Tucker Carlson vs The Alt Left

so I first heard of tucker carlson back in the days when i was a big fan of jon stewart and he went on crossfire to tell them that they ran about show I wanted to I felt that that wasn't fair and I should come here and tell you that I don't it's not so much that it's bad as it's hurting America so I want to do today let me and say wait here's just what I wanted to tell you guys yeah stop stop stop stop hurting America okay I remember at the time thinking that this was not only hilarious but precisely what people needed to hear and even back then I could see that the political partisanship of english-speaking countries was growing out of control and so Jon Stewart felt like a necessary and far more objective voice on the situation he wasn't sponson of either side or at least not noticeably now come work for us because we as the people how do you pay the people not not well let me say that but you can sleep at night see the thing is we need your help you're right now you're helping the politicians and the corporations and we're left out there we're too rough on them when they make mistake no no you're not too rough on them you are part of their strategies you're partisan what do you call it hacks and oh my god the motherfucking irony as we fast forward 10 years and you're soft balling Hillary Clinton let me ask you a question do you like commuting to work and you're like a home office but then if I'm being really honest with myself and not just getting past my bias in your favor I guess I'd probably say you were doing the same thing back then 3 the questions you asked John yeah you have a chance to interview the Democratic nominee you ask questions such as quote how are you holding up but I haven't really noticed much of a detectable change in Tucker Carlson he is at least been a consistent stock Republican in my opinion which makes it all the more amusing when he has to deal with the raving loony see of the radical left take for example the accusation of racism levelled at the star-spangled banner Jefferson Mori is a writer AlterNet he wrote a book snow in August Washington City Francis Scott Key in the forgotten race riot of 1835 he is called the national anthem a neo Confederate symbol that says it's time to quote examine it Jefferson while he joins us tonight thanks from another save time I'm going to skip to the relevant points but of course all of the links will be in the description I didn't say it was a racist anthem and I'm not a vandal so don't try and attribute that to me what I said was this is true this is true the star-spangled banner was not the national anthem when it was written from 1814 until 1931 so the story what I want to do is I want people to know the real history of the star-spangled banner why is it our national anthem and the reason it's our national anthem is because a group of people who I would describe as neo Confederates campaign throughout the 1920s to get the star-spangled banner designated as the as the national anthem and when that happened they celebrated by marching in a parade in Baltimore in June 1931 behind two flags the Confederate flag and the start and the star-spangled banner so the people who wanted to make the star-spangled banner the national anthem considered it a victory for the Confederate quad so to summarize this guy's position then the star-spangled banner in and of itself is not racist it contains no racist words doesn't even allude to racism but some of the people who did like it were racists am I missing anything else of that summary but naturally Tucker's guest is acting like anything a racist has touched becomes racist in turn somehow infected by the spreading disease of racism it doesn't surprise me that people with creepy views like the star-spangled banner they probably also like dogs and pecans and I like you know doesn't just qualify me as a dog owner because they like dogs what I'm saying is the people who wanted this to happen the most the people who were most in favor of this far spangled banner were neo Confederates so Walt if you went back in time and spoke to an abolitionist I don't think they would tell you that the black man should be the equal of the white man just that it was immoral to keep them enslaved so I think that's what's important at a time when we have a lot of controversy he's about to star spangled banner' colin kaepernick is he a hero like a lot of us think or is he a bum like before even getting the colin kaepernick and other paid athletes in their phony social activism is there the question is is there something inherently intrinsically troubling about the star-spangled banner your case is that people with views you don't like liked it okay that doesn't mean anything I mean they probably like Picasso paintings too or whatever it is it doesn't it value the paintings know inherently wrong with the song know what I'm saying is we should know the real history of the song because it's so central to these controversies that we have but as you have already conceded to Tucker that doesn't matter it's irrelevant he it doesn't make it racist and therefore it doesn't change anything that's happening now but this is part of a systematic campaign to steadily D legitimize all of the pillars of American society isn't it that's the thing it's not that there's something wrong with the star-spangled banner it's that there's something wrong with the people who campaigned to institute the star-spangled banner and therefore the star-spangled banner itself a symbol of America can be adequately deconstructed and eventually removed that's the point behind this because this is just guilt by association there's absolutely nothing here see they like the song this is what this is why there's a hole in your in your logic progression here did they like the song for racist reasons is there something racist about the song no what they were trying to do was send the message and this is the same the same motivation that led to the star-spangled banner being designated the national anthem is the same motivation that led to for example the statues to men who took up arms against the constitution and defensive I'm just gonna take it on faith that you are in fact a mind reader and you do actually know exactly what they were thinking it doesn't really matter because this is the part that was important did they like the song for racist reasons is there something racist about the song no no they didn't like it for racist reasons because it's not a racist song so it doesn't matter what their motivations were because they've instituted something was not racist and your problem is with racism and thus the star-spangled banner does not fall under that purview you need to look elsewhere my friend the point is is that this kind of racism is baked into some of our public symbols but not the star-spangled banner as you have conceded multiple times in this conversation so far it's not a racist symbol so why are you bringing it up and I think it's because we're a writer for alt left publication alternet so far left it's just gone straight over the horizon and deconstructing American symbols is part of the goals of these sites that's what the far left once we're at a time now because we have a president who says white supremacists are good people he said there were good people on both sides which means that he thinks there are alt left commies who are good people equally wrong in my opinion but it doesn't really matter because that was clearly a conciliatory statement he was making in order to try and lower the general level of hysteria but it doesn't seem to be possible because literally all you do is take one thing out of context and blow it out of proportion and suddenly a non racist song is racist there's no way and you're sort of lining around it implying for something racist but you don't know I don't think there's something racist about the star-spangled banner well then Tucker Carlson wins you don't think there's anything racist about the star-spangled banner end of story but what I'm saying is very precise neo Confederates made it that so why is that who cares neo Confederates did something that wasn't racist maybe we should actually be applauding them for that and these people have all been dead for decades so I don't see what difference any of this makes what does that tell us that the radical left have become witch hunters and inquisitors and they can sniff out the unclean and the racist from a hundred yards the thing is I'm not even joking this is exactly where you're going with this that tells us that racism has been somehow tinges or has affected our notions of public memories patriotism what did I say you're all tainted with the stench of racism oh you're not a racist but I can smell it you've you've been near it you've come into contact with it and now you're on pure - you're also unclean jokes aside this really is just a monumental purity test and they have found the star-spangled banner wanting because it was promoted by people of inferior moral development the star-spangled banner if I'm with my kids at a baseball game singing it should I keep in mind the wackos 80 years ago who also liked it like why is that relevant and doesn't in fact that devalue it to me and my kids it makes me like the country less like why is that useful to know it's irrelevant in any understand no that's like that's like saying it's irrelevant that we have a memorial to Confederate war is inherently controversial because it's two Confederates right this first mangled banner has no reference to race it's an American song there's nothing racist about the song itself and you're trying to introduce into the public consciousness this idea that there is something inherently listen to that stuttering he wants to stop by pedaling now because he realizes that that's exactly what he's doing and that sounds terrible I'm trying to remind people of the history of how this came about yeah why are you trying to do that let's go to a quick flashback that tells us that racism has been somehow tinges or has affected our notions of public memories patriotism I just can't see how this guy can think he is not trying to associate the star-spangled banner wouldn't connotations of racism because that really seems to be what he's trying to do and I don't want to sit there and assume bad faith on his part but it's really hard to believe that he doesn't believe that's what he's doing and and saying this is relevant to the controversies that we have - relevant how should we feel guilty when we sing it or like no we should just know it but know what that racist liked it but it's not a race a song like why is it why is that relevant if it's this it's the real history of funny you didn't know that absolutely irrelevant and tucker carlson nailed him on every point here the star-spangled banner is not racist it doesn't have racist connotations and does need racist language and there were non racists who supported it in addition to racists and I wasn't joking early the old left literally have written books to explain how the abolitionists were also racists because they were but that doesn't discredit the value of abolitionism but hey we really don't know what the 2018 agenda for the regressive left is gonna be maybe it will be bring back slavery because black people were better off under it or something like that who knows they may well come full circle so anyway let's move on to the next one and you listen to the inaugural where was the white supremacist park I mean Donald Trump is harken back to the Nixon strategy he's used the Lee our Atwater playbook pretty much since he I mean let's be precise she said this speech was a white nationalist speech yeah I listen to the speech he talked all about how we need to rebuild our inner cities which are not primarily white as you know kind of sad white nationalist speak because we know what Donald Trump was actually hearkening to was that I'm so glad we found another mind reader amongst the progressive Inquisition please go and so tell us what Donald Trump was really thinking urban cities are nothing but forgotten places where African Americans are nothing but criminals it's why when he made the comments coming down the elevator or escalator rather at Trump Tower he talked about Mexicans were rapists Tucker rightly interrupts here because what the hell is that got to do with his opinions on Mexican illegal immigrants he didn't even say it was Mexicans he said it was illegal immigrants immigrants and Americans who live in inner-city different groups he's saying I mean I watch the speech whatever you think of what he's done or whatever he was saying look these places have been ignored that run entirely by Democrats as you know as well as vote farms I love how he just concedes that with a weary nod yes the Democrats are presiding over the complete collapse of black communities in these inner cities there's really nothing I can say about that but let me tell you about Republican gerrymandering which by publicans made sure to ensure my Democrats they're super depressing they're horrible and here's Trump is saying like let's fix these places and that's white nationalism well weird version of let's not pretend that Donald Trump really wants to fix the problem why wouldn't Donald Trump wants to solve these problems he looks like he wants to solve problems well he can solve problems on art is a completely different issue but if you listen to his UN speech it's really revealing he is literally like a hardcore tribalistic American patriot and to be honest with you at the moment that is not the worst thing one can be because he's harkening back that the command wants to hear him talk about how we need to send more money to Detroit no Chuck has absolutely got him and his response to this is just bewildering think about in Chicago he or he often uses Chicago as his fallback - why urban areas have been forgotten why black people should vote for him as he said in his own words vote for me what else do you have the reason let's listen you're completely wrong here and I'll tell you why not only is he completely in the right when he says listen what else do you have to lose these communities are suffering from abject deprivation severe social issues with severe criminal elements and that's your arguments to be clear that's what you think and you think racism has caused that and it turns out so that however many years of democratic rule over these cities has failed to improve it so maybe the Democrats are a bunch of giant racists these communities are surely at rock bottom and if not how much worse does it have to get for them to decide that maybe the people ruling over them need to be changed the funniest place about this though is hearing left-wing politicians suddenly undermining their own messaging by saying wait a minute wait a minute it's not all bad you can't just say these communities are terrible just because all we've been saying for the last god knows how many years is that these communities are really terrible it was actually quite an amazing move because it's making you face up to your own failures the Democrats have failed these communities they haven't improved them they've got worse mr. play logic just really quick I know it never happens in Washington but if you're really a racist if you're a white nationalist who wanted to hurt a non-white people you'd be pretty psyched about what's going on in Chicago no I mean you wouldn't because you what's your singing he's an American shooting each other so why would you be worried about that if you were racist but see that is the narrative that certain media companies have used the actual rate of people killing each other black people are killing black people because we all live in the same neighborhood Tucker says that he's not making that point but fuck me I'll take that one are you insane oh it's just black people killing black people because they live around black people okay that's true that's why it's mostly blacks killing blacks and whites killing whites but let's took lip but let's take a look at the relative numbers shall we while looking up the statistics for this I found an article on the channel 4 website which is a terrestrial TV station in the UK and usually rather lefty so I'm gonna use them because they were forced to tell the truth and I do so like it when the left is forced to tell the truth so it comes couched in the question from James it's important to note that black men commit nearly half of all murders in this country which is astounding when you take into consideration the fact they only make up 12 13% of the population this is actually not true because black men make up around six to seven percent of the population but anyway channel 4 have to say it's true that around 13% for Americans are black according to the latest estimates and US Census Bureau and yes according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics black offenders committed 52 percent of homicides recorded in the data between 1980 and 2008 only 45 percent of the offenders were white blacks were disproportionately likely to commit homicide and be the victims in 2008 the offending rate for blacks was 7 times higher than for whites and the victimization rate was 6 times higher 93 percent of black victims were killed by blacks and 84 percent of white victims were killed by whites and out of all of the information we have here that last sentence is what he chooses to focus on as if the staggering difference in these relative numbers is of absolutely no consequence it's just fine that 7 percent the people in that country make up 50% of the murders it's just fine but Donald Trump's a racist wait I'm just saying if you were a racist you would not be concerned about what's happening on the south side of Chicago which means the man that Tucker Carlson is talking to is a racist because he has literally just dismissed what's happening on the south side of Chicago and every other black in a city that has severe problems with gang crime here's what she said in that ludicrous interview with Jane Paul she said Trump was successful in referencing nostalgia they would give hope comfort and settle grievances for millions of people were upset about the gains made by others let's look specifically at what what you're saying is millions of white people probably said millions of white people yeah Clinton replied no imagine if Mitt Romney had said in a post-election interviewed I lost because of millions were resentful black people yeah if he said did after he lost the election he came out and said the reason I lost is because Obama was willing to give to takers and I wasn't and thank you for proving my point he thinks that black people are takers it's not that there aren't also white people who are takers that Obama was pandering to in Mitt Romney's opinion this was a capitalist statement it wasn't a racialist statement but this guy actually is a racist he actually thinks black people equals takers and so when MIT Romney says he's talking about the takers MIT Romney in his mind it's what black people because that's how he thinks of it if he had said millions of resentful black people voted for me because they don't like whites I would have said Mitt Romney that's a disgusting thing to say I never would have stood by while he said something like that's all awful things I can't believe she said that I mean we didn't feel by their race like what is this anyway you like to do that out and then advertently Tucker shows us exactly why the right lost the cultural to the left he's taking his cues from him no Tucker you've just disagreed on points of principle you stand by you don't say is okay to do that now no you say it's not okay to do that full-stop Hitler Trump Hillary Clinton was not blaming people by their race specifically she said here million making America great again where did that come from from Nixon literally the campaign slogan of Donald Trump was the camp's campaign slogan that Richard Nixon used that's an absolutely fascinating diversion but what's that got to do with Hillary Clinton blaming millions of resentful white people you know judging them by their race unmask all of them / yes it's a pretty obvious one I mean take our country back where did that country's in decline any person awake who's like I'm in my late 40s I've lived it everyone knows that it's not racist to note that it's also not racist to note that rich people although more liberal by the way now have a dist knob and the Bursar's aren't gay there are some rich conserves but in general the richer you are the more liberal you are look at that look at the exit polling I hang out with a lot of but I'm just saying overall okay they have a disproportionate amount of power never before an American wife has power been concentrated in fewer times than it is now I grew drunk ran against all that there's nothing with race at all what he's talking about here is the cultural power of the hyper progressive liberal elite as we have seen in many cringe-worthy award ceremonies of late and also he's a white nationalist what you're missing is what's actually happening in America I agree with you Democrats seen a more economic message this is just the most corporate response you can imagine yes the economic messaging right that's where we should have been applying ourselves better but we will do next time you're not listening to the concerns you're not listening to the real issues being raised and you're not really taking the sort of I guess people focused approach that Tucker Carlson is trying to take people I don't think you should be allowed to dismiss people on the basis of their race like we should say that's a rule millions of white people I think we should stop right there if I was doing the interview I'd say whoa wait wait a second but what did you just say Hillary Clinton didn't dismiss people by their race she didn't that's not this is a transcript of the interview you're giving a portion half of a sentence of what she said the entire pair of what she's saying is not said about games made by others resentment they didn't like seeing people who don't look like them succeed so they voted for Donald Trump so you don't think this was just great because Tucker just blows him out of the water with that and the guy has to change tank he obviously that's an indefensible position I'll try another one but the idea of trying to find some kind of truth in all of this completely gone Donald Trump exploited white people's fears after Obama the thing is what he's saying there isn't an untrue statement it's just a misleading one it's not like Donald Trump was holding Klan rallies saying that niggas are taking over the country the white man's and on the verge of extinction but he was exploiting the fears of white people but not because that they were white it was because they had a certain set of concerns Trump had those concerns and those concerns were not necessarily racist which is why Trump had more non-white people vote for him them Romney if Trump were a racist I'm sure he would have had less so finally let's finish with Tucker Carlson taking on an anti far professor like Isaac says professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice he founded the antifa group smash racism DC and he joins us tonight for Ashley thanks for coming on I hate him okay first we're not gonna laugh at his neck second we're not gonna laugh at his hair third we're not gonna laugh at his voice and fourth we're not going to laugh at the fact that he calls himself a revolutionary thank you for having me so your position tell me if I miss characterizing this is people you define as fascist do not have free speech rights no my position is that communities have the right to defend themselves against groups that actively seek to eliminate members of that community you can already see where this is going that means that your speech is violence and that violence is being done against our community and therefore it's acceptable for I don't know a gang of brown shirts on the social media to find a Nazi and then just knock him out just for the fun of it I mean that's not a problem is it's being Nazis illegal isn't it defend themselves against violence or defend themselves against violence I mean we were talking about but no but physical violence so say for example about a history a group that has a history no we're not dead like we're just we're we're suddenly in this a historical world where where I'm not chillin roof or way Michael Page doesn't exist where Anders Breivik doesn't exist are you kidding me are you kidding me you're a fuckin communist you're living in a world where Pol Pot Josef Stalin and Mao Zedong don't exist you're advocating for communism you fucking lunatic and you're something going oh you know who's violent you know who's dangerous the old's right and it's like okay maybe they are but again like the chap talking about the murder rate in black communities let's talk about the relative numbers but isn't this just great I mean look at his face he's pretending to be outraged with a smile on his face he's having fun being outraged are you kidding me just like Carla cook these people not offended they're not outraged this is a game to them no are you a professor by the way what so here's the question though is it five we're not going to laugh at his mannerisms either past statements that have espoused violence or is it acts of violence Oh could you let me just finish my question could could you commit violence against me if you thought that I had a history of saying things that you imagined were violent I would never commit violence against you actually when I was younger I was a libertarian and I actually looked up to you when you were a libertarian okay but let's take me out of this let's just I want to know like the concept of self defense is a legal concept but it's also got like a long history and tradition in common law so the idea is if I'm hitting you and I strike you physically if I physically commit violence against you of a right to commit violence back in order to protect yourself or your property search you're seeming to say that anybody who has espoused ideas that have at some point in history led to violence can be the subject of violence from you that you're not saying that no I'm not saying that except for when you did say that it's espouse violence or is it acts of violence so could you but only now you're not saying that because it sounds bad what I'm saying is that I believe it is the right for communities to get together to assess what is a threat to them and to defend themself against that throw and then he falls back on the regressive cookie-cutter rhetoric that he feels justifies all of this but the thing is communities do not have the right to do this individuals have the right to do this and they can only defend themselves from violence when violence is being done to them this guy is making up a form of group rights for these communities and as a form of collectivism group rights naturally Trump individual rights which is why they must be prohibited groups must not have rights so give me an example like what public figure in America right now could be shut down could have his free speech rights taken away and could be the subject of violence under the standards you're describing well I mean for instance I think that the framework here of talking about violence as opposed to talking about preserving the very freedoms that you and I both enjoy that you are in no way interested in preserving because you are as you have just stated for group rights you are for privilege for some and not for others Tucker and myself and most other people in the center left in the center right are for universal rights rights that are cannot be infringed because a group of people decide that it's okay to infringe them ultimately we're talking about a movement that actively advocates against all the fetters of democracy said the Communists this guy is in no way in favor of individual rights or democracy and he's acting like he is that's in my opinion is duplicitous he is deliberately trying to deceive Tucker and I think he knows it which is why he's being so playful I mean we're talking about Richard Spencer who publishes an all right calm publishes an article in July 28th by a man named Vincent law where the headline was to protect free speech get rid of democracy honestly this is incredible because this guy doesn't care about democracy either he was suspended for tweeting it's a privilege to teach future dead cops in which he said you'll might think it sucks being an anti-fascist teaching at John Jay College but I think it's a privilege to teach future dead once you might econ professor C you have the opportunity blade drops jokes about my students getting executed in the Rev dot tumblr.com he seems to think he's lapping during the uprising of the Paris Commune that he has the temerity to criticize Richard Spencer for wanting to overthrow democracy if indeed that is even his position is pretty fucking incredible so I you know what I do so let's let's use that example I disagree with that I haven't seen the piece but it doesn't sound like something I'd agree with it's not does Richard Spencer have a right to speak in public the answer is yes but let's say what our dear professor has to say Richard Spencer is a danger to society when he speaks in public what he is doing he is publicly recruiting people to his very violent movement very violent and he should if that is the standard that makes someone a danger to society don't you think you have rather indicted yourself as well because you are doing precisely the same thing does he have a right to speak in public I don't think he has a right to speak in public on a poet and there you have it the Communist does not think that their fascist opponent has any rights and that's what this boils down to he doesn't believe Richard Spencer has rights then that is ultimately what the purpose of anti far is is to show and oppose him the purpose of anti far is to deny the rights of people they believe fascists yes we know and your definition of what a fascist is is rather malleable but it's not opposition you shut people down you prevent them from speaking and you commit violence against it I know a number of people don't tell me sir I know people have been knocked down and beaten by people from antifa imagine trying to deny that anti far have been violent just imagine the headspace you must be in you are just a naked partisan from this point onwards to say that aunty far aren't violent is just to deny video evidence so that is true it does happen we have it on tape when his roll the tape right so and he stops himself because he knows he's got an argument he knows that literally anything he says from this point he's just going to be manifestly ridiculous and make him look silly but he doesn't care he doesn't actually care he's just there for PR reasons damage control that's all he's going to do he's going to deny and deflect literally everything so the point where Tucker Carlson is saying look we have video evidence and he's like well I want to argue the case but even I have limits you're saying is that justified yes I believe that communities have the right to defend themselves against threats to them censor their community gainst ideas they don't like no explicitly said that they want to eliminate those people from our society that's great and all but that legitimizes any kind of violence against anyone who expresses any of these ideas and I just want to stress that you might be rather protective of some of the people who express ideas like that know it because they have retinal scans they have what they call racial profiling DNA banks and it monitoring our people to try to prevent the one person from coming up with the one idea and the one idea is how we are going to exterminate white people by this guy's logic anything the alt-right were to do to that guy is totally justified even inflating you're conflating violence with ideas know raised my hand to strike you you have no right to strike you have but in order to raise your hand to strike me you have to think that you're gonna strike me and there we have the admission that they are in fact the thought police it doesn't matter what you do it matters what you think in his mind you aren't defined by your actions you aren't defined by your beliefs so if you believe the right thing and do the wrong thing that's okay if you believe the wrong thing and do the right thing that's wrong and when you when you are going out in public as a protester explicitly saying that you want to eliminate most of the people from this country I believe most of the people in this country have the right to say no that's not okay thus demonstrating that he is actually conflating words and actions because we're not talking about whether it's okay for them to object to Richard Spencer that isn't the debate the question is whether it's okay to assault Richard Spencer and he thinks it is because he can that we conflates words with violence okay but it's you absolutely the right to say it's not okay what you don't have a right is to prevent me from saying what I think even if you disagree and you definitely don't have a right to commit violence against me and you're blurring the lines there and by the way don't you work at a criminal okay you don't have the right to do that you have the right to make a counter case do you see the distinction Tucker when I walk into this building I walk I counted five security guards at the front door and two police cars outside are you going to tell me that the violence that they would enact against someone who is looking to do you or any number of the people that were here harm are you going to tell me that the violence that they enact to protect preemptively the staff that are protected also by the barricades that you have I don't even know what your time not honestly not following or you parity security don't start preemptively killing people over their thoughts they kill them over actions for example if you walk in with a drawn gun yeah you might get shot but that's not the same as having a political opinion this guy is so disingenuous it's actually infuriating and he sat there with this smarmy look on his face like he is the one in the right he's completely unjustified and he knows it but because he is so well-educated he is a slippery fish and Tucker has trouble nailing him down on any one point that will actually don't have security but there is security know the reason that you have security is because ultimately that security provides a space for non-violent civil discourse which is also a we've done there are lots of million distinctions here but you don't own the public square you don't astray the public owns the public square and which charge of the public and you're not I love that this guy just keeps shooting himself in the foot by just trying to get Gallup Tucker Carlson yes the public is not in control of the public which is why we imbue the government with the monopoly on force to make them in control of the public which is why you don't have the right to form anti far gangs to go around attacking people you disagree with that's you've really hit on it right there which is great but instead of being a defense of your point it's a defense of Tucker's point you fucking idiots we're talking about a system that has been gerrymandering people out of public representation okay and what's that got to do with Richard Spencer you don't think that Richard Spence has been gerrymandering people out of whatever it is you're concerned about do you if we're relying on the cops all three of those cops are working for the very people that you work for and not in the interest of the vast majority of society right yeah yeah because it protecting people's rights is not in the interest of the vast majority of society right so you've completely delicious mised the police the right-wing media and the government presumably when it's controlled by right-wingers because they're not operating the quote vast majority of society even though protecting people's rights is working in the interests of the vast majority of society regardless of that political bias protecting left-wing rights and right-wing rights is just as useful for both presentation by the state we don't eight years of a black president you liar do you teach students I do I guess he spoke a bit too soon on that one and do you teach them that the First Amendment does not apply to people they disagree with I teach them to think critically and that's why I'm very open about my head susan of my anarchism translation i'm very open about my communism and desire to overthrow capitalism and the government by the way I mean just I mean Richard Spence has a problem but I don't need to be punched even though I am literally as bad if not worse and then Spencer saw somebody so with someone in your class said you know what I'm a trump I'm a trump voter I'm against affirmative action I've had those and I encouraged them to research and explore and hold them to the exact same standards I'd hold any other student yeah I bet I do I had no know I know none of you I had an alright supporter actually in my class last semester I work I worked with him on his papers he started off kind of bad at citation I got him better at citation and he wrote a paper that was an APA paper I mean I am not discriminating against my students I found that lost but really amazing because it shows that he sees the value in being objective and impartial and fair and he's taking pride in that right those I know know I do I treat my students equally I don't discriminate okay why can't we have that in the society around us why not advocate for that because that would also put you in opposition to Richard Spencer and it wouldn't make you also a bad guy [Music] [Applause] you

Channel: Sargon of Akkad

Views: 951,285

Rating: 4.8896646 out of 5

Keywords: interesting, funny, comedy, hilarious, current events, politics

Id: EDEFNGCBSiE

Length: 39min 13sec (2353 seconds)

Published: Wed Sep 20 2017

Reddit Comments

[u/onewalleee]

/r/EnoughAntifaSpam