Riley on Marx v. Weber in Explaining the Current Historical Moment

    Neil Fligstein and Dylan Riley on Marx v. Weber in Explaining the Current Historical Moment

    Sociologists Neil Fligstein and Dylan Riley discuss Marx, Weber, and the current historical moment.

    • 1 hr 9 min
    Adam Gaffney and Chris Pope on Health Care Reform

    Adam Gaffney and Chris Pope on Health Care Reform

    Adam Gaffney and Chris Pope debate health care reform.

    • 1 hr 33 min
    Bill Scher and Richard Eskow on Round 2 of the Democratic Debates

    Bill Scher and Richard Eskow on Round 2 of the Democratic Debates

    Bill Scher and Richard Eskow discuss the second round of the Democratic debates.

    • 16 min
    Daniel Marans and Joe Simonson on the 2020 Democratic Presidential Campaign Trail

    Daniel Marans and Joe Simonson on the 2020 Democratic Presidential Campaign Trail

    Daniel Marans and Joe Simonson discuss the 2020 Democratic presidential contest.

    • 1 hr 18 min

Customer Reviews

apk420 ,

Excited to see where this goes BUT...

Holy cow this needs to be louder. I have it at top volume and can still barely hear what the people are saying (especially Jon Chait although maybe I’m lucky in that regard). I checked against other podcasts and all the others sound fine at this volume so I think it’s the podcast that needs to be louder. I’m enjoying what I’m hearing, I just want to hear it better!

Silas Kulkarni ,

Remarkably thoughtful

Really enjoyed the discussion as it went deep and surfaced ideas and perspectives that just don’t come up in traditional left vs right talking points “debates.” This is something different and better.

RReilly7897 ,

Watered down IDW style podcast

Unfortunately this is just another IDW inspired “all viewpoints are welcome” podcast attempting to capitalize on the manufactured free speech/viewpoint diversity “crisis.” This is best illustrated in the episode on so called cancel culture. One guest presented evidence of the political right engaging in cancel culture activities in the 1950’s. The host responded by saying that he will continue to make the claim that cancel culture was invented by the political left and that the right is simply following suit!

Ultimately we have to ask if another Dave Rubin type of podcast is necessary or even wanted? How much more of an audience is out there for a podcast that ultimately lays the blame for all of society’s problems on the left? If that market audience hasn’t been tapped out this podcast should be relatively successful

Top Podcasts In Society & Culture

Listeners Also Subscribed To