What happened to Sargon of Akkad? Why do people hate him now?

What happened to Sargon of Akkad? Why do people hate him now?

Other urls found in this thread:

pastebin.com/iF76dLdu
youtube.com/watch?v=uPlHogDx3lk
youtube.com/watch?v=7bbxrkbiRhA
youtube.com/watch?v=ncEWlVs35Y0
youtube.com/watch?v=t15zy3Naxqs
youtube.com/watch?v=_VoRG8K9iz0
youtube.com/watch?v=YrifNqi2qjo
youtube.com/watch?v=HpOyEy97Gqg
youtube.com/watch?v=tYP0tPsYC7M
youtube.com/watch?v=vTomPZiWQz0
youtube.com/watch?v=Mcvq5yPvJ-Q
youtube.com/watch?v=sTJwc6_7nQA
therightstuff.biz/2018/01/03/tds239-a-bunch-of-questions-answered-immediately/
youtube.com/watch?v=UiUH-tWHbr8
youtube.com/watch?v=n-TruXHKKAI
youtube.com/watch?v=-i3XXPoaiIk
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

He's a shill

BRAAAAAAAAAPPPPAAAPAPAPA

Well, he was certainly quite the sophist in the debate against Spencer, even people who were against Spencer called him out on that. That did not help him out.

why is he getting into internet fights with dutch trannies now?

he used to be good at concealing his intelectual shortcomings
but this month he revealed his true power level

quality post

His capacity to redpill only extends to the lowest hanging fruits (frumpy sjws etc), he is still part of the problem because he is bluepilled af on liberalism itself.

The unstable dynamic in liberalism subverted modernism and brought us post-modernity. His solution to the freakshow of post-modernity? To appeal to the very thing (liberalism) that inevitably leads to it.

He is a fucking pseud.

he's basically against feminism, which is good, but loves shitskins and other subhuman races.

>now
he was always a hypocritical bitch

Would impregnate

10/10

They don't. But he got hung up on race realism at a time when Whites are becoming more and more race aware.

He really attached himself to the line "It has nothing to do with the fact that they're black!" while at the same time being willing to point to studies that point to blacks having higher rates of testosterone and shit. So it's really easy to disprove him because he was basically giving race realism to begin with.

Basically he made a very obvious mistake he should have seen coming, and now he's desperately trying to turn it into some new wacky libertarian movement that makes no sense.

WHAT ARE YOU MIND READER? WHAT COLOR IM THINKING RIGHT NOW? CHECK MATE ALT-RIGHT

The Skeptics were losing their audience and NEETBUX to the alt-right. They came out of their comfort zone to try and debate the alt-right to regain their audience. Spending half a decade picking on SJW's who never replied was poor preparation for live debates. Their lack of education was obvious to everyone, and rather than admit it, they resorted to mockery and personal attacks. Everyone saw through it, so they are disliked now.

Most of his fanbase has shifted too far right for his classical liberalism, he got them further right by shitting on SJWs but as soon as he shit on the alt-right he's the enemy too.

Maybe he wont go this way but a lot of the skeptics are smelling the Overton window shift and will probably go full alt-right or just not take shots at them to keep their fan base.

Why did anyone like him?

>muh feminism
so lame.

Because he is incapable of having an actual conversation with people who disagree with him.

He red pilled most of the people who are currently red pilled. In the world.

He's done a shit ton more for the White race than you ever have.

PFFT! Ron Paul redpilled my ass on politics and after that, it was all downhill.

he openly admitted he's okay with the destruction of the white race

The only people that listen to fat neckbeards are other fat neckbeards.
Getting a whole bunch of fat neckbeards together who dont have jobs or families is barely 'saving the white race.'

He comes from a lower class background and is poorly educated, so his ideas tend to resonate with children and people with an entry-level understanding in politics. He's a gateway figure into more serious discussion. If he attacks the more serious internet grassroots movements, he loses his usefulness. He becomes like Lauren Southern, telling people not to bother with more serious political ideologies that people should encounter on their own once they have the background, and make up their own minds about.

It makes sense if you think about it. His targets have been people like Anita Sarkeesian and Laci Green. They never responded to him, so he spent years learning to throw punches, and not one second learning to block or counter. Debating is a skill he has no practice at.

>He red pilled most of the people who are currently red pilled.
Considering his relevance in the "skeptic" community, I'm gonna have to insist that you prove your extraordinary claim

He kept telling Sargon to stop being autistic. that's not winning a debate.

Lost a debate to Richard Spencer.

Spencer did call him autistic, but he also attempted real discussion. Sargon with practicing pure sophistry and stopped discussion from happening.

He said it repeatedly as if he had some axe to grind against Akkad.

>he said it repeatedly

How does it feel to lie to empower your shitty political viewpoint, you sarcuck fan?

Kek

He did have an axe to grind, but he still brought discussion and Sargon did not. All Sargon did was use "gotcha" tactics. Pilpul as hell.

GET THE FUCK OUT Sup Forums

You know he has a wife and kid right?

That's because Sargon was being autistic as fuck. Half the debate was him screeching "How exactly will you tell if someone is white, HMMMM?! R I C H A R D! tell me how much a bus pass will cost in the ethnostate?! *chortles* HAHAHAHA!"

>Considering his relevance in the "skeptic" community, I'm gonna have to insist that you prove your extraordinary claim

He's the leader of the skeptic community, and is responsible for a provable 1/3 drop in support for feminism, prompting high level defections. Which is extreme. It took about a two decades to see that drop before that point. Sargon did that in about two years.

That having been said, he hasn't handed out every red pill that exists. He's very much a gateway drug.

Are you really asking this right now ? Have you gone mad ? *In Sargon's cucky pompous british accent*

Yes. And yet.

more claims

prove them

you were "red pilled" by a skeptic, weren't you?

...

>now

>The only people that listen to fat neckbeards are other fat neckbeards.

Must have been a lot of fat neckbeards supporting feminism. In 2013 support for feminism was polled by the Economist at about 30%. By the end of 2015 and Gamergate it was just 20% in the PerryUndem poll.

Sargon did that.

Hate him or love him, don't discount what he did.

>prove them

I did.

>you will never get gently purged by a sister squad
why even life

wait that was the wrong picture

you just bluntly made more assertions

you were "red pilled" by a skeptic, weren't you?

post moar

>Correlation causation fallacy
>Sargon is the cause because I say so

This is an amazing example of the level of education your average skeptic has. They know just enough to be completely fucking wrong.

He has done a lot of good. But he needs to be change his tactics when talking to people who are equals. What he did has caused a lot of harm to his reputation. Probably should have waited a while before the "liberalist" thing.

You think Sargon, he the individual did that?

No. He most certainly did not. His long winded videos are the stuff of fedora nightmares. Alex Jones, Ron Paul and others redpilled me.

Sauce me up.

Super Mario

Ron Paul redpilled several generations and ushered in the slow end of the Neocon menace.

Sargon is a guy who makes fun of precocious cat ladies on youtube.

Sargon was leading the movement fighting Gamergate. Nothing else was happening around this time. It's a drop in two years that is equivalent to the drop seen over the past two decades.

Sorry, that's proof.

No, I'm just wondering why Spencer went after him so hard...did he say something beforehand that made him mad?

This was within the first few statements. To be clear, I think Spencer kept his cool but his heavy use of autism as an insult was kinna weird.

Most people, including Sargon, acknowledge Metokur as the gamergate guy. Sargon and Thunderfoot were minor players because they are not gamers. Sargon's main contribution was digging into that DiGRA stuff that never went anywhere.

And no, that is not proof. Gamergate itself shined an enormous light onto the social justice thing, but that was the SJW's pissing everyone off trying to win that decisive battle. Even neoliberal news networks and "comedians" make fun of college snowflakes. They have been unpopular since people learned they exist. I can ask almost anyone about an SJW and they will give me an answer, practically none of them have even heard of Sargon or any other youtube NEET.

It's a fitting insult. Sargon was literally throwing a tantrum about implementation minutia and mass purges when anyone who spent 5 minutes studying white nationalism knows that its adherents overwhelmingly advocate voluntarism and save specific policy discussion for particular proposals (ala Northwest movement)

What you were watching was a guy who doesn't know how to debate trying to win a debate.

Debate at a high level requires at least these four things, which Benjamin lacks:
>1
A wealth of knowledge, not only of your positions, but your opponents', and of any ideas that may come up. Benjamin has perhaps the knowledge of a 4-year public college PoliSci graduate.
>2
A genuine curiosity for more knowledge, no matter what the current knowledge level is. One should seek the truth wherever it may lead. This is why Spencer slowly but surely evolved from a Right-Libertarian, to what he is now, and Benjamin calcified as a Centre-Left-Liberal. Spencer also has genuine humility, whereas Benjamin has an air of superiority, assuming his beliefs are alpha and omega.
>3
Intellectual spontaneity, to respond coherently in the face of new information or a curveball question.Benjamin doubles down on trite talking points, whereas Spencer gives a novel and comprehensive response.
>4
Very good grasp of the Trivium (grammar/input, logic/process, and rhetoric/output). A Logician, Mathemetician, or even a decent programmer, even if one is deficient at the other four criteria, can still generally be able to break down, analyze, and construct falsifiable and consistent statements better than a layman. Benjamin seems to have the grammar right, is working on the rhetoric, and fails at the logic. He tries to plaster over the logic with grammar and rhetoric. Spencer has an Oxford-grasp of all three.

Some are angry at him because they believe he was involved in Kraut's autism sewage server. This doesn't seem to have much merit desu. The extent of the info Kraut gave Benjamin was "hey we're looking through publicly available info. Maybe not the most obviously available info, but public available info nonetheless". Benjamin then responded to Kraut to the effect of "Hey man maybe stop this shit, this looks a bit skeezy." Could Benjamin have asked more questions to Kraut? Sure. Could more red flags have been raised for Benjamin? Sure. Could Benjamin have asked for more corroboration of Kraut's story from other people in the Discord? Sure. But in hindsight it doesn't seem Benjamin knew much- even The Guardian corroborated this.

Some are angry at him for supporting Candid, and supporting his friends who shilled for Candid, even after many red flags have been raised. Harmful Opinions is probably the best guy to go with for this gestalt.

Some are just plain laughing at him for his whole "Liberalist" meme.
>declares he will lead the Liberalist party despite being an individual
This is probably the worst- and thus best- thing Benjamin ever did. It's like an addict hitting rock bottom. He has two routes to go here:
>1
To iron out all inconsistencies with a "group of Individualists", he would have to go not only full Libertarian, but full Egoist.
>2
If he does not want to do what is required to iron out said inconsistencies, he can very simply abandon the idea and admit himself as a Collectivist. If he's already admitting to being Collectivist, he may as well go all the way and join the Alt-Right. This will be an enlightening year for him.
People shitting on "Liberalistism":
>Metokur
pastebin.com/iF76dLdu
youtube.com/watch?v=uPlHogDx3lk
youtube.com/watch?v=7bbxrkbiRhA
>Cato
youtube.com/watch?v=ncEWlVs35Y0
>JFG
youtube.com/watch?v=t15zy3Naxqs
>Alt Hype
youtube.com/watch?v=_VoRG8K9iz0

Sargon is an SJW in disguise.

Read a book instead of listening to jews on youtube.

>Benjamin has perhaps the knowledge of a 4-year public college PoliSci graduate.

>1
Not really. He has the level of a dropout who did casual internet learning for the past decade or so, which is exactly what he is. No humanities graduate would think that reading Locke and Paine was some high level shit.

>2
Sargon is fairly inquisitive, he just had an ulterior motive here. He wanted to beat the alt-right to avenge Kraut. He didn't want to debate any particular position, he just wanted a venue to attack the alt-right.

>3
Agreed, but the reason is more important than the observation itself. Sargon doesn't put himself in situations where people can fight back very often, so he's not used to his opponents being able to respond. The fact that he retreated into his echo chamber showed that he felt like he didn't have the control that he is used to. Styx was outright honest about it in the form of saying that his "format" is to ramble on for a while.

>4
This is another area where his lack of education bites him in the ass. JF, a biologist, had to train his reasoning skills at some point to do this job. Spencer is always under attack, so this is old news for him. Sargon makes videos about Anita Sarkeesian and she never responds. He just doesn't have the background.

>his doesn't seem to have much merit desu. The extent of the info Kraut gave Benjamin was "hey we're looking through publicly available info"

Just out of curiosity, do you actually believe him when he says this? I get a strong vibe that Sargon knows more than he is letting on.

Larpers are cancer they screech like SJWs every time someone disagrees with them. Their obsession is childish and cringy.

Eh, just from the tone of voice in the leaked audio in meto's fourth video i think it's pretty safe to say he was not on board.

He got blown the fuck out by Richard Spencer

>Sargon 'If muslims didn't rape white children, white men would' of Cuckad

People shitting on his shit "survey" and dreadful horseshoe:
>Woes
youtube.com/watch?v=YrifNqi2qjo
>Greg Johnson
youtube.com/watch?v=HpOyEy97Gqg
>Blackacidlizzard
youtube.com/watch?v=tYP0tPsYC7M
>Distributist
youtube.com/watch?v=vTomPZiWQz0
>Apollonian Slumber
youtube.com/watch?v=Mcvq5yPvJ-Q
>Porridge Pals
youtube.com/watch?v=sTJwc6_7nQA
>Mike Enoch
therightstuff.biz/2018/01/03/tds239-a-bunch-of-questions-answered-immediately/
>Richard Spencer
youtube.com/watch?v=UiUH-tWHbr8
>BravingRuin, Friended, JFG, Cedarwood
youtube.com/watch?v=n-TruXHKKAI

>He has two routes to go here:

You kinda put the spotlight on what I've been thinking about since this started. He's trying to carve out some kind of unique niche between Libertarian, and Alt-Right/Identitarian, also treating anything WN as poison that can't be touched.

But this field has been turned over for decades. It's impossible to do something really new here. So what he wants to do is resurrect Lockian ideals that were critiqued for several hundred years, and just ignore those critiques?

This really is painting yourself into a corner. He's going to self-destruct trying to stay out of any pre-established idea stream.

see
Braving Ruin/EdgySphinx released audio where Kraut got a message from the Stepfather saying he was keyed in on slimy things going on, and wanted a chat. They chatted and Kraut lied through his teeth, while Stepfather kindly implied that Kraut and company should re-evaluate themselves, they're participating in a pointless exercise, some of their "background checks" may not be optimal, etc.
youtube.com/watch?v=-i3XXPoaiIk

I'm not buying it myself. It sounds a lot like they've had that conversation before. He has that little line prepared, and Kraut was going out of his way to make sure it was documented.

>But this field has been turned over for decades. It's impossible to do something really new here. So what he wants to do is resurrect Lockian ideals that were critiqued for several hundred years, and just ignore those critiques?

I promise you that Sargon is completely oblivious to those critiques and the failure of democracy in general. He actually seemed flabbergasted at Spencer's very generic critique that those ideals do not manifest in reality the way that they are presented in text. He thought it was ludicrous that Spencer would acknowledge the inevitability of an aristocracy when those very texts were largely written by a new guard of aristocrats opposing the traditional aristocrats.