5 ms·

They're talking specifically about Jordan Peterson, and he sees himself as a high priest who is a literal embodiment of Jesus Christ, rising to the top of the u

by smhost 8y ago

They're talking specifically about Jordan Peterson, and he sees himself as a high priest who is a literal embodiment of Jesus Christ, rising to the top of the universal dominance hierarchy. He is signaling to his low status followers that he would redistribute sex if he were in power. If you think I'm making this up or being hyperbolic, watch his 100s of hours worth of lectures on YouTube. Even if you think this is utterly ridiculous, there are millions of people who will follow this man to their deaths.

jrs95 8y ago
Meanwhile 4chan & company has taken to calling him “Juden Peterstein”...so it seems his appeal is primarily limited to the kinda-sorta-far-right. Personally, seeing the guy talk makes me feel sleepy.
- dahdum 8y ago
  Peterson is fervently pro free speech and against politically correct culture, so unsurprising 4chan is smitten. He’s not right wing himself though, he’s a classical liberal with libertarian leanings. I think of him more like Bill Maher without the comedy.
  - enimodas 8y ago
    You misunderstand, 4chan doesn't like him. Maybe also see https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-petersons-strongest-supporter-now-i-think-hes-dangerous.html https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-pete... for how his pro free speech is only on a case by case basis.
    - dahdum 8y ago
      I read that and don’t see the inconsistency with regards to free speech. If he did call for budget reductions on universities that do not protect it, that’s logically consistent with supporting free speech even if the budget reduction caused less (in his view) non-free speech. As an American I can’t wrap my head around the Canadian acceptance of criminal penalties to compel speech, based on the evolving views of an extrajudicial tribunal. It’s terrifying to have that power in the hands of the far right or far left.
  - jrs95 8y ago
    Interesting. I fit more the mold you’re describing myself, maybe I shouldn’t be so quick to dismiss him.
    - dahdum 8y ago
      You’ll disagree with him, I certainly do, but I wouldn’t dismiss him. I think he’s too utilitarian on family and marriage, but his position is intellectually defensible. For example, he’s pro gay marriage but believes research saying children have better outcomes with exposure to both sides of the (traditionally gender-based) parental roles. He doesn’t claim to know a solution to the latter, or even that one needs to be be found. Only that it should be researched and discussed. It’s not hard to take that kind of view and spin it to something abhorrent if you take away the nuance and context.
- Reedx 8y ago
  > so it seems his appeal is primarily limited to the kinda-sorta-far-right. That's actually not the case (just see what kind of questions he gets from his actual audiences to see for yourself). Though on a surface level some of the alt-right likes him because he pisses off SJWs. But they're mistaken to think he's any kind of ally. He's spent much of his career opposing their views and sees both the alt-right and extreme left as big problems. The idea that he's alt-right is really nonsense. He taught for decades at Harvard and the University of Toronto. As he says himself, you can go and look through his hundreds of hours of lectures and try to find where he's promoted anything alt-right. It's quite the opposite. It's largely a false narrative driven by the extreme left, who are trying to dismiss and ruin him because he's critical of what they're doing. This also happened with the progressive professor Bret Weinstein - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM They tried/are trying to destroy him. It's a real problem.
  - smhost 8y ago
    It's only recently that Peterson has formally denounced the alt-right. Before, he was on JRE saying things like "as far as I can tell, Kekistan is a defense of comedy," when it was obvious to everyone else that it was blatant nazi propaganda. Only when the alt-right became emboldened enough to attend his lectures and start asking pretty direct questions about the Jewish question, globalist conspiracy, etc. that he finally saw what his audience was becoming and sorted himself out. Most people on the left don't think that JBP is a nazi, or alt-right, or whatever is the inverse of the "postmodern neomarxist" boogeyman. People on the left are critical of JBP because of his blatant misreadings of Marx, Deleuze, Foucault, his confusion about Bill C-16, etc. His overly broad equivocation of postmodern critiques of power and Marxian class theory is the basis of his incredibly nasty attacks on these so-called "postmodern neomarxist feminists" yet he has published no real thesis. He can't even be said to be critical of leftist ideologies because he never puts forward any real arguments, and all he does is signal that the left are evil. And I'm saying all of this as a leftist who has supported Bret Weinstein from the beginning. I accept the postmodern feminist criticism of identity politics and agree that SJWs and their constant search for categories is harmful to the left. I would love for Peterson to put forward an actual, rigorous criticism of leftist ideology, but frankly he doesn't seem to have one.

by smhost 8y ago

jrs95 8y ago

Meanwhile 4chan & company has taken to calling him “Juden Peterstein”...so it seems his appeal is primarily limited to the kinda-sorta-far-right. Personally, seeing the guy talk makes me feel sleepy.

dahdum 8y ago
Peterson is fervently pro free speech and against politically correct culture, so unsurprising 4chan is smitten. He’s not right wing himself though, he’s a classical liberal with libertarian leanings. I think of him more like Bill Maher without the comedy.
- enimodas 8y ago
  You misunderstand, 4chan doesn't like him. Maybe also see https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-petersons-strongest-supporter-now-i-think-hes-dangerous.html https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-pete... for how his pro free speech is only on a case by case basis.
  - dahdum 8y ago
    I read that and don’t see the inconsistency with regards to free speech. If he did call for budget reductions on universities that do not protect it, that’s logically consistent with supporting free speech even if the budget reduction caused less (in his view) non-free speech. As an American I can’t wrap my head around the Canadian acceptance of criminal penalties to compel speech, based on the evolving views of an extrajudicial tribunal. It’s terrifying to have that power in the hands of the far right or far left.
- jrs95 8y ago
  Interesting. I fit more the mold you’re describing myself, maybe I shouldn’t be so quick to dismiss him.
  - dahdum 8y ago
    You’ll disagree with him, I certainly do, but I wouldn’t dismiss him. I think he’s too utilitarian on family and marriage, but his position is intellectually defensible. For example, he’s pro gay marriage but believes research saying children have better outcomes with exposure to both sides of the (traditionally gender-based) parental roles. He doesn’t claim to know a solution to the latter, or even that one needs to be be found. Only that it should be researched and discussed. It’s not hard to take that kind of view and spin it to something abhorrent if you take away the nuance and context.
Reedx 8y ago
> so it seems his appeal is primarily limited to the kinda-sorta-far-right. That's actually not the case (just see what kind of questions he gets from his actual audiences to see for yourself). Though on a surface level some of the alt-right likes him because he pisses off SJWs. But they're mistaken to think he's any kind of ally. He's spent much of his career opposing their views and sees both the alt-right and extreme left as big problems. The idea that he's alt-right is really nonsense. He taught for decades at Harvard and the University of Toronto. As he says himself, you can go and look through his hundreds of hours of lectures and try to find where he's promoted anything alt-right. It's quite the opposite. It's largely a false narrative driven by the extreme left, who are trying to dismiss and ruin him because he's critical of what they're doing. This also happened with the progressive professor Bret Weinstein - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM They tried/are trying to destroy him. It's a real problem.
- smhost 8y ago
  It's only recently that Peterson has formally denounced the alt-right. Before, he was on JRE saying things like "as far as I can tell, Kekistan is a defense of comedy," when it was obvious to everyone else that it was blatant nazi propaganda. Only when the alt-right became emboldened enough to attend his lectures and start asking pretty direct questions about the Jewish question, globalist conspiracy, etc. that he finally saw what his audience was becoming and sorted himself out. Most people on the left don't think that JBP is a nazi, or alt-right, or whatever is the inverse of the "postmodern neomarxist" boogeyman. People on the left are critical of JBP because of his blatant misreadings of Marx, Deleuze, Foucault, his confusion about Bill C-16, etc. His overly broad equivocation of postmodern critiques of power and Marxian class theory is the basis of his incredibly nasty attacks on these so-called "postmodern neomarxist feminists" yet he has published no real thesis. He can't even be said to be critical of leftist ideologies because he never puts forward any real arguments, and all he does is signal that the left are evil. And I'm saying all of this as a leftist who has supported Bret Weinstein from the beginning. I accept the postmodern feminist criticism of identity politics and agree that SJWs and their constant search for categories is harmful to the left. I would love for Peterson to put forward an actual, rigorous criticism of leftist ideology, but frankly he doesn't seem to have one.