Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - This Week in Stupid (13⧸05⧸2018)

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 13, 2018 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

21:24

This Week in Stupid (13⧸05⧸2018)

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello everyone, welcome to this week in Stupid for the 13th of May 2018.
	So after the cancellation of the last live event that I was going to do in Brooklyn, I actually have another live event booked in Manhattan.
	This one I've called the Ideological Collapse of the Left, and in it I'm going to be going through the fundamental precepts and axioms that the left has been basing their worldview on, and exploring how they've been coming into contact with reality and how essentially liberal arguments have been defeating them at every point to the stage where now they are starting to make liberal arguments for their own worldview.
	Put simply, this is a massive failure of the left, and this is where social justice ideology really begins to collapse in on itself, and it's something I'm really looking forward to doing.
	I discussed this on a live stream on my live channel a while ago, but the difference between this one and the other live events I'm doing is that this one I have to charge $125 a ticket.
	Now, I'm not happy about this, and I know a lot of other people won't be happy about that either.
	The reason the tickets are so expensive is because it's going to be costing somewhere north of five figures to be able to put this event on, and the event itself is only in a 300-person capacity venue.
	Traveling to the United States, hiring extra security, and just the price of the venue itself because it's in Manhattan, mean that this is a really pricey place for me to do anything.
	But the problem with doing things in cheaper locations is that they tend to get a bit more flighty and scared if you're going to discuss something controversial.
	Now, I don't think what I'm discussing is particularly controversial, but a lot of other people do.
	I understand that a lot of people won't be able to come just because it's a small venue and the ticket price is high, and I realise that my recording skills are pretty damn terrible, so I actually will have a professional camera crew to record what's going on here, and I of course will upload that to my YouTube channel so everyone can watch it.
	I'm going to see about getting any guests for the evening as well.
	We've got the venue for four hours, which is quite a large period of time.
	So what I'm thinking is I'll probably have a guest and then my own talk, and then we'll do a Q ⁇ A session, but then I'll just come and hang out with everyone and just have beers and talk.
	Instead, I really want to make it worth your time, and if you want to come down and meet me, this will be a good opportunity to do that.
	And if you have any other ideas on what I can do with this event to make it worth your time, if you think that there's something I should be doing that I'm not doing, let me know in the comments.
	I'm really genuinely curious.
	But I do think it'll be a good event, and I'm sorry that it costs this much, but I just can't make this feasible any other way, and I don't want to stop doing live events.
	I'll leave a link in the description, so if you're interested, I'll see you then, and if not, you'll be able to watch it on my channel.
	So let's talk about the Eurovision Song Contest.
	Now, if you're not from Europe or the locations nearby, then you probably don't know what the Eurovision Song Contest is, and I promise you, you are missing absolutely nothing.
	The Eurovision Song Contest is an annual music event in which each country chooses their most cringe-worthy performer, gets them to write a unique song, and then they go and perform it live on stage to millions of people across Europe who then vote according to their ancient national prejudices.
	The Eurovision Song Contest is for normies and bald men with soft voices who are probably closeted homosexuals.
	So this year the Eurovision Song Contest was won by Israel.
	I don't know why Israel gets to compete in the Eurovision Song Contest, and please don't ask me because then I'm going to have to go and find out about broadcasting locations and I'll have to spend my time trying to understand the labyrinthine technicalities of the rules that allow Israel to qualify for European status.
	And I really can't be bothered to do that.
	But this year, the Eurovision Song Contest's entrant and winner was a person called Netta Barzilia, and she is Eurovision 2018's hashtag MeTooVoice.
	As the BBC say, she talks about finding empowerment and acceptance as a pop star who breaks stereotypes.
	They wrote it about the MeToo movement.
	It's an amazing time when women are finding their voices.
	But I think it's an empowerment song in general.
	It's it's it's it's for everybody who's been struggling being themselves.
	They're told they're not good enough, not skinny enough, not pretty enough, don't sing big enough.
	I remember myself being in a wedding band and I remember brides seeing my picture.
	I heard them on the phone.
	Don't you have a different singer?
	Don't you have a better-looking one?
	Realizing that I am very different and different is often not accepted.
	I was fat.
	I am fat.
	I've been told to change a lot.
	Your skirt is too short.
	Bring it a little bit down.
	You're very weird.
	Diet a little bit.
	Why you wear such bright colours?
	It's more flattering to wear black.
	At first I listened and then I realized I'm very unhappy.
	We're only here for a minute.
	Why?
	Why are we busy being unhappy?
	I'm a funny pop star.
	That's who I am.
	People had a really hard time to accept it.
	I think I'm doing a great service to a lot of people and we're breaking a really big stereotype, me and my team together.
	Now your guess is as good as mine as to what the fuck that was that you just witnessed.
	Because I mean a paltry-based empowerment song where the lead singer is a fat Tumblrite and starts calling everyone stupid boys is exactly what I'd expect from feminism in 2018.
	But it also is exactly what I'd expect from the South Park parody of feminism that will inevitably follow this.
	Oh yes, and of course, she was culturally appropriating.
	The performance has already drawn criticisms of cultural appropriation, which is rather ironic because as they say, it's an odd little number about defiance and not wishing to be controlled by anyone or anything.
	Something that the far-left activists who have decided that they are the ones who must control what she wears clearly have overlooked.
	This is of course because she was made out to look like a stereotypical East Asian woman, complete with kimono, hair buns and controversial makeup and dozens of lucky cat waving figures in the background.
	The not-so-subtle references to Asian culture didn't go unnoticed online and lots of people were offended.
	It's interesting because I think lots of people can go fuck themselves then, can't they?
	And I only say that because that's what Chinese people say about Westerners wearing Chinese clothing.
	They call it cultural appreciation and not appropriation, as you may remember from last week with this young girl who wore a Chinese dress to her prom that went viral and a bunch of SJWs got on her case about it for absolutely no fucking reason claiming that it was offensive to Chinese people when in fact it was not offensive to Chinese people.
	The public reception to this hasn't exactly been brilliant.
	106,000 down votes to 62,000 upvotes.
	It does seem like they may have kind of misjudged the public hunger for a fat feminist saying stupid boy repeatedly on stage, but I mean, what do I know?
	I'm just a troll on the internet.
	The only thing I found particularly interesting about the Eurovision Sun Contest, to be honest, was the fact that during the British act's performance, some guy leapt up on the stage and, according to The Sun, chillingly ranted about Nazis and freedom.
	Not sure what they're going to do now So I don't know who this guy is, but he said something along the lines of, for the Nazis of the UK media, we demand freedom.
	So the man appears to be someone called Dr. AC Activism.
	I've never heard of him, but the Sun describe him as a serial invader.
	It's very interesting because he seems to be a Corbyn supporter.
	However, Jeremy Corbyn is the only politician at this moment in time that is thinking different.
	It is, he is the only politician at this moment in time that is thinking for the many, that is that is thinking for a different way of doing and thinking.
	Jeremy Corbyn is the only person that is thinking that war is not peace.
	So he wants to think different.
	He wants to bring a different vision for Europe and for Britain.
	So that's why I'm here to endorse Jeremy Corbyn and also to denounce the oppression of ideas and the oppression of the independent thinkers that is happened because of the big media mouths that are controlling information by brute force.
	He goes on at length, and I'm tired of talking about the Eurovision Song contest.
	So after that's international cringe fest, let's have a local cringe fest with the British police.
	I know that we keep going on about these week after week after week, but it just keeps getting worse.
	For example, police threaten to arrest Facebook users after Tiny Drugs Bust is mocked.
	Officers from West Yorkshire Police Wakefield Rural, so for anyone who's not aware, that's going to be a tiny rural area in the northeast of Britain, a place that is bound to be rather low on crime and high on boredom, wrote about a small quantity of cannabis they had confiscated from a young man on Tuesday in a post that has since been deleted from Facebook.
	They apparently banned a number of people from their Facebook page after the post received an onslaught of sarcastic comments.
	Not happy with being mocked, the West Yorkshire Police posted this to their Facebook page.
	Unfortunately, we have had to ban a number of people from using this page today.
	I would like to remind everyone that this is a police page, and whatever your thoughts on one of my officers seizing drugs in the community, being insulting, abusive, or offensive can and will result in a prosecution under the Malicious Communications Act of 1988.
	Look at that startling ratio you have there, officer.
	424 likes, 5.9 thousand comments.
	But I really don't want to be offensive to you now, officer, so I'm just going to say there's nothing wrong with looking like an egg.
	There's nothing wrong with it at all.
	It's not offensive.
	It's a brown egg.
	That's not racist.
	Some eggs are whiter than others and some are browner than others.
	None of that's an offensive thing.
	I'm not trying to abuse or insult you.
	Please don't arrest me for saying something about you.
	And it really does go to show you everything you need to know about this country, that being insulting is part of something that can be prosecuted under the Malicious Communications Act.
	Seriously, folks, imagine living in a country where the police get what they consider to be insulting or offensive comments on their Facebook page and then post out, we're just going to blanket fucking arrest you and prosecute you for insulting or offending us.
	That's the police, the people charged with enforcing the laws, the laws which in this case are completely on their side in protecting their precious fucking feelings.
	And the thing is, folks, this is going to get worse before it gets better.
	Sharing hate posts online could lead to six months jail as judges recommend harsher punishments for internet trolls who torment racial, religious, or sexual minority groups.
	Are you fucking serious?
	Look at the way that the Daily Mail is framing this.
	Torment them.
	Social media users who share or comment on racist or anti-gay postings will face jail under rules proposed yesterday.
	Advice for judges and magistrates recommends harsh punishments for those found guilty of stirring up hatred against racial, religious, or sexual minority groups.
	Well, that's pretty fucking subjective, isn't it?
	What does stirring up hatred actually look like?
	Because it sounds like it's going to include criticizing these people's behaviours and ideas and being public with that criticism.
	Those found guilty of hate trolling by commenting or sharing social media should typically receive a sentence of six months in jail.
	Holy fucking shit.
	I just want to be clear, don't come to my country.
	It's not a free country.
	We are currently being oppressed by the tyranny of the politically correct and well-intentioned.
	People who think that they are just in jailing you for a share or comment on social media.
	These people run my fucking country.
	And what's the Conservative Party doing about it?
	Absolutely fucking nothing.
	Anyone who is convicted of originating hate speech that threatens anyone's life or which is widely distributed should expect three years.
	So if you say something that they consider to be hate speech, and good luck saying something that they don't consider to be hate speech, and if that goes viral, which is beyond your control, expect three years in jail under these proposals.
	This is madness.
	Critics say the proposals will mean young people who heedlessly throw insults around racial, religious, or sexual groups on the internet are at risk of prison sentences.
	No fucking shit.
	And really, this is being done to protect Muslims.
	Because criticizing Islam is considered to be hatred against a religion.
	Unfortunately for Muslims in Britain and elsewhere, I imagine, there are many aspects of Islam that to criticize them sounds offensive.
	For example, if you say Muhammad was a paedophile, that's a factually true statement.
	He married a girl at six, called Aisha, and consummated that relationship at nine, at least according to mainstream Islamic scholarship.
	This is what we would describe under British law as paedophilia.
	But if you would say to a Muslim, by the way, your prophet, the person you think is the perfect man and whose example you should follow in every instance, he's a pedophile, they're going to feel attacked by that statement, despite it being true.
	And the mail are right to point out that this is going to cut both ways.
	Labour Party figures have been accused of anti-Semitism, where in their opinion they are criticising Zionism, whereas veteran feminist Jermaine Greer and gay rights and free speech campaigner Peter Tatchell are among those labelled as hate peddlers for questioning the claims of the transgender lobby.
	Again, this is going to get everyone.
	But more importantly, this is going to get Tommy Robinson.
	The council's proposals say the most serious hate offences include speeches given by public figures with the aim of stirring up hatred, online content inciting violence towards racial or religious groups, and websites that publish abusive and insulting material to a worldwide audience over a long period.
	They mean dissenters.
	Thankfully, there are sensible people who object to this, such as Professor Anthony Glees, director for the Centre of Security and Intelligence Studies, who described the guidelines as bizarre, saying they were not strict enough where they should be strict and too severe where greater leniency is called for.
	Frankly, I find them outright draconian.
	Only three years for hate speech that leads to people getting killed, ridiculously soft.
	But six months for hate trolling?
	Are there enough prison places to lock up these hate trolls?
	Good question, I tell you what, they'll fucking build them.
	These people who are convicted of hate crimes could get harsher sentences if they have a large number of social media followers.
	Judges will be able to increase punishments for offenders who are in a position of trust, authority, or influence and abuse their position to stir up hatred, such as politician or figurehead and anyone who intends to cite serious violence or is persistent in their activity.
	So if you are persistently being insulting and offensive on the internet and you happen to have a particularly large audience, does that mean that they're going to come for you?
	Because that's what it sounds like to me.
	A representative told the Independent that having a high number of followers on social media such as Twitter or Facebook could be among the factors considered.
	The sentencing council said crimes it analysed while drawing up the document were becoming increasingly serious including inflammatory speeches given by unnamed influential figures.
	What's interesting is that the volumes of these offences as they say are extremely low and there have been no offenders sentenced for some offences according to the sentencing council.
	So why have them?
	This is a direct result of Count Dankula's conviction as they say following controversy over the conviction of a YouTuber who filmed a dog performing Nazi salutes under a little used law criminalizing gross offence, the sentencing council said abusive or insulting behaviour can be prosecuted under racial hatred offences, but crimes relating to religious grounds or sexual orientation must meet a higher bar of threatening words or behaviour.
	On one hand, that's good.
	It's good that crimes relating to religion or sexual orientation have to meet the higher bar of threatening words or behaviour, but being abusive or more importantly, insulting is a remarkably low bar which allows the governments to criminalise comedians.
	Sentencing council member Judge Sarah Munro said, our courts need to help ensure the protection of the public from these violent offences.
	Except for those offences that you are criminalising that are not violent and would not be offences if you did not consider the taking of offence to make one a victim.
	It's rather amusing how this tweet from Jeremy Corbyn from 2010 has resurfaced in recent days, in which he asks, what happened to free speech?
	The Labour Party happened to free speech, Jeremy.
	Your party.
	Your party did this.
	There is a reason that the UK Minister for Universities is going to probably outlaw no platforming of controversial speakers at universities.
	Students have raised concerns that a newly announced overhaul of free speech rules for universities could allow controversial or offensive speakers back on campuses.
	Yes, that's the point.
	Universities Minister Sam Guimar told a closed-door summit on Westminster on Thursday that university campuses must not display institutional hostility towards unfashionable or unpopular opinions.
	Good.
	As someone who has been personally attacked by Antifar, not to their benefit, but either way, I'm very glad to hear it.
	These comments follow a parliamentary report which concluded that complex rules governing events at universities were a barrier to free speech.
	And not just the complex rules, let's be honest.
	Certain small groups of far-left activists are just as big, if not a bigger, problem.
	And here's where I get a mention.
	The introduction of new rules governing external speakers has been welcomed by Sussex University's Free Speech Society.
	Peter Anson, president of the Liberate the Debate group, said that just hours before an event last month, student union officials cancelled a planned appearance of the speaker Carl Benjamin.
	That's me.
	Benjamin is a YouTube presenter known for videos promoting controversial views.
	Well, they're only controversial because you guys won't listen to reason.
	One recent video asks, was Enoch Powell right?
	The answer to which, in my opinion, is no, but that doesn't matter, does it?
	I faced protests and threats of violence when I appeared at the King's College London event earlier this year.
	Yes, I did.
	Sussex University Student Union said that while its president did withdraw from chairing the event after students raised concerns, the event was cancelled only when new information came to light about Benjamin, about when the society rejected the offer of a new check.
	Okay, what information?
	What information has come to light?
	But I absolutely love this.
	The right has weaponized free speech.
	It's time for liberals to fight back.
	I'm not even reading this.
	You are not a liberal.
	You are not in favour of free speech.
	The problems come from the left.
	At the moment, the right are doing nothing to inhibit free speech.
	The left are doing everything in their power.
	And we have to lean on the Conservative Party to promote free speech.
	To actually put rules in place to stop people like you deplatforming anyone they don't like.
	When I went to the University of Sussex, I was met by a smear campaign by a bunch of students who, when I went out to confront them, displayed that they knew nothing about me, trying to use a series of jokes I had told on the internet or out-of-context quotes or quotes from Richard Spencer as legitimate reason to deplatform me.
	The left has become absolutely blind to its own problems.
	And this ultimately is the reason you're starting to lose.
	And really, this is what I'm going to be talking about in depth in my Manhattan talk.

▲