Tangent from Sargon thread about anti-SJWism & Status Quo

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Incidentally, that's not an opinion, it's objective fact, and is proven by the fact that despite spending more on a political campaign than any candidate in history, well over a BILLION FUCKING DOLLARS[*], she somehow lost to the second worst candidate in Presidential history, who spent practically nothing, because the media did all his campaigning for him by incompetently vilifying him. This also involves completely blowing an early lead through a series of catastrophic blunders unparalleled in history.

I don't get why people, even some of Trump's own supporters, keep referring to Trump as a bad candidate. He promoted ideas that a large section of the population already supported but were getting blue-balled year after year on. That border shit wasn't radical, it was the same stuff the Republican base had wanted but kept getting screwed out of for generations. Then, as far as his personality goes, his base loved it because he wasn't just another shit-eating, smooth-talking politician. He says what he wants when he wants and swings his dick around. I liked him during his campaign because he campaigned pretty much the same way I would, except funnier and less overly hostile. I knew from the moment he started running his mouth that he would do better than any other candidate. It honestly befuddled me that people were so convinced he was going to lose.

Insightful about him getting that free advertising, though. That's the main issue I think made him win. You win an election by creating excitement about YOUR candidate. You CANNOT win if most of the attention, positive or negative, is on your opposition. Smear campaigns can work, but you still have to promote yourself.

What the mainstream media (sans Fox) says: 'Vote against Trump! Vote for Hillary Clinton!"
What the American public hears: "Vote Trump! Vote!"

 

[Emperor Julian]

I Then, as far as his personality goes, his base loved it because he wasn't just another shit-eating, smooth-talking politician. He says what he wants when he wants and swings his dick around.

I'm sorry to tell you this but that's spin. He knows that makes him looks good and helps him with his spin pitch. It's a performance just as Dubya's folksy working man persona, Barracks easy going but authorative manner and every over major leader was before. The shit-eating, smooth-talking politician is the mediocre, the pros know how to incorperate their personality into their pr. You even seem aware of how this directly benifits him but don't make the connection that he's doing it deliberatly.
You can like the guy and think he's a good leader but he really is playing you if you think he's just being earnest in his approach to public relations. We're either seeing an artifical persona or am embelleshed performance which has been built through years of trial and error. The trick is he's smart enough to know just enough people will buy and the media have no ability to effectively react to it.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

I'm sorry to tell you this but that's spin. He knows that makes him looks good and helps him with his spin pitch. It's a performance just as Dubya's folksy working man persona, Barracks easy going but authorative manner and every over major leader was before. The shit-eating, smooth-talking politician is the mediocre, the pros know how to incorperate their personality into their pr. You even seem aware of how this directly benifits him but don't make the connection that he's doing it deliberatly.
You can like the guy and think he's a good leader but he really is playing you if you think he's just being earnest in his approach to public relations. We're either seeing an artifical persona or am embelleshed performance which has been built through years of trial and error. The trick is he's smart enough to know just enough people will buy and the media have no ability to effectively react to it.

I don't really care if it's fake or real. I'm sure he plays it up, but I suspect that it is an extension of his natural personality. The point is, I want my Fuhrer to be bold and brash and offensive, not a people-pleaser. I want him to talk openly instead of being a weasel. I also like Duterte and Bolsonaro's public personas (not necessarily their policies) for the same reason. I'd prefer it if Trump acted more like them, even more over-the-top.

 

[Michael_Jordan_Peterson]

I'm sorry to tell you this but that's spin. He knows that makes him looks good and helps him with his spin pitch. It's a performance just as Dubya's folksy working man persona, Barracks easy going but authorative manner and every over major leader was before. The shit-eating, smooth-talking politician is the mediocre, the pros know how to incorperate their personality into their pr. You even seem aware of how this directly benifits him but don't make the connection that he's doing it deliberatly.
You can like the guy and think he's a good leader but he really is playing you if you think he's just being earnest in his approach to public relations. We're either seeing an artifical persona or am embelleshed performance which has been built through years of trial and error. The trick is he's smart enough to know just enough people will buy and the media have no ability to effectively react to it.

If someone punched you in the face I wouldnt care if it was an act or not, id just be happy someone did it. Same with trump. I dont care if he genuinely is that guy or not just that hes being that guy and saying what needs to be said. The effect is the same. Also pointless since he is clearly that guy, he more or less always has been. Just a horrible argument overall.

 

[Emperor Julian]

I don't really care if it's fake or real. I'm sure he plays it up, but I suspect that it is an extension of his natural personality. The point is, I want my Fuhrer to be bold and brash and offensive, not a people-pleaser. I want him to talk openly instead of being a weasel. I also like Duterte and Bolsonaro's public personas (not necessarily their policies) for the same reason. I'd prefer it if Trump acted more like them, even more over-the-top.

Even if it's total bullshit?

 

[shartshooter]

A domination so inaffective they've not only totally failed to achieve anything but are now an active liability to left wing politics. One so inherantly flawed it self-destructs on it's own, That a shitty youber can poke holes in it and be genrally on point.
Also as a tangent SJW are distinct from say a communist or a hardline femminist. The terms just get used interchaingably for rhetoric.

The function of radicalism isn't to make it suddenly be the new norm, it's to advance the Overton window in their direction. And an aggressive extreme has far more legislative impact than "normal" people who aren't going to occupy a university building or clog up roads with protests. To say the left has "totally failed to achieve anything" is an absurd statement.

 

[Sprig of Parsley]

The function of radicalism isn't to make it suddenly be the new norm, it's to advance the Overton window in their direction. And an aggressive extreme has far more legislative impact than "normal" people who aren't going to occupy a university building or clog up roads with protests. To say the left has "totally failed to achieve anything" is an absurd statement.

This. Saying that just because the radicals haven't ushered in full-on communism or gynocratic dictatorship or whatever their batshit pet cause is, that they've failed is exceptional. They're the bad-cop of a bad-cop good-cop combination and their job is to be as unreasonable and unruly as possible so people are willing to compromise "down" to where the good-cops are and consequently surrender ground in the general direction of the radicals' cause. This is how feminists have managed to fuck things up as badly as they have. This is also why you should never believe a feminist when they first say they're not one of THOSE feminists, that they want nothing to do with THOSE feminists, that THOSE feminists aren't real feminists, whatever.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Even if it's total bullshit?

What do you mean by bullshit? That they only act that way for the camera, or that they don't support the things they claim they support?

If it's the former, I don't care. Politics is theater. If it's the latter, it is a problem. Trump does seem to have been more of a coward than he seemed during the election, and it's hurt my respect for him.

 

[Emperor Julian]

What do you mean by bullshit? That they only act that way for the camera, or that they don't support the things they claim they support?

If it's the former, I don't care. Politics is theater. If it's the latter, it is a problem. Trump does seem to have been more of a coward than he seemed during the election, and it's hurt my respect for him.

So if it's bullshit and it's a false persona you're okay with it because you enjoy the performance? If that's the case isnt your beef with smooth pr politicians completly hollow?

 

[Sīn the Moon Daddy]

This. Saying that just because the radicals haven't ushered in full-on communism or gynocratic dictatorship or whatever their batshit pet cause is, that they've failed is exceptional. They're the bad-cop of a bad-cop good-cop combination and their job is to be as unreasonable and unruly as possible so people are willing to compromise "down" to where the good-cops are and consequently surrender ground in the general direction of the radicals' cause. This is how feminists have managed to fuck things up as badly as they have. This is also why you should never believe a feminist when they first say they're not one of THOSE feminists, that they want nothing to do with THOSE feminists, that THOSE feminists aren't real feminists, whatever.

I agree except for the last part. I get what you're saying but I'm not going to say that feminism is bad.

However yes, there was a strategy. The more insane proposals were supposed to give cover for the more reasonable ones.

It's been ages since I've discussed the Overton window and the strategy to shift it far enough to the left that Bernie Sanders could get the 2020 nomination

Because that was the real goal last I heard

 

[ProgKing of the North]

This. Saying that just because the radicals haven't ushered in full-on communism or gynocratic dictatorship or whatever their batshit pet cause is, that they've failed is exceptional. They're the bad-cop of a bad-cop good-cop combination and their job is to be as unreasonable and unruly as possible so people are willing to compromise "down" to where the good-cops are and consequently surrender ground in the general direction of the radicals' cause. This is how feminists have managed to fuck things up as badly as they have. This is also why you should never believe a feminist when they first say they're not one of THOSE feminists, that they want nothing to do with THOSE feminists, that THOSE feminists aren't real feminists, whatever.

For this to be completely true, what existed before would need to be perfect and there would be no need to move anything at all.

 

[Sprig of Parsley]

For this to be completely true, what existed before would need to be perfect and there would be no need to move anything at all.

What you said makes no fucking sense. It's a matter of two groups of agitators with similar if not identical goals. One takes up the role of bad-cop and proceeds to tout what looks like a very extreme stance, while the other group plays good-cop and takes a less extreme stance. Both want the same thing - they want the less extreme stance to become the new "default" or "center point". The bad-cops are about scaring you and making you really upset... and the good-cops are there to assuage your fears and assure you that unlike those nasty unreasonable extremists their proposed changes are very reasonable and won't hurt you and definitely won't lead to the extremists' changes later on. And so people side with the honey-tongued good-cops and the center point is moved and the cycle begins again as the extremists take up an even more extreme stance and the reasonable ones just want a LITTLE change in that direction, nothing TOO major. This whole tactic dovetails perfectly with motte-and-bailey at times which is used largely to discredit critics and to sow confusion as needed.

I agree except for the last part. I get what you're saying but I'm not going to say that feminism is bad.

However yes, there was a strategy. The more insane proposals were supposed to give cover for the more reasonable ones.

It's been ages since I've discussed the Overton window and the strategy to shift it far enough to the left that Bernie Sanders could get the 2020 nomination

Because that was the real goal last I heard

I'm all for the whole equality before the eyes of the law thing. Let me know when women have to hand Uncle Sam "I.O.U 1 Life To Throw Away In A War" cards in order to vote and acquire finaid for school, or when they're doing the same amount of time for the same crimes as men, or when women are as likely to be assumed to be the aggressor in a domestic violence call as men by responding officers. Feminists don't seem terribly interested in remedying those. If they've got something that needs addressing I encourage them to float it by me, maybe we can work out a compromise.

 

[shartshooter]

For this to be completely true, what existed before would need to be perfect and there would be no need to move anything at all.

...why?

What parsley described is widely accepted political strategy of the left, going back to the 60's and 70's, further back if we want to include socialist revolutions of early 20th century, and it's effective. Extremes exist to push the norm.

 

[Syaoran Li]

I've said it a million times and I will say it again. The current SJW movement right now is mostly due to a backlash against the Religious Right of the previous era, at least in America. It just happens to be a more amplified and intensified backlash because of a radically changed media landscape and the echo chamber effects of Web 2.0 and social media.

Hell, the Religious Right that preceded this nonsense itself gained traction as a backlash against the New Left and the "free love" and counterculture of the 1960's and 1970's. And all of that was a response to the paranoid conformity and uptight conservatism of the 1950's and so on.

American sociopolitical and cultural discourse practically runs on the pendulum effect.

Now, I understand Europe operates under a somewhat different paradigm due to differences in laws and culture, but I don't live in Europe so I can't really comment on the European culture wars all that much.

The SJW movement largely coalesced into a distinct and easily recognized form with Occupy Wall Street back in 2011-2012.

Obama's second term saw this new zeitgeist take further root with stuff like Atheism+, Black Lives Matter, the GamerGate shit show, and the transgender movement essentially hijacking the LGBT community after same-sex marriage was legalized federally.

The 2016 Election was a tipping point where the unexpected victory of Donald Trump sent this already powerful cultural movement into panic mode. The SJW's went into overdrive with the rise of Antifa in America (before 2017, it was near-exclusively confined to the West Coast punk scene) along with bullshit like the Covington Catholic boys getting crucified by the MSM while Jussie Smollet practically got away with perjury, the "Me Too" movement quickly abandoning its initial stated goal of cleaning up Hollywood and instead becoming a complete witch hunt, and an uproar over the supposed "Alt-Right" that ends up becoming the 2010's equivalent of McCarthyism or the Satanic Panic.

Then you have Unite The Right in Charlottesville, which gives some legs to this new moral panic.

Heather Heyer's death in particular subject to levels of blatant and sensationalist exploitation unseen since the days of grindhouse cinema and Antifa is treated with kid gloves by the MSM and lionized by the online leftist media.

Trump Derangement Syndrome is reaching a fever pitch and people are just tired of it. Even people like me who voted against Trump in 2016 are tired of it, and even moderately liberal Democrats are growing fatigued with the SJW's. Even if they don't like Trump, he wasn't the apocalyptic despot everyone feared he would be back in 2016.

Opposition to SJW's is alive and well. The pendulum will swing back eventually.

On the other hand, "Anti-SJW" loudmouths on YouTube on the other hand are already seen as old hat and played out.

Eh, Sargon is a contrarian edgelord and an attention whore who capitalized on resentment towards SJW's that was just starting to grow enough to be profitable.

Given his penchant for euphoric atheism, I get the feeling that if YouTube existed in its current form in the early 2000's, he'd be lashing out at the Christian Right and George W. Bush (or Tony Blair, seeing as he's British) and championing feminism and a lot of other leftist causes that are now SJW talking points that he now won't touch.

Basically, Sargon is to "Current Year" YouTube what The Amazing Atheist was to 2007-2010 era YouTube

Both largely filled a similar niche and cultivated a similar userbase before they both crashed and burned spectacularly.

Although I think Sargon may have already outdone The Amazing Atheist in the career suicide department.

As disgusting as those incriminating banana photos were, I'm not sure if they on the same level of repulsive as "Depends on the child" and unlike Sargon, The Amazing Atheist was just smart enough to realize his e-celeb days were pretty much over at that point.

Sargon just keeps digging his grave even deeper because he doesn't seem to understand the concept of shame or even "bad publicity"

TL;DR-SJW's and Sargon are both idiots and I would not have sex with them

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

So if it's bullshit and it's a false persona you're okay with it because you enjoy the performance? If that's the case isnt your beef with smooth pr politicians completly hollow?

Yes, because the smooth PR politicians are gay and boring.

 

[Sīn the Moon Daddy]

even moderately liberal Democrats are growing fatigued with the SJW's

This is a fucking disaster