All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 19, 2021 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
50:06
Who Hates Whom？
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey folks, how's it going?
Well, we'll wait a few minutes, let YouTube warm up, let the hamsters start going, the boiler start boiling.
And in the meantime, hey, check out my latest Space Marine biker.
They're called Outriders now, which I'm not really, I think they're called Outriders.
I'm not really a fan of it.
But check this bad boy out.
I got this done this afternoon.
I'm very pleased with this.
I'm very proud of it right so I decided my son wanted to play Necrons I want I was saddled with Space Marines.
And honestly, I've never had a Space Marine arm before.
I've been playing, well, I used to play 4K for a very long time.
That's not what this stream's about, but I'll get to it in a minute.
And I always liked Dark Angels.
I always thought they looked nice.
And so I was trying to do a colour scheme where it was like, you know, sort of like black but reflective, you know, like so the height, the reflection would be green.
And so it'd be the dark angels colour, but it looked cool and edgy.
I don't know.
Like, it was also nice to paint, but I don't know how it came out.
You guys tell me what you think it came out looking like.
But I really, really had a great time painting this.
I'm very pleased with the sort of, you know, rusted burnout effect on the exhausts as well.
Very happy with that.
And the face came out pretty well as well.
I used a bit of null noil to get some depth to it.
I'm not very good at painting faces normally, so I was quite happy with it.
And this completes my three Space Marine bikes.
They're all done.
Yes, come on.
God, I can actually say I've painted some, you know, I've only got, what have I got left?
I've got, you know, like a miniature captain.
I can't remember his name, like a sub-captain.
I've got my captain to do.
And then I've got like an actual playable force that's all painted.
And I'm very pleased.
But yeah, like I said, that's not what this is about.
But, you know, follow my Instagram for more paintings.
And of course, memes.
But anyway, yeah, so what are we going to talk about here?
Let me finish getting set up and then we'll get started.
I hope you're all doing very well, by the way.
So I wanted to talk about the view of the right from the left and the view of the left from the right.
Because I find this very, very interesting.
I think it's safe to say that the left deeply caricatures the emotional tenor of the right and the concern about individuals that the right has for the left.
And it's not that people on the right like left wingers per se.
They're not like fans of them.
But I don't think they hate them with quite the same visceral loathing and sort of depth.
There are going to be some, of course, this is not like a universal truth or anything like that.
But in my experience, the people on the right seem to be more well-adjusted.
And I think this is important.
I think this matters.
Because of course, as the left are very frequently telling us, the personal is political.
And so the way that you treat someone on an individual basis is an expression of how you would treat them were you granted political power over them.
And that's rather terrifying given the way that the left treats the right.
And this was all inspired by this tweet that someone sent me by a YouTuber called Sean.
He says, I've interacted with a few right-wing internet personalities behind the scenes, ask me to do debates and whatever.
And it's always striking how polite and business-like they are.
This is not a compliment.
It's weird.
I mean, he's not talking about me.
I've never had an interaction with Sean on a personal level, but like, I would take that as a compliment because I think that your personal behavior matters.
And again, if the person is political, then that's a political statement.
It shows that the person you're dealing with is not an insane and rabid, hate-filled monster.
They are capable of comporting themselves decently.
They are polite.
They have control over their emotions.
They are what we would describe as an adult.
And if you're a left-winger, you're like, well, I don't respect that at all.
then what are you saying that you are?
Like, what are you putting forth?
Because it makes you sound like you're insane and like you really need to get off Twitter.
He follows that with, I've had perfectly friendly emails from who on air scream about the left leading society to genocide and catastrophe.
Then off air, it's all, sorry to bother you, just a quick inquiry, lol creeps all for show.
Why do you think that's all for show?
Perhaps it's that there's a time and a place, I mean, I don't know who's talking about that, by the way.
Perhaps there's a time and a place for expressions of passion when it comes to what the right thinks that the left is doing, and that isn't when you're trying to have a conversation with someone.
Maybe that's just inappropriate.
Maybe that's not even the thing you're talking about.
Assuming that a left-winger is capable of talking someone else, someone of the right, without that being all that they can think about, which, let's be fair, might not be the case.
But I like the, again, I don't want to just say bad faith, but come on.
Like, that's got to be bad faith, right?
You can't just be like, well, you know, right-wingers are just all grifters, which is obviously the next one.
This is my pet theory about why centre media gets along with the right so much better.
They're all in the same grift.
Has the word grift, like, lost its impact yet?
Are we past the term grifter now?
I mean, at the end of the day, right, why would you be a right-wing grifter if you were like, right, I'm going to get into politics for the money, which strikes me as being a bizarre thing to do because there are so many more profitable things than doing politics.
Like, if you want to get views on YouTube, for example, do media criticism of any kind.
Like, it's amazing how many views a well-put-together and well-thought-out critique video of any movie, it seems, any franchise, anything that's vaguely well-known and popular from any political persuasion can get on YouTube.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining.
That's fantastic.
That is a fantastic thing that that is something that can be done.
And the views that you get from that, well, I mean, that's money.
That's lots of money.
That's fame, that's Patreon, that's, you know, all those sorts of things.
Why would you be a political grifter for a start, right?
I mean, you're going to have to have a certain kind of personality to want to do that.
And why wouldn't you just do it for something you believed in?
Like, seriously, it would just be so much easier.
If you're going to do politics in public and you're on YouTube, why not just do politics that you believe in?
Why would you grift?
Like, what would be the point?
You know, like, I don't even think people like Hunter Avalone, who like vacillate from left to right, depending on what day it is, are grifting.
You know, I think that we can have a much better faith interpretation of how these people are.
And again, like, if you were going to be a grifter, why would you be a right-wing grifter?
Like, why would you put yourself in the crosshairs for the platforms themselves?
If you're like, right, I literally don't care about any of this.
I'm just going to do it for the money.
Well, all the views, all the money, all the Patreon books seem to be weighted in favour of the left.
And then you've got the actual security of your channels and your various other Patreons and, you know, supporting infrastructure of your channel.
That's all secure if you hold just vaguely left-wing positions.
Like, Vorsch can say the N-word at a bunch of other progressives that probably include non-white progressives, and he still has a Patreon.
I use the N-word insulting a bunch of Nazis, you know, like, you know, I can't even remember the usernames, but like a bunch of Nazis who are, like, harassing me, and I get suspended from Patreon.
So it's like, okay, there's obviously a double standard going on here.
And if that was the case, why not grift for the left?
I mean, all of the incentives are there loaded.
So, you know, be a left-wing grifter, because left-wing grifters don't get deplatformed for anything.
Left-wing grifters buy $3 million mansions in Hollywood.
Like, unironically, Hassan Pika just leaves other people's videos on and goes off and waits for his mum to make his chicken nuggies or whatever it is he does.
And he's making millions.
He's unironically making millions.
And no one thinks Hassan Pike has some sort of brain.
No one thinks that he has worthy political commentary.
Hassan Pika has just been owned by Nikki Minaj publicly.
It's unbelievable how small-minded everyone can see.
No one thinks he's intelligent.
And yet, even Hassan, grifting to the left, can make $3 million mansions become their reality.
So why would anyone who's pretending to be interested in politics go for right-wing politics?
I just don't understand what the incentive would be.
And that makes me think, well, I imagine most people who call themselves right-wing are probably doing it because there is a genuine conviction underlying it.
Again, why do politics at all?
And if you're going to choose politics, why choose the side that's getting beasted on social media?
What would be the point?
And so I'm just going to assume that accusations of griftering are just from people who I'm guessing pronouns in the bio.
Look at that.
Every time.
What a shock.
Can't say I'm surprised.
Anyway, so this was responded to by just lots and lots of people.
And for some reason, I just don't understand why left-wing personalities think everything has to be a fight.
Well, I mean, I think I do, but we'll get to it.
But anyway, so someone was just like, well, I don't get what the alternative would be.
Is it better to be rude to someone in order to get them to debate or something?
As in screaming in their faces, sending them angry DMs or angry emails?
no i don't think that's good and there are still elements of people you know elements on this right in the center who do want good faith conversations with leftists even though such a thing seems to have i mean if it was ever possible it's certainly not possible now because all the leftists seem to use twitter and they seem to think that this is an all or nothing blood you know blood sports style internet further we're all engaged in.
Even though a lot of us are just like, okay, well, maybe there's something outside of politics that we could talk about.
But of course, if the personal is political, that's a totalizing worldview.
There is nothing outside of politics, according to left-wingers.
And again, other people just like, well, here's an idea.
One, they care about the views I talk about.
Two, they want to supply an easily, they want the supply to easily debate critics of their views.
Or they're trying to get the person by being professional and not being an asshole.
And this is actually quite important because people on the right believe in virtue.
This is genuinely something they believe in.
Now, I realize it's not something that most leftists believe in.
I've yet to meet a leftist who thinks that such a thing is important.
And I've never really heard a leftist even speak on the subject.
So it could well be that this is just simply something that has left the left-wing lexicon.
They do not understand that it is a virtue to be polite to people.
It is decent to be polite to people.
I mean, most people consider being an adult, just being a human.
But if your politics is all you think about it, if you're left-wing, then your politics are, I guess what we'll say, rationalistic.
And this is your entire worldview, then maybe it doesn't stand to reason that you'd be nice to people with whom you disagree.
Maybe it stands to reason that you'd scream at them like an absolute monkey, like you were a child.
You just screech, and all you would do is engage in bad faith.
All you would do is hate, hate, hate, hate, because you don't see any other alternative.
I would suggest that's possibly a flaw in the left-wing view, which is one of the reasons why it looks like the left want a civil war, why they're constantly going on about revolution, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
But I don't know.
Who am I to judge, eh?
Anyway, so this was picked up amusingly by just, I'm sure I've been on this by the way.
You know, one of these little gimmick accounts, like YouTube is bitching about politics.
I don't doubt that I've been on this.
I'm not on Twitter.
I don't follow these accounts, obviously.
I don't know what's going on.
But yeah, so it's just, hmm, yes, the completely inconceivable concept of checknotes not being a dick to those of differing opinions.
Apparently, it seems to have lost, be lost on the left.
But Sean replies to this, like, Sean, just when a parody account is mocking you, just take the L, man, right?
But he says, my point is, was that they are a dick to those of differing opinions when they're on air.
And then they act completely differently off-air, calling out the hypocrisy rather than either of the behaviors alone.
Learn to read gimmick account.
Oh, yeah, you got that gimmick account, Sean.
Well done.
But no, I don't agree.
I think that what you consider being a dick is not the same as what they consider being a dick.
And so it is, in fact, your particular, shall we say, myopic perspective on the thing.
And this is something I've noticed about the left wing.
There is no attempt to understand the conservative position.
The conservatives spend quite a lot of time trying to just comprehend what the left are saying when they're trying to say things.
Because it seems that what the left is saying is just crazy.
It's nonsense.
They've entered into a world of delusion.
And so the conservatives are sat there like, right, look, I just can't understand you.
But they do seem to try.
You get people like James Lindsay or Christopher Ruffo or myself who actually go and read their texts.
Actually go and sit there and write, okay, what are they trying to say to me?
And the problem with this is that often what the left is trying to say, at least the most extreme radical fringes of it, of course, you know, if you're a centre leftist and you consider yourself to be a moderate Democrat or blue labor or something, then I've got bad news for you.
You're not in control of where your political movement's going.
Lunatics are in control of where your political movement's going, and they have arrived at things like racial consciousness.
They have arrived at the disconnect between gender and sex, that there's nothing essentially biological about a human.
And if there is, that's bad and reactionary.
And basically, you're a Nazi now.
Bad luck.
By the way, you know, I'm going to punch you.
And so it's like, okay, I don't think that's a problem with everyone else.
I think that's a problem with extreme left-wingers.
And so saying, you know, they're just dicks to people.
Well, okay, let's take those examples.
Let's give Sean the most charitable interpretation.
Even if someone is in a room being a dick to someone, and that person walks in, should they continue being a dick?
Should they be like, oh, look, there's that prick now.
Oh, a prick.
You know, should they do that?
Or should they be like, okay, I will talk to them.
You might hate each other.
Maybe it's long-term personal beef that you've had forever, right?
They still, even if they hate one another, be polite to each other in person.
Because there is a difference, addressing people who aren't you and then addressing that individual.
There is a distinct difference there, and that matters.
And this is about your personal behavior, how you comport yourself, how you control your own behavior, and whether you can.
And those people who can't control their own behavior, well, that reflects poorly on them.
If you can control your own behavior, well, that reflects well on you.
That again speaks to a virtue, self-discipline.
I'm talking, I'm talking a foreign language that they're not going to understand.
I can already feel it.
But again, so he's complaining about things like, oh, well, you know, Chris, Stephen Crowder called Ethan Klein a fool or an idiot or something like that on his show.
And then he got him on and he was polite to him.
Therefore, Stephen Crowder is two-faced.
It's like, no, that's not what two-faced means.
Two-faced is when Stephen Crowder would say, oh, I don't know, if he were to be telling someone else, you know, not publicly, that Ethan Klein is an idiot, which he is, by the way.
And then to his face, oh, Ethan, I just think you're so smart.
I tell everyone that you're so smart, you know.
No, when someone publicly says something about you that's rude or unflattering, and then is not just repeating that verbatim to your face, that's not being two-faced.
You know that they said that.
They know you know that they said that.
And there is an agreement when you talk to people actually for just the sake of everyone else and just for your own sake, your own decency's sake, you are not expressly rude to that person when you're talking in person.
This is what being a human is.
And so calling it like two-faced or something like that, it's just wrong.
It's just dishonest, to be honest.
It's not accurate.
And it's not hypocrisy either.
It's again common courtesy that we should all be abiding by.
So and then you get you know these things.
It's just no, it's all for show.
Right moving policy is a grift.
So if you're not a screeching leftist or a screeching rightist in every interaction you have with your political opposition, then it's just a show and it's a grift.
It's like it's not how it works.
But anyway, so it was interesting that Big Joel, who I'm just going to call Joel because it's quicker, replied to this about me.
Now, I didn't really expect to have people sending me this because, I mean, I have things to do, I have responsibilities.
But this was very interesting because a few years ago, we had, I guess, what we call a back and forth over any Sarkeesian.
And he seems to think that I was as hateful towards him as he seems to act towards me.
And I just don't think I was.
And I think that he is busy misrepresenting me on twitter.com.
So I thought I'd do this stream to clear things up because I don't really like being smeared, to be honest.
You know, it's not very nice.
So Joel says, when Sargon wanted to talk to me, he was so polite.
Thank you.
And seemed vaguely affronted by my privately saying I don't respect him or the work he does.
Genuinely, one of the more puzzling moments of my life.
Joel, I know you don't like what I do or who I am.
And I've got to say, I don't really like you either.
But I don't hate you.
And that's the difference, isn't it?
Like, we know publicly that we disagree.
We have had public disagreements.
So if we're going to talk to one another and try and discuss what these are, why would we bring that kind of attitude to a discussion?
And just to be clear, I don't think I was rude to you, right?
So he's really talking about this video here, where I did 320,000 views in February 23rd, 2019, called Anit Sarkeesian, the People Who Like It, because Joel had done a video about me and my critiques of Anit Sarkeesian, saying it's been a while.
I've watched half of this video, but I couldn't be bothered to watch it all.
Saying something along the lines of, well, look, you know, Anit Sarkeesian's statements about like the factual effect of video game violence against women may not well translate into real world harm, but it's art and I don't care about the empirical data on the thing.
And so, you know, I just feel that that's the case.
I'm vastly simplifying what was a long video.
But he seems to have taken my response to that as a form of personal hatred.
And I find that very interesting because, I mean, I'll just play a clip for you.
That isn't necessarily why art would be bad.
That would be why it'd be something harmful or dangerous or something like that.
But you keep using the term bad just interchangeably with things you don't like, I suppose.
But yes, you seem to have proven that Anis Sarkeesian was wrong.
Thank you.
But even though I'm sympathetic to the people who bought into this logic, it is still, as far as I'm concerned, terrible logic.
And that's for one reason.
When people say that art has destructive or toxic messages, they are almost never referring to the literal destructive impact that the art had on the real world.
Okay.
So if it's not having an impact on the real world, what world was it having an impact on?
And why should I care about this fantasy world?
Instead, they're making a claim about the work itself, about what it says to us.
So to show you what I mean by that, let's do a little thought experiment.
Say a film is made that is unabashedly Nazi propaganda.
Let's call it Lubenschluben.
Every moment in this film conveys an unironic love for Nazis and an explicit hatred of Jews.
Let's say that this film is so horrendously racist that nobody in society can possibly be influenced by it to become Nazis.
The vast majority of people watch it critically, tear it apart.
I didn't realize that I had this poor, like, I just chose a random point in the video.
I didn't realize he was going to go off in a big waffle about it.
But I just want to show you sort of like, you know, my, the tone of my response to him.
It might just be exactly like a feminist frequency video critiquing video games.
I think I'm just replying to him.
I don't think that this is me being hateful.
I don't think that this is me being like, right, you're irredeemably evil and we must fight now.
Put up your dukes.
You know, that's not what I think of that.
I think this is what a dialogue is.
This is, you know, he makes his points, I make my points.
He made a video back to this, but frankly, I mean, again, it's years ago that this happened.
As I recall, it was essentially just, look, well, you know, I don't care.
I like it.
And therefore, it's like, okay, well, enjoy, I guess.
But the point is, I'm not being hateful here.
And so I find his response to this really weird.
It's just like, why would you think that I need to know that you don't agree with my position?
We've had a video back and forth.
I know you don't.
And I don't agree with yours or respect you or the work you do.
But I'm not going to be rude to you personally because there's just no need.
I don't think that's me being my best.
I don't think that's you being your best.
And in fact, that's the reason I took down the Lindsay Ellis response I did.
Because at the end of the day, I said, oh, I know.
For fuck's sake, this.
It's a fucking lead.
At the end of the day, I just thought, you know what, that's fuck.
I just pressed something there.
That's just not necessary.
You know, I mean, you know, I think I went too hard, to be honest.
And I don't want to, I don't want to be like that.
I think it's important that you manage your personality.
It makes you what you are.
And if you are just someone who is just constantly rude to someone, can't hold a sincere conversation with someone else, and feels that because you're dealing with your political opposition, that you have to be horrendous to them all the time, then that's your problem.
That's not their problem.
There's not a reflection of their politics.
It's a reflection of you and your politics.
How you're a bad person, frankly, is what that means.
And if we recall from the Vorsch's unironically evil Duma politics video, this is part of what it is to be evil.
It is to literally consciously try to be hateful to someone.
I don't think I did that to Joel, but Joel seems to think that that's what I was doing.
I find that interesting because he replies with this.
And I just can't believe he thinks this is an own.
Like, I don't think this is an own.
He says, just remembered, it's weird, a few years after the fact, and it's all just this comes up.
Just remembered his pin comment on the vid is about me is being sorry.
Just remembered that his pin comment on his vid about me is being mad that I insulted him.
Why would you think that I'm mad when I say after speaking to Joel via DMs, I found him evasive, sarcastic, not acting in good faith?
Again, recall that Duma politics video about being evil.
He refused to have a conversation via Twitter except via Twitter DM, which I didn't want to do.
And he insulted me several times.
I left the conversation by letting him know I'd be happy to talk if he wished.
I don't think I come across as mad there.
I think that you would have to be, I mean, you know, engaging in the Twitter culture war as a foot soldier against those evil right-wingers to frame it that way, because I wasn't mad.
I was just trying to have a conversation with you.
I wanted to have a live conversation with you because I think that would be more productive where we just talked about things.
Again, I don't think I was rude in this video.
I don't think I was confrontational or hateful or anything like that.
Confrontational, maybe the wrong term to use.
But I don't think it was unnecessarily cruel or mean or anything like that.
I was just going through talking about your points in the same way as you were talking about mine and previously.
So I don't understand what this attitude is about.
I don't understand why you behave this way.
I don't hate you like you hate me.
It's just not something that comes to my mind.
Like, you know, you're remembering our conversation years ago.
I don't think about you at all.
I'm not trying to be mean when I say that.
Like, I just have other things going on in my life.
That's not Twitter.
Do you is the real question, I think.
But anyway, I find this really interesting because then, and again, like the weird lies that they tell themselves.
But at least there's one consistent thing.
So Philosophy Tube, who's still not verified on Twitter.
Oh, that's that's rough.
Isn't that the real one?
I mean, yeah, no, it seems to be rough.
Ouch.
But yeah, they say I met him once years ago at CNITH, CITC.
I can't remember the name of it.
It was a London YouTuber conference a few years ago that I went to with Arch Warhammer and, you know, met lots of people.
Maybe some of you are watching now.
And it was fun.
Don't know what to tell you.
But I was queuing to get into a presentation.
I think, you know, they did various talks.
And PhilosophyTube was there, as Oliver at this point.
This is pre-transition, assuming I'm allowed to say that.
And yeah, I shook his hand and said, you know, hey, if you want to talk to somebody, because at the time he had like 60,000 subscribers, a bit on the make.
And I had discovered his channel previously and I enjoyed it because it wasn't like the insane left-wing claptrap that it is now.
It was.
Well, here's a philosophy idea, here's a book, here's something.
And here we go.
It wasn't like you know, Antifar did nothing wrong or anything like that at the time.
And so yeah, I enjoyed his channel and uh, and so I said hey, you know you probably don't know who I am, I guess and uh, feel free if you want to come on the show.
And he was just like no.
But then he says he tried to get backstage and security wouldn't let him not.
To my knowledge, I didn't.
But again, if you don't put that in there, then I didn't really do anything wrong, did I?
Because you should say he was polite, at least.
Yes, I was.
And again, big Joel, he was polite.
Hmm, I was, but of course Joel has to again lie about me.
He was, he was mad.
Look at this, i'm not mad.
I didn't try to get backstage.
Why would I?
Why would I want to be backstage at like a left-wing youtube event?
Like, what am I gonna do is just abandon ARCH sorry ARCH, cheery old chap, you know.
And I messaged ARCH before this and he was like no, I don't recall us trying to get backstage either.
It's like no, but uh, but again, if you don't lie, then I just come across looking quite good out of this, because how do you disrespect someone who's polite to people?
I mean, you know, it's just the way my father raised me.
I guess you know, be polite to people when you talk to them.
Son oh yes dad, okay seems to be uh, for the best, doesn't it?
But anyway.
So um, again someone else don't know who this is just replies.
I think these people are shocked that it's not a grift for everyone else to.
You know, the it's genuinely puzzling when Carl tried to have oh Sargon sorry, tried to have a polite and good faith conversation with me and I was nothing but bad faith to him and I was rude to him, and it's like, well, don't you understand?
It's not a grift?
And it's like, okay, but what does that mean?
Like am I, am I supposed to have just been screeching?
Listen you, soy boy cuck, you know, meet me behind the bike sheds and i'll beat you up.
I mean what what, the what the fuck are you expecting?
Like he had.
He made a video, I made a video, he made another video.
I was like, hey, why don't we just talk about this?
And he's like yeah, and it's like okay whatever, like I don't know what to say.
You know like, my world doesn't revolve around hating you like yours revolves around hating the right-wing grifters that you, on the twitter sphere, have persuaded yourself that everyone is, and that's a grift, apparently.
If your life is not 100 left-wing zealot, you know, god only knows what they think.
You know, pounding the the the, the Civil War drum, then you're a grifter, is the implication I take from this.
Let me know if i'm misreading this, Sarah Z, but uh, I'm sorry, I just don't understand what you think.
And I'm trying, you know, I'm really doing my best.
And so, you know, you get, you know, Callum and Neo-Unrealists being like, hmm, damn rightist in their common courtsy.
And, you know, that seems to be a common thread, doesn't it?
You know, I'm not a dick to people, believe it or not.
Even though everyone says that I am a dick to people in my videos, which again, I didn't think I was, especially to Joel.
And there we go.
I get to be the villain because you need villains.
Otherwise, it's a grift, isn't it?
It's very interesting.
You know, I was polite to Vorsch when I first spoke to him.
And after the Adams, I was on Adam Sitch's show.
And Vorsch was like virtually shouting at me like he was trying to punch through the monitor or something.
And everyone was just like, oh my God, what the hell's going on with this guy?
And, you know, the comments on these are just like, wow, he needs to chuck.
So we didn't know who he was at the time, obviously.
And so it was just like, right.
This is an echo chamber that you guys are in that's turned you into these kind of insane radicals who think that everyone is trying to kill each other.
They're not.
At least a lot of people on the right aren't.
A lot of people on the right are just decent and good people who genuinely believe the things they're saying.
And one of those things, those convictions that they have, is that you should be decent to people, like in a human way.
Like you should actually treat people well.
Now, one of the things I've noticed about the left-wing echo chamber is it's bloody ruthless with its own that fall from grace.
It's really ruthless.
And I'm not saying that people on the right can't be ruthless or anything like that.
I'm sure they are.
It's just I don't really see it.
It doesn't happen to me.
You know, occasionally, like someone will be pissed off with me and they'll, you know, like say things and I'll be like, okay, man.
All right.
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way.
You know, don't know what to tell you.
Don't agree.
You know, and if I've hurt someone, like you've actually, you know, I don't think I've ever not paid a bill.
I don't think I've ever, you know, not credited someone.
Or at least, you know, if I have, I apologize and I will credit you.
Email me.
You know, like, I don't ever recall like doing anything like this, right?
And the way that the left thinks that everyone is.
But anyway, so Joel says, hmm, I'd usually say it's not common courtesy to pettily insult my appearance in a video to thousands of people.
I don't know.
I guess I was just built different.
Right.
So the insult to Joel is when at the beginning of the video, he says, well, I don't know.
I'm a big fan of Anise Sarkeesian.
I was like, well, okay.
I guess you would, because Anise Sarkeesian, I can't remember the exact words, obviously.
Anis Sarkeesian is going after masculinity.
She is systematically attacking it.
And I mean, like, I'm just saying, and I said this in the video, I don't think you look like someone who's been well served by masculinity, as in there is, and maybe I could have been more clear about this, but there is obviously a sort of deliberate intent and a what's the term?
There's a particular term for motivated reasoning, right?
There's motivated reasoning for him to support someone who is also attacking masculinity because I'm just going to throw it out there as a guess.
Joel got bullied in school by big M boys than he was.
And this can lead to the effect of saying, well, that means all masculinity is bad and things like this.
You know, subconsciously, at the very least, and then siding with those people who are going to attack masculinity.
But the thing is, I don't think that that's the case.
I don't think he should have been bullied, obviously.
But I don't think that that example makes condemns the entire project, shall we say.
And so I, when I say I don't think Joel has been well served by masculinity, that's not an insult.
And I'm not really, you know, making, I could make a comment on his appearance.
I probably have elsewhere, to be honest, since then.
But in my defense, Joel had been incredibly mean to me and incredibly bad faith.
So I think at that point, you're probably within your rights to at least make a couple of jabs back.
But I don't think that's an insult to your appearance.
I think that you can admit that, Joel.
I think you can admit you are not the most manly man around.
You know it's true.
And it's pertinent to your political critique and my response to your political critique.
But at least I was polite about it.
Anyway, again, I find it interesting how Joel would say common courtesy.
That's interesting, isn't it?
Common courtesy from the left, from a leftist, from people who otherwise actually don't believe in common courtesy, especially to those people who disagree with them.
You know, we're for universal human rights, except yours, those sorts of people.
Very interesting.
Because, I mean, one example of this: if Joel's interested in common courtsy, and again, I just, Joel, it just, this is why you look so bad faith, right?
It's because you're literally on Twitter proclaiming your bad faith.
You know, it's like Vorsk with the clips of him literally saying, I'd lie.
If I thought he was justified to win an argument, okay, yeah, file that under unironically evil.
Well, saying I was unironically and deliberately bad faith with him.
Okay, file that under unironically evil.
Because, I mean, I don't think it's common courtesy to sort of leak DMs between us.
Like, why would I have a DM conversation with you if, like, you're just going to just throw it all out?
I'm just like, okay, well, there you go.
And out of context as well.
So who knows?
I mean, it's two years ago, and I don't even have that Twitter account now.
So I can't go back and check what was the context.
What was I saying here?
But, you know, oh my god, a little bit of the convo is screen capped, iconic.
Okay, Joel, but this is you just being bad faith.
And in fact, the worst part about this is you can see that just by what's being said.
Again, I can't remember, recall what led up this, but I said, you know, I think your comfort is more important than dialogue.
And he's like, thanks, you prime example of a man well served by masculinity.
So I said, okay, well, thank you.
Best regards to your wife and kids too.
Who Anita?
She wishes you well.
That went over his head.
I said, no, your wife and children, unless you marry Anita, he's like, yeah, my bride.
Okay, well, look, don't say that you want to have a conversation via DMs if you don't want to have a conversation via DMs.
And then if you're going to like publicly, look how much of a conversation I didn't want to have with Sargon on Twitter to like, you know, dunk on me.
Oh, look at this.
Look at this fucking idiot.
He's trying to have a conversation with me after I said I wanted to have a conversation via DMs.
What a prick.
Like, sorry, I don't think that being publicly bad faith is an own on me.
I think that that's you looking really, really terrible, Joel.
Again, feel free to correct me if you like, but it looks really bad.
And I find it amazing that, like, you know, whoever this pronoun bearer is, absolutely unhinged of him to think this does anything besides demonstrating how badly he got owned.
Well, I didn't post it.
I didn't leak our DMs because I'm a person with common courtesy.
But does it demonstrate I'm being owned?
I don't think it does.
I think that Joel didn't really understand what I was saying here.
But hey, okay.
Oh, yeah, unhinged of me.
Unhinged.
I'm the unhinged one here.
I'll go and cry myself to sleep with my wife and kids and business, I guess.
Anyway, so yeah, moving on.
You know, you get people like this, you know, like a reply to Neo and Realist.
So what then is the default state of public interaction?
To say that someone is not well served by masculinity.
I don't think that Joel particularly cares about masculinity.
I don't think he's someone who wears his masculinity as a badge of pride.
And I think that's one of the reasons why he's a fan of Anita Sarkeesian.
And I don't think that anyone on the left thinks that masculinity is anything other than purely toxic.
I mean, I think they even have a term for it, don't they?
So as someone who doesn't think that masculinity is toxic, you know, I can, I think, observe when someone is not being well served by masculinity.
And I do think that is pertinent to the political conversation.
I don't think you're even offended by that.
I think that just like everything else leading up to this, Joel is acting in bad faith as he publicly proclaims himself to be acting in bad faith, which is really weird, you know.
Anyway, so yeah, Sean replies to this and says, there's something really interesting in the responses to those tweets from the right-wing audiences.
It reveals they don't think or know that political arguments have any point or effect outside of entertainment.
Wow.
What an absolutely, you know, like that's broadside of a barn, missing of the point.
Like, how did you do that?
Like, how did you miss that?
It's like, no, there is more to life than hating one another, Sean.
I don't see why everything has to be a I hate you.
Like, and again, I can't believe I have to say this.
There are genuine philosophical disagreements between left-wingers and right-wingers based on sincerely held convictions on either side.
But this is the thing, isn't it?
Everyone on the left, especially on Twitter, is just like, ah, if you disagree with left-wing politics, you're a grifter.
Therefore, everyone on the right is a grifter.
And if you're not constantly, I mean, maybe I guess the right needs to start shouting in the same way that the left needs to constantly shout in order to prove they're not grifters.
Or else everyone's just a grifter.
I mean, that's not what people on the right think.
People on the right think that their personal behavior matters, which is why, despite all of the lies, one of the few things the left is not lying about me personally on is that I'm polite to them.
Because I'm not impolite to them.
I am nice to them.
And that, I think, is not a political position.
That's a personal one.
But I guess if you think the person is political, then you interpret that as a form of political attack.
I don't.
I see that as good manners and common courtesy because I actually take those things seriously.
I hate to say it, but I sincerely believe they matter.
And that's because I believe in a civil society.
One in which, regardless of whether we agree, we still have to live side by side in the same countries, in the West, in England with Sean, probably.
You know, I mean, he probably lives in Liverpool, but if he lived in Swindon, I'd still have this opinion, you know, here.
If he was my neighbor, I would have that opinion.
You know, even though I would think he was a disingenuous idiot, I would still be polite to him because we live next to each other.
And that would make his life better.
Because I do think we have a duty, an obligation to not make each other's lives unnecessarily difficult.
But he says, you're supposed to oppose Sargon and similar because you're playing the role of their opponent.
Only if we're disagreeing about something.
And even if we're disagreeing about something, what does playing the role of the opponent mean to Sean?
I mean, it seems to mean civil war.
It seems to mean, right, we're going to have to pick up the rifle, put up your dukes, we're going to have to slug it out as hard as we can, or we could discuss things.
Unless, of course, people on the left have come to the conclusion that there is nothing to discuss.
It's not that there is a disagreement.
It's that you're a bad person.
We have the perfect received wisdom from the divine intersectional gods, and they have shown us what moral good is.
And if you don't agree, you're an evil person.
I don't think the right thinks that.
I think the right thinks the left is just confused and stupid in some times.
I mean, there is a wealth of evidence to suggest that the left has deeply confused themselves.
Ask them to define a woman, and you'll get a slew of different answers, very few of which are philosophically coherent.
And so I think that this is a coping mechanism for them.
But anyway, actual principled opposition for a reason beyond their entertainment is uncomfortable for them to see, and like a wrestler breaking character and throwing a real punch.
But what if your principles are to be decent to people on an individual basis?
Then they are living their principles.
Then they are doing what they think the right thing is to do.
They are not, by that standard, grifters.
But again, you could only come to this position if you literally knew nothing about right-wing philosophy or the people who espouse it.
If you had done no reading, if you had literally learned nothing about your opposition, then you could come to this position.
Hmm.
I think that probably is the case, isn't it, Sean?
Anyway.
Keemstar being mean, but I didn't really need that.
No, I've read that one already.
So yeah, like, this is just a random thing.
They're framing literally everything as disagreement, as if this is all some low-stakes argument about whether the toilet paper roll should go over or under and whether we're just a bunch of uptight ninnies for holding a grudge over it.
Well, I mean, in the case of me and Joel, he literally said, well, this doesn't have to have any impact in the world.
This could have an impact on some fancy world.
This is about the principle of the thing.
My thought experiment will prove you're evil.
And he accepts that Nisa, in some ways, I think, accepts that Anisakis's criticisms didn't have an empirical basis.
As in, whatever harm is being done by, you know, sexist video games is not translating into physical abuse of women.
So, I mean, you know, don't know what to tell you.
You know, it seems to just be a disagreement.
I mean, maybe, maybe there are subjects that are more dramatic.
It's just that Joel didn't pick one.
And so, you know, and he came to me.
I didn't come to him.
I didn't know who he was.
So, don't know what to tell you.
You know, you do feel like a bunch of uptight ninnies to me, holding a grudge over things that are just theoretical.
Like, almost everything you say is theoretical.
Very little of it actually translates into real life.
And again, the things that do translate, I just don't agree with your interpretation.
And I think that maybe you could be more honest about things.
But again, you'll show that you'd be willfully dishonest and disingenuous.
And then you'll accuse other people of doing the very same thing that you're doing, which is weird.
I mean, I get accused by Big Joel's commentators on probably the original post of saying, you know, being disingenuous.
And I'm like, okay.
But I was totally genuous.
And he was the one being proud that he refused to engage in a straight dialogue.
I don't see why I would think that I was the problem there.
It seems like it's you guys.
It seems like you just are incapable of having a dialogue with someone you disagree with.
And like, look at the Ethan Klein, Steven Crowder thing.
Like, Crowder genuinely seemed to be like, okay, Ethan, come on.
We'll have an honest talk about whatever the subject was.
And Ethan Klein was a total prick about it.
Okay?
like that doesn't make you look good like the the whole like oh um who's the the guy with the voice the boring the guy sounds like he's about to fall asleep all the time that kline substituted in as if crowd was supposed to get oh well i guess if you're going to be deeply disingenuous about all this and be as sneaky as a sneak can be then i i guess i'll just go along with it Why would he do that?
You know, if you can't hold to your word, why would he engage with you at all?
Why would he give you any time?
What was the what's the guy sounds like he's about to fall asleep?
Sam Cedar, that's right.
All right, so anyway, so to finally top this weird Twitter drama off, I just want to show you one of the most interesting comments from this Twitter debacle.
And I just found this fascinating.
So someone had replied to Joel and Sean.
So I'm guessing this person being a follower of theirs, pronouns in the bio, of course, watches their content.
I think it's reasonable to assume.
Says, some of these people, Sagan of Cad, Sean Hayd, Chris Laser Gun, they'll pop up on leftist shows every once in a while.
And I swear they've been grifting for so long, it's like I have trouble viewing them as a human being.
Yeah, that's about right.
And I think that Sean and Joel and Philosophy Tube and all of the rest are basically the same.
I think that they are the sorts of people who have dehumanized those that simply disagree with them.
And again, go and watch this video.
Ask yourself: if someone was having just a one-on-one face-to-face conversation with me in this tone and in these terms, would I think this person was being abusive to me?
Because I don't think I was at all.
But I don't hear people on the right saying that.
I mean, you'll find like you know, I you probably find it on Gab and like there's like the areas of the internet and Telegram and you know those sort of areas of the internet where you get unironic Nazis who also dehumanize people.
But I think that the conservatives don't dehumanize people and I don't hear conservatives saying things like I don't even I have trouble viewing them as human.
I just don't hear that.
That seems to come from the left.
And ironically, I mean like saying I don't view someone as human because of the things they think like that's pretty bad.
That's just really bad.
And I didn't see Joel or Sean or Philosophy Tube or anyone address the obvious dehumanization that's going on in their political circles.
And I just, I don't know, just seems bad to me.
I don't think it's good.
But I think that's them that's the problem.
And it's they have this problem because of Twitter.
I think they need to understand that, frankly, not everyone uses Twitter for certain reasons.
And not everyone hates them.
Like the people on the right, I don't think they do hate them.
I just think they think they're silly.
I think that a lot of the MAGA crowd have realized that actually they're trying to actually dismember the Republic in the United States.
So maybe they're concerned.
But again, on an individual level, I don't think it's hatred.
Anyway, let me know what you think, guys.
▲
Export Selection