The Liberalists

[I'm With Stupid]

Sounds like basic libertarianism. What I've never understood about that philosophy is how of all of the artificial rights that society bestows on people, property is the only one they're in favour of preserving.

 

[BobKowalski]

Sounds like basic libertarianism. What I've never understood about that philosophy is how of all of the artificial rights that society bestows on people, property is the only one they're in favour of preserving.

Freedom and personal liberty for all! Now get orf moi land.

 

[Pell]

I love real debate and opposing views trying to convince and reason with those whose opionions differ.

A you tuber making statememts aimed a certain group is not debate, especially when it normally involved basically slagging some people off and the unfortunate effects of social media politics is that, even if the intention is to engage in a discussion, too many cranks now latch on and the conversation is drowned out

Then this myth that tbese vloggers are champions of free speach and people opposed to them are trying to shut it down is bollocks, the twat can post what he likes and in turn people can call him out for it, but I show no reason to consider him a serious voice unless he is out talking to oppsition views and having a conversation.

I don't see real debate from these types or from the same on the left or centre, he has no interest in hearing or tying to come round to the opinions of those he slates so on his part debate is dead, just as much as it is on others including those who oppose his view.

Then again these Youtube campaigners are raking in roughly 5 grand a month, so the cynic in me thinks none are that sincere in their views

From Patreon, not Youtube. Youtube won't monetize you for "controversial" political videos.

 

[Ghandi's Flip Flops]

I love real debate and opposing views trying to convince and reason with those whose opionions differ.

A you tuber making statememts aimed a certain group is not debate, especially when it normally involved basically slagging some people off and the unfortunate effects of social media politics is that, even if the intention is to engage in a discussion, too many cranks now latch on and the conversation is drowned out

Can you give an example of where Sargon basically slags off a certain group without giving his reasoning behind it?
Like i said previously, his M.O. is rebuttal videos against views & opinions he opposes; if people didn't post stupid stuff in the first place he wouldn't have any material to work with.
Also, why is it his problem if cranks latch on to the conversation? Does this make his opinions, views & ideas less valid or is it purely they can be dismissed by 'guilt through association'.

Then this myth that tbese vloggers are champions of free speach and people opposed to them are trying to shut it down is bollocks, the twat can post what he likes and in turn people can call him out for it, but I show no reason to consider him a serious voice unless he is out talking to oppsition views and having a conversation.

So do you consider a campaign of getting him banned from twitter, mass flagging of his youtube channel to get community strikes, and targetting Patreon to get his account removed is not an attempt to shut him down?

I don't see real debate from these types or from the same on the left or centre, he has no interest in hearing or tying to come round to the opinions of those he slates so on his part debate is dead, just as much as it is on others including those who oppose his view.

Maybe try watching Sargon's debate with Thomas Smith from last years Mythcon event. If you don't consider that listening & debating with the opposition, then i'm not sure what you would.

Or have a read of this report https://datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/DS_Alternative_Influence.pdf
The introduction explains how the most viewed livestream for Jan 2018 was a debate between Sargon (who constantly opposes White Nationalism in his vids) and Richard Spencer.
If you then proceed continue to the conclusion it makes interesting reading, basically concededing that not only people with far right views & opinions need reigning in, but also those from the centre etc who provide them with a platform. Again it seems a case of guilt by association.

Then again these Youtube campaigners are raking in roughly 5 grand a month, so the cynic in me thinks none are that sincere in their views

There was some evidence & conjecture that at one point Sargon was earning £60-80 grand a year from his youtube channel. Nice work if you can get it, but his ideas & opinions must be striking a chord somewhere, because if they didn't have some validity & merit to some people he'd earn sweet FA.

I somehow get the feeling you haven't ever listened to Sargon or got a clue what he is about

 

[BobKowalski]

I'd never heard of Sargon of Akkad (what a twatty name, btw - fantasy meets fantasist) before today, but by chance I was reading the below article on Bellingcat earlier.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/americas/2018/10/11/memes-infowars-75-fascist-activists-red-pilled/

Inspiration for US neo-nazi nut jobs apparently.

Why the disenchanted let themselves get distracted by bullshit argument, when they are being robbed blind and the planet is on a fast track to climate hell is a mystery to me. What happened to good old fashioned class war?

Interesting article.

Not sure they are disenchanted as such more that it gives them a meaning that they lacked previously and is a way of exercising a feeling of superiority. They are awake unlike the rest of us and to argue against them is a sign of herd like thinking or you have never actually listened to any of the proponents such as Saragon (honestly I can never get over the names they use. I’m automatically thinking ‘here’s another dick’). Followers are always encouraging you to listen to them or printing manifestos to get you to engage. It’s political grooming.

For me at the heart of it there is just a sucking black void. It looks nice and reasonable and ‘surely you believe in free speech’ and all that but it’s just so damn empty and sterile. It’s clever but very one dimensional. It has no depth. Getting into bed with these guys would be like dating a corpse.

Guess I need to keep popping those red pills or maybe I’m just immune :)

 

[Metal Biker]

I love real debate and opposing views trying to convince and reason with those whose opionions differ.

A you tuber making statememts aimed a certain group is not debate, especially when it normally involved basically slagging some people off and the unfortunate effects of social media politics is that, even if the intention is to engage in a discussion, too many cranks now latch on and the conversation is drowned out

Then this myth that tbese vloggers are champions of free speach and people opposed to them are trying to shut it down is bollocks, the twat can post what he likes and in turn people can call him out for it, but I show no reason to consider him a serious voice unless he is out talking to oppsition views and having a conversation.

I don't see real debate from these types or from the same on the left or centre, he has no interest in hearing or tying to come round to the opinions of those he slates so on his part debate is dead, just as much as it is on others including those who oppose his view.

Then again these Youtube campaigners are raking in roughly 5 grand a month, so the cynic in me thinks none are that sincere in their views

But it is how younger people are engaging in politics and forming their political stances.

They aren't watching Question Time, This Week, PLP conferences on BBC Parliament or Andrew Marr like older generations. Short, snappy 10-20 minute videos easily accessible on their smartphone. It's also not helped when those who are opposing people like Meechan and Benjamin tend to use ad hominem attacks to discredit them rather than debate them directly on their views and opinions. They've often made their opponents look silly because they've acted silly with ridiculous opening arguments that has gained them a lot of attention and "support", because it is their opinion that they are the ones trying to have a reasoned debate, but are having to contend with "shouty liberal types" whose only choice of discourse is to shout "racist" at every opinion they don't like to hear, and that has resonated with a lot of people who have had similar experiences whenever they've debated with others on the opposing political spectrum.

You might not like this type of debate or consider it true debating, but it's popular with those under the age of 30, those who find current political discussion to be stale, tedious, unchanging and incompetant as well as the current theme that the "elites" don't listen to the "regular people" out of snobbery and their rejection of internet culture being a valid form of political discussion and a genuine place for debate. That's why they've grown.

 

[urban genie]

But it is how younger people are engaging in politics and forming their political stances.

They aren't watching Question Time, This Week, PLP conferences on BBC Parliament or Andrew Marr like older generations. Short, snappy 10-20 minute videos easily accessible on their smartphone. It's also not helped when those who are opposing people like Meechan and Benjamin tend to use ad hominem attacks to discredit them rather than debate them directly on their views and opinions. They've often made their opponents look silly because they've acted silly with ridiculous opening arguments that has gained them a lot of attention and "support", because it is their opinion that they are the ones trying to have a reasoned debate, but are having to contend with "shouty liberal types" whose only choice of discourse is to shout "racist" at every opinion they don't like to hear, and that has resonated with a lot of people who have had similar experiences whenever they've debated with others on the opposing political spectrum.

You might not like this type of debate or consider it true debating, but it's popular with those under the age of 30, those who find current political discussion to be stale, tedious, unchanging and incompetant as well as the current theme that the "elites" don't listen to the "regular people" out of snobbery and their rejection of internet culture being a valid form of political discussion and a genuine place for debate. That's why they've grown.

I get that and both the left and right are using it to great effect, I just think it only preaches to the converted.

 

[lust overlord]

I had never heard of this Sargon fella until very recently.
Having watched a few of his videos,I think he has a lot of valid points about freedom of speech and racial and sexual discrimination.

What I will say however,is that as good as he is at pointing out flaws in the current system he is arguing against, he doesn't usually come up with a workable solution that has any type of detail.

Taking him on face value,and assuming he has no ulterior motives,he at least gets people to think about freedom of speech and discrimination by asking questions of the current system.

 

[BobKowalski]

I had never heard of this Sargon fella until very recently.
Having watched a few of his videos,I think he has a lot of valid points about freedom of speech and racial and sexual discrimination.

What I will say however,is that as good as he is at pointing out flaws in the current system he is arguing against, he doesn't usually come up with a workable solution that has any type of detail.

Taking him on face value,and assuming he has no ulterior motives,he at least gets people to think about freedom of speech and discrimination by asking questions of the current system.

The point is not to advance a workable solution with details. The point is to make you doubt the way free speech or discrimination is currently framed and then to accept the way they frame it. Once you accept their framing the ‘solution’ is self evident. Be it political systems, religions, cults or advertising the trick is framing the arguments on grounds of their choosing and then the solutions flow from that. Key is the motivation behind the framing. What is the end game here? What is the speaker really aiming for? If you can’t trust the motives of the speaker you can’t trust the sincerity of the argument. The first thing these people are after is your trust. Once they have your trust they call sell you all manner of shite.

My problem is that I have insurmountable trust issues :)

 

[lust overlord]

The point is not to advance a workable solution with details. The point is to make you doubt the way free speech or discrimination is currently framed and then to accept the way they frame it. Once you accept their framing the ‘solution’ is self evident. Be it political systems, religions, cults or advertising the trick is framing the arguments on grounds of their choosing and then the solutions flow from that. Key is the motivation behind the framing. What is the end game here? What is the speaker really aiming for? If you can’t trust the motives of the speaker you can’t trust the sincerity of the argument. The first thing these people are after is your trust. Once they have your trust they call sell you all manner of shite.



My problem is that I have insurmountable trust issues :)

Yeah I must confess to being a cynic myself mostly when it comes to things political :)
Mainly because I see people like me,working class,have been,and still are being let down by politicians,of all persuasions, for years.

I'd like to see my cynicism being replaced by positivity for a change though.