The Jordan Peterson Thread - V2 -

[Hog-train]

Random interjection - has he explained why he thinks his anti identity politics rhetoric has gathered steam with the right and not the left, outside of specific subject matter which he is known to tackle?

He has gathered steam among alt right circles because he speaks against identity politics and transgender movement trying to change the way we talk.

But Peterson is going at it from an angle of free speech trumping transgender's being called their preferred pronoun.

The alt-right essentially preys on young white men who are often frustrated, unsuccessful, and upset with a society that has purged many of the jobs that men once performed. The alt right movement lays the blame on this upon immigration, Jews, etc. Basically anyone and everything except them. It's toxic and fosters racial resentment.

Peterson is actually an antidote to the Alt Right movement. He doesn't lay blame on other people, but rather tells young men to grow up and become men.

Jordan Peterson classifies himself as a liberal actually.

“Politically, I am a classic British liberal. Temperamentally, I am high in openness, which tilts me to the left, although I am also conscientious, which tilts me to the right. Philosophically I am an individualist, not a collectivist, of the right or the left. Metaphisically, I am an American pragmatist, who has been strongly influenced by the psychoanalytic and clinical thinking of Freud, Jung and the psychotherapists who have followed in their wake.”

 

[PrinceOfPain]

Try again.
There is a reason Barbie's neck is twice as long as a real human woman's.

 

[tonni]

Try again.
There is a reason Barbie's neck is twice as long as a real human woman's.

LOL

 

[jimmas99]

Try again.
There is a reason Barbie's neck is twice as long as a real human woman's.

Can i give it a try?

 

[sub_thug]

I guess I see it now. If you subscribed to such a misguided and surface level form of leftism its not hard to see why you''d leave it behind.

A) I was young, so yeah, I was misguided. That’s what happens with young people. There was obviously a little more to it than just morality, but that was a governing principle.

B) That same morality is used as the basis of a lot of liberal platforms. You see posters using it all the time. Also, “Love Trumps Hate,” anyone? I used to buy the bullshit, but now, I don’t. Simple as that.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

Can i give it a try?

Heh.
Point out a man who doesn't love a woman with full lips.


Though, honestly, I think there is still speculation as to whether the Mursi wear lip plates as a sign of beauty or social status.

ETA: for your morbid viewing pleasure:

 

[Devout Pessimist]

That's pretty clearly what he is now. Most of his guests are right wingers and he never ever challenges them and just gives them a soap box to vent their views. That's fine, he's entitled to do that, but its a bit disingenuous for him to then claim he's a liberal.

That is because it is taboo for leftists to appear on Dave Rubin's show because he is now seen as an Alt-Right Nazi. If someone from the left agrees to go on his show, then they risk being ostracized by leftist mobs. Like Jordan Peterson, Rubin will speak with anyone who is willing. Unfortunately, one side is far more willing to speak while the other resorts to insults and threats.

Dave Rubin treats all of his guests the same regardless of their political background. He lets his guests speak their mind.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Of course countries where big industries develop, there are positive ripple effects throughout the economy. No one is arguing that. And that is an obvious conclusion.

What you haven't shown is that deregulation and tax cuts have attributed to positive effects that "trickles down" to the normal everyday individual. That's what trickle down economics refers to and always has referred to.

Anyway who cares - that is a irrelevant tangent from this thread.

My original point is that I think Shapiro is dishonest and uses his intellect and debating skills for wrong causes. His debating style is also more of that "gotcha" style where he is just trying to win.

Peterson is a breath of fresh air in comparison and also truly believes in what he says. I don't like it when they are compared - because they are not the same, nor are they on the same side on many issues.

Why would I try and show that when I have stated the opposite since the start.

Look, you are obviously desperate for a bogeyman to fight against who will argue crony capitalism is good. You mistakenly thought that was me based on what I said and even after I reclarificed my position numerous times you are still arguing against a ghost that does not exist.

Anyway we finally seem to be getting on track. Good day sir.

 

[Islam Imamate]

A) I was young, so yeah, I was misguided. That’s what happens with young people. There was obviously a little more to it than just morality, but that was a governing principle.

B) That same morality is used as the basis of a lot of liberal platforms. You see posters using it all the time. Also, “Love Trumps Hate,” anyone? I used to buy the bullshit, but now, I don’t. Simple as that.

At the same time there are many liberals who make no reference to such things in their arguments. I haven't seen anyone seriously post "Love Trumps Hate" on this forum.

 

[Islam Imamate]

That is because it is taboo for leftists to appear on Dave Rubin's show because he is now seen as an Alt-Right Nazi. If someone from the left agrees to go on his show, then they risk being ostracized by leftist mobs. Like Jordan Peterson, Rubin will speak with anyone who is willing. Unfortunately, one side is far more willing to speak while the other resorts to insults and threats.

Dave Rubin treats all of his guests the same regardless of their political background. He lets his guests speak their mind.

Sam Seder has wanted to get on his show but Dave Rubin blocked him on Twitter instead. Like I said, when you look at his funding its easy to see which side he is on.

Jordan Peterson is not alt right if you actually listen to what he says.

However, many alt right sites and personalities have attached themselves to him - even though Peterson would not agree with a lot of their stances.

I'm not talking about Peterson. I know he's not alt-right even though he does play to the right more than the left. I like JP though. Rubin is the one I'm talking about here.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Jordan Peterson classifies himself as a liberal actually.

“Politically, I am a classic British liberal. Temperamentally, I am high in openness, which tilts me to the left, although I am also conscientious, which tilts me to the right. Philosophically I am an individualist, not a collectivist, of the right or the left. Metaphisically, I am an American pragmatist, who has been strongly influenced by the psychoanalytic and clinical thinking of Freud, Jung and the psychotherapists who have followed in their wake.”

Being a classic British liberal would put him on the right.

 

[sub_thug]

At the same time there are many liberals who make no reference to such things in their arguments. I haven't seen anyone seriously post "Love Trumps Hate" on this forum.

At the same time, I have heard a number of arguments about abolishing the death penalty due to morality, allusions to the goals of the Great Society for morality, a disdain for capitalism because of morality, a disdain for foreign policy decisions (partly in regards to supporting or opposing military intervention) due to morality, and the whole argument for "fair trade" is entirely centered around morality. Even though it's not quite as convenient as a campaign slogan, a sense of morality and the appeal of liberalism are inextricably linked.

 

[Hog-train]

Why would I try and show that when I have stated the opposite since the start.

Look, you are obviously desperate for a bogeyman to fight against who will argue crony capitalism is good. You mistakenly thought that was me based on what I said and even after I reclarificed my position numerous times you are still arguing against a ghost that does not exist.

Anyway we finally seem to be getting on track. Good day sir.

Huh? How am I looking for a boogeyman? It seems you are projecting.

I mentioned trickle down economics as an example for Ben Shapiro. You assigned a completely different (your own) definition to the term.

Why in the world would I know what your own personal definition is for a term? I'm going by the current accepted meaning for it.

It seems you didn't initially know what trickle down economics even was.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Huh? How am I looking for a boogeyman? It seems you are projecting.

I mentioned trickle down economics as an example for Ben Shapiro. You assigned a completely different (your own) definition to the term.

Why in the world would I know what your own personal definition is for a term? I'm going by the current accepted meaning for it.

It seems you didn't initially know what trickle down economics even was.

yes but I said in my very first post that I was NOT referring to the NOW used common definition that involves the Gov't taint and crony capitalism and in every single post you made prior to me you were arguing as if that was what I was talking about.

If we simply agree to disagree on the origins of the idea of 'Trickle down economics' and whether or not it is hijacked and popularized by Democrats during the Reagan years than that is ok. We can move on. Because otherwise you and I are not talking about the same thing so there is little point in us debating.

My view is that it is absolutely proven that the principle of trickle down economics devoid of gov't taint (crony capitalism) is absolutely proven to work as large investments in corporations by various investors has shown enormous benefits down stream and on an ongoing basis. there is in FACT a strong trickle down benefit across the economy.

 

[Der Eisbär]

So what you're saying is they're each special little snowflakes? Haha, okay...

Anyway, Rubin's taken, and might still be taking, money from American conservative political organizations like Learn Liberty(which has been funded by Charles Koch) so I think its fair to use the " dichotomic language of the american political landscape "...

I know Sargon says he's not a right winger but that doesn't seem to stop him from constantly throwing red meat to the right with his videos. Either way he's some fucking nerd in his bedroom, even lower than Dave Rubin since he has a lower production value despite being around longer. Too much kek, not enough Koch money.

I guess I just classify people by their actual political positions and not based on assumptions and who donates some money to them.

I don't believe it's "throwing red meat" to be constantly pushing back against and mocking the insanity that has been spreading on the far left for the last 3 years. They are attempting to normalize more and more insanity with each passing day:
-small children should have the ability to change their sex
- not using made up gender pronouns is hate and you should be fined or jailed for it
-gender, sex, sexuality, and "gender expression" are all independent of one another. Not believing that is hateful and bigoted
- not wanting the importation of hundreds of thousands or millions of people that believe homosexuals should be killed along with Islamic apostates and adulterers is xenophobic and hateful


These causes are advanced every single day on social media, on campuses, in legislatures and elsewhere. This insanity needs to be constantly pushed back against and doing so isn't "throwing red meat"

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Can i give it a try?

I bet you could fry an egg on that thing.

 

[Der Eisbär]

Random interjection - has he explained why he thinks his anti identity politics rhetoric has gathered steam with the right and not the left, outside of specific subject matter which he is known to tackle?

Because by and large, identity politics are used far more on the left than the right. The left has adopted identity politics as their standard mode of operations whereas on the right, white identity is only used on the far right (the alt right, the ethno nationalists). So in this way, Peterson's anti identity politics rhetoric is far more damaging to the left than the right.

 

[HomerThompson]

Because by and large, identity politics are used far more on the left than the right. The left has adopted identity politics as their standard mode of operations whereas on the right, white identity is only used on the far right (the alt right, the ethno nationalists). So in this way, Peterson's anti identity politics rhetoric is far more damaging to the left than the right.

 

[Der Eisbär]

-mocks the notion that the left uses identity politics more than the right
-openly supports black lives matter

You can't make this shit up people.

 

[HomerThompson]

-mocks the notion that the left uses identity politics more than the right
-openly supports black lives matter

You can't make this shit up people.

I thought you were going to college. How the fuck do your arguments keep getting worse?

Baffling.