Carl Benjamin / Sargon of Akkad / Akkad Daily / The Thinkery / @not_sargon / @WarPlanPurple - Leader of the "Liberalists" & Droning Pseudo-Intellectual Boomer anti-SJW Activist, Applebees Waiter, Mass Shooter Whiteknight

[SuperDeeDuper]

The ultimate point being that it’s not a liberal society, and the skeptic liberalists have a pattern of supporting things totally outside their stated principles as long as it does not offend some cherished sensibility.

bingo. as long as they can reframe it and word game it into looking like it fits their hedonistic social liberalism, they are fine with any kind of surface-level perception of extremity. when you actually delve into the underlying implications of whatever larp they're trying to adopt, it becomes clear that it doesn't fit with their actual manifested worldview (the status quo) at all.

the society we live in expects very little of its inhabitants other than to consume goods and services, clock in and out at work, and not question the delineated sacred cows. that's how you end up with people like the skeptics who don't care about anything except their porn, weed, and video games. any system that permits them these basic hedonistic frivolities can inflict anything else upon them and they won't care.

the people who founded the united states fought a war over much less than what the government does to us now, but as long as people have their sources of dopamine they're fine with it. that's liberalist-ism in a nutshell.

 

[Toucan]

liberalistisim can be said to be the ultimate gsteway drug as it will immediately plug itself into any more radical ideology at the drop of a hat. Fascism, Ethno nationalism, anarcho capitalism. All of these things and more could realistically use liberalistisim as a recruiting ground

 

[Kaiser Wilhelm's Ghost]

It's the "service guarantees citizenship" aspect. Only the soldiers are citizens and may vote, because only the soldiers are putting their lives on the line to protect the society they live in. The idea that only those who serve (or have served) the government's strong arm may have any say in the government is what people are calling fascism. That's not exactly what fascism is, but as George Orwell once said, the word fascism has been tossed around so often that it no longer has any meaning.

Well most modern people conflate militarism with Fascism, even though the two while similar are far and away not the same

Something tells me Sargon wouldn’t ever volunteer for service if Starship Troopers was real.

Of course, games and theory would need a big brained person like Carl.

The United States had a draft during World Wars I and II, and the generation that fought World War II came back and actually did make massive amounts of change, largely in part because they wanted to see a world where such a thing would never again be necessary.

True, a lot of people tend to forget that the interventionist movement in the Us nearly won out during WW2 and that was a direct side effect of having had to participate in the Great War.

there are aspects of the book that outright reject modern democratic ideals, though. i wouldn't say that the book was definitively pro-fascist, but it was certainly critical of liberal democracy (and in a serious way rather than the piss-take way done in the film)

this post is getting autistic but my point is that heinlein's reading of how society should structured is not a one to one mirror of 1950s america or even 'classical liberal' early america. it's much closer to greco-roman style democracy where the element of political participation by the common people is very limited and is treated as a privilege rather than a right. this is what causes people to have the knee-jerk 'muh fascism' reaction, as we saw in the wisecrack video. the idea of a society and its inhabitants openly and honestly recognizing the role of violence and force in the construction and defense of that society makes people's skin crawl, because they have been so thoroughly inculcated by the talking points and mythologies of the current system.

Yes I think this is what Heinlien was harkening back to. We think of Grecian democracy as a singular unit that is equated to modern democracy, but it isn't. There were several forms of experimental democracy that came out of the Old Greek period of Ancient Greece, and a lot of this political thinking of the citizen being the extension of the state was forgotten or later added to or conflated by the enlightenment thinkers.

Most Grecian states would have been well established Oligarchies with a Tyrant in rule and the citizens of that city state, those who had undertaken to identify with and fulfill the obligations of the social contracts of the time would have made up the elite core of the society and held voting rights over the direction of what was good for the state and participation in wars. The upside of this of course was enfranchisement for the Citizen where as a person did not have that capability or the benefits that came with it.

Carl just seems to be under the illusion that he would have a place in such a society if the society was run like that, which always strikes me as curious, because in many cases he wouldn't or would the great majority of us.

 

[SuperDeeDuper]

liberalistisim can be said to be the ultimate gsteway drug as it will immediately plug itself into any more radical ideology at the drop of a hat. Fascism, Ethno nationalism, anarcho capitalism. All of these things and more could realistically use liberalistisim as a recruiting ground

not with any sincerity, it doesn't. they will try to co-opt anything that seems sleek and edgy and attention-grabbing, but like everything else they do, they do not sincerely believe any of it.

i think you have it backwards in that these other ideologies have had some success enticing people away from liberalisticism. liberalists want to cast themselves as transgressive edgelords without having to challenge anything about the status quo in any meaningful sense, but a subset of the people who are drawn to that actually do want to challenge the status quo and end up moving on to other things.

there is a reason people like sargon will co-opt edgy rhetoric from genuine right-wing movements and then cry foul when people call him 'far right.' it's because he doesn't believe any of it with any sincerity and is just stealing people's content and ideas to draw attention to himself. the guy is a grifter and always has been, and you can observe a change in his 'edge factor' as he became more popular. if you look at old sargon, circa 2013, he was constantly spewing /pol/ memes and basically sounded like your garden-variety /pol/tard. then, the moment he thought he could break into the mainstream, he started being more low-key about that, cut it out of his mainline videos and now only does it on small streams where he thinks no one is listening (see 'white niggers')

the problem for him is that people see him for who and what he is, a newfag and a larper. not only does he not believe the edgy right-wing stuff he tries to co-opt, but he also doesn't even believe his 'classical liberal' schtick either. he is a self-admitted social liberal, and when pressed by progressives, he always kowtows to their morality in the end. he and his followers are nothing more than disaffected leftists who only began criticizing the left because they, as overweight straight white male gamers, had begun to feel attacked by it.

 

[Toucan]

i think you have it backwards in that these other ideologies have had some success enticing people away from liberalisticism. liberalists want to cast themselves as transgressive edgelords without having to challenge anything about the status quo in any meaningful sense, but a subset of the people who are drawn to that actually do want to challenge the status quo and end up moving on to other things.

I agree with a lot of what you said however I will say that I think one of the many reasons why liberalistisim failed to launch was and always will be the fact that its membership base will always be siphoned off by edgier ideologies.

I have seen the facebook groups that liberalists inhabit. They are swarming with excatly the type of person you would expect. Genetic disasters with pasty skin thats been untouched by UV radiation for years. Semi to completely unironic pictures of people in ill fitting maga hats. Posts upon posts opining for the days of the British Empire. In fact im surprised when i read through the postings of the liberalist groups just how unlike Sargon the prevailing zeitgeist seems to be. They are nationalistic to the point that some of them want a round 2 of the zulu war and there does seem to be a distinct trend for the alt right/ ethno politics. This is, in my opinion fertile ground for legitimately more edgy ideologies and i think they will have a feeding frenzy on the liberalists, if they havent already.

In this regard Carl can be thought of as a cuck/pay pig for the right.

 

[Grand Lunar]

Noticed something peculiar when going through Sargon's This Week in Stupid playlist, after I realized that I hadn't seen it in a while and remembered that he had said that he was going to farm it out (curiously, he only included the first of those vids in the playlist).

Anyway, I saw that in the latter end of the playlist he'd included videos other than TWIS. Strange because the purpose of these playlists is usually to organize videos of the same type and including these videos just bogs it down, but most of them are at least anti-SJW related so it's not that surprising. What is surprising though is that, out of no where, he includes the Monsters, Inc. movie in it (as in, youtube's official version of it that you have to pay to see). LOL, I'm assuming that this (and possibly the inclusion of the other videos) has to be a mistake that he made by clicking the wrong thing, and he's just never bothered to check the playlist to make sure that it's all in order.

 

[Far Queue]

there are aspects of the book that outright reject modern democratic ideals, though. i wouldn't say that the book was definitively pro-fascist, but it was certainly critical of liberal democracy (and in a serious way rather than the piss-take way done in the film)

Really the only difference between Heinlein's world and modern society (in regards to democracy) is a lack of birth citizenship granted by merely being born in the country. Outside of being able to vote or stand for office, there doesn't seem to be any difference between citizens and non-citizens. Additionally, anyone could serve and they'd find some way for you to do your service even if you were a cripple. Similarly, they didn't insist on anyone serving either.

It doesn't appear as though non-citizens are looked at poorly either. The protagonist's father is suggested to be a wealthy business man. Lack of citizenship did not prevent him from doing well. The idea behind the system was to prevent anyone who wouldn't gladly sacrifice themselves for their country from voting in how it was run. I think you could look around and see plenty of people who probably shouldn't vote. They can't even run their own lives properly, so why the think they know what's best for their country is beyond me.

Like many of Heinlein's fictional worlds it presents and ideal world where everything works out according to the rules that world runs by. It's unlikely that if we were to try to emulate those systems that they would work out nearly as well. He even has a few stories that have systems of government that more closely model socialism and we know how well that works out in the real world.

 

[Danton23]

I mean the big issue with that model is assuming that the group who have worked for their right to vote and engage in politics dont start 1. making the barrier to entry higher therefore making a full caste system 2. start cutting more and more rights from those who have not served. Also serving in military and being willing to give your life for country doesn't really mean you are any more qualified in making good choices in how to run it, just because you have a "stake" in a system doesn't really prevent you making choices to rig it in your favour or ruin it.

I wonder how Sargon squares his love of locke (government exists to serve the people and should be super small) with you should sacrifice yourself to the government in order to even have access to it gain benefits from it.

Honestly though I want him to really start work on "The Imperium of man is a morally just system that we should seek to implement"

 

[Toucan]

I wonder how Sargon squares his love of locke (government exists to serve the people and should be super small) with you should sacrifice yourself to the government in order to even have access to it gain benefits from it.

Its easy when you havent read it.

 

[Iron Father]

Honestly though I want him to really start work on "The Imperium of man is a morally just system that we should seek to implement"

I can just see him unironically comparing the existential threat of xenos races in 40k to the migration crisis in Europe, justifying fascism while pretending it will still somehow be a liberal project. He wonders why people call him the gateway to the alt-right when he acts like Pakistanis are the same as 'Nids devouring whole planets.

 

[instythot]

He wonders why people call him the gateway to the alt-right when he acts like Pakistanis are the same as 'Nids devouring whole buffet trays before Carl gets down to the pub

Pretty close to his actual concern, but not quite

 

[Inquisitor_BadAss]

I can just see him unironically comparing the existential threat of xenos races in 40k to the migration crisis in Europe, justifying fascism while pretending it will still somehow be a liberal project. He wonders why people call him the gateway to the alt-right when he acts like Pakistanis are the same as 'Nids devouring whole planets.

The video he did with Archwarhammer was garbage even by his standards.

He manages to string a total of about eight minutes of footage into a nearly hour long video which was painful to watch.

 

[Exceptionally Exceptional]

The video he did with Archwarhammer was garbage even by his standards.

He manages to string a total of about eight minutes of footage into a nearly hour long video which was painful to watch.

I only watched that video because Arch was in it. It would have been better if it was just Arch. Sargon added fucking nothing.

 

[SuperDeeDuper]

The idea behind the system was to prevent anyone who wouldn't gladly sacrifice themselves for their country from voting in how it was run

even if we take this as the only difference, it's pretty damn significant and would dramatically alter modern day democracies. but i think there are many more produced simply by the mentalities and cultural philosophy of heinlein's system: people in his world are not so pearl clutchy and holier than thou. they have a sense of collective pride and social duty that modern liberal democracies are almost totally devoid of. the character of a nation state is strongly influenced by the values instilled in its constituent parts, the people. heinlein's world world not provoke the reactions it does if there were only a minor difference to be had.

 

[Toucan]

I can just see him unironically comparing the existential threat of xenos races in 40k to the migration crisis in Europe, justifying fascism while pretending it will still somehow be a liberal project. He wonders why people call him the gateway to the alt-right when he acts like Pakistanis are the same as 'Nids devouring whole planets.

Look mate muslim refugees are exactly like the Tyranids. The shadow in the warp is LITERALLY the call to prayer. Honestly. Im not even making this up.

 

[instythot]

Look mate muslim refugees are exactly like the Tyranids. The shadow in the warp is LITERALLY the call to prayer. Honestly. Im not even making this up.

If it weren't for your unbroken English, I would swear that Vee himself just graced us with his presence

 

[OffRecord]

Its easy when you havent read it.

It’s like RS said, he isn’t as smart as he thinks he is.

 

[Spooky]

inalienable rights are a fundamental aspect of american-style liberal philosophy, the kind that carlgon larps as being an advocate of (despite being an admitted social liberal who believes in rights as entitlements rather than solely as negative rights like the founders would have)

That's the modern public American highschool take sure, but not that of the original founding. Originally there was no real safety net aside from your community, you could go out into the wild and live how you like near the frontier, the franchise wasn't doffed on just anyone, and you were expected to arm yourself to defend your stake. The Framers knew that.

Paris Nov. 13. 1787.
the people can not be all, & always, well informed. the part which is wrong [. . .] will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. if they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. we have had 13. states independant 11. years. there has been one rebellion. that comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. what country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms. the remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. what signify a few lives lost in a century or two? the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. it is it’s natural manure.
-Extract from Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith

Thomas Jefferson directly calling out Carl and people like him here is my take, maybe calling out (almost) everyone.

 

[BlancoMailo]

Looks like he's taking a break from saving the west in order to get into slap fights with youtube commenters on a video that has nothing to do with him but happens to have a picture of the historical Sargon in a corner of the thumbnail:

Archive: http://archive.fo/xsHic

Quote:

Context:

 

[zyclonPD]

Did anybody see Carl's video today about pedophilia on youtube? He seems to be trying to pin the entire thing on the Ballinger Family being unfairly demonitzed for filming their children doing normal activities.

Did he miss the whole thing about the Girls Couture Club channels sexualizing children, is he obfuscating, or is he just trying to oppose demonitizing channels while ignoring the larger controversy here?
Couture club channels, in case somebody wasn't aware of the debacle:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFZuipxt32stpGzjbOaBuNA/featured
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClZ-fRhAOvUBpfIGHSkWfXw