Sargon of Akkad's "Takedown" of David is Absurd
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 10. 2017
- --I respond to Sargon of Akkad's critique of my views on socialism.
--Become a Supporter: davidpakman.com/membership
Become a Member: www.davidpakman.com/membership
Support us on Patreon: / davidpakmanshow
Support TDPS by clicking (bookmark it too!) this link before shopping on Amazon: www.amazon.com/?tag=thedavpaks...
David's Instagram: / david.pakman
Website: www.davidpakman.com
Discuss This on Reddit: / thedavidpakmanshow
Support Our Sponsors: www.influencerbridge.com/david...
Facebook: / davidpakmanshow
TDPS Twitter: / davidpakmanshow
David's Twitter: / dpakman
TDPS Gear: www.davidpakman.com/gear
24/7 Voicemail Line: (219)-2DAVIDP
Subscribe to The David Pakman Show for more: czcams.com/users/subscription_c...
Timely news is important! We upload new clips every day, 6-8 stories! Make sure to subscribe! --Donate via Bitcoin: 15evMNUN1g4qdRxywbHFCKNfdCTjxtztfj
--Donate via Ethereum: 0xe3E6b538E1CD21D48Ff1Ddf2D744ea8B95Ba1930
--Donate via Litecoin: LhNVT9j5gQj8U1AbwLzwfoc5okDoiFn4Mt
--Donate via Bitcoin: 15evMNUN1g4qdRxywbHFCKNfdCTjxtztfj
--Donate via Ethereum: 0xe3E6b538E1CD21D48Ff1Ddf2D744ea8B95Ba1930
--Donate via Litecoin: LhNVT9j5gQj8U1AbwLzwfoc5okDoiFn4Mt
The fact that there's thousands of people who think Sargon is some kind of intellectual terrifies me.
It's the British radio voice. Sargon is a dumb person's idea of what a smart person sounds like just as Trump is a poor person's idea of what a rich person is like.
Jack Akimbo Always thought he lacked nuances and loved generalization, besides having vids that lacked on the substance side.
j CZcams audiences aren't that smart. They believe in crackpots like Mark dice who believes in the lizard people, and Alex Jones who thinks everything is false flag. Yeah I am not holding my breath on idiots who consider Pauly Watson smart.
Iridescence93 and that's why my rough Scottish brogue will never be heard on the radio haha but yeah on a more serious note I think your right about the accent-it's pretty saddening that simple things like an accent holds more currency for some people than the substance of the speakers ideas
You could debate his ideas if your some kind of intellectual, show him who the higher intellect is, but who am I kidding? We knew that's not going to happen.
The problem with Sargon is he is a one issue guy. He only cares about taking down SJWs.
Taking down SJW's is easy. The smallest insult will send them scrambling for their safe spaces. LMAO!!! Why waste time on such triggered snowflakes?
bongo155 you mad bro?
In his defense he went from a game nerd with a neckbeard to making pretty damn good money for what is essentially low hanging fruit.
The nature of social media is to create echo chambers and he's become fully engulfed by his anti-sjw echo chamber. I've been in that echo chamber for a while, i'm trying to get out of it because it's tiresome and wholly unproductive but with youtubes algorithm for video suggestions it's hard to get away from and i'm not even making money from this just killing time watching the same themed video over and over again.
try deleting your history?
*The problem with Sargon is he is a one issue guy. He only cares about taking down SJWs.*
The problem with his fans is that they're morons
Sargon must have misunderstood you because you didn't communicate it in memes.
Sargon is a goof. He is completely riding a wave of pseudo-intellectualism to some kind of career. Amazing how far an accent can take a person.
WTF? The accent? look how he dresses! you can not be smart with that kind of T-shirts etc. I bet he has an Ikea bed at home too.
He have the accent of an up jumped chimney sweeper..
@Edward Turner They don't know, they just think if they can point out he has an English accent, that means they can expose him or something. It really just shows that they expect everyone is as shallow as they are, and only think Carl is smart because he has an English accent.
I bet the accents fake.
Him and shapiro are both full of shit
Dave has a degree in journalism and political science, Carl has a degree in gaming, Doritos and mustache riding
Alexis Belton wtf fuckery is moustache riding?
many "experts", like cortez, have degrees, yet are still dumb...
Lol, okay Reza Aslan, no need to trot out credentials for no reason.
Appeal to authority much?
@Siedler Joe He said that Dave has a degree while Carl doesn't. Yes it was a joke, but it was pretty clear he was trying to legitimise Dave over Carl by education qualification rather than their argument
Always amusing to see Carls army of "free speech" warriors descend to downvote anything that hurts the tender feelings of their dear leader.
It's like they don't realize the rest of the world can tell when a troll army does a mass downvote. It just makes them look childish and shows they care more about the appearance of winning an argument than actually winning an argument. Like we're so stupid that we're going to think those 4,000 downvotes mean anything other than a bunch of mindless fanboys upset because someone disagreed with their idol.
Couldn't agree more. It always amazes me that Sargon and Co. can claim that there are a large number of "SJWs" that swarm the internet the moment you say anything offensive....as their own videos enjoy massive positive likes/dislikes ratios. Where are they? Whereas anyone who speak out against them are instantly set upon by their fans and begin mass downvoting. So much for a free exchange of ideas....
How are dislikes against the free exchange of ideas again?
@Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy, to analogize, can throngs of people commenting the word “no” actually be said to be part of any constructive discourse? Because normally that comes with a few other mechanisms that make it possible to move participants or third parties introspecting on that discourse by grounding debates in propositional logic. From browsing the comments I’m finding that the ratio is basically just Sargon’s contingent saying they’re asshurt about Pakman without so much as a by your leave as to their justification other than that he disagrees with their political alignment, which is their most prominent critique of SJWs. It doesn’t necessarily degrade the conversation, but it also doesn’t add anything. Attempts to detract from someone’s credibility should always be associated with some reasoning to explain the proposition that what they are saying is incredible, and if the stand-in for that is just denial, are you even saying anything? I can’t say whether Pakman’s revenues suffered as a result of the ratio or there were other structural consequences, but it’s my position that if there were going to be, the people who brought it about should also have marshaled their intellect to try to say why, and I’m not seeing that.
downvoting a video is not really any attack on free speech..
in this case it would just suggest to me that the viewer is too lazy or stupid to understand the well made points..
So. Sargon of Akkad doesn't know what "ostensibly" means. I am not shocked.
The word wasn’t used in the video Carl of Swindon watched. It’s used only in this one.
If you say so.
iMagGiNe My ShOcK
No wait, wrong idiot.
Sargon 'That might be what I said, but that's not what I meant' of Akkad.
Lots of pissed off Sargon fans I see...
Sargon's fans are always pissed off, lol.
@@KayleeCee are we? Dude all i would be pissed about would be my personal issues, but i don't take criticizing carl personally.
Sargons fans are right wing SJWs. They’re just too stupid to look in the mirror and acknowledge their own faults.
@@unslaadkrosis3489 what would these faults be? Sargons fans aren't wearing masks and attacking people in the name of diversity. Im a minority aswell but i won't use it as an excuse for my failures in life :D
Sniffle, you're all b b b b being mean to my c c c c carl sniffle. I am not right-wing. I am not a f*cking SJW, either. Sargon gives me a totally non-gay boner. No homo.
You butchered Sargon with logic and reason.
he butchered logic and reason.
David Pakman BUTCHERS Sargon with LOGIC and REASON
The capitalization is essential
Of course he did. David doesn't speak if he doesn't know what he's talking about in depth. Check out the videos where he goes on conservative talk or fox news. He kills them softly by taking the right stance on as issue (which is a pretty good start lol) and calmly dismantled their claims with logic, facts and figures. All they can do is A. Interrupt him B. Outnumber and team up on him or C. Try to personally attack him or call names. One host is a self hating conservative black man named Jesse i can't remember his last name but it's just pathetic. He calls Trump "the great white hope". Just be ready to cringe. Lol.
Or so you'd like to think. By logic and reason you mean ad-hominem non-arguments.
KlumsyK Can you point to a single ad hominem in the entire video please? He literally just defended himself against ridiculous false claims made by sargon, and there never was a "non-argument"
Sargon is a right wing SJW lol
for reeeeeal
JJ McCollough has a video explaining former "leftist" who have since 'converted' into conservatives. Lmao. I think these people are just grifters but eh idk. Look up "pro and con of conservatism by jj"
CM, Sargon is a liberal, he has told people to check David Pak Man out multiple times, even though they disagree, he respects him. Well, till his video of Andy Ngo.
Sorry dumbass, but since Carl isn't trying to get Pakman banned, your "you're one, not I" comment is so childish
I watched Sargon in 2016. I was 16 years old living in Kansas. The whole Social Justice takeover was trending because of the election. I now watch David because my political views have changed, probably because I’m going to college now and coming into young adulthood involves mental development. Trump has definitely made me call for more of a Social Democracy.
yup I even used to watch Gavin Mcinnes. I was young and stupid. Glad I saw the light
I use to watch the same kind of videos when I was 15 but my views didn't really change it was just funny
Was the exact same way. I was always fascinated by politics and political/economic theory but was too lazy or unwilling as a 14 year old to read in to the meat and potatoes and actually form my own opinion. What I considered my political ideology was whatever I thought was most cool at the time. I enjoyed history and kind of like the phenomenon when you exit a movie theatre feeling like one of the characters, whenever I'd delve in to learning about historical events, I'd take on whatever ideology the people I was studying was and run with it. I went through a Communist phase because I thought the Red Army was cool. Then I was a Nazi because I thought the Wehrmacht was cool. The lowest depths I reached was holocaust denial and legitimate belief that Adolph Hitler was right. I supported Trump rabidly in 2016 when I was 15/16. I was hooked on the "feminazi social justice warriors" narrative. My socially depraved sink in to extremism was eventually discovered by my parents by looking at my previously watched videos on CZcams. As soon as I was actually pressed on the issue and it came time to stand up for what I supposedly believed, I broke down in absolute shame for what I had done. I steered clear of politics for a while and nowadays I find myself much more left-leaning.
Amazing how casually you admit to being indoctrinated into leftism by going to college. Your mind is not being developed, it is being controlled.
@@exeter1588 Why do you think people's views change when they go to college all of the sudden? Do you think your views would change if you went to college? Would you be indoctrinated? It's ridiculous to just assume that people going to college have no conscious and are just robots that will believe whatever institutions they're apart of program them to believe. People form opinions based on their philosophical feelings and the facts as they are. Some opinions considered "conservative" are not based in reality. For example, not believing in climate change is not based in reality. If someone were to believe that humans didn't contribute to the climate changing at all despite heaps of evidence and then went to college and learned about the facts, they might change their views. That's a very black and white example. Lets say an 18 year old goes to college, majors in political science, and comes out as a communist after graduating. Was that brainwashing or was it just an individual with a functionating brain studying society and forming their own opinion in the process? You must always remember that the people around you, including people with opposing political views, have functionating brains that can interpret things and do critical thinking.
This video pissed a lot if people off. Good job!
Shane Bischoff
I'm not sure that's the reason there are many dislikes.
It's mostly because Carl is grossly misrepresented in this hit peace...
Cody Stewart that's what all his fans say.
Shane Bischoff
"That's what all his fans say" isn't an argument...
David obviously has a liberal bent, Carl is libertarian.
I'm conservative/libertarian.
I also don't agree with everything Carl says because he's atheist and I'm christian.
I'm no more his "fan" than he is a fan of christianity...
Shane Bischoff
I'm sure you read what I wrote 17 hours ago...
Carl is atheist, I'm christian.
I research ALL views.
Saying I'm his "fan" is an enormous stretch.
NUTCASE71733
Fine, just to be clear, I research all views. I agree with the "stay out of my life, I'll stay out of yours" ideology.
I'm NOT a 2A person... if you want 10,000 guns, fine by me. I simply will never own one.
A lot of taxes is theft, but we also need things to run smoothly, so small gov. taxes are fine.
I'm pro-life, and will never pay into a healthcare program that forces me to pay $1 per month so some irresponsible girl can kill an unborn child.
And stuff like that...
You just summed up why Jordan Peterson is overrated.
Revenue on ignoring policy while attacking ideology while over focusing on social justice issues.
James Goldberg I also find Jordan Peterson to be overrated.
That’s because Peterson isn’t looking at issues through the lens of politics, rather, he sees things through the lens of psychology
Tyler Rein So? Looking at brain surgery through the lens of gynecology doesn’t make your observations anywhere near correct. Peterson is a psychologist that talks about everything besides psychology and most his assertions that aren’t political and are entirely concerning people’s everyday lives and the way they carry themselves are never based in his psychology background. He just states opinions that don’t relate to research or data.
@@Pcgamingfixes From that comment alone I know you haven't watched jack shit
Nurul Haque Enjoy your intellectual charlatan
Bad news David, this video is over 1 Sargon long, therefore Carl of Applebees won't be watching it.
David, you should change your name to Hammurabi of Babylon; then you can be equally as pretentious.
Stalin was authoritarian-left, not right-wing.
And there's Sargon's point, you put everything bad into a right wing box. If a Marxist murders somebody? Oh, he was right wing the whole time. It's really silly to play no true scotsman with the left by claiming anyone who doesn't fit into your personal definition of left is right wing.
You really showed me there. Like when you said I was a moron. It really refuted what I said.
He tried to grab power, therefor he was not authoritarian but right wing? Sorry you need to learn what power and authoritarian means.
Dude has 2 first names. I don't trust him.
you're name is timothy, your point is invalid.
So which is it? You're or your? You can't use both just because you are unsure :P
Timothy Oertel better than having 2 last names!
Gave me a good laugh, thank you :)
David Worobec lol. That’s a strange thing to comment about. I wasn’t telling Timothy that he had two last names, I was making a joke about having a name that sounds more like a surname and how it’s worse than having a surname that sounds like a first name
David Pakman is the absolute shizz for political commentary and general discussions. Well informed, emotionally continent and insightful! Always end the video with a fresh objective perspective on topics 👍🏻
Sargon: "I'm leftwing"
Sargon: "let me join ukip, a right wing to far right wing political party"
>smfh
He's a token leftist.
What is the far right?
And what about ukip is right wing?
Have you read their manifesto?
@xirsamoht x
my is not joking no
@Matthew O'Rosco
Ukip doesn't deny humans having an effect on climate change. Just wants to get out of the bubble of pop-science thinking that controls the field today. And instead tackle the issue their own way. They are probably the only party that would support nuclear power. While the rest of the parties will argue about petty things that won't actually help anyone.
What does environmentalism have to do with economics anyway? This issue isn't even on the left-right spectrum.
privatizing the healthcare system is in every capitalist party's manifesto. I know first hand the troubles of state run healthcare. Our old are not very good taken care of. And if something is wrong with you have to wait a long time to get poor help. I also think there need to be some control that prevents health care profiteering. But full on state run health care is shit. Believe me. This is hardly a FAR right policy
Sargon claims he's a liberal. Which used to be left wing. With how extreme the left wing of today is though. Liberals probably seem right wing. Now, you've only proven that Ukip is center right, while Sargon is center left.
Not that any of them are Far anything.
If anything you've proven yourself to be far left. since your political center seems to be labour
@Matthew O'Rosco
So Margaret Thatcher is far right?
I am pretty sure sargon psychos disliked this video without even watching. His fan base even worse than undertale fans.
Sure, just like how Pakman psychos upvoted without watching. That's what happens when people only communicate through response videos.
I feel like both took things out of context sargon had only 30 secs out of this 22 min video and suggested he was alt right when he sent them interracial corn on Twitter to piss them off and has had multiple hit pieces from the daily stormer
You're being too nice. More like call of duty fans lol.
Well. Pakman does start it off with a bold face lie, Sargon hates the Alt Right.
How can Sargon hate the alt right when he caters to them and they help him pay his bills through viewership?
Thats why I unsubbed from him. He really only talks about BLM, and feminists and what not. He dosen't talk about the things that are really important. He's just kinda going off the rails.
Sargon reminds me of Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán, who is completely correct on his assessment of Islam, uncontrolled immigration, etc. But that's the only one issue he ever talks about, and tries to make it into the be al end all issue, making the people overlook how much of a corrupt, crony capitalist asshole he and his party are.
Welcome to the club, I was following him cowder and Rubin for the lolz till I REALLY listen to them. Then I found secular talk and David.
BLM is a terrorist group? Where can I see their bodycount? 🤔 (And no, the Dallas thing doesn't count because he wasn't BLM. He just wanted to shoot some cops that day, for whatever reason.) Do you have any numbers for antifa as well? (Good luck with them, they have no central leaders and are anarchists.) Sorry, but I find conservatives and alt right/neo Nazis far more dangerous. They are more numerous in this country than a bunch of sjws, and unlike said sjws, they have power.
BLM/antifa/sjws are an old topic, and a boogeyman. Grow the fuck up. Maybe when sjws become 30-70% of the nation, we can talk about them. But as far as I know, I've only encountered them occasionally on social media sites. Not a threat.
Arthur Kirkland If even. I have yet to see an actual SJW in it's habitat! Lucky you.
MJPK. So white nationalists and alt righters are terrorists by your definition.. Lol
First time I heard of Sargon was when he was on the late Drunken Peasants podcast and thought "wow what an intelligent guy" (think it was the accent). Didn't take long to come to pretty much the same conclusion Pakman did that he has a very superficial understanding of most of this stuff and is fixated on the labels and definitions.
X_____________ e There is a hold on any press dealing with high profile court cases. Eventually, it is lifted. If Robinson had talked about the case away from the location it was taking place, he would probably have been fine.This is perfectly normal , and has been part of the criminal justice system for a long time.
(I will say though that the UK is not as relaxed as the US in terms of its speech laws,but that has always been the case ).
Paul: what do you think of Climate Change
Sargon: I don't know
Gregory Heinz The progressives don't disagree with the view of which you stated, but rather on economic issues, so to call them moronic is just pointless.
free speech is not banned in england.
The court session he tried to crash was closed to the public, because they wanted to give the defense no chance to claim bias on part of the jury, and call for a mistrial. In effect, mr. Robinson's self-serving bumbling may have caused an elongation or even dismissal of a pretty clear-cut case of mass human trafficking and child sex slavery.
Tommy Robinson is going to jail for violating parole TWICE, and that was parole for a pretty hefty and wanton case of fraud, one that would land most people in jail for far longer than 13 months. Free speech has no part in it. If he had done the same thing from a block away, without trying to film the participants in the trial and releasing the video to society at large, he would never have been taken in for breaking parole.
Sargon of Cuckkad fans are triggered! Delicious.
Carl read some John Locke, said, 'Right then, that's my political education done and dusted', and has stayed right there in the 17th Century ever since. He puts on the airs of an intellectual and a deep thinker, but has no stamina for research or political nuance beyond his small array of canned, mummified early reading. In my circles we speak of a period of time of one Sargon as five minutes because Carl once complained about a long, detailed, nuanced video response to him by saying, 'My god, can't you boil this down into five minutes!' That was and is par for the course, and his 'research' tends to be the first page of an Internet article on a subject to which he reacts as he reads it, often not noticing when the article debunks his claims right there in print. Carlgon is a paper tiger and a useful idiot for the alt-right, even when he 'debates' them, because of his lack of sophistication and mental agility and his total ignorance of those lacks in himself.
He's the epitome of a pseudo intellectual with dunning-kruger effect thrown in.
Excellent description of the faux intellectual Carl. Cheers!
Fellow hbomberguy fan!
I started to realize how much of a phony he was during his Natural History Museum critiques and his sharing of a Graecopithecus finding in which he did nothing but project ignorant anachronistic views.
His own videos frequently expose that when he pretends to cite a study not only is he incapable of reading more than the first page, but also incapable of noticing information on said abstract that says the exact opposite of what he attempts to use it to support.
This video is like 4 times as long as Sargons attention span. Thank God this is a video, poor Sargon can't even read.
Can I just say how much I love that Sargon's limit on focusing on something has become a measure of time?
@@trippinsciko one Sargon = 5 minutes
It’s about 4 Sargons long.
I heard Han Solo once made the Kessel Run in 12 Sargons.
Ah, I think I see the issue here. Carl doesn't know what "ostensibly" means.
Well, considering he apparently can't read.
David always destroys people who attack him in the most elegant way. It’s hilarious because it’s condescendingly chill the way he does it.
Carl over simplifies every issue
Hes just a dickhead
Black Knight Socialism does not do that...you're thinking of communist
You realize that you are complaining about bad arguments by using an Ad Hominem?
Every issue he disagrees with. But he supports "steelmanning" literally "the jewish question"
and he doesn't understand socialism... or history for that...
The beginning of this video was the real highlight for me. Sargon and others like them are making a killing off of the Intellectual fast food of focusing on "sjw's", feminists, and PC culture. The constant regurgitating of these topics, while ignoring the many issues impacting people in serious ways is pretty sad.
BlackMasamune X Guys the SJWs are BAAAAAADDD. *Sucks Trumps Dick*
If sjws, feminists, and PC culture aren't a problem; why is he able to float his channel mostly on that material?
Shouldn't it be up to the left to stop supporting blatant liars and crazy sociopaths instead of Sargon to stop reporting on it? I see this argument everywhere, "yeah if you don't look, they won't affect you." If that's the case, why can Sargon make a weekly compilation showing these lunatics actively affecting western institutions?
Maybe you should make your own videos on the "important issues" if they bother you so much. Since they're so much more important, I'm sure you'll quickly rocket in populiarity above him.
Internet Saltmine
Because they're more scandalous than economics and foreign policy. Are you really trying to say that sjws are of a higher priority than living standards and war?
I don't think he's trying to say that. He's probably saying that to tackle those issues however you do need political power, and to get that you can't have SJWs tarnish the image of what people see as "that side" or "the left". How exactly are people supposed to see feminists as credible sources as to where we should spend precious resources that ought to go to the poorest if all they see them do is complain about manspreading and other such nonesense that are only really truly a problem in your life if you're at least upper middle class? It's like when Trudeau met Trump and the thing he got out of Trump is an attempt to get more woman into business... If Trudeau hadn't been such a feminist he might actually have gotten something useful that would actually have helped the poor rather than give a bone to primarily upper middle class/middle class and white woman. Maybe Trudeau could have gotten the whole DACA saga to never happen if he had focused on that instead.
> than economics and foreign policy
SJWs aren't more important than that, on the contrary. Economics and Foreign Policy are more important, that is precisely why we should concentrate on economic class rather than gender-based issues and similar. Furthermore feminists do tend to appropriate economic problems in order to turn them into social problems which they can then "solve". There's nothing crazy in saying this either, Rorty basically said the same a while ago as he was more or less predicting the arrival of Trump.
And it really is the same thing over and over again. These youtubers latch on to a handful of stories that fit their narrative, and complain about the same half dozen universities every week. They make it seem like left-wing political correctness is out of control; like it's the biggest threat to society. Yet in every single example, the majority of people regardless of political leanings are making fun of these overly-sensitive people. But somehow right-wing political correctness doesn't even show up on their radar.
I mean, if you started getting into politics because of “Gamergate”... 9.99999999999999/10 you shouldn’t be taken seriously
Chris ray gun is good sooooooooo
I think that David conflates Rightism with Authoritarianism.
You're smart David, Sargon of Akkad lacks the ability to debate or provide logic to his claims or even provide an insight on the subject at hand, I think he talks shit just cause he can and trying to stay relevant.
He's never going to discuss real issue with you, Sargon is a notorious coward.
By taking a video of destiny then act like the victim when destiny took down that video. Sargon is an absolute pussy who is the same as all these anti-SJW channels. Like Full of bullshit, Rebel media, Lauren oh look women also agree with us and more.
What about Sargon of akkad's public debates?
MisterL2 They suck. He wouldn't be able to debate with Pakman even if he wanted to.
Sargon is a pretty bad debater. He argues like a kid trying to trip people up rather than getting people to explain their position. He also will refuse to address what his opponents ask him, it's dumb. He thinks of debate more as a contest that he can declare himself the winner of rather than two adults discussing their disagreements.
Blah Blah that explains the entire alt right's argument style...
I was really into sargon then I turned 18 and realized that he has no idea wtf he's talking about and just sounds like an unhinged conspiracy theorist.
@Wyatt Mason Right..?? All this stuff about "feminists being over the top" and "there is no real racism or sexism anymore" or "there is too much political correctness" are all concepts that most of us when through at the age of 15, or something like that... And then we grow up, we get out to the real world, and we see how it really is xDxD
@M. Jones, tell your mother I said hi.
@Yuki Yuki Do you seriously want to start to compare attacks and numbers..?? Because there´ve been more than 270 attacks perpetrated by white nationalist JUST IN 2019..!! Because of that, the U.S. is now officially a less safe country than Pakistan, or the Arab Emirates... LITERALLY. Im not even kidding, look it up, because of the overwhelming amount of extremist right-wing attacks north-america sits now at a worst place in the murder-per-habitant rate lists than Israel :S:S
@@gabrielp9646 I would like to see a source on that
@@johnb693 Hahahahaah Easy, its on Wikipedia (and you can follow the original links).
I love how David doesnt care and just calls him Carl lmao
This guy Carl is everything that comes out of the empty heads of Ayn Rand zombies. He ain't so great a looker but his alt-racist remarks he tosses at the Young Turks is cringeworthy. Just because u babble with a faux bourgeous accent don't make u smart. Aargon of Bombast doth not create, he can only attempt to tear down the work of others. I yearn for his 15 mins to be up soon
Peter Choyce his 15 minutes is 3 years long now.
Right wingers love telling people what they think.
Apophis so do people on the left...
Leftists love to tell ppl what to do and what to think
@@arthurdaffos1490 That's the right's job.
Sounds like a lot of bias to me
Arthur Daffos that’s exactly what the right do then try to project their actions onto the left, it’s a cheap playground tactic they’ve always used.
Sargon fanbois have been super triggered by this video.
I'm shocked that Carl is still around. Apparently, some folks can't get enough pseudo-intellectualism their diet.
Well, get ready for his fanboys to storm the comments.
Mataeus The Apostate they won't even watch the video and they'll start in on this and that and the other that isn't even mentioned. It's like I can predict the future!
Hi, Sargon Fanboy here. I watched the entirety of the video.
I think Sargon misunderstood Pakman's reference to how Stalin was "right-wing".
I think Pakman is misrepresenting Sargon when he says Sargon is an alt-right apologist.
You suck at predicting the future.
Pakman is a shifty little troll. He dodges questions, completely misrepresents people and removes all context from clips in order to fool his audience into thinking he's an intellectual. He's just lucky he's found so many idiots willing to gobble up his bullshit.
@Darkeydance Uh no, Sargon absolutely is an alt-right apologist and may very well be alt-right himself. At the very least he specifically targets them with his videos. Most of his arguments are framed in a way to appeal to the the alt-right. Sargon just likes to play the "I'm not alt-right, I'm a classical liberal" game, which is exactly what it is.... A fucking bullshit game to try to appear neutral or on the side he opposes. Its the same shit people like Christina Sommers do when they claim to be feminists while spending their entire career attacking feminism. lol Its the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing.
anytime--I love to trash their ignorant asses
Sargon, like Dave Rubin, are not bad people, they're just politically shallow individuals who always retreat to the low hanging fruit of 'defending free speech'. If I weren't so lazy I could dig through all their videos that I've listened to and point out how they avoid any deep discussion on any specific complex issues and reveal that they don't quite know what they believe. I've seen Sargon try to semi-retreat from his support of Trump, or his economic ideas, when he felt a bit of pressure, I've seen Crowder retreat from criminalizing marijuana when he was pressured by Rogan (and actually call him a bully), and I've seen Dave Rubin not want to engage in *any* complex issue.
Sargon has an accent, so people think he's smart.
@Luck Genuine Lightning Not an english accent though.
Autoritarism is neither left or right. You can be libertarian and right wing (like Milton Friedman or Friedrich Hayek) and you can be authoritarian and left wing (like Mao or Stalin).
It really depends on how the political spectrum is represented and defined. You have to keep in mind these are all human constructs - the spectrum doesn't come from nature, and has no objective structure. Pakman is using definitions of the right and left to make his argument, which is perfectly legitimate.
The spectrum is an interpretation of human behavior in relation to power. Humans are part of nature, products of the human nature are natural consequences of our existences.
@@MrCmon113 You can use whatever definitions you like of things, even creating your own, although you should define your terms in those cases to minimize confusion. Words don't have intrinsic meaning, and are not prescriptive. Words are merely descriptive.
That being said, one of the major common concepts in leftism is egalitarianism, which you can argue is anti-authoritarian.
Human concepts, even those based on observable phenomena, can be messy, and can break down in edge cases. Take the concept of 'species', which is pretty easy to grasp initially, although when you dig into phenomena such as 'ring species', you realize the concept isn't as useful as you thought it was as reality is just far more complicated.
The whole 'Hitler was a socialist' stems from the name 'Socialist' in the NSDAP name, which comes from the history of that party, which existed before Hitler became involved. Hitler didn't institute socialist policies, and actively persecuted socialists. I don't know by what metric Hitler can be evaluated to be a socialist, as there was no social ownership of the means of production under the Nazis, nor workers self-management.
Slave labor was widely used by Nazis as a part of their economy, and that is the antithesis of socialism, as slaves don't manage/own/control anything. Slave labor is completely compatible with capitalism, however.
You would have to completely re-define socialism into something unrecognizable for Hitler to be a socialist, at which point major historic socialist figures would no longer be categorized as socialists under that definition. Which defeats the entire purpose, namely that of associating Hitler with those who advocated what is known as 'socialism'. Which doesn't mean someone can't legitimately do this, it just doesn't serve the purpose that they likely think it does.
Burnt Toast I wouldn’t consider egalitarianism to be anti-authoritarian at all. All egalitarianism is is the idea of equality and everyone having the same rights and opportunities, ideally on a level playing field. Authoritarianism is entirely compatible with that since the state can be used to forcibly make everyone equal (as is often said to have happened to citizens of the USSR) and remove difference.
At the same time, the right being in favour of traditional hierarchies doesn’t necessitate authoritarianism in the way Packman seems to think either, considering most of these hierarchies are social as in the family unit, or the value of the church. Again, authoritarianism can be used to enforce these hierarchies but it’s not inherent. Unfortunately, Sargon did have a point in this criticism.
Where Dave would be more accurate in his criticism of Stalin would he in his more nationalist tendencies. Nationalism is certainly a more right wing phenomenon and Stalin absolutely had a ton of that.
But under Stalin there were hierarchies, more so than before, more so than a Marxist would want. The secret police and those connected etc. The pertinent criticism (I think) is that communism is vulnerable to invasion or tyranny (as are liberal market economies).
Sargon makes the argument that the left attributes anything bad it doesn't like to the right, and an absurd example of this is David recasting Stalin as Right Wing. David responds by stating that Sargon's argument is "when someone has a stance on something, that person is at fault for not agreeing with someone with the opposite stance" and then extended that to say that the left disagreeing with the right is normal and righteous. Thus completely skipping Sargon's actual point and simultaneously proving it. Couldn't get past six minutes.
Sargon is a joke. He and Rubin are one of the same.
j More like disingenuous hypocritical assholes.
When I took a class on Russian art in the 90s.Russians themselves reffered to Communists and Stalin as right wing, as per the original use of The term in the ancient regime.where in the assembly people who wanted to keep the status quo or even roll back rights were seated on the right. and reformers were seated on the left.
Thanks, I never knew how the names came about.
Sargon gets mistaken for intelligent because Americans can’t hear through the British accent to realize that he’s middle-aged Tim Pool
So, this will be full with Carls audience soon then, these snowflakes usually don't handle being schooled well.
Rhine0Cowboy they'll deny it too and claim Carl makes sense and David is lying or something. Anything to please Sargon.
lmao im not mad
Don't worry, I'm sure Sargon will line David out.
or one of their most common and unoriginal attacks "STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN YOU'RE STRAWMANNING SARGON OF AKKAD PLEASE STOP STRAWMANNING HIM STOP STRAWMANNING STRAWMANNING I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT A STRAWMAN IS BUT I WILL REPEAT IT ANYWAYS SO STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN"
lmfao he did straw man carl in the first five minutes, but whatever you say dude
That guy needs to "take down" fewer calories.
Carl is a full-on Trump supporter now yet calls himself a classical liberal.
The Sargon Chodes are out in full force today.
Unsubscribed to Sargon because I found that he did not seem to have any principles. I will stick to David and Secular Talk with a dash of TJ and Cult of Dusty.
>Cult of Dusty
>David
Hey, at least Kyle tries to be honest.
David has a very passive aggressive attitude towards his naysayers and I love it 😂
My guess is that in addition to having poor listening comprehension, Sargon seems to be conflating Leftism and Socialism as the same thing, even though Socialism can be Left, Right and shades in between.
Problem is that when he say the left, he mean a certain kind of left. One with a lot of power.
He talks about SJW mostly. He doesn't like Political correctness. He is a liberal. Political correctness is decided by this pervasive left wing branch, that he sees as extreme, that he sees as having too much power. And that he is ideologically opposed to because of his own liberal and free speech stance.
Because political correctness has as much power as it does, he blame the rest of the left for not seeing the fault in this, and in many case supporting it. Which is why he just say "the left wing". In the policies he care about, the whole left wing is his adversary.
Sargon is proof that just because someone speaks with an English accent DOES NOT mean they're smart.
Also, Sargon NEVER talks about policy. He’s always personality over politics
Sargon also smokes. A very unhealthy habit. It might have been cool in the '60's but not anymore.
Let's not forget how he cherry picks. Way back then there was a time when they would "take down" 13 year old "feminists". Can you imagine being that pathetic? Feeling intellectual from taking down a bunch of kids?
+Chris Nilsson lol you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel now! It's his own choice if he smokes. He's not encouraging anyone else to do it. Fuck sake like....
+K S Are you seriously saying you believe 13 year olds are the feminists lobbying Western govts to push feminist agendas? Fucking really? Something that's been going on for decades before Tumblr was created was being done by 13 year olds. Even 18 year olds? You need to read up on the history of feminism before opening your mouth methinks. There are women my age (30+) who are dripping in 3rd wave feminism, and these are the type of women employed in large firms as 'diversity' officers, taken on by govt ministers as advisors and to sit on quangos. Yer full of shit lad.
Holy Cow, FLYINGTHOR, if Sargon ever comes to a sudden stop, your face is going to go halfway up his ass.
Argon simply doesn't know what he's talking about. When I was subscribed to him, I thought he had knowledge about the things he speaks about, but people only *think* he knows what he's talking about because he has a decent vocabulary.
Why would anyone trust a guy who openly admits he knows nothing about economics and only shits on low-hanging sjws for money?
*Argon simply doesn't know what he's talking about.* yes. mostly much too long rants either about nothing or with an unsubstantial angle, but i haven't seen anything from him lately and i don't have time to waste so that won't change likely
epithymbria And a British accent it would seem. When will you yanks learn that a British accent alone doesn't imply intelligence !?
It helps that I'm not an American ^^ But yeah, I wish the whole "moneymaking off of angry people on the internet" wasn't as much of a thing. People are just getting themselves riled up.
I used to be subbed to him because I like to be exposed to a range of views. I grew bored of it as it is the same stuff over and over again and some content appeared to not be very well thought out. Not to mention his hypocrisy became very annoying. He has this Hitchens complex I found quite annoying too.
Sargon's appeal is 70% british accent, 10% his beard 10% his use of the name Sargon of Akkad and 10% his intellect.
Correction:85% British accent. -5% intellect
str 4 stamina 3 dex 2 int -5
Carl calls himself "classical liberal" or "center left" but were highly supportive (too supportive) of far right ideas
He can call himself that but he ran for the EU as a right wing kipper!
Fantastic, detailed rebuttal.
I smell a CZcams beef.
Maybe David should cut a fire diss track on Sargon
I once began watching one of his videos and my b.s meter was set off....I just looked up who he is again: he has claimed Heather Heyer was not hit by a car but must've had a heart attack from a car crash happening...when he was corrected, he refused to back down....also, he is claiming to be abused by feminists, because he makes poor taste ant-feminist videos in a series, and he got complaints from feminists. ...yeah...not worth watching the guy unless he gets promoted by Trump..
As always, bravo! It's very refreshing to see someone in such good command of logic!
Being born in the end of soviet union, alot of my older family members and friends have described the political environment during the era. it sounds alot like national socialism. Pretty far from what Karl Marx was intending. For me personally wearing a hammer and sickle, is the same as wearing a swastica. Yet it does not stop me in believing in better and being a democratic socialist.
Would you excuse me from any posthumous blame if I recommended to knock on children's skulls with a wodden mallet after birth if I had good intentions with it? No, of course not. Marx helped to bring the Stalinist dictatorships in the word by his lack of understanding of human societies, by his lazy disregard for imposing any sort of checks or balances to the "dictatorship of the proletariat".
you cannot blame Marx on how other people use his ideas
@@danteshydratshirt2360 his ideas were one dimensional sh*t. he got it wrong and history has proven that- its time for the left to admit it.
@@Oatsrock ...so Marxs ideas about Capitalism devouring itself and exploiting workers is wrong?
@@danteshydratshirt2360 his predictions were wrong so the underlying theory is incorrect. the workers didnt rise up- there was no revolution. but when socialism is implemented it has failed murderously every time- it is corrupting and far more oppressive than the free market. in the free market you can walk away any time u want- ur not exploited bc its entirely your choice. as far as capitalism devouring itself that remains to be seen- its not perfect. but even if you correctly point out flaws in the system that doesnt mean your idea of an alternative is correct- and in marxs case his ideas have proven to be grotesquely incorrect.
I subscribe to both of you and have critiques of both but I find Sargon harder to endure because he seems to cross the line between criticizing over-reactions of the left and being an apologist for the right. He seems to lose all rationality when "triggered" by some idiotic SJW, and goes off on rants more often than breaking down issues. That's not exactly the deep analysis I'm looking for. I hate when people jump to conclusions about people's motives and label them as ~X just because they criticize X, but I've never seen Sargon outright criticize Donald Trump in any sort of meaningful way. (I admit I could have totally missed it.) Contrast this with someone like Thunderf00t, who regularly criticizes outrageous PC / SJW culture but won't pull any punches when it comes to Donald Trump or ridiculous actions of conservatives in general.
The critiques I have for the David Pakman Show are similar, in that it seems to use kid gloves when criticizing the left but doesn't pull any punches when attacking the right. But not to the degree of Sargon. I also grow weary of all the "This is big news that's going to ruin Trump" headlines that end up going nowhere, because I'd like the real deal please.
Dude this is over 4 sargons long
Sargon is not on the left.
His criticisms are entirely focused on the left. He habitually defends right wing politicians and commentators and ignores their flaws and lies. In what way is Sargon "left wing"?
Because your political position isnt based upon who you decide to call out. Its based upon what policies you would like to see enacted.
A lot of center left youtubers call out the left predominantly. Take a look at shoe on head or tim pool. Both moderate left in their voting and political positioning, but call out the left more than anything else.
Why? Because they probably want to save their political side before it drowns in the absurdity of modern femocomunintersectionalsitic (just made that one up) nonsense.
@@klosnj11 but he has joined UKIP and defends capitalism and rather lives in a nazi world then an sjw one. He has made constant absurd right wing views in the past. He is right wing. He instantly believes in right wing conspiracy like the girl in Charlottesville who was killed, he believed she died from a heart attack, he still found that funny. He laughs at raped victims. There's a video of that
Shoe0nhead is definitely left wing although she kisses white supremaist lauren southern ass and has fail to distance herself from her. Refuses to condemn her far right audience which are the majority of her subs. Says alot of racist shit.
Tim Pool from what I heard he is definitely right wing. He failed to see right wing violence as a problem and is a yes man to white supremaist.
They're not helping the left when all they do is attack the left, become a safe space for nazis and join right wing political parties. Also hang around with white supremaist. They never call out the right for anything because they're grifters.
OMG DAVID YOU WOULD WRECK CARL IN A DEBATE.. LOLOLOLOL
Carl cant debate because he views it as a game. He just tries to score points rather than have conversation like an adult.
I could feel Sargons crazy fan base coming to dislike without watching the whole video
false
With all due respect:
Sargon's channel rakes in a shitton of views.
More probably leads to more "crazy fans"
More "crazy fans" leads to more dislikes.
His video on the Right Wing Scapegoat (the one this is about) has 300k views.
This video has 1/6th of that; 50k views.
Sargon's newest video (the Berkley documentary) has 12k likes on 200k views.
This means that for just this "bout", Sargon has 6 times the fanboys to dislike this video, as Pakman has had to upvote it, and that's approximately 18k downvotes we are talking about here.
Accounting for the fact that even fewer people will go out of their way to dislike this video, that number becomes something along the lines of say...
1000 dislikes?
One would think that a "crazy fanbase" with a 18k strong voting power would maybe be a bit more efficient in their brigandeering?
It's nice that you understand basic math, but you're not doing logic very well. All you've proven is that fans of Sargon don't necessarily watch David Pakman when he pops up in their feed, a fact that any person could have told you, since a sub to Sargon is not an automatic sub to the David Pakman Show, unless I've missed a memo somwhere.
You entirely miss the point. Of course Sargon's fanbase doesn't neccessarily watch the video; they wouldn't need to either. It has nothing to do with the original comment.
"I could feel Sargons crazy fan base coming to dislike without watching the whole video"
Sargon's "crazy fanbase" *could* brigandeer this video to such a degree that the like/dislike ratio would be blown to shreds. The accusation is that Sargon's fanbase wont watch the video, and still dislike it, which might be true for *some* fans, but as you now might notice, not all of them.
This video has 80k views. If just 40k of those are Pakman's viewers and the remaining 40k is Sargon's viewers, you just show that not only does Sargon's audience engage *exactly as much as Pakman's* on his videos, but also that *most* of Sargon's audience doesn't care. And that's assuming that all of Sargon's viewers who engaged with the video are disliking it.
Do you want to wager a guess on how many Sargon fans watched the video, and how many Pakman fans watched it? If you claim that 2000 people came here just to dislike it, making up for the entirety of the dislikes, then you *prove that the majority of Sargon's fanbase is reasonable*
Your logic proves nothing, it provides no extra information, and it disproves nothing. You are so off that I have a hard time even figuring out how to address what you're saying.
Your "logic" proves nothing
Without hierarchy you wouldn't have government or even a family.
Hierarchy is unavoidable.
Sargon of Akkad is a sick joke.
Pakman is some what correct. stalin was in practice somewhat oddly right-winged...he abandoned the corporative internationalist core of left winged ideology, in favor of an odd brand of isolationist soviet nationalism. basically adopting practices that resembled the classic European nationalist conservative right. he made himself to a tzar.
it's not that Stalin was right wing because he was awful, but because in practice he didn't really conform with what a lefty is
Fidel Castro was very Authoritarian but much more left winged than the like of Stalin and mao ever were ...not denying lefties can be authoritarian...but Stallin wasn't very much a lefty in practice, no matter how he described himself.
there was no such thing as soviet nationalism, the whole idea of USSR and Soviet satellite states was that it transcended nationality- if you'd read the anthem of USSR it should be pretty obvious.
Ninja Samurai not sure if satire...
What is satire, is 'soviet nationalism' a term itself being a misnomer is used here as a supposed defining feature of USSR when in fact it was the ultimate reason for its downfall. Fact that Stalin's policies were not 100% left-wing but incorporated some nationalistic elements during the war does not make him a right-wing figure. More shows how failed this ideology is and that you can not transcend tribalism even after decades of genocide and oppresion.
Their anthem may have contained talk of 'transcending nationality' and yet Stalin continued the process of Russification across the USSR as had the Tsars before him. And he took the USSR in a more imperialist, if not nationalist, direction during his later years. Where Trots and Marxist-Leninists preached permanent world revolution, the Stalinists favoured socialism-in-one-country: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_One_Country
So while he certainly couldn't be called a right-winger he was no orthodox leftie by any stretch, and his idea of rulership did not depart too much from the Tsarist model.
Nah, that was the whole point of Stalin's idea of "transcanding nationality". Destroy all non-Russian nationalities while maintaining his own.
David, it's clear that the problem is that the terms "left" and "right" already have such nebulous definitions. Sargon's complaint was clearly that among the left the term "Left Wing" is synonymous with "good" and the term "Right Wing" is synonymous with "evil". Your definitions of the terms don't help matters either because you've made "Right Wing" synonymous with structured authoritarianism and "Left Wing" synonymous with fairness and equality. This is quite ironic, because it was not too long ago that you made a point of labeling Classical Liberalism, a system that is decidedly against structured, hierarchical authoritarianism as being Right-Wing... Even if it was Right Wing, why would it matter? You only did that because you have also fallen into the trap of conflating "Right Wing" with "Bad".
The original definitions, and the ones you'd find in most dictionaries, have the Right Wing being the side that prefer to keep things the way they are, or to return things to the way that they once were, believing that tradition is the most valuable guide, while the Left Wing eschews tradition and instead seeks to transform society, dissolving old institutions and creating new ones, in pursuit of an ideological goal. No matter how structured and unequal the Soviet Union was, it was still a project of rebuilding society in order to achieve a planned glorious future, rather than an attempt to preserve the glory of the past... The same is true of Cuba and Maoist China.
In the 21st Century, most Western nations have a rich history and tradition of liberal values, and so it's quite possible, if not common, to be a tradition-loving conservative who has a lot of liberal values, just as it's possible to be a progressive who views totalitarian control as the best way to achieve a better world. In the former Eastern Bloc countries, it might be quite the opposite, with the conservatives wishing to maintain the totalitarian status quo, and the progressives striving for something resembling the Western liberal democracy that we all have come to take for granted.
I think you're conflating liberal and conservative with left and right. The first deals primarily with the content of beliefs, the latter with the structure. Meaning, you could very easily have, as we do, an authoritarian left and libertarianism. Furthermore, David is talking specifically about left and right, egalitarianism vs authoritarianism in regards to Stalinism and Marxism. David literally goes through the history and definitions of the terms to show that Stalin had an authoritarian take on what was originally an egalitarian ideal, i.e., how Stalinism is to the right of Marxism. To get left = good, right = bad from that means one either wasn't thinking critically or didn't actually listen to the arguments being made.
Incidentally, by an equally strict and literal reading of your definition, no right wing movement could ever overthrow a government, which is no less absurd than the implication that no left wing government could become the entrenched establishment looking to preserve its traditions. The point of this video is to push past the factoid debates and unquestioned presumptions typical of the discourse we see on the internet (especially on CZcams) and have a deeper, genuine, & more nuanced discussion.
the problem is thinking in terms of left and right - these political labels are wholly inadequate
Bingo.
i absolutely despise sargon, never liked him
Sargon of Akkad seems to like the sound of his own voice.
I always found his videos boring as hell, lol. His videos are like continuous 40 minute run ons. Dave or Kyle can summarize one of his topics in about a 5 min video. Sargon goes on and on just to look intellectual to dumb frog posters and alt-righters who need someone with a British accent to make them seem not as stupid.
T Gilly Yes I get it, you like having the same opinions spoonfed to you into 5 minute digestible pieces.
+RihannaIsIluminati
Who doesn't?
A lot.
His hundreds of thousands of subscribers like his voice too.
My guess is that, no matter how fine a point you put on it, he will not admit to being wrong and he will refuse to recognise any distinctions you have outlined.
And his fan boys will be queuing up to make asinine comments regardless of the content of your video, if you disagree with him.
" I haven't really looked into it I don't really know" Sargon of Akkad when asked about the issue of climate change and his thoughts on it.
It's recognize, bud.
Jake Tomberlin No, it's recognise in most countries, but I know the US spells things weird
Cheesio *not weird. The best country out there.
Sargon is the human embodiment of "Red Pilling". Can't even hear his voice with out my brain screaming in rage after the years he had his fingers in my brain.
Love your videos David. You strike me as one who cares about finding the truth.
did I just witness an intellectual rape?!
Dude, chill english is my 4th language. And you are judging someone just by the generation that they come from this just shows me how simple minded you are.
To call "authoritarianism & totalitarianism = Right wing" as political fact and politics 101 is to utterly fail in political studies, Pakman
They're not left wing, by definition so I'm curious what we're supposed to think they are if it's a spectrum.
Let me guess nothing negative is left wing? Was soviet russia left wing in any way?
You should post your sources in the description so people can see the full videos.
He's another one of these "I used to be on the left but then I noticed they were all crazy" types.
Very well said.
I smell a debate coming.
This is like watching your Political Science professor dunk on the Conservative Stoner in the back of the class shouting buzzwords.
Actually, I think that’s a pretty accurate summary.
Oh my god I wish I were back in undergrad
I used to watch Sargon when all talked about was SJWs and atheism+. Then he spiralled into politics whith extreme bias. Problem now is that he lumps the left into one group and often blindly defends the right. He has stopped weighing the issues. He has gotten lazy.
If I remember correctly, a writer for the Daily Stormer actually stated Sargon pushes people towards the alt-right, so he was actually a gateway for white nationalism, bizarrely. Hell, there was even an instance where Sargon joined an alt-right google chat / conference call and one of them thanked Sargon for "putting me on the right path."
Let me guess, you interpreted my comment to mean that I'm villifying Sargon by associating him with the Daily Stormer? Because that's not what I'm getting across. Also, lrn2grammar and lrn2discourse, you ad hominem slinging asshat.
"FUCK YOU FOR MAKING A REASONABLE INFERENCE"
If you weren't trying to villify Sargon by associating him with white nationalists, what then, pray tell, was "what you were trying to get accross"?
TheRefractingOne
The point was to show that Carl nudges people away from the left without even realizing it; The same guy that is trying to "improve the left" is merely turning people away from it even more. Hell, there was a time every TWIS top comment was "I ARE A CONSARVATIVE NOW BECAUSE I DONT LIEK SJEW XDDD." Note, by the way, if you read my comment I say: "so he was actually a gateway for white nationalism, bizarrely." Keyword: bizarrely. Meaning I'm not vilifying Sargon for being alt-right, but that he bizarrely (and to his opponent's benefit) pushes people towards it as a sort of useful idiot to the alt-right. This wouldn't be a problem if Sargon actually set up a plan to improve the left, but he'd rather continuously preach to choir about how bad they are and collect a patreon check.
Your next line is: "WELL MAYBE IF THE LEFT WASN'T ALL A MONOLITH OF COMMUNISTS WHO HATE WHITE PEOPLE." Even if this isn't your next line, I'll address it regardless.
People think the left is all thin-skinned college kids with Che Guevara t-shirts that hate white kids particularly because of the Anti-SJW crew (read: "Skeptic" community) who have been ragging on SJWs for three years now. When you magnify the fringe of a particular set of people, people often begin to conflate that whole set of people as the fringe. You can see the opposite with those same SJW fringe movements calling all right-wingers nazis; people calling all right-wingers Alex Jones worshiping conspiritards. Neither the Left or the Right, as a whole, are monoliths. In closing, it'd be real cool if people on both sides could stop treating the other as this big extremist strawman. This is probably the biggest reason I unsubscribed from Carl: he seems content to make fun of the left and that's it. "He ridiculed them, pack it up and move on. No constructive criticism here."
PS: I suppose I could have written an essay of a comment in my OP, but then I doubt a single person would have read it, so fuck it I guess.
So where's the bit about Steven Crowder scapegoating the left by calling Hitler left wing?
Travis Himebaugh Carl doesn't criticize his fans heroes much.
Travis Himebaugh you will never see that from sargon. He likes crowder.
1) Convince me he was a socialist. In what way did he restructure economics along socialist lines?
2) being a socialist does not make one left wing
3) He advocated for ethnic nationalism, defense of national identity, rallied the people behind a flag of anti-elitist populism, took a very pro-established-religion position, and was hotly anti-communist. I fail to see how these do not align with what we consider to be right wing.
Travis Himebaugh i've seen the idiot Stephen crowder make this same argument, that having socialist in national socialism means it's the same thing. Even if u DO NOT like socialism, saying Hitler was a socialist is pretty fucking stupid.
It’s hilarious to see the dislikes/likes from rabid Carl Of Applebee’s subscribers(3 years ago), then as the years went by.. the likes extremely outweigh the dislikes.
I wonder what Sargon fans of that year think about him now, I’m sure it would be hilarious.
You don’t need to “take” “down” David Pakman... he literally thinks that it’s multi-culturalism when people of different ethnicities get married. Stop picking on the guy, he’s learning.
David, just because the Soviet Union didn't fully realize the communist utopia as Marx imagined it DOES NOT MEAN that the policies of the Soviet Union were any less left-wing. Collective ownership of private property and workers' benefits were arguably the two greatest hallmarks of the Soviet economy and ideology, both of which are provinces of the left. Furthermore, you seem to suggest that authoritarianism is relegated exclusively to the right wing, which, frankly, is fucking ridiculous. A regime that holds its citizens at gunpoint if they don't comply with state policy is inherently authoritarian, no matter which side of the political spectrum it comes from.
So who owned the property? Who benefited from the labor? From what I recall, the KGB elite were well-rewarded. however, the common Russian did not share those same benefits. When you look deeper at the situation, you realize that those nice left sounding ideals were not part of the reality. But then, every dictatorship has had the word "democratic" in that country's name. Maybe there were some socialistic elements, but they are no different from American Social Security or the nationalized healthcare programs of many countries around the world who are decidedly not communistic or authoritarian dictatorships.
"So who owned the property?"
-"The people - aka the state"
"Who benefited from the labor?"
-Nobody except "the party".
"From what I recall, the KGB elite were well-rewarded. however, the common Russian did not share those same benefits."
-You mean, the people of the party were well-rewarded. And everyone else, specially the ones disagreeing with the state aka the party got put in the gulag or simply shot at the side of the road.
"When you look deeper at the situation, you realize that those nice left sounding ideals were not part of the reality."
-Thats because its a leftwing utopian ideology and everytime it has been tried it turned into a horrendous enviroment for everyone except the party members.
It does not work and will never work because people are NOT ants. People are individuals.
Communism does not allow personal freedom.
You dont have any rights under a communist government, you are property of the state.
Equal misery for everyone except the party members is the only guarantee you have.
The rest is just way beyond ridicilous to go over.
Read some books (other then marx) regarding this issue and talk to some people that actually lived under communism to get some fucking perspective already.
"Its no different then US social security" are you insane or just extremely ignorant about this?
And by the way, i can argue the exact same thing about the nazis.
Yet you would call me insane for doing so. Because it is.
And the same thing is true for all those armchair communists/socialists.
Theyre delusional idiots that dont have a shred of understanding of what theyre arguing for.
They all think they will be part of the party when instead they will be the first to get the bullet.
The USSR was doing exactly as Marx laid out in the communist manifesto.
Direct quotation from the Communist Manifesto: "Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionizing the mode of production. "
How do we know Stalin, Mao, et. al. weren't just "in the beginning" stages of creating the true Marxist utopia?
thepeoplescube.com/peoples-tools/the-communist-manifesto-original-text-t3022.html
tritiumchannel - calm down. You truly are reacting like this is some religious blasphemy. Sorry, capitalism isn't purely good. Neither is communism or socialism. I never said that any of these systems were "good". What I did was merely point out the inconsistencies between the stated marxist communist ideals and the reality of the USSR. To put it in an analogy, you claimed that an apple was a tomato and then, expected everyone to agree even though a tomato is not an apple. They only share some superficial characteristics.
You should read a few more books as well. You clearly haven't read or studied any economic or social or political theory. You wouldn't be posting these kind of comments if you had. FYI - I took the time to learn because I didn't want to be an ignorant conservative republican. Don't be a willful idiot. Take the time to do more than look like an ignorant fool.
(I can point out historical examples of unregulated capitalism as well. People died because businesses valued profits over cheap safety. As long as you don't have some form of workers' rights, you are just as much a slave in a capitalist society. Be grateful that the US is not a pure capitalist society and that we do have socialized programs and some few workers' rights.)
LaMortetLamour - if you are responding to my comment, I'm not a republican anymore. I invested in myself and opened a few books - and many of them were in finance and economics.
When I was talking about workers rights, I was thinking of the lack of power that workers in the US have. I suspect that unregulated capitalism will always result in a slave worker class. Just look at the basic business model - kill the unions. Draft contracts that reduce employee rights. HR department works for the busines.. not for the welfare of the employee and the business. Outsource or automate and screw the people of the community. And we can all guess who will win when the big guy has the money and the little guy doesn't have any resources in a typical dispute.
When I speak about the US not being a purely capitalist society, I am referring to the socialized elements such as our standing army and the post office and our beloved police/firefighters and the most important of them all, roads. I think that you would agree that those aren't inherently capitalist but they are part of the US economy/society.
I think the republican idea of capitalism is some strange capitalism on steroids. They sometimes act as if this system is a religion and that any critique is some sort of blasphemy. You can guess how enjoyable some of the conversations are. I sometimes suspect I'm 5 minutes away from a hail of holy water and an exorcism. (yep, apparently Jesus personally endorsed capitalism.)
I don't mind capitalism. But like most things, moderation is key and it should be applied in the appropriate places. (I have significant issues with capitalist healthcare structures. It doesn't feel like an area where the consumer has free will. After all, would you really quibble with the cost when you know the surgery will save your life? But then, the US is known for medical bankruptcies.)
Carl just learned what socialism is last week. Give him a break.
+Wolves "SCREEEEECH" That is quite literally all that can be gleaned from you comment.
Wolves And Sheeple imagine being this stupid
+bevilhive
He has read most of socialist and communist literature years ago. In fact he keeps giving citations of them and their authors every now and then.
However you don't know what socialism is.
Tespri I read Kim Jong Il's writing about democracy. Now I know all about democracy. I AM SO SMART. S M R T.
Socialism is inherently authoritarian. You have to forcefully take the property of others. "But muh ends justify the means!"
David Pakman refers to this "Sargon of Akkad" character as, Carl, so I'll call him Carl. Carl is not liberal and doesn't seem to support democratic socialism, so, I don't know how far 'left' he could actually be. He spent nearly all of his debate time with Michael Brooks accusing Brooks of being part of the "regressive left", which Carl refused to define. The rest of Carl's 'debate', he was like a siding salesman, asking questions and refusing to answer any. It was a complete waste of time.
Karl doesn’t even know how to read so the fact that he would blast you for something you didn’t say isn’t surprising
"His arguments are pretty flaccid."
You've got some of the best burns in the pwnage biz, David.
GreyKnight7777 hey, I know u
I know you're both morons.
That's a thing lots of people say to describe weak arguments, it's not really a burn at all, let alone one of David Pakman's making.
Bewildered Ape omg, it's a blue chat streams reunion here in the comment section. Makes me nostalgic. Heard u and Jenny got hitched. If so hope that's going well mr. Ape.
I am part of that overlap.
Parado My condoloences.
Thank you very much for the political history lesson. It's fascinating and a very concise presentation for beginners.
Too bad this video is over 20 minutes longs, his attention span for a video can’t go beyond 5 minutes :P
Making assumptions about someone from the other political sides intelligence and calling them a moron, eh? I wonder who that sounds like?