Also in the news

[MC Prussian]

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

Respectfully I don't think the milkshake was thrown as a protest against anyone's opinions or out of some inability to handle being 'destroyed' in a debate, I imagine the bloke was thinking more about rebuking Farage for his deeds.  Not questioning the legality of it but I really don't understand why some are making out like this harmless act of defiance is the end of the world.

 

Carl Benjamin is a practitioner of coded hate speech who always confronts the lowest hanging fruit for easy victories.  Just the other day he posted a video from one of his events where he got an old lady up on the microphone to reminisce about the good old days before the wrong foreigners were allowed in the country "to destroy the British people" (about 2:00 in) while he stands by nodding in approval:

 

Well, allowing a free mic means anyone can voice their opinion. I found "Margret" a bit of a looney bin myself, but I'm not going to be the one calling for her to be put away.

Also, kind of selective editing by yourself, choosing her and not mentioning all the other more sensible guests and debates.

Benjamin standing for four hours straight, he's got my respect for that alone.

 

I'd like to know more about the "coded hate speech" you're referring to. Last thing I read about the guy was that a rather well-known English newspaper doctored several separate of his quotes together to make him look racist, homophobe and an admirer of child abuse.

 

There are too many milkshake-throwing milquetoasts these days. What do they think to accomplish? It's absolutely meaningless, and ultimately only acts as a gateway move for more radical elements to go even lower in their choice of weaponry. Some people find this "protest" funny? I don't see the point in it. It adds absolutely nothing.

Edited 20 May 2019 by MC Prussian

[Guest SO1]

Milkshakes now? The new fashion in expressing our point of view. Makes me wonder If people really understand what violence and humiliation feel like. 

Human Beings the absolute dumbest creatures in the universe. No wonder the aliens wont help us.

[David Guiza]

13 minutes ago, MattP said:

So why is a far-right leader allowing such a diverse list of candidates for his party?

1. He knows what he's doing. 

2. You don't have to be white to hold those views.

 

In the same way that Corbyn knows how to get large fractions of the youth on his side by saying, in effect, nothing, Farage knows how to do the same with the opposite end of the spectrum. He's intelligent, calculated and knows when to strike, If it wasn't for his abhorrent views and personality I'd admire him.

 

He'll get more votes and support over the milkshake incident than he will lose. He knows how to speak to those who he knows he can get on his side, and doesn't give two s**ts about those who will never vote for him. In many ways that's where the likes of Corbyn and Miliband fall down. 

 

Ultimately though, even he's successful here which I suspect he will be, he'll fall down because he rides of waves of hate and frustration which eventually die down when the results don't follow. 

[The Horse's Mouth]

Think calling Farage far right is a tad harsh and just devalues when an actual far right candidate comes to the mainstream, Thankfully, we seem to have moved on from the likes of Nick Griffin. The milkshake thing isn't really about politics I don't think, just funny craic to make some tosser look like and idiot, though I will say the coverage hasnt exactly helped the matter. Even Burger King tweeted a few days ago about Sargon being in scotland to basically use milkshakes. While it's a bit of a daft thing and isn't actual violence, it's still bizarre a company like that can actively encourage it

[Carl the Llama]

41 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Well, allowing a free mic means anyone can voice their opinion. I found "Margret" a bit of a looney bin myself, but I'm not going to be the one calling for her to be put away.

Also, kind of selective editing by yourself, choosing her and not mentioning all the other more sensible guests and debates.

Benjamin standing for four hours straight, he's got my respect for that alone.

 

I'd like to know more about the "coded hate speech" you're referring to. Last thing I read about the guy was that a rather well-known English newspaper doctored several separate of his quotes together to make him look racist, homophobe and an admirer of child abuse.

 

There are too many milkshake-throwing milquetoasts these days. What do they think to accomplish? It's absolutely meaningless, and ultimately only acts as a gateway move for more radical elements to go even lower in their choice of weaponry. Some people find this "protest" funny? I don't see the point in it. It adds absolutely nothing.

I'm not talking about out of context comments here, I'm talking about when you actually take the time to watch his videos and pay attention to what he says.  I've been subscribed to his youtube channel for the last few years so I'm very familiar with the man.  He may be softly spoken and charming but he's been making a living off getting people riled up against various different iterations of the oppressive left ever since gamergate.

[MC Prussian]

27 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

I'm not talking about out of context comments here, I'm talking about when you actually take the time to watch his videos and pay attention to what he says.  I've been subscribed to his youtube channel for the last few years so I'm very familiar with the man.  He may be softly spoken and charming but he's been making a living off getting people riled up against various different iterations of the oppressive left ever since gamergate.

I think his take on the Gamergate controversy could be labelled as a conspiracy theory at the time. I'm not sure he's really touched upon the gaming industry that much since the Sarkeesian incident two years ago.

 

Using an event from four years ago as the basis of an argument is probably not the best of moves. Having said that, just as with any other job, I'm not a big fan of quotas at work myself, and more women in the gaming industry doesn't simply equal better games. Just look at how screwed up Mass Effect Andromeda turned out to be. The goal is admirable, the execution more than questionable. That counts for both games individually, as well as the movement on the whole.

 

Benjamin usually comes across as rather considerate, open-minded and tolerant (for most part). He throws in the odd curse word here and there, but that's about it.

I just don't see how he is getting people "riled up" against the "oppressive left". I see him speaking out against SJWs, equality of outcome, faux morality, groupthink and whatnot - all pretty liberal causes. Almost on the same cynically snide level as Paul Joseph Watson.

 

He's got hundreds of thousands of followers, so either he's an outstandingly smart con-man, or he's good at grasping the Zeitgeist well in advance.

Making content for your fanbase whilst you're getting paid for it is pretty much anyone's dream, no? Last thing I heard is that he makes about 250k a year - but pays two, three people who help him create his content.

Edited 20 May 2019 by MC Prussian

[Guest MattP]

Another reason here why Corbyn can't go for a second referendum - it's not just the MIdlands and North of England. 

 

 

[Carl the Llama]

5 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

I think his take on the Gamergate controversy could be labelled as a conspiracy theory at the time. I'm not sure he's really touched upon the gaming industry that much since the Sarkeesian incident two years ago.

 

Using an event from four years ago as the basis of an argument is probably not the best of moves. Having said that, just as with any other job, I'm not a big fan of quotas at work myself, and more women in the gaming industry doesn't simply equal better games. Just look at how screwed up Mass Effect Andromeda turned out to be. The goal is admirable, the execution more than questionable. That counts for both games individually, as well as the movement on the whole.

 

Benjamin usually comes across as rather considerate, open-minded and tolerant (for most part). He throws in the odd curse word here and there, but that's about it.

I just don't see how he is getting people "riled up" against the "oppressive left". I see him speaking out against SJWs, equality of outcome, faux morality, groupthink and whatnot - all pretty liberal causes. Almost on the same cynically snide level as Paul Joseph Watson.

 

He's got hundreds of thousands, if not millions of followers (depending on what platform you cite), so either he's an outstandingly smart con-man, or he's good at grasping the Zeitgeist well in advance.

Making content for your fanbase whilst you're getting paid for it is pretty much anyone's dream, no? Last thing I heard is that he makes about 250k a year - but pays two, three people who help him create his content.

413k Youtube subscribers but if I'm one then you can't really use that as justification for his support levels, how do you know the other 412,299 aren't all similarly open minded individuals?

 

I wasn't using gamergate as any kind of argument, just saying that's how long I've been following him so I'm well accustomed to his divisionary rhetoric.  If you don't see how he gets people riled up then you haven't watched that many of his videos, one of his most common habits is getting wound up talking about a topic them saying things like "see this is what the left want you to think/say/do".

 

[yorkie1999]

3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Sorry I didn't realise we were ramming the cup down his throat.

Er, not exactly a cup.

[Kopfkino]

No Michael they can't cos you spunked your integrity away 30+ years ago

 

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

413k Youtube subscribers but if I'm one then you can't really use that as justification for his support levels, how do you know the other 412,299 aren't all similarly open minded individuals?

 

I wasn't using gamergate as any kind of argument, just saying that's how long I've been following him so I'm well accustomed to his divisionary rhetoric.  If you don't see how he gets people riled up then you haven't watched that many of his videos, one of his most common habits is getting wound up talking about a topic them saying things like "see this is what the left want you to think/say/do".

 

If you remember the chat from a while back in the US thread you're talking to someone who doesn't believe the alt-right exists as an organisation and/or is not much of a threat in the US, Carl.

[Carl the Llama]

7 hours ago, leicsmac said:

If you remember the chat from a while back in the US thread you're talking to someone who doesn't believe the alt-right exists as an organisation and/or is not much of a threat in the US, Carl.

There's a reason I stuck to the topic and didn't bother addressing his hot take on gamergate or the apparent belief that PJW is anything other than a crackpot conspiracy theorist.  The sad irony is that when you criticise a person like Sargon their supporters always assume you're someone who's never watched his videos and has been taken in by the liberal media's lies about him when really they're the ones who struggle to hear alternative opinions.

 

It's funny, he claims to be in support of personal responsibility yet whenever he covers an act of violence by right-wing elements one of Sargon's favourite things to say goes along the lines of "you have to ask yourself why these people are doing this", the conclusion being that he doesn't approve of the act but it's clearly the left's fault that they felt the need to commit it and so anybody with left-wing views should take it as a sign to question themselves... he even did it with the tiki-torch Klan rally and Chalottesville.  Yet when someone asks Sargon why he thinks a person felt the need to throw a milkshake at him he forgets that logic and starts complaining about victim blaming, being indoctrinated by the mainstream liberal media and how the act of launching a milkshake undermines the very fabric of democracy itself.  Interesting that  

Edited 21 May 2019 by Carl the Llama

[MC Prussian]

7 hours ago, leicsmac said:

If you remember the chat from a while back in the US thread you're talking to someone who doesn't believe the alt-right exists as an organisation and/or is not much of a threat in the US, Carl.

Because the "alt-right" isn't an organization per se. It's a way of thinking at best, an ideology at worst. Otherwise, one needs proof to back up such unsubstantiated claims.

Antifa, on the other hand, does exist as an organization, albeit a loose one, coming together in masses to impose their worldview onto others, gearing up, hiding behind balaclavas and masks, intimidating and trying to silence free speech in the process, going as far as doxing and vehemently attacking people, many of them innocent bystanders.

 

Anyone who is now right of the Left today is too easily labeled "racist", "alt-right", "Nazi", "woman hater" just for having a different opinion.

This is a sort of libel. Throwing around these terms only helps diluting them. And once you're up against a real "Nazi" or "racist", it's probably already too late.

 

People who are or were in parts sympathetic with some of the leftist causes are put off by this purge, then head in the one direction they can still go - to the right, where they feel accepted. This is fatal.

 

As for the US, there's been a graph of late showing how far both sides in the US have drifted apart, the Democrats in particular:

Edited 21 May 2019 by MC Prussian

[MC Prussian]

5 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

There's a reason I stuck to the topic and didn't bother addressing his hot take on gamergate or the apparent belief that PJW is anything other than a crackpot conspiracy theorist.  The sad irony is that when you criticise a person like Sargon their supporters always assume you're someone who's never watched his videos and has been taken in by the liberal media's lies about him when really they're the ones who struggle to hear alternative opinions.

 

It's funny, he claims to be in support of personal responsibility yet whenever he covers an act of violence by right-wing elements one of Sargon's favourite things to say goes along the lines of "you have to ask yourself why these people are doing this", the conclusion being that he doesn't approve of the act but it's clearly the left's fault that they felt the need to commit it and so anybody with left-wing views should take it as a sign to question themselves... he even did it with the tiki-torch Klan rally and Chalottesville.  Yet when someone asks Sargon why he thinks a person felt the need to throw a milkshake at him he forgets that logic and starts complaining about victim blaming, being indoctrinated by the mainstream liberal media and how the act of launching a milkshake undermines the very fabric of democracy itself.  Interesting that  

Then let's have these alternative opinions.

I don't see how you can come to the conclusion that ALL of the people following or interested in YouTubers such as Benjamin or Watson only accept their take on things as gospel.

 

I'm all for discourse and debate, an art form that is seemingly getting lost in the overly inflammatory rhetoric of today's politics.

[Izzy]

[Carl the Llama]

32 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Then let's have these alternative opinions.

I don't see how you can come to the conclusion that ALL of the people following or interested in YouTubers such as Benjamin or Watson only accept their take on things as gospel.

 

I'm all for discourse and debate, an art form that is seemingly getting lost in the overly inflammatory rhetoric of today's politics.

Is that what I said?  That's interesting because I feel like somewhere on this very page there's a post by me talking about how I'm subscribed to the guy so you can't take sub figures as evidence of support.  Maybe I imagined it.

 

In any case if you fancy a debate then I've given you a pretty good talking point in the bottom half of that post you quoted if you want to weigh in on that.

Edited 21 May 2019 by Carl the Llama

[MC Prussian]

7 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Is that what I said?  That's interesting because I feel like somewhere on this very page there's a post by me talking about how I'm subscribed to the guy so you can't take sub figures as evidence of support.  Maybe I imagined it.

Quote

The sad irony is that when you criticise a person like Sargon their supporters always assume you're someone who's never watched his videos and has been taken in by the liberal media's lies about him when really they're the ones who struggle to hear alternative opinions.

That's semantics. You may argue that one doesn't "support" somebody as a subscriber, but that sounds a bit far-fetched or clinging onto straws to me. At least you surely admit you're interested in or sympathetic to (some of) what he stands for, otherwise you wouldn't be a subscriber in the first place.

 

But maybe I'm just imagining things.

 

All in all, I think what this discussion shows is that one tends to be sidetracked talking about certain individuals, when we should dissect their ideas and politics instead.

We still haven't talked about the "coded hate speech" you've been referring to. Examples, please.

 

[Carl the Llama]

2 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

That's semantics. You may argue that one doesn't "support" somebody as a subscriber, but that sounds a bit far-fetched or clinging onto straws to me. At least you surely admit you're interested in or sympathetic to (some of) what he stands for, otherwise you wouldn't be a subscriber in the first place.

 

But maybe I'm just imagining things.

 

All in all, I think what this discussion shows is that one tends to be sidetracked talking about certain individuals, when we should dissect their ideas and politics instead.

We still haven't talked about the "coded hate speech" you've been referring to. Examples, please.

 

I subscribed to him because I enjoy hearing opinions from across the spectrum and subscribing to different youtube voices is a good way to break out of your echo chamber.  I agree with him that SJWs and identity politics are bad but having seen so many of his videos I've come to the conclusion that he's just another side of that same coin.  I've been talking about how he tells people to ask themselves why neo Nazis are attacking them, is that not an example?

 

Here's a good video to show what I mean, watch this video and tell me he's not making excuses for neo-Nazis while deliberately fuelling white vs non-white ill-feeling:

 

[Alf Bentley]

13 hours ago, MattP said:

 

 

 

12 hours ago, MattP said:

Another reason here why Corbyn can't go for a second referendum - it's not just the MIdlands and North of England. 

 

 

 

Thanks for these.

 

In Brexit terms, for Wales - a region that voted Leave in the referendum - these figures show:

- Euro elections: Remain parties 39%, Brexit Parties 38%, Lab 15%, Con 7%

- Westminster: Remain parties 30%, Labour 25%, Brexit Party 23%, Con 17%

 

Polls are notoriously approximate and all sorts might change before another general election.

But, on the face of it, those figures are in line with national polls suggesting the change in Leave/Remain support is small, but a minor shift towards Remain.

 

Of course, if there's an early general election with Brexit unresolved, with its current stance Labour risks losing Leave votes to the Brexit Party and Remain votes to the LDs, Greens, Plaid etc.

The same applies to the Tories, though, so what the outcome would be under FPTP is anybody's guess....and God knows where Brexit might be if there's no general election for 1-3 years. 

There's also a distinct possibility that the Brexit Party vote would decline at a general election. Maybe not (and it might rise at the Euros), but a general election campaign wouldn't ONLY focus on Brexit & democracy.

 

You're right that there are similarities between Wales & Midlands/North: densely-populated Labour-voting industrial / deindustrialized areas (S. Wales) surrounded by rural & retirement areas.

 

On Newsnight yesterday they mentioned speculation that Boris might be open to a Second Referendum (the lad would whore his granny out for personal glory).

The theory was that a lot of Tory MPs believe that a Referendum or General Election is inevitable as, if we were heading for No Deal, this Parliament would either trigger an election/referendum or revoke.

It seems even some No Deal types believe that a referendum or election, changing the parliamentary numbers in their favour, might be the best route to No Deal.

 

It'll be massively interesting to see what stance the new Tory leader takes, particularly if they get a honeymoon bounce in the polls.....opportunity to push through No Deal or Referendum or to call an election?

 

As for Corbyn, I'm sure his stance is partly personal preference: Soft Brexit would be his favoured outcome, not Remain.

Tactics come into it, though. He'd like a general election, but might also be happy to lose a few votes provided (a) the Tories lose even more than Lab; (b) Tory splits get worse (& worse than Lab splits). He might even get the scenario of the Tories having to call a referendum to avoid an election, if the impasse continues & parliament might revoke or bring down the govt rather than accept No Deal. Tory support would plummet if a referendum was triggered on their watch.

High risk tactics, if so, not to mention the damage to the economy and politics. A new Tory PM could get a big honeymoon bounce, call & win a general election on a Hard Brexit platform, with lots of Lab Remain voters going LD, Green or whatever....a recipe for disaster under FPTP

[Guest]

15 hours ago, David Guiza said:

1. He knows what he's doing. 

2. You don't have to be white to hold those views.

 

In the same way that Corbyn knows how to get large fractions of the youth on his side by saying, in effect, nothing, Farage knows how to do the same with the opposite end of the spectrum. He's intelligent, calculated and knows when to strike, If it wasn't for his abhorrent views and personality I'd admire him.

 

He'll get more votes and support over the milkshake incident than he will lose. He knows how to speak to those who he knows he can get on his side, and doesn't give two s**ts about those who will never vote for him. In many ways that's where the likes of Corbyn and Miliband fall down. 

 

Ultimately though, even he's successful here which I suspect he will be, he'll fall down because he rides of waves of hate and frustration which eventually die down when the results don't follow. 

Isn't it a shame that the people you want in don't know what their doing or how to get voters on their side. 

 

Sometimes the leader you need in a particular situation is not the leader you want.

 

As regards the milkshake throwing, I'm surprised so many of you are for it or at least not condemning it. It's wrong. Simples.

[Guest]

When some people don't think.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48348431

 

[Strokes]

12 minutes ago, FIF said:

When some people don't think.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48348431

 

Christ!

Even taking the sexism out of, how bloody inappropriate?

[MC Prussian]

3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

I subscribed to him because I enjoy hearing opinions from across the spectrum and subscribing to different youtube voices is a good way to break out of your echo chamber.  I agree with him that SJWs and identity politics are bad but having seen so many of his videos I've come to the conclusion that he's just another side of that same coin.  I've been talking about how he tells people to ask themselves why neo Nazis are attacking them, is that not an example?

 

Here's a good video to show what I mean, watch this video and tell me he's not making excuses for neo-Nazis while deliberately fuelling white vs non-white ill-feeling:

 

There's loads to unpack here, and I'm trying to boil it down to the most interesting aspects.

 

First of all, pretty early on, Benjamin clearly states how he despises the far-right and/or right-wing extremists. That should be pretty clear, because that is his belief and he hasn't changed in that regard. So, people on the left should embrace him for that condemnation. Also, pretty early on, he calls the left "regressive", not "oppressive" - so we'd need more proof he shares that sentiment on a constant basis. Labeling the reacting faction "regressive" is a pretty fair assessment. One on the Left should be smarter than that.

 

What Benjamin does is putting the Charlottesville event into context, with the main reasoning being that if you start reacting to it (right-wing extremism), then you make either completely credible or at least partially, you start giving it meaning. One can argue that if there hadn't been a counter-protest, none of the violence would've happened, no people injured, no deaths, no retard driving his car into the crowd. The longer the clashes went on, the more the right-wing protestors saw their existence/their presence legitimized.

Freedom of Speech applies to all people and groups in the US, you can't just pick and choose (if you're on the left). I think I've seen much more ludicrous attempts on the (extreme) Left to shut down debate and people on the right or merely to the right of the Left, than the other way around.

Also worth noting that the US or Americans have a different understanding of Freedom of Speech or at least it's handled different over there as opposed to the UK, for instance.

Some of what I read in the news about law enforcement in the UK against people to the right of the Left is concerning to say the least.

 

This unbelievable attempt at censorship does my head in - in what world do they want to live in? A Communist state where everything you say or do is controlled by the authorities, à là German Democratic Republic? That worked out well.

 

The question is - what is the way forward? If we've learnt anything from history, censorship can't be the way forward, because it emboldens radicals (on both sides). Social Media outrage via Twitter does nothing to resolve the issue, it's merely and mainly self-absorbed claptrap of so-called "do-gooders".

With regards to the Charlottesville incident, Benjamin criticizes the local police and law enforcement, as well as the city council for dealing with the issue so poorly. Also the media for its rather one-sided approach to reporting, and the misleading headlines. These days, the coverage is all somewhat one-sided in its weighing of left and right extremism.

For instance, lots of talk about the AfD in Germany being a threat to society, yet little talk of how the German Green Party is affiliating itself with Antifa.

 

I think part of it is certainly down to it being a rather US-specific thing, with two extreme sides colliding, not just in political terms. There's a distinct lack of discourse and nuance.

I'm not even sure it's a left vs. right issue, more so a case of dumb vs. dumb.

I can't see Benjamin making any excuses for the far-right movement, he condemns them for their existence and their stupid set of ideas, but also criticizes the left for its false way of reacting to it. As long as the answer to extreme views is no rhetorical challenge, only physical presence (the counter-protestors outnumbered the original protesters by at least a factor of two) and shouting insults, plus the attempt to dox right-wingers, nothing will change. The wheel continues to turn, an endless cacophony of extremist rhetoric on both sides. Both sides thrive on getting a reaction out of each other, so why not simply ignoring them and/or use the police to arrest anyone who breaks the law by either attacking, injuring or killing people or damaging or vandalizing property?

 

Towards the end, he raises the issue of selective racism. Is racism only to be called out for if it's aimed at black people, Asians and other minorities? Shouldn't we be consequential and apply it to all situations, no matter where the racist person comes from? Why is it okay to shout obscenities at white people because they are white?

Main point here is that Benjamin wants you to see through that Leftist argumentation in terms of collectivism and intersexuality, that minorities to them are merely a pawn in the chess game of identity politics.

 

The irony of it all - remember Sally Boynton Brown who makes an appearance at the end of the video? The white woman telling white people to "shut up"?

Turns out she was complicit in sexual harrassment at work:

http://sunshinestatenews.com/story/fdp-president-sally-boynton-brown-resigns

Speaking out against something, only to tolerate it in real life. The hypocrisy gets me.

Edited 21 May 2019 by MC Prussian

[urban.spaceman]

27 minutes ago, FIF said:

When some people don't think.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48348431

 

 

13 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Christ!

Even taking the sexism out of, how bloody inappropriate?

They look suitably thrilled

 

[Strokes]

Just now, urban.spaceman said:

 

They look suitably thrilled

 

Buzzing in fact