Sargon the Supreme Individualist finally caved and decided to resort to collectivist violence administered by his very own right-wing rape posse.

BBC:

Two protesters have thrown milkshake at UKIP European election candidate Carl Benjamin at a rally.

Mr Benjamin was holding a gathering on Lemon Quay in Truro, Cornwall, with British activist Milo Yiannopoulos.

It is understood a man and a woman tried to target Mr Benjamin with the milkshake but missed.

Supporters of Mr Benjamin pulled the man to the ground after he threw the milkshake. Police said they received reports of an altercation. 

A bit of the old ultraviolence.

Brother Blackshirts confirmed.

Sargon has finally accepted and imbibed the spirit of his forerunner, Oswald Mosley, and begun to take to the streets to speak the truth and fight back against vicious neo-libs and paid Jewish shills.

This is a serious escalation.

Because at this point, Carl is a man with nothing to lose. He’s been kicked off Twitter, kicked off Patreon and now YouTube is demonetizing him for pledging to rape his female opponents to death in the elections.

BuzzFeed:

On Friday afternoon, YouTube told BuzzFeed News the company was now taking the step of demonetising Benjamin’s Sargon of Akkad channel, which has almost 1 million subscribers, effectively removing Benjamin’s ability to make advertising money from videos he posts on the platform.

A company spokesperson also confirmed Benjamin had been removed from the “YouTube Partner Program”, which gives popular video creators access to a share of YouTube’s advertising money, assistance when it comes to copyright, and direct contact with the company’s IT support.

YouTube declined to give a comment about the crackdown on Benjamin’s account.

When contacted for comment on Friday, Benjamin sent BuzzFeed News an unrelated political statement about knife crime. Several of his online followers have been tweeting a statement claiming to be from Benjamin.

“YouTube let us know today that they have demonetised my YouTube channel, which as you know is my primary source of income, and how I support my family and team,” the statement reads.

“I’ve always taken care to comply with YouTube’s rules, and the only thing I’ve done differently recently is standing for public office. Companies as large as YouTube have to rely heavily on algorithms that are vulnerable to mass reporting from malicious actors.

“Given how much of a hate-mob has been stirred up against me due to the, frankly, dishonest reporting about my candidacy, it is hardly surprised this has happened.”

I see the two events (Death Squad and demonetization) as being closely related.

First, they took away Sargon’s support system – his ability to care for himself, his wife and his wife’s son. Then, they made him dangerous – they forced him to organize a Blackshirt Bloc and repudiate his previously-held views on individualism and liberasty/liberistism.

Sargon ALWAYS makes sure to wear a Black Shirt to stress the need for a Fascist overthrow of the government.

Sargon didn’t create Sargon.

They created Sargon.

They made him put on the black shirt.

I dare say that Oswald Mosley has found a worthy successor in Carl Sargon.

Basically, Sargon of Akkad has somehow become the most important figure in the white right-wing. It doesn’t really matter that he doesn’t have any strong ideas, because he’s going up against people with literally no ideas.

He’s making waves and telling women and Jews to fuck themselves.

Now he’s got the Joke Police on his ass.

BuzzFeed:

Police are investigating whether Carl Benjamin, UKIP’s star candidate at the European elections, committed an offence when he talked about raping Labour MP Jess Phillips.

On Friday, BuzzFeed News revealed that Benjamin had posted a YouTube video in which he said he might rape the MP if he had had enough alcohol.

UKIP has continued to stand by Benjamin, despite widespread condemnation from senior MPs.

In the video, which has now been removed on YouTube, Benjamin — known widely on the internet as Sargon of Akkad — addressed a 2016 tweet in which he said: “I wouldn’t even rape you @jessphillips.”

“I suppose with enough pressure I might cave,” Benjamin said in the video posted 10 days ago. “But, let’s be honest, nobody’s got that much beer.”

On Tuesday, West Midlands Police, which covers Phillips’s Birmingham Yardley constituency, confirmed officers were now investigating the rape remarks.

“Police have received a report of malicious communications relating to MP Jess Phillips,” the force said in a statement.

“Officers have spoken to Ms Phillips and the comments are being investigated to establish if an offence has taken place.”

Phillips appeared on the BBC TV’s Victoria Derbyshire programme Tuesday to talk about how she felt when BuzzFeed News told her about Benjamin’s rape remarks on Friday.

“I realise I did what all women do in these situations, I’d put a brave face on it and pretending that it was all fine and I could cope,” Phillips said. “It dawned on me that for four years essentially this man has made a career out of harassing me. I felt harassed.

“I felt like, how could somebody say that they would rape me if forced and be a legitimate candidate in an election?

“It was one thing when he was just some idiot off the internet with a load of bros following him. It’s a different thing when he’s standing on the same platforms that I’m standing on, that he will potentially go to a Parliament himself as an elected representative when he’s said these things.”

This is friggin nuts.

The series of events is this:

• Sargon said that he wouldn’t rape this bitch
• The media flipped out about his claim he wouldn’t rape her
• The joke became that the media appeared to be implying they were offended he wouldn’t rape her
• ????
• He joked that maybe the media could talk him into raping her if they had enough beer

Now the Joke Police come knock-knock-knocking.

BuzzFeed is colluding with the Joke Police to stir up outrage against Chad of Akkad in order to try to bring him down.

But they’ve made this guy YUGE.

He’s got Jeremy Corbyn tweeting about him.

This is appalling and has absolutely no place anywhere in our society, let alone in politics. Solidarity with @jessphillips. pic.twitter.com/g0KvL9stWZ

— Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) May 4, 2019

People should pay attention to the Sargon model, because you can do this anywhere. Just run for office, say a bunch of semi-extreme shit, then refuse to apologize for it. Even if you don’t get elected, you’ll get massively famous. As long as you don’t act weird. If you act weird, they’ll just ignore you.

Granted, Sargon smartly used the then-defunct UKIP Party as a vehicle. But you can find other exploits. At this point in America, you could probably join the Libertarian Party. Or the Green Party. Whatever.

People just need to start doing this because it’s fucking hilarious.

Sargon of Akkad was once my nemesis, now he’s my hero.

Sargon doesn’t give a fuck.

First stop, European Parliament.

Next stop, 10 Downing Street.

Finally, we oust the negrofied Royal Family and install KING SARGON.

As many of you may know, Sargon of Akkad is a die-hard neo-Nazi White Supremacist who has been promoting the Alt-Right for years now on Youtube.

He decided to hold a Hate Session at King’s College recently that got attacked by Antifa.

RT:

Anti-fascist protesters stormed an event by an ‘alt-right’ speaker at King’s College London, Monday night.

Demonstrators wreaked havoc, successfully stopping the talk while scuffles broke out and windows were reportedly smashed.

Dramatic footage shows the moment the left-wing group stormed a lecture theater packed for a speech by Carl Benjamin. Benjamin, who goes online by the moniker of ‘Sargon of Akkad’, has been described by various outlets as a member of the so-called ‘alt-right’, a movement known for its white-supremacist views.

The protesters grabbed the speakers’ microphones before smashing windows and leaving threatening notes to the organizers, the Daily Mail reports. Videos also shows the protesters chanting “no fascism on campus,” as alarms rang out in the background.

His followers fought Antifa back – quite successfully I might add. These are some good brawlers.

I think this means that Sargon’s Liberalists are now officially a Hate Group. All jokes aside, this should be a wake-up call for Sargon. In the ethnostate, no one will harass you for doing your Liberalist shtick.

But as the situation stands now, you’re basically a White Supremacist. Don’t believe me? Check it, m8.

So congrats on the conversion, Sargon. Glad to have you onboard.

I understand that you think that claiming to be a Liberalist will save you from the treatment that the Alt-Right gets, and helps you feel like the Big Fish in a small pond, but c’mon dude. Enough is enough.

You can’t be a Liberalist in a society where Antifa and non-Whites are becoming a majority.

You didn’t believe us at first. But now you have the proof. Now you know why the Alt-Right is as “radical” as it is. Now you know why we say what we say.

Think of this as a learning experience, Sargon. And welcome to the Alt-Right.

People who go against the Alt-Right will need to lie about or simply ignore at least one thing which is objectively true. Usually that thing is the Jews, the second most common thing is race realism.

The Sargonites are no different. They are denying biology, crime statistics which no one disagrees are real (they just disagree on why it’s a thing or try and hide them), and a very obvious over-representation of certain groups in positions of power. When you get them to admit those things are true, everyone (Sargonite or not, but the Sargonites have been extremely bad about it) will usually fall back on “Well what’s your plan?”

If you then respond with “My plan is to deputize vigilante Right Wing Deportation Squads armed with tazers, netguns and knockout gas to remove these people,” they will respond with “BUT WHAT IF X!”

They are dishonest and just want to sit in a comfortable middle of the road making some shekels.

That will not end well for them.

Sadly I don’t have time to watch every 4 hour stream every day.

Some days I do however, but this is not one of those days.

I expect that this was as good as the Anglin vs Sargon stream, which you can read about here.

Okay.

It’s over.

Good times.

I’ll do a write-up tomorrow. It is late af in Nigeria rn.

Spoiler: I won.

Sargon bringing a friend home to meet his wife, colorized 2018

As we reported yesterday, Sargon of Akkad has declared himself the leader of a cult – “The Liberalists,” he’s called it – and declared that one of the main purposes of his cult is to fight us, the Alt-Right.

I don’t have to tell you what comes next.

I am going to lay down some basic points to cut through this gibberish he is pushing. Not that you don’t all already see through it. But I want to catalog it together for you, so you’ve got all the angles you need when addressing Sargon or the members of his new cult.

Individualism vs. Collectivism

He appears to be hinging his entire cult doctrine on some sort of as-of-yet undefined form of radical individualism.

This is not something that most people actually even comprehend – and I am one of those people.

He’s doing an emperor’s new clothes thing here, acting like there is some fundamental distinction between his beliefs about the individual and our beliefs about the individual, but he doesn’t break that down into any detail, because the only thing he is actually saying is that he believes that nonwhites should be treated as individuals and we do not.

In an all-white country, we wouldn’t infringe on people’s rights or outlaw private property. In fact, people would have a lot more rights than they have now. The only rights that would be curtailed are the new rights that have been given to people by the Jews over the last few decades, such as homosexuality and miscegenation – and the reason we would be curtailing these rights is that giving individuals these rights infringes on the rights of other individuals to not have to deal with the consequences of these actions.

In a white America, individual families would have the right to go out in public and not have to see men kissing one another.

Because the idea that an individual’s decisions don’t affect other individuals in harmful ways is nonsensical. It is just a goofy, dumb claim.

Beyond sexual things, I don’t really have any idea what he is on about. The only form of extreme “collectivism” that I can really imagine is a Marxist collective, where hierarchy is removed through economic scheming. We do not want to ban the free market (nationally, obviously globalism is negative), we don’t want to take away private property.

We want people to be able to think freely, we just don’t want foreign groups in our countries aggressively pushing for the interests of a foreign people.

Furthermore, the concept of a “collective” is basic human nature and the idea of an “individualist” is really a myth. Every individual person exists as a part of a society, short of a hermit living alone in a cave. Everyone is in a collective now. Sargon just formed a new one. What happens when you use multiculturalism and sexual deviancy to remove the main collective of a cohesive dominant culture is that people form new, smaller collectives, and society atomizes.

Churches, universities, hobbies, etc. are all collectives.

We all remember high school, where the kids who made a point to be different tended to all be similar to one another. When I was in high school at the turn of the millennium, there were gothics – they all claimed to want to be different, yet they all dressed alike and were interested in the same things.

This goes back to our basic biology, which is tribal in nature. Our brains are hardwired to come together with a group and to adopt the same symbols, beliefs and behaviors of that group. You cannot disprove that, because it is an obvious fact. And again: the hilarious thing here is that Sargon’s own “scene” (now an official cult) proves this point. What were called the “skeptics,” which he is now calling “the Liberalists,” all think the same things.

“What if the Child Consents?”

Sargon made a name for himself by deconstruction what SJWs were saying. He was simply attacking them, breaking down why everything they are saying is stupid.

Picking apart something someone else is saying – in particular when it is something as stupid as what SJWs say – is very different than advocating FOR something.

It appears as though he hadn’t really put too much thought into what he was advocating for until he realized that the Alt-Right was advocating for something and that in order to address what we are saying he has to be advocating for something. He had vague ideas relating to the philosophy of John Locke, Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine, but even though I have my disagreements with this particular philosophy, it doesn’t even really work in the way he is trying to use it. These were white men who would appalled at the idea of a multiracial society.

All of these men he cites were a product of white society and formed their philosophy in that context.

So, in order to fill-in the blanks of his advocacy position, he simply decided to adopt modern extremist libertarian positions – specifically because that critique can be used against any system whatsoever. In his debate with Richard Spencer, he was asking him to solve problems that have existed for centuries in relation to the structure of governments, the social order and the management of economies.

But how far is he willing to go with “freedom of the individual”?

For instance, does he believe in legalizing hard drugs? Voluntary indentured servitude?

That parents have a right to starve their children to death?

Does he want to eliminate all social safety nets?

Most importantly: what if the child consents?

Of course, he will claim he is not an anarcho-capitalist, but that is the line of argument he is using when he claims that the Alt-Right can’t work because no ordered system ever can work.

The reason he can’t use the purely classical liberal line against the Alt-Right is that any of those arguments can be easily addressed. Again: we have a position on individual rights, private property and free markets that is very easy to grasp and very difficult to argue against, so he’s started using arguments from a system he claims he doesn’t even support just to give his critique the illusion of substance.

Pointing this out demonstrates that he is not actually proposing anything – that his only concern is with not being a racist. And it is easy to point out by simply forcing him to address the extremist libertarian positions he is arguing from.

No One Wants to Die for an Abstract Concept

Sargon seems to underestimate just how serious the state of the world is for most people. Our society has effectively already collapsed.

And the last thing anyone wants to fight for is some weird abstract idea that no one really even understands.

Sargon is saying “yes, race exists and yes, multiculturalism has had a negative effect on white people – but we can’t address that issue because of this abstract concept. Instead, we have to fight to preserve the abstract concept.”

Well, fighting for abstract concepts is for people who are not backed up against the wall. It is simply the realm of the hobby to go to war over a philosophical ideal.

In the 1960s, people fought for all of this “liberation” that Sargon is defending because there was no risk. The baby boomers lived very comfortably, so fighting for “freedom” was just like a game.

Things have changed. We are now in an extreme situation, where people are very alienated, they are struggling just to survive. People are ready to put their entire being into a fight for a better future.

The only things that are actually worth giving your entire being to fight for are things that exist in real life.

At one point in his recent stream with Mister Metokur, Sargon did mention along with his desire to fight for an abstraction that he doesn’t want trannies teaching his kid to cut his dick off. That is the only real life thing he mentioned. The rest of it was vague abstractions, which again, he hasn’t defined.

Presumably, he also wouldn’t want a daughter to be sex trafficked by a Pakistani rape-gang. He doesn’t want his house burned down by a roving pack of Africans. He doesn’t want to be forced into third-world living conditions. He doesn’t want to feel like a stranger in his own home, being surrounded by people that speak hundreds of different languages. He doesn’t want Britain to become an Islamic state. And he doesn’t want to be arrested for talking about any of these things.

So even if you eliminate race from your perception entirely, the effects of race do not just magically disappear. And the idea that vague notions of “individual liberty” and other abstract ideas are going to hold this multiracial circus show together is utterly nonsensical. We are dealing with real life problems that require real life solutions.

And when you are living with real life, reality is the only thing that matters.

What is the Point of Multiculturalism?

Sargon still has failed to explain the positive of why you would want brown people in your country. Instead, he only puts forward negative arguments against people arguing for white countries – it’s mean, it’s immoral, but they have rights now because they are already here, you can’t even tell for sure if someone is 100% genetically white, etc.

But the question remains: can he name a single benefit derived from having nonwhites in our countries?

Because if not, his entire negative argument of why it would be wrong to remove them is meaningless.

He seems to at least tacitly admit that multiracialism has detrimental effects (even if he claims that these effects somehow have no relationship to race), but hinges everything on the alleged immorality of removing them.

Imagine if you get shot and you’re bleeding out, but there is a lot of traffic on the road to the hospital: is your solution going to be to stay and home and bleed to death? And then if a family member is like “hey, you’d better do something, you’re going to bleed to death,” do you start arguing with them about how it is impossible to get to the hospital and so you just have to make the best of bleeding to death?

If we accept that multiculturalism is an extreme disaster, then we need to work on fixing the situation – not to find some impossible method of dealing with an unbearable situation.

That’s All I’ve Got

Hopefully in the near future Sargon will be releasing an agenda of some kind. It is currently frustrating to critique him given that he has put so little forward with regards to his vision for society. But this is what we’ve got right now.

Andy Warski has announced that Richard Spencer and Sargon will be having a second debate – this time with Mike Enoch included.

So that is going to be good.

Honestly, I’m not sure how Sargon will be able to continue with this agenda after that. I think the “I’m sorry I performed so poorly in the debate – I am now the leader of a cult” trick will only work once.

The “skeptic” movement is a mostly YouTube-oriented phenomenon which emerged largely from #Gamergate and was popular between 2014-16 as a response to SJWs, feminists in particular. By the end of 2016, they had pretty much bullied most SJWs off of YouTube and so were struggling for content. Several in the movement suggested attacking the Alt-Right.

Their position, you see, is “radical centrism” – they believe that both the far-left and the far-right are somehow mirrors of each other in that they are “too extreme,” and thus have attempted to solidify a “reasonable middle ground.” By far the best way to understand this is to understand that they are basically arguing for 1990s normalcy.

Last year, the popular skeptic personality “Kraut and Tea” attempted to “debunk” the Alt-Right. When he failed to do so, he created a secret team to dox and defame members of the Alt-Right. Then the chat logs were leaked, and he resigned from the internet in disgrace.

Note that the situation started when a female YouTuber, who had been popular within the skeptic movement, cited one of my articles in a video.

Now, the mac-daddy of the skeptic movement, Sargon of Akkad, has now thrown his hat into the ring.

With a seemingly modest video entitled “8 Questions for the Alt Right,” he has signaled that he intends to go to war.

Watch the video above. He has a questionnaire he’s created for the Alt-Right. Disregarding the fact that he has no ability to ensure that Alt-Right people are the ones answering it, which makes the data itself irrelevant, there are several other troubling aspects.

He has based the entire thing on Millennial Woes, a rather obscure Alt-Right YouTube personality who does not represent the mainstream of the movement. This is a strategic move, trying to define the movement by a person who he believes is easy to attack.

What he is attempting with the questions – and this is rather shocking, after he watched what happened to Kraut and Tea – is a “gotcha” move that he believes will somehow bring shame on the Alt-Right. He throws out several different attempts at this, trying to grab specific threads that he then believes he will be able to break down for his grand “gotcha.” This is a weaselly, disgusting thing and he should be embarrassed of himself.

Let me comment now on each of the 8 questions, so as you can grasp what it is he is trying to do here.

1. Are Jews Oppressing White People?

This is a ham-fisted attempt to push the Alt-Right into a box as “right-wing SJWs.” The idea is that white people who are opposed to Jewish power are no different than black people that are opposed to white power. Or women who are opposed to male power. Or whatever.

This is such a low-level, idiotic non-argument that I was shocked he had the nerve.

A yes or no answer to that question is wrong. What Jews have done is infected white society as a virus. They worked their way to the top of our societies and replaced our traditional culture with a culture they are comfortable with, and one which serves their interests – interests which include ethnic replacement of white people in formerly white countries, along with a breakdown of the entire social order.

It simply is not debatable that Jews are behind immigration, feminism, racial egalitarianism, the homosexual liberation movement, the international financial system, the pornography industry, etc. etc. etc.

They created a new religious moral order based on the myth of the Holocaust and used that new morality to reshape the entire order of our societies.

We have been dominated by Jews, from the inside of our own systems. And there is no way to argue otherwise with any type of acknowledgement of empirical fact.

2. Should Interracial Couples be Forced to Separate?

Here is starts with the attempt to do a “gotcha” on the freedom of the individual, which is the main thrust of his gotcha agenda.

It is another trick question – he wants you to say you would force your will on people and destroy families, then he will lead you down a path from there.

The fact of the matter is that interracial couples were illegal in white countries up until very recently. Please peruse the “Anti-Miscegenation Laws” Wikipedia page for more information on that. They were all repealed following WWII as the Jews entered our systems on a large scale and began reshaping our society.

The US Supreme Court decision of Loving v. Virginia in 1967, which was the final ruling on the legality of miscegenation, was backed by the NAACP, an organization that was founded and largely entirely run by Jews.

The fact that mixed-race couples do now exist because of this Jewish action against our people is tragic, and it will be a nuanced issue to deal with. However, the primary agenda should be reinstituting the laws which prevent these types of relationships from forming in the first place.

3. Should the Government Prevent Citizens from Leaving the Country to Preserve the Race?

Here again, he is going after this “you want to destroy the rights of the individual” gotcha.

It is a weird question which I have never even thought about, but which he says he’s pulled from Millennial Woes. I’ll just have to trust him that MW said this. I certainly would not say it.

Again, he chose MW to base his attacks on because he is obscure and says some irregular statements. If he genuinely wanted to “disprove” the Alt-Right, he would go after Daily Stormer or The Right Stuff, the two media outlets which best represent the mainstream of the Alt-Right. The fact that he even asks this question shows how dishonest this thing he is trying is.

After all, I was the one cited in the YouTube video that triggered the skeptic interest in the Alt-Right. Most people in the Alt-Right do not even know who Millennial Woes is.

Of course people should be allowed to go where they want to go. We do not have a problem of people leaving our countries, we have a problem of aliens coming in. Most of the people who do leave permanently – a very, very small number of people, mind you – leave because of some effect of the Jewish system, whether financial or social.

4. Should the State Control Education? 

In the video you will see the context of this question, which is apparently the idea that we want to brainwash people against critical thinking – which apparently he believes is currently being taught in schools, which are obviously already run by the state.

The fact that all states control education makes this a bizarre question.

So I will answer the gotcha itself instead of just saying “well, every state controls education” – that question being: “should critical thinking be taught to children?”

Of course critical thinking should be taught to children. Everything that the Alt-Right believes is the result of working through data using a methodology of logic and reason. All of this logic and reason should be explained to children, and they should be given the opportunity to challenge any of it.

Obviously, if the children try to do “gotcha” questions on us like Sargon is attempting to do with this video, than the wrong-headed nature of that gotcha attempt should be broken down with honesty and reason, as I am doing right now to Sargon.

5. Should the State Control the Media?

He elaborates in the video that to him, the only way of keeping Jews from running the media (which he admits is the case) would be to have the state control the media.

My answer would be that Jews should be prohibited from owning media companies. In fact, ideally, Jews should be prohibited from being in our countries at all.

I also argue that media MONOPOLIES (oligopolies, technically) should be illegal, and that existing media monopolies should be broken up under anti-trust. Having a totally centralized corporate media is always going to be bad, with or without Jews.

That said, the internet makes this a lot simpler. Right now, the old media is attacking and trying to thwart rising new online media. Just look at what has happened with the censorship of the Daily Stormer. And long before this, I was locked out of all financial services. If there was not this attempt by the old, Jewish media to silence rising alternative media, then there probably wouldn’t even be a need to break-up existing monopolies, as they would simply collapse under their own weight.

If the question is actually “do you believe in free speech?” (and I think that is actually what he is asking) – I absolutely do. In the ideal white country, people who believe in communism and whatever else should be allowed to shill for their ideologies. In this age of information, however, they are not going to make any inroads with such an ideology in an open market of ideas.

6. Should the State Control the Economy?

What do you know, another “gotcha.”

The answer is that the economy should be one which serves the interests of the people, and so should be regulated based on what is for the good of the nation. What is and isn’t good for the people is easy enough to figure out if you genuinely have the interests of the people in mind and you come at the issue rationally.

Sargon is not an Anarcho-Capitalist, and believes in a mixed-economy of some kind. And I think we pretty much all agree, outside of a few fringe elements in the movement, that a mixed system with some social benefits as well as a free-but-regulated market works best.

About half of American billionaires are Jewish and we live in a predatory system that is run by Jews where there are such things as artificial scarcity. We also live under a globalist open-market which has largely sucked the blood out of the West. The solutions to these things are not easy, but they are relatively straight-forward.

7. Do the Decisions of Individual White People Matter to the Alt-Right’s Goals?

This is another attempt to gotcha on individual freedom, I guess, though it is more obscure.

Individual decisions do not matter for any large social goal, as people in a society that is functioning properly will generally always abide by the norms of the society. The goal is to return the society to a traditional framework, wherein individual choices will be in line with the whole of society.

For thousands of years before the mid-20th century, white western civilization existed without the input of Jews, and it generally worked out. Yes, empires rose and fell, but that was not the result of individual choices, but of large societal trends based on a complex web of internal and external elements made manifest over generations-long periods of time.

The question is worded weirdly, and I don’t know if he is asking “should people be allowed freedom of choice” or something else – either way, the answer is that individual choices don’t matter to a society, because of the way individuals behave when they exist in a society.

If we are simply talking about the degree of individual freedom that should exist in a society, under an ideal Alt-Right system it would increase in many ways and decrease in several others.

Right now, people are restricted from freedom of association, various property rights are infringed upon, people are denied freedom of thought through various mechanisms of financial pressure (or legal pressure – outside of the United States and sometimes inside of it), small businesses are overly-regulated while big business isn’t regulated enough, personal privacy is routinely violated by the state. We would increase personal freedom in these areas.

Conversely, the use of hard drugs and pornography will be banned. As stated above, we will reinstate anti-miscegenation laws, as well as laws against sodomy. Parents will be blocked from giving their boys estrogen injections in order to “transform” them into girls. Various other forms of “new freedom” will be banned. Social and moral norms will be lined up with the 19th century.

8. Should Women Have a Role in Public Life?​

Sargon accurately states that the Alt-Right has not fully come to a conclusion on this issue. I certainly have come to a conclusion, and my answer is a hard “no.”

Women should go back to the role they had before the women’s suffrage movement and throughout all of history before that. We have experienced exactly zero benefit from the “liberation” of women. Not only have men not benefited, but women have not benefited. Women consistently report significantly lower levels of personal happiness with every leap of the liberation movement. Women were biologically designed to live in the home and raise children, and that is the role they should keep to.

To Conclude

My hope is that Sargon will respond to these answers, rather than continue to do this thing where Millennial Woes is taken to represent the Alt-Right. But this entire “opening move” is so fundamentally dishonest that I don’t expect him to do so right off the bat. I expect that he will continue to attempt to obfuscate the issue, as I think it is clear that he knows that without obfuscating the issue, he cannot win.

To be clear, I am not bothered by what Sargon does, necessarily. I agree with much or even most of what he says, even while I obviously do not believe he goes far enough. He is now a major YouTube personality, and it makes sense that he would want to stay within an established mainstream paradigm while slightly working at the edge of it.

He’s evolved a lot since we had our first run-in back in early 2015.

So honestly, I don’t really understand what he hopes to gain from this. He was a confidant of Kraut and Tea during that debacle, and it has been said (though I have not heard the tape) that he told Kraut to simply leave the Alt-Right alone. That seems to me to be the wisest path. But, presumably, he is hemorrhaging supporters to the Alt-Right, and thus feels it necessary, for professional and financial reasons, to “take us on.”

It is a very bad move. And it is something that he will not recover from unless he converts, which he appears to be unable to do (if he was capable of doing that, he would have done it already).

Sargon, you have to know that this is a battle you cannot win.

It is not too late to simply back down and scurry away.

Both Antifa and MILO are essentially dead at this point.

Antifa has no power and no sway over the public and are cowards who will lock doors rather than confront their enemies.

MILO has died in popularity due to him being a Jew-faggot pederast and Antifa being more concerned with the actual Alt-Right.

We are the only group capable of organizing large events and drawing mass attention at this point.