/lit/ - Literature

>>10570419
He wont be.

All his lectures and books dont have anything groundbreaking or profound. Can you list any original though in his oeuvre?

His basic philosphy is dont be a lazy man and christianity is good.

>>10570419
He won't be.

>>10570419
He's going to be studied as a cultural oddity in the future as part of a larger pantheon of Trump era e-celebs including icons like Alex Jones and Stefan Molymeme, who all promote essentially the same ideology filtered through varying levels of delusion.

>>10570419
just to recap, this man has
>fucked more prime pussy than anyone here posting about him ever will
>made more money than anyone here posting about him ever will
>achieved more academically and experienced life more than anyone here posting about him ever will
>has had more of his works published than anyone here posting about him ever will
>is genuinely a nice dude
so just stop with the infantile rage over him; you can't compete and it's embarrassing

>>10570457
Why do you paw over someone you've never met?

You are no better than a girl who squeals at the name of her boy toy boy band member

>>10570468
>stating objective facts
>pawing
you are actually illiterate wow so surprising

>>10570457
making a lot of assumptions here bucko

>>10570419
I don't think he will be, his ideas come from Jung, so you might aswell read Jung and get a better understanding.

>>10570468
He's judging him over what he has proven without the need of physical confrontation, as should be his profession to make such judgments.

As a charlatan

>>10570419
Whats with his obsession with lobsters.
Ok I get it, one male lobster will mate with all the females but why does he take such a special interest in that very exceptional case in nature
Its not sure a simple conceitful rhetorical tool r-right?

>>10570443
his timing and delivery platform is what makes him relevant. He'll be remembered for that.

>>10570448
>He's going to be studied as a social oddity in the future as part of a larger pantheon of multidisciplinary celebrity scientists including icons like Gad Saad and Jonathan Haidt, who all promoted essentially the same sense of a grand academic narrative of the evolution of human personality and culture filtered through varying perspectives of theoretical specialty.

>>10570498
Its sad that Papa Greg probably won’t be remembered

>>10570477
>>10570485
I know you two are only playing around, but seriously: why are so many people so submissive to some faggot who states obvious facts over and over?
He is to philosophy what Neil Tyson or Bill Nye is to science.

>>10570513
Yeah except he's not even half as effective as those hacks are.

>At 31:25 - The Minotaur Of Milwaukee navigating the labyrinth of truth! (in Petersonian terms)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woxZrgjyv5I

>>10570419
Even in ten years he won't be remembered. He's a reactionary thinker that just happened to find a niche at this specific period in time. He's trying to fulfil the same role as Sagan was for the sciences, but his personal politics get in the way of this success.

>>10570555
>reactionary

>>10570419
/lit/ is for the discussion of literature, specifically books (fiction & non-fiction), short stories, poetry, creative writing, etc. If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/. If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/. Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but ideally those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.

There are at least three Peterson threads already in the catalogue. Don't you faggots have anything better to do than advance the cult of personality for this asshole?

>>10570561
He is pretty open about wanting to return to more traditional social values before the sexual revolution

>>10570499

It's about the larger fact that lobsters have a dominance hierarchy much the same way we do, and our common ancestor is 100s of millions of years ago.

The point Peterson is trying make is that the dominance hierarchy has been an innate part of our being for a very, very, very long time and the postmodern neo marxists can't just throw it away because they think it's "oppressive"

>>10570574
why doesn't he mention that rape is also a part of the dominance harky and postmodern neomarxists have outlawed that

>>10570443
What Peterson preaches isn't even authentic Christianity though ... it's some wierd Jungian amalgam of Christianity and semitic paganism

>>10570574
>postmodern neo marxists

>>10570574
>It's about the larger fact that lobsters have a dominance hierarchy much the same way we do

But they very literally do not, its extremely different from any mammal species reproductive cultures

>>10570586
New wave Christianity

>>10570601
Huey Lewis and the Good News?

>>10570443
bashing Peterson is pseud shit. He's not one of the greats, so what? I don't pay much attention to him so I don't know if he claims to be one, but at least it seems like he's holding the line in times of extreme decay in western thought. That's something at least, no matter what you think of his politics/persona.

>>10570574
>>10570499
the lobster social hiearchy is completely different from the human one in that the lobster's social hierarchy is predicated on their ability to contribute to the survival of the species: there is nothing explicitly fit about wall street executives, silicon valley social network CEOs, or Instagram supermodels that insures the survival of our species

He hasn't done anything worth remembering yet. He won't be taught in philosophy classes (remember his profession is as a psychologist), in his current narcissistic quest to be a public figure, his closest analogue is Malcom Gladwell, who is quite a bit more known than Peterson but will also nonetheless be completely forgotten in 100 years time.

>>10570608
There is also no survival benefit for humans eating nothing but fructose syrup and sugars and carbs and becoming fat fucks, but they do this because the behaviour is built on an evolved circuitry that favours these things from eras when they were scarce.

Social heiarchies are an evolved part of the human species, they don't just turn off when we invent computers and marketing.

>>10570608
>there is nothing explicitly fit about wall street executives, silicon valley social network CEOs, or Instagram supermodels that insures the survival of our species

In the long run maybe, but you can't deny Henry Ford and IBM didn't vastly increase the power of our species

>>10570613
Why does everyone keep acting like he's failing as a philosopher as opposed to winning as a psychologist? He is a very successful academic.

>>10570619

>>10570626
Not an argument

>>10570629

>>10570594
>>10570608

The part of the dominance hierarchy that Peterson refers to is the part where your serotonin levels go up and down depending on your position in the dominance hierarchy. He's not making any further claims about similarities between our dominance hierarchies and lobster's other than that they both exist really.

He also mentions that in our society there is a nearly infinite amount of dominance hierarchies, not just one singular sexual one, and one's goal should be to move up the set of all of them.

not only is he clueless about philosophy but he's clueless about technology as well, so he started believing in conspiracies

>>10570624
Because nobody cares about psychology, its a meme field that has all but lost any respect it had in the past

>>10570641
Then why bring up lobsters at all, why have them in photo?
He seems to keep lauding them as if they're some impassable evidence of something but I don't see what

>>10570619
Henry Ford didn't invent the assembly line, he visited a Chicago slaughterhouse and witnessed it there being used to process carcasses, it emerged in parallel in several countries over thousands of years of man's being and can't be tied down to one person

IBM, and especially its executives, was not especially influential in the development of computing machinery

>>10570641
>He's not making any further claims about similarities between our dominance hierarchies and lobster's other than that they both exist really.

No, with that remark about evolutionary developed serotonin responses he's making a whole class of statements about the biological basis of dominance hierarchies and social psychology, some of which contradict his own philosophy and prescriptions.

>>10570643
You just want to close your eyes to the obvious point he's making in that tweet.

>>10570643
>>10570654
He also thinks that Google is trying to replace Europeans with black people, again without understanding technology and falling for /pol/-tier conspiracies

>>10570648
>Blaa blaa blaa the world didn't literally rest on individual men

Irrelevant to my point. If you deny these people had SOME hand in the product of the organizations they led you're just a resentful memer

>>10570646
That our mood hormones are directly linked to our very real place in the societal hierarchies, that societal hierarchies exist amongst many species on Earth including ours, and that the neurological circuits responsible for expressing these heirarchies are literally millions of years old.

The argument is essentially: Social hierarchy is biological, not socially constructed.

>>10570648
>Henry Ford didn't invent the assembly line

Nonsense.

>>10570646

It's impassable evidence that the general evolutionary concept of a dominance hierarchy has existed for 100s of millions of years. They're in the photo because he is well known for talking about lobsters, and it's somewhat of a meme that is obsessed with lobsters at this point

>>10570659

Well said

>>10570655
You're a fucking maroon if you think Google is *not* trying to shape our perceptions.

>>10570655
>>10570643
Google openly admits to having "censorship" divisions manipulating their algorithms towards certain social engineering. I don't know why you consider this a conspiracy

>>10570662
>It's impassable evidence that the general evolutionary concept of a dominance hierarchy has existed for 100s of millions of years.

You say that as if there is any substantial group of people that would disagree.
Don't Liberals of all people assert a history of domination from which we are "progressing" from?

>>10570654
the point is that, with a few exceptions like von Neumann, these innovations emerged as collective social efforts rather than as the genius of the Great Man

>>10570660
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_line#History

"At Ford Motor Company, the assembly line was introduced by William "Pa" Klann upon his return from visiting Swift & Company's slaughterhouse in Chicago and viewing what was referred to as the "disassembly line", where carcasses were butchered as they moved along a conveyor. The efficiency of one person removing the same piece over and over without himself moving caught his attention. "

>>10570665
>>10570643
>>10570654
Google doesn't alter your results because of propaganda purposes, it alters your bikini search results because it WE WANT EM' THICC

>>10570667
source?

>>10570665
yes replacing "europeans" with images of black people sounds like an excellent way to go about that

>>10570419
As a father figure to underaged /pol/edditors and not by anyone else.

Jordan Peterson, for somone so concerned about Google censorship, didn't seem to mind until he started getting demonetized, and he still continues to publish his videos on Youtube

>>10570676
https://www.wired.com/2016/09/inside-googles-internet-justice-league-ai-powered-war-trolls/

>>10570700
>Trump’s anti-Semitic supporters mobbed Jewish public figures with menacing Holocaust “jokes.” Anonymous racists bullied African American comedian Leslie Jones off Twitter temporarily with pictures of apes and Photoshopped images of semen on her face. Guardian columnist Jessica Valenti quit the service after a horde of misogynist attackers resorted to rape threats against her 5-year-old daughter.
whoa how dare they try to stop this from happening. Censoring muh freeze peach

>>10570712
Yeah because we all know unaccountable authoritarian mechanisms only ever get exercised for their "official" purpose forever

>>10570721
lol so what do you think is gonna happen eventually? Google is going to destroy western civilization?

>>10570419
Can't trust a guy wearing pleb shoes like his. How much does he make off of Patreon again?

>>10570419
that pic is reddit incarnate

>>10570671
And it's a very different thing to all be discussing together how we might go about taking control of our evolutionary trajectory in a safe and responsible way, as opposed to blaming one group of people for creating the evolutionary imbalance. Also Peterson is essentially saying that to "progress" beyond an essential organising principle of nature is not something that should be done lightly or without serious consideration of both sides of the argument.

>>10570739
No that would be the Jews. Google are just doing their part

>>10570712
There is no such thing as non-physical violence

>>10570804
Sargon of Akkad's careful analysis

>>10570804

Holy fuck that is cringy.

>>10570804
Doesn't seem like he fully handles his twitter himself anymore.

>>10570883
yeah i think his son is doing social media and video editing

>>10570804
all credibility --->> *window*

>>10570613
Biblical lecture series is great desu

>>10570419
like hitchens, but more weirderer

>>10570506
I don't think he cares about that. He always seems happy when people tell him that his videos helped them understand philosophy.

>>10570505
>Gad Saad and Jonathan Haidt

are Petersonfags capable of not thinking in memes

>>10570552

>>10570624
Because he's a successful published author. /lit/ is projecting.

>>10570973
kek

>>10570586
>Semitic paganism
what do you mean by this anon?

>>10570739
Do you want the 10, 50, or 100 year prediction?
Within 10, all information (Location,speech/articulation patterns, fears, etc) is consolidated to massive channels for easy ISR funded entirely by Google and subordinate entities. This information will be exploited to maximize the consumption of goods and services. Crime will decline dramatically thanks to free porn and cheap food.

Within 50 years, competition within a 90% of human interaction will be gone. Solutions to our problems will be dropped at our doors. People will willingly pile into progressively smaller quarters thanks to advancements in VR. Video games will be designed to maximize dopamine release thanks to those massive info channels. Governmental organizations will be rendered obsolete. Law enforcement will equate to a short suspension of entertainment.

In less than 100 years, people will be practically born into VR. Self-paced educational programs, much like the video games, will provide the optimal challenge/reward curves to accelerate human learning. Spoken language will be happily forgotten as the networked human mind work happily with self-improving computers.
The nation, the family, and the self have all been rendered obsolete.

Bonus:
In 200 years you will not know that death exists.

>>10571018
The religious beliefs of Babylon, which is what the Jews believed before Abraham

>>10571030
Do you have a single fact to back that up?

>>10571045
Other than the exponentially growing hybrid of surveillance, marketing, and AI? Nah.
That's why it's an anonymous prediction on 4chan.

>>10570930
>Discussing popular public figures
>Huuuurr can you even think without talking about popular public figures.
What a strange non-argument.

>>10570419
As a misogynist that wanted to model human society on lobsters.

>>10571030
suddenly death seems less scary

>>10571074
You don't want to be involuntary suspended in life for eons with nothing to do but locate the next prime number?

>>10570572
And what's wrong with that, you leftist cunt?

>>10570419

Like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZQJFbrqjUY

>>10571094
Dude I'm all for it, but I call myself a reactionary

>>10570419
>Kermit, the uh, pseud here

>>10571153
Legit laugh everytime

Why does he pretend to be a libertarian and an agnostic when it's clear he's just a typical christian conservative, if slightly better educated than his peers?

>>10571165
You only have it half right, he's a conservative but he's an atheist that pretends to be a Christian

>>10570419
The events that determine his legacy have yet to occur so there's no way to answer that question yet.

>>10571176
And why exactly you're saying that? Unironically curious.

>clean your lilypad, mantadpoles.
>growing up and becoming frogs is the true counterculture

>>10570419
good fellow who helped a lot of people

>>10570419
Biblical analysis

>>10571799
I actually unironically think his advice does more harm to people than good.
I've known anyone IRL who is a fan of his who doesn't just use his hysterical victim complex to justify their own bad life choices and refuse actual self reflection

>>10570419
Allow me to play doubles advocate here for a moment. For all intensive purposes I think you are wrong. In an age where sophists are a diamond dozen, true academics are a blessing in the skies. We often put our public figures on a petal stool like a bunch of pre-Madonnas, but you all seem to be taking something very valuable for granite. So I ask of you to mustard up all the strength you can because it is a doggy dog world out there. Although there is some merit to what you are asking it seems like you have a huge ship on your shoulder. In your question you seem to throw everything in but the kids Nsync, and even though you are having a feel day with this I am here to bring you back into reality. I have a sick sense when it comes to these types of things. It is almost spooky, because I cannot turn a blonde eye to these glaring flaws in your rhetoric. I have zero taller ants when it comes to people spouting out hate in the name of moral righteousness. You just need to remember what comes around is all around, and when supply and command fails you will be the first to go.

Make my words, when you get down to brass stacks it doesn't take rocket appliances to get two birds stoned at once. It's clear who makes the pants in this relationship, and sometimes you just have to swallow your prize and accept the facts. You might have to come to this conclusion through denial and error but I swear on my mother's mating name that when you put the petal to the medal you will pass with flying carpets like it’s a peach of cake.

Between Peterson and any other current academic I would much prefer the firmer to the ladder and so he will no doubt go drown in history and be remembered for many ears to come

>>10571938
>his hysterical victim complex
Please elaborate.

>>10571946
The whole "Post-modern Neo-Marxists turned me into a nihilist manchild" narrative. It takes away personal responsibility and ownership of your own life choices and perspective and he offers no rebuttal to this malaise he other than basic platitudes of "grow up" which I don't see being followed by his frogposting twitterbase.

I feel like these people need to learn to see themselves from the perspective of others but instead they're just being offered more enemies to fixate on

>>10571969
I don't think that's an accurate interpretation of his ideas. His philosophy is very much about personal responsibility and how other people may act to impede your success.
His gripes about "Post-modern Neo-Marxists" have legitimacy in academia.
Just because some of fans aren't admirable doesn't mean he's peddling shit. He's helped a lot of people.

>>10570419

The man certainly will not be remembered for originality, and if this were a few decades past I think it would be fairly easy to dismiss the idea of someone like him having a lasting legacy. However, I am not sure we really have a precedent for how he has gone about doing what he is doing. The crowdfunding, the interactive web-presence,and his appearance during a cultural pivot point in western civ where his repackaged, and mostly benign message, is able to provoke such a widespread and hysterical response. Not to mention the plethora of material he produces for free that will remain online forever.

My take is that if the man is remembered it will likely be as a secondary figure, known largely in the context of people influenced by him who achieve something greater.

>>10570504
He's a professor with a podcast. The size of his audience is impressive and is def based on his delivery and the way he poses his ideas. But he won't be "remembered" in any meaningful way.

>>10570804
if I was a public figure I'd be reading/listening to all that shit too. its free criticism that you get to take in and assess

>>10570419
Well, he will maintain a wide audience until his death. After that people will forget about him for some time and even after that he will be happened upon by people as some now obscure intellectual who had tremendous influence in his day. This is all predicated upon the failure or YouTube at some point in time. If it continues so will he.

>>10570804
>Sargon of Akkad's careful analysis

>>10572121
what's the matter, don't like a radical centrist classical liberal-economic skeptic applying the Socratic method to totally btfo sjws & alt-right babies simultaneously?

pft, you probably haven't even read Locke

>>10572151
>radical centrist liberal-economic skeptic

You mean a jaded young man who uses philosophy and politics to justify his a priori resentment?

>>10570457
>>fucked more prime pussy than anyone here posting about him ever will

Kek. He married his high-school sweetheart

>>10572191
>D-d-don't insult my internet d-d-daddy every again you fucking l-l-leftist

>>10572191
After she spent her 20s in the jungle.

>>10570586
Oh please Peterson is no gnostic

>>10570419
Reminder, this is what /lit/ hates.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ER1LOarlgg

>>10571137
That's silly and you shouldn't, call yourself a progressive. Western civilization is Faustian, owing to its Christian roots, we have always worshiped the Cult of Progress. What you want is the future, it is progress to achieve it, to move in the right direction past those silly backwards leftists.

>>10571939
>pre-Madonnas
DROPPED

>>10572097
>free criticism
Pretty sure all of those videoes were full of prouder of him

>>10571037
the Jews were caananite fire-wind worshippers before Abraham, the Babylonian influence is what developed later Judaism (and Chrisianity) and eventually the Talmud

>>10572344
>prouder
Praise

>>10572345
Name the Babylonian influences in Christianity.

>>10572336
Fucking hell how conceited and righteous can he be

>>10571030
>Implying the average temperature on Earth won't have raised by 8% by 2118, killing off almost everybody

>>10570973
he is going to snap any moment

>>10572336
STOP encouraging men

>>10572238
Lol what

I don't think he's original enough to be remembered in an academic way. I also don't think he'll be remembered outside of a pop-politics way either. I can vividly imagine a 4chan thread eight years from now, titled "you are now remembering this guy exists" with a picture of Peterson, followed by 300 histrionic replies asking where the time has gone. Like how we remember early Youtube now, with video game montages with "let the bodies hit the floor" in the background or The Final Showdown. Peterson will not continue to exist outside of this strange era of SJWs and Trump.

The popularity of Jordan Peterson says more about this moment in society than the man himself actually does.

Young people and especially men are so deprived of anything other than pop nihilism and consumerism that they form a cult around the first guy to explain the Bible and Jungian psychology to them in a manner that's easy to listen to and give them basic life advice they didn't receive from their shitty fathers.

>>10572595
so he teaches brainlets how to be a reactionary
fantastic

>>10572614
I mean most of them are already traveling down that pipeline before they even find Peterson. They're exposed to libshits and they think, ah this is fucking dumb, but for all of the wrong reasons. And then some guy comes along talking about Postmodern neo Marxists and he sounds like he knows what he's talking about. And the brainlets clap like seals, because the man who won't say the tranny words is gonna save civilization. Have they read any of these "postmodern neomarxists?" duhhhhh... By then you're well on your way to thinking academia in general is a semitic sham based on an infographic you saw and some screencaps of peer reviewed queer underwater basket weaving articles

>>10572614
There is nothing wrong with being a reactionary in a world gone mad. And this world is very mad indeed. Stupid leftist.

>>10572646
the thing that bothers me the most about him is that, in contrast to the Alex Jones/ Spencer crowd, his followers deem themselves as intelectuals whilest most of the time they haven´t even read a book and only whatched a 5 minute video titled "Peterson DESTROYS a SJW at a lecture".
Sme goes for the molymeme fanboys

>>10572646
>implying that neo-marxists isn't an adequat label for SJWs

>>10572656
reactionism is class colaborism
read bordiga you idiot

>>10572656
>Implying the souls of these men are aristocratic enough to carry a true reactionary movement
Shouldn't you be re-fueling your Walmart tiki torch

>>10572662
imagine being this illiterate and yet still posting on a literature board

>>10572614
They were going to be brainlet reactionaries either way. At least by following Peterson their imaginary enemy is something that doesn't exist instead of a precise ethnic group.

>>10572662
A more accurate label would be pseudo-marxists.

>>10572663
Fuck off back to leftypol.

>>10572664
>implying I'm alt right

>>10572667
>being a reactionary implies racism
>SJWs in academina don't exsist

Lmao.

>>10572673
They replaced class struggle with Race an Gender shit. Neo, pseudo, who cares?

>>10572663
that's only bad if you fall for the egalitarianism meme

>>10572661
Molyneux is worse because he wants to hold the pretension of being a philosopher when literally all of his concepts are derivative, but people still think that he's fucking brilliant. And he's inconsistent. For someone who claims to be an Anarcho-Capitalist he sure loves defending the state as long as it does things right wingers will like.

>>10572678
they are liberals
there is nothing marxist in wanting to have more black people being opressors in a neoliberal economic

>>10572683
molymeme is a failed theater kid, when you learn that everything else just makes sense

>>10572681
no it´s always idiotic
if there are more right wingers they´re going to sell nationalism
the system stays the same

>>10572678
'Neo-' implies an evolution on marxism. 'Pseudo-' implies a corruption and degeneration on marxism.
They're pseud marxists.

>>10572684
There is nothing liberal about affirmative action and anti white bullshit. They aim for equality of outcome, therefore they're ""marxists"". Not very liberal.

>>10572689
That depends entirely on your perspective.

>>10572684
that would be fine if there were any actual marxists around as a contrast, but 99% of them have decided to pander to what you call "liberals" and decide to fall for all of their memes, even the so called "scumbag left" plays the same kind of purity test spirals as the "liberal left" do, they just like to pretend they are edgy

>>10572692
marxism is not the equality of outcome
try to read a book and not just blindly follow cold war burger propaganda

>>10572688
a non-hierarchical system makes no sense unless you assume everybody has the same nature or is just a blank slate

>>10572688
>muh system
How to spot a brainlet ideologue 101

>>10572697
i know, socdems ruined leftism

>>10572698
Maoist China, Cambodia and the USSR disagree. I don't give a shit about actual marxism, I care about what Happens when people try to implement it. Again, fuck off, leftypol.

>>10572698
>hurr durr, all ideologies should be judged by marxist standards, and marxist should only be judged by their own standards
it's an old trick, stop embarrassing yourself, nobody is falling four your memes any longer, make an effort and produce some theory of substance instead of keeping rolling in your own antediluvian irrelevant shit

>>10572700
first of all, human nature is a meme when it comes to economics. capitalism has only been around for roughly 200 years yet people always claim it´s muh human nature.
also marxism isn´t non-hierarchical that´s anarchism.

>>10572703
tbf purity test spirals have always been a thing of the left, liberals just switched the subject of the purity tests to something that was more convenient to global capital, but the flaw was there all along

>>10572698
How the fuck does marxism not imply equality of outcome?

>>10572675
>being a reactionary implies racism
I didn't say that, what I was saying is that if it weren't for Peterson they'd probably end up being on the more extreme side of reactionarism
>SJWs in academina don't exsist
Sjws aren't "post-modern neo marxists" (which is a contradiction in terms, go read what Foucault said about Marxism), they're intersectional feminists + critical race theorists + a touch of Judith Butler.
And I very much doubt the average Peterson enthusiast is in academia.

>>10572720
marxism only implies that the means of production are in the hands of those that produce.
you only get the same outcome if you do the same work
marxism isn´t a welfare state

>>10572712
i didn´t judge your ideology i told you to read a book
but considering that you aren´t even able to read my post i highly doubt that you are capable to do that

Is he a Christian, though, or is he not a Christian? I think he isn't, but I won't give any reasons just like the other guy,,,,,, but it fits my narrative so I will just say with conviction that he isn't a Christian. Good luck refuting me.

>>10572700
Not really true. Inequality and hierarchy differ in that hierarchies inequally distribute regulatory and administrative power by definition.

So all hierarchies are inequal, but not all inequalities are hierarchical.

>>10572724
But doesn't intersectionality borrow from post structuralism with its "x is just a social construct" bullshit? Also I am in academina, just not in the humanities.

>>10572736
>inequalities
>implying hirarchies are unfair

>>10572725
>use the means of production to produce a new and improved means of production
>someone who did no work and built no new inventions has just as much right to use that new machine as I do, since all means of production are collectively owned
hmmm

>>10570419

As one of the many irrelevant voices that talked in the irrelevant culture war started in the 2010s, created by governments to divide peoples and achieve absolute dominion over them.

>>10572746
>i have the right to own a piece of land because someday someone i am related with said it was his or because i bought it from someone that didn´t rightfully own it with money i made exploiting workers

>>10570498
>>10570506
>>10570552
(((Sadler)))

>>10571030
>>10571045
>>10571074
https://imgur.com/a/rhFuj

>>10572753
You can't exploit a worker unless they are a slave or are otherwise compelled by threat of violence to work for you.

>>10572753
>implying work is expoltation by nature
>implying that private property isn't a human right

Hands off my house, red scum.

>>10572763
you either starve or live of welfare,which comes from the money of exploited workers
so not much of a choice eh?

>>10572739
Yep. They borrow from postmodernism as far as I know, but they aren't Marxists.

>>10572766
>implying companies owning most of the land has anything to do with human rights
>implying housing and safety aren´t the real human rights, not "owning" a piece of ground
nice try wannabe boomer

>>10572772
>implying you have to work for a employer that is known for having shitty conditions
>implying unions aren't a thing
>implying it's the 19th century

>>10572777
Again, the took the class struggle from Marx and turned it into race and gender bullshit. They borrow from marx and post structuralism, therefore we can call them ""Post modern neo-marxists"" as dumb aus that sounds.

>>10572783
>implying having a friendly boss means that the economy is fair
>implying http://time.com/956/how-amazon-crushed-the-union-movement/
>implying it´s not much worse than the 19th century

>>10572780
Owning my own house is REQUIRED to ensure my safety, you turbo cuck.

>>10572791
>>implying it´s not much worse than the 19th century
the absolute state of fucking retards

>>10572796
living in a house is the same materialistic condition wether you own it or not
everything else is pure ideology

>>10572788
Well at least you recognize that it sounds dumb lol

>>10572791
If you would rather work in a 19th century factory or a coal mine as opposed to Amazon, you're a fucking self entiteld brainlet. Yes, Lord Bezos is a shitty employer, but nobody is forcing you to work for him. There are so many better employers to choose from. Quit whining and get a job.

>>10572802
>property is materialism
Lol. Also leftist don't have any right to call anyone materialistic

>>10572799
it´s a different kind of bad. The government monitores your every move, banks play with your money causing you to loose your house and consumerism alienated people so much from each other that there isn´t the slightest chance of change.
also oppressive work like in your picture hasn´t dissapear, it has only been outsourced to the 3rd world. but think about what happens when there isn´t a new kind of exploitation left in a system that only maintains through growth

>>10572803
Sounds dumb, since marxism is a grand narrative, but still true if you look at the values SJWs hold.

>>10570930
>Jonathan Haidt
>Meme

>>10572819
Leftists condem people based on guilt by association. Imagine my shock.

>>10572812
leftism is based on materialism.
materialism is the only thing that rids you of spooks like religion, ideology and your so beloved "right of private property"

>>10572665
>T. Pseudoscience Dialectician

>>10572827
>calling out idiots is being a pseud

>>10572823
God dammit, people like you see the reason people are starting to like facism again. Something something fireing squads and helicopters.

>>10572808
>Yes, Lord Bezos is a shitty employer, but nobody is forcing you to work for him. There are so many better employers to choose from.
lol

>>10572823
>materialism is the only thing that rids you of spooks like religion, ideology and your so beloved "right of private property"
is there something left at the end?

>>10572836
There are, you worthless welfare faggot.

>>10572833
>X can be widely observed within Y. Y was even first thought up by X. Y and X loves to hate on Z (capitalism).
>But Y and X have nothing in common.

>>10572839
no there aren't, they're all shit and even if some are better than others there is a limit to how many employees they need you dumb fuck

>>10572732
define Christian desu

>>10572846
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N

>>10572851
Apostolic confession of faith defines Christian.

>>10572846
Hating on the shitshow that is american capitalism should be a matter of common sense.
t. capitalism fanboy

>>10572823
lmao, nope
The thing you're describing is material love of material things. What you need is not leftism or rightism, but genuine love of both material and non-material things. This can be easily free of, or within, things that you consider 'spooks'.

>>10572336
Brought to tears by the destruction of his civilisation and he is called names by plebs like >>10572422

>>10572850
Life is a struggle. If you have more merit then the average employee you have much more market power to choose wehre you work. But if you had any merit, you woudln't ne a leftist in the first place.

>>10572853
>T. Fraud who haven't witnessed the Dialectics

>>10572846
>wanting to have more transgender muslim ceo´s is hating capitalism

>>10572858
Nah, that's not real capitalism.

>>10572862
materialistic means basid in observable reality
a spook is something imaginary that affects the real world

>>10572866
Alright. Sure. Z = Kant Locke the Paine

>>10572851
believes absolutely in the bodily resurrection of Christ

If you do not believe that you cannot be a Christian

>>10572864
Just coz proletarians compete with one another doesn't suddenly mean they can compete with capitalists

>>10572864
>implying leftists are all slackers
nice strawman. who was Engels?
>implying having to sell yourself to the highest bidder through your "merit" isn´t the same as being the proudest slave

>>10572870
>imaginary, thus normatively a 'spook'
>because I said so

>>10572884
read stirner
the ego and it´s own is pretty short and freely available online

>>10572732
>>10572854
he is not, he is just a cultural christian and likes to suck judeochristian cock but he thinks the same kind of truth is found in all religions, the christian one is just more advanced for that retard

>>10570739
>implying they haven't already

>>10572881
Again, this isn't the 19th century. Also implying that work can't be meaningfull or fulfilling.

>>10572927
i´m not saying that it can´t be but the reality is that most work isn´t

>>10572896
Surprisingly levelled for my provocation. Thanks, anon, I will check him out.

>>10572950
That's life. It's your job to find a niche in which you can exsist. Like starting your own company from your mothers basement.

>>10572982
you have to be incredibly naive to think that everyone has the opportunity to become the next bill gates
who btw wouldn´t have existed if the big boys of capitalism didn´t need a way to fuck over the japanese

>>10572981
i believe that throwing around insults on an image board doesn´t amount to anything
also i would recommend to not take the "egoist" portion of the book as literal since a lot of it was written as a provocation and instead look further into the "union of egoists" concept if it sparked your interest

>>10572988
You realize that small companies who still turn a profit exsist, right? And no shit, of course only a small portion of the population has the chance to be the next Bill Gates of Jeff Bezos and that's exactly why the state should try to provide equal opportuinity via free Education and Startup funding.

>>10573007
while i agree that free education and trying to provide equal opportunities is a step in the right direction it doesn´t change the fact that capitalism is inherently flawed in the ways it keeps itself alive since there is no stable equilibrium in todays economics. dreaming of a world where everyone is happy at their work in a small communal business is naive if you allow multi billion dollar corporations to exist

>>10573023
>wanting to be happy
Stop being such a materialistic hedonist. Life is a struggle, fight or go under. That has always been true and will always ne true, capitalism or no capitalism.

>>10573023
>what are anti trust laws
>also implying that capital is a zero sum game

>>10573025
>it´s good that people suffer because of corporative greed, wars fought over resources and going bankrupt in america if you don´t have health insurance because i can larp as a tough guy on the internet
>>10573036
> what is lobbyism
> implying the dangers of capitalism aren´t exactly there becaus it´s a non-zero-sum game

>>10570457
Why are you sucking his sick so hard
And you have no clue how much prime pussy i fuck

>>10570574
>postmodern neo-marxists
t. no idea what he's talking about

>>10573051
>being a literal dysgenicist

>>10573069
those are just the buzz words the aut right loves to throw around
next he´ll call you a cuck and a soyboy

>>10573051
Wars are fought for political power, bot resources, Jesus. Also I would make lobbying illegal if I could. Just because "the system" has flaws, doesn't mean we should throw out the baby with the bathwater. You see flaws with capitalism? Great! Try to fucking fix them instead of thorwing your table like a 2 year old trying to upend the entire structure.

>>10573051
Also I'm not American and I do have ensurance.

>>10573076
>people going bankrupt because of work related accidents has anything to do with spreading genes
>>10573081
>i´m out of arguments so I´m building a strawman
>war in the middle east was so that america could rule the people and not about oil!!!
also i never said i was a marxist
this whole argument started because someone wrote "lol marxism means everyone gets paid the same xD also liberals are communists xDD"

>>10570574

Are we lobsters? No.

>>10573107
People should go to war over resources. Resources are scarce and thus the stronger population must/will survive. You are a literal dysgenicist.

>>10573152
https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/overweight-obesity
oh you mean the 70% overweight population of burgerland? who´s the dysgenicist here?
also social darwinism is reactionary anti-interlectualism

>>10573167
*intellectualism

>>10572760

Is this real? This borders on nefariously evil.

>>10573107
There is nothing liberal about american """liberals"""

>>10572760
nickland.jpg

>>10573246
and there is also nothing marxistic about the american left

>>10573246
there is nothing human about american """humans"""

>>10572732
he's more of an unwitting Hegelian 'logos is manifesting itself throughout human history and it all culminates in the notion of the sacred individual which discovers and creates its own freedom and necessity, which it conceptualizes as its relationship with god'-fag.

>>10570574

boy when you put it this way it seems really stupid

>Jordan you should really throw away this trash, it smells bad.
>No its been there a long time and that's no reason to throw it away.

>>10572614
obviously you're well versed in the ways of the brainlet, just from the opposite end

>>10571030
Wallahi you have no grasp on the power of Islam

>>10570626
My man

>>10573115
You're getting ahead of yourself. It's possible that in a simulation we are lobsters just dreaming of being humans.
Next book
>Rule 13: Pet the Lobster;Escape the Dream

>>10572788
>competition is class struggle
>Marxists believe in class struggle
>capitalists are Marxists
See how easy it is to come up with bullshit based on apophenia?

>>10570419
In the 90's, he was a professor at Harvard, and did serious research into alcohol and drug abuse. He ran several research projects, and over a hundred academic papers were published as a result. He will be remembered in the world of substance abuse treatment for the work he did at Harvard. Once he moved to University of Toronto, his quality of work seems to have suffered, becoming entrenched in 3rd rate politics, obsessed with political correctness and identity politics, and seeing "boogeymen" in all the shadows. The memory will be of a gifted psychologist, doing great work in the field of addiction treatment, whose career got side tracked and ruined by lesser issues.

>>10571094
Women were kept in the kitchen.
Love wasn't free
The cultural hedgemony was even more oppressive than it is now. People don't appreciate how civilized we have become.
Also please don't respond with your edgy incel banter. As a person who values liberty I have no interest in it.

>>10570712
I guess it’s easier to make a shitty argument for censorship and mind-molding than it is to admit you were wrong.

>>10573706
What were the conclusions of this research?

>>10573711
>how civilized we have become
>don't respond with your edgy incel banter
Femcaps...
https://youtu.be/nNOuhpGDCSQ

>>10573706
Peterson wrote Maps of Meaning while at Toronto in 1999.

>muh political correctness is a boogey man
Anyone who seriously believes this is either naive beyond measure or willfully complacent in their ideological takeover.

>>10573729
>Femcaps
Explain this portmanteau
Are you trying to say I am a feminist and a capitalist?
I am obviously not a capitalist, I just said that I value liberty.

>>10572361
Not that anon but I think he’s referring to the Assyrian Baal Tablet which tells a different story than the Babylonian Epic of Creation but does share some resemblance with the story of the crucifixion.

http://www.bobkwebsite.com/belmythvjesusmyth.html

>>10573711
>Women were kept in the kitchen.
Well someone's gotta take care of the household. It makes sense that the submissive partner stay at home and the dominant/aggressive one goes out an earns money. Usually this means that the woman stays at home since women are on average less aggressive and more caring then men. I woudln't bind being the woman in this social order at all. What's so horrible about staying at home with your children (that you love) and cooking for the husband when he gets home (that you also love)? This world wasn't perfect by any stretch, but you just came in in the 60s and 70s with a bulldozer and left nothing but ruins.

>Love wasn't free
What the fuck do you mean """free"""? As in """free love"""? Please fuck off with your hedonistic horseshit. Love (and more imporantly sex) is worthless if you don't have to earn it. Jesus. I thought this was /lit/. Didn't you read BNW?

>The cultural hedgemony was even more oppressive than it is now.
True I'll give you that, but it was all in all still a better place to live. People had their shit together and didn't stumble around lonely and confused not knowing what is real because they are fed with a constant sludge of conflicting information perpetuated by insincere ideologues (muh crisis of masculinity, muh men need to change even if it makes them miserable and unattractive to women).

>People don't appreciate how civilized we have become.
Lmao. What's so civilized about hedonism, pathetic beta males, pierced thots and modern western woman (who probably have more freedom than women ever had in any other civilization or time period) bitching about how oppressed they are? What's so civilized about taking 19th century bigotry and simply reversing victim and perpetrator? What's so civilized about the destruction of meaning, moral relativism and ever increasing loneliness and suicide rates?

>Also please don't respond with your edgy incel banter.
I'm a virgin, yes. But not a fucking incel. Incels are victims of our hedonistic culture who were promised free love and didn't take the reactionary pill once they realized their worthless boomer parents had fed them lies about sex and gender. Incels believe they are entitled to sex because that is the lessen modern egalitarian society implicitly teaches with their lies about how men and women are the same.

>As a person who values liberty I have no interest in it.
I value liberty, but I'll still take 1910 over 2018 and that's really saying something. Liberty and freedom is worthless if people are fed bullshit and lies which leads them to making the wrong decisions.

Fuck off.

>>10570419
Another fucking Boomer that recognized the problem but advocated for more of the thing that caused the problem in the first place

>>10573729
What's wrong with this?
We used to torture bears for fun before we had movies. Are you trying to say that twerking is uncivilized? It's obnoxious at worst.
Any consensual act between an enslaved ape and a young woman is none of your business.

>>10573762
I second this, returning to pre-sexual rev values is what we honestly need

>>10572863
You don't read much do you? You'd be a better judge of character.
He's constructed a narrative around his messiah complex in which he genuinely cares about these issues. It's an important component of the story he tells himself that he is absolutely and sincerely invested in these problems. Doesn't mean he's not a charlatan all the way down.
On another plane of analysis, his appeal to emotion is irrational and part of his dangerous rhetoric.
The interesting question is why you're unable to see this

>>10573769
Thank's. I'm not trying to be edgy, this is just the conclusion I've come to. Maybe I'm a bit over dramatic, but my father was a commie revolutionary and my mother a second wave feminist, so you can see why I am resentful about being fed false information. I know that it's wrong to blame other people for the decisions I ultimately made myself, but how was my teenage self supposed to know if I was being fed politically motivated lies? I took their values to heart, tried to live according to them but it just didn't match up with what I was experiencing. Their world view promised me everything and delivered jack shit.

>>10573776
>dad was a commie
>mom a femcunt
Christ Almighty, and I though my parents were bad.....(sterotypical evangelicals who go to seeker churches)

>>10573762
Not that anon.
>I woudln't bind being the woman in this social order at all
The thing is, anon, you can be in the house if you want to. That's the beauty of liberty, you can do what you want, and not have society ostracize you.
>Lmao. What's so civilized about hedonism, pathetic beta males, pierced thots and modern western woman (who probably have more freedom than women ever had in any other civilization or time period) bitching about how oppressed they are? What's so civilized about taking 19th century bigotry and simply reversing victim and perpetrator? What's so civilized about the destruction of meaning, moral relativism and ever increasing loneliness and suicide rates?
Are you implying society was without hedonism before? Because whores and betas were just kept out of sight, anon. One of the greatest criticisms about it is exactly sweeping the worthless and broken under the rug while those who can pretend they fit in with the values of then can play happily. Do you seriously think people opening up about their own issues is bad?
>I'm a virgin, yes. But not a fucking incel. Incels are victims of our hedonistic culture who were promised free love and didn't take the reactionary pill once they realized their worthless boomer parents had fed them lies about sex and gender. Incels believe they are entitled to sex because that is the lessen modern egalitarian society implicitly teaches with their lies about how men and women are the same.
Incels are not victims. They do love this "dindu nuffin" narrative though. It's never their fault that they didn't stop browsing 4chan and went outside, and were the first to talk to friends. Always someone to blame for your own shortcomings. Classic.
>I value liberty, but I'll still take 1910 over 2018 and that's really saying something.
Then you don't value liberty, anon. Get a pair of balls and stop being a conservative in denial. It's galling to everyone.

>>10573781
Their marriage wen't down the drain the moment I was born (because my """father""" is a lazy beta cunt). I've never seen them show any affection for one another, only fighting and arguing over petty shit. He is a lazy beta faggot and she is a hysterical bitch. You should see how they live. Their entire house is stuffed full with shit, my mom has spread her books and clothes into the corridor, the batch, the stairs, the living room and even my fucking childhood room because her's is already so tightly packed with shit that even she can't navigate this mess anymore. Well, at least it's a clean mess. Which brings me to my father. His room is /b/ tier and he pisses in bottles because he is too lazy to leave the literal basement. I really wish I was making this shit up. Is it a surprise to anyone that I turn out to be a reactionary with parents like these? Really?

Sorry for the personal blog.

>>10573762
I don't think you appreciate how prevalent domestic abuse become when women are literally unable to leave their partners because of no social or financial support. Your whole argument is predicated on the woman loving her family, but when semi-forced marriage (parental arrangement / post-pregnancy etc) was more common, loving relationship are obviously common.

You should go read some of the earliest proto-feminist tracts like Vindication of the Rights of Women. Appreciate the problems of the world you want before you advocate it.

>>10573802
You should consider mentally divorcing your parents and their ideologies, because they sound like dumbasses who would be bad whatever they believe. Sounds like your social beliefs are pathological rather than rational tbqh

>>10573762
you are an incel tho, you just have a more developed sense of responsibility than most

>>10573762
>Usually this means that the woman stays at home since women are on average less aggressive and more caring then men.
You act like every couple came upon this decision on their own. That simply isn't the case. Women were forced to become submissive house keepers because of cultural expectations. While men had more autonomy in deciding what to do with their life.
This "on average" meme takes all personality away from the individual. You go on about how their is no meaning in people's lives today, yet advocate to go back to a culture where women were not allowed to find their own meaning.
>True I'll give you that, but it was all in all still a better place to live
If you were a white male with property. Otherwise no, don't be delusional.
>What the fuck do you mean """free"""? As in """free love"""? Please fuck off with your hedonistic horseshit. Love (and more imporantly sex) is worthless
> if you don't have to earn it.
You seem to be thinking of the capitalist meaning of free. Free love is free in the sense that it is not enslaved by bullshit. You are free to love without repression or convention. If you are a mixed raced couple, unmarried, homosexual, you are free to love. You don't even know what free love means.
>(muh crisis of masculinity, muh men need to change even if it makes them miserable and unattractive to women)
>Muh
Yeah I don't care what you say, you are an incel. If you actually ever interacted with those people (memes do not count as social interaction) you would understand that all the current zeitgeist of feminism really advocates for to do is get people to respect femininity. Most of the bullshit has to do with liberals.
>Lmao. What's so civilized about hedonism, pathetic beta males, pierced thots and modern western woman (who probably have more freedom than women ever had in any other civilization or time period) bitching about how oppressed they are?
It seems you have confused civilized for polite.
For one, Western women now have the freedom to bitch about being oppressed.
Pierced thots have the freedom to be
>Pathetic beta males
This is because most westerners do not work outside anymore, it is a symptom of ecological alienation. I bet you have soft hands and can't tell east from west. Probably can't even name 6 herbaceous plants endemic to your bioregion.
>What's so civilized about the destruction of meaning, moral relativism and ever increasing loneliness and suicide rates?
What does this have to do with the sexual revolution? These are all product of the corporate demolition of community structure.(besides post modernism which is just an irrelevant intellectual meme at this point)
>Incels believe they are entitled to sex because that is the lessen modern egalitarian society implicitly teaches
No it's not you fucking incel.
>I value liberty
>but
No you don't

>>10573801
>The thing is, anon, you can be in the house if you want to. That's the beauty of liberty, you can do what you want, and not have society ostracize you.
Women don't marry down. Finding a dominant alpha wife is next to impossible because women aren't attracted to submissive beta males.

>Are you implying society was without hedonism before?
At least 100 years ago everyone agreed that I was bad and a vice.

>Incels are not victims.
They are. Of their own mind. Here is the thought process of the average Incel:
>be taught that everyone is equal
>be taught that there is not real difference between men and women
>be taught how great sex feels and that it's the most important thing ever
>the media and the current zeitgeist also feed into these above believes
>be horny teenage male, willing to fuck everything in sight
>since women and men are the same they think that women must desire them as much as they desire women
>get resentful when they realize that this isn't somehow the case
>conclude that women control society and are unfairly depriving them of sex because, after all, men and women are supposed to be equals in all respects

I would bet that at least 80% of Incels were raised by leftists and boomers. Prove me wrong.

>Then you don't value liberty, anon.
I do, faggot, and I choose by my own liberty that the world was a better place in 1910.

>Get a pair of balls and stop being a conservative in denial.
I'm a reactionary. With libertarian leanings. I can see the social order of the past as beneficial without being an authoritarian. And if liberty really only means hedonism and relativism, then liberty can go fuck itself. But I believe that people will chose tradition over so called "progress" once they realize they've been bamboozled. That's my ultimate goal: People choosing to live a traditional live by their own volition. Same as I did.

>Your whole argument is predicated on the woman loving her family
It's the woman's job to choose a man. People often ignore red flags because of "love", sadly. Still, this is an edge case that needs to be fixed. However, just because a structure isn't perfect doesn't mean it should be torn down, the baby thrown out with the bathwater. That's the problem with leftism and critical theory bullshit. Identify an issue with an otherwise practical and stable system, tear it down and leave nothing to fill the void, disenfranchising the next generations.

>You should go read some of the earliest proto-feminist tracts like Vindication of the Rights of Women.
You mean like Suffragettes who attacked policemen, slashed paintings and joined the British facist party? Also ever notice how all these first wave feminists were bourgeois as fuck and never working class? Really gets my noggin joggin.

>>10573828
I don't "want to get laid". I want to have a fucking relationship and a family. I no longer see the point of having sex with a person I have no feelings for. How is that incel?

>>10570419
not going to be

>>10570419
he's only looks

not even joking

>>10573802
two retards create a third, the miracle of life

>>10573830
Shit, I wrote a lengthy reply to you, but I slipped and accidentally went back deleting the entire text wall. Still this reply should suffice: >>10573838

>>10570419
As the man whom god told that trannies don't get their own pronoun.

>>10573875
Only if you can call Jungian archetypes god.

>>10573880
Peterson probably would

>>10573886
What would you call this? Jungian spirituality?

>>10573762
Nothing about the economy, huh.

>>10573838
>red flags
Where do you get this 'women choosing men' thing from? Seems ahistorical? Men were the ones to court and propose, men asked father for permission to marry daughters, men traded women as political or social leg-ups, etc etc. Women without agency were frequently coerced into marriage with men they hated.
Even if they did have the power to choose, most abusers are very good at masquerading as safe, and start abusing after a few months into the relationship. My fren if your new cultural standard is women are the property of men, you will get way more possessive abusers, and you then remove women's ability to get away from them!

There no baby in the bath. This is the central problem that early feminists were reacting against, as you'd know if you just read Vindication instead of stupidly memeing that historical figures weren't perfect.

If you don't present a case as to *why* abusive spouses are an unimportant edge case, your reasoning is clearly motivated and clearly stupid.

>>10570419
serious question, why are leftist unable to realize that they are objectively the bad guys? Their obsession with Jordan Peterson is really interesting in that they never have any real counter argument to him since they never listen or read any of his shit in the first place

>>10573893
>There no baby in the bath.
Arguing with you is a waste of time.

>>10573912
Thanks for the confirmation. I hope in some quiet moment you remember the danger of spousal abuse, and become slightly less reactionary.

>>10570712
>lose argument
>move goalpost

daily reminder that Ira Wells got BTFO by Peterson after he stepped up to him
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcGFwWc5eVI

>>10570606
this

>>10570419
if some magazine or newspaper asked me to pose with lobsters, i'd walk.

>>10573948
who's even that?

>>10570574
>>10570582
>>10570588
>>10570594
>>10570608
>>10573069
>>10573115
>>10573478
>>10570499

>all these brainlet non arguments
lol

>>10573948
>ira wells prides himself on not being like the other social justice advocates that Peterson levels on a routine basis
how can somebody say some shit like that with a straight face? the guy sounds older than 14

>>10573988
hi Ira

>>10573255
...El Atrocidad...

>>10573937
>tradition marriage is bad because some men beat their wives
Is that really your argument?

>but think off the poor battered women
I would never beat my wife. End of story. No real traditionalist would.

>>10572509
Al Gore pls leave

>>10574030
My argument is marriage without legal and social equality is bad because *many* men beat their wives given power over them. I don't care about the personal behaviour of activists and idealists like you, I care about the statistical base rate of abuse, and the necessity of empowering abuse victims to escape it.

If you had read any historical feminist literature you'd know about this argument. You know a truth-seeker is meant to expose your beliefs to their strongest counter-arguments, not just watch le SJW cringe compilations?

Yet another reactionary who gestures to the past but is completely unfamiliar with it.

>>10574072
Al Gore is an "environmental optimist" now.

>>10573985
>getting hume'd
>N-Not an argument!

>>10574027
*la atrocidad
it is femenine as it end with "a"

>>10574079
I'm not against legal equality, you twit.

>>10572814
And your best solution to this is Marxism?
I prefer what we have

>>10570419
some dude on the internet

>>10574030
>I would never beat my wife. End of story. No real traditionalist would.
brilliant, "I wouldn't do it" and "No true Scotsman"

>>10574030
>>10574115
I'm a traditionalist, and I have to say, the only reason I am is because I want to legally beat my wife.

>>10573023
yes capitalism is a zero sum game. It is a struggle to be successful and the fact of the matter is, stupid or unlucky people are going to be fucked over. At least 40% of americans are too stupid to be worth much to the economy, and the rest are either happy where they are or unlucky.

>>10574122
Same.

>>10574124
>it is another capitalist uses muh meritocracy episode
Read Micheal Young

>>10574124
Yeah but the point of his internal contradiction claim is that eventually the rich will gorge themselves to death, at least as far as this country is concerned, and the unlucky will not only lose at capitalism (ha ha, fuck them) but at life. Once all production is outsourced, who will consume domestically or pay taxes? And how do you feel about increasing the national debt to fund a stimulate short-term artificial consumption? Me neither. Capitalists will chase oversees consumers, leaving us stranded.

The point is, the wealthy would be better off investing (paying politicians) in education, infrastructure, job-training, and high-tech research (those things we are promised every so often) to create the type of economy that isn't a zero-sum game and ensures not only long-term stability, but productivity (and it would follow to assume progress, but I know that's a bad word).

The point anons are trying to extract from Marxism is not to advocate for the gulags or a gulag disguised as a utopia, but to reckon with effectively reckon with the class differences in economic interests that allow us, as working people, to survive, and you don't even need Marxism to do that. The United States has a long history of successful mass labor movements, but no so much recently.

>>10570419
He'll be remembered as the guy who said that Raskolnikov murdered his landlady.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wEimnnCFfg&t=146

>>10570419
>>10570419
He'll be remembered as the youtube """literary""" guy who said that Raskolnikov murdered his landlady.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wEimnnCFfg&t=146

>>10574158
as a side note, yeah errors, but I'd say the claim that capitalism must grow (not in a spacial sense but in a productive sense) to survive is correct. and it is a characteristic feature of oligarchs (or call them ((them)), if you like) that they don't like to budge on new forms of production that produce greater a surplus of energy insofar as it undermines their ability to control the mechanisms of wealth generation, or raise the standard of living for the proles (the political system can always be bought). The point is that the type of economic system described is not impossible, but just unlikely.

>>10571938
He clearly isn't honestly listening to what Peterson is saying

>>10574158
>>10574190
All well and good but all this requires giving the state to arbitrate and undermine the principles of property and free organization. Such power will always leave itself open to be manipulated by a small self interested group or individuals and as if we've seen time and time again this does not have pleasant results

>>10574202
>le not true Petersonite

>>10573167
America is dysgenic nation, as is any nation with welfare state, anti-meritocratic workplace policies, goverbment subsidization, et al. I'm not sure why you think America is an example of anything but gross abuses of government overreach.