TRIGGERnometry — “He Called Me A Grifter... It Didn't Go Well”

Date: July 25, 2025
Host: Konstantin Kisin (TRIGGERnometry)
Guest: Jimmy the Giant

Episode Overview

In this episode, TRIGGERnometry host Konstantin Kisin sits down with YouTuber Jimmy the Giant following Jimmy’s viral video “Rise of the Middle Class Grifter,” in which Konstantin is prominently featured as an example of so-called “grifting.” The conversation explores the definitions of “grifting” in online discourse, YouTube incentives, media accountability, the left/right political divide, and Jimmy’s personal political evolution from “alt-right pipeline” libertarianism to a more left-leaning, materialist focus. The tone shifts from combative to occasionally self-reflective, as both wrestle with the ethics of public critique and the responsibilities of content creators.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Jimmy’s Background and Political Evolution

• Jimmy started as a Parkour YouTuber and micro-entrepreneur.
• His later popular content examined UK subcultures (e.g., “chavs”) and the material conditions behind their rise.
  • “I started to learn about the material factors that led to the creation of the ‘chav’ underclass.” (05:30)
• Initially self-described as “right wing, hustle-bro, libertarian, meritocracy-believer,” he shifted leftward after researching social issues and becoming aware of his own advantages.
  • “I realized I had a lot of advantages that I didn’t even consider advantages – like two parents in a stable, if small, house, decent school, etc.” (10:12-11:21)
• Claims his journey out of “the alt right pipeline” ran through exposure to left-wing writers (particularly Owen Jones), and exploration of historical subcultures, eventually focusing on “material” (class/economic) rather than “cultural” issues.

2. Defining ‘Grifter’ on YouTube

• Jimmy’s viral video accused many right-leaning commentators (including Konstantin) of being “grifters.”
• What is a “grifter”?
  • Jimmy: “Someone who effectively sells bullshit…they see that outrage and reactionary content sells, and if I follow that, I’ll make lots of money.” (28:57)
  • However, he concedes: “Doesn’t mean that they don’t believe in these ideas. Really, some grifters are true believers…” (29:13)
• He admits the “grifter” accusation is often deployed too broadly, including by himself.
  • “What I was doing was calling people grifters if I disagree with them — and you guys do the same, where you call us woke libs…” (28:37)
• Repeatedly, he and Konstantin challenge one another’s use of clickbait, evidence, and intent-to-outrage as criteria.

3. Content Criticism and Evidence

• Jimmy’s Analysis: He claims TRIGGERnometry overwhelmingly focuses on “culture war” topics (trans, woke, migrants, etc.) and rarely addresses material issues (housing, NHS, cost of living).
  • “I looked through about 222 videos…93% are reactionary, only 15 about things that affect your audience, like housing, NHS, climate…” (33:03-34:10)
• Konstantin’s Defense: He challenges the methodology (“Have you watched the videos or just scanned titles?”). Jimmy admits he did not watch the vast majority, mostly analyzed titles for buzzwords.
• They argue repeatedly about the relative importance of “culture war” topics, with Jimmy insisting material concerns matter more to the public, and Konstantin rebutting with examples of prior coverage and book chapters on those issues.
  • “When was the last time we did an interview about trans? A very long time ago. Would you like to know why?” (38:53-39:01)

4. Net Zero and Economic Debates

• The interview touches on UK energy prices, privatization, the cost of net zero, and neoliberalism.
• Jimmy argues that Britain’s high costs are chiefly due to failed privatization rather than green policy, and criticizes Konstantin for not engaging with the “material” explanations in depth.
  • “The reason everything is screwed up is neoliberal economics…started in ‘79, Thatcher gets elected…continued under Blair.” (22:06-23:02)
• Repeated, heated exchange on the costs vs. savings of net zero:
  • Konstantin: “Net zero is estimated in Britain at 1.5 trillion…that’s quite a lot of money.”
  • Jimmy: “But it’ll save people money in the long run.” When asked “how much?” — “Probably, you could find the answer to that.” (51:16-54:15)
  • Konstantin criticizes Jimmy's lack of specifics and charges him with “grifting” by making unfounded economic claims.

5. ‘Grifter’ Accusations and Fact-Checking

• Konstantin presses Jimmy on jokes/claims made about him in “Rise of the Middle Class Grifter.”
  • “You show a picture of me and say people like me end up defending Enoch Powell. When have I done that?” (55:18-56:03)
    • Jimmy: “It’s a joke, isn’t it?”
  • “You said people like me remain strangely silent when Trump tried his coup — is that serious?” (56:45-58:23)
    • Jimmy initially maintains seriousness, then admits he never heard Konstantin discuss January 6th; Konstantin points out he did — the very next day, on record.
  • After being pressed, Jimmy concedes: “Yeah, I should probably have looked more at the things you said…probably didn’t understand your channel very well.” (61:47)

6. Self-Reflective and Meta Moments

• Mutual Acknowledgements of Grifting:

  • Konstantin repeatedly suggests that by Jimmy’s own definition, Jimmy is also a grifter: “You’re giving me a good example of what a grifter does — throw out claims, can’t back them up…” (54:26)
  • In the end:
    • Konstantin: “By your definition, are you a grifter?”
    • Jimmy: “Massively.” (74:55-75:01)
    • Konstantin (deadpan): “I think we can leave it there.” (75:01)

• Memorable admission:

  • “Jimmy, do you think this is going well for you?”
    Jimmy: “Terribly.” (69:24-69:26)

7. The Limits of Online Discourse

• The episode becomes a case study in the circular, defensive, and at times bad-faith nature of online culture war conversations.
  • Each party accuses the other of focusing on “the wrong issues” and engaging in shallow “outrage” content for clicks and status.
  • Multiple moments of both mutual and self-directed irony:
    • Jimmy: “I think we’re all playing into a dumb thing here…” (28:09)

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• Jimmy the Giant:

  • “I realized I had a lot of advantages that I didn’t even consider advantages…” (11:21)
  • “A grifter — someone who effectively sells bullshit… outrage and reactionary content.” (28:57)
  • “I looked through about 222 videos and I put them in two categories: cultural topics and material topics…” (33:03)
  • “You’re good at this.”
    Konstantin: “I know I am.”
    Jimmy: “You’re very good at this.” (31:51-31:54)
  • “You know what you’re doing and it’s deeper, bro.” (33:40)
  • Jimmy asks himself: “Am I a grifter? Massively.” (74:55)

• Konstantin Kisin:

  • “Have you watched any of the videos you’re critiquing? No? You’re commenting on something you haven’t watched.” (32:38)
  • “You made a video in which you made a bunch of false claims – your defense is what?” (62:58)
  • “Are you going to withdraw that video? Take it down?”
    Jimmy: “No, no, no.”
    Konstantin: “So you’re going to keep lies up there on the internet about other people?” (72:52-73:06)
  • “You really have come here with talking points. You’re not able to go beyond them, are you?”
    Jimmy: “No, no, definitely not.” (72:41)

Key Timestamps for Important Segments

• Jimmy’s Background & Political Journey: 02:54 – 11:21
• Grifter Definition & Content Focus Debate: 27:37 – 35:04
• Trans Topics, Culture War, and Titles Analysis: 33:03 – 41:54
• Privatization, Neoliberalism, and Net Zero Debate: 22:06 – 26:25, 50:07 – 54:15
• Fact-Checking The Grifter Video & Accusations: 54:50 – 62:28
• Final Admission and Meta-Reflection: 74:49 – 75:01

Tone & Dynamics

• The conversation is confrontational and occasionally testy, especially as Konstantin systematically dismantles unsupported claims Jimmy makes about TRIGGERnometry.
• There are flashes of humor and self-deprecation punctuating the debate:
  • Jimmy: “You’re good at this.”
  • Konstantin: “Do you think this is going well for you?”
    Jimmy: “Terribly.”
• Both are self-aware about the farcical quality of the “grifter wars,” but neither is willing to back off their foundational criticisms entirely.

Conclusion

This episode is a deep dive into the mechanics of online critique, YouTube “grifting,” and the distinctions (and confusions) between cultural and material politics. It vividly illustrates the hazards of issuing public claims without firsthand knowledge, and is self-referential about the circularity of such debates. The conversation ends with both host and guest recognizing the performativity—and the irony—in their mutual, if reluctant, admissions of “grifting” behaviors within the modern internet landscape.