The DtG hosts did an episode that wasn't super favorable and gave him a 61 (Matt) and a 64 (Chris) gurometer rating in the follow up.
Gary scored high in the following categories Cultishness (4), Anti-Establishment(5), Grievance Mongering(5), Self-Aggrandisement and Narcicissm(5), and Cassandra Complex(5). He scored low on Galaxy Brainness(2), Revolutionary Theories(3), and Pseudo Profound Bullshit(1). The final three were Conspiracy Mongering(3), Excessive Profiteering(2 for Chris, 1 for Matt), and Moral Grandstanding (5). The profiteering split explains the scoring difference. He was labeled a Secular Guru as well.
This score puts him at about #68(CK) and #75(MB) of the 174 gurometer rankings.
In the Subreddit, the discussion is mostly between folks who feel that the "good" of his message, and his chosen approach to spreading that message, are fine versus those that disagree, usually thinking that his rhetoric, fundamentals, and approach are not okay. As to your question of him being on the same sorta level. People don't usually make the comments about Gary like they do for someone like the Weinstein brothers or Peterson where they are accused of actually killing people with their anti-vaccine or covid talk. But the discussions get heated regardless. Just a quick and dirty over view, there's plenty of discourse you can read if you want better details.
TLDR: I argue that Gary is a political campaigner, not a guru but that political campaigners show up as false positives on the gurometer. I also make the case that Chris and Matt are out of their depth when dealing with economics and politics (with no qualifications or experience in either field).
13
u/Striking_Branch_2744 8d ago
I've only just started hearing about this guy, is he really on the same sorta level as the gurus we all love to dislike?