[TheOllam]

Been listening to him for over a year, and found some great topics and points.

He's an excellent, well reasoned take-down artist of leftist SJW feminism along with its cultural cancer. Plus he's British as far as I can tell by the accent.

YouTube Video: "The Regressive Left has Become the Religious Right" where he breaks down an SJW outline on how the "right" is preparing to strike a major blow against the regressive left.

Sargon's comments are taken from "Loki the Scottish Rapper" an apparent lefty, white male SJW type, that seems to realize the absurdity of his cult, but is probably stuck too deep to escape.

At 9:16, the RooshV meet-up and how the rights of free speech and assembly were trampled, with lengthy explanation of the ramifications.

2016 is a major year, hopefully a turning point for sensible discourse and a rebalancing of our society from freakish gyno-centrism that many people (including myself) have suffered through far too long.

This video talks about how casual centrists and otherwise disinterested males will begin to move right now they see how clearly the regressive left has stacked the deck against them politically, economically and socially. What started as pick-up artistry has become a greater issue regarding masculinity in our modern era.

I'm sure we all saw this coming right?

Mods: I searched the forum for other Sargon of Akkad Threads, but did not find one. I thought it would be appropriate to keep a thread to track this discussion as we move forward this year, and add more videos from Sargon when needed.

[GlobalMan]

He makes some great content for sure.

However, I was surprised by his support of Bernie and disdain for Trump, given his contempt for the SJW/Anti free speech crowd. I don't quite get that one.

[TheOllam]

(04-07-2016 10:12 PM)GlobalMan Wrote:  

He makes some great content for sure.

However, I was surprised by his support of Bernie and disdain for Trump, given his contempt for the SJW/Anti free speech crowd. I don't quite get that one.

Though the content I've listened to has been more-or-less Sargon ripping on Trump Haters, I like that.

The mysteries of Sargon, that's why it's in the Deep forum.

I chalk it up to him being a foreigner to US politics...........

[GlobalMan]

(04-07-2016 10:20 PM)TheOllam Wrote:  

I chalk it up to him being a foreigner to US politics...........

I think you're right. My guess is that being a Brit makes it difficult for him to like a "brash" guy like Trump

[armenia4ever]

Oh Aurini is going to have something to say about this thread hehe.

I personally still really enjoy Sargons material, and for all the disagreements I have with him;

1. He's a good introduction to "spheres" you will jump into later. Consider where anti feminism leads for people - places like here.

2. He's rather genuine in his conduct and people he disagrees with. I like it.

[TheOllam]

(04-08-2016 11:14 PM)armenia4ever Wrote:  

Oh Aurini is going to have something to say about this thread hehe.

I personally still really enjoy Sargons material, and for all the disagreements I have with him;

1. He's a good introduction to "spheres" you will jump into later. Consider where anti feminism leads for people - places like here.

2. He's rather genuine in his conduct and people he disagrees with. I like it.

"Social Justice Losers" is hilarious and highly observant of several controversial media moments that have popped up in several other threads. He ties them all together to express the greater narrative.

Hiis breakdown of "Carl the Cuck" sums up so much of the Anti-Trump movement @ 11:22: Even breaking down his weak body language.

I really enjoy his content as well. Based on these recent videos, he is skewering the Anti-Trumps brilliantly. I can agree with that much

[TheOllam]

From "This Week in Stupid (17/04/2016)"

@ 7:36 "Trump Effect" Stirring Hatred and Fear in Schools"

Report Says: "My students are terrified of Donald Trump" says a middle school teacher with a large student body of African American Muslims. They think if he is elected all black people will get sent back to Africa"

Sargon: "...I don't recall Donald Trump saying anything about black people other than "They Love Me" which is what he says about everyone, everywhere, all the time..."

"...what this does is demonstrate the power of an unchecked narrative if you block everyone that fucking disagrees with you and you sit there going "Donald Trump is the new Hitler," you will have people who genuinely think Donald Trump is the New Hitler..."

[Aurini]

(04-08-2016 11:14 PM)armenia4ever Wrote:  

Oh Aurini is going to have something to say about this thread hehe.

At this point attacking him would be expensive, and victory would offer me very little benefit. I am not skilled at the game of soundbites.

As with anyone else, I would advise that you pay attention to what a person does, rather than what they say.

[hydrogonian]

(04-17-2016 07:38 PM)TheOllam Wrote:  

@ 7:36 "Trump Effect" Stirring Hatred and Fear in Schools"

Report Says: "My students are terrified of Donald Trump" says a middle school teacher with a large student body of African American Muslims. They think if he is elected all black people will get sent back to Africa"

I don't believe that anyone gave them this impression outside of their media-reinforced echo chamber.

I think that their opinion is largely a result of their over-emotional, reason-free cognitive process.

And so goes the nature of democracy. As soon as one introduces true-stupid, or more precisely true antagonistic interests (that incentivize inter-group willful misunderstanding [ie: stupid]), on a mass scale it breaks. It really only works in small homogeneous groups with mostly similar political interests who are, essentially, only voting on how to best make those self-evident interests manifest. As soon as groups are voting on the interests themselves, because they are in natural sociopolitical opposition, it can be said that the fractured nation is effectively post-democracy and in a cold-war state.

As of now, voting for the POTUS is roughly akin to two opposing armies voting on a single general to lead one army against the other. Whichever army turns out in greater numbers gets a general and thus gets to attempt to fuck the other army for four years.

It follows that mass immigration is, at its core, political displacement.

[TheOllam]

(04-18-2016 12:39 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 07:38 PM)TheOllam Wrote:  

@ 7:36 "Trump Effect" Stirring Hatred and Fear in Schools"

Report Says: "My students are terrified of Donald Trump" says a middle school teacher with a large student body of African American Muslims. They think if he is elected all black people will get sent back to Africa"

I don't believe that anyone gave them this impression outside of their media-reinforced echo chamber.

I think that their opinion is largely a result of their over-emotional, reason-free cognitive process.

And so goes the nature of democracy. As soon as one introduces true-stupid, or more precisely true antagonistic interests (that incentivize inter-group willful misunderstanding [ie: stupid]), on a mass scale it breaks. It really only works in small homogeneous groups with mostly similar political interests who are, essentially, only voting on how to best make those self-evident interests manifest. As soon as groups are voting on the interests themselves, because they are in natural sociopolitical opposition, it can be said that the fractured nation is effectively post-democracy and in a cold-war state.

As of now, voting for the POTUS is roughly akin to two opposing armies voting on a single general to lead one army against the other. Whichever army turns out in greater numbers gets a general and thus gets to attempt to fuck the other army for four years.

It follows that mass immigration is, at its core, political displacement.

Good points. I think a lot about how teachers struggle with Nature VS Nurture when trying to educate others.

From practical experience, I can clearly see how stupid teachers influence and reinforce stupidity in children by way of projecting political theory through a reactionary mindset via their interpretation of curriculum.

I think many teachers enter cognitive dissonance as a result of simply having to deal with and manage a bunch of young people every year while they grow older.

They Succeed by living inside this "Bubble" but any politician that can seemingly break the rules like Trump MAGA 2016 and roll to victory threatens that safe narrative they thrive on, leading to "fear" as the top of mind concept driving the remainder of classroom discussion.

In Sargon's example, we see classrooms in distress due to foolish teachers unable to explain emotion in politics, both it's negative and positive consequences, and how we should learn from the 2016 campaigns rather than fear the results.

[hydrogonian]

Which is why there should be no politics in the classroom, to include the history classroom. 99% of teachers are too politically (and intellectually) disabled to teach or mediate on the subject of politics. Think of the average sorority girl. That's the average teacher. When kids bring up politics in the classroom, they should simply be dissuaded. It's entirely too complicated for most kids to grasp, and those who can grasp it would be prevented from any intellectually productive discussion due to political correctness.

In short, media outlets that appeal to the political opinions of eleven year old children, to influence wider political opinion, are almost invariably doing evil work.

[TheOllam]

(04-18-2016 02:05 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

99% of teachers are too politically (and intellectually) disabled to teach or mediate on the subject of politics.

Is that a Verifiable Fact?

But I get your point, especially the retard millennial aged female teachers we see today.

There was a time when these topics were covered in social studies and civics classes to help students understand government and elections, and teachers did a good job without pushing a right/left bias.

I'd rather not ban the topics from school entirely, but it seems like only a select number of private schools can even broach the subject given that public schools appear to be filled with the "GibsMeDat" cohort.

[hydrogonian]

Quote:

[quote] (04-18-2016 02:20 PM)TheOllam Wrote:  

99% of teachers are too politically (and intellectually) disabled to teach or mediate on the subject of politics.

Is that a Verifiable Fact?

Sure. Just like everyone else's "verifiable facts" ( that are all cited throughout this forum, correct?). Look, respectfully, just say "I disagree". Sarcastically implying that I need a citation, or the equivalent, for my experiential opinion isn't good rhetoric. The fact is that it has been my experience when working in the primary school setting that most teachers are low information and of average intelligence. The veracity of this "fact" will be relative to anyone else's perspective (to generalize), of course. This is mine.

Quote:

But I get your point, especially the retard millennial aged female teachers we see today.

You're being too kind to most other teachers. When they are smart, they are usually still low information either willfully (due to political views) or not. The fact is that being politically astute isn't something that most teachers even have the time to become if they have broken out of their information bubble to begin with (rare).

Quote:

There was a time when these topics were covered in social studies and civics classes to help students understand government and elections, and teachers did a good job without pushing a right/left bias.

Maybe. My experience, twenty years ago, was quite agenda driven and that was in a school with better teachers.

Quote:

I'd rather not ban the topics from school entirely,

Why? If politics can't be taught consistently on a competent level (as if that would be allowed) then the political opinions of children should not be indulged in school. When the kids get upset, it leads to manipulative articles like the one above quoted.

If curriculums are to be cleansed of their potential for political abuse, then politics shouldn't be indulged. As of now, leaving the door open merely means liberal indoctrination both intentionally and unintentionally under the watch of teachers who mostly have no idea how to mediate the political knowledge deficiency and political discussions of children.

Quote:

but it seems like only a select number of private schools can even broach the subject given that public schools appear to be filled with the "GibsMeDat" cohort.

Good point, theoretically speaking. However, what you will find, almost invariably, is an intensification of the social justice and overall liberal indoctrination. They learn the same views, only more in-depth and to a better degree of indoctrination due to the money and care spent on their curriculum. Additionally, this occurs due to the influence of the almost always neo-liberal / neocon / trotskyist nature of the board members at the truly better schools.

Again, this is all my experience. Yours may vary. Are you a teacher?

[TheOllam]

(04-18-2016 03:08 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

Quote:

[quote] (04-18-2016 02:20 PM)TheOllam Wrote:  

99% of teachers are too politically (and intellectually) disabled to teach or mediate on the subject of politics.

Is that a Verifiable Fact?

Sure. Just like everyone else's "verifiable facts" ( that are all cited throughout this forum, correct?). Look, respectfully, just say "I disagree". Sarcastically implying that I need a citation, or the equivalent, for my experiential opinion isn't good rhetoric. The fact is that it has been my experience when working in the primary school setting that most teachers are low information and of average intelligence. The veracity of this "fact" will be relative to anyone else's perspective (to generalize), of course. This is mine.

Quote:

But I get your point, especially the retard millennial aged female teachers we see today.

You're being too kind to most other teachers. When they are smart, they are usually still low information either willfully (due to political views) or not. The fact is that being politically astute isn't something that most teachers even have the time to become if they have broken out of their information bubble to begin with (rare).

Quote:

There was a time when these topics were covered in social studies and civics classes to help students understand government and elections, and teachers did a good job without pushing a right/left bias.

Maybe. My experience, twenty years ago, was quite agenda driven and that was in a school with better teachers.

Quote:

I'd rather not ban the topics from school entirely,

Why? If politics can't be taught consistently on a competent level (as if that would be allowed) then the political opinions of children should not be indulged in school. When the kids get upset, it leads to manipulative articles like the one above quoted.

If curriculums are to be cleansed of their potential for political abuse, then politics shouldn't be indulged. As of now, leaving the door open merely means liberal indoctrination both intentionally and unintentionally under the watch of teachers who mostly have no idea how to mediate the political knowledge deficiency and political discussions of children.

Quote:

but it seems like only a select number of private schools can even broach the subject given that public schools appear to be filled with the "GibsMeDat" cohort.

Good point, theoretically speaking. However, what you will find, almost invariably, is an intensification of the social justice and overall liberal indoctrination. They learn the same views, only more in-depth and to a better degree of indoctrination due to the money and care spent on their curriculum. Additionally, this occurs due to the influence of the almost always neo-liberal / neocon / trotskyist nature of the board members at the truly better schools.

Again, this is all my experience. Yours may vary. Are you a teacher?

I know A LOT of teachers and worked in the college level until it went completely off the rails during the Obama admin, so I fled to the private sector and changed my game. Much happier now

[TheOllam]

Suport for Trump on latest This Week in Stupid: @ 20:17

"...with Donald Trump because the man just pisses off all the right people.
In a sane world I would find the idea of voting for Donald Trump to be absolutely laughable. And he would never have got as far as he's gotten but honestly at this point I think I would actually vote for Donald Trump and not just because he's the sign of a system that is in need of reform.

I'd probably do it to get up in the craw of people like Vox.com. Listen to this, last month Donald Trump accused Hillary Clinton of playing the woman card. This suggests she's only polling well because she's a woman or because she's duping politically correct liberals with a gender equality guilt trip.

Well given hillary's unpopularity among progressives, it's interesting how you literally going to start defending her just because she's being attacked by Donald Trump. If she was talking to Bernie Sanders you'd be probably very anti-Hillary. wouldn't you. Trump is wrong in the polling and wrong on the gender politics but over the weekend he doubled down on his wrong idea in the most Trump way possible suggesting that men and not women are really oppressed ones."

[Mr. D]

Apparently, Sargon's on vacation:

[Mr. D]

[rotekz]

He has done some great stuff but can also be really irritating and tedious in the way that he argues. Mixed bag.

[TheOllam]

(06-14-2016 01:08 PM)Mr. D Wrote:  

Nice to compare voices of Islam, but it's very clear that homosexuals are not acceptable to true believers.

In the west, we socially evolved past religious wars, and in the US we see a birth of a nation with the "enlightenment" ideals. See, we as a society can accept homosexuals even if we disapprove the lifestyle. That's Freedom, and there is no room for it in the Muslim faith apparently.

[Mr. D]

(06-14-2016 01:54 PM)TheOllam Wrote:  

(06-14-2016 01:08 PM)Mr. D Wrote:  

Nice to compare voices of Islam, but it's very clear that homosexuals are not acceptable to true believers.

Which is quite ironic, considering the progenitors preferences.

Quote:

In the west, we socially evolved past religious wars, and in the US we see a birth of a nation with the "enlightenment" ideals. See, we as a society can accept homosexuals even if we disapprove the lifestyle. That's Freedom, and there is no room for it in the Muslim faith apparently.

To a sheep, a pen is a habitat of controlled freedom.

[911]

(06-14-2016 01:54 PM)TheOllam Wrote:  

(06-14-2016 01:08 PM)Mr. D Wrote:  

Nice to compare voices of Islam, but it's very clear that homosexuals are not acceptable to true believers.

In the west, we socially evolved past religious wars, and in the US we see a birth of a nation with the "enlightenment" ideals. See, we as a society can accept homosexuals even if we disapprove the lifestyle. That's Freedom, and there is no room for it in the Muslim faith apparently.

California, the most liberal state in the union, only sanctioned gay marriage in 2008, and barely so (52% for). Gays were barely tolerated in the military up to 2010, before that you could be fired for being openly gay.



The muslim world is well behind. In term of social and cultural conservatism, countries like Turkey or Lebanon are similar to 1950s America or W. Europe. More backwards places like Saudi or Pakistan are more like 1900 Europe.

It's all good for now, but at the rate things are going, I'd rather live in a place like Turkey that is stuck in the 1950s than in what the US is going to become in 10-20 years. To that extent, their religion has been helping them preserve their basic social norms.

Countries like Russia seem to strike the right balance on this subject, they're pulling the reins back towards the 1950s. Gays aren't really persecuted there (despite what you hear in western propaganda), but they aren't held up as some kind of ideal lifestyle to be elevated above normal behavior and taught to children either.

[TheOllam]

^^^ Agree. When speaking with folks on the left that are pro-gay marriage, I'm careful to explain:

1. My tolerance of gays.

2. The misuse of the Supreme Court to force the institution. (I believe the states should have choice in the matter)

3. The hypocrisy considering that straight marriage in the usa is in the dumper.

That being said, I'd rather live in a tolerant society that can honor personal life style choices Including traditionalism as you noted, like in Russia.

[Leonard D Neubache]

(06-14-2016 10:50 PM)911 Wrote:  

While this map is not a prime example, itreminded me of the fact that while voting in the megacities is often highly progressive, geographically speaking conservatives own most western nations.

It would only take for food trucks to stop rolling for a week or two and the progressive disease would consume itself.

[Hades]

He's got a bit of that smug British schtick going, which I like listening to. Other than that I hope he has great luck fighting the powers that be.

[TheOllam]

Britain chooses Freedom over Fear

Sargon covers the triumph of Brexit.

His advice is clear.

"Instead of being bitter, my advice to those that want to remain, is you need to realign your ideas now."

He's right to point out how salty the remain camp has been. As noted in the Brexit thread, the Butthurt has been epic from that camp, and they quickly turn into roadblocks. They become anti-democratic when they diminish the value of the voters that supported Brexit. They want democracy until it does not support all their wants/needs.

I also appreciate the forward looking perspective here. This is the vote, this is the way forward. The reason why? Because the future of Remain removes GB sovereignty!