Jordan Peterson interview on C4

ancapailldorcha

Corb_lund wrote: »

I don't get this left/right business.

I would say that I'm fairly left wing on lots of economic issues, I believe people have the right to healthcare, privacy, right to life etc, paid for with a reasonable taxation system. I think business's that operate across borders are clearly not cognisant of the problems they create in unfair tax streams....or are wilfully ignoring them..

And yet I would be very much against open borders, fair taxation and a sustainable eco/social system is only workable with a strong national identity and people buying in to make everyone's life better.

Am I left wing or right wing?

Centre-left by my reckoning.

CrankyHaus

Corb_lund wrote: »

I don't get this left/right business.

I would say that I'm fairly left wing on lots of economic issues, I believe people have the right to healthcare, privacy, right to life etc, paid for with a reasonable taxation system. I think business's that operate across borders are clearly not cognisant of the problems they create in unfair tax streams....or are wilfully ignoring them..

And yet I would be very much against open borders, fair taxation and a sustainable eco/social system is only workable with a strong national identity and people buying in to make everyone's life better.

Am I left wing or right wing?

You're old left.

In particular the second part of your views would make you an ethno-nationalist xenophobic racist in the eyes of the new left.


I don't like conspiracy theories but I am quite suspicious of how this new left came to prominence in recent decades. It has managed to neuter left-wing responses to soaring inequality, financialization, rent-seeking and "austerity". Instead the new left launches divisive witch-hunts against heretics who disagree about how many dozen genders there might be or advocate for border controls. It would be difficult to plan such an advantageous outcome for the big-business right.



I would not be surprised to find that a large amount of the academic, media and political support for this new left receives funding from "philanthropic" endowments from corporate sources and the very rich.

Akrasia

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

I would say almost all HR departments subscribe to the agenda of the left now, which deeply influences the intellectual makeup of large corporations over time. From what I have gathered, it is lower level employees grouping together that are responsible for the current climate; it seems people like Zuckerberg are actually quite reluctant about all this because of The Implication that people as smart and powerful as him must be aware of. i.e. putting his platform in jeapordy if it is perceived to be taking too much editorial control.

Huh? Workers grouping together is a thing called unions, and if you mention the word union in the presence of a HR person you'll be out on your ear or marked as a trouble maker.

Left wing economics is inextricably linked to unions, workers representation and the last few decades has seen a constant attack on the right to organise via unions across the developed world.

Call Me Jimmy

CrankyHaus wrote: »

You're old left.

In particular the second part of your views would make you an ethno-nationalist xenophobic racist in the eyes of the new left.


I don't like conspiracy theories but I am quite suspicious of how this new left came to prominence in recent decades. It has managed to neuter left-wing responses to soaring inequality, financialization, rent-seeking and "austerity". Instead the new left launches divisive witch-hunts against heretics who disagree about how many dozen genders there might be or advocate for border controls. It would be difficult to plan such an advantageous outcome for the big-business right.



I would not be surprised to find that a large amount of the academic, media and political support for this new left receives funding from "philanthropic" endowments from corporate sources and the very rich.

It seems very much pro-corporate or, more accurately, unprincipled. With the spates of bannings and denial of service you won't be able to get any moral or philosophical arguments other than 'private companies, money talks, end of discussion'.

Sometimes I even feel right wing even though I'd describe myself almost exactly as the post above. Although I do find it hard to really pin down because I like the idea of everyone having free health care for example but I've given more thought to the downsides.

At a younger age I would just take some ideal and assume that anyone opposing it is doing so out of some dark motive. Same for multiculturism. What surprised me over the years was that excluding the extremes of complete idiots at either end of the spectrum, right-leaning people seemed to at least argue their points with more civility, logic and less casting of aspersions (obviously #NotAll).

One guy I used to think was just a troll, SnakePlissan, who I really thought 'I don't want to be on the same side of an argument as this guy'. But I noticed a lot of his posts he'd link to stats, articles etc. and people opposing him would just call him names and provide very little in the way of actual retort, even just making up things out of thin air.

Overall I'm lefty socially, very centre-right economically, but I'm also really ignorant on a lot of stuff so I wouldn't like to nail myself to any flags. The people I'm most wary of are those who's opinion lines up 100% across vastly different topics with a certain 'side'. That's what made me have time for Ben Shapiro, even though he is very conservative he goes against the grain enough to make him worth listening to. Whether I agree or disagree he lays out arguments clearly and with precision. Would consider Kyle Kulinsky and maybe David Pakman similar on the other side of the Youtube arena.

One thing Jordan Peterson emphasises which I have always believed is that we need both outlooks on the world and we are at our best when we oscillate safely between them. There's going to be repeated pulls from the left and to the right over time and it seems society is at the best somewhere in the middle. But if there is a sudden black hole on the 'left' like in the recent past it may require a stronger counter-force from the 'right', as we see in Italy, Hungary. Hopefully it will normalise but that's what happens when we ignore grievances for too long.

TL;DR Centrism - It's Not Sexy But You Need It.

Call Me Jimmy

Akrasia wrote: »

Huh? Workers grouping together is a thing called unions, and if you mention the word union in the presence of a HR person you'll be out on your ear or marked as a trouble maker.

Left wing economics is inextricably linked to unions, workers representation and the last few decades has seen a constant attack on the right to organise via unions across the developed world.

No I wasn't talking about unions or workers grouping together formally for bargaining power. Was pointing to the increasing power of workers in tech companies who are responsible for algorithms and monitoring of these vast networks, who are politically homogeneous for the most part.

Akrasia

Ok, i completely misinterpreted you so.

markodaly

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

They have the best benefits but expect you to give your life to them.

I know people that worked in Google and Facebook and all that nice "Cool" stuff is nice in the beginning, but the trade off is you work 12-14 hour days.

And all the innovative work is taking place in the US anyway.

What we have is predominantly back-office support.

12-14 hour days, really? Do you have any proof of that claim that tech companies expect these kinds of hours, or are people making $hite up again?
My nephew works for Linkedin and he says the work day is always about an 8 hour day.

markodaly

Wibbs wrote: »

And this isn't America, it's Ireland. Your notion of left/right seems to be almost entirely based on American perceptions and definitions.

Actuallu, this is the internet but anyway, I guss if I asked you for evidence to show high turnover of staff say in Google, you will give me something from an American context. Hypocrite much?

Feck all to do with strikes or extremes like that. As UG notes - and I've heard it from a few horse's mouths who worked for various US tech companies here and abroad - they're very much an all in there's a good cubicle dweller environment, though they did note they were better to work for here than in the US. Pesky workers rights and all that. It's no coincidence that outfits like Google have one of the highest turnover of staff in big businesses. If they and others were the "best companies to work for" one would think they'd have the highest worker retention rates. But they don't

Yes, workers rights. The tech companies in the US will go far beyond the standard perks, leave entitlements and other benefits like medical insurance than most other companies.

The retention issues are to do with the nature of the industry and the demographic working within them.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2013/07/28/turnover_rates_by_company_how_amazon_google_and_others_stack_up.html

According to the report — titled "Companies with the Most & Least Loyal Employees" — companies with the highest turnover are mostly in retail and information technology industries. For retail, Bardaro attributes low retention rates to the industry's mostly younger staff. "Gen Y essentially doesn't have the same feelings toward employers like their parents did," she said. "They saw what happened to their parents during The Recession. They saw them lose their pensions and lose their jobs."

Manufacturing companies tend to have workers that stay the longest. Bardaro said this has a lot to do with an older age group typically working in these industries.

Also, I do note that you ignored my comment about Alex Jones. I guess that he must be worse than Satan or your point about tech companies selling their granny for a dollar is horse manure.

Wibbs

markodaly wrote: »

12-14 hour days, really? Do you have any proof of that claim that tech companies expect these kinds of hours, or are people making $hite up again?
My nephew works for Linkedin and he says the work day is always about an 8 hour day.

As I pointed out MO'D the most recent tech companies consistently have the highest turnover of staff of the multinational corporations. Hardly seems like the employee's paradise you seem to think. Your nephew might be happy out in his job tab Linkedin and fair enough, but I'd be willing to bet he's in Ireland or within the EU. Those worker's rights and safeguards again(though many Amazon workers even in those territories are worked like galley slaves). And that's before we get to tech companies in places like Asia and elsewhere, where worker's rights are little more than a pipe dream. Forget the "Left/Right" stuff as that varies throughout the world, always follow the money and see how the money operates and that's far more consistent in the real world.

Skylinehead

markodaly wrote: »

12-14 hour days, really? Do you have any proof of that claim that tech companies expect these kinds of hours, or are people making $hite up again?
My nephew works for Linkedin and he says the work day is always about an 8 hour day.

Certainly the case for Google. What are you looking for in terms of proof, official documents saying they do it? Come on.

Wibbs

markodaly wrote: »

Actuallu, this is the internet but anyway,

You do realise this is the internet in Ireland? Just because some fcukwit in Arsefeckistan posts one thing doesn't mean it makes sense in Ireland.

I guss if I asked you for evidence to show high turnover of staff say in Google, you will give me something from an American context. Hypocrite much?

Nope. Even if I did, it would show in the "land of the free", where workers expect far less rights such outfits are still not the "best to work for" that you seem to think. Now if some still want to suck on the wizened teat of the American Dream™ good luck to them, but jaysus a it of perspective is required, especially form those not indoctrinated into it from birth.

Yes, workers rights. The tech companies in the US will go far beyond the standard perks, leave entitlements and other benefits like medical insurance than most other companies.

Ahh sure aren't they great altogether. Maybe you should read up on the perks, benefits and medical insurance that evolved cultures deem a basic right.

The retention issues are to do with the nature of the industry and the demographic working within them.

So the same demographic working in other industries that don't show the huge turnover is out of the picture? Or do you think that Generation [insert stupid letter/descriptor here] solely work in tech?

Also, I do note that you ignored my comment about Alex Jones. I guess that he must be worse than Satan or your point about tech companies selling their granny for a dollar is horse manure.

Jesus. Talk about nator a lack of perception and focus. Alex Jones got canned because of a surface display of being "right on". His name came up and one canned him, then others jumped on in a #metoo knee jerk band wagon. That ballsology is all too common these days. And yes I purposely included a huge chunk of the #metoo bandwagoners and attention seekers. You can still find his kind of views and many more extreme ones on every single platform he was banned from. Why did they not get excised? Again follow the money and the the bottom line. They reckoned their audience/revenue stream would react well to a figurehead like him being removed. More of a return than not banning him. Literally an example of actual corporate "virtue signalling" in play.

Oh and I say this as one of the more "right wing" people on here, who for example thinks multiculturalism is a failed experiment and should be rethought and quickly. Some think me somewhere to the right of a nazi.

Ulysses Gaze

markodaly wrote: »

12-14 hour days, really? Do you have any proof of that claim that tech companies expect these kinds of hours, or are people making $hite up again?
My nephew works for Linkedin and he says the work day is always about an 8 hour day.

Yes. People I know who worked in Google (notorious for it) and Facebook.

pumpkin4life

markodaly wrote: »

12-14 hour days, really? Do you have any proof of that claim that tech companies expect these kinds of hours, or are people making $hite up again?
My nephew works for Linkedin and he says the work day is always about an 8 hour day.

Yes. The typical turnover for software engineers in Facebook/Google is about one to two years, before people move on. And the pay isn't as great as you would think either for Ireland. 50 grand for a nine month contract through CPL or Crystal Equation, for a software engineer with a small bit of experience. Like not bad at all, but not rolling in the money
either.

Most people just use it to get it on their C.V, and then everyone think's your a genius, so getting jobs elsewhere becomes a lot easier.

The free shìt is a form of forced loyalty. People think it's great, but it's a actually a form of psychological manipulation because you feel obliged to work longer hours.

markodaly

Nixonbot wrote: »

Certainly the case for Google. What are you looking for in terms of proof, official documents saying they do it? Come on.

More than mere conjecture or 'the dogs on the streets know it' type guff.

Skylinehead

markodaly wrote: »

More than mere conjecture or 'the dogs on the streets know it' type guff.

So I ask again, what do you want? I didn't ask what you didn't want.

markodaly

Wibbs wrote: »

You do realise this is the internet in Ireland? Just because some fcukwit in Arsefeckistan posts one thing doesn't mean it makes sense in Ireland. Nope.

Maybe I have to remake this point, again, but Silicon Valley is in Northern California, in the US of A.... where we are posting in a thread about a Canadian Professor whos claim to fame was standing up for what he believed was freedom of speech, which is a big hot topic in, the US of A, among other places.

So, yea, we can't just dismiss that side of the argument because its inconvenient for some.

Even if I did, it would show in the "land of the free", where workers expect far less rights such outfits are still not the "best to work for" that you seem to think.

So, where are these other magical places that are better?

https://www.glassdoor.com/Award/Best-Places-to-Work-LST_KQ0,19.htm

Look at the top 100 companies to work for in the US, all the top tech firms place highly, with 5 out of the top 10 being tech companies and if you broke down the top 100 by sector, tech would win hands down.

But sure, what are facts when people can just spout an unfounded opinion with nothing but a fancy ™ to back it up?

Ahh sure aren't they great altogether. Maybe you should read up on the perks, benefits and medical insurance that evolved cultures deem a basic right.

That is one way of looking at it, another way of looking at it is that evolved cultures won't tax you at 52% of your wage when you earn over €32,000 a year.
How is the health service working out for the 1,000,000 on waiting lists. Oh right, nevermind! There is a big argument there, that we can have all day long about what 'system is best' but glasshouses and stones come to mind.

So the same demographic working in other industries that don't show the huge turnover is out of the picture? Or do you think that Generation [insert stupid letter/descriptor here] solely work in tech?

Older demographic values job security. I thought it would be obvous, but alas.

Jesus. Talk about nator a lack of perception and focus. Alex Jones got canned because of a surface display of being "right on". His name came up and one canned him, then others jumped on in a #metoo knee jerk band wagon. That ballsology is all too common these days. And yes I purposely included a huge chunk of the #metoo bandwagoners and attention seekers. You can still find his kind of views and many more extreme ones on every single platform he was banned from. Why did they not get excised? Again follow the money and the the bottom line. They reckoned their audience/revenue stream would react well to a figurehead like him being removed. More of a return than not banning him. Literally an example of actual corporate "virtue signalling" in play.

Hold on a second, you are saying that Silicon Valley banned Alex Jones from their platforms because it would go down well politically with the 'right on' crowd but then you deny that Silicon Valley are anyway left-leaning.

ROFL, sometimes Wibbs when you are right, you are right, but when you are wrong you are sooooo wrong.

markodaly

Nixonbot wrote: »

So I ask again, what do you want? I didn't ask what you didn't want.

More than mere conjecture.

Skylinehead

markodaly wrote: »

More than mere conjecture.

I don't know what I can give you other than anecdotes and what colleagues have told me (I am in the industry), considering Google aren't likely to publish it. So we're at a bit of an impasse there.

markodaly

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Yes. The typical turnover for software engineers in Facebook/Google is about one to two years, before people move on.

The main reason for that is that they can get more money elsewhere once they put 'Facebook' or 'Google' on their CV. Money talks, bull**** walks. The free food and all this OK for a while but if you can contract out your services for €600-€800 a day instead, well yea bringing your own sandwich to work is hardly going to be a drawback.

And the pay isn't as great as you would think either for Ireland. 50 grand for a nine month contract through CPL or Crystal Equation, for a software engineer with a small bit of experience. Like not bad at all, but not rolling in the money
either.

So, that would equate to €67,000 a year, for a Software Developer who only has a small bit of experience, as in maybe 1-2 years of experience behind them?
Yeap, peanuts!

How much would an experienced software developer get, say working in Oracle, or Java or SAP or C# with 10-15 years of development experience get? Close to 100k easy in Dublin, if they contracted, more again up to €150k easy.

I can see why they hate it and want to go work in a Pennys instead. :rolleyes:

Most people just use it to get it on their C.V, and then everyone think's your a genius, so getting jobs elsewhere becomes a lot easier.

Like I said above. Money talks.

The free shìt is a form of forced loyalty. People think it's great, but it's a actually a form of psychological manipulation because you feel obliged to work longer hours.

For some people maybe. For others it's a nice perk. You can look at it either way. No workplace is perfect, I have yet to find one as I imagine anyone has, but it is what it is and surveys like glassdoor constantly has these tech companies like Google and Facebook at or near the top of the tree.

Do you want to work for the Civil Service or something instead, a god awful soul destroying place?

markodaly

Nixonbot wrote: »

I don't know what I can give you other than anecdotes and what colleagues have told me (I am in the industry), considering Google aren't likely to publish it. So we're at a bit of an impasse there.

No impasse, here is some evidence.

https://www.glassdoor.com/press/recommended-irish-tech-employers-revealed/

I await yours.

B0jangles

I worked in the Dublin office of a US company tech company which had all the jazzy perks - (almost) free gourmet lunches, free snacks everywhere, free gym etc.,.

As a staff member, you paid well over the odds for all the 'free' stuff by being expected to work overtime every day*, to take short or no lunch-breaks - everyone ate at their desks, to be available to do unpaid on-call duty at Christmas, to work weekends sometimes. If you add up all the unpaid extra time staff are pretty much required to put in, those freebies work out to be an extremely good deal for company owners.



*I left on time once and got dirty looks from multiple senior managers on my way out of the building.

20Cent

Silicon Valley companies were given big fines a few years ago for collaborating with each other to fix wage levels and making anti poaching deals.

http://fortune.com/2015/09/03/koh-anti-poach-order/


Far from left wing or right wing more corporatist.

kubjones

20Cent wrote: »

Silicon Valley companies were given big fines a few years ago for collaborating with each other to fix wage levels and making anti poaching deals.

http://fortune.com/2015/09/03/koh-anti-poach-order/


Far from left wing or right wing more corporatist.

Company policy =/= Social Leanings.

In practice they have to be Right leaning or their company would go belly-up.

In relation to the environment that they are cultivating within their company and as a result, throughout their platforms are overwhelmingly Left-leaning.

I'm not entirely sure how anyone could deny this.

Skylinehead

markodaly wrote: »

No impasse, here is some evidence.

https://www.glassdoor.com/press/recommended-irish-tech-employers-revealed/

I await yours.

Glassdoor....eh. Ok. It's not exactly the most reliable or trustworthy thing out there.

If you await my evidence you've not been reading my posts. Waste of time, this is well, well known in the software industry. I'm out.

AllForIt

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

They have the best benefits but expect you to give your life to them.

I know people that worked in Google and Facebook and all that nice "Cool" stuff is nice in the beginning, but the trade off is you work 12-14 hour days.

And all the innovative work is taking place in the US anyway.

What we have is predominantly back-office support.

When I was studying Computer Science in UCD we were taken on a grand tour of Google HQ some years back.

I took an immediate dislike to the chap who showed us around. He was decidedly dour and serious. I had understood this was to be fun day out. We were first taken to the recreational areas. First to the pool table, where no one was to seen. Secondly the gym where I said out loud feeling a bit irreverent, 'doesn't look like anyone uses it' in earshot of the host. It didn't actually - spick and span...and empty.

We did a hurried walk through an open plan office area and then to a very large high ceilinged loungy area with trendy sofas and bean bags which I had heard of beforehand that is used as a working area and unique to Google. There was one solitary person with a laptop working away in the corner where everyone else was working at their desk in the open plan office - just like you'd expect to find in any company. Cynical me felt that person was planted for while we were there.

So my point is I didn't buy the whole image they were trying to create. I have heard a millions times ppl say Google are 'supposed' to be a great company to work for but I've never heard anyone say from first hand experience that they actually are.

I just got the impression that when it comes to working in big tech firms, specifically working in the tech development side, that students are being brainwashed to thinking that working for them is a reward in itself, in lieu of a higher salary but long hours and devotion are expected.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Nixonbot wrote: »

Certainly the case for Google. What are you looking for in terms of proof, official documents saying they do it? Come on.

I take the dart at GCD a few tunes a week. A fair chunk of them leave at 6.

Franz Von Peppercorn

AllForIt wrote: »

When I was studying Computer Science in UCD we were taken on a grand tour of Google HQ some years back.

I took an immediate dislike to the chap who showed us around. He was decidedly dour and serious. I had understood this was to be fun day out. We were first taken to the recreational areas. First to the pool table, where no one was to seen. Secondly the gym where I said out loud feeling a bit irreverent, 'doesn't look like anyone uses it' in earshot of the host. It didn't actually - spick and span...and empty.

We did a hurried walk through an open plan office area and then to a very large high ceilinged loungy area with trendy sofas and bean bags which I had heard of beforehand that is used as a working area and unique to Google. There was one solitary person with a laptop working away in the corner where everyone else was working at their desk in the open plan office - just like you'd expect to find in any company. Cynical me felt that person was planted for while we were there.

So my point is I didn't buy the whole image they were trying to create. I have heard a millions times ppl say Google are 'supposed' to be a great company to work for but I've never heard anyone say from first hand experience that they actually are.

I just got the impression that when it comes to working in big tech firms, specifically working in the tech development side, that students are being brainwashed to thinking that working for them is a reward in itself, in lieu of a higher salary but long hours and devotion are expected.

Yes. Most of it is nonsense. The lounge area can sometimes be used.

In the US, if not here, though students can continue their student lifestyle in these “campuses”. Stay around until 10 pm. Play some fuzz ball, go to the gym, but also work.

Many of them live close by too. Here as well. Goggle have bought the apartments at bolands mill in its entirety. So working until 7 means getting home at 7:05. Which is before the average stiff living in Kildare.

Wibbs

markodaly wrote: »

Maybe I have to remake this point, again, but Silicon Valley is in Northern California, in the US of A.... where we are posting in a thread about a Canadian Professor whos claim to fame was standing up for what he believed was freedom of speech, which is a big hot topic in, the US of A, among other places.

So, yea, we can't just dismiss that side of the argument because its inconvenient for some.

It's not inconvenient it's positively retarded to kick off from a standpoint of spouting right(or left) wing American political positions. They do not equate to this country or Europe for that matter.

Look at the top 100 companies to work for in the US, all the top tech firms place highly, with 5 out of the top 10 being tech companies and if you broke down the top 100 by sector, tech would win hands down.

See the bit in bold? Again this is not bloody America. Of course any company offering healthcare and other perks people in the rest of the developed world think of as givens is going to fare well.

That is one way of looking at it, another way of looking at it is that evolved cultures won't tax you at 52% of your wage when you earn over €32,000 a year.
How is the health service working out for the 1,000,000 on waiting lists. Oh right, nevermind! There is a big argument there, that we can have all day long about what 'system is best' but glasshouses and stones come to mind.

Yes, like the American model of "healthcare" is a good one. Not. If you get cancer you hear the tills ringing before the X-ray machines have powered up. If you can afford it. America, the only country in the developed world where life expectancy is going down. You realise the US of A has the fourth widest wealth gap in the developed world, only being beaten out by barely functioning kips like Turkey, Chile and Mexico?

Hold on a second, you are saying that Silicon Valley banned Alex Jones from their platforms because it would go down well politically with the 'right on' crowd but then you deny that Silicon Valley are anyway left-leaning.

Christ... No. I am saying that going down well with their most lucrative demographic helps them look good. Yet as I also pointed out the same platforms continue to host views the same as his(and worse views unrelated to him). He got nuked because they saw it as great optics in their pretence of actually giving a crap. Note how one kicked it off, then the rest of the herd followed in a stampede? All eager to try and share the same optics. If there was enough whining from their demographic against a "Left" platformer they'd be nuked too. As 20cent notes they're corporatist, they give two hoots about politics unless it suits. Indeed they donate to both sides of US politics. If these corporations are so "left" how come they "avoid" tax like the plague, seriously look down on even the sniff of unions and are happy to outsource their operations to third world crapholes where labour is much cheaper?

Brian?

kubjones wrote: »

Company policy =/= Social Leanings.

In practice they have to be Right leaning or their company would go belly-up.

In relation to the environment that they are cultivating within their company and as a result, throughout their platforms are overwhelmingly Left-leaning.

I'm not entirely sure how anyone could deny this.

Companies don't have "social leanings". They have one motive: making profits to pay their shareholders dividends.

They treat their employees well to make more money. It's that simple.

Retaining staff helps make money. Hiring the best people helps make money.

RandomName2

Brian? wrote: »

Companies don't have "social leanings". They have one motive: making profits to pay their shareholders dividends.

It's why I trust companies over governments. At least companies only want your money.