So I'm watching this video, and I'm going to make some comments as I see things.

• First off, I didn't know all the details of the GG origin story. The whole "5 guys" slut shaming thing was bad enough (and the ultimate reason that I'll never be a part of gamergate), but the whole /pol/ thing makes it look even worse.
• There's an interesting parallel between GG having a persecution complex and the people who he names as persecuted. If anything, their relationship is kind of symbiotic. Anita Sarkeesian, for example, reached her popularity specifically because she was harassed by 4chan. The story that caused her kickstarter to take off wasn't "Woman has something insightful to say" it was "Woman gets harassed by gamers." I honestly suspect that if either side backed off, the other side would eventually fade into obscurity, because it's hate and drama the draws attention.
• So, the bit about "joining in the criticism of people of color". Let's say that a person of color does or says something that's worthy of criticism. The fact that it draws the attention of racists and other horrible assholes doesn't necessarily make any criticism invalid, and it doesn't follow that the legitimate critics are on the same "side" as the racists. If someone draws negative attention of a person of color, the racists are going to come out of their disgusting little holes and say racist things. Same thing with sexists and women.
  

I am not, for the record, condoning this at all, or taking the "Angry Jack" position that, well, nothing can be done about it. I'm quite in favor of banning these toxic people from communities, and this is another place where I break with GG in a pretty big way. Even if you want to make some kind of namby pamby bullshit statement that all speech (even racist, sexist bullshit) is equally valuable, that sort of speech still detracts from the total value of a community by driving people away. And not, as 4chan would assume, the overly sensitive types who take offense at everything (in fact, if anything, it seems to attract people who love being offended), but rather the moderate types who take positions that aren't necessarily in lockstep with everyone else and really want to talk and hash out their views. Moderates see racism and hate, and they aren't offended, they just say "well, looks like this isn't the place for me", and they go elsewhere. And it doesn't take very many hateful types to drive these folks away.

Of course, the group of feminists that Anita Sarkeesian considers to be the "right kind" of feminists (as opposed to the "wrong kind", like Liana K) have some problems that are really quite similar to GG. It's plenty clear by now that they have their own little mob of harassers (like the wonderful folks who harassed Jennifer Dawe and mailed Boogie a knife with instructions to kill himself). Most of these people, like the harassers in gamergate, are either children and fuckwits who believe that their righteous cause justifies harassment, or trolls who are deliberately perpetuating this bullshit either for amusement or because they believe that when their side is harassed, it somehow proves them right, so they goad the children and fuckwits of the other side into harassing them back. I don't blame feminists (or even Anita Sarkeesian's "good" feminists) for that harassment any more than I blame GG for it, but both of these groups of people seem to believe that the harassment that comes from their side is the exception and that the harassment from the other side is the rule.

Note: If you're going to tell me I'm delusional for not realizing that your side is right, then find the people on the other side who are telling me the same thing and have an argument with them, because I'm going to ignore you.