RedPanels' debate with Sargon

RedPanels just had a debate with Sargoy of Asschaps about Anarcho-Capitalism.

Truthfully, RedPanels really got hammered. I love the guy's comics, but man...he really wasn't up to scratch here at all.

youtube.com/watch?v=OQ8G6kjFsE8

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Qu1FwKS7vWM
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Why do you faggots waste your time watching other faggots talk about jack shit on jewtube?

Because we have nothing better to do.

You say that as you are on Sup Forums you fucking imbecile

He was autisticly bad. I thought an-cap being retarded was just a meme, but this guy lived up to the meme and more

>This is the literal definition of oppression
Yes
>and a community refusing to interact with someone due to a baseless allegation for which there was no trial would be oppression
Yes
>this is why businesses are not allowed to put up signs saying "no blacks"
WHAT!? NO ITS YOU BUSINESS YOU CAN PUT UP ANY SIGN YOU WANT!

Another gem of the evening was him insisting if you are morally obligated to help a starving child in front of you, you must therefore be obligated to feed all starving people on the planet.

And let's not forget:
>how do you punish someone for a crime with no monetary cost, like murder?
I don't have an answer for that

10/10 stream if you want to watch an an-cap be comically unable to answer even basic questions about his ideology, and then gradually sperg out hardcore

Sargon actually did surprisingly well considering he's usually shit at debating, I put it down to his opponent being literally retarded.

Sargon is pretty smart

Well no shit, he's a political cartoonist. He's more propaganda than debate oriented.

Is he from ShittyWebcomics? Cause those guys are usually on point with their criticism

And Sargon not once ever answered the question that started their twit fight, about how Red's comic misrepresented him.

Red looked better on twitter, where Sargon just looked butthurt, but Red is clearly a shit debater, and let Sargon completely control the debate.

Anybody listening to Red Panels creator talk in any of his own youtube videos could easily see him getting crushed.

I like his comics but in terms of conversation the guy comes off aspie as fuck.

Stick with what you are good at.

Basically sargon failed to explain how he was a classical liberal but tore apart reds ideology. so while sargon crushed him, he didnt really disprove reds point about him not being classical liberal.

yeah this wasnt really fair. keep in mind he got his ass handed to him by kristi winters, so i think the more well spoken ancaps couldve done much better

Two hilariously bad debaters clash!

reminder

Pretty much. A debate isn't about being right, but making yourself sound right. Sargon controled the coversation by deflecting things to Red so he wouldn't have to answer the question about how Red's comic was misrepresenting him(Because it wasn't)

Not everyone has the proper skill set for debating. I know I don't. But its completely different from having to type out responses online where you have time to think. In a debate, you don't have hat luxury.

If anyone wasn't answering questions, it was Red. He dodged so many fucking questions, tried to answer questions with questions of his own, at one point he even literally asked to skip a point of discussion because he'd been backed into a corner.

It was pathetic, it wasn't about Sargon controlling the debate, the guy couldn't even answer basic questions about his ideology. It's not hard to make someone look like an idiot when he's caught off guard by even simple questions

They're both shit at debating

Why give attention to these hacks

All these 'alt-right' faggots do nothing but harm the position of an opposition to the GOP neo-con bullshit

Ignore them and watch them fall into obscurity, make fun of them and watch as people search them to get in on the abuse

We need the altright to completely die, it's cancer and doesn't represent what actual nationalists and defenders of the white race on Sup Forums want. It's just more cuckservatism

Exactly, and that is controlling the debate. Sargon controlled the debate so that he wouldn't have to answer questions like the entire original point of their twitter fight. Red's shit debate performance, clearly no preparation for the obvious questions, meant Sargon didn't have to if he just kept on offense.

But Sargon isn't "alt-right"

That was only one aspect of the Twitter fight, they also ranted about gay cakes for fucking hours.

Sargon isn't alt right, he is open about being left and openly doesn't like the alt right. He claims to be a "classical liberal" but that just isn't true, and Red called him out on it.

You're mistaking the alt right for the nu-right

He isn't? His shitty videos could have fooled me

Yeah well he sure as shit isn't a classic liberal

>people not helping you is oppression
Sargon is okay but sometimes hes a giant faggot

Freedom of association. Sargon doesn't believe businesses should have that right. And his only response is "muh feelings. racism"

Is That Guy T any good? I like the idea of small government but when AnCaps and Libertarians start talking it's like they're out of touch with the world.

he a good boy

> sometimes

But that wasn't his point. His point was a community refusing to even interact with you when you've committed no crime leads to suffering (as in if they won't employ you, accept your money, give you food etc you will demonstrably suffer, not just you feeling a little sad), causing someone to suffer for an extended period of time is the literal definition of oppression, an oppressed person cannot be free and besides that oppressing someone would violate non-aggression

I agree with Red's argument overall about the topic of oppression and gay cakes but Sargon was a much better debater, and they both pulled a bunch of bullshit regarding definitions of words.

I think their feelings can basically be summed up with a simplified version of the trolley problem (Not drawing it now because I'm on mobile):
Trolley is coming to fork in tracks. A person is tied to the tracks on Direction A of the fork. Nobody is tied to Direction B. You are at the switch to change the trolley's direction. If the switch is NOT pulled, the trolley will travel to Direction A. If you do not pull the switch, have you killed the man tied to the tracks?
Red would say no.
Sargon would say yes.

I'm an ancap and my mind wasn't changed, but I must admit Sargon is an excellent debater and redpanels got his ass handed to him

>Sargon is an excellent debater
He's a decent primer on current issues and nothing else.

Sargon's argument was "you have a moral obligation to help those in need of it is reasonably within your power to do so"
Reds argument was "fuck you mum and dad, you can't tell me what to do!"

He was a petulant, autistic, little man-child throughout the entire stream.

Humor and satire is far different from informed rhetoric. Both have their place on the field of political discourse but you can't win with comedy unless you can successfully manipulate the field.

Look at the interview Jon Stewart did on crossfire years ago. He didn't debate anything, he didn't make any points except that they are hacks and the show is bad. He managed to not only reduce all of their arguments to being valueless but he also deflected all of their criticisms of him as baseless because he does comedy. As much as I hate Jon Stewart, he is brilliant at debating in such a way that you think he won when he merely throws out humorous strawman arguments and ad-hominems while expertly deflecting all criticism of his own bias and failings as a media head.

Didn't watch but I'd imagine the cartoonist failed to turn the field into his home turf.

And the reason gay cakes was a crux is why should someone be forced to support something that they do not believe in against their will? Sargon may not see religion as a valid excuse, but he is retarded if he thinks it isn't.

Watch Thank you for Smoking and you'll see that you're likely thinking someone won merely because they controlled the discussion.

I've fallen for this too many times. Sargon thinks he's really hot shit so he never concedes anything, and he always argues in bad faith. He always starts off feigning calm and he gets more and more passive-aggressive as it goes on. The result is he just pisses everybody off, never explains his views, and nobody gains anything or develops their point of view.

Since he never tries to convince, only humiliate, these "debates" are just cringe. I don't think I've ever learned anything from one of these. It's so low-information and there's never any novel ideas or convincing appeals, it's just a dumb fight. The only good debate he's ever been in was when he invaded the MW Christmas stream trying to start fights, and rather than playing along SeventhSon just yelled at him.

Most people are not prepared for these "debates" and "lose," but the only real loser is me as the viewer. This is a total waste of time. He gets views from people with a stake in the fight, and anyone interested in an actual exchange of ideas gets alienated. I like Red Panels but he should know better than to engage with this schoolyard bully.

You give Sargon too much credit, they were both autistic man children.
Near the end they each wasted about 10 minutes mis-framing the other's argument about freedom and oppression. Red was saying that you can be free in one sense and oppressed in another. Sargon was saying thay you can't be completely free while facing any oppression. They were both too daft to see how these ideas are not contradictory.

How is that supporting it? Make me right "Britain needs refugees" on a cake all day long, I'm paid to make cakes, not decide who gets cakes and what's acceptable to write on them.
Your fee-fees don't matter. Objectively, their is no rational reason to reject a gay cake. It just comes down to "I don't like it! You ant make me! This is fucking slavery! :( "
It's ridiculous. You're paid to make a product, you make that product for everyone, or you don't make it at all. You are not being forced to associate with anyone, if you don't want to make cakes for gays, don't be a baker.

redpanel is a faggot too

>what are the philosophical roots for this

Is that really a necessary question to ask?

A privately owned business has the right to refuse service for any reason they want.

Privately owned, serving the public.

Why does society get to arbitrarily decide who is and isn't a 'protected class'?
What do you say to people who've been bakers for many years when you suddenly change the rules and begin threatening their only reasonable livelihood if they don't serve the class you like.

You're saying bakers are slaves and should legally have to make cakes for all paying customers? So people have a right to cake, and by refusing them a baker should be committing a crime?

There's no point in micromanaging this. You don't need a law for everything you THINK should happen. In reality bakers are still going to feed the public even if they refuse certain jobs. There is no valid reason why they should be compelled by law to bake.

No one is a protected class, that's the point dipshit. Everyone is treated the same, you serve everyone and don't get to discriminate for arbitrary reasons.

You haven't explained why government resources should be used to compel him, or why he should be punished for not making a certain cake.

So then who gets to decide what reasons are arbitrary and what reason's aren't?

Bullshit.

Forcing anyone to do business with someone is bullshit, the end. If society chooses to progress, which they have, then that individual will have plenty of other places to go and the business owner, at least financially, is only hurting themselves.

Alright, you now live in a black majority country, and oh shit, most places won't serve whites anything, in fact in your local area hardly anywhere will serve you at all, you're poor as shit and can't move because the only work you can get is incredibly low paying.
What now?

It's a preventative law. Set in stone that you can't discriminate for arbitrary reasons to prevent a society where the majority of business owners discriminate against 1 group, causing them to suffer.
There is no valid reason why they should be allowed to discriminate against someone who has personally done nothing wrong.

Why do you care so much, you're on Sup Forums ? And it's Sunday can't I do what I want with my weekend?

Not that I'm defending sargon of Akaad.

But do people unironically like Redpanels?

A couple of his comics are funny, but 90% of them are so cringe-inducingly pandering to Sup Forums it's just completely off-putting.

None of his comics really have any insight or thought, they are all just mindless regurgitation of whatever talking point is most popular on Sup Forums at the time.

>you make that product for everyone, or you don't make it at all
Why?

>Everyone is treated the same, you serve everyone and don't get to discriminate for arbitrary reasons.
Why not?

You didn't even begin to answer the question. The government controls people by forcing them under threat of punishment. What is the punishment? Why? Who determines what reasons are legitimate to reject a cake? Why should I be forced to pay taxes to fund this initiative? What if all of the bakers quit, will that also be a violation of "the right to cake?"

Government policies do not determine the morals or values of a community. A hypothetical scenario I "wouldn't like" doesn't explain anything. They do determine what you are physically allowed to do and what lines you will be killed for crossing.

Explain why you want others to kill and die for gay cakes.

>most places won't serve whites
I go to places that do.
Or I grow my own food.

We did the exact same thing to black people in America for a long time yet they somehow didn't starve to death.

Why are people debating with this loser, he hates white people and doesnt believe in white genocide, his views are irrelevant, Trump won.

Hes also jewish.

sage

>seems like an interesting conversation
>2 hours long

no fucking thank you

Jesus Christ, I wouldn't listen to a debate between Chomsky and Buckley for 2 fucking hours, let alone a fucking webcomic artist and an annoying faggot with a monotone voice

Sargon isnt 100% cuck, but he does hold some cuck views.

Still, i like him. He makes SJWs look like morons on occassion and it makes me kek, i appreciate it. Not as redpilled as jim but still bretty ok.

>Anarch-capitalism
Literally the most retarded ideology there is

>most places won't serve whites anything
>most places
>most
I find the places that do, simple as that. Inconvenient, maybe, but by your own conditions, places still exist where I can get service. Its that simple.

Jim?

mister metokur AKA internet aristocrat
He is top tier for me.

I'm a libertarian and I think everything beyond miniarchism is meme-tier.

Also in a libertarian free-market regime you can sell (or not sell) your goods/services to whoever you want.

Oh, him. Yeah, I like his videos. Shame he doesn't make them more often.

Reminder that all Brits in this thread are Sargon, even me.

On a serious note, why can't I deny someone service on the basis that I don't want to serve them?

I think I'd like internet aristocrat more if he had logical criticisms towards things rather than the over-the-top condescension he constantly puts on.

sargon vs molyneux when?

I agree, though id be lying if i said it didnt make me laugh anyway. How he destroyed dean esmay though.. that was the most thorough ive ever seen him and it was great. I dont understand why he doesnt do it more often.

Most of the subject he tackles don't merit it. The more serious the subject, the more serious the tone and arguments.

Molyneux would destroy Sargon. For one, and this is the single biggest mistake Red made, Molymeme would not let Sargon deflect from the original issue(How was the comic misrepresenting him) no matter how much Sargon would try to deflect.

>they are all just mindless regurgitation of whatever talking point is most popular on Sup Forums at the time.
What's wrong with that?

His regular videos are more for humor. Its when he actually he gets into debates when he does stuff like that.

Which video is being referenced here?

If molymeme has anything going for him, it's his ability to source shit to a T. The other guy in his videos probably does all the work but damn, even basic videos about the most obvious shit are accompanied with a document of 10-15 sources minimum.

Sargoy dismantled AnCapism in practice and then went full cuck with muh oppression. Redpanels guy demolished him there and exposed Sargoy for the crypto-SJW he is.

Redpanels should have just told it like it is
anarcho capitalism is only gonna work in a extreme high trust community of high iq people and schemers get rewarded, thus making a society of expert goy-jews needed to propel manking into space colonisation

youtube.com/watch?v=Qu1FwKS7vWM
His debate with Dean Esmay
Dean is still assblasted about it to this day

Because I like Sup Forums

Thank you, this will make for better listening than the nonsense at the top of the thread.

Let's be honest, this wasn't about being misrepresented and muh classical liberalism. Sargon was mostly triggered by the fact that RedPanel drew him manboobs.

Yeah, Molymeme also does his research before making his videos. Meanwhile, I can't count the number of times I've seen Sargon say something along the lines of "I'm not familiar with X, but..."

I hope that the debate will make redpanels change his mind of his retarded ideology, fuck I never thought someone took ancap seriously, I thought they were shitposting holy shit

He is better than Sup Forums in many cases, i know we can step it upp

Holy fuck this guy is retarded

>PAIN IS A FEELING

>discriminate for arbitrary reasons.
"arbitrary" the way you are using it is arbitrarily defined. You don't get to decide for other people what a valid reason is.

First sentence on Wikipedia:
"Painis a distressing feeling"
Literally.

A physical feeling, but his comic clearly meant feelings as an abstract emotion, not as a reaction to physical stimuli

like
>tfw no gf
not
>tfw getting stabbed to death

After viewing it, it was pretty bad. Turned into a dickwaving contest in stead of debating issues.

This
Redpanels comics are just boring and predictable

>Sargon of Akkad has been consistently shit at debates
>he found someone shittier than him at debates

Congrats, I guess?

Fuck you all.

...

What is psychological/mental pain aka suffering aka muh feelings?

Btw, Sargon and RedPanel did poorly in this debate. At least they should have agreed on the topic and clarify the definitions at the beginning.

when someone calls you fat and you start crying, that's mental pain. Your feelings have been hurt, this is the accepted meaning of "hurting someones feelings" in the english language

In this comic, the quote "Well excepting minimum wage and anti-discrimination laws of course, they protect my feelings" cleary means this kind of feelings in this context.

Redpanels tried to equate suffering to feelings. Yes, suffering can include feelings, but like Sargon explained, it also includeds physical things like starvation and and death.

Redpanels then tried to argue both kinds of feelings are the same. This is clearly not the case. Hurting someones feelings by starving them to death and killing them is not the same as "offending" them

They are LARPers just like the youtubers. They all think they actually matter.

>Another gem of the evening was him insisting if you are morally obligated to help a starving child in front of you, you must therefore be obligated to feed all starving people on the planet.

That is actually entirely correct. You do not get to live a privileged life and pretend you are such a good person for helping a starving child in front of you and then just ignore or put it off your mind on the rest. It is plain virtue-signaling.

I'm happy Sargon has SJW to focus on. If he started attacking us the same way we wouldn't last long.

Sargon fucking sucks at debating and gets blown out just about every debate he goes on. This guy is just worse than him.

Hi RedPanels!