Debating Sargon

Proof plz

spectator.co.uk/2013/07/sorry-but-intelligence-really-is-in-the-genes/

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000889

lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/beaver-and-wright-2011-school-level-genetic-variation-predicts-school-level-verbal-iq-scores-results.pdf

articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/10/news/la-heb-genetic-study-intelligence-20110809

Because the alt-right is Milo supporters. 4chan and Holla Forums for the most part disassociated with that group as soon as it was given a name.

He likes to ask a lot of questions for you to fall in his pace.
Answer his questions with disdain, powerfully and end up asking him your question, which must be one to corner him to agree with you.

That's not even remotely true.

Milo "culturally appropriated" the term.

The term was coined by Richard Spencer to describe his worldview, which includes white nationalism.

He isn't in favor of muslims leaving either.

This pretty much. It may be our brainchild, but pol will never and should never be a movement. Movements can be corrupted and are subject to a whole new set of issues. For necessity's sake, Holla Forums must float

"Homosexuality seems to be an implicit last stand of white identity"
-Richard Spencer

Seems like a real good face for the movement

What are his policies other than being a cuck?

That isn't an endorsement of homosexuality you moron.

The term "Alt-right" originally meant anyone on the right who isn't a cuckservative.

I'm not a fan or anything. You'd have to go to his channel.

Tell him about the Kalergi-plan.

balder.org/judea/Richard-Coudenhove-Kalergi-Practical-Idealism-Vienna-1925.php

So I was wrong and the term existed before Milo took it, but it is still his now. It is the typical controlled opposition that just doesn't cross a certain line, which is pretty ironic given how Milo describes it as "libertarians who don't care about your feelings". I suppose you just have to care about certain people's feelings.

Sargon has redpilled a lot of normalfags. I don't know what's the point of sperging out at someone like that just because he isn't wailing about jews or wears a MAGA hat.

Of course it isn't. But it's deliberately tying degeneracy to white identity, which is the exact opposite of the goal. If he feels it is true, he should work to make it less true, not shrug his shoulders and embrace it.

The Alt-right movement has no infrastructure & no leader. Its open to anyone who wants to join. The alt-right isn't going to do anything except shift the overton window. And as such, doing anything but winding these intellectual movements up and letting them run their course is asking for more attention then pol needs or wants.

I don't know if you know what the word means, shill.

I feel the same way. Those closer to moderates on the political spectrum should be viewed as future allies, not immediate enemies.

He's a leftist who spouts off at far leftists and believes it makes him enlightened.
You're the useful idiots - raising his view count and relevance whilst expecting it to somehow not bite you in the future.

Are you literally retarded m8?

Not an argument

Not trying to make an argument, just curious if literally retarded or not

Here's a small list of some questions to ask Quadron:

1. Ask: "Do you think that, in the long-term, there is a place for Muslims within Western Society?". After he inevitably replies yes, follow up with: "But why should there be when the majority of it's values are not only directly contrary to the majority of western values, but also dictates to convert others to their cause? And what have muslims done for the Western World? And how much has it taken? How is it not like a parasite within a host? Imagine if the USA let California became a USSR-style Communist state, would it just sit there idly and not have an effect?"

2. Ask: "What do you find distasteful about British Nationalism?". He'll probably reply: "The people endorsing it are racist." Follow up with: "That is just some British Nationalists, not British Nationalism itself. There are racists everywhere. Do you think Nationalism is a racist concept? Look at the USA, American Nationalism is not White, Black or Hispanic Nationalism."

3. Ask: "Do you think everyone should be able to go to University upon finishing High School?" He'll reply, surely (given he's a Bernie supporter): "yes, of course". Follow up with: "But surely University is only meant to be for exceptional people who not only work hard but have the capacity for the intellectual advancement that (a good) University provides. And it is an undeniable fact that the majority of people in University who excel within any serious (i.e. non SJW-ridden or Marxist-based) are either White or (Eastern) Asian. So shouldn't people with the potential to do the best with a University education be given priority over others who are less likely to excel?"

4. If asked about he refuses to touch the JQ or anything related to Soros and co. concerning the current refugee crisis, ask: "Seriously, just how many of your patrons are Jews?"

5. On the topic of American exceptionalism, draw an analogy between America becoming more ethnically and genetically diverse with it's current decline in power, against the downfall of the Ancient Greeks, and how that, to this day, because they have had their DNA corrupted by Turkish blood their country has been in a state of steady decline.

Redpilling comes all at once for some, for others you have to slowly ease it in. For the latter case, Sargon and attacks on the far left are a good transition period.

Ask him if cuckoldry is an intellectual fetish.

Tell that to the Marxist KGB circa 1959 you moron

I got you, fam.

brown.edu/academics/economics/sites/brown.edu.academics.economics/files/uploads/2013-15_paper_0.pdf

www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

actazool.org/temp/{73B99493-DF40-41F1-A96E-595F6E15B833}.pdf

Vid related.

You can ride the last two points particularly hard, as they are the methods and results of dispassionate scientific inquiry. Any disagreement on them only for humans is the result of bias and irrationality.

centralization of power strips sovereignty from people. decentralisation does the opposite, and allows people to have a louder voice in politics.
mind and body have a causal relationship. the physical differences between a dog and a man cause the difference in intellect. people are also different to a certain degree. intellect is influenced by both nature and nurture, not nurture exclusively.
the people used to be more practical, as the times demanded it. there was a stronger bond of people and country which caused the peoples to have a greater disposition to excel and provide. women were also pure and dutiful.

also, our history is completely revised and slandered.
just imagine, considering the circumstances, what normal life would have been like in some hamlet in europe based on the circumstances.

just to clarify, other tribes are bent on destroying european ethnicities, so we are constantly attacked in a number of ways and villified as justification for such transgressions.
consider all the ways in which this can be done.
we are being convinced to kill ourselves.

Not to imply that I have any relevance whatsoever, but as far as I know I was the first to get pissed off enough at the defeatists and shills to start beating Holla Forums over the head with the "useful idiots" (i.e. pragmatism) argument.

As far as I'm concerned, Sarcuck is not a useful idiot. He's not attacking the enemy in any useful way, and he's not destabilizing enemy systems at all. He's not even brushing people to the right to any degree; He's a net, not a broom. He catches people who are sick of PC culture and tries to convince them that liberalism as a worldview and a philosophical and ethical framework is a perfect system, and it's just this vague group of "fascists" that are ruining it for everyone.

(Prepare your anus, this comparison is going to cause a shitstorm. I may be wrong, the other side has merit, etc, so let's try to stay on the topic of Sargon)

Unlike Milo, he is actually arguing just as passionately and often for liberalism as for anti-PC. Unlike Milo, he isn't actually going into the belly of the beast and inciting violence. The irony is that Milo is riding the wave of anti-feminism for his amoral, hedonistic self-interest, while Sargon is legitimately blue-pilled and isn't actually shilling.

In any case, the second Sargon of Akkad is seen as legitimate by any more than a handful of retards on Holla Forums, you'll know the board has fallen. Sargon is a net-negative. Remember to think pragmatically.

I'll go with this then, and assume that he's wrong on all counts.

Nationalism is basically the same a patriotism at least in terms of it's benefits and drawbacks. Certainly taken to absolute extremes it's counter productive, but so is anything else. Everyone should want a healthy dose of patriotism/nationalism at least as a default position. The onus should be on the accuser to convince someone that the patriotic or nationalist position is wrong.

Nationalism is generally seen as the antidote to globalism. Some amount of globalism may be productive. Having everyone speak at least some English, for example, is very useful. The problem is that globalists want to go too far. Replacing all of the other 100s of languages in the world with only English would destroy so much culture and history. The end result of globalism is a sterile world where every restaurant is mcdonalds, every coffeshop is starbucks. Much like communism everything is equal, and it's all shit.

All the studies I've seen have shown that at least 50% of intelligence is inherited. I'm not sure how this is even a debate. Your genetics define your potential for intelligence. Your education determines how much of that potential you utilize.

I'd go with talking about culture on this one. In the midwest (and among whites in general) there is a culture of hard work and competition. If you ask people to tell you about themselves one of the first things they mention is their job. They are proud of their job and proud of working hard and doing a good job. The work late and on weekends, giving up time with the family to do the best job they can.

In Mexico the culture is one of family first. They show up late, and do the minimum at work, then go back and spend time with the family.

Now neither one of these is right or wrong objectively. They just have different focuses and value things differently. Niggers have their own culture, which values neither family nor hard work.

This culture of hard work leads directly do our dominance of the things used to objectively measure the success of a nation. While I'm sure mexicans probably report higher contentment and happiness in their lives.

This goes back to globalism. By flooding white countries with lazy shitskins we lose that culture of success forever.

Here are some talking points:

He believes that individualism and collectivism are moral absolutes with nothing in between. Ask him if people shouldn't band together to acieve things greater than themselves. Say that you reject forced ideological collectivism(Communism) but support purpose driven colletivism (Natsoc, Nationalism). Name space travel as an achievment only acievable by a common cause.

Sargon has a very weak knowledge of modern Islam. Provide statistics and citations on Islam and Muslims to prove that there is now way Islam can coexist with the modern world

Provide examples of Africa regressing massively after decolonization. Decolonization in general is a wealth op talking points not compatible with Sargons ideology

You should have a large stash of informations about race and intelligence already. Every transracial study proves that genetics are a huge factor

As for the sources of excellence, in this topic you have a very comfortable and defendable position. Sargon will have to find factors other than genetics and european culture, that account for the fact that nwestern countries are superior.

He will probably claim that colonialism is one of the main sources of western wealth. Be ready with data that at least debunks the claim that it was a main source of western wealth, if possible go further to say that it was a net loss(if you can hold that claim. The decision to end colonization was economic, not moral

Sargon loses more or his bluepilledness everyday, but he is still appealing to people who see themselves on the left.

You need people like that as stepping stones. Very few people go redpill in a day, get a bluepill cuck to agree with Sargon and he enters the right way, especially with all the flak from sjws. The sjw flak produces a counterreaction, where people stop to outright reject right wing political standpoints and slowly but surely they will see that the truth is on our side.

Race shouldn't decide that, exceptional people can be born anywhere and everywhere. We can't waste geniouses just because they happened to be born woman or black.

Who gets in and who does not should be decided by some sort of test, where all participants have equal opportunities to get in (not equal chance of success).

Maybe but diversity is shit.
Also women get less utility from degrees since they work less and have children.
Tbh they should let the free market sort it out :^)

This.

Sargon going full redpill would actually be detrimental to the cause.

Tear his pseudo-intellectual ass up!

Make sure to back your thesis with empirical evidence, studies, etc., that way he can't just glance your blow by saying something like "Ok… and the source of this?" or something retarded like that.

He'll probably bring what you say into question a lot because he's a blathering autist and can't believe anything he doesn't believe himself to be correct.

It's this exactly, and Gavin serves the same function. They see SJWs as some weird, inexplicable phenomena, with themselves as the "sensible ones" who are victimized by the "crazies"

And golly gee, once we get that sorted out then we can repackage, rebrand and roll-out a new form of liberalism according to my specific preferences!

OP should ask him why Sargon can even call himself a "rationalist" when he hasn't read ANY reactionary or conservative literature, only his liberal pseudointellectual masturbatory bullshit. Sargon hasn't read the Protocols, nor the Gulag Archipelago, nor Evola, nor Jung, nor Hitler. For a rationalist, he isn't very educated about the viewpoints of others at all

Finished the debate. Gonna start upload in a second.

and then these so-called "moderates" always end up drifting out to the looney parts of the leftist spectrum.

Serious question: Aren't The Protocols bullshit?

Remember to end it something like;

Constantly attack his character and refusal to take actual positions.
Sargon won't debate fairly, and neither should you.

Insofar that they aren't written by some secret Jewish cabal member.
It's thought that the Protocols were written by a Russian imperial spy.

But everything in them has come to true, so I wouldn't call them "bullshit" exactly.

If Sargon calls it bullshit just stick to the other stuff. He cannot deny that he has literally never read anything related to nationalism/ fascism/ conservatism whatsoever

What would lead anyone to that conclusion?

Not even really part of this thread. I'm just reading a lot of stuff right now but I don't really want to get my jew facts confused by reading fake shit.

His wife's kid?

Are you a retard? That's exactly the opposite we should be doing when debating people like him.

If you check the comment of those videos, even those who support his points said he didn't debate fairly.
The first one was 5 on 1, and many of those where not very bright, but when he debated MW, he looked like a catcaller bully most of the time.

Speak gently, and use reason; when he attacks you unfairly, his supporters will notice, and realize he cannot debate the alt-right without making himself look like a leftist.

In the end, the people will realize who is in the right, by being the better talker, and the better person, and having the important facts support his position.

Reminder debates are about you and the audience. Then again the audience is pretty niche as his followers are just anti-feminists, and they have all already seen the other Sargon vs nationalist videos.

he's raising his wife's nigger child from another man

Can I have a sauce on that?

This. I even think Sargon isn't unreasonable unless being caught up in a debate and his own ego.

Stay calm and rational and you will convince these people since I genuinely think that they care about the truth.

Being anti-sjw is only the first step towards our side.

Also, found the thread late, but just in case, here are some redpills you might want to use.

Also, check out some of the debates of Jared Taylor, he make some normie friendly arguments as of why race and ethnicity has value in society.

I fucked up at embeing.

When exactly are you going to debate him?

I have uploaded the debate.
Will make a new thread for it since different topic.
New thread:

why would anyone debate that faggot