Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - The Manhattan Panel

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 5, 2018 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

01:47:36

The Manhattan Panel

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I just want to make a quick introduction.
	I forgot that I forgot that I didn't actually do it.
	I'm Bunty.
	For those of you guys that don't know who I am, I'm a YouTuber.
	I provide social political commentary on YouTube.
	I've been banned on Twitter not once, not twice, but three times.
	Three times.
	Are you clapping because you're happy or are you clapping because I'm one of you?
	Terrible.
	I had a good time on that platform.
	I liked it.
	It's honestly one of the, it is one of the best platforms to exist.
	It's amazing.
	It really is.
	I was able to put my voice out there and I was able to connect with thousands of people a day and it was incredible.
	I really, really did love it.
	It is very addictive and it did fuck me up.
	It really did because it was just like, I think it was a sensory overload.
	And it got me to be a little bit distant from people in real life.
	But now that I'm not on it, I've started like, I had to, you know, I've had to go back to Facebook and Instagram.
	So that means, that means I'm interacting with people who I've known for over a decade.
	Yeah, I'm a normie.
	I'm a normie.
	I'm a normie.
	Sorry, guys, I'm a normie.
	Deal with it.
	Deal with it.
	Sorry?
	Steve.
	Oh, Steve Shives.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	You know what's funny?
	Steve Shives, okay, blocked me after I was, when I was defending my friend Lacey.
	And he was just, I guess he went on this whole tirade after he found out that she was dating Chris Raygun.
	And he was like, he was tripping.
	And I was like, you guys need to shut the fuck up and let her date whoever the hell she wants to date.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	absolutely i mean do if you want to date somebody you feel if you feel like you like someone and you want to date them don't let anybody tell you you know unless it's illegal unless you're dating someone and i think you guys can figure out what i mean by that All right.
	So yeah, listen, that's who I am.
	I'm a YouTube guy.
	I'm an approachable dude.
	If you see me tonight, come say hi.
	If you have any feedback for the event, please let me know.
	I'd like to know.
	Unless it's bad feedback, then just keep it there.
	Just keep it to yourself.
	We're going to have our panelists come out.
	Tim Poole's right there.
	That's Tim.
	All right?
	And then we have Carlos.
	Carlos, come out, please.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	That was bad.
	And then we're going to have Carl Benjamin, aka Sargon of Akkad.
	You know that if you Google Sargon of Akkad, he comes over the real Sargon of Akkad.
	Terrible.
	Terrible, man.
	You're whitewashing our history, literally.
	Yes, I am.
	You take notes.
	I brought notes.
	You brought notes.
	I feel underneath.
	I didn't mind the Q ⁇ A section.
	I just brought notes.
	I'm a dad.
	Oh, wait, hold on.
	I do apologize.
	I always forget to do this.
	The kitchen's going to be open for this place.
	So for those of you guys that are hungry, when you get there, you'll be able to order some food.
	And they got some good food, okay?
	So just letting you know about that.
	I'm so sorry.
	And I'm going to go around asking, if you guys have any questions, raise your hand.
	I'm going to come to you and I'll give you the mic and you can ask it.
	Sorry.
	I'm done.
	Okay.
	I hadn't really planned anything for this.
	I did all the work for the presentation.
	Did you want to start with something?
	Well, yeah, I got invited into this sort of critical thinking world.
	Yeah, I'm not so confident in this arena, but thank God it's not a Friday night second show in some shitty Midwestern comedy club where people are going, it's my bachelorette party!
	I don't care.
	I just want to get paid.
	And thank you for letting me ride your coattails and making a little dough tonight.
	Oh, that was nice.
	I think we were talking backstage about what maybe launched me into this arena of sort of critical thinking.
	My mom is, both parents are from Argentina.
	My dad was British educated.
	Fucking Brits.
	You're welcome, everyone.
	And I was the voice of the Taco Bell Chihuahua in 1997 through 2000.
	I'm a pretty left-leaning guy.
	I'm on Stephanie Miller.
	But I have to recount this story because I go, this is where I thought I might have to start thinking beyond just the parameters of quote-unquote identity politics.
	So I'm doing the yo quiero Taco Bell Viva Gorditas.
	And it's going well and people love it.
	And then I got a call from a guy named Garriel Casares from the LULAC, the League of United Latino Citizens.
	And he calls me, he says, you're a sellout.
	This is a hate crime against all Mexican people.
	I went, okay, wow, fuck.
	I thought it was a Taco Bell commercial.
	And then I go to my alma mater, Sacramento State, and I meet these students, and I'm doing my show, and they're yelling.
	And there's these Latino students.
	And this is funny, it was an actual war between factions.
	They're holding up these signs with a Chihuahua right after Columbine of the Chihuahua getting shot by bullets, going, We hate the Chihuahua.
	And then the other guys with Chihuahuas, like Latinos, like, fuck those guys, man.
	We fucking love the Chihuahua dude.
	I'm like, hey, please don't fight.
	But it was then I realized that there was this attempt to censor a chihuahua.
	And even at that extent, it's frightening.
	And even on the show that I'm on, there's always an attempt to be censored.
	I had a fan that said, oh, don't be on stage with Sargon.
	Do you know what he stands for?
	And I'd be like, I just, I want to have the discussion.
	And what I noticed from people.
	Thank you.
	I'm not going to yell at anybody to my point of view.
	It is my great hope tonight that I behave like Stephen Fry.
	I really like where he's coming from.
	I think he conducts himself very well.
	And I noticed by people talking out tonight, thank you, that people want to be heard.
	And all of us, whatever side we're on, we're afraid.
	The world's changing.
	There's more people on the planet.
	There's less resources.
	Borders are dissolvable now.
	And so we're all reaching out to figure out how to make it work.
	So that's kind of me in a nutshell.
	I'm a dad.
	My whiskey drinking group is me, an agnostic, even though my mom was an Episcopal and Methodist minister.
	My best friend growing up was Catholic, Opus Day, really conservative.
	So it's me, a Hindu, my Catholic friend, and a Jewish Scientologist.
	And I think it's really cool.
	What is my tomorrow this is?
	It's coming soon.
	I don't care.
	If you love fucking whiskey, come on down.
	That's all I got to say.
	And we'll figure it out.
	We'll figure it out.
	So that's me, pretty much.
	So thank you.
	Do you want to introduce yourself, Tim?
	Oh, yeah.
	I'm Tim Poole.
	I'm a journalist.
	And I do social commentary as well.
	I've been doing a lot more commentary on news stories as of the past year or so, simply because, you know, before I started doing YouTube, there would be big breaking stories I would travel around the world to once every other month.
	And there's an interesting phenomenon that's kicked in due to the fact that I've been working more and adding my personal thoughts on the news stories outside of just traveling places.
	And it's that people are actually mad that I do more work.
	Back in the day, they'd be like, wow, it was so cool that Tim went to all these places.
	I have people who say, I used to be a big fan of yours when you went to Brazil and Turkey.
	Now you're making YouTube videos.
	I'm like, yeah, I was in Sweden.
	I was in Korea.
	I was in Japan.
	I don't understand.
	I'm still doing that.
	I'm just doing more.
	But it tends to be, I think, for political reasons, right?
	They don't want to know what I think about the stories so much, depending on where you're coming from.
	But there's been an interesting thing that it's because of that, I've actually found that my audience has shifted more to the center, interestingly enough.
	if that's a good enough introduction, I suppose.
	I don't know why I'm being left to manage the panel, because I'm terrible at managing anything.
	Bunty, do you want to see if anyone's got anything?
	There we go.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Does anyone want to ask a question?
	Yeah.
	Yeah?
	Okay, you're excited.
	Here you go.
	Hang on.
	I'll hold the mic.
	Okay.
	First of all, thank you for everything you do, Sargon and the rest of the guys.
	because of what you do that that's what allows me to raise my family and take care of my kid um the question i man i forgot it now Okay, so some people say that identity politics is inevitable, like that because the left is all in for identity, that one day lose politically, they're just going to go and start violence.
	And it seems like right now we are about to win politically.
	And then what comes next?
	Yeah, I don't think it is inevitable.
	In fact, I think that pushing identity politics is alienating more people than it's bringing in.
	And I think we're going to return to sort of interest politics, policies, people who are actually joining parties for actual reasons, rather than just saying, I'm white, I'm brown, I'm whatever, you know.
	So I think that eventually it probably will collapse in on itself.
	My problem is what's going to happen in the interim?
	Because I mean, I hate to keep referring to the things happening in my country, but the weapons that identity politicians use, the slurs, the attacks that they use, are damaging to people's reputations.
	And so it creates this chilling effect where people are just afraid to speak up.
	And I'm sure that a lot of you know exactly what I'm talking about.
	That's probably the reason you're here, right?
	Exactly.
	I mean, when I was in California, I was told, don't bring your MAGA hat, because you'll get attacked.
	And I was thinking, come on, that's, but obviously I didn't see any MAGA hats in California, you know?
	And so I think it is going to eventually find itself in an unelectable position.
	But it's the damage that it does to people in the meantime.
	It's totally unnecessary.
	And we talked about dispatch days.
	Suffice it to say that I might not agree that Trump is the best person to be where he is.
	But again, me yelling at you to take off that hat doesn't accomplish anything.
	I can do my best to try to hear what you have to say.
	And I may not agree with you, but that's the best attempt to try to get along, is what I'm thinking.
	I hate to be so utopian and non-opinionated because my inside is like Robert DeNuro, that fucking scumbag, that motherfucker.
	I kind of feel that.
	But I realize that that's a reaction.
	That's not a true response.
	And we're all so prone to react instead of actually responding.
	But Nurse, you did the thing that you said that everyone wants to be heard, and you listen.
	That's the difference.
	When Sargon asked me about coming to this event, and then asked me about any people who are on the left who would be willing to come, I just laughed.
	Honestly, I—and here's the thing.
	I have a lot of friends who are feminist, intersectional feminists.
	And it's funny when the activists message me on Facebook or Twitter and they claim that all of my friends are Nazis.
	I literally don't have, like, I don't hang out with anybody who's alt-right or even right-wing for that matter.
	And I say, like, actually, I hang out with like skateboarders, and a few of my friends are like intersectional feminists.
	They call me a liar.
	And I've actually gone to some of my friends who are not hardcore activists.
	You know, they're at home, they go to work, they mind their own business like most normies.
	And then, but they do hold, you know, feminist and intersectional feminist values.
	We have calm conversations like normal human beings.
	No problem.
	And we exchange ideas and then we disagree on a lot of things.
	And I've actually, this is what really bums me out.
	I've said, would you be willing to come on my podcast or come on my YouTube channel, like have a conversation with me?
	And they say they say no.
	And they say no for basically one reason.
	They will be accused of being right-wing and a Nazi if they even try to argue with me on my YouTube channel.
	And what really, I don't want to say it grinds my gears, but I kind of laugh.
	I see this photo that goes around.
	It's a photo of me hanging out with a basic man and like James Asup in Baked Alaska because there was an event in Portland and I wanted to understand why they thought the things they do.
	And it devolved, I shouldn't say devolved, but it became sort of an argument where I was like, I don't agree with your politics and I don't think you're going to win in terms of white identitarianism.
	And now people in media, like The Guardian, actually used this photo to try and claim I'm chummy and secretly like a part of the alt-right or something.
	It's like, it's absurd that simply by trying to have that conversation, it's not allowed.
	As soon as you, as soon as, like, you're, I'm sorry, man, you're a Nazi.
	That's just, it has happened.
	I'm getting a tattoo tonight.
	My first one.
	Whoops, they did it backwards.
	Oh, well, we tried.
	Heaven forbid people try to understand what other people think or even try to talk them out of extremist views because then you're ostracized.
	You're done.
	You're not allowed in anymore.
	Yeah, I think as Stephen Dry would intimate, your best chance to do it is not to shout someone down, but maybe be an example of what maybe you could attract people towards.
	There was one thing about Jordan Peterson.
	I remember we saw the monk debates, or I did.
	I checked it out.
	And I know Michelle Goldberg at the end challenged him on what he said about women in the workplace.
	She said that he said women shouldn't wear lipstick.
	And he was clever, and he said, I love his Canadian.
	That's not what I said.
	And I checked it out, and he actually cleverly did not say women shouldn't wear lipstick in the workplace.
	He said, why are they wearing it?
	It makes them more attractive.
	Why are they wearing heels?
	It pushes their pelvis forward.
	But then I also thought the interviewer missed his chance to go, that presupposes that all the assaults that take place are on women that are made up.
	So we'll be happy to know that there are no sexual assaults on Casual Friday.
	It also presupposes that women who don't wear makeup, that are just in sweats, never get sexually assaulted.
	And I thought that was an opportunity for that interviewer to kind of break that down.
	So there are things that I agree with him on, and then there are things I can point out and went, well, there's a hole in that argument.
	Because you're presupposing that all assaults take place with women who wear makeup.
	And that's not the case.
	In his defense, though, I mean, I think he is raising a valid point.
	I mean, if it's something that is almost taboo to talk about is women's power over men.
	I live with three women.
	I agree.
	But it's hard to talk about.
	And it's almost like taboo in our society to say, you know, women have power.
	Like, for example, young men, when they're in their teens, short skirts are distracting to them.
	I know it's difficult for feminists to understand this, but for a young man who's got raging hormones, I'm sure, well, you know, you guys all remember when you were kids, it's difficult.
	You don't know how to deal with this.
	maybe there should be some, like, thoughts around Web Vista.
	Well, then it gets towards something that you might despise, which is women being covered in a religion.
	I'm not, I'm, exactly.
	It might say the same thing.
	I totally agree.
	And that's exactly their argument.
	That's exactly their argument.
	And I agree, but it's not to say they aren't speaking to a reality of the human experience.
	Right.
	And the way it's loaded at the moment is entirely in favor of women at the detriment of the men who now have to try and figure out through the raging hormones, why is this person signaling to me with makeup and high heels and low cut tops, and yet I'm expected to pretend that that's not happening.
	Yeah, you're not saying that men don't have control over the impulse.
	They do.
	Of course, they do.
	You're saying that this might contribute to it.
	It causes confusion.
	Right.
	You know, there's a percentage of men who are less aware or less in control of themselves.
	Unless assault is not about sexual attraction, unless assault is about power.
	Because what are you talking about about...
	Hold on, I think we need to clarify assault and harassment especially.
	Because one of the big issues with workplace isn't that men are physically attacking women, but doing things that make women uncomfortable.
	And that sexual harassment, I'm probably wrong because it's not like an area of expertise for me, but the lawsuits are about harassment, about men saying repeatedly things they want from women, and assault is a crime that they will be prosecuted for, right?
	So the issue I think Jordan Peterson brings up, when you talk about a woman who is engaging in social behavior that is traditionally recognized as sexual signaling, is that it encourages or will contribute to harassment from men who can't control themselves.
	Could.
	Could, right.
	But I certainly think it's the guy's fault that they can't control himself.
	I'm not getting gymnasts, gymnastics, the cases that have come up, swimmers.
	They're certainly not in makeup.
	No, no, it's not universal.
	And it's not the only thing.
	That's what I was just trying to point out.
	It's not always the case.
	You're absolutely correct.
	And there are definitely times when rape is about power and not about lust.
	There are definitely times.
	But one of the things that drives me crazy about the far-left narrative is that that's the only narrative they work with.
	They never operate.
	I mean, look, this is why Jermaine Greer, one of the famous TERF feminists, recently came out and said that the punishments for rape were too high.
	And it's like, how do you get a radical feminist to say that the punishment for rape is too high?
	You prosecute the feminists under Title IX.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	No, that's exactly it.
	Because even she can accept that most rape is between people who know each other and it's done in an intimate setting.
	And it's not the kind of brutal rape on the street that people are thinking about when they're thinking about rapes about power.
	And one quick thing, one of the things that led me into the sort of the discussion about feminism was I was on Stephanie Miller and somebody, I had made a comment that in this election cycle where Trump is so popular and so attracted to half the population, I said, Hillary wearing yellow pantsuits to an event in Virginia is not cutting it.
	She needs to change her wardrobe.
	And the woman on the other end of the line, like, let me mansplain something to you.
	And that set me off.
	I went, that's not, that's a re, that's a, that's a response designed to get a reaction from me by being condescending.
	I said, I don't like that term.
	And I got lit up.
	And that was one of the things that just pissed me off.
	I don't say woman splain.
	I don't say gay splinter straight splain.
	I don't try to start a discussion by being demeaning.
	Yeah.
	And that's what got me involved.
	It's a power play.
	So wait, I'll let you close it off to him.
	I want to ask another question.
	I'm getting someone to ask another question.
	Feel free to interrupt.
	I don't want to.
	You guys are having a good discussion.
	I'm not going to come in and fuck it up.
	I want to.
	We are prone to obloviating this.
	I want to make a point first that I think I'm only able to criticize people like Sargon because they're willing to have the discussion.
	And after saying that, you called that professor in your Portland speech a soyboy.
	Which professor is this?
	It was the TVO interview.
	Oh, yeah, he was.
	Right, but so this is where this is something that I've like, you know, people were like, Tom Pool, smoke talking, Sargon.
	I'm like, I've referred to you as a dick.
	But I told you as a dick.
	Yeah, and I want to clarify for everybody.
	Like, this is the first thing I said when I met you is that I think of a lot of videos where you're mean.
	I am sometimes.
	Absolutely.
	Well, I said it's appropriate, but I'm not always a dick.
	So I respect that we're able to have a conversation about it because, in my opinion, I try to avoid using disparaging comments against people because I know it won't lead to anything productive.
	Even when people are just repeatedly saying Nazi over and over again, there's no conversation.
	I still try and just figure out how I can communicate with them.
	And if I can't, then I just kind of end it.
	But I'll admit, there are times online where I'm just like, I just lose it.
	I'm just like, you know what, man?
	And I just start saying stupid things, like, not necessarily insulting, but just kind of trollish.
	People have got to remember the purpose of being a dick to someone is to remind them that they're out of line.
	Because it's very rare that you find someone who's being a complete dick to somebody who doesn't deserve it.
	What I've noticed, the first time I went to see, the Brits are more comfortable with it.
	You look at Parliament, ah, yeah, yeah.
	There's no decorum.
	And the first time I noticed is that in 1987, 25 years old, I go to Speaker's Corner, and they're literally standing on bars and says, fuck her, whatever you did, we're dead, I got it.
	But then afterwards, like, you want to go get a point?
	Yeah, let's go get a point.
	They were willing to go there, and we have to be sort of willing to go there.
	This is why I love my country.
	All right, so we're going to take a quick look at the pressure.
	We're going to take the piss out of people.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	Yeah.
	All right.
	So my parents divorced when I was relatively young.
	I got to have the fun chance to live out in a tent in the middle of the woods, take showers at the Y.
	And I've crawled my way from that point to living here in New York City, going through college and everything else.
	Yet, oftentimes, since I've moved here.
	Let's get a round of applause for this young man.
	So, both later in college and then now that I'm here in New York City, oftentimes when this comes up in conversations at bars, some people, you know, react somewhat here and they say, wow, you've done amazing things.
	But some people then tell me, no, it's because male privilege, white privilege, things along these lines.
	And I'm kind of wondering, is there really a conversation I can have there and explain to them kind of the hard work that has to be done?
	Yes.
	I'll try to make this quick.
	I had a conversation with a feminist a couple years ago who, when I said I wasn't a feminist, kind of got slighted and said, how could you not be for equality?
	And I was like, I am.
	And I explained to them, I said, I want you to try and imagine this.
	Imagine you're a young person that is repeatedly told that you're too high energy, you're too rambunctious, you're too aggressive, you need to stop, you need to stop what you're doing.
	You try to find a job, but all of the low-level jobs at like fast food restaurants in your neighborhood and all the bars, they want to hire women.
	Bars say, we'll hire female bartenders, we won't hire men.
	And you are a nobody high school dropout with no opportunity, begging on the street.
	You end up homeless.
	And then every bar you go to looking for a chance to work hard to succeed, you see women who have jobs, and you see that.
	I actually had a bartender tell me on the north side of Chicago, look, man, let's be real.
	You know, a bar's not going to hire a young guy without some kind of training, but they'll certainly hire a young woman who's going to make them money.
	Then have that person struggle all their way from homelessness multiple times through back-breaking labor up to a point where they're finally comfortable and then get a bunch of people to come into his face and scream that they're actually part of the problem and don't be surprised then when they become your enemy and think you're the problem.
	So I experienced a lot of, when I was younger, I was really, I guess, I was like, what is this narrative about men being oppressors?
	Like, how could I be homeless time and time again and told time and time again, I can't have a job.
	I can't work at any of these places because they don't hire guys.
	I was actually told by a famous yoga instructor, I wasn't allowed to participate in her class for being a man.
	I was told I couldn't take gymnastics because I was a man.
	And certainly there's something is wrong in this narrative.
	And then I got older and realized everyone thinks everyone else has it better.
	And I said, I'm internal, I'm looking at my problems and thinking that no one else experienced problems.
	And that's when I was like, now I really, like, that kind of made me more of like a neutral person.
	But when I explained this to this feminist, I think it kind of meant something like, you know, whether or not you think any of the people who are men's rights activists or who oppose feminism are wrong, you have to understand they're coming from a perspective where they felt some kind of strife that makes them focus on the things they do, right?
	So I guess to go to your question, that story of what I went through with homelessness and fighting my way up meant something to a lot of people who didn't understand it.
	And I think you can.
	Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who refuse to listen and try to understand that, look, it's entirely possible.
	I've always had it better than everyone else.
	I don't know what their problems are.
	But I do know that I can at least try to explain the problems I have faced, and maybe that will mean something to somebody.
	There's something I've noticed about the accusation of privilege when it comes from someone who doesn't know you.
	It's deliberately designed to put you in your place and to make you stop talking about the thing that you're trying to talk about.
	Effectively, I'm not, I mean, Tim's example is pretty much the only thing I would be able to come up with as well.
	Because as far as I'm concerned, when someone says that, they're saying it to shut you down.
	They're saying it's trying to get you to know where you should belong.
	And obviously, they don't know anything about you.
	They don't know how hard you've worked to get to where you are.
	And man, congratulations.
	Keep going.
	Just keep going.
	That's the only thing you can do.
	But good luck.
	All right, we're going to.
	Another question over here.
	So, question for Sargon, but I appreciate the other panelists' view.
	Sargon, you made a pretty good case, I think, for the collapse of liberalism, the left, and their ideas.
	It's not the collapse of liberalism.
	They actually had to rely on liberalism to justify a lot of stuff at the end of it.
	It's the collapse of progressivism, really.
	Well, I know you guys call it.
	They don't in my country.
	The liberals are still liberal in my country.
	I'm not letting them have it.
	Sorry, go on.
	No, no.
	My question is that if and when they do collapse, what next?
	What replaces that movement, that set of ideas?
	Well, I mean, this is why I think we should be assertive about liberal principles and liberal values.
	It's just wrong to discriminate against arbitrary characteristics.
	I mean, the essence of liberalism is to empower the individual and say, your choices matter.
	What you do matters.
	And it does, you know.
	And it's a way of, because I find progressivism entirely disempowering.
	I find that it's creating victims where there weren't previously victims.
	And nobody wants to be a victim, but there's currency in that.
	They think that a victim is pure and good and a victim has done no wrong.
	And I'm thinking, well, I've been a dick plenty of times in my life, but I've been the victim of some things during my life.
	It's not something I should be given something for, but neither should I be penalized for it.
	Sorry, go on.
	No, I kind of want to address a part what you're saying about the idea that the presses will collapse.
	I'm not entirely sure they will.
	And I'll say that there's a lot of...
	They will eventually, I think.
	Well, so...
	So let's see.
	You'll answer.
	There are a lot of rules that make absolutely no sense among the woke ideology that I've been trying to figure out.
	Like, who has more privilege in certain situations?
	It can't be quantified.
	So do I, as a mixed race person, have more or less privilege than a cis woman?
	It can't be answered to me.
	And then depending on the person's personal views of the world, they tell me they do or they don't.
	If that's the case, if the rules don't actually make sense in many circumstances, what is reinforcing the ideology in the average people?
	Why are they following this?
	And I think there's a few bits, at least in my research I found, and it's that major companies tend to abide by those who are most willing to use force against them and cause them damage.
	That's why we say social media companies capitulate to those who oppose hate speech because they're the most angry, vocal, and willing to destroy.
	So, you know, someone asked me if I thought that who was going to win or why these media companies side with the progressive left.
	And I said, do you think Sargon of Akkad is going to get a group full of liberalists down to Twitter headquarters with Molotov cocktails and cause damage?
	Absolutely not.
	But will Antifa show up with bats, clubs, and Moltov cocktails at a university?
	Yes.
	So who are they more willing to, who are they scared of?
	Hopefully the collapse of what is wrong, not all aspects of progressivism, I think, are wrong.
	And if you believe, Dyson, that it's a response to marginalized people, maybe there's some truth in that.
	But hopefully what it will result in, I got it to a utopian way, is a form of dialogue that doesn't identify with either side, that just identifies we have to be solution-oriented.
	And it begins with being able to talk to each other beyond reactionary responses.
	So I know that's very vague, but that's the best I can do.
	All I know is that here's my thing that I say in my act.
	World peace is untenable if you can't fucking pick up your cigarette butts, you can't return your shopping carts to where they belong out in the suburbs, and you can't fucking flush your shit in a public toilet for somebody else.
	I don't care what you believe.
	There's no such thing as world peace.
	And my friend sent me pictures of shopping carts blocking parking spaces.
	Fucking no world peace today.
	We got another question here.
	Go ahead.
	Hi, panel.
	Hi, Sargon.
	I'm a big fan.
	Can you hear me?
	Okay.
	I have a question about borders.
	Although I understand the importance of them, and I do feel like Donald Trump is kind of staying staving off the, you know.
	Yeah, by like, sorry, kind of nervous.
	Mexico is going to pay for the world, believe me.
	Okay?
	Believe me.
	No.
	It ain't happening.
	I mean, I feel like he's, you know, kind of holding back like the open border ideal.
	It's not as strong as it's going on in Europe.
	But I do feel like in the future, that just seems like the trajectory of where the world is headed.
	Like that eventually, maybe not in our lifetime, but that it is going to happen.
	It's going to be, you know, people are going to be moving around the world more thoroughly.
	So I'm just wondering, like, is it really that something that we should be fighting so hard for?
	You know what I mean?
	Because I feel like that's just the way the world is going to eventually go.
	You know, it might be that eventually things do go that way, but the problem that we have at the moment is it's not happening naturally.
	It's being artificially forced.
	And the urban elites are leaving behind a segment of the population that they just don't understand.
	I mean, you go to someone like New York or Los Angeles or San Francisco, and you know that they have so little in common from someone in the flyover states.
	And I watched, I did a video on this because it was just, it drove me mad when after the election of Donald Trump, Van Jones on CNN had to come to grips with the white lash.
	And so he went to somewhere in the Rust Belt, I think it was, and spoke to a family who are dirt poor.
	And he's speaking to them as if they owe him something.
	A millionaire.
	He earns a million a year.
	He's on TV, he's famous.
	And he's like, wow, this is blowing my mind.
	I can't believe you exist and you're not a racist.
	And it's like, dude, these are some of the poorest people in your fucking country that you are currently condescending to.
	Right, but in terms of borders, yeah, I think there has to be sensible immigration.
	Obviously, Mexico kicks out the Hondurans and the El Salvadorans and the Guatemalans.
	But it also presupposes that all the immigrants that come over here are not educated.
	And a lot of people that do come from Mexico are fleeing Honduras or El Salvador.
	They're doctors, they're engineers, and they're looked upon because they're brown and they're speaking actually two languages as threatening and or uneducated.
	And that's not always the case as well.
	So there is a sort of middle ground on that.
	There's actually a problem with us poaching, headhunting skilled people from these countries, and it's preventing their rapid development.
	It's actually, it's actually kind of irresponsible of us for the rest of the world to just take in their best and brightest and leave them with the results.
	All right, we've got another question here.
	It's for Sargon and the rest of the panel.
	Big fan.
	I work in security, and one of the things that we've noticed coming across our desks more and more, despite what various governments say, is when we design buildings in London or in Germany, one of the recent reports we're receiving is these are the migrant centers and we actually have to change risk assessments based on that.
	So despite the ideology saying, oh, no, no, these people integrate, these people are fine, like, I guess my question would be, if the free market's acting this way and companies are going, no, you watch this, plan for this, what eventually wins?
	The free market?
	Or do these ideologies stop it?
	The free market is going to win on this one because it's responding to the actual reality of the situation on the ground.
	I mean, like, the problem with open borders and mass immigration is that areas of the world just operate on different value systems.
	Not all of them.
	I mean, for example, there's been a huge amount of Hindu immigration into Britain.
	And you wouldn't know it because there's no conflict in value.
	The food got better.
	The food got amazing, actually.
	Yeah.
	But by orders of magnitude.
	But the reality on the ground is going to win out over the ideology.
	I think I agree with you completely.
	We should be solution-oriented, and that means being realistic about what's happening, not living in a delusional fantasy land that everyone is the same, no one has any different opinions, and we can all just get along hunky-dory because there are some people who do despicable things, in my opinion.
	That's my opinion.
	I can't live with people enslaving women, beating homosexuals, and chucking out apostates.
	I can't stomach that.
	And I don't think my country should.
	I think the government should be intervening.
	And that's the most obvious example, obviously.
	Okay.
	Another question, but before I get you to ask a question, I just want to get building management to know, can you raise the AC or something like that?
	We've got some people who are schwitzing in here.
	And another thing I also want to say, obviously, this should go without saying, not all of you are going to be able to ask questions.
	I really do apologize.
	I'm trying to get to as many as I can.
	I just see them.
	I'm pointing at them.
	I'm going to them, but I'm trying to go in order of who I see.
	So, all right.
	Thank you.
	Hi.
	Looking at me, a lot of my peers assume that I'm pro-Hillary, super feminist, hate all the men, and all of that sort of stuff.
	And with a regressive left that is as aggressive and as focused on attacking individuals as they are and as willing to dox people as they are, I mean, I posted a picture on a certain subreddit and I had someone go through seven years of posting to identify my employer and say, would such and such organization be happy that you have X, Y, and Z belief because of a hat?
	What do you recommend for individuals?
	I went back and forth for an hour with my boyfriend.
	I said, I don't know that I want to speak and have my face or my voice affiliated with ideologies where my peers don't feel that way.
	I'm afraid of that.
	What do you recommend to an individual who maybe doesn't have the same platform you guys have?
	Good question.
	Good question.
	By the way, the turning the AC up.
	I just played this new game called Detroit Become Human.
	And what I really love about it is that when the cops were pointing their gun at my character, I walked straight forward with my hands up.
	I don't care about being deplatformed.
	I don't care about being fired.
	You can take everything I have from me, and I will not back down on what I believe to be true, right, and just.
	So if I believed something and someone threatened me and said, we're going to dox you, I'd be like, here's my address.
	Have fun.
	Do it.
	I'm standing right here.
	When I go to events, I went to an event where Mike Cernovich was speaking.
	I met the guy a couple times, and one guy decided to lie and claim that I was a white nationalist.
	One guy started telling him all I was friends with Cernovich.
	And when they got in my face, I just stood there and I said, you done?
	I'll wait.
	I'll wait until you guys are done surrounding me and screaming and I'll keep going about my business.
	Just, you know, I can't expect everyone else to have the strength to endure, but I sincerely hope that anybody who is like a moderate, rational human being who wants to have real dialogue and discussion stands up and tells the crazy people to back off.
	Nice.
	All right.
	No, I am generally curious why, obviously I voted for Hillary.
	I thought she was the best chance to beat Trump.
	I didn't think she was a fantastic candidate.
	But from the people that are MAGA, what is it that you think will change or become better that he's in a very honest response?
	What is it?
	It's a culture war.
	It's about who is driving the direction of your country.
	Can I try to be okay?
	Yeah.
	But it was already trending, too.
	Okay, before we get into the Trump Hillary...
	But that presupposes that it could have been perfect before him.
	Hang on, Anne.
	Before you get into that, I just want to address a thing.
	Because it is difficult for people to speak out, especially just regular people who don't have an online presence and who are just, you've spent your life building your career and suddenly it's in danger because of your convictions, your moral convictions.
	And it's a scary thing.
	I mean, one of the things I would recommend is speaking to your employer in advance.
	Say, look, I'm a liberal.
	I'm opposed to progressivism.
	I'm opposed to identity politics.
	And I'm intending to speak about this online.
	So you are probably going to get harassment from people who oppose me.
	Other than that, I guess we've got to rely on one another.
	When these things happen and you hear about it, retweet it, share it, make people aware.
	We have to stick together.
	Because you've got to remember with these people, they're doing it because they want to defeat you.
	They see you as a political actor with political power opposing their hegemony of the discourse.
	And if you oppose them, they're going to come down on you with all the institutional force they can muster.
	So we really do have to stick together in this.
	I just want to default to my beating a dead horse and say the beliefs that you have and you have are derivative of a media that has no intention of being honest about what's actually going on in this country.
	So your beliefs are probably isolated.
	Your beliefs are probably isolated.
	And that's making people not understand each other.
	One more question.
	Another question.
	No, one more.
	How are you doing?
	Big fan of Sargon.
	I've met Carlos before, and you won't remember me.
	Tim, also a big fan.
	Nice beard, by the way.
	Thank you very much.
	Beards.
	Stick together.
	So this question is directed towards Carlos and Tim specifically, but I'd love Sargon to weigh in on it as well.
	I've worked professionally in film, theater, and television for over 12 years.
	I've had a pretty successful career.
	I've made a living off of it for a good amount of time.
	In the last two years, however, I've experienced more hate and vitriol than I've ever had in my little cultural sphere, I guess.
	I've been blacklisted by people I consider my good friends.
	It's very hard for me to be able to get a job working in an acting scenario or anything.
	I've kind of been forced into a corner of making my own work, which I know for all of you up there, you know how difficult that is making your own work.
	So it's a two-part, but basically it's like, what would you recommend to someone who want to work creatively in an artistic field where it's so dominated by progressives and people who will literally disassociate you after working with you for 10 years on seven different projects and this other thing?
	And on top of that, should I just consign myself to the idea that film, theater, art, journalism, anything that's artistic, has a bit of artistic scent to it, is it just going to devolve into left and right?
	There's going to be left-wing art and right-wing art forever?
	Or is there ever going to come to a point where I can work with a progressive as a voiceover actor?
	I can be in a theater thing without having to fear wearing a MAGA hat or something like that.
	What was it that made you marginalized with your former friends?
	The biggest, I mean, the two biggest things were I was anti, I was pro-Gamergate when it was coming.
	Gamergate, I was a Gamergate fan.
	I'm not sure what that is.
	Gamergate was basically the Donald Trump of the gaming world.
	Okay.
	And then I also eventually.
	I started dating a Democrat.
	I'm a Republican.
	I started dating a Democrat, and they ostracized her for dating me.
	Wow.
	And I guess it kind of killed us because she was pro-Hillary, I was Trump.
	And that was the end of her friendships and my friendships.
	And we've kind of been aware of that.
	I guess what maybe a solution is, is obviously you keep creating your own content.
	So even if it is not about being marginalized or being politically in a war with somebody, the way to combat it is to make your own content.
	And I think eventually you are going to align with a progressive who's listening to say, what have you got to say?
	Let's make it.
	I remember this.
	It was called, I think it was called Promises.
	It was about an Israeli filmmaker going to Israel and Palestine.
	And it was about him making a documentary on these two kids that used to know each other.
	This Palestinian used to come across the border and work on this guy's landscaping.
	And they had a son and they grew up together.
	But then after some of the unpleasantries or whatever, they became divided.
	And they found that the kids, through the war of words and cultures, they still missed each other.
	There was a separation.
	And I thought, that was kind of a beautiful documentary.
	Another thing I saw in the 700 Club of all places, which I don't know why I was watching, I was on the treadmill.
	Yikes, let me turn it off.
	Hold on.
	This is kind of interesting.
	Was that there were Israeli doctors currently that will teach Palestinian doctors, Sudanese doctors, heart surgery to these people to save their kids.
	And so these in Tel Aviv, for free, the Israeli doctors were taking in Palestinian kids, Muslim kids, Sudanese kids, operating them for free, and teaching that surgery to Palestinian doctors.
	And I thought that was a story that we may not hear on mainstream media.
	So that was a thing where people can come together eventually.
	Sorry, long-winded.
	When I first joined Fusion back in 2014, they told me they wanted to be edgy like Vice.
	They had posters on the wall saying we will not be partisan and things like that.
	And then about six, seven months later, they changed editor-in-chief, decided to become a woke company.
	And all of a sudden, me trying to just do like travel news didn't make sense.
	I actually tried quitting.
	I was under contract.
	Instead of letting me quit, they gave me more money.
	So, you know, golden handcuffs.
	After my contract ended, I thought, okay, which company should I go to now?
	And I have a lot of connections with a lot of the big digital media companies in New York.
	And I went to a lot of meetings.
	And then I met some of the people they had who I think, in some instances, I actually met sociopaths who produce fringe content for the sake of manipulating people into gaining power for themselves.
	And the companies are okay with it because it makes them money.
	I've been up in some of these big towers, surrounded by people who are self-described woke, and their boss is a libertarian, a white libertarian guy who completely disagrees with everything he says, but he's making money.
	And I realized there's nothing I can do in these companies because they hire people who produce the content that makes them money, regardless of whether or not it's true.
	And they've said this to my face.
	So I said, you know what?
	I'm starting making YouTube videos.
	We'll see what happens.
	I'll just say I got lucky, I guess.
	It worked out.
	I tried to work hard, and it works.
	So perhaps there is some potential through the internet and social media that can be obtained, kind of like how Sargon and I have done something.
	But I do want to point out, I could be wrong, but I think Kanye West just debuted at like number one, even though he supported Trump.
	So maybe there is some change happening.
	Got another question?
	Hang on, I just want to, I'm sure I recognize your face from somewhere.
	We met before.
	I knew I never forget a face.
	I'm terrible at night, but you remember the beard, let's be real.
	Yeah, yeah, no, no, he's a very handsome beard.
	But I think what you're asking is the consequence of the chilling effect.
	The person who stands up is the one that gets the guillotine.
	And if you are in a situation where you see someone standing up and you agree with them, or you just want them to be able to express yourself themselves, you've got to support them.
	It's the fear effect that keeps this machine moving.
	If people en masse, you all have to be vocal.
	This is why I'm saying share, support.
	You have to do this.
	Because it's them thinking, right, we've got one person on their own, and then we can bring the institutional power to bear on you.
	They don't feel threatened.
	They think they've got everything under control because they do have everything under control.
	Everyone else has to start becoming dissenters.
	That's my thought.
	I had one more, another question.
	Literally, actually.
	Hi, thanks for your talk, Sargon.
	Sorry, I'm over here.
	I'm afraid I can't.
	I'm just to your right.
	Oh, you're right.
	Yeah, thanks for tonight.
	My question relates to the NHS in the UK.
	I know you've been discussing a bit with Jaron Brook, which I found interesting.
	Since 2015, there's been a policy, and it's not been secret or anything like that.
	It's on the NHS, England.AHS website, where you get basically a prevent scheme.
	So you might have heard of it with regards to counter-terrorism.
	Prevent is an anti-extremism scheme.
	So there's been at least three reports on this people being referred to this scheme.
	One was by Diane Taylor in The Guardian, who did a piece where she stated that there are some mental health trusts in the UK where all patients are screened for radicalisation risk.
	And you've also got basically she reported on a case where a care team went around to somebody's house, saw that they were watching Arabic TV and referred that person.
	You've got there's also another report done by Katie Forster in the Independent, and she describes how one of the NHS colleagues, someone working for the NHS, who was talking about Ramadan, was basically, again, referred to the scheme by one of her colleagues.
	And the third report, which I'm aware of, was from the BBC, which talks about in some areas, the report kind of talks about, gives an instance of a reformed far-right extremist.
	And basically, the report says that in some areas, it's a statement from the Home Office, in some areas, 50% of people that are referred to this scheme come from what they class as a right-wing extremist edge by going to the NHS.
	So it's more about, rather than it being about ecosystem extremism or far-right extremism, it's really the principle of if you go to a doctor or go to the NHS, you want to be cared for your condition.
	So with that in mind, their argument or their case is that it's a safety issue or it's deemed as part of your care if you're deemed as vulnerable to extremism.
	My question to you really relating to this and knowing that these reports are out and this scheme is in place is: are you concerned that the NHS could be being utilized by the British government as a tool to monitor or spy on its systems?
	Thank you.
	Yeah, that is, I'm not familiar with the cases that you're talking about, or the scheme, in fact, but it does have echoes of what they used to do in the Soviet Union, which is pathologize objections to communism and basically say that person has effectively has a mental illness.
	The services in Britain, one of the, in my opinion, the sort of liberal precondition for the National Health Service, and this is a problem I have with the Conservatives as well, with the work-fair scheme, is these things are entitlements.
	You're entitled to them as a British citizen, whether the state approves of your politics or not.
	In fact, whether you're a criminal or not, it doesn't matter.
	These things are just an intrinsic right for the citizen.
	And I think there's every danger of them being politicized that way.
	And there's every danger of political objections being pathologized in that way.
	But I'm afraid I don't know anything about the individual cases that you're talking about, so I can't really speak anymore.
	I'm really sorry about that.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	I changed what I was going to say after the woman over there spoke.
	I'm one of the other minority here.
	And I was.
	Hi.
	I was thinking about what she said about the guy looking through like seven years of her employment history and how nutty that is.
	And that actually happened me going back to pre-Facebook, pre-Twitter, on freaking Usenet.
	Someone, and that was a lot harder to get information.
	Someone put together little bits and pieces of information, made some lucky guesses, and contacted a former college professor of mine, if you can believe.
	It was crazy.
	But for women, and women don't like to speak out.
	As Jordan Peterson would say, we're more agreeable.
	We're less confrontational.
	We like security, right?
	So I think it's even more important for women to speak out and to try to have that courage.
	And I say that as someone who has received death threats.
	I've been physically accosted by another woman in a public meeting because she didn't like what I said.
	Well, I mean, I think it goes for everyone, but I mean, you're absolutely right.
	The statistics suggest that women are less likely to take that step than men.
	I mean, what do you guys think?
	I grew up with my mom being an Episcopal Methodist priest from one of the first Latin American women ordained, actually, I think, in the freaking world, and very opinionated.
	I don't give a shit.
	She didn't suffer fools, nor does my wife or my two daughters, so I'm not used to that.
	But yeah, I can see that happening.
	And it's especially sad to see that coming from another woman.
	We're completely free to disagree almost vehemently with the other person, but it shouldn't lead to threats and violence.
	It's just kind of sad.
	And on the other hand, I posted something about Tommy Laron where I posted actual footage of Tommy Larin getting water thrown on her, and I posted Father Karis tossing holy water on Regan.
	It burns, it burns.
	And apparently I got threats.
	And I'm like, holy fucking shit, it's a video.
	It's comedy.
	So it does go both ways.
	It's just comedy.
	And Tommy Laron is not the daughter of God.
	She's a commentator.
	So it can get outrageous on both sides.
	So in a sense, I wasn't afraid to make that comment, but the result of it was people made threats against me.
	So it does go both ways.
	And it's sad that it does.
	I also want to take this opportunity to talk about doxing and how ridiculously easy it is.
	So maybe one thing that we should stress more often is how many times can we say be careful about what you post online?
	Sometimes people don't even realize it.
	There are so many websites that have all of your personal information, your address, and it costs me nothing to search for your name, find your parents, where you grew up, your pets.
	It's absolutely ridiculous.
	And this is a whole other problem because, I mean, you're essentially doxed already.
	It's just an issue of whether or not somebody wants to let everyone know where to find the information.
	All right, Peter here.
	Tim Poole, I know you've been on a live stream before.
	And I was wondering if Sargon, will you ever be on Matt Christensen's and Rebecca Blonde's live stream, Beauty and the Beta?
	Of course I will.
	I'm a big fan of Matt Christensen.
	I like what he's doing.
	I like his delivery.
	He's got a really sort of, I don't know, it's kind of like a really respectable demeanor, but a lot of sass.
	I really like that.
	He did invite me on, but I overslept, I think it was.
	And Matt, if you're watching, I'm really sorry.
	I would love another invite.
	You were willing to go on Joe Rogan, and Joe Rogan sort of challenged you, but that's a good sign.
	You go to places that you're not comfortable with.
	That's the only way we grow.
	It may not be perfect.
	It'll be ugly at times, but good on you for doing it.
	Matt Christensen, for anyone who doesn't know, he's one of those kind of like ex-Democrats.
	But he's actually a lot like me.
	He considered himself left-wing, and then essentially he was just like, I can't agree with the principles that you're putting forward here.
	And this is, I guess, where a lot of us sell ourselves.
	I'm so many people come up to me.
	I was in the UK at the free speech event, and someone said, so, Tim, when are you going to be, you know, are you right-wing yet?
	And I was like, no, and I'm not going to be because my principles basically stayed in the same place for most of the past 10 years.
	And it seems like it's the other people who are moving further left.
	And a good example of that is during Occupy Wall Street, Julian Assange was a hero.
	Glenn Greenwald was a hero.
	And people were fighting for free speech.
	They opposed Hillary Clinton, and they mocked Alex Jones because Alex Jones was concerned about the coming Nazi communists or whatever.
	And now you actually have...
	So there's a video about this.
	It's Rap News No. 6, which went viral.
	It's got 1.6 million views.
	And it's these Australians mocking Hillary Clinton, defending free speech, and praising WikiLeaks.
	And this was a left-wing video.
	But now for some reason, all of those things are considered conservative.
	You said the Overton window, exactly.
	It's shifted.
	I've been a liberal my entire life.
	I've gone from being a communist to a Nazi.
	The shirts still fit the same.
	And I just want to stress, Julian Assange is a hero.
	There's no getting around.
	I tend to avoid extreme opinions, but I would just say I'm neutral to positive on the guy.
	But the fact that it's gone to the point where they praised him for the leaks that came out, they praised Glenn Greenwald for his reporting on the NSA, to now the left hates both of them.
	It's the strangest thing.
	It's because the left gained power.
	WikiLeaks have been consistent about holding power to account and giving us inside information that the people in power don't want us to have.
	And so when George Bush was in power, of course the left was thrilled about that.
	But I guess the question now is, did he have information on what I believe in collusion on the other side and not release that?
	Did he just release one side?
	I don't know.
	Okay, that's what we don't know.
	All right, another question?
	Gentlemen, so I was really divided between what question to ask you.
	I have two primary ones, whether or not it's a good idea to hand over all my data to Google.
	For the other people in the audience, should we go for one question?
	Yeah, one question.
	It's one question.
	All right, go ahead and simply.
	I'll be in the pub afterwards, man.
	We can.
	So with, I have a not a strange family situation, but it's sort of like our family strangely bots heads.
	My side of the family with my dad's, my dad's side of the family, we all lean Republican.
	And my dad's brother, they all strongly lean Democrat.
	And at the end of the day, I can only hope that when we go ahead and go at it as far as politics goes, that it's relatively as peaceful and productive as you guys.
	How, I suppose is my question.
	I can't, like, I try to go ahead and hand the olive branch, but it never seems to work out.
	I can't go ahead and not convince them of anything, but even have them consider it for more than just a moment and then just have it be worth more than a laugh.
	I would recommend in, you learn this in sales.
	You learn this if you're in the hacking community and social engineering.
	You always have to approach someone with a rapport as a friend.
	And so the first thing that would probably help with any discussion is finding common ground and going from there.
	Yeah, and to acknowledge that, that we're all afraid to some extent, and we all want to be loved.
	We all want to be heard, and we all want to be respected.
	It sounds altruistic, but that's a good place to start from.
	We all just want to be safe and heard.
	And maybe that lends itself to more proper discussion.
	In most instances, if you approach someone as an enemy, as an other, and then start telling them they're wrong, they're immediately going to go into a defensive mode where even if you agree with them, they'll still like you could you could repeat their own points back at them and they'll disagree with you.
	And I've been calling this bugs bunnying.
	Like, you know, I don't know if you're familiar with the cartoon where he switches it on Daffy Duck.
	I've actually, in the past couple days, been arguing with some anti-fascists, and I've presented very calmly and plainly, like, so do you agree with me that racism is bad?
	We shouldn't blame all Muslims for the acts of individual terrorists, and that we should hold those accountable who would lie to us, and they disagree with me simply because we're enemies.
	Like, I'm not trying to be their enemy, they just don't want to be agreeable for some reason.
	So, Jonathan Haidt actually talks about this quite extensively in The Righteous Mind, and it's a really great book.
	I know I should do a reading list, everyone always asks me, but The Righteous Mind is definitely the top one.
	And basically, he establishes that your emotional state is effectively like an elephant, and your rational capacity is like a rider on the back of the elephant.
	The elephant, if it gets spooked or upset about something, then it's going regardless of what the rider says.
	But if the elephant feels comfortable and safe, the rider can steer it in the direction that you want it to go.
	And so, this sort of analogy is basically how people have arguments.
	Maybe we all just masturbate before you get into an argument.
	Maybe so relaxed, you're like, I don't care.
	I love you, man.
	That's going to be an uncomfortable conversation at dinner, though.
	And go.
	Oh, shit, dad finished first.
	Okay, we got to wait for mom.
	Come on, mom.
	But yeah, basically, right, you need to have the argument and then kind of make up with them and then actually make the point you want to make.
	And then listen to their point in return, because, like you say, people need to feel heard.
	So, good luck.
	I just want to point out, I have to imagine you appreciate this audience more than like a university where you're not allowed to make certain jokes.
	That's my assumption.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I would have to say it's relative to where you are.
	Yeah, you appreciate an audience that doesn't automatically prejudge you and shout you down, obviously.
	But that depends on who I am as well.
	So, thank you.
	You're a great audience.
	I'm not going to agree with many or several things or some things, but hey, that's not the point.
	Again, we all just want to be heard.
	And I'm not probably not going to change anybody's viewpoint to come to mine.
	It's just about discussion.
	I think it's by degree, isn't it?
	I mean, it's very rare that people have like a sea change where they completely flip.
	But I think that you slowly and incrementally bring them one way or another with what you say.
	Yeah, if that's my goal.
	And my goal is not to gain Twitter followers or be more noticed.
	My goal is just that in the format that I'm on on Stephanie Miller, it's fun and I enjoy it, but I don't ever get a chance to get beyond it.
	And so when Sean invited me from Mythicist Milwaukee to do this, I was like, yeah, it intimidates me a little bit.
	I'm not familiar with most of some of the stuff.
	I had to look it up.
	But yeah, let's go for it.
	So that's, you know, the point I'm trying to make is that it feels good when people laugh at your jokes.
	And there are communities where you'll try to be good, you'll try to be funny, and then you'll get yelled at and belittled for it.
	And people don't want to be in those situations.
	It's why Seinfeld won't do university tours, isn't it?
	We're talking about that.
	Illuminating, gentlemen.
	Thank you.
	I masturbate.
	If you learn anything.
	Simple answer.
	Simple answer.
	So Sargon in his talk made allusions to people don't understand what statistics are given and if they make sense or if they don't.
	My question is, with so many, if you look at an American, the mathematical education rate is like at 63%.
	So the question is, with people who don't understand statistics, how do you have discussions?
	Because you're not going to send them, you're not going to send them to school to learn statistics, but you can't also tell them, hey, you can't promote, you can't participate in democracy because you don't have these basic understanding of statistics.
	And the second part is, how do we not perpetrate this problem?
	To be honest with you, the statistics don't really matter.
	They're a post hoc rationalization for a moral argument that's already or an ideological argument that's already being advanced.
	You don't need to worry about them.
	Go straight for the root principles that they're espousing and figure out what your own are.
	This is another thing that a lot of people don't realize.
	They don't even know the sort of base of their own ideology.
	Most people, they don't think about it.
	And this is honestly how the progressives managed to sneak in under the label of liberal.
	You know, they're like, oh, well, you know, liberals are for gay rights.
	Of course they are, for individual rights.
	And so the progressives go, great, we're for gay rights.
	By the way, you can't be homophobic.
	And suddenly you're like, well, I didn't realize I agreed that I couldn't make a gay joke, but now you're in a position where you can't.
	So don't worry about the statistics.
	Go for the meat of what they're talking about.
	Because the statistics, you can find a statistic to support anything everywhere, all the time.
	There's always something.
	But go for what you think is right and wrong, and then have that dialogue with that person, is my advice.
	You probably heard this quote already, and it's new to me because of the monk debates and what Stephen Fry said.
	When you're in a discussion, don't it's like playing chess.
	Don't automatically go for what you think is the best quote-unquote move.
	Go for the move that your opponent least wants you to make.
	And that sometimes might be being cordial.
	I mean, I step backstage.
	It was the first time I met Sargon.
	I go, I'm a huge Stephen Fry guy.
	He's like, oh, fuck.
	We might agree too much on shit tonight.
	This may not be.
	Fuck.
	It was a genuine conversation.
	Because he knew me from Stephanie Miller.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I knew him from Progressive Podcasts.
	I thought, great, he's going to be identitarian.
	Red meat.
	Yeah, he's going to call me a straight white male.
	No, it turns out he's woke on identity politics and he's a really reasonable guy.
	So, I mean, at least we get to have a productive discussion.
	Yes.
	I said, keep your British boy away from my progressive girls.
	He literally did not.
	They're going to be totally Rose Nami Yunis, Joanna Jersek.
	They're going to be badasses, man.
	How's it going, guys?
	Three questions.
	First question.
	One question.
	Come on.
	One question, Michael.
	Sorry.
	It's got to be one.
	That's important.
	All right, fine.
	Sargon, and well, actually, this is to the panel in general.
	I was wondering if you could comment on the sort of the divide I see growing.
	I don't want to call it a community, but the atheist community, specifically what I define as the secularists and the new atheists.
	So the sort of Mouthy Buddha made a video where he's like talking about how the sort of fans of the Four Horsemen are defecting over to the sort of Jordan Peterson pro-Christianity crowd.
	I was wondering if I could get commentary on that.
	I think, I don't think it was your intention, Sargon, but I think this sort of split really came into focus with your debate with Thomas Smith back in MythCon.
	Thank you very much.
	Excellent.
	I'll take it if no one else has got a comment on it.
	It's interesting, isn't it?
	Because as far as I can say, the new atheist movement was a response to an oppressive Religious cultural domination.
	And that's not really the case anymore, at least not that I perceive.
	Maybe it is, you know, in Idaho or something, but I, you know, where I live, in the spaces I occupy, I don't see this.
	People now are concerned about the oppressive hegemony of social justice.
	And so I find myself with more Christian subscribers than I would have ever expected who are surprisingly tolerant when I talk about atheism.
	They're surprisingly forbearing on this.
	But the split, in my opinion, has come down to whether you are in favor of social justice or not in the atheist community.
	And it seems to have ruined the atheist community.
	I have a hypothesis.
	So Anonymous, stemming from 4chan, at one point decided to troll Scientology by doing big protests against Scientology.
	This was kind of just a joke, meant to poke fun at how they were abusing the internet and trying to take videos down, but it did attract actual anti-Scientologist activists into the folds of Anonymous.
	And then when what Anonymous was went about its whims and changed, there were still activists who thought they were within Anonymous, confused why no one cared about Scientology anymore.
	And then Anonymous started focusing on things like Occupy Wall Street.
	And then people who were, you know, it moved and it changed.
	And people were wondering what's going on.
	So when I look at what the atheist community was when I was growing up, it was because the Republican Christians were against gay rights and that attracted a lot of people who were in support of gay rights.
	And then when atheists, actual atheists, said we should keep the issue focused to secularism, the social justice warriors were still there.
	This is something I said backstage in the monk debates when Dyson invited Jordan Peterson to a black Baptist church.
	I was the agnostic atheist guy going, I want to go to a black Baptist church and go, why the hell are you against gay marriage?
	It doesn't make sense.
	There are oppressed people like you perceive to be or are oppressed people as well.
	So as liberals, we're afraid to say that.
	I'm a Joseph Campbell power of myth guy, and we talked about it backstage.
	I think this sort of vaguely addresses your question, Dutt.
	I think the best course for us is to change the software.
	That's what he said.
	A lot of us are subscribing to things that were written exclusively by men, make women second tier, yet they still ascribe to it 2,000 years ago, and damn the luck.
	It's like we didn't get to see the Beatles live.
	Shit.
	Muhammad and Jesus were around 2,000 years ago, and it'll never get better than that.
	That doesn't make sense.
	It really doesn't.
	In the same fucking area code, how unlucky we were not to be alive at the time that these gods went, boom, boom.
	Sorry, folks, born 2,000 years later, you don't get to see them live.
	That's fucked up.
	That's fucked up to me.
	Change the software.
	That's how we get along, too.
	That is, in effect, a form of tribalism where we lead with our religions or our beliefs first, and that also gets in the way of true discussion.
	I'm a big believer in change the software.
	Let's come up with something.
	Let's get women participate.
	Let's do a new prayer.
	Our mother who art in heaven.
	Oh my God, blasphemous.
	Imagine that.
	If Sam Harris needs some advice on this, it's focus on the most immediate thing.
	I mean, Sam Harris himself has been chewed out by the left repeatedly.
	He gets it in the neck all the time.
	And it's like, Sam, at what point do you say, okay, I'm obviously still an atheist, but there are a bunch of rabid SJWs who are shitting up my mentions on Twitter.
	Can we do something about this, please?
	And I know Dean Abadali, he's called in.
	I think he's a very intelligent guy.
	I like his arguments sometimes.
	But I remember bringing Barry Weiss in an article on women in Tehran taking off their hijabs.
	And I'm surprised that liberals weren't, or feminists weren't coming to their defense going, wow, that's a real feminist thing to do, to say, I really don't want to subscribe to this anymore, and I want to actively protest.
	And I was really surprised that liberals, especially on my show, Stephanie Miller, weren't really calling in about that and going, good for them.
	They're taking a chance.
	That's real, in my view, real feminism.
	They're too busy wearing the hijabs now.
	I was curious.
	I wonder what the reaction from a lot of people who are in the far left, what would their reaction be to someone calling for mosaic law, which is Old Testament Judaism, Christianity.
	You have Linda Sarsour saying that Sharia is not so bad, and there's like a tepid response to it.
	What would they say if someone, a Christian conservative, called for Mosaic Law?
	Saying that, I've actually seen a very heartening pushback against Linda Sarsour from progressives these days, which is, I mean, I'm sure everyone here is pretty woke on the cockroach issue.
	But there has been a lot of pushback because she seems to be awful.
	All right, another question.
	Hey guys, thanks for showing up.
	You happen to schedule this.
	Honestly, thank you guys for showing up.
	You happen to schedule this on my birthday, man.
	Happy birthday.
	So like, this is like a fantastic birthday present for me, so thank you.
	Now, you've seen the recent happenings with Kanye West and how he came out and said everything since he came out in support of Trump and the dragon energy, whatever that is.
	And it's weird because, you know, I'm also black, so we all can't, like, we don't feel like we can all be Kanye and come out and say these kind of things to other black people because it feels very crippling, especially from family members, close loved ones.
	These are the same people that are doing this to us and to saying these things to us.
	So I was wondering, what can we do in situations like that when it comes to close loved ones to express our ideas of different thinking and different political views and things like that without really alienating them?
	That's a really good question.
	And it sounds very much like the problem, the same problem happens in ex-Muslim communities, like with ex-Muslims in Muslim communities.
	I've spoken to a bunch of them.
	They say almost exactly the same thing.
	They know that they don't subscribe to this value system, but they also know that their family and friends do.
	And if they say, look, I'm against these value systems, it's going to be seen as a blanket repudiation of the moral character of the people who hold these value systems still.
	And honestly, I don't think I have an answer.
	It's a really difficult thing.
	And you get to a point where, because what you're effectively doing is essentially overthrowing their entire moral system by saying it's not moral.
	You're oppressing me by being as you are.
	And I can't stand living this way.
	But there's no way they're going to want to hear that someone they love is being oppressed by them.
	They need their moral system to function in the world.
	It's their entire worldview.
	And you can't just take that away from them.
	It's really difficult to try and, you'd be uprooting decades of their thought processes.
	And so, honestly, I don't know.
	I honestly don't know.
	And I don't think there is an easy way.
	I don't think there's going to be a simple solution.
	I think it's going to be really hard for every person that does it.
	But I think it will get slightly easier for every person after the first.
	Yeah, and also it's making sure why you believe what you believe.
	Is it a novelty?
	I personally think that Kanye is doing it to be relevant.
	Again, that's my belief.
	And it's kind of a gimmick for him.
	So make sure you don't do it just because Kanye is doing it, but if you truly believe it, yeah, stand up for what you believe in.
	I think you're doing it because you believe in yourself, don't you?
	Yeah.
	What's your name, friend?
	Ryan.
	birthday are you old enough to drink I'll buy you a drink at the bar later.
	All right, guys, I'm going to ask you a question.
	Well, you're going to ask it to ask a question, and I'm just going to go over to that gentleman over there, and then there's another guy over there, and then we're going to go right to the front again, and then I'm going to look again.
	I'm going to see who else can.
	I'm so sorry.
	I'm fucking sorry.
	I feel terrible.
	We'll be in the bar, so if you've got anything you want to ask us, you know, on a personal level, or have you used it when we're there?
	So this goes out to Sargon, but also the main panel.
	My granddad was a desert rat.
	My dad is an immigrant from England.
	My family's over in England.
	And me, I'm a constitutionalist.
	I'm a huge supporter of the Second Amendment, and I wanted, I wanted, I mainly wanted to get your opinion, Sargon, but also the rest of the panel.
	Because I talked to my family.
	They don't have an opinion on guns.
	They don't have an opinion on self-defense and taking that priority into themselves.
	So I'd like your opinions, yeah.
	Man, I got to talk to you at the pub, because I'm not a gun guy, but my father-in-law is.
	And we've had loads and loads and hours and hours of really good civil discourse on it.
	So I'll stop there.
	I think that in a republic it's incumbent on the citizenry to make sure that the government understands that the government is answerable to the citizenry because it's not like republics don't have, I mean republics actually aren't really a very stable form of government because you've got constant, you're constantly beset with factions that are always in competition with one another.
	I mean, every government's like this, but they're competing for the top position in the land.
	They're competing to be the peak of the pyramid.
	And so it just happened.
	And the French are on, like, their fifth republic at this point.
	Whereas Britain hasn't had a civil war in 400 years, and we're a constitutional monarchy.
	So I think it is sensible for the citizens in a republic to remain armed.
	Outside of that, I think if you took the average urban city dweller maybe 50 miles out into the middle of nowhere into a cabin where there's no police and then threatened them, like I don't mean like personally threaten them, I mean like put them in a position where they would feel threatened.
	They would change their opinions.
	And this was actually kind of my experience.
	I lived in rural Miami.
	I lived in the Redlands, about 40 miles out.
	And we had a string of home invasions and murders.
	And we had no defense and there were no police within, I think, you know, 45 minutes, maybe 30 minutes of where we lived.
	And so what happened was we actually had someone break into our property, and this was rather terrifying.
	However, I bought an air rifle.
	So I just, I compressed it and fired in the air, and they fled.
	But, you know, when I explained to people that it's really easy when you have the police on speed dial, it's really easy when you have witnesses who will know what happened to you or be there to even maybe try to help defend you.
	And it's really difficult when you live in the middle of nowhere and you have no way to protect yourself.
	I think that's one of the core issues of the debate and why conservatives in rural areas are pro-gun.
	There's also the governmental issue.
	And then people in cities with police forces are more for gun control.
	Yeah, that presupposes that you subscribe to all guns will be taken away as opposed to what quote-unquote.
	The assault weapons ban includes handguns like the Glock 17.
	So those laws are happening.
	Right.
	I don't think it's going to continue all the way.
	I think that's a red herring.
	Nobody wants to take all cars because carrying out the money.
	Hold on.
	One second.
	One second.
	There are lots of people who say we want to take all of the guns.
	And I disagree with that.
	I don't think that's sensible.
	I think that you should be able to defend yourself in rural areas, but point...
	One second.
	Point it...
	Oh, God, I wish my father-in-law was here.
	Okay, hold on.
	When two cops can be shot, two armed train officers can be shot point-blank range after the Clive and Bundy fiasco is what I call it.
	And that's, to me, that tells you that guns can always protect you in every situation.
	Just because you're armed, there could have been, every concert goer could have been armed in Las Vegas.
	That wouldn't have prevented them.
	So it's a matches with kids at sleepovers kind of analogy with me.
	Just because three kids say I'm responsible with matches, as a parent, you're not going to go, okay, 20 kids, y'all get matches.
	Unfortunately, we have to deal with the fact that not all people are going to control it.
	So as I argue with my father-in-law, there's a happy medium.
	I'm not saying taking all away guns.
	People have the right to defend themselves.
	Let's come up with tougher gun laws too.
	So this guy in Louisiana was selling DVDs, and he got shot because he had a gun on him.
	But where I agree with my father-in-law is that I think a couple of times before...
	Yo, yo, keep it down there.
	I think a couple of times before he had been arrested for illegal possession of firearms.
	So that maybe if the prison sentence was stiffer for that and he was in prison, then we don't get to that point.
	So that's where I can agree where better laws can be in place.
	We don't need to take all firearms, but we can't admit that carrying a gun, because a criminal doesn't text ahead saying, oh, by the way, you may want to prepare your weapon.
	Dan White, and Moscone and Harvey Milk could have been armed, and that wouldn't have prevented Dan White from shooting them because he wouldn't have told them.
	He would have just walked in and shot them.
	I think we can go into a crazy gun debate.
	Yeah, we could.
	But the last thing I want to say is just there actually is a bill in Congress that would ban basically every gun, every semi-automatic weapon, almost, like handguns would be totally illegal.
	So police would be allowed to have them.
	You wouldn't anywhere in the country.
	I'm not afraid of the police.
	I'm not afraid of the police.
	No, no, no, no, no, I'm not saying you should be.
	I'm saying you're giving the government the sole right to a basic handgun.
	But the government is elected by the people.
	You either trust in it or you don't.
	Okay, then it's chaos, then it's not a form of government.
	I'm not trying to get into it.
	It can still be a legitimate form of government.
	Government, there is always a risk of devolving into tyranny with government, and that's the, especially in a republic, in my opinion.
	And so I do, I mean, I come from Europe, obviously, where we don't have handguns.
	We don't have all the problems.
	Yeah, exactly.
	But that's disingenuous.
	If you believe knives are just as equally, then you would use a knife to defend your home.
	But you don't truly believe that.
	That's not what he meant.
	What he's saying is it's become a spiral.
	Where now my government is literally saying we should blunt the ends of knives because they're being used in gang stabbings.
	I mean, like, where does it end at that point?
	It's the people who are doing something wrong that needs to be addressed, not the tool itself.
	Right.
	It won't be solved tonight by shouting at each other.
	But I think there is the quote-unquote happy medium.
	I'm not in favor of banning on firearms.
	I think there's some sensible, stricter gun laws that could be...
	But when you defund the CDC that does research on it that says you're three times more likely to be shot in your home if you have a firearm...
	I've talked to a park ranger, National Park Ranger, who works all over the, he did the 21-foot rule with the drawing on somebody with a knife.
	He says, most of the time, people, especially if you're not trained, and that's where I agree with my father-in-law, get trained.
	If you're not trained, you're carrying around the instrument of your own death.
	So there's so many.
	It's too complex to solve in one night, which is why we should do it at the pub.
	Yeah, we should.
	Yeah, we should do it at the pub.
	This is what we're talking about.
	Yeah, yeah.
	This is a pub debate.
	Please don't get a fist to cuffs.
	Please, please don't fight each other about this, okay?
	I mean, you can be verbal about it, but.
	Hi.
	Hello.
	Hey Sargon, you were my introduction to the anti-SJW community, so thank you for that.
	My pleasure.
	My question is: whenever I get in Facebook arguments with my lefty friends, they always do what they always do in deflect straw man, anything they can do to avoid addressing what I actually say.
	So what would be your advice for how to present your ideas so that they can't, they really just can't do that?
	If I had an answer for that.
	Can I. Honestly, I mean, you've got to know who you're dealing with.
	You've got to know what they're likely to say.
	And you've got to tailor your argument for the person who's receiving it.
	Honestly, that's the only advice I can give you because if someone wants to avoid answering your question, they're going to do it.
	They're going to find a reason.
	You can't force someone to address the issue you're presenting on fair terms if they flat refuse to do that.
	So, I mean, if you guys have got any ideas on that.
	Well, I just have a question.
	How many times can anyone count on any of their hands that an internet argument ended with someone saying, you know, you're right, I agree with you.
	If only they had masturbated first.
	And maybe smoked some weed and just sat back and said, yeah, you know what, man?
	I just don't care anymore.
	You're right.
	You're right.
	It never ends sort of cordially by saying, yeah, you've convinced me.
	It ends with someone blocking someone else.
	Yeah.
	Almost all of your commands.
	Cool.
	That's because you're probably in the right.
	Good evening.
	Sargon, still waiting on Necromancer.
	I'm sure it wasn't all my backers.
	I didn't realize you were backing me.
	No, no, no.
	I'm thinking that it's the kind of thing that will come out once we win, you know?
	Maybe, maybe.
	I would really like to be able to do it by standing.
	But it's not a question.
	I want your comment on this because it seems, and this goes in line with what you were saying before, that there seems to be an apparent disconnect between the policies they ask for and then the results they get.
	And I know you may have commented on it, but I also want the feedback of the other gentlemen.
	Because, for example, let's say you think Trump is Hitler, but you also want to ban guns.
	That doesn't make sense.
	Or let's say that you want the government to police what people can say, but the person in the government is the person you hate.
	That doesn't make sense.
	Or the last one, the deep state, which was responsible for all kinds of things, allegedly, like the unseating of all these wonderful little democracies and whatnot that you were against, but suddenly they're against Trump, so now you're like, oh, yeah, I'm cool with them now.
	So that doesn't make sense.
	So I'd love your opinion on that.
	I'm a deep state agent, by the way.
	that is a really great uh comment um honestly i don't think i need to address it too much because i would come from the other side I remember when Red Dawn was a bunch of rural guys that love guns and want to beat the Russians, and right now, we fucking love the Russians.
	They got our guy in office.
	So how can you justify that, from my perspective?
	Absolutely, he's in bed with Putin and the oligarchs.
	It's steel with his dossier.
	Can I just say that?
	But you don't believe that.
	I'm not going to convince you in one night.
	That's what I believe.
	I don't know that that's proven.
	I don't know that what he's saying is proven either.
	No, no, no.
	What he was saying was a series of logical contradictions.
	The deep state is, what, 13 Republicans?
	I mean, Rosenstein is a Republican.
	Mueller is a Republican.
	Well, then why is the left supporting them against Trump?
	Why not?
	Because in the search of truth.
	Exactly.
	No, no, no, exactly.
	It's because it's politically expedient to do so.
	That's what we do.
	That's how the game is played.
	That's exactly right.
	So the left, there we agree.
	But that means the left has absolutely no claim to a moral high ground, a moral consistency.
	I think you're right.
	We don't always have that claim.
	Yeah, and the right doesn't either.
	There we go.
	I just need to point out how much I hate the media.
	I think the reason that's important though is because so many of the left's arguments are predicated on their perceived moral superiority.
	And I think what the gentleman was pointing out is that they compromise on that whenever it's convenient.
	As does the right.
	Yeah, we all want to be right.
	We all want to be right.
	It's about winning, rather.
	It's about winning.
	Fundamentally, you read publications they don't, and they read publications you don't.
	And so everyone thinks they're reading the truth.
	Yeah.
	That's true.
	You've got to read from both sides, whether you like it or not.
	No, I just, I think it's all total bullshit.
	All of it.
	Seriously, I've just, I read an article the other day.
	It said the economy is worse than ever.
	And then I read an article literally 10 minutes later, like the economy is better than ever.
	I was watching, I don't know if you guys know who David Firth is.
	He's amazing.
	And he did the Salad Fingers, you know, back in the day.
	He's got a video called The New.
	He's got a series called The News Hasn't Happened Yet that I've been just watching on repeat because it's a series of these twisted, like creepy news anchors with his face constantly contradicting each other, like saying ridiculous things like space doesn't exist.
	Then someone goes, space does exist.
	And I'm like, that's literally what I see every day.
	Yes.
	Hi.
	This is going to be, this is kind of a long question, but I'll try to keep it short.
	Well, first, I'd like to mention a person who goes by the name of Frame Game Radio.
	He is a Jewish-American YouTuber who is very critical of Jewish identity politics.
	And I'd like to know if you have an opinion on him, if you've never heard of him.
	I haven't heard of him, but I'm thrilled that we get to talk about Jewish identity politics.
	Okay, well, this isn't going to end badly.
	No, no, no.
	That's the point.
	I'm just teasing.
	I'm just teasing.
	Actually, I want to be delicate about it.
	It's that he went really in-depth lately on a, recently on a stream, and he calls, well, he calls all these kind of pro-Jewish identity groups.
	He refers to them as the Jewish Affinity Network, I guess.
	It's a little bit, it's more charitable than what some other people call it.
	And basically, they're very influential and powerful for they're really pro-open borders.
	And I want to know if I can, if how you can point them out without automatically engaging in what would be considered identity politics.
	So who wants to take that one?
	Oh, it's up to me, is it?
	Right, okay.
	It's your show.
	Yeah, yes.
	But I brought you guys here to take the fall.
	In all cases, regardless of what our opinion is, we can't be afraid to at least have opinion on.
	My brother and I have arguments about Israel and Netanyahu and things like that and settlements.
	I don't suppose there's a perfect solution to that either.
	Pardon me, it doesn't seem to be solvable.
	And same with speaking out against other religions as well.
	But I'm being vague because maybe I'm being afraid to answer the question.
	I don't think it's about religion, though, is it?
	It is about the identity politics of it that you're thinking.
	And I see, I mean, this happened recently in my country with Jeremy Corbyn.
	And I'm loath to defend a socialist like Jeremy Corbyn, but he didn't deserve the absolute pasting he got in my country because there are elements in the far left who are so anti-Zionist, they come across as being anti-Jewish.
	And it's no different to the elements on the far right who are just openly anti-Jewish or the elements in the Islamist camp who are openly anti-Jewish.
	But it is, it does mean that it's very difficult.
	Because, I mean, Jewish people do very well in our societies.
	They're often, and that's to their credit.
	They work hard.
	It's not that this is illegitimately gained.
	But then I can see why people are resentful that successful, rich, well-off people who are well-connected, who are socially very advanced, are then playing the game of identity politics as well.
	I can see why it doesn't seem fair.
	It seems like an unfair defense, an unfair advantage that they have.
	And that's not a common...
	Like, if someone would say, well, that's an anti-Semitic thing to say, it would sound to me like someone criticizing feminism being called a misogynist.
	You know, it...
	To me, it's just another brand of identity politics.
	But it's not an indictment of Jewish people.
	It's not suggest that they've done nothing wrong by playing identity politics.
	Everyone, I think, is playing identity politics, is doing something wrong inherently.
	But it is an issue that I think a lot of people do notice.
	And I think it is something that has to have an honest conversation regarding it.
	They've got to be honest.
	You can't just shout people down when they point this out because it is a real thing they're pointing out.
	Jewish people are very smart.
	They work very hard.
	Of course they're successful.
	If we want to even have any idea that we're living in a meritocracy, if Jews weren't succeeding in our societies, they must be being held back.
	But they're not.
	They're doing great because they're not being held back because they do work hard, because they are smart.
	Jewish people, unfortunately for them, have got to drop the identity politics.
	I'm sorry about the Holocaust, but I don't give a shit.
	I'm sorry.
	All right.
	You guys have anything else to add to that?
	No?
	Okay.
	Got another question here.
	I'm all the way in the back, by the way.
	You can't see me, but I'm all the way in the back.
	Back left.
	Back, you're right.
	Sorry.
	Back right.
	There you go.
	Sargon and Tim, long time fan.
	Thanks for coming out.
	I'm seeing a lot of discussion in the Twitter sphere where there seems to be renewed debate about the trap question.
	Hear me out.
	Hear me out.
	It's happening.
	One side says that if you don't suck penis, it's not gay.
	But the other side insists that as long as she hot, anything goes.
	My question for you guys is, are traps still gay?
	This is true.
	Translate anyone into English for this guy.
	I'm too old to be on that.
	Okay, so a trap is a man who looks like a woman but is not transgender.
	I lived in San Francisco for seven years.
	I understand.
	You know what I'm talking about.
	And the question is, if you have sex with a trap, are you gay if you don't know about it?
	No, because if you're fantasizing.
	No, because Homer said you're fantasizing about a woman while you're doing it.
	You're not gay.
	Right.
	So being gay is all about intent.
	Yeah, saying, I want to have sex with a man.
	Okay.
	But if you believe it's a woman, it's not gay.
	So, right, that's a category statement.
	There we go.
	Yeah, I'm going to go with that.
	Your Twitter feed is going to be interesting after this.
	I know.
	There I go.
	That's kind of harmless, though.
	Hey, absolutely.
	I'll be open.
	My wife knows about this.
	When I was a kid, I experimented.
	I ended up being a heterosexual.
	So if it occurs while you're a youth, that's definitely not gay.
	You're just horny.
	No, no, no.
	You just want to stick it in places.
	It's not about judgment.
	It's really about the philosophy surrounding it.
	Are you defined by your actions or are you defined by your intentions?
	That's what it comes down to.
	I think you're defined by your intentions.
	I think that's a good thing.
	Every once in a while, I get drunk and a man looks kind of good.
	That never happened to me.
	Soft, they shave their legs.
	It's not my fault.
	I got confused.
	That was a very intelligent way to describe the meme, Sargon, by the way.
	Thank you.
	So, I'm just going to ask, I'm going to get one person to ask a question.
	For anyone else that has a question now, if you can do me a favor, because I feel like it's just everyone's popping a question all over the place, more questions pop up whenever they say something, because you have a question, obviously, it makes sense.
	Can you just stand down the middle there?
	You can do that, just make a little line, and I'll try to get to you guys.
	Oh, shit.
	Okay, wait, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
	Whoa, guys.
	All right.
	Okay, we're not going to be able to get to all of you.
	I promise you that.
	Okay, we've got 20 minutes left, the event.
	We've got 20 minutes left.
	Yes, actually.
	So, this guy, I'm going to get this guy to ask a question, then him.
	Guys, keep it short, please.
	I'm begging you, okay?
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Let's go for the lightning round.
	Hey, so I have a question for Carlos, actually, because I'm a supporter, Patreon, and subscriber to both Tim and Sargon, so I know where you stand on this.
	But I'm happy you mentioned the monk debates because during that discourse, Jordan Peterson asked a question which I think is central to what Sargon's point is about the collapse of the left.
	And it's the question of we understand the right goes too far when it's ethnic or race-based politics.
	Oh, yeah.
	So, when does the left go too far beyond a platitude of no violence, no censorship?
	Like, is there an actual ideological proposition that is going too far?
	I found myself agreeing with Michelle Goldberg when, yeah, when you're trying to center free speech, like Yannanopoulos, I guess, or when you're trying to censor free speech and when you become violent, would be my standard answer.
	And so, that's what I would answer.
	I mean, look, like the centrists on each side have been saying, they feel censored.
	Like Ryan over there, I think that's too far.
	I think that's too far.
	There's no violence involved.
	It's just community.
	Right, it's subtle violence.
	It's a violence of ideas, actually.
	So, a violence against ideas.
	So, I think that's too far.
	I think that's too far.
	It's a power move.
	Yeah, it is.
	It is.
	I'm going to pull the dictionary on you.
	Violence is defined as physical damage to a person or thing.
	We tend to find that the left and the right define words differently.
	So, I usually default to the dictionary.
	But I'm not trying to be disparaging, but the left disagrees.
	They do.
	What you're saying is I can see why you would characterize it as violence, because I'm sure.
	It's an attack.
	Yeah, it's an attack, exactly.
	It's a power move.
	That's a great way of describing it.
	And it really is designed to inhibit their opinions from preventing them from breaking an orthodoxy.
	And I think that's, in my opinion, where everyone goes too far, because that's directly attacking your personal freedom to be the people you want to be.
	Yeah.
	And by the way, I don't care about if people want to wear whatever uniforms they want or hijabs or whatever.
	I love the tapestry of it all.
	I just hope it's like your choice.
	I just hope it's your choice as an individual to say, I really want to express myself this way.
	We have a kid that comes over to play out at our house.
	He's five years old and he wears dresses.
	And mom's like, he wants to wear dresses.
	Fuck yeah, wear dresses.
	Who the fuck cares?
	Well, there's an argument among the far left that the system in place today forces women socially to choose certain things that they wouldn't normally choose.
	So it's interesting that there's the argument that, oh, the patriarchal system makes women choose nursing as a profession.
	Then at the same time, they say, oh, but women chose to wear the hijab without saying, yes, their society and culture is pressuring them to make those choices, right?
	It's like a contradictory argument.
	Good contradiction, I don't know.
	Wear it if you want here.
	I don't care.
	I'm having a good time.
	I'm eating a burger.
	But I agree with you.
	It should be about personal freedom.
	It should be your choice.
	Yeah, I think that's one thing that almost all of us can agree.
	Probably everyone.
	Man, wear the MAGA hats.
	That's your personal freedom.
	You enjoy wearing them.
	I don't care.
	You know, I always tell people, I don't care what you do.
	You can walk down the street dressed as a clown juggling bananas, but the moment you start throwing those bananas at people, I've got a problem with you.
	Hi, Sargon.
	My question is mainly for you, and the panel can chime in if it applies to them.
	So, you, Sargon, I've heard you say it directly and indirectly, the best way to get ahead in this game is to read, read, always read.
	Get that reading list soon.
	That's how I had a good answer for Tim on that.
	The Sports Illustrated count?
	But I'm a high school student.
	My days are filled with work.
	I'm an average American teenager.
	I like to play video games.
	The last book I read was Chris Feimy, Outlaws Shrugged.
	It took me like two months to get through it because I wanted to pay attention to everything.
	But I want to be able to read as much as possible.
	What would you say?
	Because you have to edit videos, et cetera.
	It takes a lot of time out of your day.
	How do you set up time so that you personally can manage just reading and getting it done?
	I mean, honestly, it's one of those things where it's just you've just got to get your nose to the grindstone.
	I mean, a lot of the time I'm doing, I feel like I'm always behind on everything.
	I never feel like I have enough time to do anything.
	And so honestly, everyone's like, how was the flight?
	And it's like, it was really good.
	I read half of a book.
	I was on a plane for 10 hours.
	I got loads of work done.
	But when you're in your real life, it's complicated.
	Things come up.
	You're probably always going to feel like you're behind, but just keep going.
	Set a schedule.
	Even if it's like 6 in the morning for 15 minutes and you do it every day, you're going to be there.
	So set a schedule.
	Sleep less.
	Get as much sleep as you can.
	Don't have kids.
	Yeah, don't have kids.
	And if you enjoy your sleep, don't have kids.
	Okay.
	Another question?
	Hello, panel.
	Hello.
	Surprised no one actually said this, but welcome to New York.
	And the guy who before did the trial question, you beat me to it, you son of a bitch.
	But you mentioned earlier with the whole concept with forming borders and whatnot, and how some countries, especially you, Sargon, mentioned it before with Scotland, how they're now just letting refugees having the right to vote.
	Are there any countries currently in this day and age that you three gentlemen might believe who are doing the sort of like processing of refugees or immigrants or whatever term people want to use these days properly?
	Because I've had this argument with plenty of my friends back at home and I've been looking at countries like Poland, Hungary, other Eastern European nations, and then Western European nations.
	And it's just a whole big debacle, so I'm just curious.
	Yeah, I mean, like, there should be no Middle Eastern refugees in Europe.
	This is something that shouldn't happen.
	Because international law says that they should go to the nearest safe country.
	I mean, I'm more than happy to help out places like Turkey and Jordan and wherever, where they've got large camps full of refugees.
	And Saudi Arabia won't take the European country.
	Exactly.
	They won't take a damn one.
	And I think they're operating directly in their own interest.
	But I mean, I'm happy to say, yeah, it's an acceptable thing for me for us to help these people because it is a crisis.
	And it wasn't started by these countries.
	And they are the ones who are most affected.
	But the way that Europe has handled the refugee crisis has been entirely ideological.
	It's been, oh, if we open the borders, it's very progressive.
	It's very optimistic about whether these two types of value systems can coexist.
	I actually disagree.
	I think it's economics.
	I think one thing I heard repeatedly in Sweden was that they know that the citizens aren't replacing themselves and that the economy is going to shrink unless they bring in as many people as possible.
	That's definitely one aspect.
	They look at it like an opportunity.
	If you listen to the way Merkel was describing it, she was making a moral argument.
	They do also make the economic.
	I should have said that.
	Right.
	And then I think there's another issue that I kind of want to ask you about: I understand you said that they should go to the nearest country, but I've actually met refugees who have fled to Turkey, and then Turkey straight up says, we're going to send you back.
	You will die.
	And so they flee further into Europe.
	What do you think they should do?
	Well, that's not a safe country, and they should move to the next one.
	They shouldn't.
	But I mean, Germany isn't the next safe country.
	No, Romania.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Greece.
	I mean, this is the problem with international crises.
	Yeah.
	You know, I will add that in my experience in Europe, you know, looking into a lot of this stuff, the biggest mistake made by all these countries, because I don't know if anyone's doing it right, is they just almost, it's almost like they refuse to allow integration to happen.
	One of the things that happened with Sweden was that they brought in a lot of migrants and refugees and just pushed them into certain neighborhoods where they didn't integrate.
	And 20 years later, they have kids who are disconnected from Swedish culture.
	But now, one of the things we learned last year was that they're actually trying to make sure that all new refugees coming in the country are actually spread out rather evenly throughout the entire country, even to more rural places, so that it allows people to integrate into their economy and culture better.
	Another question?
	So, this is, I kind of see Britain kind of as an example of what's going to happen here in America.
	But, you know, how do you deal with places like Rotherham and Luton and stuff like that, where the government kind of is turned against its own people and not enforcing the laws against the minorities and immigrants, but actually targeting Dankula and other people?
	So what do you do about that?
	How do you get the government to change its priority and change its method of operation?
	In the same way that you do anything in a democracy.
	And this is why I get a lot of stick from people who are right-wing, not alt-right, but people who are just right-wing, when they say, no, Islam is the biggest threat facing the West.
	And it's like, okay, but we can't even talk about it in my country.
	We can't have that conversation because of the left, because of the shouting down from the progressives.
	And okay, so, I mean, if there are obstacles to liberal democracy and threats to liberal democracy coming up, we've got to take them as we find them.
	And if we can't address this one because of this one, then we have to get this one done first.
	But ultimately, it's dialogue, the same way everything ever changes in a democracy.
	It has to be through argumentation, because otherwise we're just left with force.
	And I don't want to have to use force.
	And I tell you what, man, like the stuff in Luton and in Rotherham and the 20-odd other cities in my country, it drives me crazy.
	I can't fucking stand it.
	I cannot fucking stand that my government will make special exceptions for people just because they're brown or Muslim or foreign or whatever.
	No, it's one rule for everyone, and that's the only way to run our societies.
	I have a question for anyone who's willing to answer, but I go to a community college, so I regularly get into discussions about socialism and communism.
	And I've heard you, Sargon, bring up how communism is more insidious and fascism is more blatant, which is why people are willing to dismiss communism.
	What would you say to someone who, in a discussion, would say that communism is just a form of economics?
	How would you respond to that?
	How would I respond to destiny?
	It's not.
	It's a moral goal.
	I think that's why communism is ultimately more insidious.
	Because, in fact, fascism isn't really making a moral argument.
	It's making an argument for glory, effectively.
	And that's appealing to some people, and maybe to a lot of people, but for different reasons.
	But communism is appealing to people's sense of fairness.
	And a lot of people have a really strong sense of fairness.
	And if you follow it down its logical line of reasoning, then eventually you decided that any difference between anyone is completely unfair.
	And oh, capitalism's evil.
	But I think it's just the goals that they have in mind.
	It's interesting, too, because that attempt to control the outcome kind of informs me on how people feel about the borders.
	I've always said that I see a lot of Latinos on the subway systems in Los Angeles, and it's something that LA people don't do because they're Hollywood elite at times, and they get in their cars and they don't ever see anybody.
	And these guys work 16 hours a day.
	They got bronchitis, they're asleep on the train, they've got to get up the next morning at 5.
	They work fucking hard.
	I'm not threatened by that.
	I'm not threatened by competition.
	They're not coming to take my job.
	If they're coming to take your job, you're not working hard enough.
	So you want to try to control the outcome by saying they can't come here.
	Fucking out-compete them then.
	Work harder for less because the corporations hire them because they know they're going to work harder than you for less money.
	So it's not their decision.
	It's the corporations' decision.
	They didn't make it up.
	So hold on.
	Would you advocate for getting rid of the minimum wage then?
	Then, no, I wouldn't.
	And that's where I kind of fall into my own.
	It's not less than minimum wage in a lot of instances.
	But it's because it's what's being offered.
	So there's a minimum wage in this country.
	We have a lot of people coming in this country illegally than working for below that.
	And that makes a lot of workers aren't able to get their money.
	But they aren't setting the wages.
	They aren't setting the wages.
	The market is.
	Somebody else is.
	Yeah.
	The market.
	So?
	How do you compete with that?
	But another aspect as well is that the world is such a big place.
	There are so many people who would love to come to the country illegally if they could.
	And the American worker, surely, I mean, asking them to out-compete millions of other people is quite a challenge when those people don't even have a right to be in the country at all.
	Yeah, if they're not coming here legally or they don't have a path to citizenship.
	It's obviously a complex issue.
	But you're right.
	I think it's twofold.
	They are willing to work for less, but people are willing to pay less.
	They're basically telling the American worker, you're valueless to me.
	You don't matter to me.
	What matters to me is the person that is going to work for less.
	So that's what corporations think of it.
	Amazing thing.
	I just discovered that this could be the second thing that we discuss at the bar.
	Okay?
	We've got one more question, and that's it.
	Sargon, Tim, longtime friends, but my question is actually for Carlos.
	Yes.
	We've been seeing a lot of stories today, and the general consensus that I see in our society today is that whenever something happens to a person of color, that I would expect to be treated the same way.
	The person yells out race.
	We got the Starbucks incident.
	If I walk into a Starbucks and I don't buy anything, I don't expect to sit there.
	Tim, you just had the story a couple days ago about the Waffle House incident when the Waffle House closed down and two women were fired.
	Oh, the bakery in Portland.
	The bakery, yes.
	I'm sorry.
	Yeah.
	Here's my question.
	My question to you is, do you think this is where society should be heading and this is the best way to move forward?
	And does this benefit everybody?
	No, when it's wielded incorrectly just for the sake of power, I don't think that's what we're going to be seeing.
	I begin with a story in 1991.
	I'm doing comedy in Sacramento in Citrus Heights, suburbs of Sacramento.
	I'm working with a guy named Johnny Ray, black comedian.
	We do our gig, we go home, we hang out at the comedy condo.
	I go to sleep.
	3 o'clock in the morning, I get awakened by Johnny tapping me on the shoulder.
	I look up, there's two cops behind him.
	He's going, Carlos, tell these guys you know me.
	Some lady saw him on the balcony and went, oh, the black guy on the porch.
	And I went, oh, fuck, now I get it.
	I could have hung out on that porch all night, nothing.
	So there is that reality.
	I lived with my friend Sean Corvelle for 12 years, black man.
	Sean would come home.
	He'd go, hey, Carlos, man, I got pulled over.
	I go, why?
	He'd go, what the fuck do you think?
	I go, oh, okay, I get it.
	So there are those realities, but the answer to that is not to try to make everything sort of about race.
	It is a reality, but we can't fix it by tilting the ship, steering it suddenly too far the other way.
	It capsizes it.
	The problem itself is the racial discrimination.
	You can't solve racial discrimination with more racial discrimination.
	Correct.
	So are there any closing statements you guys want to end with?
	No, but thanks everyone for coming.
	Honestly.
	Masturbate before you get into arguments.
	Just want to say some last things here.
	I wanted to give a big thanks to the people at MythCon who helped make this event possible.
	All right, if it wasn't for them, this wouldn't have happened.
	It was really amazing.
	They booked the place in Brooklyn.
	They rebooked the place.
	That was excellent.
	Thank you, Sean.
	Another reminder.
	I know there were some people that didn't get the chance to go ahead and actually ask their questions.
	I want to apologize for that.
	Seriously, I mean, there's so many of you, and I didn't want to just give people like fast questions.
	I wanted them to be able to get their questions answered.
	You can tell he's Canadian, can't you?
	Yeah, I'm not.
	Yeah, totally.
	I'm Canadian.
	Whatever, deal with it.
	We're going to be in the pub.
	It'll be fine.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Come to the pub.
	All right, let me go ahead and give you the address again.
	It is 252 West 37th Street, 10 p.m.
	It's called District Social, and it's a nice place.
	Please be on your best behavior.
	But of course, have fun.
	Have a couple of drinks.
	Have a good time.
	I'll see you there.
	Can we get a pause for Bunty?
	No, no, it's good, it's fun, it's fun, it's good, spin, spin.
	Fine.
	Seriously, Sean made all this happen.
	Bunty hosted it all.
	I am the worst organizer in the world.
	I couldn't have done any of this.

▲