So apparently JonTron is a racist
- Thread starter Dansen
- Start date
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.
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.Eri said:
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'sevilthecat said:
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)
one squirrel said:
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!evilthecat said:one squirrel said:
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.
Why, though?zellosoli said:
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.
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?shrekfan246 said:
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.
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.shrekfan246 said:
I don't consider it bigotry to refuse to watch awful youtube videos. If anything, I consider it bigotry to insult my intelligence by making awful youtube videos and expecting me to watch them and thus facilitate you making more of them.gigastar said:
If you can't even read the correct study for a video you're making, if you instead read a completely different, unrelated study but don't read past the first page, if you cite statistics from a piece of research whose conclusion entirely disagrees with your own without making this clear, then you've forfeited your right to my time. Not because of who you are, but because you've demonstrated how little you actually think of your audience.
Oh, and openly laughing at the idea of women being orally raped.. that was pretty shit too. Not sure I'm totally down with that.
This is news to me, got a link to it?evilthecat said:
If theres one thing i know Twitter does, its that they dont ban people for posting porn.evilthecat said:
Not even child porn, if what i hear about Malaysian Twitter is even partially true.
And nothing of value was said. Again, the blatant ignorance of people toward criticism of white people fucking astounds me.
Also since nobody showed it yet:
They don't ban you for talking about immigration either.gigastar said:
But they do ban you for repeatedly sending gay porn to specific people in an effort to "trigger" or harass them, because how better to entertain both sides like a rational person than to tweet images of guys entertaining both sides, amiright?
gigastar said:
(That's rhetorical, by the way. I've been around long enough to know how the "WELL YOU'RE THE REAL BIGOT" shtick goes.)
Except, as I've already said, there's no point in engaging with any of his fans, because they refuse to acknowledge that anyone else has a valid point of view in the first place.
Like, dude, I've done this before. Many times. I've tried, again and again. I've been doing this dance for literal years now. Sargon himself refuses to accede that his position is incorrect when actual facts counter him, and that sort of personality attracts fans who act the exact same way. And in this era of everything being called "fake news" it's even more pointless, because now all of these right-wing pundits and their frothing fans have a quick and easy label that they can slap on everything they don't like. There's no point trying to get them to see things from my perspective, because they're actively refusing to even entertain the idea that any other perspectives might be valid. And like I said, they do this in the direct face of literal facts that prove that their perspective is misinformed, ignorant, or otherwise untrue, sometimes even misreading those facts and trying to use them as support for their own positions.
My point was that I don't need to give them any credit. I'm far past letting anyone like Sargon, or Thunderf00t, or Paul Elam, or Roosh V, or Mike Cernovich, or Matt Forney, or Davis Aurini, or whatever other Youtube blabbermouth have the benefit of the doubt, because I've seen and read enough from them and their fans to know that... well, frankly, my time is better used just not bothering trying to refute them or anyone who agrees with them.
Let me reiterate, I have actively seen and heard and read what their positions on various political subjects are, and I made the informed decision based upon that knowledge to disregard the things that they have to say. I'm not just off-handedly dismissing people because I don't like them or because I'm some feminazi beta SJW who wants to censor everyone; I'm actively deciding that they're not worth my time because their ideas are so retrograde and come from such a fantasy world depiction of the world that literally sitting here staring at a wall would be a better use of my time. I've said it before and I'll say it again and I'll keep saying it until the end of time: I don't need to tolerate other peoples' intolerance. Not putting up with the active subjugation of minorities and women is in nowhere near the same ballpark as criticizing and mocking insecure white men with an overinflated and honestly rather pathetic view of masculinity.
He is so full of shit. I can't get through it in one sitting, his condescension is palpable. Now that he is alone on his private channel he can portray himself as the reasonable one to all his subscribers. Look, Destiny wasn't great either, If he was interested in having a real debate he would have found a moderator(and I don't mean some yokel from youtube). That being said Destiny actually tried to have some type of dialogue with Jon, while Jon did everything in his power to avoid it. The whole video was Jon makes bold, vaguely racist claim, Destiny challenges him on his claim, Jon smugly laughs and changes the subject. Rinse and repeat. Their are points he made in this video I am fine with, I even agree with a lot of them, but he needs to own up to the fact that what he said during the "debate" had some serious implications. The issue of racial identity is a complex one, one that I don't think John grasps at all.gigastar said: