|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgccg9xurE8 Sargon is a good laugh this week. At the start he says he is not Alt-Right, hes a liberal. Then goes full Alt Right blaming the city and politicans for everything that happened.
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 02:30 |
|
|
happyhippy posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgccg9xurE8 when did this shift from "we are proudly right-wing/alt-right" to "I am definitely a classical liberal always have been always will be" happen? Like, Friday?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Nah, Carlgon has always been a classical liberal but has just not read any of the classical liberals to find out what dumb poo poo they also believed but would probably support that too. His recent change of rhetorical focus has been an Ayn Rand "racists are bad, but only because they're collectivists, like communists" thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Nah, Carlgon has always been a classical liberal but has just not read any of the classical liberals to find out what dumb poo poo they also believed but would probably support that too. how the gently caress are racists collectivists?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:how the gently caress are racists collectivists? Because they think collectively, I assume. They reject the idea that everyone is an island of pure rationality, solely responsible for their own ideas, status, and actions in life and can by sheer force of will reshape the world according to their desire as long as they want it enough. Because that's incompatible with the idea that foreigners are inherently inferior. And y'know, the former is very much Rand's schtick. I mean racists are correct in their assessment that environments shape people they're just completely wrong about what environments shape what people in what ways and lack any self awareness about the effects of their environments on themselves. But they are, in theory, at least accepting of a fundamental basis of collectivist thinking, whereas Rand utterly rejects it. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Aug 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:how the gently caress are racists collectivists? OwlFancier posted:Because they think collectively Nah, it's because racists think in terms of things being a group. Black people are all the same, Jews are all the same, etc. Each group is collected!
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Because they think collectively, I assume. They reject the idea that everyone is an island of pure rationality, solely responsible for their own ideas, status, and actions in life and can by sheer force of will reshape the world according to their desire as long as they want it enough. yeah. idk i hate objectivism with a passion because i was dumb liberterian kid in 10th grade(grew out of it by 11th) so i am not surprised carlgon has just discovered it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:how the gently caress are racists collectivists? quote:Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man’s genetic lineage—the notion that a man’s intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry. Which means, in practice, that a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but by the characters and actions of a collective of ancestors. There are forms of racist collectivists, the guys forming white only towns, the people who support welfare but believe that racial heterogeneity undermines it, the entire body of National Socialism, but it's still a  analysis.I mean, at a base level I agree that racism is one of the lowest, most crudely primitive forms of collectivism. I just think that implies that there are much better forms, not that racism is bad because it is collectivist. e: vvv 
Guavanaut fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Aug 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
A true conundrum for the ages, The Man Who Cannot Read pitted against The Woman Who Is Unreadable. Perhaps that's how Rand works, she is the anti-literature, bearable only to those who cannot read any other book.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
^^^ 🤣
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
Wait, if racism is bad because it's collectivist, how does Sargon rationalize his own hatred for muslims?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
Muslims are also collectivist. Islamic State 
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 23:40
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:Wait, if racism is bad because it's collectivist, how does Sargon rationalize his own hatred for muslims? He isn't racist, obviously, he's a realist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
Uh... https://twitter.com/VicBergerIV/status/897093928150761472
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgccg9xurE8 His reason for blaming both sides is that violence is the wrong way to change ideas and just fuels the fire, but also he's in favor of police brutality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
At the very least he was probably hoping to get sprayed, even if he didn't actually do it himself. "Keep streaming" indeed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
the fact that nobody else in his bro posse got hit except for him is pretty much proof he's faking it for attention lmao
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
If this is true, then this means he really isn't going to go blind in one eye. 
Mr Interweb fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Aug 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:If this is true, then he means he really isn't going to go blind in one eye. unless he actually maced himself or one of his idiot friends did it for him. he might actually have put his own eye out
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:He isn't racist, obviously, he's a realist. This if my favorite 'checkmate', it's like they think the argument is a deflection but are in fact literally coming out as racist, eg they think a race being inferior is 'reality', the definition of racism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:how the gently caress are racists collectivists? Color of skin, not content of character, etc, etc. I.e. racists believe your worth is determined as a group instead of on individual merit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 06:01
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:Wait, if racism is bad because it's collectivist, how does Sargon rationalize his own hatred for muslims? According to Objectivists: Muslims all freely subscribe to a terrible religion/ideology. Ideology or philosophy is the only thing that determines your actions in a consistent way. So all muslims are terrorists and all muslims are innately responsible for being muslims and therefore it is fine to equate all muslim to being terrorists and also to place all moral responsibility on them for being muslims. Easiest group for objectivists to hate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 06:07
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:According to Objectivists: Muslims all freely subscribe to a terrible religion/ideology. Ideology or philosophy is the only thing that determines your actions in a consistent way. So all muslims are terrorists and all muslims are innately responsible for being muslims and therefore it is fine to equate all muslim to being terrorists and also to place all moral responsibility on them for being muslims. Easiest group for objectivists to hate. okay but what about his hatred for black people?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 07:13
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:okay but what about his hatred for black people? Oh, that's just racism. Carlgon of Swindon isn't really literate or consistent or really all there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 07:17
|
|
|
noether posted:unless he actually maced himself or one of his idiot friends did it for him. he might actually have put his own eye out i wonder if the eye damage is because he only maced himself from arm's length away so basically all of it got in to his eye instead of people whose eyesight doesn't get crippled cause they get sprayed from like 20 feet away
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 07:23
|
|
|
landgrabber posted:i wonder if the eye damage is because he only maced himself from arm's length away so basically all of it got in to his eye instead of people whose eyesight doesn't get crippled cause they get sprayed from like 20 feet away I really hope this is the case
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 07:29
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:If this is true, then this means he really isn't going to go blind in one eye. One can always hope he held the spray too close to his eye like an rear end in a top hat because that's how you get eye damage from sprays.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 08:11
|
|
|
Thanks trump https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fntc6ixzJw8 quote:The first facists were the... Marxists. The Marxists want collectivism! quote:Naziism... Why not give it its proper name.......... National. Socialism. quote:The choice is... Individual freedom, or Collectivist subjugation! Collectivists ---- THEY DON'T CARE!!! quote:Around the world, governments slaughtered a quarter of a billion people, their own citizens, in the 20th century alone -- we hear of genocide, even more dangerous is denocide crime weed fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Aug 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
So, conservatism is unpopular. He really has no explanation other than.... This is really good rebuttal to the moral majority. temple fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Aug 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfxqcmExjoE welp...
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
Rugoberta Munchu posted:welp... All right, I'll burn my youtube recommendations by watching this garbage. Quick take: Bad idea, usual bullshit about forms filled out in triplicate for position changes. I had a thing I was gonna write about how his metaphors suck, but then it became really clear that he has never actually had sex with a living person. Like, the poo poo that he's saying is impressively ignorant of the practical nature of how sex works. Moreso than your usual MRA consent critic. I'm guessing it's the lovely, whiny voice that's driving 'em away, dude. And then there's the words you're using that terrible voice to say. It's all just a bad combination.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 13:12
|
|
|
Rugoberta Munchu posted:welp... But what if my friend says he wants to play cricket and I accidentally injure him with the ball and then he lies and says I assaulted him and I go to prison for not getting cricket consent forms in triplicate? That's not a real thing that happens unless you're a total rear end in a top hat who goes out of his way to injure your friends, so yeah, consent during sex is a lot more like getting agreement from your friends to do any activity, and not a lot like getting agreement from your bank for an overdraft or whatever stupid poo poo he seems to imagine social interactions as. Somfin is right, he sounds like someone who has never actually had sex with another person. And probably has never socially interacted with other people in a fulfilling way either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
I mean given their weird obsession with treating sex like they're planning to blitzkrieg the Ardennes, one can believe that they might fail to understand the idea of being friends with someone you want to have sex with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
this man dont gently caress
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:lol what a loving idiot. You don't ask for consent in basketball, so it's okay to throw balls at random people on the street. No? Oh, it's okay to throw balls at people, but only after you've asked "hey, wanna play basketball?" Ok, so it's okay to throw cricket balls at people as long as you've asked "hey, wanna play basketball?" No? Okay, so there's a set of things that most people culturally expect basketball to involve, and if you want to go outside those you should clarify to make sure they're down with it too before proceeding? Like maybe there's shorthand for some of them, like "hey, wanna play cricket?" and maybe for other more unusual requests you might have to go into more detail? Yes! Well that just sounds a lot like you're describing consent. With that basketball thing, I think he's trying to make an argument like: "I don't have to ask permission to pass the ball to someone in basketball, so why do I have to ask permission to do <sex thing my partner might not expect or want>?" But he's forgetting something. Basketball is pretty standardized. Most of us agree already what is involved in a game of basketball, and what the basic rules are. If you ask someone to play basketball, and they say yes with no stated conditions, you can reasonably assume they've agreed to all of the understood rules of basketball. If you want to play by other rules, you have to talk about that ahead of time. If certain things aren't allowed, if certain things are worth more or fewer points, anything deviating from the most basically understood premise of "the rules of basketball" needs to be determined ahead of time, and you're probably not going to do that non-verbally. Let's say a player has to leave for some reason. If you force them to stay and finish the game against their protests, you're being pretty loving rude, right? If a player gets hurt and wants to stop playing because it, y'know, hurts to do so, and you force them to finish the game anyway, you're actively hurting someone, right? And sex is a whole lot more complicated than basketball. We don't have an agreed-upon set of rules that we categorize under "sex." If you ask another person if they want to have sex, even if they say yes, you might not know exactly what they expect, and they might not know exactly what you expect. It would be like if there were dozens of different versions of basketball that were all called "basketball," some played with a ball and two hoops, some with like four hoops and three balls, some with just four balls and there's a stick for some reason, some where dunking is the only way to score and others where it's not allowed at all, and you asked someone if they want to play "basketball"--you'd probably still have to do some communicating along the way to make sure everyone's playing the same game and everyone's on board with the game being played.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
this might be unintentionally funnier than any standup comedy special released in the last year. holy gently caress. typical nerd voice talking about how consent is crap and using horrible points - i couldn't write that poo poo as well as he performed it probably off the top of his head. holy gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Harrow posted:With that basketball thing, I think he's trying to make an argument like: "I don't have to ask permission to pass the ball to someone in basketball, so why do I have to ask permission to do <sex thing my partner might not expect or want>?" *slowly starts to move fingers towards partners butthole* *referee blows his whistle* "foul, out of bounds touching. three penalty shots"
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Harrow posted:And sex is a whole lot more complicated than basketball. We don't have an agreed-upon set of rules that we categorize under "sex." 1.- Only after marriage. 2.- Only missionary position. 3.- Only to have kids. Sadly, I'm only half joking. These are supposed to be the rules for a large group of people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
People like these have no grasp on actual social interaction, and it's kinda sad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 02:30 |
|
|
I go to "a woman isnt actually participating in sex" and a very loud slide whistle made me stop watching
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 20:41
|
|
