Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - This Week in Stupid (01⧸07⧸2018)

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 1, 2018 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

23:44

This Week in Stupid (01⧸07⧸2018)

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello everyone, welcome to this week in Stupid for the 1st of July 2018.
	I've gone and done it and set up a Discord server because everyone was asking me to.
	I don't really know that much about Discord and I've only used it a little bit, so this will be kind of an experiment.
	But I've got a public area and then I've got a patron area and there are two tiers to the patron area.
	And like I said, I don't really know how all this is going to work, but basically if you pledge on a Patreon tier, then you'll get access to these things automatically through a bot that does it all for me, so I don't have to do it, which is great.
	But I'll be spending quite a lot of time in there to do research, post links about things that I've found and talk about stuff, and it means that you can quite easily send things to me as well.
	And I'll be around talk to people a lot more than I am usually, because I know I'm quite difficult to get in contact with.
	Also, I'll be doing patron live streams and things like that on my alternate channel and on my livestream channel.
	I'll leave links in the description, so if you want to come and check them out, you can.
	And so hopefully this will be a way of people being able to actually talk to me more readily.
	And I think it'd be quite fun as well, because, you know, everyone's just hanging out and posting memes and chatting about things that are going on and things that are interesting.
	You can find a link to join the Discord server on my Patreon page, which is in the description of this video, so if that's something you're interested in, it's available.
	So let's get into the fun things that have happened this week.
	And a lot has happened, and I tell you what, it's been very, very interesting.
	Did I mention that I joined the UK Independence Party?
	Because The Guardian and all of the sort of left-wing media lovedies are not happy about this.
	Especially given how UKIP seem to have embraced us with open arms.
	UKIP's new guard.
	Web agitators threaten to swamp struggling party.
	Dun dun dun.
	This article is the result of the author Peter Walker being dressed down on Twitter by Count Dankula, who puts him in his place rather rapidly.
	And Paul decided to change his tune and actually speak like we are people rather than monsters from the abyss.
	Only a few years ago, UKIP was fixed in the public mind as the party of tweed jackets, warm beer, and a monomaniacal devotion to a single political cause.
	In 2018, the battle to define Brexit is still raging, but UKIP's position is far less clear.
	It has been through a string of increasingly eccentric leaders.
	The clarity of its goal has been diluted, and it had begun to find common cause with jailed founder of the English Defence League Tommy Robinson.
	Not Tommy Robinson!
	Now to the significant alarm of its old guard, a new group of online political agitators, some connected to the hard right, has joined the party and promised to swamp it with their online followers in what has been presented as a soft coup.
	I love this narrative because as far as I can tell, it's so far from reality.
	We are not connected to the hard right.
	We are British liberals in the classical tradition and that's what we represent and you know it.
	But I love the idea that this is some sort of soft coup.
	It's actually a meeting of two different wings of what I think can be broadly termed the freedom movement and all we're doing is actually coming together and you even say this in your own article.
	The move has caused ructions within UKIP.
	While some are aghast at the idea, others hope it could revitalize the party which is polling at around 3%.
	It also highlights a wider political flux in which the party with just over 21,000 members still receives national coverage.
	While activists with well over a million YouTube subscribers run known beyond their mainly young army of acolytes.
	Well that's not true.
	We get an awful lot of press attention.
	I think there are a lot of people who know about us and I think that there will be even more in future.
	The best known new arrival is Paul Joseph Watson who has 1.2 million YouTube subscribers.
	Calling himself a small government libertarian.
	Oh what a monster.
	Watson Works for the InfoWars, the US conspiracy theory website that's claimed Sandy Hook Primary School that shooting was a hoax.
	Another is Carl Benjamin who posts videos as Sagan of a CAD and has attracted condemnation for alleged misogyny.
	Wow, I can't believe it.
	Someone opposing feminism was called a misogynist.
	If you could imagine such a thing happening.
	He described some of Harvey Weinsley's victims as gold-digging whores.
	We'll get to that in the very next article that I will bring up here.
	And taunts about rape on Twitter.
	Well, that's not true, is it?
	That's the opposite of what I did.
	I taunted about not raping, and I will not rape all damn day.
	Finally, there is Mark Meachin.
	On YouTube as Count Dankula, a self-styled comedian.
	But aren't all comedians self-styled?
	You can't exactly get a degree in comedy, can you?
	I mean, can you?
	I don't know.
	I mean, is there an official guild of comedians that you can join to get your official comedian license?
	He is best known for being fined £800 after he posted a video of his girlfriend's pug raising his poor in response to comments such as, gas the Jews.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	A comedian makes a joke and gets fined £800.
	Yeah, I think there's a reason that a freedom movement is necessary in Britain.
	So what's UKIP's reaction?
	UKIP have confirmed all three have been accepted into the party.
	Another online activist, the self-promoting professional contrarian Milu Yiannopoulos, has applied for membership, but it remains unknown if this has been approved.
	The group's motives remain unclear and are partly based on a joke.
	Meachin began the process by pledging to join if a tweet was retweeted 10,000 times, while Benjamin posted a video saying he was doing so for the bands.
	And they've pledged to take the party over, with a thousand new members arriving in their wake, according to UKIP sources.
	And I just want to stress, if and when you join UKIP too, because you're sick of political correctness and you want to do something about it, you're going to have to bear with them because apparently they have been overwhelmed with applications and they can only process so many in a short period of time.
	So if you are actually waiting for them to process your application, I'm afraid you might have to be patient.
	Some of UKIP's old guard are unimpressed, having already seen the interim leader Jared Batten move the party towards a hard-right anti-Islam stance and associates himself with Robinson.
	Okay, but who are these people?
	Like, where are they?
	I've seen nothing but glowing praise from UKIP itself for us joining.
	I've yet to see any of the major figures in UKIP say, well, I don't agree with this.
	Especially when you say a party spokesman said the new arrivals were welcome.
	Many of them seem to be young and libertarian.
	It reminds me of a more socially liberal members we had in our youth wing about eight years ago.
	We lost a lot of them when the gay marriage law was passed, presumably because they achieved their goal.
	Nathan Riding, the chair of UKIP's youth wing, Young Independents, said that the arrival of the online activists allows us to be seen by a much younger audience all over the country.
	He added, they are all libertarians who believe in free speech and freedom of expression.
	UKIP is the only party that actually supports those freedoms.
	And as far as I can tell, that's true.
	As far as I can see, in the British political landscape, UKIP literally are the only party who gives a shit about the idea of free speech.
	It's also unclear whether they have the patience for traditional politics, not least as their incomes come from online activities.
	Benjamin makes £6,500 a month from supporters via the online membership site Patreon.
	Okay, Paul, I've got some bad news for you.
	That means that I have literally nothing else to do.
	As in, that's my job.
	To try and make you guys realise that you're going in the wrong direction and to try and bring things back to a more British, liberal, and traditional form of politics that we had in this country.
	You know, politics that wasn't infused with nothing but socialism.
	You know, politics that wasn't dominated by Marxism.
	And again, we will get to that slightly later in this video, because these things are all happening here and now and they matter.
	Matthew Goodwin, a professor of Nazism at Kent University and an expert on far-right fascism, said that while the new members could help the party tap into a newer anti-left, anti-political correctness sentiment, it remains to be seen whether they could be active enough to change its fortunes.
	Given that UKIP has been in freefall since 2016 at referendum, and is currently polling at some of its lowest ratings in recent history, I think the party will probably be happy with this development.
	It could be potentially significant in terms of bringing new members to a party that had been hemorrhaging them.
	But at the end of the day, we're talking about a party that needs a new message, not a new activist base.
	That's the problem.
	After the referendum, it's not entirely clear to who they are speaking and why.
	And that is a very good point.
	Personally, I think that the direction that UKIP should go in is to be the party against political correctness.
	When you are sick and fucking tired of being spoken to in the way that the far-left activists and anyone else who supports political correctness will speak to you, just join UKIP.
	Just say to them, like Donald Trump, that's it, I'm voting for Trump, now I'm joining UKIP.
	Fuck you.
	I will not be spoken to as if I am a bad person for participating in democracy and not sharing your political views.
	I will not have this.
	And at the end of the day, if you don't like it, like I said before, you can swivel.
	So now that we've allowed The Guardian to set up their narrative about how everyone's evil, let's talk about an article posted on Penthouse this week called, Can We Talk About Toxic Femininity.
	Now this was written by a woman, so I presume that we're allowed to take this as credible when talking about feminism and femininity, because this is exactly what I mean when I say that some of Harvey Weinstein's quote-unquote victims are gold-digging whores.
	Lei says, first off, let me say that I can't believe I even have to write this.
	I wanted to keep this piece more about facts and less about my personal opinion, but it's impossible for me to do this.
	I need to get this shit out of my system because enough is enough.
	Well, I'm definitely interested in hearing what she has to say.
	So on June the 8th, celebrity chef, author and food show host Anthony Bourdain, I've never heard of this guy, hanged himself in his French hotel room.
	Although Bourdain openly talked about his battles with addiction to depression, the world was shocked when he had taken his own life.
	The question on everyone's minds, why would he do this?
	However, as the days went by and the storm raged on, another question arose.
	This one not only about why Bourdain committed suicide, but about how his girlfriend, actress Asia Argento, and a friend of a couple, actress Rose McGowan, came to be feminist heroes to so many American women.
	How are these things connected beside the fact that Agento was dating Bourdain when he died?
	Hear me out, because what is unfolding in the wake of Bourdain's death is a display of chronic predatory narcissism from Argento and McGowan.
	Both of these women have used and abused the Me Too movement, which they have been at the front lines of since the beginning for their own personal gain.
	No way!
	I know it's uncouth for me to say that, but I'm saying it.
	I'm uncouth.
	Kick me off the planet, ladies.
	Well, don't worry, Lei, when you've finally had enough of the way that they're treating you, join UKIP.
	I'm not arguing that Argento's public indiscretions with French journalist Hugo Clement caused Bourdain's death, more on that later.
	People cheat on one another.
	I've been there, most of us have.
	Lust has a hard time steering your moral compass when you're drunk on pheromones.
	It's not the adulterous sex that eats you up inside, it's the lie afterwards.
	I for one have made a daily, okay weekly, maybe monthly commitment to owning my shit.
	That's the only way I've been able to quiet the noise in my head and find any kind of peace in my life.
	To me, it's all about personal responsibility, which is why I would never blame anyone for someone else's decision to kill themselves.
	That said, it's ironic that since Bourdain's suicide, we have witnessed a display of totally irreconcilable behaviour from two women who are among the most prominent faces of a movement that centers around accountability.
	Well shit.
	Well, I've got to say I'm really enjoying the way Lei thinks.
	On October the 10th of last year, journalist Ronan Farrow published a bombshell New York article in which 13 women made allegations against Hollywood kingpin Harvey Weinstein, sharing accounts of not only sexual misconduct and harassment, but also rape.
	Credited with the initial contemporary Me Too movement, the article detailed what it called Argento's rape experience with Weinstein, one very similar to Rose McGowan's own experience with the producer.
	Wrote Farrow, Adria Argento, an Italian film actress and director, said that she did not speak out until now.
	Weinstein, she told me, forcibly performed oral sex on her because she feared Weinstein would crush her.
	Argento went on to tell Farrow, I know he has crushed a lot of people before.
	That's why this story, in my case, is 20 years old and some of them are older, has never come out.
	And you know what?
	I wasn't going to go there.
	But fuck it.
	I'm going there.
	I'm going there because someone needs to.
	American journalists today are scared.
	They are cowards.
	Their opinion pieces are timid when it comes to topics like this.
	While they share a much different view when texting in private.
	So here's the ugly fucking truth, everyone, because you have all been spoon-fed a bunch of idealistic garbage over and over.
	Holy shit, I love this woman.
	Argento and McGowan described Weinstein giving them oral sex and both say they faked an orgasm in hopes of getting the experience over as fast as possible.
	Calling this rape is doing our society, including sexual assault survivors, a disservice on so many levels.
	I was raped when I was 15 years old.
	I know a lot of women will accuse me of victim blaming, but at some point we have to remove the impenetrable shield that one receives when she is considered a victim.
	Argento went on to have a consensual relationship with Weinstein for several years.
	The New Yorker article is what thrust the Italian actress into the America's cultural conversation.
	Before this, the American media knew little about her.
	Make no mistake, Weinstein is a monster.
	He is a total predator, and I consider the women who spoke out against him to be very brave.
	But what Agento and McGowan are doing is not brave.
	In fact, it's disingenuous.
	Rape and sexual transactions are worlds apart, and they need to stay worlds apart.
	Agento was not blackmailed.
	She was not threatened.
	She had a sexual relationship with Weinstein, which resulted in a transactional consensual union.
	Because, let's be honest, that's how Hollywood works.
	Fast forward a few years, and Argento saw a bigger opportunity.
	She could brand herself as a survivor.
	That's exactly what I was talking about.
	This is how the Guardian's narrative explodes in their face.
	I'm going to skip to the end of this article because it goes on into detail about the entertainment industry that I'm just not familiar with.
	So, Leigh finishes with, you can't hide shitty, awful behavior behind the excuse of misogyny.
	Not everything has to do with gender discrimination and the patriarchy, and to pretend that it does does a disservice to the feminist movement.
	I am all about fighting toxic masculinity, but to demand that women must agree and support one another because we are the same gender is ridiculous and illogical.
	Toxic femininity exists, we can't continue to deny that.
	Maybe McGowan and Argento are really just two damaged human beings.
	I don't know.
	But what I do know is that you cannot heal unless you own up to your shit and get real honest with yourself about who you are.
	These two women seem to be completely incapable about being honest with themselves.
	And with that, let's take a look at the US media's toxic femininity and the narrative of victimhood that they build around perpetrators.
	Shall we?
	This week, BuzzFeed published this article.
	The accused.
	Vulnerable women are routinely prosecuted and imprisoned for false rape claims in the UK.
	Good.
	Anyone who makes a false claim should be punished because what they're doing is trying to ruin someone else for their own benefit.
	A BuzzFeed news investigation has found that UK authorities are exceptionally aggressive in pursuing women for lying about rape, prosecuting hundreds over the past decade.
	Good.
	Bravo!
	I want to see more of that.
	I want to see every single woman who registers a false rape allegation to be imprisoned.
	Every single one.
	And any man who lays a false allegation against a woman or anyone else should also suffer the same punishment.
	Accusing someone of rape when they didn't rape you is one of the worst things you can do to an innocent person.
	It means that their life is ruined just on the power of the accusation.
	And then to try and get that person jailed for decades, potentially, on the basis of your lie?
	Yeah, that's something that is definitely something you should go to jail for.
	Unbelievably, though, BuzzFeed is coming to the defense of these criminals.
	The Crown Prosecution Service, the State Prosecutor for England and Wales, has even written rules for whom to target and when.
	Something other Western countries don't do, experts say.
	Well, good for them.
	Other Western countries should really learn to follow suit, because we're always ahead of the curve when it comes to human rights.
	The policy is meant to restrain law enforcement from going after people who did not make clear and malicious accusations, those who are young and mentally ill or those who have experienced past abuse.
	But BuzzFeed News Today exposes how prosecutors routinely fail to follow these rules as they send vulnerable women to prison.
	Our investigation can reveal that at least 200 women in the UK have been prosecuted for lying about being raped in the past decade.
	Okay.
	How are they vulnerable?
	They seem to be the perpetrators.
	They seem to have made malicious allegations in order to try and get someone else sent to jail.
	And your complaint seems to be that it's backfired on them and these criminals have been sent to prison, dozens of them with sentences of two or more years.
	And what?
	How is that unjust?
	Britain's approach stands in stark contrast to that of the US, Canada, Australia and other European countries.
	Women in these countries do not typically face prosecution, let alone prison, for lying about rape.
	State prosecutors and experts have said, well, maybe they fucking should.
	Maybe they should.
	How many men are in jail because of false rape accusations?
	Innocent men going to jail because of false allegations made by toxic women.
	Why wouldn't you want these women prosecuted?
	Apparently, though, it's not considered to be in the public interest.
	Norway's public prosecutions authority, for example, said that its priority is encouraging more victims to come forward and warned that a low threshold for opening a false accusation case could counteract this goal.
	Yeah, but you know that that's going to cause men who have done nothing wrong to be considered to be rapists.
	Do you think that's acceptable?
	How is that justice?
	Especially as BuzzFeed say false rape complaints can ruin lives.
	Even suspects who are quickly exonerated can face public scrutiny and lose their jobs and reputations.
	Yes, exactly.
	So if toxic women are making false rape claims, then they should be punished for it.
	Because that's totally unjust.
	And as BuzzFeed even say, but such cases are rare.
	Well that's good.
	A 2012 Ministry of Justice study estimated that only 3% of rape reports were perceived to be malicious.
	Okay, and those 3% of malicious rape reports can result in prison time for the women making them.
	So we can get that down to 0% of malicious rape reports.
	Wouldn't that be a good thing, BuzzFeed?
	And you even give us one of the most famous examples of women making malicious false claims.
	Even if the authorities strongly suspect the allegation is false, there are many reasons not to charge the accusers with a crime.
	The prosecutors in the 2006 Duke University Lacrosse gang rape case, you know, the one that never fucking happened, one of the most infamous false accusations in US history, seem to understand this.
	They took no action against the accuser because they said that she was not of sound mind and might have believed the many different stories that she has been telling.
	It doesn't matter.
	I don't give a damn if they think if she is so wedded to her false narrative that they're like, well, I mean, she seems to really believe it.
	Of course she's going to double down on it because in the end you might go, okay, well she's just nuts.
	Bullshit.
	When women make false allegations, they should be punished.
	When men commit sexual assault against women, they should be punished.
	Both of these things are crimes and one does not cancel out the other.
	But toxic femininity doesn't just end with false rape allegations.
	Toxic femininity is also something that is present when women are trying to extort their employers for money that they do not deserve.
	As we can see in the example of Carrie Gracie.
	I love the BBC.
	It's been my work family for more than 30 years and I want it to be the best.
	Sometimes families feel the need to shout at each other, but it's always a relief when you can stop shouting.
	I'm grateful to the Director General for helping me resolve this.
	I do feel that he has led from the front today.
	In acknowledging the value of my work as China editor, the BBC has awarded me several years of backdated pay.
	But for me, this was always about the principle and not about the money.
	So I'm giving all of that money away to help women who need it more than I do.
	After all, today at the BBC, I can say I am equal.
	And I would like women in workplaces up and down this country to be able to say the same.
	Well, I guess some animals are more equal than others as Carrie Gracie wins £280,000 in pay battle with BBC as broadcaster apologises over unequal salary.
	But why should they have an equal salary?
	In a significant climb down, the BBC admitted that it had been wrong to pay Carrie Gracie less than it paid John Sopol, a fellow international editor who was appointed a far higher salary.
	The corporation previously tried to justify the discrepancy, saying Carrie Gracie was in development in her role as China editor despite 30 years of experience and also argued that Sopol, the North American editor, appeared in more peak time bulletins.
	He did.
	Gracie accepted the China job in 2014 on a salary of £130,000 and she only worked four hours a day.
	When the BBC was forced to publish the salaries of its highest paid presenters last year, Gracie was shocked to discover that Sopol was in the £200,000 to £250,000 bracket because he worked twice the hours as her in Washington, DC.
	And after a six-month fight, she has apparently won her case.
	Because fuck it, reason doesn't matter anymore, but feminism does.
	In a statement, the BB said, the BBC acknowledges that Carrie was told she would be paid in line with the North American editor when she took the role of China editor and she accepted that role on that understanding.
	She was.
	The BBC is committed to the principle of equal pay.
	What principle of equal pay?
	How on earth could someone who works half the amount of time as someone else ever expect to receive the same amount of money at the end of each month?
	But the BBC have hamstrung themselves with feminism.
	They are now incapable of making an argument from the liberal principles that they should be promoting.
	The BBC's head of news, Fran Unsworth, was called before a parliamentary select committee where she attempted to defend the pay discrepancy between Gracie and Sopol.
	Unsworth said that Sopol came to the post with a higher salary accrued from his previous jobs as political editor and BBC One presenter and that as North American editor he was on air twice as much as Gracie at peak time.
	The China job is a more features-based job and not on the relentless treadmill that something like the North America editor's job is and Sopol had even agreed to take a salary cut because Gracie is a lazy she worked half the time as him and received half the money and thinks that's an injustice.
	But Sopol, through no fault of his own, has now had to take a pay cut and she has had a nice payout thanks to the fucking taxpayer.
	You know what?
	I actually genuinely do believe we should abolish the BBC's license and make them compete on their own in the market if they want to continue doing shit like this.
	And you can see from the little liar's smile on Carrie Gracie's face that she's got the best here.
	She knows that she doesn't deserve this and she can't believe this is being pushed forward, but she's managed it anyway, because that's what toxic femininity is.

▲