All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 3, 2017 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
25:21
This Week in Stupid (03⧸09⧸2017)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello everyone, welcome to this week in Stupid for the 3rd of September 2017.
It's been a very good week this week and we've had many victories on multiple fronts.
Let me take you through a few of them.
The first one is L'Oreal firing their first trans model.
Now I know how that sounds.
I'm not in favour of them firing trans people, but this isn't because she was trans, this is because of the things that she said.
So L'Oréal Paris fired its first transgender model to join the brand just days after announcing the partnership.
L'Oréal released a statement on Twitter, which is where everyone releases statements these days apparently, Friday morning saying the company champions diversity but decided to cut ties with Monroe Bergdorf, saying her comments calling out white America's racism in a recent Facebook post are at odds with their values.
Monroe Bergdorf, the person in question, wasn't simply calling out America's racism, was she?
I imagine she was probably making some racial generalizations herself, wasn't she?
Let's find out.
So Bergdorf received big buzz, not a big buzz, just received big buzz, earlier this week after L'Oreal announced her inclusion in a YouTube video ad for L'Oreal Paris, true matching, whatever.
But Bergdorf's excitement was short-lived because she's a tremendous bigot.
For me, them hiring people like this is like them saying, right, we've hired Richard Spencer to be the face of our company, and then Richard Spencer going on a tirade about blacks or Jews.
It's like, well, what did you expect?
By Friday, the company had disavowed comments the model previously made on social media, which surfaced in a report by the Daily Mail published on Thursday.
The damning piece blasted Bergdorf over her comments, claiming that she wrote, all white people are racist.
Imagine my shock.
Spectators highlighted how her words had been misrepresented and taken out of context.
Well, what is the context?
Was she saying, well, not all white people are racist?
Perhaps, isn't that the context that was missing?
Or was she paraphrasing someone else?
Or was she actually saying that she believes all white people are racist and then expands on that at length?
I'll let you guess which one is the correct answer, but it's hardly surprising that apologism like this is coming from the Huffington Post.
This is precisely where I'd expect to find it.
Spectators highlighted how her words had been misrepresented and taken out of context, with some even suggesting that the story was a deliberate attempt to downplay Bergdorf entirely, with someone saying the Daily Mail is trying to destroy the career of a young black trans woman for making observations on white complicity in racism.
It's exactly what you expect, isn't it?
Cookie-cutter SJW bigotry is what we're dealing with here.
It's not even anything original.
She's just taking it to its final logical conclusion by determining actually yeah, all white people are racist.
All of Western society is based on racism.
And maybe, just maybe, I'll move to Zimbabwe.
Really makes you think, doesn't it?
Really activates those almonds.
Why do all of these people who are not white stay in white supremacist countries?
If I was living in, say, oh, I don't know, Zimbabwe, I would be like, well, this is a black supremacist country.
I'm not black.
Therefore, I'm going to leave because I'm going to be a persecuted, oppressed minority.
However, these people don't want to leave Western countries because when everything is said and done, they know they are not white supremacist countries.
Because white supremacist countries wouldn't elect, oh, I don't know, say, a black president.
They wouldn't have black trans models modelling their makeup and clothes and whatnot.
This wouldn't happen in a white supremacist country, and they fucking know it.
What I'm saying is that anyone who says the West is white supremacist is a fucking liar.
She says, honestly, I don't have the energy to talk about the racial violence of white people anymore.
Maybe you should go somewhere that there aren't white people then.
Move to China, there are no white people there.
Go to India, hardly any white people.
You won't experience the racial violence of white people at all.
But none of these things matter.
None of this matters.
All you can do is sit there and go, Yeah, but hundreds of years ago, and I'll stop you there.
We're not living hundreds of years ago.
Neither me nor you nor anyone else is living hundreds of years ago.
So if you're going to bring up something from hundreds of years ago to explain why Western countries now are bad, I think that A, you're being completely disingenuous.
And B, you're free to leave.
You are actually free to leave any Western country you want.
Unlike certain other countries where you're not allowed to leave, and I could name a bunch, but I'm not going to bother.
You are free to just go wherever the fuck you like.
And that means out of this country and into a non-white country where there is no white supremacy.
It is rather amazing how many non-white people want to live under a white supremacy.
And I'm just saying this from our immigration numbers, it's honestly incredible to me that so many people, I mean, you've got progressives in the media all day, every day, screaming white supremacy, white supremacy, white supremacy.
I mean, they must be looking at our papers and going, well, I mean, it's still pretty good.
It's still better than what we've got now.
It's, I mean, yeah, okay, white supremacy, but what does that mean?
I have to get a job.
Okay.
I have to treat other people as equals.
Okay.
I have to not be racist.
Okay, that's an interesting thing for a white supremacy to put into law, but okay.
And I have freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, which is interesting.
Jesus Christ, white supremacy sounds fucking amazing.
It's almost like it took hundreds of years to get people these civil rights and liberties.
And for some reason, people like Bergdorf here are trapped in the 18th century and refuse to actually arrive in the modern day where these things aren't actually happening.
Except, oh no, no, that's not true.
Actually, slide correction.
Where these things aren't happening in Western countries that she's calling white supremacist countries.
Just to be clear.
These things are still happening.
They're just not happening here.
And they're not happening here because we all decided these things are highly immoral and we won't stand for them.
And therefore we outlawed them.
Unlike some other countries, which actually would still have slaves, if we weren't the ones telling them they weren't allowed slaves.
But that is just white supremacy in action.
Honestly, we're so oppressive.
Most of y'all don't even realize or refuse to acknowledge that your existence, privilege, and success as a race is built on the backs, blood, and death of people of color.
Amazing.
I mean, I guess we should just call these people racialists.
They're just concerned about nothing but race.
I mean, the idea that, like, you owe something racially to other white people is bizarre to me.
I don't owe any white people anything.
But it is a fortunate circumstance of history that I happen to be born in a place that has actually gone through the fires of all of these things.
Whereas you could go somewhere else in the world today and it's like living 300 years ago.
But hey, I mean, you know, progress is not for everyone.
I think the best bit about that statement is that you could literally apply that to any racial group and it would be true.
I mean, what are you going to do?
Go to the Zulus.
Do you know what?
Your existence, privilege, and success as a race is built on the backs and blood and death of people of color.
Totally true.
Good for the Mongols.
By the way, your existence as a success and privilege as a race is built on the backs and blood and death of people of color.
Totally true.
Hate Japan.
Hate the Middle East.
Guess what the success of your race is built on?
That's right, the backs, blood, and death of people of colour.
But more importantly for the Middle East, it's also for white people.
But I guess that's not a problem.
It's really not something that is particularly useful to say to anyone because history is as history is.
To make a moral judgment out of it when literally everyone was doing it and everyone thought it was the thing to be done is baffling.
Why not punish the other people?
Is it because they lost?
Is it just success that we're angry about here?
You know, oh, white people did this better than other people.
Well, we're so sorry.
Your entire existence is drenched in racism.
Alright, let's assume it is.
Why are you being taken seriously by white people?
At all.
If our existence is entirely drenched in racism and you are a trans person of colour, then why would you be given a platform?
Why wouldn't you just be put back in the cotton fields?
Oh, is it not because we are actually entirely drenched in racism and that's just meaningless, hyperbolic SJW rhetoric?
This is nonsense.
From microaggressions to terrorism, you guys built the blueprint for this shit.
The fuck we did.
The fuck we did.
We found a fully functional, completely intact caste hierarchy of slave traders who would find the darker people from Inner Africa and sell them to the white man or to the Arabs or to whoever was already slave trading at the time.
And we were like, hey, would you like some guns in exchange for this human labor?
The idea that you think we built this is amazing.
We actually didn't.
People of color managed to make this all on their own and we were like, hey, that's a good idea.
Looks profitable.
And then after a few hundred years, we were like, Angeli, this is fucking immoral.
How has no one stopped this until this point?
And unbelievably, no one else had.
It was just us, baby.
Come see me when you realize racism isn't learned.
It's inherited or consciously, or unconsciously, passed down through privilege.
Right, okay, racism is just inherent in people.
Is that what you're saying?
Which would explain why you think that everyone's entire existence is drenched in racism, which is why you think all white people are racist.
Which means, and I hate to say this, that this is an inherent part of white people, and you can't discriminate against us on this basis.
If a white person is racist, according to you, it's not their fault and they can't change it.
Once white people begin to admit their race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on earth, then we can talk.
That is an incredible statement to me.
I mean, that is just, okay, your race is why you are like this.
I'm not even going to call that you racist.
I'm just going to say, look, if it's true that white people are the savages you make them out to be, and I mean, I'm just going by your logic here.
Let's assume that's true.
That is the most incredible argument for segregation.
You know, if you found a particular breed of dog that was just, I mean, no matter how you raised this dog, this dog was vicious and aggressive and attacked everything around it.
You would have to segregate that dog from other dogs.
She carries on saying it's designed to benefit, prioritize, and protect white people before anyone of any other race.
That's not true.
It's designed to protect every person.
Before white people, before brown people, before anyone of any other race, before race is even a consideration.
It's designed to protect every individual.
And I guess if you can't think as an individual, or you are not an individualist politically, then maybe you'll look at it and go, well, I don't understand this system.
And so I'm going to say that this system is white supremacy.
Why?
Well, look at all of these white people everywhere.
This is the best bit though.
Unknowingly, white people are socialized to be racist from birth onwards.
It's not something genetic.
No one is born racist.
Hang on a second.
Let me check your earlier statement.
Your entire existence is drenched in racism.
Come see me when you realize that racism isn't learned.
It's inherited.
And consciously or unconsciously passed down through privilege.
Once white people begin to admit their race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on earth, then we can talk.
Right.
So that makes it sound like it's not learned, it's inherited.
I mean, you literally say racism isn't learned, it's inherited.
So it must be something about being white that makes them racist.
Contrast that with unknowingly, white people are socialized to be racist from birth onwards.
So either white people inherit their racism or they are socialized to be racist.
Make your choice.
I don't care which one it is, but you choose.
And saying no one is born racist, well, that's actually not what the studies find.
Clementine Ford.
Now, if you're not familiar with Clementine Ford, she is in fact a fascist.
I'm just saying that because she appears to have a fashy haircut.
Look, it's really similar, isn't it?
It's just kind of the girl's version of a fashy haircut.
It's an interesting way for Clementine to come out of the fascist closet.
She is actually a feminist, which may well be a form of fascism anyway, and she sparks a walkout by refusing to answer schoolboys' questions.
Because I suppose we are also all misogynists.
Tell me about the systems of structural misogyny, Clementine.
I know where you're going with this.
Anyway, some schoolgirls staged a walkout on feminist Clementine Ford after she refused to take questions from male students at the exclusive Aquinas College in Melbourne.
They say female students, schoolgirls, what they mean are Aunt Jemimas.
These are young ladies who are complicit with patriarchy because they are against gender discrimination.
The problem with feminism, and again, Black Lives Matter sectionalism is it all relies on the same logic and always paints itself into the same goddamn corner.
Why are you getting such privilege if everyone hates women?
Why are you getting such privilege if everyone hates black people?
Why are you getting anything if you're supposed to be oppressed?
Because oppressed people don't get anything.
The 35-year-old blogger and controversial outspoken activist was slammed by parents after she blocked questions from year 10 schoolboys at the private secondary school.
Imagine being such a piece of shit that you'll go to a school, you'll give a talk and then you'll say, right, I'm not taking any talk from boys.
I fucking hate boys.
You're all privileged.
You're a problem.
Yeah, I don't give a shit that you're 15.
You don't know what's going on.
You're a problem.
Girls only.
The incident which caused some female Aquinas students to walk out of Ford's talk happened in May this year.
One angry parents claimed that Ford treated the 15-year-old male students like crap.
Sounds that way, but then when you're a fucking man-hating bigot, what do you expect?
Of course she's gonna do that.
She hates men.
That's what feminism has become.
And Clementine Ford is one of their biggest cheerleaders.
The boys wanted to ask her questions, but she refused to answer questions from boys.
No, no, I'm only taking questions from girls, parent Darren told Melbourne Radio.
The ones that turned on her after she treated the boys like crap were the girls who got up and left.
I applaud you.
Well done.
Standing up against bigotry.
The father said following the fallout from the talk, Ford went nuts.
She crucified the boys online and the school had to do a massive backpedal.
She said she had been paid to speak for 50 minutes, but I was not paid to deal with the ongoing bullshit and demands from small-minded boys who cannot handle being shown their worldview is limited.
Wow, that's really, really fucking ironic.
Because it really looks like you're the one with the limited worldview.
You seem really sensitive to people asking you questions that are inconvenient to your worldview.
Just saying.
In other news, that's rather amusing.
Muslim activist Linda Sarsall caught soliciting funds to left-wing PAC by disguising it as Hurricane Relief.
I bet all the Islamophobes have come out of the woodwork to tell you that you shouldn't be doing this, haven't they, Linda?
What a bunch of anti-Muslim bigots they are for being angry at you for soliciting funds to line your own pockets because a natural disaster struck.
So Sarsall tweeted out, donate to the Harvey Hurricane Relief Fund.
And the link brings you to a page that describes what the funds will be used for.
Rebuilding in areas impacted by Harvey were the most challenging for marginalized communities.
Nearly a quarter of Houstonians live in poverty and approximately 550,000 people and there are 575,000 immigrants in the Houston metro area.
We will work to ensure that Harvey's most vulnerable victims have access to critical services from first response and basic needs to healthcare, housing and transportation.
Hey, that sounds great.
Together we will organize and advocate for our devastated communities, shining a spotlight on inequalities that emerge in the restoration of lives, livelihoods and homes, amplifying the needs of hard-hit communities and providing legal assistance for residents wrongfully denied government support.
You're just going to whine on Twitter, let's be honest.
It's going to be social media, probably Facebook as well.
Wow, it looks like there were quite a few people who are angry at Sarsour.
I mean, there must have been a lot of alt-writers.
Yes, everyone who doesn't agree with your scamming the victims of the hurricane are alt-right.
Not because you're a garbage human.
Hey!
That's our word.
You're not allowed to use that word.
Linda Sarsour is nowhere near a good enough person to be a garbage human.
I am sorry.
Garbage humans have standards and principles.
But no, garbage humans are much better humans than Linda Sarsaw.
I am sorry.
I definitely take offense at that.
Honestly, this ball just keeps rolling.
Southern Poverty Law Center transfers millions in cash to offshore entities.
Left-wing non-profits pays lucrative six-figure salaries to top management.
So the Southern Poverty Law Center is a liberal Alabama-based 501c3 tax-exempt charitable organization that's gained prominence on the left for its hate group designations, pushes millions of dollars into offshore entities as part of its business dealings.
Additionally, the non-profit pays lucrative six-figure salaries to its top directors and key employees while spending little on legal services, despite the stated intent of fighting hate and bigotry using litigation, education, and other forms of advocacy.
Okay, I have a question.
What the fuck would a tax-exempt charitable organization need to put money in offshores for?
I thought people put money in offshores to avoid paying exorbitant taxes.
Why would they need this?
But I can't say I'm too surprised that these people are being paid, or say paying themselves, six-figure salaries.
I imagine it's a very lucrative thing to go around and call everything racist.
So on March the 1st, 2015, the SPLC sent $2 million to an incorporated entity in Canana Bay in the Cayman Islands, according to Security and Exchange Commission.
And another $2 million cash transfer was made on the same day to another fund whose business is located at the same address as a previous fund in the Cayman Islands, according to SEC records.
Wow, I'm really interested in knowing why that is.
Tax experts expressed confusion when being told of the transfer.
I've never known of a US-based non-profit dealing in human rights or social services to have any foreign bank accounts, said Amy Sterling Casil, CEO of Pacific Human Capital, a California-based non-profit consulting firm.
My impression based on prior interactions is that they had a small, modestly paid staff and were regarded by most in the industry as frugal and reliable.
I am stunned to learn of the transfer of millions to offshore bank accounts.
It's a huge red flag and would have been completely unacceptable to any wealthy, responsible, experienced board member who has committed to a charitable mission who I ever worked with.
Brad Dacas, the president of the Pacific Justice Institute, a Sacramento-based group that defends religious freedom, parental rights, and other civil liberties without charge, I'm guessing this is a Christian organization, was listed on the hate groups list.
He said, why is the Southern Poverty Law Center doing this?
It's simple.
They want to vilify and isolate anyone that doesn't agree with their very extremist leftist policy and ideology.
True.
I don't care if this guy is a grand wizard of the KKK, that is a true statement.
To the SPLC, literally everything is racist.
Everything is sexist, and you have to point it all out and get paid six figures in the process, as well as squirreling away money in the Cayman Islands for God knows whatever reason.
But I have to say, the absolute best thing to come out of this week is the FBI and Homeland Security calling Antifar domestic terrorists because they are.
So federal authorities have been warning state and local officials early since early 2016 that leftist extremists known as anti-FAR have been become increasingly confrontational and dangerous, so much so that the Departments of Homeland Security formally classified their activities as domestic terrorist violence to any anti-FAR supporters, you fucking terrorist sympathizers.
I am more than happy to accept the Department of Homeland Security's assessment there, and I agree that anyone who is sympathetic to anti-FAR is also a terrorist sympathizer, because they are.
Since well before the August 12th rally in Charlottesville turned deadly, DHS has been issuing warnings about the growing likelihood of lethal violence between left-wing anarchists and right-wing white supremacists and nationalist groups.
Previously unreported documents disclosed that by 2016 of April 2016, authorities believed that anarchist extremists were the primary instigators of violence and public rallies against a range of targets.
Why weren't they stopped then?
Institutions, along with symbols of the capitalist system, because they're communists, racism, social injustice and fascism, according to a confidential 2016 joint intelligence assessment by the DHS and the FBI.
After Trump's election in November, anti-FAR activists locked onto another target, his supporters, especially those from white supremacist and nationalist groups, suddenly turning out in droves to hail his victory, support crackdowns on immigrants and Muslims and to protest efforts to remove symbols for the Confederacy.
Those reports appear to bolster Trump's insistence that the extremists on the left bore some blame for the clashes in Charlottesville and represent a problem nationally.
No fucking shit.
This isn't Trump's insistence.
This is the DHS and the FBI's insistence.
And this is only because it appears to reflect reality as it is being recorded on video.
How many times do they have to say, right, what we want to do is smash white supremacy, fascism, capitalism, literally everything about Western civilization by any means necessary?
And we're going to do it.
And if you get in the way, you're the problem too.
How many times do we have to see that before we say right?
I think anti-far might be a problem.
Believe it or not, right?
I don't think that most of these right-wing groups even really want to protest.
I think that really, they're out in the streets because they can't stand watching a bunch of black flag communists attacking random Trump supporters, smashing things up and the authorities doing nothing.
The rest of the article spends an awful lot of time going to explicit detail about what Antifar have done, but since I've already done that, I don't see the point.
I'm sure you're familiar with Jesse, the mayor of Berkeley, who has ties to BAM, by any means necessary, a group that also has ties to Antifar.
He apparently is happy to reward them.
On Monday, Berkeley Mayor Jesse whatever said he was so concerned about anti-far violence at a scheduled speech at the University of California, Berkeley, that the school should cancel it altogether.
In other words, his strategy for stopping anti-far violence is to give the group exactly what they want, and to let them know the reason they're getting what they want is because of their violence.
And there really just aren't enough desks in the world for me to smash my head on when I think about how dumb that is.
I don't really know who Catherine Timf is, but that was quite funny.
And guessing back to the Southern Poverty Law Center, they've condemned Antifar, but they won't call it a hate group.
The leader of the SPLC said the organization condemns anti-FAR movement but won't brand it with the center's off-sited hate group designation.
You can't go branding left-wing groups as hate groups, can you?
Because then you can't say the left is nothing but entirely pure.
If you go around saying they're also hateful.
Richard Cohen, the president of the SPLC, told the Washington Examiner the loosely organized anti-Far movement, short for anti-fascism, is wrong-headed in opposing free speech and using violence.
No shit, Richard.
Unsurprisingly, when they say things like, well, fascists don't care about freedom of speech, fascists don't care about not using violence, fascists don't care about your rights, well the same goes for communists, Richard.
We oppose these groups and what they're trying to do.
We just don't think anyone should be able to censor someone else's speech.
How brave of you, Richard.
Thank you for finally coming out and saying it.
Echoing and endorsing recent statements made by progressive scholar Noam Chomsky.
Yes, indeed.
We think that they are contributing to the problem we're seeing.
We think it's likely to lead to other forms of retaliation.
In Berkeley, Antifar showed up and shut down speeches.
The next time, the white supremacists brought the oath keepers with them and they brought their own army.
Yes.
Yes, this is what happens when they are allowed to, with impunity, infringe upon the rights of others, and the SPLC didn't speak up about it then?
Yes, unsurprisingly, people feel they need to do something about it.
But he said the SPLC won't label Antifar a hate group because adherents do not discriminate against people on the basis of race, sexual orientation, or other classes protected by anti-discrimination laws such as religion.
That's true.
They discriminate based on ideology and they're very hateful to people outside of their ideology.
Remember that liberals get the bullet too, Richard.
There may be forms of hate out there that you may consider hateful, but it's not the type of hate we follow.
Oh, that's brilliant, isn't it, Richard?
It's the wrong type of hate.
Well, you know, they do hate Republicans and literally anyone to the right of Stalin, but that's not the kind of hate we worry about.
Imagine heading up an organization that is explicitly designed to call out and brand hateful groups and then saying, well, that's just not the kind of hate we worry about.
I mean, it really makes it look like there's some sort of ideological alignment there.
It looks like you're giving them a favor.
Special favours, privileges, if you might.
Antifar introduced political violence into the public dialogue.
They are a problem.
They have to be stopped.
Which is why almost 350,000 people signed the petition to get Antifar recognized as a terrorist organization.
▲
Export Selection