Jordan Peterson interview on C4

Havockk · 14-03-2018 7:40pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’ve since watched him speak about religion in a few videos and he has an interesting way of talking for ages without actually answering the question. He slags off ‘new’ atheists for not thinking deeply enough about the question of god. Then goes on to muddy the waters by including transcendent things like love and hate and anger as evidence of ‘Something ‘.

I wondered if he was taking the p1ss out of his followers.

Listening to him waffle-on left me very sceptical of the rest of his preaching. But I’m going to give his podcasts another go.

I can't say I can put a great deal of faith into what he says. Sure he hits notes I agree with from time to time but his notions of hierarchies are insane. He thinks they are natural in human societies because lobsters have hierarchies and both lobsters and humans have serotonin based nervous systems.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 14-03-2018 8:22pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Britain had rationing until 1954, while in West Germany it had ended many years before since they had embraced a market economy despite their economy being completely wrecked. Socialism came to Britain in WW II, and they continued with that economic policy until they had to call in the IMF in 1976 and they did not recover until the Thatcher revolution of the 1980s when they closed and offloaded many loss making and inefficient government sponsored enterprises.

We brought in the IMF a few years ago because of the collapse of unregulated capitalism. I’m glad you brought up post war Britain because wages and standards of living increased enormously between 1945 and 1980. Wage growth fell off after Thatcherism, grew a bit under Blair, and has stagnated in real terms for a decade.

Price controls were the lever they used to gain control of the means of production and implement the Wehrwirtschaft.

Leftists Become Incandescent When Reminded of the Socialist Roots in Nazism

Price controls aren’t what made the Nazis bad people. They were racists. A racism that evolved in the 19C capitalist states again.

As for anti-Semitic racists here is Karl Marx & Friends in their own words

Indeed but he was Jewish. He’s echoing the ideology of the 19C, mostly driven by the right wing in extreme capitalist society.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 14-03-2018 8:31pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’ve since watched him speak about religion in a few videos and he has an interesting way of talking for ages without actually answering the question. He slags off ‘new’ atheists for not thinking deeply enough about the question of god. Then goes on to muddy the waters by including transcendent things like love and hate and anger as evidence of ‘Something ‘.

I wondered if he was taking the p1ss out of his followers.

Listening to him waffle-on left me very sceptical of the rest of his preaching. But I’m going to give his podcasts another go.

Possibly. I’ve just bought his book so I’ll know more later. It strikes me in a saner age he’d appear on an interview where somebody actually dismantled his arguments - the ones he actually makes rather than straw men - and we wouldn’t think any more of it. Just another shrink with a book.

El_Duderino 09 · 14-03-2018 8:36pm

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Possibly. I’ve just bought his book so I’ll know more later. It strikes me in a saner age he’d appear on an interview where somebody actually dismantled his arguments - the ones he actually makes rather than straw men - and we wouldn’t think any more of it. Just another shrink with a book.

I can’t imagine anyone dismantling his speech in an interview. Every story meanders around the houses and down so many rabbit holes, that each answer would create exponentially more questions. I’d say reading his book would be the only way to figure out what he’s on aboot.

Pa ElGrande · 14-03-2018 8:36pm

Havockk wrote: »

. . . but his notions of hierarchies are insane.. . . .

Why do you think this is insane? and what is an alternative to the hierarchical dominance structure for humans and is that viable in terms of human well-being and productivity? How else would 100+ human beings get along in the same place, how would you derive an ethics structure so that we won't all kill each other?

Petersons claim is that many hierarchies of competence are desirable and should be promoted as people naturally possess different capabilities. The lobsters are used as an argument that hierarchy can't be a human invention because it is present in nature and therefore is not a socio-cultural construction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU6Oy66cSx8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvCsZ_6qRAs

markodaly · 14-03-2018 9:02pm

Havockk wrote: »

\ He thinks they are natural in human societies because lobsters have hierarchies and both lobsters and humans have serotonin based nervous systems.

That is actually not what he said at all but go on..

markodaly · 14-03-2018 9:05pm

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

We brought in the IMF a few years ago because of the collapse of unregulated capitalism.

Eh, the banks were regulated but they were regulated badly. This topic has been done to death here.

Price controls aren’t what made the Nazis bad people. They were racists. A racism that evolved in the 19C capitalist states again.

Are you saying that racism is inherent only in capitalist states?

Pa ElGrande · 14-03-2018 9:14pm

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

We brought in the IMF a few years ago because of the collapse of unregulated capitalism. I’m glad you brought up post war Britain because wages and standards of living increased enormously between 1945 and 1980. Wage growth fell off after Thatcherism, grew a bit under Blair, and has stagnated in real terms for a decade.

If the British people at the time were living in the land of milk and honey they would not have voted in Thatcher and kept re-electing her. Blair had to abandon the toxic socialism of the labour party under the old guard and repackage themselves along Tory lines before they could be elected abetted by the Tories eating also their own young. In the end it was the Tories themselves who threw out Thatcher not the electorate.

You can open up a separate thread on the Irish crash, I will say it was more than Lehmans crash brought down the country and the consequences will eventually play out in the collapse of the current western socialist model when we run out of other peoples money in the next sovereign debt crisis.

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Price controls aren’t what made the Nazis bad people. They were racists. A racism that evolved in the 19C capitalist states again.

That's not what I said. Price controls were the lever they used to implement socialism in Germany.

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Indeed but he was Jewish. He’s echoing the ideology of the 19C, mostly driven by the right wing in extreme capitalist society.

Marx was born and raised in the Lutheran church, his parents converted from Judaism to advance their careers and status in Prussia. Marx was in debt most of his life and had to pay interest (usury), its the primary reason he was anti-Jewish (Many Hegalians were also anti-Jewish). Marx was a man who never did a days work in his life and lived by exploiting the labour of the working class. Having read quite a bit about his personal life and attitudes I find Marx behaviour and attitudes repugnant.

Marxism vs. the Jews

HappyAsLarE · 14-03-2018 9:35pm

If you don’t believe in the existence of the dominance hierarchy then you are probably at the bottom of it :-P

Brian? · 14-03-2018 9:37pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

If the British people at the time were living in the land of milk and honey they would not have voted in Thatcher and kept re-electing her. Blair had to abandon the toxic socialism of the labour party under the old guard and repackage themselves along Tory lines before they could be elected abetted by the Tories eating also their own young. In the end it was the Tories themselves who threw out Thatcher not the electorate.

You can open up a separate thread on the Irish crash, I will say it was more than Lehmans crash brought down the country and the consequences will eventually play out in the collapse of the current western socialist model when we run out of other peoples money in the next sovereign debt crisis.

That's not what I said. Price controls were the lever they used to implement socialism in Germany.

Marx was born and raised in the Lutheran church, his parents converted from Judaism to advance their careers and status in Prussia. Marx was in debt most of his life and had to pay interest (usury), its the primary reason he was anti-Jewish (Many Hegalians were also anti-Jewish). Marx was a man who never did a days work in his life and lived by exploiting the labour of the working class. Having read quite a bit about his personal life and attitudes I find Marx behaviour and attitudes repugnant.

Marxism vs. the Jews

I see you’re having a fine time doing an old school ad hominem character assasination on Marx. But I have a couple of points.

Marx did plenty of days work. He was a journalist and an author. Just because he wasn’t a factory worker or a banker, doesn’t mean he never worked. This is an oft repeated criticism of Marx that’s patently a lie.

Instead of sticking you head in the right wing echo chamber to have your opinions validated, why don’t you try reading Karl Marx “On Jews”. It’s a pretty straight forward essay. I know you presented some quotes from it earlier, but they were wildly out of context. I’d suggest reading analysis of the piece by some actual academics.

As for exploiting the working class? That’s laughable.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 14-03-2018 9:57pm

markodaly wrote: »

Eh, the banks were regulated but they were regulated badly. This topic has been done to death here.

Bad regulation is the same as none.

Are you saying that racism is inherent only in capitalist states?

If i wanted to say that I’d say it.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 14-03-2018 10:07pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

If the British people at the time were living in the land of milk and honey they would not have voted in Thatcher and kept re-electing her. Blair had to abandon the toxic socialism of the labour party under the old guard and repackage themselves along Tory lines before they could be elected abetted by the Tories eating also their own young. In the end it was the Tories themselves who threw out Thatcher not the electorate.

Irrelevant to my point. Yes people were getting annoyed by some over powerful unions but she hardly had more than 40% of the vote ever. You ignored my general economic point.

You can open up a separate thread on the Irish crash, I will say it was more than Lehmans crash brought down the country and the consequences will eventually play out in the collapse of the current western socialist model when we run out of other peoples money in the next sovereign debt crisis.

This thread was about Peterson. You changed it, not me. Other people’s money is literally how capitalism is fuelled. You seem to think it was government spending that caused the crash. It was the crash that caused governments to intervene and spend.

That's not what I said. Price controls were the lever they used to implement socialism in Germany.

Price controls on their own aren’t socialism. And you keep missing the point about Nazzism. The problem with it was that it was an imperialist racist State. It wasn’t alone. The US had racial laws on the books at the time. If all the Nazis did was price controls then we wouldn’t even remember it.

Marx was born and raised in the Lutheran church, his parents converted from Judaism to advance their careers and status in Prussia. Marx was in debt most of his life and had to pay interest (usury), its the primary reason he was anti-Jewish (Many Hegalians were also anti-Jewish). Marx was a man who never did a days work in his life and lived by exploiting the labour of the working class. Having read quite a bit about his personal life and attitudes I find Marx behaviour and attitudes repugnant.

Marxism vs. the Jews

Commentary used to be fairly Marxist itself back in the day. Left wing anyway. A few quotes taken from Marx out of context in a time of common anti Semitism doesn’t prove much. Not that Marxism is all socialism anyway.

Dyr · 14-03-2018 10:11pm

markodaly wrote: »

That is actually not what he said at all but go on..

So what he's saying is...:D

The funny thing about Kermit Peterson is he has become some kind of pied piper that draws out the loony tune spoofers who have infested the left side of the spectrum and has them dancing around spouting their guff for all to see

It's quite funny

Pa ElGrande · 14-03-2018 10:15pm

Brian? wrote: »

As for exploiting the working class? That’s laughable.

I provided several quotes from Marx showing his racism and anti-semitism.

It was Engels did all the legwork and most likely wrote many of the articles or provided the analysis the Marx used for his articles. Marx himself never even bothered to set foot in a mill to see the conditions for himself. Marx cousin was the Frederik Philips who founded the Dutch company Philips. He leached off them and it took Engels efforts to publish the rest of his volumes on Capital after his death as Marx would never do that while he lived.

As for exploiting the working class: Helene "Lenchen" Demuth

markodaly · 14-03-2018 10:28pm

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Bad regulation is the same as none.

No, its not. We only discover bad regulation after the fact anyway. But nice goal post shifting.

If i wanted to say that I’d say it.

So, can your clarify your last statement then as it comes across that only Capitalist states are racist.

pumpkin4life · 14-03-2018 10:37pm

Bambi wrote: »

So what he's saying is...:D

The funny thing about Kermit Peterson is he has become some kind of pied piper that draws out the loony tune spoofers who have infested the left side of the spectrum and has them dancing around spouting their guff for all to see

It's quite funny

Yeah, it's the what I call the Trump effect in action. Peterson called it monetizing SJWs.

How it works:

1: Say something in a brash/controversial/truthful manner that can potentially hurt people's feelings. Being funny also helps.
2: Encourage loony toon spoofers to melt down on social media/the mainstream media and point and laugh at it when they do.
3: Drags moderate lads away from the left, because they don't want to be associated with those lads because they're a bunch of creeps. These lads will then vote for you/buy your book.
4: Repeat step one.

If you lads just ignored Trump and ignored Peterson, we wouldn't even be talking about them right now.

Brian? · 14-03-2018 11:15pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

I provided several quotes from Marx showing his racism and anti-semitism.

I saw them. The were removed from their original context. Which is exactly what I said in the post you selectively edited to respond to. Decidedly underhand debating tactics.

It was Engels did all the legwork and most likely wrote many of the articles or provided the analysis the Marx used for his articles. Marx himself never even bothered to set foot in a mill to see the conditions for himself. Marx cousin was the Frederik Philips who founded the Dutch company Philips. He leached off them and it took Engels efforts to publish the rest of his volumes on Capital after his death as Marx would never do that while he lived.

As for exploiting the working class: Helene "Lenchen" Demuth

I love this kind of stuff. Forget about debating the merits of Marx work. Attack him for being a shiftless lay about. It doesn't matter that he was actually employed, somehow he still didn't work.

Be decent. Attack the ideas, not the man.

Brian? · 14-03-2018 11:20pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

I provided several quotes from Marx showing his racism and anti-semitism.

It was Engels did all the legwork and most likely wrote many of the articles or provided the analysis the Marx used for his articles. Marx himself never even bothered to set foot in a mill to see the conditions for himself. Marx cousin was the Frederik Philips who founded the Dutch company Philips. He leached off them and it took Engels efforts to publish the rest of his volumes on Capital after his death as Marx would never do that while he lived.

As for exploiting the working class: Helene "Lenchen" Demuth

I forget the last bit. He possibly had an affair with his housekeeper. So what? He didn't force her down the coal mines afterwards.

That's not exploitation of the worker classes. That's being fierce bold.

Pa ElGrande · 15-03-2018 1:23am

Brian? wrote: »

I saw them. The were removed from their original context. Which is exactly what I said in the post you selectively edited to respond to. Decidedly underhand debating tactics.

#notmyracism

In the context of the 19th century, what is today classed as racism and anti-Semitism was just not seen in that context. This is the era Phrenology, Eugenics and Darwinism were generally accepted scientific fact. Marx was no stranger to any of these concepts and incorporated elements of them in his own writings.

Brian? wrote: »

I love this kind of stuff. Forget about debating the merits of Marx work. Attack him for being a shiftless lay about. It doesn't matter that he was actually employed, somehow he still didn't work.

Be decent. Attack the ideas, not the man.

The guys personal circumstances and biases were incorporated into his writings and how he lived is life tells a a lot about how he reached his conclusions. This is a man who could not manage money and yet wrote about capital. His and Engels ideas of violent revolution cost many millions of people their lives, sure you can argue they were long dead by the time that happened and were not responsible for how others implemented their ideas, that's were the #notmysocialism argument comes from.

Brian? wrote: »

I forget the last bit. He possibly had an affair with his housekeeper. So what? He didn't force her down the coal mines afterwards.

That's not exploitation of the worker classes. That's being fierce bold.

I'm sure I read she received a most generous compensation package by the standards of the time as an employee of the Marx household and their son was free to visit any time while she worked for the Marx family.

Brian? · 15-03-2018 8:07am

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

#notmyracism

In the context of the 19th century, what is today classed as racism and anti-Semitism was just not seen in that context. This is the era Phrenology, Eugenics and Darwinism were generally accepted scientific fact. Marx was no stranger to any of these concepts and incorporated elements of them in his own writings.

The guys personal circumstances and biases were incorporated into his writings and how he lived is life tells a a lot about how he reached his conclusions. This is a man who could not manage money and yet wrote about capital. His and Engels ideas of violent revolution cost many millions of people their lives, sure you can argue they were long dead by the time that happened and were not responsible for how others implemented their ideas, that's were the #notmysocialism argument comes from.

I'm sure I read she received a most generous compensation package by the standards of the time as an employee of the Marx household and their son was free to visit any time while she worked for the Marx family.

Again, you selectively edit my posts and only respond to the parts you have wiggle room on.

Have you read Karl Marx “On Jews”?

johnp001 · 15-03-2018 10:42am

Brian? wrote: »

Again, you selectively edit my posts and only respond to the parts you have wiggle room on.

Have you read Karl Marx “On Jews”?

It is very common on these forums to respond to parts of long posts in the way used above. It aids with readability and it is not a case of selectively editing your post which still exists in its entirety and full context where you posted it.
Your own reply is of a low standard. You have already suggested the poster reads that sizeable essay you name in a recent post. For clarity to those reading this thread you should point out what point is made in that essay that specifically addresses the points made above.

Havockk · 15-03-2018 5:04pm

johnp001 wrote: »

Your own reply is of a low standard. .

You have seen marks posts ....right?

WinnyThePoo · 15-03-2018 6:07pm

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Yeah, it's the what I call the Trump effect in action. Peterson called it monetizing SJWs.

How it works:

1: Say something in a brash/controversial/truthful manner that can potentially hurt people's feelings. Being funny also helps.
2: Encourage loony toon spoofers to melt down on social media/the mainstream media and point and laugh at it when they do.
3: Drags moderate lads away from the left, because they don't want to be associated with those lads because they're a bunch of creeps. These lads will then vote for you/buy your book.
4: Repeat step one.

If you lads just ignored Trump and ignored Peterson, we wouldn't even be talking about them right now.

So basically what your saying. You like to be feed stupid?

When Trump and Co say something stupid. It's directed at you. You listen. Your the target audience. Moderates can see this. You can't. Your the target audience for a reason.

Havockk · 15-03-2018 7:40pm

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

So basically what your saying. You like to be feed stupid?

When Trump and Co say something stupid. It's directed at you. You listen. Your the target audience. Moderates can see this. You can't. Your the target audience for a reason.

ouch lol

Pero_Bueno · 18-03-2018 1:06am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwdYpMS8s28&feature=youtu.be&t=1

See the little nazi bigots banging on the windows, they don't even see the irony in their actions

Brian? · 18-03-2018 9:41am

Pero_Bueno wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwdYpMS8s28&feature=youtu.be&t=1

See the little nazi bigots banging on the windows, they don't even see the irony in their actions

What Nazi bigots?

I finally watched some of that video. 2 speakers who fundamentally agree, being cheered on by an audience who agree. Pouring scorn on the dissenting voices outside the room. While championing free speech. Not once seeing the irony in it all.

I want to see Peterson actually debate someone.

Brian? · 18-03-2018 9:46am

johnp001 wrote: »

It is very common on these forums to respond to parts of long posts in the way used above. It aids with readability and it is not a case of selectively editing your post which still exists in its entirety and full context where you posted it.

My posts weren’t long. They were quite succinct actually. Portions were edited out as they couldn’t be rebutted. Underhand debating tactics.

Your own reply is of a low standard. You have already suggested the poster reads that sizeable essay you name in a recent post. For clarity to those reading this thread you should point out what point is made in that essay that specifically addresses the points made above.

My posts decreased in standard the less the were actually replied to. I asked a question, had they read an essay. If they hadn’t I was happy to summarize it. The problem is that some posters only want to quote long passages of text they agree with and quote out of context from the other side. It’s disingenuous at best.

JRant · 18-03-2018 3:25pm

Brian? wrote: »

What Nazi bigots?

I finally watched some of that video. 2 speakers who fundamentally agree, being cheered on by an audience who agree. Pouring scorn on the dissenting voices outside the room. While championing free speech. Not once seeing the irony in it all.

I want to see Peterson actually debate someone.

They were disrupting an event that people obviously went to the trouble of organising and getting tickets for. Of course they were pouring scorn on the protesters.

Brian? · 18-03-2018 4:25pm

JRant wrote: »

They were disrupting an event that people obviously went to the trouble of organising and getting tickets for. Of course they were pouring scorn on the protesters.

While championing free speech......

greencap · 18-03-2018 4:36pm

Brian? wrote: »

While championing free speech......

Surely you can still have private ticket events without infringing the same free speech they're promoting.

Free speech will still allow you to take a dump in private without having to answer a TV interviewer. Or wake up in the morning without a crowd in your room demanding answers.

Personal space can co-exist with free speech.

Jordan Peterson interview on C4

Comments