Ask Me Anything

with Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar (Premium)

Ask a question

Everyday Russian vloggers

21 Minutes Ago Everyday Russian vloggers Is it important that Americans know the opinions of everyday Russians? I'm including a link that I hope one of you will find intriguing. https://youtu.be/0dK6dvrJuOk

Everyday Russian vloggers

21 Minutes Ago Everyday Russian vloggers Is it important that Americans know the opinions of everyday Russians? I'm including a link that I hope one of you will find intriguing. https://youtu.be/0dK6dvrJuOk

China's Plans

I'd be interested in an explanation of the China hawk position and particularly the idea that Chinese leaders have a plan or ambition for world domination. There was an interesting discussion on Badfaith pod recently with Matt Stoller, and it highlighted a lack of clarity around what the actual evidence is for China being a "Nazi" level threat to the rest of the world. I want to remain open minded, but it often seems that China hawks are speaking in a kind of code that doesn't make a lot of sense to people who are not in Washington. For example, the idea that China is "undermining democracy" around the world just seems to be a technical Washington phrase meaning "challenging US hegemony". While someone like Stoller might readily accept that US influence and hegemony has not resulted in a flourishing of democracy around the globe (or at home), when it comes to China suddenly there is an argument that seems to imply that US hegemony and the safety of people everywhere are one and the same. I know Saagar tends to lean in this same direction a bit, so I would be really interested in an explanation of this view on China that reviews the evidence and steel-mans the case for aggressively confronting China as a modern "Nazi" party.

Third Party options

I'd be interested in hearing about third parties, what they're doing, is the labor movement going to go third party?

FCC fairness doctrine ressurection?

What are your thoughts about the FCC fairness doctrine that was rescinded back in 1985? I'm wondering if we should re-instate it or a similar doctrine to try to combat proven dis-information & rhetoric that has been proved to cause harm; based on research & real world consequences that have been recorded/documented. Thanks- love your show. Keep up the great work. -Jessica