/lit/ - Literature

The irony is now someone has to wash his penis for him.

>>14840389
wonder who she is

>>14840359
So.. Why did he go off the deep end in the first place?

>>14840389
Serves him well for being a shabbos goy

>>14840397
Guilt over preaching that you should speak the truth while concealing the truth about Jews

>>14840359
Did he ever actually say that?

>>14840397
I believe he was conflicted.
He knows (((who))) is making life so hard for young men but he didn't have the guts to fight for what he believed in.

DUDE

BENZOS

>>14840359
I'll have you know I wash my dick because I don't wash my hands after I piss because I don't piss on my hands, but I do wash my hands after I shit even though I don't shit on my hands because shit gets on your hands when you wipe your ass, and I also wash my ass when I wash my dick

Someone redpill me on why this guy is loved by many but also hated by many.

>>14840397
Zizek played the Tiresias to his Oedipus in their 'debate' or whatever you wanna call it (it obviously wasn't a debate). JP thought he knew what he was criticizing in academia, just like Oedipus believed he knew how to lord over Thebes. When Zizek threw his unfounded ideas right back in his face with a simple question ("Where are these 'neo-Marxists' you keep bitching about?") it was like Oedipus learning that he was the one who killed his father. Oedipus realized he was a fraudulent king and JP realized he was a fraudulent pop-culture theorist. Oedipus responded by blinding himself & JP responded, rather pathetically, by eating his way through bottles of benzos, so that he didn't have form any new memories concerning his mass-scale scam that led to his fame. I'd almost feel bad for the dude if he wasn't such a hypocrite for constantly yelling about the dangers of alcohol & alcoholism while taking benzos, which are essentially pills that deliver the same effect as alcoholism. The prick.

>>14840893
i used to like him when i was younger because:
a) he's sort of well spoken
b) has some kind of inspiring rethoric
c) hated on leftism
d) i was a fucking mess
e) filled the role of a public intelectual
he is hated because:
a) he puts the responsabiblity on the individual while ignoring sociological factors (race, gender, class, etc)
b) his speech is rather mistical than clear
c) appeals manly to young man
d) his books are basically self help books with some evolutionary psychology thrown in them.
d) politically right-ringwer even if he denies it
e)appeals to the social status, basically a funcitonalist.
d) misrepresents every school of thought that doesn't align with his world views
e) he's massively popular, which instantly makes people say that he's intelligent for dumb people.

Do we have any updates on him?

>>14840359
Did he died?

>>14840944
I dig this breakdown. I think the bulk of the people who love him can be boiled down to
>d) i was a fucking mess
and the reason the bulk of people hate him is because of
>d) misrepresents every school of thought that doesn't align with his world views

I also dig your avant-garde alphabet of "abcddede". Pure pottery.

>>14840957
He's a retard now.

It still baffles me such a well-educated man, in clinical psychology no less, would pursue such a risky, non-conventional form of treatment when he must've had more than enough money to afford the best treatment programs across the US/Canada. Who would ignore the universally used tapering method that's been proven successful for decades and put themselves into a coma just to avoid dealing with withdrawal while conscious instead? Benzo withdrawal is brutal but it's better to bite the bullet and suffer through it under medical supervision than be content with permanently ruining your neurological or physiological health, which is clearly what happened according to his daughter's update. He isn't an idiot, I don't know what he was thinking.

>>14840990
We are all hypocrites. Unfortunately for him, his hypocrisy was displayed before everyone. This is not to say I'm defending him but simply empathizing.

>>14840957
Worse, he's barely more than a vegetable right now. Unless his daughter was exaggerating it sounds like it'll take years for him to become even a tiny fraction of his old self. I hope he gets there eventually but the old JP who became a major part of board culture 2 years ago is dead and gone

His fate makes me sad. I found him entertaining but I never bought his books or anything. I’m usually apathetic to things like this, but what happened to him just seems... cruel.

Now that Peterson hate has become so popular my contrarianism is kicking in. I mean the guy meant well. There is a clear lack of models of masculinity today and many people are suffering because of it. Peterson tried to fill the gap by offering himself as such a model. He took upon himself a task so demanding that his back broke under the weight. He failed, yes, but at least in a noble pursuit.

>>14840944
Thanks for answering.
It sounds like he's more 'good' than 'bad'. I say fuck the naysayers. I'm also not too keen on what the fuck happened between him and meds. This thread makes it sound like he took some pills that functionally dropped his IQ by 70 points.

>>14840996
I'd normally be tempted to call someone who did what he did weak or foolish but he spoke frequently about his own struggles with depression and I think he was able to connect with so many young disaffected men because he was like them too. So yeah, it's sad to see his lowest point turned into a meme - but it's 4chan, what can you expect? I've never been a big fan of his but he always seemed sincere and nobody should have to go through what he did let alone have it broadcast to the entire world. I still respect him, flaws and all

So which was it that gave him brain damage, the benzos or the Russian doctors?

>>14841038
>I say fuck the naysayers.
lol, you've done a great job of replicating JP's hyper-delicate persona. If someone calls you out for being wrong or misleading, just say fuck them and run away, rather than actually try to deal with your issues.

>>14841079
He helped people.
If I was famous, I would expect at least some people trying to make clickbait by slandering me.
If I let that get me down, I am a weakling.
So yes, fuck them.

>>14841071
Going cold turkey from benzos will give you brain damage - so will abusing them but he it's not like he was on them for years and according to his daughter he took them as prescribed. Instead he went cold turkey WHILE completely comatose and being overseen by doctors who were probably far less experienced and trustworthy than anyone in the West. Seeking alternative treatment isn't always bad but benzo withdrawal is one of the most serious things so it's insane to experiment like he did. Everyone has lapses in judgement his just cost a very severe price.

>>14840389
He's a vegetable?

>>14841104
Then why did he quit cold turkey instead of doing it gradually?

>>14841150
He has the biggest balls a professor could have.

>>14840408
in a way.

he told young men to stop masterbating so much and go out and get girls

>>14841160
And thanks to it, now he has also the smallest brain.

>>14841097
>He helped people.
Sure, I'll give you that. I'm sure there are some lonely, ornery young men who bettered themselves because of his book. Cool. But he simultaneously did radical harm to the perception of universities. What he claims about a cabal of "postmodern neo-Marxists" is so demonstrably false, but it got into peoples' heads, and now an entire generation of his followers are anti-academia because of his misrepresentation. That'll ending doing more harm than good, because these alienated young men will avoid going to college because "muh marxist & feminist professors."
I've been a graduate student at a relatively large public university for 3 years, and having gotten neck-deep in the shit of administration, it's ABUNDANTLY clear that neoliberals who co-opt identity politics are the problem, not "postmodern neo-Marxists" (a term that anyone who's remotely educated in the humanities will realize is a ridiculous phrase).

>>14841176
Take massive risks and deal later with the consequences (Big Balls) or Wait "just a little bit" in spite of the circumstances and make Reasonable Decisions (Big Brain)

Truly an underapreciated dilemma every man shall face in his lifetime...

>>14841235
Well said. The Balls/Brain dilemma is the plight of the men of all times.

>>14840872
If your first wipe is from the gooch back towards the asshole the chance of getting shit on your hands drops dramatically. Women have to do this all the time because otherwise they'll get shit in their pussies lmao

>>14841150
That's what nobody knows for sure. He wouldn't have gone cold turkey if it wasn't for the coma because that would be 10x more painful than tapering. He probably wanted it over with while being unconscious. My guess is he simply has a low pain tolerance and couldn't handle being conscious while withdrawing like others but I'm not going to judge without knowing all the facts.

>>14841130
>In early 2020, his daughter revealed that he had spent the previous year struggling with addiction to benzodiazepine tranquilizers and had gone to Russia for an experimental treatment that included a medically induced coma. He was neurologically damaged and unable to type or walk unaided.

Pretty much, yeah.

>>14841203
>radical harm to the perception of universities.
>What he claims about a cabal of "postmodern neo-Marxists"
>it got into peoples' heads, and now an entire generation of his followers are anti-academia
>these alienated young men will avoid going to college because "muh marxist & feminist professors."
After I returned to my non-english-speaking country in 2016, I starting hearing from some right-winged relatives that the former president had made successful efforts in putting in 'marxist' teachers in colleges, illustrating a similar scenario that you just said JP was talking about. I'm having a difficult time imagining that JP was behind spreading this truth/falsehood as well.

>>14841327
>some right-winged relatives that the former president had made successful efforts in putting in 'marxist' teachers in colleges
Is that Brazil & Lula? I know that kind of stuff going on in Brazil. Basically finding one crazy professor saying radical shit & filming it, then saying that the entire school is jamming these beliefs down students' throats. That spread, if I'm correct, mostly through youtube (ie JP's preferred medium).
>I'm having a difficult time imagining that JP was behind spreading this truth/falsehood as well.
In North America, he's the most powerful proponent of this idea. I teach freshman-level English, and I had a student express his concern about identity-politics leftists running the school, and then later in the semester as I talked to him I discovered he was a big JP fan. Obviously this is anecdotal, and I'm not claiming it explicitly proves anything, but it feels to me like no one in America has had quite the impact of creating this conception of academia as JP.

>>14841371
Yes, Brazil.

is there a name for these vertical crows feet and how do you get them

>>14841800
High iq peaks. Only occurs when your brow is constantly furrowed with the most profound questions anyone could ask during their brief existence.

>>14841371
I dunno, man. The grad school I went to was full of progressive lunatics. It’s not just a hallucination; it’s an impression with at least some basis in reality.

>>14840397
Gaslighted himself by acting like God exists while not believing God exists.

>>14841280
>women have to do this
Are you wiping your ass in direction towards your crotch?

>>14840397
his dying wife and benzos?

>>14841823
Same here, I went to the same uni Marx,Feuerbach,Schiller went and the amount of leftist is overwhelming. And there is the student council, ought to represent the WHOLE student body, only concern themselves with gender neutral toilets, gender neutral language. Most disgusting is their blatant nepotism. Funny thing is that in my uni town even immigrants( people with visible dark skin) are getting attacked for having vanilla conservative ideas. I was grabbed once and called a nazi(I'm black). There are even worse university cities were conservatives are afraid of going outside because if indetified you get mauled or at least viciously orally attacked on the spot. These are the extremes I have to add. And not representative for all universities.

>>14841815
If he truly had a high IQ, he wouldn't need to furrow his brow against even the most profound questions. These are pseud ridges.

>>14841280
the sitting toilet and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

>>14841823
Same, and in my case there’s a lot of outright Marxism. Idk Zizek asking him where the Marxists are was apparently such a gotcha, lumpenprole Marxists are everywhere in the humanities.

>>14840939
Quality take

>>14841130
No. His daughter posted a photo of him standing next to her before they left Russia so he can stand by himself at the very least.

>>14840939
Based, I can picture it now, Peterson suckling on Zizek's shrivelled androgynous dugs.

He looks...good?

Is he gonna make it?

>>14840397
He read Two Hundred Years Together

>>14842680
>good
That's almost weekend at Bernie's tier, i.e. nowhere near good.

>>14840964
He's always been a retard.

>>14841203
How exactly do you account for things like the Boghossian affair? Or all that stuff that went down at Evergreen college? Sure, people just going along with idpol are a big part of the problem but don't pretend that that nonsense didn't come out of the universities in the first place, certain departments and subjects are corrupted as fuck and you know it.

>>14842460
...and Peterson's immediate response was, here is a reliable citation showing that X proportion (can't remember the amount) of professors self-identity as Marxists. It definitely wasn't a gotcha moment.

>>14840437
the man is a Koch shill
Koch backed policies are what is making life so hard for young people

>>14840359
He's like the dysfunctional father I always wanted.

>>14841130
No, still just a giant fruit though

>>14841203
>neoliberals who co-opt identity politics are the problem

Exactly this, and the reason they do so is to de-economize politics (amplifying politics centered around race and various forms of identity, anything EXCEPT class really) while simultaneously de-politicizing the economy - in other words transferring partisan politics from focusing on the economic system into centering over inflated social issues to create the modern "culture wars" as a smoke screen for the true problem: transnational elites vs. the powerless masses

It's a genius move that global elites have successfully been pulling in response to the challenging of structures of power in the 1960s. It's remarkable that, for all its redpills, 4chan is still almost entirely oblivious to this.

Isn't ironic that his daughter only eats meat and now her father is a vegetable??

>>14842788
He was on the meat only diet for quite a while too.

>>14841203
>it's ABUNDANTLY clear that neoliberals who co-opt identity politics are the problem, not "postmodern neo-Marxists"

Whenever I hear the words class reductionism, I reach for my revolver.

>>14842773

>>14842903
A picture truly is worth a thousand words. This image demonstrates my point far better than I could have explained it in my post.

It is remarkable how well they have managed to stay several steps ahead of the opposition for such a long time, carefully preparing and executing their calculated plans to embrace movements that further their agenda before these movements even gain public traction in the first place. "Woke" culture must have made their jobs so much easier. It's all so tiresome.

>>14842788

M O N S P U B I S

O

N

S

P

U

B

I

S

>>14842975
It doesn't matter who gets voted into what, they're all ineffective against the ones truly in control. The system is strong because its pillars are many. If you want to fix the system, you have to demolish it entirely, knocking out the head and burning it.

>>14840893
>why this guy is loved by many but also hated by many.
He has opinions

>>14843035
He is loved and hated for the same reason, fragile millenials ego

>>14840893
Half of America hates the other half and it's only getting worse. The dynamic is similar in other Western countries but it's far more pronounced here. You cannot become a recognizable public figure without being despised by a large segment of the population. Andrew Yang is the closest there is to an exception I can think of right now but outside of his internet support bubble voters didn't take even him seriously enough for him to win a single delegate.

The commies here didn't like his anti-victim mindset. The ultra right thought he cucked on the JQ. I still think he was very reasonable and well spoken. I find it weird that he is so controversial.

>>14842747
Fitting that her name is basically the onomatopoeia for the noise of dismissively snorting

>>14842773
It is true that both a) the elites use these issues to distract people from challenging their own rule, and b) these issues are actually important and consequential

>>14842788
OwO nice bulge

>>14842773
/pol/ has been talking about that forever. in like 2012/2013 there were a bunch of guys on /pol/ who were at Occupy Wall Street and saw that happen in real time

>>14843101
The media cultivated the idea that there are correct and incorrect political views
It started going full retard when they started peddling that electing a black president was the 'right thing to do' and denying him presidency would be morally wrong
It only got worse after the evil drumpf took power and now our politics are talked about the same way they talk about fucking star wars and Harry Potter
It's the complete infantilization of adult speech

>>14843147
He was controversial because he was dismissive of SJWism (making him "Nazi adjacent" in the eyes of the faithful), but too articulate to be ritually humiliated through emotive pilpul, which is how the Cathedral usually tries to cut challengers down to size (see his interview with Cathy Newman). This made him a threat, because the Cathedral relies for control on intimidating people into silence lest you be unpersoned for voicing heresy, and he demonstrated that you could defy it and get away with it.

>>14843264
>defy it
>Peterstein
LMAO

>>14842788
She looks a little bit like Melissa Moore in the face. And that's a good thing

>>14842788
that's a fat pussy

>>14840990
>Benzo withdrawal is brutal but it's better to bite the bullet and suffer through it under medical supervision
Some people simply cannot go through with it. Not everyone has the same capacity to handle fear/pain.

>>14840359
I always love how much 4chan hates a guy who tells them to wash their penis.

>>14843264
I think it was precisely because he couldn't exactly be pinned as a Nazi or altright that he enraged them so much. He was dissenting but not in a way that they could immediately tar and feather, he was a university professor at a good school so he had their own academic prestige, and he managed to promote a sort of Boomer liberalism tinged with bits of rightist rhetoric in a way that just made him seem eccentric and independent. They absolutely despise this sort of centrism because they see it as crypto-fascism that will lead moderates away from leftism or left-liberalism.

Add on to this that he really did not know what he was talking about wrt Marxism or Postmodernism, but he had in his vague grasping boomer way managed to realize that Marxist leftists, liberals, and postmodernists pretty much all somehow agree on things like Antiracism, Feminism, LGBT, etc. and the butthurt reached a sort of fever pitch Those groups hate being associated with each other, and nobody is supposed to notice that the Prog stuff really has taken precedence over old disputes. You're not supposed to even consider that stuff as like political positions a person can have, it's gauche to even talk about it in that sense. So he's pointing out something they dont like thinking about while also being completely wrong about the actual reality of Marxism, pomo, etc. yet getting a huge audience for his retarded takes.

It was hilarious watching him enrage everyone while being totally clueless about what he was actually doing. The guy genuinely believed his retarded individualism shtick and his ridiculous Jungian pseudo-Christian whatever the fuck memery was winning people over, rather than his having positioned himself basically accidentally at the ideal sociopolitical locus to cause a gigantic shitstorm and give disaffected young men some kind of belief structure they could latch onto for muh self-improvement.

>>14843319
Good take

>>14841371
>Is that Brazil & Lula? I know that kind of stuff going on in Brazil. Basically finding one crazy professor saying radical shit & filming it, then saying that the entire school is jamming these beliefs down students' throats. That spread, if I'm correct, mostly through youtube (ie JP's preferred medium).
As a brazilian enrolled in a large public university I can absolutely guaran-fucking-tee it's chock-full of marxist ideologues. Hell, the universities were THE haven for leftist/marxist groups in the country since the early-days of the military dictatorship, remaining so for the entire period and still holding the monopoly of academic discussion with an iron fist. It only takes a few seconds to notice how influent these people were/are in the humanities, to the point where the entire educational system is based on said ideologization.
I can't speak for other countries but Brazil definitely fits in what JP criticized when it came to academia. It's not just "one crazy professor".

>>14843264

idiotic to think that the 'cathedral' took him down, he took himself down

Segments of academia are undeniably corrupted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair

>>14843368
Also, let Camille Paglia talk you through the genesis of thoroughly fake and gay disciplines like women's studies.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v-hIVnmUdXM

>>14843358
Brazilian and can confirm this. In the US and Canada when they say “Marxists” they just mean left-liberal post-modernist, but in here it’s actual true-believing marxists who believe in the LTV, the proletarian revolution, etc. that’s because we had actual Stalinist, Maoist, Castrist communist parties coordinating the infiltration of academia and the military regime didn’t do jack shit about it.

>>14843316
It's even funnier because most americans here are circumcised so they keep saying at least they don't need to wash their dicks lmao apparently they do

>>14840359
What a great thread about books.

>>14840944
He's not that bad in general but he's not a serious philosopher and he shouldn't have debated Zizek of all people- a philosppher much more well read than him.

>>14843360
More like the cathedral absorbed him just as it is capable of doing with any supposed dissident that do not actually wish to completely overturn the system. People like Peterstein only makes the Cathedral stronger.

>>14841037
>a task so demanding that his back broke under the weight.
lol no. His back didn't break under the weight. He never took the weight on properly to begin with; he was just a self-help guru who became more and more enraptured with his own celebrity. The real cause of his anxiety and depression was his failure to reconcile himself with truths that he was plainly aware of intellectually but failed to actually voice publicly - either to himself or others. I am not talking about Jews. I am talking about this "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" crap. He knows it's bullshit; he knows we're all really victims of our material circumstance. But the Brothers tell him to promote transcendentalism, so he does.

>>14840939
Underrated.

Get well soon Peterson. Life is hell.

>>14843583
>he knows we're all really victims

Well no, that isn't accepted universal wisdom. In fact you could make a case that that statement is the major fault line between left and right.

>>14840939
The benzos are because hes been depressed his entire life and his wife is dying. You cant seriously think it's because of his debate with Zizek even if you like the idea because it sounds like a cartoon with your favorite character btfoing the character you dont like

>>14843668
My point is that he actually recognises this aspect of left wing thinking as being essentially true but refuses to admit it either to himself or his audience as it would undermine his entire praxis. It would also put him at odds with his financiers.

>>14843745
I think he rejects it because it's not useful psychologically to see yourself as a victim rather than focus on what you can change. The left would say this is supporting existing inequalities, but some random guy might still feel a lot better being a low level wage slave who works out than being a resentful neet, which is really all Peterson was telling them to do.

In so far as we are all victims he probably doesn't believe it's possible for society to be structured such as there are no 'victims', ie. those lower in hierarchy. It is a basic right wing tenet that the left's desire to level these inequalities is a hopeless pipe dream if not an outright deceitful masquerade for power grabbing among a vanguard who want to be the new elite.

>>14843360
Good thing I didn't say that, then.

>>14843787
>it's not useful psychologically to see yourself as a victim rather than focus on what you can change
It's also not useful to just accept whatever shitty hand you're dealt meekly.

Sometimes killing people and breaking shit IS the right answer, but Peterson would never admit that because he's a jaded old man.

Violence and strife might not make your life better - but Peterson himself admits that that's not the point. The point is to live righteously, and sometimes that means fucking up the fucked up world today so that a new, better one has space to emerge.

Peterson would now say that I'm too young and too much of a failure to possibly have a worthwhile opinion on the world anyway and what the fuck do I know about anything, but I stopped giving a shit about ad hominems ten years ago. If he's as much of an adult as he thinks he is he should surely be able to do better than that.

>>14843815
>just accept whatever shitty hand you're dealt meekly

Absolutely antithetical to what Peterson spent two years preaching to crowds about lmao. Would be a poor starting point for any self-help author!

>>14843844
>improve yourself
>but don't bother trying to improve anything around you, if you're a good person the world will just get better by itself like magic!
I'm not paraphrasing his arguments, I'm parodying them.

>>14843844
>don't accept your McJob
>improve yourself just enough to enter into white collar work but whatever you do, don't actually threaten the system
Wow, how compelling.

>>14843445
I’m right-wing but that debate was embarrassing. Peterstein obviously had only read the communist manifesto, which he tried to refute with boomer libertarian points. Zizek was charitable with him. I guess European politeness prevented him from tearing a new asshole on ole Juden Kikenstein.

>>14842747
Idpol have nothing to do with Karl Marx, or even Lenin. You continue to miss the point completely.
Jordan Peterson is like Alain Soral in France. A strong male figure for fatherless young adults who identify with him. However, it's been many years since we noticed in France that Soral was far from being the Messiah, and that he had his own contradiction. About time for young americans to realize the same with Jordan Peterson.

>>14843847
His point was to improve yourself first before improving the world around you. In Petersons mind shitty people make the world shittier even if they have good intentions.

>>14844003
(...) Oh by the way before Peterson went AWOL, like last summer, i predicted that Jordan Peterson would have the same fate as Alain Soral on this very website. I thought his ego would catch with him, and that he would implode. If i remember, i even predicted some sex scandal or stuff like that. Finally, it was benzo addiction, which is not much better for a man who was supposed to be the leader of young white males.
Do not follow leaders, young retards. Read, and forge your own opinion.

>>14844038
>His point was to improve yourself first before improving the world around you
But "you're not good enough yet" is an endless argument used to stifle anyone you disagree with - because, of course, the only possible reason that anyone could disagree with you would be if they weren't yet good enough.

>>14843005
>you have to demolish it entirely, knocking out the head and burning it.
Do you like living without running water anon? Start with yourself *then* decide your view on the system.

>>14840939
>well thought post
>long and engaging
>no reddit spacing
>clearly started with the Greeks
Is this /lit/?

>>14843236
Actually, it doesn't happen since 2012/2013 but since the 1960s, when the power that be decided to put forward identity politics in mainstream medias and stop inviting people who were into real class struggle.
The only thing that scare them, really scare them, is not Hitlerian costumes, or swatiskas, but massive and uncontrolled unlimited general strikes. This scare them shitless. But it will still take 10 years for the incels on this board to realize this.

>>14840944
>a) he puts the responsabiblity on the individual while ignoring sociological factors (race, gender, class, etc)
Dont see the problem
>b) his speech is rather mistical than clear
I've never heard him use vague terms except when he made a remark about snakes and dna
>c) appeals manly to young man
Young men are attracted to him but nothing he does is particularly mals oriented
>d) his books are basically self help books with some evolutionary psychology thrown in them.
Maps of Meaning isnt a self help book. His 90's lectures stick to the theme of psycho-political analysis.
>d) politically right-ringwer even if he denies it
This only seems true because the left disassociates itself with centrism or centre left to the point that lukewarm, relatively non-contravertial common-sense opinions are considered 'conservative'. making it seem as though
>d) misrepresents every school of thought that doesn't align with his world views
People always claim he does this but they never follow through with exaples.
>inb4 postmodernism and Marxism are incompatible
He acknowledges this
>e) he's massively popular, which instantly makes people say that he's intelligent for dumb people.
This is kind of understandable. A lot of his public lectures are stylistically akin stand-up comedy in the sense that he's entertaining them somewhat. He does a very good job at making what he has to teach accessible enough for the general public without compromising any more than is necessary (he still refers to philosophers by name and uses a vocabulary that might require some google search definitions on the audience's part), but it's easy to understand how a well-read individual would be skeptical at the way he delivers his talks.

>>14842788
I want her to eat my meat, if you catch my drift!

>>14840437
You mean (((he)))?

>>14841037
He meant to unify the alt right and add “normies” in to the movement. The alt right movement is ultimately there to bring about unhinged capitalism and kleptocracy, they want to privatise the world and buy your sorry asses.

>>14844354
>Ethno-socialists want to privatise the world.

>>14842632

That's a body double the Russians found and implemented. Peterson's radical conservatism is too dangerous to the US to not let him continue to do more damage.

>>14844357
Don’t confuse the common foot soldier of the day with the puppet masters like Koch, etc.

>>14844367
The Kochs fund socially acceptable foot solidiers in Republicans, why would they tie themselves to nazis?

>>14844354
>The alt right movement is ultimately there to bring about unhinged capitalism and kleptocracy, they want to privatise the world and buy your sorry asses.
Nigga wut

>>14844289
I want her to have sex with me, if you know what I’m saying.

>>14844412
Wait, you haven’t figured that out yet? Look at trump and brexit, the paid for YT alt righters, etc. What’s their end game? To neuter actual nazis, gather forces by attracting normies, making them accept Jewish leadership (rogan, harris, Rubin, Shapiro, etc) and be good goy slaves for the coming national robbery.

>>14844397
Because they’re the overwhelming hip majority. Free PR.

>>14844496
Nigga you cray
Also
>Blumpf
>altright

>>14844003
I never said it had anything to do with Marx or Lenin, clearly what Peterson was crusading against is the postmodern tendancy ie, radical relativism, 'social contructivism' etc which is absolutely rampant in certain university departments. I admit that his use of the term 'neomarxist' is clunky and distracting but it is disingenuous to pretend that what he had his sights on just doesn't exist. It certainly does. Again, please account for the Boghossian affair! By itself it is absolute evidence that this issue is not a paranoid conspiracy.

>>14841130
He's in a better place, where his philosophy makes sense.

>>14844532
Are you saying trump isn’t an alt right kleptocrat?

>>14844546

>>14844559

>>14844564

>>14844568

>>14844574

>>14844582

>>14844586

>>14844546
Causality reversal. progressivism doesn't exist on itself. It is an ideology generated by the Capital. The Capital only favor what favors him. Progressivism, aka the left of the Capital, is Capitalism laboratory. News idea being created in order to increase the domination of the exchange value based system in the future. E.G: in the 1960s: women power! women can be free and work independantly! Today, most women are wage slave, cannot even not work, and are obliged to work in order to pay rent and daily expenses. Same for LGBT: distraction from class struggle, mass immigration: increase offer on the labor market, thus lowering prices. All these are not that complicated, but the alt-right of the Capital, doesn't seem to understand it.

>>14844594

>>14844602

>>14844613

>>14844623

>>14844638

>>14844650

>>14844659

>>14844669

>>14844650
>>14844638
>>14844623
>>14844613
>>14844602
>>14844594
>>14844582
>>14844564
>>14844559
>>14844546
Fucking hell, University education is worthless and gutless now. I'm so glad I pay almost nothing for my STEM major at my State University without having to deal with this bullshit. And they wonder, huh why are the Universities are closing down?

>>14844678

>>14844696

>>14844705

>>14844574
That’s a fake iirc

>>14844710

>>14844729

>>14844741

>>14844750

>>14844750
>>14844757
Stop wasting your time with this stupid clickbait.
Clownworld is already an addiction to some of you fuckheads.

>>14843698
can't you see he is trolling?

>>14843815
these kind of people actually exist lmao. enjoy knowing you will feel dominated for the rest of your miserable life.

>>14844559
More like because she’s barren

>>14842903
Fucking hell, we truly and utterly lost in this timeline, didnt we bros?

>>14844602
If there is no race, how is some people "indigenous"??? holy fuck

>>14844003
Soral is retarded, JP is much better.

>>14842751
People act like it was though

>>14844678
>>14844669
>>14844659
>>14844623
>>14844602
>>14844594
>>14844586
>>14844568
>>14844559

>>14840939
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wsz6ijXWS3A

>Oedipus realized he was a fraudulent king and JP realized he was a fraudulent pop-culture theorist.
I don't see that at all. He certainty had anxiety during the debate (no doubt due to the fact that he came completely unprepared and very quickly realized he had know idea who he was dealing with) but I think it's dishonest to say he was defeated by the question.

>>14844080
>well though post
>get the crux of its argument objectively wrong

Why are anti-petersonfag so prone to incredibly obvious lie? This happen in every thread

>>14846068
>no doubt due to the fact that he came completely unprepared
That's what pissed me off most about JP's appearance at the debate. He admitted that he had only read TCM once when he was a teenager, yet he gained massive popularity for criticizing "neo-Marxism" when he obviously understood nothing about it. He admitted that he not only hadn't read The German Ideology, The Grundrisse, or any of Capital, aka the actual substantial writings of Marx, but he hadn't read any of the "neo-Marxists" like Horkheimer, Adorno, Lukacs, Althusser, Jameson, Spivak, Chibber, Eagleton &c. &c.. It's downright hilarious that his examples of "neo-Marxists" are fucking Foucault and Derrida, neither of whom ever self-identified as Marxists, and are typically argued against by *actual* Marxists in contemporary academia.
To me, this shows that he either 1. doesn't understand the rigors of research in the humanities 2. has no respect for humanities researchers.

>but I think it's dishonest to say he was defeated by the question.
1. He doesn't even remember the name of the organization that he bases his criticism of Marxism on (you can hear that the moderator or someone has to tell him the name).
2. Zizek asks a simple thing: 1 proper name of a Marxist in academia, and even gives him 2 names himself.
3. He returns to his same, tired, misrepresentation of Marxism as "moving by slight of hand" into identity politics.
Here's my favorite, and most illuminating move he makes: 4. He says "people who are postmodernists say: 'look, one of the hallmarks of postmodernism is skepticism of meta-narratives'". There are several funny things about this. Firstly, I've been in academia for 7 years straight now, and I've never encountered someone who identifies as 'a postmodernist'. It's not a school of theory that you follow; it's an analytic tool to describe the consciousness of a particular era. Secondly, that line of "skepticism of meta-narratives" is such a pedestrian appraisal of postmodernism; it's the first thing you read about it on fucking Wikipedia. That line is taken from Fredric Jameson's (notably an actual Marxist himself) excellent article "Postmodernism, or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism" which Peterson obviously hasn't read in full (it's like 20 pages) because he never actually provides any thoughtful insight into what postmodern logic is.

>>14846093
What was the crux of its argument? I'm the dude who wrote the Greek thing last night half-in-jest and half-imbibed. Frankly, I do feel stupid for spending so much time on a Croatian fly-fishing forum attacking a charlatan.

>>14846172
Is Peterson actually wrong though that the pomos often deconstructed meta-narratives while still trying to smuggle in their narratives about progress and equality and stuff

>>14840944
>abcdedefde
Based retard

>>14846190
>the pomos
Did you read the entirety of my post? I'm confused who you mean by "the pomos." Derrida & Foucault are post-structuralists. Is that who you mean?

>>14846211
I mean the entire set of people who liked to mock others beliefs structures as naive but hold their own narratives as unquestionable. Foucault to his credit did not do this but questioned academia as well.

>>14846190
>>14846211
Addendum: maybe you mean Lyotard, because he's commonly called a 'postmodernist', but it doesn't fit to me. Lyotard (& Derrida, Foucault et al.) diagnosed and analyzed what they saw as the nature of postmodern society. But that doesn't mean they endorse it. I'm gonna repeat that, because it's important: writing ABOUT something does not mean you ENDORSE it. To make a silly analogy, oncologists diagnose and study cancer, but that doesn't mean they advocate for cancer, right? Quite the opposite, I'm assuming. We don't call oncologists "cancerists", but for some reason JP and others call people who write about postmodernism "postmodernists".

>>14846226
>the entire set of people who liked to mock others beliefs structures as naive but hold their own narratives as unquestionable
You're still being vague. Could you maybe give me a book of a philosopher who does this? Have you ever read Derrida? He's actually quite funny and charming in his prose, and doesn't construct a narrative that he finds 'unquestionable'. He's pretty self-demeaning at times, in fact.

>>14846246
Derrida's attitude towards Fascism is a good example

>>14846255
I'm not an expert in Derrida; in which book does he write about fascism? I've only read The Gift of Death, Specters of Marx, and part of Of Grammatology.

>>14846190
Yes. He's quite wrong. Post modern writers have critiqued progress, equality, etc. as grand narratives. Hell, the critique of identity offered by writers like Barthes, Foucault, et al. was in turn critiqued by third wave feminists like bell hooks.

Peterson doesn't know a damn thing about post modernism or Marxism except all the bunk Stephen Hicks made up. And to cut right to the issue as >>14846172 suggestions. Peterson doesn't know anything because he has no respect for the humanities.

>>14846270
https://www.acla.org/deconstruction-literature-and-singularity-against-fascist-mythologies
This sort of thing

They are never 'deconstructing communist mythology' or whatever

>>14846236
The post modernist tag is an easy shorthand for describing writers whose subject is post modernism. In that sense, I don't think it's wrong to use it; though, we're certainly seeing the aftermath of its imprecision.

>>14846276
What is this, a CFP with a single Derrida quote? I don't think this is very substantial evidence for your claim. I'm going to point out that Derrida's fear/dislike of fascism is probably more practical than you think. Fascist governments were notorious for pushing academics that didn't toe the party line out of their jobs. Thus, the fear of fascism was really an act of self-preservation, so that Derrida could keep his comfy job. It's the same thing in contemporary America. Of course most professors vote for left-leaning candidates; Democrats tend to increase financing for education (aka the profs get paid more) while Republicans tend to decrease financing (aka the profs get paid less). It's not some "postmodern neo-Marxist" conspiracy that professors are left-leaning; it's an act of financial self-interest. I'd figure that capitalists would actually appreciate that.

>>14846172
>He doesn't even remember the name of the organization that he bases his criticism of Marxism on (you can hear that the moderator or someone has to tell him the name).
Irrelevant.
>Zizek asks a simple thing: 1 proper name of a Marxist in academia, and even gives him 2 names himself.
Whether or not he can namedrop academic marxists is irrelevant if the statistic he cited was correct.
>He returns to his same, tired, misrepresentation of Marxism as "moving by slight of hand" into identity politics.
He doesnt misrepresent Marxism when he does that. That's his definition of 'neo-marxism', 'neo' because traditional Marxist concepts were recontectualized as he describes.

>>14846276
Also:
>They are never 'deconstructing communist mythology' or whatever
Yes, Derrida actually does this. His book "Specters of Marx" does exactly that: he examines academic Marxism in 1993, after the disintegration of the USSR.
Also >>14846273 brings up a great point about >>14846190. Post-structuralists were generally opposed to 'progress' because it was considered a Hegelian conception of historical movement, and post-structuralists in general were critical of Hegel. Also, if you've ever read a 20th century French philosopher, you'd know they don't believe in "equality"; it's usually pretty clear they think of themselves as quite above the rest of the population. As for "stuff", well, I can't argue with that.

Ultimately he's right, any pushback on the death memes is fine by me. Thinking that men can be women or vice versa will prevent younger men from realizing that the only way to be a man is to have a love for conquering. The only thing you can have is what you take. Nothing is given to you and anything that is "given" will only rot you from the inside

There is no gender spectrum, the only choice is between Man and entropy

>>14846361
>Irrelevant.
Being shook at an academic discussion indicates an anxiety about your performance. JP obviously knew he was trying to save a sinking ship with a coffee mug.
>Whether or not he can namedrop academic marxists is irrelevant if the statistic he cited was correct.
So I've looked around the Heterodox Academy website for the claim that "25% of social scientists identify as Marxists" and can't find what he's talking about.
Here's a link that shows a study indicating that professors are overwhelmingly left-leaning, but the entire pages says nothing about Marxism:
https://heterodoxacademy.org/professors-moved-left-but-country-did-not/
Again, the left-leaning nature of professors is obvious, see >>14846342. But left-wing politics =/= Marxism. I shouldn't even have to say that.
>That's his definition of 'neo-marxism', 'neo' because traditional Marxist concepts were recontectualized as he describes.
But why should I care about his conception of "neo-marxism" when he obviously has never read any of the "neo-marxists"? Again, he clearly doesn't value humanities research.

>>14846342
>Fascist governments were notorious for pushing academics that didn't toe the party line out of their jobs.
So were Communist governments. Yet he wasn't afraid of them

>>14842719
lmao

>>14846437
>Yet he wasn't afraid of them
Oh, gee, I wonder why. Could it be because he was living in France, a country that bordered not one, not two, but three formerly (with Spain still functioning) fascist states, one of which had invaded and imposed a fascist government, while the only potent communist state was on the other side of the goddamn European continent? Seriously, are you ignorant, or just grasping at straws, brother?

>>14846471
Do you think France was more likely to turn Communist or Fascist at the time?

>>14846471
oh you mean the country that bourdered another that had a communist-fascist civil war, as well as multiple influential communist parties especially durring wwi as well as being in a time period where the USSR was pretty much a next door neighbor in the time of planes and mechanized industry?

>>14846471
also the communist state was not on the other side of the continent, it was half a country away from France and ruled over much of the continent. It was a much more credible threat than Spain

>>14846490
Neither. France is society that idealizes its history of championing liberalism and parliamentary republicanism too much. They were never in danger of self-imposing either totalitarian state. In the 1960s, while Derrida was making his climb through academia, the president was fucking de Gaulle, who obviously was no where near "communism." Even in recent decades, they've only had one left-leaning president, who was totally incompetent, hated by the public, and only served one term. You're a schizo if you legitimately think that France almost went red in the 20th century.

>>14846428
>But left-wing politics =/= Marxism.
I suspect that's a claim Peterson et al. may be making.

>>14842975
Also this

>>14840397
everything he did was him trying to deal with his deepest existential fears. whenever he lifestreamed anything his room was a mess. he wasn't talking to incels in his vids, he was addressing himself. projecting his own angst on others so that he could then try to play shrink.

he is a deeply troubled man

>>14846507
>had a communist-fascist civil war
That the fascists won handily, and led to the execution of leadership, so that there was no coherent communist movement in Spain for decades.
>>14846509
>it was half a country away from France and ruled over much of the continent.
But Stalin had no interest in 'spreading' communism to European countries, contrary to the West's propaganda. Stalin advanced his own theory of communism that differed from conventional Marxism (which demanded the entire world, starting with the industrialized nations, change to communism) by claiming that communism could function in one nation, and that the USSR need to work on its domestic development & industrialization. The evangelical idea of Russian Communism died w/ an ice axe to the head.

>>14846555
What, that anyone who identifies as left-wing is a Marxist? I don't like JP, but I'd like to give him more credit than that. That's the exact same sort of moronic claim as saying that anyone who supported Trump was a "neo-Nazi" or "fascist".

>>14845707
I apologize but it is what it is. I'm holding out for some sort of Nuremberg trials for academics, these people don't belong anywhere near a university.

>>14846590
I, too, would like to give Peterson more credit than that (hence my "may"), since it would be a moronic claim to make, but I sometimes wonder if I ought to give him that credit.

>>14846574
Of course he is, he's not an alpha chad who intuitively understands the world but he has reasoned himself to it and it almost breaks him, because while he feels deeply for all these weak misguided men he also understands that most of them are doomed

>>14843787
Absolutely this.

>>14844696
niggers are actually mentally disabled

>>14846584
>But Stalin had no interest in 'spreading' communism to European countries,
then what the fuck was he doing in Poland and half of Europe?

>>14846658
That's the point of the "iron curtain" metaphor, isn't it? Stalin was anxious about how capitalist states would invade other nations without warning (as had happened w/ Barbarossa), so he wanted a land-based buffer-zone. Also, it's a lot like what Putin (who's clearly not a communist) does nowadays. He destabilizes nearby countries in order to keep attention away from his own dilapidated state and inefficiency as a leader like Stalin did.

>>14846677
Russia has been doing that ever since their state first appeared. I remember reading some history book years ago that said the reason was just because there are literally no geographical barriers protecting it, it's just an enormous plain all the way into France.

You're being a bit too charitable to Stalin though, 'he had to annex Poland because the evil capitalists' is a bit much to swallow.

>>14840397
His daughter said he started taking benzos after a bad reaction to food (apple cider?). He upped his dose when his wife was dying, then tried to quit cold turkey and fucked up his brain

>>14846172
Am I reading this right? The line "skepticism of meta-narratives" comes from an actually Marxist claiming that post-modernism is basically capitalism.

That's some impressive stupidity on Peterson's part.

>>14846690
>'he had to annex Poland because the evil capitalists' is a bit much to swallow.
I didn't mean to imply that he was doing it for the good of those countries... It's obvious Stalin didn't give a shit about the actual states or people in Eastern Europe (hell, he barely cared about most of his own population in the USSR). I meant to say that it was purely for the preservation of one-state socialism in the USSR.

>>14846702
Lyotard rejected Marxism pretty early on actually

>>14846702
>that post-modernism is basically capitalism
I see what you're saying, but that's an oversimplification. They're not equivalent. In Jameson's argument the post-modern mentality of "skepticism of meta-narratives" is derived from the market economy, which is a result of global capitalism. Basically the idea is that "the free market," which is the central ideal of neoliberalism, leads to skepticism about doctrinal perspectives on economics, since for economists like Friedman and Hayek the freedom of the market determines the values of capitalist society (if the market is doing well, then the country is doing well). This has leaked into all other non-market aspects of society. For example how religious institutions now function like capitalist corporations (evangelicalism is on the rise, mega-churches have organizational structures the replicate Fortune 500 companies &c.). Since the market determines the 'truth' of a society, humanity doesn't have the power to determine the validity of meta-narratives.
So basically global capitalism leads to obsession with market-based philosophy, which in turn leads to a skepticism about doctrines. His article is really damned good. It has a very funny piece of architectural criticism that reads like satire, as well.

>>14846751
>So basically global capitalism leads to obsession with market-based philosophy, which in turn leads to a skepticism about doctrines.
does he compare Nietzsche to this somewhere?

>>14846751
Right. I should have said "a result of capitalism.".
It's still funny how Peterson defends capitalism, and yet the social disintegration he criticizes-as even non-Marxists have argued-is mostly due to capitalism. I do know Marx said something like this, of course, when he said capitalism destroys all traditional, patriarchal institutions. Amusingly he says this in the Communist Manifesto, which Peterson "really read".

>>14846702
>>14846751
you guys know this was first formulated by Lyotard, right? he is considered a post-modernist

>>14846766
Don't think so. Haven't read the article in like 2 years tho.
>>14846806
>yet the social disintegration he criticizes-as even non-Marxists have argued-is mostly due to capitalism.
It's very interesting, indeed. It reminds me of what Althusser wrote about the Ideological State Apparatuses. Basically, the brilliant power of capitalism and how it is able to continually survive through centuries of criticism, is that it locates all of those criticisms within itself, so that any attempt to rectify or escape capitalism ultimately are "controlled opposition" that capitalism produces in order to maintain itself. Pretty brilliant. As Zizek's famous for saying: "it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism." We don't even know what a non-capitalist system would look like at this point.
>>14846825
Yes, the verbiage of "skepticism toward metanarratives" is borrowed by Jameson from Lyotard, but Jameson is much more critical of this reality.

>>14846555
No you retard

>>14846555
his position is that postmodernism is literally undercover Marxism, and ties all progressive politics to postmodernism, so there isn't much room for non-Marxism on the left according to Peterson

>>14846855
>Jameson is much more critical of this reality
for sure, but he uses that definition of postmodernism because that's what the postmodernists gave it. it's not a Marxist definition, Jameson just analyzes it under a Marxist framework
also based Jameson posters

>>14846892
'neomarxism'. Which means for Peterson and co. progressivism, eg. antiracism, feminism

the position is that the left are all sort of on the same side, and since they control the universities Pomo is only ever used as a kind of rhetorical tactic for their purposes

>>14846806
Peterson doesn't believe in the current social disintegration to be some kind of unique capitalist blight tho.

>>14846892
Except he never said the left is entirely made of Marxist or pomo, hell he even praise them as those people who bring renewal to a stable but stagnant society.

He never said every pomo where undercover marxist either

>>14846892
>that postmodernism is literally undercover Marxism
This is a claim that has been dismissed time and time again. Also, your use of "literally" doesn't work here. You're writing like an 18 year old SJW on twitter.
>ties all progressive politics to postmodernism
Despite the fact that probably >90% of people who vote for progressive policies probably have never even heard the term in their lives.
>there isn't much room for non-Marxism on the left according to Peterson
This is horseshit, and you know it. There's no room for Marxists on the left. Look at the current Dem primaries. Bernie is the only candidate that even approaches employing Marxism in his policies, and he doesn't even have the support of 35% of the Democratic party. On the other hand, people who are obsessed with intersectionality and identity politics consider Marxism to be an antiquated doctrine dominated by old white men. You're delusional if you think that even 5% of the American left are Marxian in character.
Sorry, I couldn't tell if you were advocating these ridiculous ideas or just explaining if JP did. If it's the latter, I apologize for my tone.

>>14841839
underrated

>>14846959
>reading comprehension
He literally starts his post with "his position is". He's also wrong in explaining JP position.

>>14846935
>postmodernism is a dead end from the perspective of applicable wisdom, it leaves you bereft and nihilistic. And that's not good, cause people can't exist without a purpose, and so they sneak the Marxism through the back door and jump into this power landscape for reasons we discussed earlier
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw8-NPAN0C8
he's literally not educated in this subject anon, I am more qualified in political theory than Peterson is, and he is talking shit

>>14846959
no, he literally says that
>>14846970
>This is horseshit, and you know it. There's no room for Marxists on the left
of course it's horseshit, Peterson believes it

>>14846967
>unnecessary "literally"
Are you doing this on purpose?
& I did get that. But it seems like the only ones who want to explain JP's position are his sons i.e. his defenders. What did he get wrong, according to you?

>>14846970
>being retarded

>It’s not as if I personally think that postmodernism and Marxism are commensurate. It’s obvious to me that the much-vaunted “skepticism toward grand narratives” that is part and parcel of the postmodern viewpoint makes any such alliance logically impossible. Postmodernists should be as skeptical toward Marxism as toward any other canonical belief system.

>>14846977
What? No plenty of people do wild assumption based on whatever they heard about him.
>>14846935

>haha I find it funny that psychiatry is literally poisoning the populous and giving people early onset dementia XD

>>14846273
What are some post modernists writers that critique equality?

>>14846997
The next paragraph of that braindead essay is him explaining how Derrida and Foucault were undercover Marxists who smuggled Marxism back into mainstream though
>So the formal postmodern claim, such as it is, is radical skepticism. But that’s not at all how it has played out in theory or in practice. Derrida and Foucault were, for example, barely repentant Marxists, if repentant at all. They parleyed their 1960’s bourgeoisie vs proletariat rhetoric into the identity politics that has plagued us since the 1970’s. Foucault’s fundamental implicit (and often explicit) claim is that power relations govern society. That’s a rehashing of the Marxist claim of eternal and primary class warfare. Derrida’s hypothetical concern for the marginalized is a version of the same thing. I don’t really care if either of them made the odd statement about disagreeing with the Marxist doctrines: their fundamental claims are still soaked in those patterns of thought.

My main problem is he didn't have the balls to just embrace belief in God and spiritual reality fully. He practically reintroduced me to that world yet he never really admits to believing it.

>>14846935
>Peterson doesn't believe in the current social disintegration to be some kind of unique capitalist blight tho.
Neither do I it is materialism and technology that is the cause. Basically the tendency to abandon spirituality in favor of physical and material conceptions of the world is killing our spirits and deteriorating our culture.

>>14847023
the so proclaimed father of postmodernism: Friedrich Nietzsche

>>14847048
Do you think maybe he's limited by his skepticism toward that meta-narrative? That'd be pretty strange.

>>14847066
That doesn’t count. He’s not their father. They are bastard children. A contemporary author please.

>>14847032
And it's also irrelevant to the point I was addressing.

>>14847067
Dunno but I feel like he need some kind of thing to believe in, he's a very anxious man according to Maps of Meaning.

>>14843005
The system runs on people chasing their desires. Once people realize their own desires as illusions it will end. Until then, there will be no liberation.

>>14847109
>Dunno but I feel like he need some kind of thing to believe in, he's a very anxious man according to Maps of Meaning.
Anxiety is something to overcome, not to run away from. Well, you can run away from it while you're trying to learn how to deal with it, but religions rarely teach how to deal with it in ways that aren't just running away. Then there are some people who're never going to be able to deal with anxiety, and who would be better off just running the rest of their lives, but how can you tell that ahead of time?

he got hooked cuz of his wife, yeah? is she still kicking or what?

>>14847096
Not that guy, but I suggest this book. Particularly Marcuse's essay "Repressive Tolerance". Marcuse isn't a "postmodernist" (because, again, that's not really a valuable label) nor is he a Marxist, but he definitely is a leftist. In "Repressive Tolerance" he doesn't exactly critique equality as such, but he critiques the overemphasis on wide-spread toleration of all ideas, or the belief that all perspectives deserve equal voice. Kinda seems to be hitting at what you're asking about.

>>14847096
Deleuze then...

>>14847109
>Dunno but I feel like he need some kind of thing to believe in
Another instance of JP's hypocrisy. He's essentially living out the attitude of his conception of the "postmodernists" that he claims to attack. He's unable to form a solid foundation on anything outside of clinical psychology.

>>14847151
>he critiques the overemphasis on wide-spread toleration of all ideas,
lol no. equality as in 'the races and sexes are equal', a perspective certainly upheld by very powerful institutions in our society, that I would imagine these guys would critique somehow

>>14845165
Socialist movements haven't yet regained their footing after the fall of Soviet, and at the same time haven't lost the stigma of Bolshevism and the propaganda against it. They are trying to replace Soviet with China, but it doesn't work as well, because nobody really thinks China is interested in forcing their system on the rest of the world.

>>14847195
>They are trying to replace Soviet with China
"They" being the propagandists, not the socialist movements.

>>14847195
China are happily colonizing Africa by creating capitalist industry there

>>14847151
>or the belief that all perspectives deserve equal voice
Gee I wonder which perspectives he thinks don’t deserve a voice.

>>14847187
This.

>>14844600
It's all very well and gold that "capital did SJWism" but virtually all leftists are just as on board with it

>>14847187
>equality as in 'the races and sexes are equal', a perspective certainly upheld by very powerful institutions in our society
I don't want to redirect the conversation, because I know what talking points from the youtube alt-right you're going to use, but it's very obvious that outside of academia "powerful institutions" do not view the races and sexes as equal. Even though your youtube pals will constantly claim it's not the case, with no citations, in America there IS institutional racism (banks redlining, police shooting black youths at inordinately high numbers) and sexism (wage gap, continual harassment, assumptions about women's competency).
And trust me, I do know what your reaction to this is gonna be. It's the same as all the other NEETs who post on here and have no idea about the harsh reality in the real world: "lol, wage gap is a myth" "lol, black teens deserve to be shot cuz it's fukken epic! praise kek!". But the reality of institutional racism and sexism is not undermined by what you saw some frogposter say on a Samoan basket-weaving forum. I can already imagine you obstinately prepping your meaty sausage-fingers as you reach for the keyboard to type "but the white man has it bad!" but you're delusional if you think that major American institutions don't have racist and sexist tendencies. If you walked around in the real world for even 10 fucking minutes you'd realize that.

>>14847226
Well there is absolutely no evidence that the races are equal but it's upheld as absolute dogma so I just thought they might have noticed that.

>>14847226 here.
As an addendum, directed at >>14847216 >>14847187 I want to say that I do think that academia does overdo it with their fetishizing of equality. Those headlines that were posted earlier in the thread are just as frightening to me as they are to you. I'm not saying that academia is perfect. But it's simply unreasonable to say that there's no institutional racism or sexism in the government or corporate America.

>>14847233
What do you mean "the races are equal"? I think you're starting from a false premise. I'm assuming you're talking about IQ or some shit. Okay, let's take for granted the assumption that black Americans have lower IQs than white Americans. Does that mean they don't have a right to life? Does that mean they don't deserve the opportunity to live their lives in the way that hyper-educated white folks do? The equality I think most people are looking for is basic human respect for other humans.

>>14847226
>you're delusional if you think that major American institutions don't have racist and sexist tendencies.
Prove it. Prove he's delusional. I fail to see how you can look at pic related and other examples posted in this very thread and still say that with a straight face.
>it's just in education though!!
And? You can't participate in modern society without a degree of some sort. These universities are far more influential long term than any of the other institutions you referenced.

>>14847234
>institutional racism or sexism in the government or corporate America.
Not sure if serious

>>14847246
>>14847234
you seem somewhat aware of how this discussion usually goes so I guess there's no point.

The only institutional racism in the US is against asians and whites because they are 'disproportionately represented'. It's been like that since the Civil Rights movement which made it legal to discriminate in the name of bringing equality of outcome to the various demographics it deemed relevant. It did so under the supposition that any disparities were due to existing inequalities in society rather than things like IQ averages, and then made it impermissible to discuss the possibility of the latter.

I bet you already know all this though.

>>14847255
>You can't participate in modern society without a degree of some sort.
Okay, let's assume that's true (which it's not, Zuckerberg is one of the most influential forces in our era). When you get a degree, are you automatically brainwashed into believing the bullshit like "math is racist" that you've been posting? No: you're smarter than that, right? You can listen to a professor say shit and disagree with it, right? Serious question: have you actually ever been to a university lecture?
>These universities are far more influential long term than any of the other institutions you referenced.
You honestly believe that universities are more powerful than the US government? How has Trump been able to enact policies that academia would generally be opposed to, then?

>>14847277
Remind me again, when was the last time an inner-city asian was shot dead for committing a minor crime?

>>14847289
Zuckerberg is literally a 1 in a billion. There are like 10 of the guy in the world, everyone else has to go through the approved channels, income is strongly correlated with education. And the point is that university admissions are legally allowed to racially discriminate.

The universities train the people who become the press, the civil service, pretty much every agency in the government. They control the education of children to a large degree, they impact all of culture, and given a generational lag what the Ivy League believes trickles down.

You don't even need to just look at the universities anymore though, this shit is everywhere now, evn the fucking military have race and sex quotas now

>>14847301
Asians commit a minuscule amount of crime, less even than whites funnily enough. Blacks are shot dead by police more than other races because they commit more crime. They are not more likely to be shot for a minor crime than any other race.

>>14847289
>which it's not, Zuckerberg is one of the most influential forces in our era
This is such a stupid fucking comment:

1. A Harvard dropout is still a Harvard man. It's in no way comparable to dropping out of your average university.

2. Zuck is one individual. Most dropouts crash and burn and with good reason

3. Zuck had a great many social connections, made at university and in academic life, that bolstered him.

>You can listen to a professor say shit and disagree with it, right?
Not openly. Not if you want a first. And this isn't even the issue at hand. This is you moving the goal posts. You started out by implying that the influence of universities on society is far less than that of other institutions. This is a silly thing to say. Universities have major influence on public behaviour over time and ignoring this in favour of some outdated boomerisms around bank loans and police racially profiling black kids is absurd.

>have you actually ever been to a university lecture?
Far more than you ever have or ever will.

>You honestly believe that universities are more powerful than the US government?
My claim was that they have greater long term influence, particularly as a collective, than any one President.

>And the point is that university admissions are legally allowed to racially discriminate.
So what school was it that denied you? I'd love it if you'd post a university-level essay you've written, so that I can judge it against black and Hispanic students that I've taught at the university level. I've avoided this because I recognize it's "arguing from personal experience" which is bad in itself, but I've taught around 200 students over the course of 3 years. And I can say that among the top 10 writers I've taught 7 were white and 3 were Hispanic. But I'd also say that the worst 10 writers that I taught would also be 7 white people and 3 Hispanic. I can verify from my experience that the race of a student in no way prepares you for how good or bad they are as a writer. There are dumbasses of all races who get into college. Affirmative Action has no effect on you personally getting denied from an institution.

>>14847380
you can't actually think this is a suitable response the immense disparity in average scores that blacks, hispanics, whites, and asians have, specifically so that their numbers correspond to the percentage of the population at large, except in the couple schools which refuse to do this and as a result are like 60% asian and the rest mostly white.

I didn't expect much, but I expected better than that

>>14847380
>Affirmative Action has no effect on you personally getting denied from an institution.
This is demonstrably false, and if you actually worked in admissions, you would know that. Statistically speaking, we know blacks are held to a much lower standard when it comes to standardised testing for a start. If an Asian kid and a black kid both score highly but there was only one place left, you can bet your ass that black kid is the one being made the offer.

>>14847380
I made a mistake; meant for >>14847309

>>14847374
>1. A Harvard dropout is still a Harvard man. It's in no way comparable to dropping out of your average university.
Alright, I agree there. Zuckerberg was obviously always in a position privilege &c.
>Not openly. Not if you want a first. And this isn't even the issue at hand.
Really? I realize now from the term "first" that you're in the Commonwealth or something, right? Because in the US I've never personally encountered anyone who received a lower grade for disagreeing with a professor. But I guess I'm in the humanities, and generally that's considered an unreasonable practice in a discipline that emphasizes personal critical thinking abilities.
>My claim was that they have greater long term influence, particularly as a collective, than any one President.
I just don't see that. Academics have been barking about capitalism for over half a century, and it hasn't had any lasting impact on policy.
An example: Christopher Hill, a dedicated Marxist and Communist Party member, was the Master of Balliol College, the same college that produced Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson. Did the Marxist leadership of Balliol lead to the indoctrination of its student, Boris Johnson? Doesn't seem so.

>>14847432
>Because in the US I've never personally encountered anyone who received a lower grade for disagreeing with a professor. But I guess I'm in the humanities, and generally that's considered an unreasonable practice in a discipline that emphasizes personal critical thinking abilities.
this is possibly the funniest thing ever posted to 4chan

>>14847380
>I'd love it if you'd post a university-level essay you've written
So you can dox him?
Also nobody cares about your anecdotes dumbass.

>>14847432
>I just don't see that. Academics have been barking about capitalism for over half a century, and it hasn't had any lasting impact on policy.
Really, I thought you guys were vigorously denying that academia was anti-capitalist the entire thread

>>14847439
I don't really know what that means & def don't know how to do it. I realize it was an unreasonable request, I just wanted to use it to slide into my other conversation piece.
>>14847436
audible shrug

>>14844080

There is nothing well thought out about >>14840939 the two and a half hour debate has been boiled down to one question that can not be answered well in the context of that debate. If people do not self identify as Post-modern or neo-Marxist, then any identification of an academic would be shot down. It is a non point. "People can't be Nazis unless they identify as a Nazi" would never be an acceptable point of view if the person in question holds all Nazi opinions and attitudes. Yet post-modernists are given a pass because....they haven't called themselves post modernist?. If Peterson stated a name, such as one of my professors at Rochester that I'm thinking of right now, what then? What happens next? It was a meaningless part of the discussion. All the question accomplished was allowing faggots to harp on the same point every time the debate is mentioned. What a shame, keep the meme alive you stupid faggots.

>>14847449
I notice you avoided responding to the fact that the average test scores for the different races that get into universities are extremely different, except in the couple schools that explicitly don't allow racial discrimination, which show an almost entirely asian and white student body.

>>14847443
Not really. I've been interested in arguing the following: 1. JP has no respect for the humanities and shouldn't speak about its issues if he's unwilling to do the necessary research. 2. JP conflates Marxists and "postmodernists" in a way that has no sense to it (and "postmodernist" is not a helpful signifier). 3. The ideology of academia is not a monolith with a single coherent philosophy. In general the only law guiding academia is self-preservation, and since left-leaning parties tend to fund universities better, universities support left-leaning parties.

>>14847432
>Because in the US I've never personally encountered anyone who received a lower grade for disagreeing with a professor. But I guess I'm in the humanities, and generally that's considered an unreasonable practice in a discipline that emphasizes personal critical thinking abilities.
Where do you go to college? I'd like to go there.

I got into a scrape after arguing with a professor who insisted that banning FGM was white supremacist. I did actually end up passing the class, but barely. I learned my lesson after that one.

>>14847289
>You can listen to a professor say shit and disagree with it, right?
And be put on the spot in front of 200 people and potentially be attacked by all of them.

>>14847461
I did avoid it. Frankly cuz I don't really care that much personally. All it means is that if you got denied from a university you anticipated getting into, it means your CV & writing sample were less impressive than an average African-American. So that's on you, then.

>>14847449
>def don't know how to do it.
Oh but you do. Ousting dissidents to signal your unquestioned adherence to the status quo is an acquired evolutionary trait and leftists are particularly good at it.

>>14847461
That’s because he is a bad faith agent.

>>14847481
Universities are shit and ought to be gotten rid of. I went to college and have a degree and I love hearing success stories of people without a degree or people with a bachelor's being the boss of someone with a masters/phd.

>>14847468
1. we can agree Jp is an idiot
2. half agree. they're different but they both care more about racism than anything else, as does everyone else in university, you yourself are a good example
3. Academia 200 years ago kicked people out for being atheist, today it kicks them out for being racist. Leftism has fuck all to do with it except that various forms of leftism dominate society including the universities and the government the way Christianity used to. call it Progressivism is you want to retain the word 'leftism' to mean only Socialists or whatever.

>>14847470
>Where do you go to college? I'd like to go there.
Montana. Highly recommend anyone going to Montana to live or learn. I think it's mostly that people are just chill there.

>>14847481
You can't be serious.

it means that the universities outright racially discriminate instead of looking at test scores, so that they can pretend everyone is equal.

Trying to sidestep this with some weak ad hominem is honestly beneath you, youre not that dumb man.

>>14847487
>Ousting dissidents to signal your unquestioned adherence to the status quo is an acquired evolutionary trait and leftists are particularly good at it.
dude what

>>14847509
>Trying to sidestep this with some weak ad hominem is honestly beneath you, youre not that dumb man.
thankee!

>>14847513
Are you stupid? Do I need to draw? Also if you don’t know what doxxing you’re probably a boomer so what are you doing in this site?

>>14847517
I'm 25, but I've spent the last three years of my life as a shut-in studying 17th cent. British Christian theology texts. I never got into technology that much, never used a smartphone or stuff like that. So I don't know how to "doxx". Again, I apologize for the suggestion that someone post their personal writing here. It was a stupid move & wouldn't have been conductive to the conversation we were having. My motives aren't that extreme or nefarious.

>>14847504
I'll bear that in mind. My grad school experience was like some kind of Ben Shapiro fever dream. It confirmed the stereotypes in a way I hardly thought possible.

>>14847543
That's a bummer. I appreciate that you're giving me real, human input about your experiences, unlike the other guys I've been talking to. It does help elevate your message. I guess I have over-privileged my experience in college because my experience was so smooth & I had such great teachers along the way. I now realize more fully that not all university experiences are the same. I recognize I was misguided with my idyllic vision of academia.
Sometimes I feel like the kid in my pic. I don't feel like I need to defend my positions, because they seem so apparently clear to me, based on my own experience. To all those who sparred with me throughout this thread: I sincerely thank you for your input. I'll probably think on this further throughout spring break. I hope you recognize the advantages of such a discussion, instead of walking away even angrier at people like me. I'm gonna head out & get stoney now. Best wishes to you all.

>>14847581
I've often thought that I wouldn't believe what I've seen if I'd heard it from someone else. It sounds too much like a right-winger's fantasy of the "other side" behaving badly.

Anyway, I've graduated and have my degree now. The school is well reputed, so it look good on my resume. And, of course, there are worse things than having to go to grad school with maniacs; it's not like I'm illiterate or I live in a war zone or something.

>>14847380
>Affirmative Action has no effect on you personally getting denied from an institution.

1. This is objectively wrong.

2. You attacked the anon by asking what university rejected him. That's not only a low-brow thing to do - you're saying that someone who points out an obvious instance of institutional discrimination (you may disagree with the "obvious" part but the facts don't) must obviously be speaking from his own personal biases or a failure himself. It's an ad hominem attack, even worst frankly. Would you say this to an Asian American who attends Harvard but is still arguing against affirmative action?

3. Your anecdotes don't mean anything compared to the TROVES of data supporting affirmative action as having a substantial effect on admissions outcomes.

Are you really being unironic?

>>14847600
fugg. I realize I said I was leaving, but I'll still reply. I wasn't be ironic, I'd say I was being silly. That point in the conversation was when I was beginning to lose interest. Yeah, it was a shitty comment, "low-brow" as you put it, but I've gotten pretty accustomed to seeing "low-brow" stuff on 4chan. somehow.
But yer right! You win that argument! I, as the prostrating loser, officially confer on you 1 /lit/ victory.

>>14847226
Literally every sentence is ad hom. I'd support the most outrageous tyranny just to make you mad

>>14847623
Ah! A sarcastic, clever jab to buffer your ego after not being able to put forth any arguments. Just as textbook as "low-brow" content on 4chan, I'm sorry for forcing you to return, hopefully I at least made you feel good about yourself while you were at it.

>>14847147
Well he clearly overcame it long enough to become very succesful

>>14847177
What? How is it hypocrisis.

>>14847226
>alt-right

Is this 2017 again? Stop, you're hurting their feelings.

>>14847639
>>14847648

>>14847468
There's no respect to be had for the humanities
Postmodernism is post-truth and pomo marxist uses it to attack whatever they dislike
Sure but you can still extract a, or one of the, dominant ideology trying to suppress all other

>>14847648
Lol what a dipshit

>>14847459
Honestly, Peterson didn't have a good answer to the question because it's a hazy category that he only came to secondhand in dumbed down polemical books like Fashionable Nonsense. Zizek meant to draw attention to the fact that Peterson doesn't really know dick about the intellectual streams he criticizes.Sure, if he pointed to Judith Butler or whatever, no one would be surprised, but that wouldn't make "postmodern neo-marxist" a meaningful category. By his own admission, Peterson isn't familiar with Marx and I expect the same goes for Foucault, Butler or whoever.

>>14847659
>u mad bro? haha

BASED

>>14847623
Lol what a dipshit

>>14847669
Fair enough

>>14846934
>the position is that the left are all sort of on the same side
And it would take a moment of perusing the American left eating itself over the Democratic primary to understand how incorrect that statement is.

>>14847226
From nyc, have also lived in Houston. Blacks can't behave and there is something fundamentally different and violent about them. Anyone who doubts this fact I feel is a suburban zilch or trolling.

>>14847374
>Not openly.
You absolutely can. I disagreed with professors all through my undergraduate and graduate careers. The problem is that most students who disagree with them are absolutely dismal academics and rhetors, so to the professors the disagreements seem (rightfully) midwit.

>>14847502
>today it kicks them out for being racist
Only private institutions, and they can kick you out for nothing.

>>14847432
>because in the US I've never personally encountered anyone who received a lower grade for disagreeing with a professor. But I guess I'm in the humanities, and generally that's considered an unreasonable practice in a discipline that emphasizes personal critical thinking abilities.
I was marked down by several (though not all) of my professors for disagreeing with their views.

I went to two UC campuses and was marked down by several (though not all) of my professors for disagreeing with them. One was a professor who was trying to combine some pseudo Kafkaesque conception futility with Marx, and the other was a professor who misunderstood Turner's frontier thesis. Both were insecure.

Also got into it with a TA when I noted that some of Calhoun's writings were close to being Marxist works that predated Marx, but she (some euro grad student who didn't realize that the US had any political philosophers) didn't try to mark me down for that.

>>14847432
>because in the US I've never personally encountered anyone who received a lower grade for disagreeing with a professor. But I guess I'm in the humanities, and generally that's considered an unreasonable practice in a discipline that emphasizes personal critical thinking abilities.

I went to two UC campuses and was marked down by several (though not all) of my professors for disagreeing with them. One was a professor who was trying to combine some pseudo Kafkaesque conception futility with Marx, and the other was a professor who misunderstood Turner's frontier thesis. Both were insecure.

Also got into it with a TA when I noted that some of Calhoun's writings were close to being Marxist works that predated Marx, but she (some euro grad student who didn't realize that the US had any political philosophers) didn't try to mark me down for that.

>>14848272
>I went to two UC campuses and was marked down by several (though not all) of my professors for disagreeing with them.
How do you know?

>>14844354
Dilate.

>>14840359
>assignment: reduce jordan peterson to 9 words

>>14848290
On the first, saw the grade and comments. On the second, the Turner question was on the final, and I went into the final with an A/A- overall grade, and my final grade after the final was a B, despite clearly demonstrating in my response that I knew the material being asked about while still disagreeing with the professor's conclusions.

Actually, I now remember another class on international politics that had a portion of the grade based on class discussion; I spoke relatively frequently (though half the time I disagreed [politely] with some of the professor's premises), but I got overall low marks on participation in discussions, with the written comment that 'anon rarely participates in class discussions' which was just flatly not true.

On the whole none of these things really hurt me (still graduated with honors and a good GPA), and now (15+ years out of school) I actually remember more of the material where I openly disagreed with professors than the material from classes where I didn't. But I do think it's off to deny that there are professors out there that will mark you down for disagreeing with them, because there are. They are generally shit professors, but they're still out there nonetheless.

>>14848309
It's not that I don't believe professors (really, probably LOAs) don't grade down due to their egos and what they feel to be right, but none of your recounting here offers much proof of that. I guess I can live with the possibility that they did. Though, it doesn't seem like we can move farther past that maybe, except possibly with your final anecdote, which seems damning, but we have to accept that you can recognize what an acceptable amount or quality of discussion is for a given instructor.

>>14848324
Well, given that we're talking about qualitative judgements, at some point you have to either infer something or not. My assignments in the classes of my first two anecdotes where I didn't disagree with the professors was all given A's and positive comments, and then when I suggested that the professors' views on open questions were not mine, I saw lower marks. I don't think the overall quality of my work changed, but I guess of course I would say that.

In any case, the actual impact of those lower marks on my life was minimal, so it's really water under the bridge. Just offering some observations from my own personal experience.

>>14847516
>thankee
lol you little faggot

The people you've been defending in this thread will eat you alive before you finish your time at your school you pathetic fucking coward

>>14848339
>I don't think the overall quality of my work changed, but I guess of course I would say that.
Well, and it could be even more complicated. It could be that these instructors that graded you down had higher expectations for either your work or for classwork in general. However, I absolutely recognize that grading will generally contain the opinions (and therefore biases) of the graders.

>>14847220
Along people who have read Das Kapital, they are a minority of progressivists, especially for the young generations.
On the other hand, conservative ideology never criticize the Capital. Conservatives want the Capital, but no immigration. They think they can tame Capitalism. It's delusional.
Ethno whites should unironically support a mode of production without wage labor. But it's too late now. Non caucasians are already everywhere in the west.

>>14840359
if you like Peterson you are a pseudo-intellectual, this is a proven fact

>>14844552
Trump is absolutely not alt-right