Over the past week, activists have been targeting Tucker Carlson at trying to get advertisers to pull from his program, and it's working, his show on Fox NEWS has lost around twenty or so corporate sponsors and the Hollywood reporter notes the Commercial segments have noticeably fewer ads in them. There's an interesting overlap between what's happen. Tucker and what's happening with Sargon Patrion. In both circumstances, activists have targeted things. They've said Anne pulled them out of context to use as weapons. They won't debate your ideas. They just want to go for your money with Tucker Carlson there, claiming that he's had all immigrants that immigration in general is making our country poor. In dirtier when that's not what he was talking about and the instance of Sargon there taking his statements where he used the language of this harasser's against them and claiming he was targeting people based on their race or whatever. When I call Sargon is very similar to what Sarah Jeong did. Sarah John

I was using. The language of a harasser's and the left defended her saying that we understand why she did it, but in the instance of Sargon they don't defend him. In fact, far left activists targeted another platform. He was using to try and get him removed. Sargon was banned from Patris on at least. We believe he was bad because far right or alt, right or white nationalist, every wanna to call it targeted, patrion pretending to be concerned but racism when in fact they actually aren't because they just want to get him banned. This tactic works. It doesn't matter if it's the left or the right. The issue is that those or willing to use. This tactic will succeed in removing those they do not like. So today, let's take a look at these stories because there's more evidence to suggest the activists targeting both of these individuals don't actually care about what they seem to be fighting for me, but before we could start it, please head over to timcast dot com, slash donate! If you want to support my work, there is emo, flea donation option through Paypal, I take crypto currency. There is a

sickle address, and if you want to go to the shop, there's clothing that I've actually designed to myself, you can buy it to support my work. First, let's take a look at what happened with Tucker Carlson, the Hollywood reporter notes. He is shed major advertisers as boycott grows now this story from a couple days ago and they say never crossing tonight. The prime time Fox NEWS opinion show publicly last four more corporate advertisers on Wednesday, with Samsung Sodastream Pfizer and sand joining a list of at least sixteen other companies that have pledged to stop advertising on the program after its host said last week that immigration makes the United States dirtier the job website. Indeed, dot com decided in recent weeks. That is no plans to advertise on the show, because the site is for everyone, regardless of back on or beliefs, however Tucker Carlson, was talking about illegal immigration, an low skilled workers coming in not immigration in general. This seems to be taken out of context in a store free from CNN. They point out that Carl

It has found some supporters in unlikely places, Jack Shafer, the political media critic who said he dislikes Carlson's, show and wishes. It would find itself an immediate shallow grave in the tv show, Boneyard wrote in a column Wednesday as much as the Carlson show pains me. The calls by activists for an advertiser boycott pain me more. Advertisers tend to be timid, overreactive running from controversy and conflict and in times of perceived crisis, their timidity spreads to publishers, which is bad for journal Schaefer wrote it's easy to imagine today's boycotts turning into tomorrow's blacklist. So how does this relate to the Sargon issue? Well, there's a paste been going around. In fact, someone said to me that claims that what Sargon does can never be acceptable that it's racism and bigotry at cetera but

the people who produce less are accused of being all right. I mean most people, even the daily beast, acknowledged Sargon was debating the extreme right, as they call out that's a fair statement, because I don't know who these people are, but at least the common narrative around? Is that sorry? I was arguing with people he perceived as racists, so he used the language they use against them. Much like Sarah Junket, if it's true that they produce this pays for in accusing Sargon of being racist and fighting against it. Well then, it's fair to say they don't actually care of out what Sargon does a we, because they themselves don't fear or hate racism and bigotry they're, just trying to get in the platform and something similar can be said for what's happening with Tucker Carlson. Do they really care about who Tucker's, probably not, as evidenced by a new thread by Glenn Greenwald HEAT? We did this exchange with Nate Silver, five hundred and thirty, eight after he denounced pressuring Carlsons advertisers highlighting a fascinating dynamic.

If you oppose censorship, people falsely accuse you of not understanding marginalization, even though that's often the reason for opposing censorship. He highlights these tweets one from Nate Silver, defending Jack Shafer, saying Jack is right. The logical endpoint of deeming advertisers to have endorsed the political messages of the shows they run ads on is that only milquetoast. Both sides, ISM with a pro corporate band, will be advertising supported, any political content is at support at all sleeping giants responded. This is one of the organization's targeting talkers show you are speaking as a publisher, not a citizen. If you're a person of color or a member of the Lgbtq Community or an immigrant, these companies are literally footing the bill for you to be vilified every week, bigotry should not be deemed political. That's a big part of the issue in response over pointed out that he himself is gay. He said I'm just old enough to remember when conservative groups urged a boycott

advertisers and networks who are seen as promoting LGBT Q or other non traditional lifestyles that strongly influences my views on the subject. Greenwald noted, like all powers, censorship will typically be used against marginalized groups, not to protect them. That's what it means to be marginalized, that powerful factions act against you. The experience of being in a marginalized group should make one fear not support censorship in response to that threat. Shannon wants to eat it. Why are three white men the authorities on boycotts and racism. Glenn Greenwald responded. This highlights how some dams, wheeled identity, politics, so manipulative Lee selectively and offensively LGBT. And use our either marginalize minority to face bigotry and racism or just white guys who have no right to speak. It shifts based on the petty needs of the moment, and that's why this story, I feel, is important because it speaks to me

personally for those that watch my videos. You know that very often I point out that I mixed race and a lot of people make a joke about the making it mean about it, but there's a reason that I do. It is because I kind of have to when I get packed for not understanding being. Like being part of a marginalized group, it's just not true, and I feel like early on years ago. I thought this was actually something that need to be pointed out and I can buy Wall Street people either. I think I was a white male or just not know what it was, and thus I face different forms of discrimination from this different people. Sometimes people would immediately just re with whatever I said when they found out that I was mixed or they would immediately disagree with what I've, whatever I said or tell I can't speak because they assume I'm just a white male and that's what I see with what going green is tweeting about that they will accused you of being a minority or not a minority. Depending on what you agree with. I called this at one point, I think I think I call it Schrodinger's person of color, but someone point

but better once the Heisenberg uncertainty person of color, if you're not familiar the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, I'm not an expert on this, but it's basically that we can't measure at what point on electron becomes a wave or a particle. Basically, and as soon as you try to look at it, it changes from one position to another. I'm probably destroy the understanding what it says, but the point try to make as if I agree with these people. If I say you know what Tucker should be banned, they'll say we as a marginalized person understands because it's mixed race, if I say no, actually, I think it's wrong to boycott people. They will say well you're, a white male and that's exactly what they're doing to Nate Silver, who it's my understanding. He is a gay jewish man because he defended talker. They are saying you can't possibly understand, and then he has to come out and say actually he is gay as if that will absolve him of his wrong thing. Unfortunately, it will not. It won't save it. The activists don't care if you're marginalized on

this is a tactic against their perceived enemy tribe. Today, someone tweeted, I was putting out the Sargon situation and someone to to me that they believe I held conservative views. They said oh, but bakeries shouldn't have to bake a cake for somebody but a tragedy. I support Sargon ha how those conservatives believe doing for you now and I was like what you guys My videos, you know that actually side foot somewhat in favor of the gay couple in that in that argument, Lucky lost because their technical reasons I'll talk about the gay wedding cake, bigger issue, it's complicated and I recognize the once, but my opinion is typically on the liberal side. I'm I typically I mean pretty much always defend liberal positions, but these people don't care about politics. It's about combating the the tribe so because I'm willing to speak up in defense of Tucker's, show and say you shouldn't boycott him simply because you disagree with them challenge his idea and prove him wrong. They say you must be conservative. Therefore, you must believe all of these things, but one thing

clear with what happened with Sargon activists. Don't actually care what he believes. Why? What is actually more evidence? We know at least it's believed that so Morgan was debating against people on the extreme right that the daily beast cause it again. I don't know how you define these people, but it is widely perceived, even among page round that Sargon was debating racists. Why, then, would patris on defense those racists? They knew what Sargon was doing interesting, how this works? Isn't it it's because principles be damned they just want to target someone on the other side and now we can see something else really interesting in the sock on the buckle, the woman who was hired. Who was who talk to me and I made the statements she was hired recent. She is now citing what happened at Vidcon with saga card. As is more evidence, he should have been banned from the platform once again, even though

the time the story was, that Sargon didn't do anything wrong and page round investigated the situation and said his check. His channel is fine. A woman who was recently hired is going back to use that to justify having him removed. Okay, so let's say that won't once again, tried admitted Sargon did not break the rules at Vidcon, but this woman doesn't care about the rules. She doesn't care. What is written down all that matters is she takes action against an enemy of the tribe or or perhaps she's just scared in acting at the behest of racists, but that also paints. Another why would patrion defend the racist in this circumstance? It's plain and simple: Sargon was arguing against Identitarians, the woman and page are also identitarian. They all lined politically and want to defend those values against anyone who is not part of their spectrum. I guess is real weird isn't it, how patron would actually defend the racists. It shows you that what they claim

to be fighting for is not real they're, not actually fighting for these things. That's why, when you see a black conservative, they insult them and call them white supremacists. That's why progressive activists to push these white supremacy this despite a promising narrative, tends to be upper class white people because they will claim to be fighting for a cause and they are not actually fighting for right. 'cause, it's just a game. You are the enemy tribe. They will ascribe whatever belief they want to you to smear you and that's something that I've been experiencing now. People are making up fake quotes about me. Take. In quotes, I've taken from new stories and mashing them together and then screen shot NG it. So you can't actually watch the video to prove it wrong and sharing it among other activists to try and smear him. They don't actually care that I'm depressed mixed race, Social Liberal, that is pro choice and believes many of the same policies they do. They don't care that I would actually most likely vote

for a social liberal politician over a conservative politician. They don't care it's not about politics. It is about try, it is about them, saying my side is going to win by any means necessary. Long story short. I think we can clearly see here by patrion defending racists over Sargon, how Bing Giants is claiming that a gay jewish man, Nate Silver, doesn't understand marginalization that they don't actually fight for what they claim to fight for they. Don't it's a lie: it is just tribalism, but nothing in the comments below will keep the conversation going you follow me on Twitter at TIM, cast, stay tuned new videos every day at four hundred pm. Eleven more videos on my second channel today at six hundred pm thanks for hanging out- and I will see you all know-