Sargon of Akkad opinions

I was just wondering since he seemed to get brought up here a lot a while back what do most people here think of him (that is assuming you have heard of him or care enough to have an opinion LOL)

Well despite the myth about me supposedly being a big fanboy of Sargon, I've never rated him as one of my favourite Youtubers or social commentators.

I don't hate him, or think he is a fascist, or a racist or anything stupid like that. He has his strengths and weaknesses like everyone else.

Good points.

1/ He has used his fame to bring a lot of attention to other members of the alternative media, like ShoeOnHead, Chris Ray Gun, Sye Ten etc.

He was also the first person I ever saw who gave attention to Imam Tawhidi. You should follow him on twitter here. Imamofpeace

Imam Tawhidi IMO is the most effective Muslim reformer. I don't mind Maajid Nawaz. He has done some good work, but the problem with Maajid is that he doesn't really have a plan for reforming Islam. He just kind of states the problems of Islam and that's that.

Imam Tawhidi however has actually has laid out ways he wants to reform Islam by drawing on other Islamic sources and having them replace the current main ones that are fucking evil! So its really good that Sargon brought him more attention.

2/ He is a lot more open minded and fair than people give him credit for. He has interviewed people who disagree with him, and have even slandered him as a Nazi like Kevin Logan, and of course Laci Green too. He also has offered to debate people like Anita Sarkeesian and Steve Shives who have of course turned him down.

3/ When he's good he's really good. His best video is the one he did on Trump's strike on Syria. To me that was John Pilger level.



Negative Points

1/ His big hate boner for Socialism. Now I am not going to deny that there are problems with Socialism, but Sargon IMO takes it too far.

He goes on about how every dictator was a socialist, and claims that capitalism is not causing any deaths around the world.

I do always laugh when Sargon, and PJW and all of the others go on about how communism killed over 90 million, and how the excuse of "communism just wasn't implemented right" is bullshit when they come out with exactly the same arguments in defence of capitalism.

They always overlook the fact that Capitalism has killed more people than communism. All the deaths in the first world war? The Vietnam war, Suharto, Pinochet, the Iraq War, the Libyan crisis, over a million dead in Ireland in the 1840s of starvation, the genocide of the Native Americans etc.

Of course when you do things like bring up Soros, the Iraq War, people like PJW and Sargon just say that "this isn't true Capitalism. This is just croney Capitalism." How is that any different to the "they just weren't doing Communism right" argument?

Now again I am not saying this means Communism's or Socialism's hands are blameless. The point is however what I am always saying that no system is perfect and its best to take the best parts from each system.

Like the national health service and the welfare state for instance. They are two of the biggest success stories in the history of UK politics, and those are socialist concepts, yet Sargon will NEVER acknowledge that they work.

To me like a lot of people he's too tribal and the tribe he has chosen is Capitalism, which is why his argument of "they just weren't doing it right" is no different to any SJWs about Communism. Neither want to acknowledge that there are any positives in the opposition, or big faults in their own.

I also think he was guilty of a bit of a soft bigotry of low expectations when he was going on about how "if you are a communist, then you are automatically a bad person because communism is an evil ideology". Okay then Sargon why not have the same attitude towards Muslims?

I'm not saying he should, but the fact that he would say that about one dangerous ideology ironically makes me think that its just because Muslims are mostly brown skinned, so he's worried he would look like a racist.

2/ When he's shit he's REALLY shit. I can't stand it when he just laughs for ages over people he thinks are stupid. Its not an argument and its so smug its unbearable. Also he doesn't always do his research either. I remember Tree of Logic did a video on police brutality where she absolutely took him apart.

3/ He and the rest of the "skeptic community" have become a bit too cliquey for my liking. The thing I like about the alternative media, was that it had such a wide range of people. Everyone from lefties like John Pilger, and Brendan O'Neill, to right wingers like PJW to Christians like David Wood, to Muslims like Maajid Nawaz. However to me Sargon and a lot of the other more popular youtubers are kind of turning it into a club where everyone has to think the same on this and that much like the SJWs.

"I don't think Hitler was a sadistic man. He was kind to dogs." ~41:38.

FFS, anyway...
I think that's from youtu.be/0LZh6VzLhxU

This guy was commenting on it https://twitter.com/danieleharper/status/962883410845892608

Mr. Happy wrote:"I don't think Hitler was a sadistic man. He was kind to dogs." ~41:38.

FFS, anyway...
I think that's from youtu.be/0LZh6VzLhxU

This guy was commenting on it https://twitter.com/danieleharper/status/962883410845892608

I think that was a joke. I do wish people wouldn't try and make out that Sargon was a Nazi. You do nothing but make it look like there isn't anything to actually attack him for that way, so you have to reach and take quotes he said out of context or smear him as a Nazi.

Its like what Johnny Rotten says about Trump in this video here. I'm not saying everything Johnny says here is right. He's a bit too tribal about the working class (though in contrast to the likes of Lily Allen, Bob Geldof and Gary Lineaker, its nice to see a celeb that doesn't think they are all idiots.) Still he makes a good point that the left are just looking like idiots when they smear the Donald as racist, rather than going for things you can ACTUALLY attack him for.



Here's the thing people need to learn about Sargon.

He is NOT a Nazi.

He is NOT a racist.

He is NOT a sexist.

He is NOT in danger of bringing back white nationalism or eugenics or anything like that.

However Sargon I feel is becoming a danger in the following ways.

He is a tribal git who is an apologist for all of the worst aspects of capitalism, including the fucking dictatorship of Pinochet, one of the most brutal and evil dictators of all time.

He has attacked genuine left wing politics by associating all of it with this SJW crap.

He is an apologist for McCarthy along side many other members of the so called skeptic community like that total arsehole Stefan Molyneaux.

McCarthy was ironically the SJWs/MeTooMovement/Third Wave Feminism of his day.

Like them he shut down free speech, like them he was such a foaming at the mouth fanatic he accused people of being the most extreme things over the most minor disagreements.

If you had any liberal views, or even just knew people who did, McCarthy and his followers would call you a Stalinist, whilst nowadays as we know if you say something like "I don't want a female Doctor Who" then you are tarred as a misogynist, a sexist, a woman hater etc.

McCarthy as we all know got people fired from their jobs, and made sure they weren't able to work again which completely destroyed people's lives and careers, whilst feminists are doing exactly the same thing to their critics.

However incredibly enough all of these people like Sargon who attack feminists for not being pro free speech WANT McCarthyism back, simply because they hate communists.

I can easily see it in 20 years time, once the backlash against SJWs begins, the next generation of young people being drawn to Sargon's tribal bullshit, in much the same way as SJWs of today are drawn to feminism.

Then we'll have it not being okay to say you support any left wing ideas like the NHS etc in public without being tarred as a communist all over again, people still being fired from their jobs, except it will be for different political opinion.

We don't want to just trade left wing identity politics for right wing identity politics. We've had enough of their shit in the McCarthy era.

Sadly however the left are playing into Sargon's hands by attacking him as a Nazi as that's just more of the same SJW crap.

Attack Sargon for his rank hypocrisy in saying he's for free speech and then being an apologist for McCarthy. Attack him for going after leftists like Jeremy Corbyn for defending Castro, a dictator, and then being an apologist himself for Pinnochet, another even more brutal dictator because Pinnochet was part of his little tribe.

Point out how for these reasons he is absolutely no better than the SJWs he fights against, and is no alternative to them. That's the way to make him look like the tribal git he has sadly become. If not then its right wing SJWs again, and then the backlash to that will lead to left wing SJWs again and on and on it goes.

Identity politics needs to die once and for all.

I'm sick of people.

burrunjor wrote:

Mr. Happy wrote:"I don't think Hitler was a sadistic man. He was kind to dogs." ~41:38.

FFS, anyway...
I think that's from youtu.be/0LZh6VzLhxU

This guy was commenting on it https://twitter.com/danieleharper/status/962883410845892608

I think that was a joke. I do wish people wouldn't try and make out that Sargon was a Nazi. You do nothing but make it look like there isn't anything to actually attack him for that way, so you have to reach and take quotes he said out of context or smear him as a Nazi.

I never said he was a Nazi. I think he is an idiot, if you want my opinion, and I think the joke was unfunny and stupid. But I never said he was a Nazi so you are applying your own context there.

Mr. Happy wrote:

burrunjor wrote:

Mr. Happy wrote:"I don't think Hitler was a sadistic man. He was kind to dogs." ~41:38.

FFS, anyway...
I think that's from youtu.be/0LZh6VzLhxU

This guy was commenting on it https://twitter.com/danieleharper/status/962883410845892608

I think that was a joke. I do wish people wouldn't try and make out that Sargon was a Nazi. You do nothing but make it look like there isn't anything to actually attack him for that way, so you have to reach and take quotes he said out of context or smear him as a Nazi.

I never said he was a Nazi. I think he is an idiot, if you want my opinion, and I think the joke was unfunny and stupid. But I never said he was a Nazi so you are applying your own context there.

Well the guy you posted the link to thinks Sargon is trying to, or at least making it easier for others to start an ethnostate so it was a fair assumption.

I don't like humour that's just designed to be shocking without any kind of point (which is a big reason I was never a fan of Frankie Boyle, though I now absolutely despise him.)

Still again the SJWs by being so easily offended are making it easier for this type of lazy humour to be daring and counter culture again.

Carl isn't the remotest bit important to the cultural debate or culture wars. Most of his work is speculative or poorly-cited pseudo-intellectual trash with a bit of polemic chucked in in order to seem edgy.

He's the chin-stroking man's favourite shit poster.

Boofer wrote:Carl isn't the remotest bit important to the cultural debate or culture wars. Most of his work is speculative or poorly-cited pseudo-intellectual trash with a bit of polemic chucked in in order to seem edgy.

He's the chin-stroking man's favourite shit poster.

Sadly that's not true. He has a massive following. Most youtubers don't make enough to even quit their day jobs. Sargon not only has, but is actually wealthy too.

If he was a journalist with that following then he would be seen as a fairy influential figure. Again I'm not saying he's going to change the world or anything, but he does have a wide reach.

Again I think he has become a poisonous influence due to becoming a Tory shill, but I want people like him debunked properly, rather than just smeared as Nazis and sexists which plays right into their hands.

burrunjor wrote:

Boofer wrote:Carl isn't the remotest bit important to the cultural debate or culture wars. Most of his work is speculative or poorly-cited pseudo-intellectual trash with a bit of polemic chucked in in order to seem edgy.

He's the chin-stroking man's favourite shit poster.

Sadly that's not true.

Go into your local Tesco, go on the Tannoy, and ask every normie to shout yay or nay if they know who Sargon is. Answer: probably none; maybe one or two disaffected, alienated young men with little to no political agency or clout.

Sargon isn't particularly well known outside of the hermetically-sealed dome of the internet scepticism/politics community. The overwhelming majority of people don't know who he is and what he stands for, therefore his impact on the wider debate is zero.

You can have a million subscribers worldwide and not even lightly brush against the culture you're trying to influence.

Conversely, someone like Jordan Peterson has. Mainly because he has true academic credentials, is a published author, and has been invited to speak within his native political system and in the wider mass-media. Yes, he's also part of that Youtube community now, but his success was down to his real world ability to oppose authoritarianism within an academic institution.

The likes of Sargon have never had such influence because they are pseuds playing at political philosophy from their bedroom studios. This is why they play so hard on polemics - they're looking to create digital controversies which propel them into the public eye. However, internet drama doesn't make particularly good news. You have to put yourself out there; earn your crust as a journalist. academic or a writer before you can penetrate the mainstream.

Good for him for making a bit of money though.

Got into a debate with Sargon on youtube today. He was rather polite, considering I've slagged him off more than a few times. It was about capitalism vs socialism as that's the area I feel Sargon goes wrong.

He's not as bad as other right wingers like say Yaron Brook or Dave Rubin who are against the NHS and the Welfare State. Sargon to his credit supports both, but his apologism and support for Pinochet and McCarthy are what pissed me off the most.

Sargon's views are incomprehensible to me these days. He seems to have completely lost his mind. He's mostly known for being a hardcore brexit supporter on democratic grounds - which would make sense if he didn't always take the anti-democratic position in regards to every other constitutional issue. Here we have someone who can't stop ranting about how democracy is at stake, yet supports first-past-the-post, the Electoral College, the House of Lords, is campaigning on behalf of a party that wants to scrap the devolved administrations, and has even begun flirting with the idea of returning political power to the monarchy. The guy is insane.

But the Electoral College is democratic, surely?. It prevents power over an entire country being decided by the denizens of just the one state.

Isn't that a city in Vietnam? I've never actually been so I can't really comment.

Again, what Cunnus Maximus says is true. He may have a million followers on social media, but millions more are like: Sargon of what? Is he from Lord of the Rings or something?
I'd never heard of Carl Benjamin until the whole rape 'joke' thing with Jess Phillips.
And it just typifies what I believe about contemporary tribalism. It's full of hypocrisy. She's a cunt because of her attitude towards male mental health issues, and he's a cunt retaliating the way he did.
I look at some people in politics today, (and I'm thinking Phillips more than Benjamin, because he's just a minor figure in an increasingly minor party), and think: were our political representatives always this crap, or is it just that every move they make is subject to so much more scrutiny these days, thanks to the internet?
Probably more of the latter, but definitely a bit of both if you ask me.

iank wrote:But the Electoral College is democratic, surely?. It prevents power over an entire country being decided by the denizens of just the one state.

The solution to that problem is devolving more power to the state level, not the electoral equivalent of affirmative action. I'm generally in favour of minimising the role of the federal government. I don't think it's possible for democracy to function on such a large scale, across such vast cultural differences, without a sizable chunk of the population ending up feeling left out.

I've gone off Sargon more and more these days. He's far too much of an apologist and shill for both Trump and the Tories. Never even addresses the human cost of Tory austerity, or Trump's backing of the Saudi's unending war on Yemen.

He's just not someone I can take seriously anymore.

Cunnus Maximus wrote:
Go into your local Tesco, go on the Tannoy, and ask every normie to shout yay or nay if they know who Sargon is. Answer: probably none; maybe one or two disaffected, alienated young men with little to no political agency or clout.

I'm not even sure the people that shop at my local Tesco know who the Queen is.

Tanmann wrote:I've gone off Sargon more and more these days. He's far too much of an apologist and shill for both Trump and the Tories. Never even addresses the human cost of Tory austerity, or Trump's backing of the Saudi's unending war on Yemen.

He's just not someone I can take seriously anymore.

It's disappointing, since he was once able to criticise the SJW crowd without abandoning sensible leftist ideas on poverty, austerity, the NHS, western imperialism, etc.





These days, he's just a partisan hack.

I think Sargon is just scared of Corbyn coming to popularity and power, and I can somewhat understand why. I think Corbyn has a lot of dodgy positions and allegiances.

But that said, I feel Sargon is being dishonest by omission in his U-turn by now completely ignoring and trying to bury the issue of what Tory austerity is doing to the poor, sick and disabled, even though it used to be his own concern. Hell these days he sounds head over heels over Priti Patel and she was one of the most vicious when it came to pushing for austerity cuts.

And he's pretty much doing the same to Trump's worst policies.

Surely this chap lost credibility when he made some stupid comment about rape and Jess Phillips MP. I don't much care for her - she has made some imbecilic comments herself - but Sargon's comment was beyond the pale for me. I don't care what she has said but Sargon only loses the PR battle by stooping to the level of that comment he made.

^
Precisely.

I've been going off him for a while, and now I'm at a stage where I will never give him the time of day ever again.

I could've lived with him gloating over the recent Labour defeat. But he's just proven to be a complete troll who's now been trying (right when it couldn't be more important that Labour gets the right new leader) to get VoteLammy trending on twitter just to make the party completely unelectable.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I honestly thought that clown was better than this.

The guy's basically a grifter, and it serves his purposes to help ruin the Labour party just so he can make hay out of the catastrophe. And I guess fuck all the people who continue to get fucked over by the Tories in the meantime.

I have been browzing this chap's videos since Burrunjor started this thread. Some of his videos are insightful, some not. After watching one i usually take a step back and read / look elsewhere before forming my own opinion on the issues he discusses.

Tbh, if Labour Party members vote for Lammy it will be because they think he is a good potential leader for reasons other than Sargon's VoteLammy twitter thing. They are not naive but politically active, intelligent party members who will be following the forthcoming leadership debates closely. Which in turn suggests to me thy won't vote for Lammy anyway. And if they do vote for him in significant enough numbers, those same party members will have only themselves to blame for whatever calamities then befall them. Not Sargon.

The problem is it's been made very easy these days (thanks to Ed Miliband) to buy a cheap membership to the Labour party to have a vote in the upcoming leadership contest (I was even thinking of joining myself). It's how Corbyn won, and how Momentum entered and gained de facto control of the party.

Infact there have even been claims that in 2015 there were devious Tories purchasing Labour membership just to vote in Corbyn as leader precisely because they believed he'd make the party unelectable.

Would Sargon's fans waste £3 to do the same? Maybe they wouldn't (I don't think he has much of a UKIP fanbase either). But the fact he'd even try and would be so gleeful about the prospect definitely makes him seem very shady to me. I just don't think we need clowns like him involved in politics.

I don't know how influential he is. Maybe I overestimate how much, simply because the Trump and Brexit vote he endorsed went his way (though the 2017 election result of Labour gains certainly didn't).

At the moment it looks like Labour's Keir Starmer is a near foregone conclusion with Rebecca Long-Bailey just behind (personally I prefer Long-Bailey, but I don't know if the electorate would go for her). Momentum might be the deciding factor that see Rebecca beat Keir after all. But most projections suggest Lammy will get knocked out early, so maybe it's not to worry.

Sargon has very little influence. He's just a weirdo antagonist and extreme libertarian spluttering along on the fumes of his previous fame like Hopkins and Milo - none of whom will ever be in the public eye again unless they have a Damascene conversion to respectfulness and good taste.