So apparently JonTron is a racist

[Rangaman]

Don't worry Jon, going full retard always works out just fine for celebs. Just look at Mel Gibson!

Seriously now: didn't this shit happen months ago? I remember that he did a stream with that guy in which he said even more unacceptable shit. Oh, and this series of tweets about the Woman's Day March. And he did a Brietbart interview.

Between that and the increasingly shitty videos, I unsubscribed from that guy months ago. I'm surprised he's still banging on the Reactionary drum, though. You'd think the backlash would've taught him what happens when a non-political figure tries to be political. Especially when their best counter argument is akin to this:

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

No, see, that only convinces them that the conspiracy is real. After all, why would so many disagree with him if they weren't either part of the secret forces or being duped by it.

Everybody prefers being the underdog over just being wrong.

 

[zellosoli]

You'd think the backlash would've taught him what happens when a non-political figure tries to be political. Especially when their best counter argument is akin to this:

then why is Anita Sarkeesian still around?

heh heh heh

 

[gigastar]

IMO Jon went into discussion completely unprepared and got utterly steamrolled by Destiny.

And since the drama has been going round like the flu, ive just been enjoying watching people shit on Destiny.

 

[Ogoid]

Is this the same Sargon that said feminists are ruining American culture because of Mad Max, despite Mad Max being Australian and directed by George Miller like every other Mad Max film and the fact that Mad Max has never made gendered arguments about violence in the Wasteland?

Funny how all the idiots crawled out of the woodwork over this, without having ever watched any Mad Max film.

Almost as if they're manufacturing battlefields...

At the risk of derailing this thread... I remember there initially being exactly one crank in some obscure blog or another saying that, at which point every progressiver-than-thou clickbait rag on the internet jumped to loudly defend it against this massive backlash existing in any demonstrable form only inside their heads, and proclaim it a "feminist action movie".

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

At the risk of derailing this thread... I remember there initially being exactly one crank in some obscure blog or another saying that, at which point every progressiver-than-thou clickbait rag on the internet jumped to loudly defend it against this massive backlash existing in any demonstrable form only inside their heads, and proclaim it a "feminist action movie".

Well that's dumb, too. Because Thunderdome exists.

The Road Warrior told a better story of male insecurity, and Aunty Entity was a better feminist role model than Furiosa.

Aunty Entity built and protected Bartertown. That she was a genuine hero that brought back something approximating civilization to the Wastes, and that's ultimately why she has become a tyrant. She's Max if Max had actually stayed someplace. Using violence to hold and protect a vision of community. She's Max if Max stayed on in the MFP, protecting the same stretch of roads for decades on end rather than running away. Ultimately, the only difference between them is that Aunty Entity actually stayed and fought the good ('best of a bad situation') fight.

Hence why she spares his life at the end, saying; "Well... ain't we a pair, raggedy man."

 

[Ogoid]

Well that's dumb, too. Because Thunderdome exists.

The Road Warrior told a better story of male insecurity, and Aunty Entity was a better feminist role model than Furiosa.

Aunty Entity built and protected Bartertown. That she was a genuine hero that brought back something approximating civilization to the Wastes, and that's ultimately why she has become a tyrant. She's Max if Max had actually stayed someplace. Using violence to hold and protect a vision of community.

Hence why she spares his life at the end, saying; "Well... ain't we a pair, raggedy man."

As I see it, Road Warrior is a direct continuation of the themes of societal decay and Max's estrangement from his own humanity (which are intimately connected). It's the story of a "shell of a man... a burnt-out, desolate man" "learn[ing] to live again" - of Max's partial redemption as he rediscovers a capacity for empathy towards his fellow man.

That's why at the film's climax Max for the first time - for the only time - actually smiles at the Gyro Captain; when he finally lets the walls down and allows himself to share a moment of levity with a friend, to laugh together at the absurd of their situation, and it's what makes that scene so powerful.

Not sure I see how "male insecurity" comes into it, though.

Thunderdome, however, is just a re-tread of that theme (in addition to many more faults I could point out). It brings nothing new to the table.

As far as Aunty Entity goes, I don't think I would say she's a "role model". She's an idealist, yes, someone with a vision who held together a community on the sheer strength of her personality; but she's also unapologetically power-hungry and amoral, not above employing assassination, blackmail or torture to get her way. As I see it, at her core she's a ruthless pragmatist, which I always assumed is why she spares Max by the end of the movie; he has already defeated her at that point. It was Master she needed, and she lost him. She has nothing to gain by killing Max, and petty vengeance isn't something she indulges in.

For all of Thunderdome's flaws, I'll agree that Aunty is a great, complex character, as opposed to the barely two-dimensional cardboard cutout that is Furiosa (and everyone else on that thing, frankly).

...But, as you can probably see, Mad Max is a subject I can (and gladly will, given half a chance) rant about endlessly, and this thread isn't about that, so I'll stop now.

 

[irishda]

Where did you get that fact from

The FBI given the conviction rate based on race and cross-referenced with income. Unless there's a massive conspiracy that no one has been able to uncover the existence of, rich black young men are marginally more likely to commit a crime then poor white men are.

If you're going solely off of conviction rate, then why are black people exonerated at a much higher rate than white people?

 

[Worgen]

Where did you get that fact from

The FBI given the conviction rate based on race and cross-referenced with income. Unless there's a massive conspiracy that no one has been able to uncover the existence of, rich black young men are marginally more likely to commit a crime then poor white men are.

If you're going solely off of conviction rate, then why are black people exonerated at a much higher rate than white people?

Because more of them are falsely imprisoned.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

You make a living from a bubble online, you will not be equipped to build accurate judgements for the world occuring around you. I advise people who may feel weak in life to avoid seeking their strength through online personalities that provide validation. I don't know or care about this guy, not my thing, but people care wayyyy too much about these randos to be healthy.

 

[Terminal Blue]

To everyone defending Destiny (who is an idiot)...

Ah yes, Sargon of Akkad. A man so tremendously endowed with research skills that the picture he uses to represent his online persona isn't even a representation of the historical figure after which said online persona is named, and who never reads past the first page of any article or piece of research he cites.

Honestly, if you take anything Sargon of Akkad says seriously, you've made yourself look bad.

 

[zellosoli]

To everyone defending Destiny (who is an idiot)...

Ah yes, Sargon of Akkad. A man so tremendously endowed with research skills that the picture he uses to represent his online persona isn't even a representation of the historical figure after which said online persona is named, and who never reads past the first page of any article or piece of research he cites.

Honestly, if you take anything Sargon of Akkad says seriously, you've made yourself look bad.

Sounds like you never watched one of his video's

I get it if you don't like him, whatever, it's a big internet
but don't use dishonest arguments, it makes it easy for people to pick apart your argument and present you like an uneducated narcissist.

i would advise actually watching it even if you don't like it, and pick apart his arguments based on what he actually says on a regular basis

(ill get you started, try going for the nationalistic bent of his reporting)

 

[Terminal Blue]

Sounds like you never watched one of his video's

We can all dream of that glorious world which could have been..

 

[one squirrel]

To everyone defending Destiny (who is an idiot)...

Ah yes, Sargon of Akkad. A man so tremendously endowed with research skills that the picture he uses to represent his online persona isn't even a representation of the historical figure after which said online persona is named, and who never reads past the first page of any article or piece of research he cites.

Honestly, if you take anything Sargon of Akkad says seriously, you've made yourself look bad.

Who is the guy on his avatar then?

 

[Terminal Blue]

Who is the guy on his avatar then?

It's a bronze age statue of a head discovered in Nineveh with no accompanying inscription. It's impossible to verify who it might have represented save that it was probably a king or royal figure.

However, the wikipedia page for Sargon of Akkad (the historical figure) features an image of the statue and cites it as "presumably" depicting either Sargon of Akkad or Narim-Sin of Akkad. There is absolutely no reason to assume this save that it is one of the several different scenarios which would match the conditions specified above. It's actually considered most likely at this point that the statue depicts Narim-Sin due to being vaguely similar to other suriving depictions of Narim-Sin, but the archaeological record of the Akkadian dynasty is so sparce that there isn't enough information to call it. It's just a head.

But since Sargon of Akkad (garbage Youtuber) can't research or formulate independent opinions beyond taking at face value a cursory reading of the most immediate and accessible source he can get his hands on, he obviously just checked Wikipedia.

 

[zellosoli]

Sounds like you never watched one of his video's

We can all dream of that glorious world which could have been..

uh....huh

not helping your narcissism angle here

but i have a feeling continuing further discussion with you on this would be like trying to tell the emperor he has no clothing

 

[gigastar]

JonTron has reemerged.

 

[one squirrel]

Who is the guy on his avatar then?

It's a bronze age statue of a head discovered in Nineveh with no accompanying inscription. It's impossible to verify who it might have represented save that it was probably a king or royal figure.

However, the wikipedia page for Sargon of Akkad (the historical figure) features an image of the statue and cites it as "presumably" depicting either Sargon of Akkad or Narim-Sin of Akkad. There is absolutely no reason to assume this save that it is one of the several different scenarios which would match the conditions specified above. It's actually considered most likely at this point that the statue depicts Narim-Sin due to being vaguely similar to other suriving depictions of Narim-Sin, but the archaeological record of the Akkadian dynasty is so sparce that there isn't enough information to call it. It's just a head.

But since Sargon of Akkad (garbage Youtuber) can't research or formulate independent opinions beyond taking at face value a cursory reading of the most immediate and accessible source he can get his hands on, he obviously just checked Wikipedia.

What a damning state of affairs. Sargon busted!

 

[shrekfan246]

i would advise actually watching it even if you don't like it, and pick apart his arguments based on what he actually says on a regular basis

Why, though?

His videos, much like videos from the vast majority of bloviating right-wing talking heads, are exercises in Gish Gallops of propaganda and conspiracy that are only actually believable to the people who are already on his side. Moreover, it's not our job, as random users on the internet, to refute the claims of racist idiots. Certainly it's tempting, because when confronted with so much that's so wrong our inherent interest lies in correcting them, but I can pretty definitively say that doing so honestly makes zero difference because the people who support heads like Sargon don't actually care about refutations "based on what he actually says". Something interesting about the alt-right is that they don't let facts get in the way of their perception of the world. And more to the point, they tend to rely on things that have already been proven wrong to support their positions, even after being shown how their evidence is wrong.

Sometimes it's just not worth entertaining "both sides". Also, I don't know if you're a fan of the guy or just came to different conclusions about him, but it's really smugly dismissive to assume that someone hasn't actually watched the person they're criticizing just because they're referring to them in a way you clearly don't appreciate, as if they would obviously see the person the same way you do if they would just watch those videos. That's not how opinions work.

 

[gigastar]

i would advise actually watching it even if you don't like it, and pick apart his arguments based on what he actually says on a regular basis

Why, though?

Perhaps because dismissing arguments just because they come from Sargon makes you seem like the sort of bigot that he made his Youtube career in criticizing?

If you want to see an end to Sargon's relevence you wont get it by flinging point blank dismissals and buzzwords at anyone who links to him, the bulk of his fans are people who have grown sick of seeing exactly this happening in political discourse and they will certainly not come to your point of view if your only response is to refuse to engage.

Sometimes it's just not worth entertaining "both sides".

I disagree on this, the best way to discredit someone is to let them represent thier viewpoint to the masses, therefore digging thier own graves if their views are grossly out of sync with the popular opinion.