/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10661063]

Hitchens Vs Peterson: Dawn of Morality

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/jordan-peterson-doesnt-go-nearly-far-enough/

[Anonymous No.10661081]

>His message is aimed at people who have grown up in the post-Christian West. I think it appeals especially to young men. And I think this is mainly because those young men cannot work out how to behave correctly towards modern young women. These young women’s minds have been trained to mistrust masculinity. But in their hearts they still despise feeble, feminised men. The outcome is that men are trapped in a minefield, in the midst of a quicksand. Whether you stand still or move, it will still destroy you. I do not know how anyone copes with it, or ever could.

[Anonymous No.10661106]

>>10661063
Hitchens is quite literally my dad

[Anonymous No.10661107]

Conspiratorial pseudo-intellectual gibberish.

[Anonymous No.10661138]

>>10661063
tl;dr Hitchens is not part of Peterson's intended audience.

[Anonymous No.10661139]

forbid posting about these absolute pseuds PRONTO

[Anonymous No.10661170]

>>10661139
Hitchens is not a pseud. He's one of the few meme thinkers who has the humility not to claim authority outside his domain

[Anonymous No.10661177]

>I am too keenly aware of the good things which have been utterly lost in recent years to be comforted by what looks like an attempt to reconcile us with the revolutionary order. I find it hard to applaud efforts to help me adapt to a world which I think has gone utterly wrong.

That's a pretty good identification of a main sticking point with Peterson. Of course, this plays into Hitchens' own problem which is that he has no solutions either.

[Anonymous No.10661180]

the tldr of the article is "Peterson is kind of a pussy and doesn't really have the balls to be really mean about things that he should be" and I don't really think anyone would disagree with that. Peterson is a clever, highly educated pussy, which is entirely why he's successful, he's palatable to other pussies who don't agree with typical ultra left politics but are also afraid of being labeled "alt right".

Hitchens is not a pussy, in fact, he's kind of an asshole, so he is squarely outside of Petersons demographic.

[Anonymous No.10661196]

>>10661063
>They seem to me (even if they work as claimed) to be a version of Aldous Huxley’s soma, the drug that reconciled the inhabitants of Brave New World to their servitude and ignorance.

[Anonymous No.10661199]

>>10661177
>which is that he has no solutions either.

He doesn't claim he does though at least unlike Peterson who actively asks people to give him money to "sort themselves out"

[Anonymous No.10661204]

>>10661199
t. unsorted

>>10661081
What complete and utter bullshit

[Anonymous No.10661215]

>>10661180
>afraid of being labeled "alt right".
What if -- and please consider it -- these people simply don't share the same delusions you have.

[Anonymous No.10661230]

>>10661215
Which delusions are you referring to?

[Anonymous No.10661239]

>>10661230
your delusions, the deluding delusions which you are deluded by.

[Anonymous No.10661244]

>>10661139
>hitchens
>pseud

[Anonymous No.10661260]

>>10661244
what's he reacting to here?

[Anonymous No.10661261]

>>10661196
He's right though

[Anonymous No.10661266]

>>10661261
do you think the same thing about aspirin?

[Anonymous No.10661283]

>>10661260
probably degeneracy

[Anonymous No.10661287]

>>10661266
nigga fuck you I'm weening myself SSRIs (down to a 1/4 of what I would have usually taken 2 months ago) and I'm finally starting to feel like a human again and not a zombie

[Anonymous No.10661296]

>hitchens
>jewish mother
>peterson
>jewish wife

HMM MAKES ME THINK

[Anonymous No.10661300]

If a new Peterson came along who was better spoken, more presentable, and did a more convincing job of weaving his field of study into supporting the right while also giving modern young men purpose, Peterson would be dropped in a minute. The reason he's defended so tirelessly is because they have no one else. They can't really articulate what Land has to say, and he's not that active of a content creator. The other options are laughable, like Shapiro and that faggot with the bleached hair. The only thing they'd muster in their defense is "they're not wrong" "tell me how he's wrong," stuff like that. Who else does the right have? I feel like I'm missing a few.

[Anonymous No.10661356]

>>10661300
It's kind of embarrasing there's no presentable traditionalist intellectuals, so they end up with a liberal Canadian doing apologetics for marriage and capitalism.

[Anonymous No.10661360]

>>10661063
Radical Petersonism when?
>government mandated room cleanliness checks
>brownshirts roam the streets violently misgendering trans people
>national animal replaced by a lobster

[Anonymous No.10661376]

>>10661356
that's because traditionalism is such a ridiculous and indefensible position. It's 2018, not 1950. Get over it.

[Anonymous No.10661383]

>>10661356
It's an untapped market. The evangelical, traditional values moralists the boomers loved are obsolete. I'd think Peterson is casting the mold for our generation. Unless his dominance of the market is challenged, millions of anons will grow up into conservatives (liberal or traditional, dosen't matter) who compare every new intellectual figure and every thought they read in relation to daddy Peterson and wisdoms.

[Anonymous No.10661396]

>>10661376
please be baiting

[Anonymous No.10661404]

Jesus the amout of deluded mutt peterson fanboys. The north american might as well be wiped off the map, NO MUTT could ever understand the concept of traditionalism

[Anonymous No.10661410]

>>10661170
>who has the humility not to claim authority outside his domain
What is his domain though?

[Anonymous No.10661419]

>>10661410
Britain

[Anonymous No.10661429]

>>10661404
this is true
women are laughing at you
minorities are laughing at you
Europeans are laughing at you
what are you doing this for again?

[Anonymous No.10661447]

>>10661419
That is too big for one man. What is in his qualifications?

[Anonymous No.10661458]

>>10661180
Peterson isn't political, he is personal. He says fix yourself first and the rest will follow. Which is a grand message in today's world of ready made partisan group think (just add false outrage). Hitchens is just another political snob. One wants to help people find what they think, the other wants people to think what he thinks.

[Anonymous No.10661464]

>>10661447
bike riding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7ZmmIetI5o&t=48s

seriously though he is an expert in all moral laws and traditions of britain as well as the end of soviet russia


>>10661458
of course he is political, peterson is very clearly a liberal

[Anonymous No.10661477]

>>10661464
>he is an expert in all moral laws and traditions of britain as well
Any old man in UK can be that too. What makes him so special?

[Anonymous No.10661497]

>>10661477
He is an excellent debater as well, just look him up on youtube. He frequently is a part of tv panels. Most are interesting if youre into politics i would say

Watch out for his pessimism however

[Anonymous No.10661509]

>>10661300
>Land
>Inspiring for young men
Uhh

[Anonymous No.10661518]

>>10661464
>of course he is political, peterson is very clearly a liberal
Meaningless, he doesn't affiliate himself with any political identity. Liberals appealing to tradition? Nice try pseud.

[Anonymous No.10661524]

>>10661518
He has gone on record calling himself a classical British liberal

[Anonymous No.10661528]

>>10661497
I meant what are his qualifications. What makes him more qualified than a grumpy old man on the street ranting about 'Back in my day ..."?

>Most are interesting if youre into politics i would say
Oh I already know about his participation in politics

[Anonymous No.10661532]

>>10661458
Peterson has made himself known publicly by taking a political stance, he's an academic that advises young people, and deals with subjects that have their political relevance. Not to mention he's appeared on political shows to argue over points on contemporary political issues. He carries a message that is political. I realize he's not running for office, nor does he brand himself with any outrageous -isms, but he is political.

It's wild how club Peterson can detect the political significance of a film or story from miles off, but will not acknowledge their guru as political because he dosen't get on TV to announce "I'm being political now guys."

[Anonymous No.10661541]

>>10661260
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NzlZ2GADaI

[Anonymous No.10661548]

>>10661532
>everything is ideology
how's that half read Zizek tome treating you? You'll finish it one day don't worry anon

[Anonymous No.10661549]

>>10661518
retard

[Anonymous No.10661555]

>>10661524
a classical british liberal isn't an american liberal
a classical liberal is a conservative

[Anonymous No.10661559]

>>10661518
>he doesn't affiliate himself with any political identity
Bitch is already calling himself a classical liberal, that is like the term center-right wingers call themselves to pretend they aren't center-right wingers

[Anonymous No.10661567]

>>10661524
And what party represents them? None.

[Anonymous No.10661568]

>>10661260
Someone else won an award he was shortlistred for IIRC.

[Anonymous No.10661570]

>>10661106
Tell him he's a good lad.

[Anonymous No.10661584]

>>10661567
Obviously the conservative party does, globalist continue the tradtion of the british liberal, clear as day. And no the conservative party isn't in the slightest traditionalist

[Anonymous No.10661589]

>>10661532
I guess they just like hearing the sounds he can make with his mouth, or they really just like rambling stories since it's not the ideas he is unpacking from them which give them meaning that they are after. They'd probably be fans of ASMR or daily vlogs as well.

[Anonymous No.10661600]

>>10661532
>. I realize he's not running for office, nor does he brand himself with any outrageous -isms, but he is political.
>contradicts himself in the same sentence
think we're done here

[Anonymous No.10661601]

>>10661548
I've never read him, but being this much of a radical empericist is not very convincing. It may have worked in the days of Locke and Hume, when the layperson couldn't read, but it's beyond idiotic today.

[Anonymous No.10661608]

>>10661568
>being this much of a sore loser

[Anonymous No.10661614]

>>10661600
except he didn't contradict himself at all

[Anonymous No.10661619]

>>10661600
You have to call yourself by some party identity to effect political change? Is that what you're saying?

I'm judging Peterson on what he does, not really what he say's he's doing.

[Anonymous No.10661620]

>>10661600
>think we're done here

blow it out your ass fag

>you only are political if you are running for office

big fucking mutt

[Anonymous No.10661631]

Retard v. Retard: The Article

[Anonymous No.10661635]

>>10661555
>a classical liberal is a conservative
That would depend on the country, wouldn't it. I'd like to think a conservative would be fine with state intervention, to prevent 'moral decay' and the destruction of tradition by the free market.

[Anonymous No.10661641]

>>10661081
i think thats a pretty good point about women want to immasculate men whilst simulatenously want men to be masculine.

[Anonymous No.10661643]

>>10661619
>I'm judging Peterson on what he does, not really what he say's he's doing.
So he doesn't belong to any movement or party but based on what he does he's political? God, how do people this stupid function. You just make noises, the meaning of the words is totally secondary to regurgitating as many as you can. I guess that's just the nature of today's rhetoric, fucking morons trying to convince others through sheer quantity of speech.

[Anonymous No.10661657]

>>10661360
>government mandated room cleanliness checks
We already have that with conscription. Not a good practice - it stems from the egalitarian world view, where all meat can be thrown into the grinder. More industrial views have already taken its place.
>brownshirts
More like redshirts, he's Canadian, after all.
>roam the streets violently misgendering trans people
That's only if they don't pass the quality check. Transwoman who passes for a woman will be labeled she. Not because she wants to be called that (ships don't want to be called anything, either), but simply because she passes the cultural norms.
>national animal replaced by a lobster
That would be cool.

[Anonymous No.10661658]

>>10661643
Not that guy but your false sense of superiority isnt working lad

BIG FAT MUTT PSEUD

[Anonymous No.10661659]

>>10661532
>It's wild how club Peterson
>everyone who doesn't agree with me is a partisan ideologue
t. partisan ideologue

[Anonymous No.10661661]

>>10661081
Well said.

[Anonymous No.10661668]

>>10661643
Mate, first of all, it's impossible to take a stance on literally anything without being political. Second of all, one can clearly see Peterson is mostly ok with today's neoliberalism, choosing instead to blame all the evil in contemporary world on feminist cartoons and french intellectuals.
It's impossible to ignore this, it's impossible to ignore the man is very clearly pro-status quo for anyone who has even a passing education in political theory.

[Anonymous No.10661669]

>>10661658
Of course actually understanding the words I use, and using them coherently is "false superiority" and thus doesn't work on you. As I said, that's just the nature of today's debate with today's morons, it has nothing to do with substance, only volume. If it did work on your ilk that's when I'd be in the wrong.

[Anonymous No.10661674]

>>10661668
>Mate, first of all, it's impossible to take a stance on literally anything without being political.

[Anonymous No.10661679]

>>10661674
>Bloom
>not political

[Anonymous No.10661686]

>>10661674
Well, given that today there are groups that hate everything you do based on your characteristics (white heterosexual Christian male), it becomes political. You say sky is blue, but that is only because of the language you used is formed through history, which is political. Haha checkmate. We, however, reject this history and can use the language as a weapon. We don't even need this oppressive language and its standards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzsGmdmhDTI

[Anonymous No.10661688]

>>10661643
It's cute to see you're overcompensating with rudeness, like a true pseud.

[Anonymous No.10661693]

>>10661674
But Bloom critique literary shit and nothing else.

[Anonymous No.10661701]

>>10661356
The right is at its best when it's being consciously anti-intellectual. It's a waste of time trying to participate in an i intellectual discourse when all contemporary intellectualism is rooted in left-wing ideology.

[Anonymous No.10661702]

>>10661669
As if i dont understand them, you are however clearly wrong when you claim that peterson and his message isn't political and no big worded sentences from a 19 year old mutt college student will change that. It also seems that nobody in this thread actually agrees with you so why dont you provide some argument for your stream of half-baked consciousness or is it just dogma we should accept as you are clearly a superiour individual m'lord

Mutts please reffrain from posting in the future, thanks

[Anonymous No.10661706]

>>10661686
I have no control or interest in what other groups do. Their purported hate is totally irrelevant. It's perfectly possible to have your own ideas and not be political and only a modern idiot thinks otherwise. Probably the same kind of idiot who thinks a toilet can be art, and everyone deserves participation medals. Just the kind of idiots who are bent on eroding all meaning from everything. Well you have fun with that, I'll be over here.

[Anonymous No.10661708]

>>10661686
Strawman (Straw-woman)

[Anonymous No.10661716]

>>10661708
Poast physique right now

i am 100 percent sure you look like a bitch

[Anonymous No.10661717]

why do we hate /pol/ again? they have great taste
>>>/pol/159704043

[Anonymous No.10661719]

>>10661708
Not at all. It doesn't mean all my enemies are like that, but that there are creatures like that. Hence my mere existence is a political statement.

[Anonymous No.10661723]

>>10661063
They should have a debate. Sounds like it would be interesting for Peterson to debate someone who's more conservative than himself.

[Anonymous No.10661724]

>>10661410
>What is his domain though?
Having opinions

[Anonymous No.10661727]

>>10661701
Don't you know it's a fact that right wingers tend to be less educated? Of course this fact is touted as some kind of discredit to them while pretending that college is just a leftist indoctrination chamber.

[Anonymous No.10661728]

>>10661719
> but that there are creatures like that.
In that case I'm so sorry you have to see this.

[Anonymous No.10661734]

>>10661686
>others observing what you do changes what's done
The sad thing is there's people who actually believe this swill.

[Anonymous No.10661742]

>>10661727
that college isn't*

Honestly I look down on anyone who has a college degree my age.

[Anonymous No.10661750]

>>10661742
>Honestly I look down on anyone who has a college degree my age.
Sour grapes

[Anonymous No.10661752]

>>10661734
>others observing what you do changes what's done
Are you familiar with Schrödinger's cat?

However, we don't even need to go there. You can be painting roses wherever, thinking it's not political, but a group like ISIS might kill you for it. Politics is expanding at a rapid rate, and we must stop it.

[Anonymous No.10661757]

>>10661750
Yeah, it sure is terrible having a career and no debt, and not being brainwashed.

[Anonymous No.10661762]

>>10661742
The invasion of imbeciles, everyone.

[Anonymous No.10661763]

>>10661752
embarrassing

[Anonymous No.10661771]

>>10661763
We need a political architecture that allows for non-political existence. Say, state borders to halt foreign invasions, laws to halt anarchistic, chaotic and oppressive elements from changing your behavior etc.

[Anonymous No.10661774]

>>10661752
>Are you familiar with Schrödinger's cat?
Can we just ban Peterson threads so we don't have to deal with this level of idiocy?

[Anonymous No.10661783]

>>10661774
>If I do something, I get to say what it is, not the observer and not the system

[Anonymous No.10661802]

He's right, Peterson is putting the final nail in the coffin by turning the last people who could be legitimate "reactionaries" into people who (think) they can still settle for post-modernity (or modernity, for that matter).

[Anonymous No.10661807]

>>10661300
The Catholic right is where the intellectual heft is. Ross Douthat, Michael Brendan Dougherty, etc.

[Anonymous No.10661810]

>>10661081
It's not always all about women.

[Anonymous No.10661816]

>>10661674
Authorial intent is dead old man, I get to decide what Joyce meant, and I say he was a gay feminist lusting for the BBC (post op). My interpretation is just as valid as anyone's.

[Anonymous No.10661818]

>>10661807
Are these Catholic or Vatican II Sect cultists?

[Anonymous No.10661825]

>>10661752
>Are you familiar with Schrödinger's cat?
Imagine being this totally divorced from self awareness.

[Anonymous No.10661847]

Pseud rambling, be warned:

Hitchen's pessimism is useful once you're already a proper adult, and established. When all you can really do is continuing your life. Yes, your country will fall and your culture is already dead for a decade or more, and all you can do is stay true to tradition, like the soldiers at Pompeii being melted by the lava. This doesn't really work for younger people, since they never grew up in the first place. So Hitchen doesn't appeal to them, they are left cultureless and confused in our brave new world.

[Anonymous No.10661879]

>>10661825
How come? Do you have a monopoly to dictate the effects, limits and nature of your actions?

[Anonymous No.10661888]

>>10661879
No-one else can dictate my intentions, your understanding of what I do is nothing.

[Anonymous No.10661891]

>>10661807
In all honesty, the best chance that the right has for a new intellectual tradition is the revival of confucianism.

[Anonymous No.10661894]

>>10661107
>>10661138
>reading comprehension

[Anonymous No.10661899]

>>10661891
This but unironically

[Anonymous No.10661903]

>>10661879
>How come?
Appealing to pop quantum physics memes in a debate on politics is the fucking HEIGHT of cringe, anon.

[Anonymous No.10661905]

>>10661888
>intentions, your understanding of what I do is nothing.
If I were to smurf you, and others were to view it as murder, what would it be?

[Anonymous No.10661920]

>>10661903
He may as well have quoted Rick & Morty.

[Anonymous No.10661927]

>>10661903
>The way all interaction works
>Cringe
Imagine opening this box in 10 years.

[Anonymous No.10661929]

>>10661905
>If I were to smurf you
God, who am I even talking to, what are they even saying. I need to reevaluate my own life...

[Anonymous No.10661936]

>>10661929
>God, who am I even talking to, what are they even saying.
That's up to me to decide, not you or anybody else.

[Anonymous No.10661940]

>>10661081
The preceding part really nails it, IMO:
>Perhaps this is why I am so glad that the whole nature of Dr Peterson’s work is alien to me. I am too keenly aware of the good things which have been utterly lost in recent years to be comforted by what looks like an attempt to reconcile us with the revolutionary order. I find it hard to applaud efforts to help me adapt to a world which I think has gone utterly wrong.

[Anonymous No.10661941]

The funny thing is this thread epitomizes the "bloody post modernists" Peterson harps on about.

[Anonymous No.10661950]

>>10661063
>2018
>millenials need dads
>believe anything a PSYCHOLOGIST says, because, psychologist

I don't even like Vice but Christ, Peterson is a nutter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blTglME9rvQ

[Anonymous No.10661953]

>>10661464
W-what did I just watch

[Anonymous No.10661956]

>>10661940
So what good things have been lost?

[Anonymous No.10661962]

>>10661668
>Mate, first of all, it's impossible to take a stance on literally anything without being political.
stopped reading there

[Anonymous No.10661963]

>>10661956
How long do you have?

[Anonymous No.10661966]

>>10661956
Poetry, hymns and chants!

[Anonymous No.10661969]

>>10661950
>1:30
>I'm only a provocateur in so far as when I say what I think is right you find it provocative
The faggot arguing Peterson is political because of people disagreeing with him...B T F O

[Anonymous No.10661970]

>>10661956
Let's start with a simple one.

[Anonymous No.10661972]

>>10661956
>So what good things have been lost?
God

[Anonymous No.10661973]

>>10661266
>all drugs are the same, a panacea
>might as well take the ones with the most adverse reactions then

[Anonymous No.10661978]

>>10661266
Why is DMT illegal?

[Anonymous No.10661987]

>>10661300
What exactly does Land say? Isn't it just A Thousand Plateaus dressed up in hyper-Joycean paratextual scientism?

[Anonymous No.10662003]

>>10661410
It used to be smoking and drinking.

[Anonymous No.10662004]

>>10661978
I'm not that anon, but why is it illegal? Doesn't it just last for 15 minutes and then have no negative effect?

[Anonymous No.10662007]

>>10661404
You do realise that the only truly traditional societies that survived are located in backwoods NA, right?

[Anonymous No.10662008]

>>10662004
It can actually help you, that's why. It can put you outside the boundaries of most artificial things within your mind.

[Anonymous No.10662009]

>>10661396
You known it's true.

[Anonymous No.10662014]

>>10661376
>1950
>traditional
kek'd

[Anonymous No.10662019]

>>10661969
Just because Peterson himself directly contradicts what some anon is saying Peterson is about doesn't mean that anon isn't correct! He knows Peterson better than Peterson, clearly.

[Anonymous No.10662020]

>>10661807
>Ross Douthat
Please no crypto progressives.

[Anonymous No.10662033]

>>10661548
>haha some rando only half-read the book, therefore it's untrue

[Anonymous No.10662036]

>>10661559
better right than wrong

[Anonymous No.10662044]

>>10661584
but all conservative parties are basically 10 years delayed progressives at this point, maybe not economically but socially quite clearly

[Anonymous No.10662048]

>>10661941
>that image
Modern intellectualism is such a fucking joke, holy shit.

[Anonymous No.10662049]

>>10662033
>>10661532
DUDE IDEOLOGY LMAO

[Anonymous No.10662051]

>>10661635
classical liberals believed in liberal institution from day 1, meme libertarians were invented recently

[Anonymous No.10662057]

>>10661963
Basically all afternoon. If you wanna post a lengthy, incoherent screed about the fall of the West, then be my guest.

>>10661966
>>10661970
>>10661972
How typical

[Anonymous No.10662070]

>>10661727
>progressive institutions
>right wingers get less educated in them
really makes you think

[Anonymous No.10662075]

>>10661802
except nobody is following Peterson politically, just in a few memes he created, and his "individualist" meme is one of the least popular ones

[Anonymous No.10662076]

>>10661170
bullshit, see: his stance on drugs

[Anonymous No.10662082]

>>10662057
A human should be able to form a family, right? A human should be able to expect it to last, right?
If you succeed at 1, you will fail at 2. I'm not sure if it is because of the innately horrid nature of females or because they were understood well enough to control and manipulate.

[Anonymous No.10662086]

>>10661950
>unironically get himself initiated into an indian tribe and fill his house with wooden indian memes
is he just autistic?

[Anonymous No.10662088]

>>10662086
He's taken psychedelics.

[Anonymous No.10662094]

>>10661941
second pic is hotter, sorry

[Anonymous No.10662101]

>>10662076
Why do you need drugs when you could just have a tall glass of milk?

[Anonymous No.10662108]

>>10662094
she also has thrice as much stds and is 10x as likely to #metoo you into submission

[Anonymous No.10662113]

>>10661204
Why is it bullshit?

[Anonymous No.10662118]

>>10661810
>Still hasn't figured out that women are the primary motivation for men in the physical realm
Women will not only attract men, but drive them out to work.

[Anonymous No.10662123]

>>10661528
Just fucking Google him you idiot

[Anonymous No.10662133]

>It was not just my eyes that repeatedly glazed over as I perused it on my homebound train, but my brain and my entire body.
Imagine seeing Peter Hitchens reading Jordan Peterson on the train. Jesus Christ.

[Anonymous No.10662136]

>>10661810
>It's not always all about women.
Women are an integral part of any man's coming of age story. He's talking about why men are failing to develop. You cannot talk about that without discussing women.

[Anonymous No.10662137]

>>10662118
i'll work for peanuts too

[Anonymous No.10662156]

>this right wing public thinker is now more popular than me and i'm mad >:((((

[Anonymous No.10662157]

>>10661940
This sounds like jealousy desu.
>His efforts are useless because the well is poisoned because I said so.

[Anonymous No.10662169]

>>10662156
>peterson
>right wing

[Anonymous No.10662179]

peterson btfo. get educated, /lit/

[Anonymous No.10662180]

>>10662169
i mean he is a conservative, not that that means much, but in the current state of affairs most right wingers don't venture much more right than that

[Anonymous No.10662181]

>>10662169
>larping as a 20th century political thinker
left and right are relative distinctions anon.
peterson is right wing in 2018

[Anonymous No.10662187]

>>10661532
What's his political stance?

[Anonymous No.10662191]

>>10662142

He's ridiculous, but I feel sort of sorry for him desu.

[Anonymous No.10662214]

>>10662187
capitalist, socially conservative, so basically conservative

[Anonymous No.10662226]

>>10661532
It isn't that Peterson' isn't political, it's that he isn't merely political. His insistence on the notions of free speech and the inherent worth of the individual can be characterized as having a place in political history, but as Peterson would say, these ideas are emergent from a theological substructure. Thus to characterize him as a political figure is to only engage with the discussion on the most shallow level. In short, you're missing the point.

[Anonymous No.10662237]

>But whatever it is that has made Dr Peterson a hero to so many, I do not think it is his prose style. Here is an example (page 201) of the higher Peterson: ‘Meaning is when everything there is comes together in an ecstatic dance of single purpose — the glorification of a reality so that no matter how good it has suddenly become, it can get better and better and better more and more deeply forever into the future.’ Ah.

kek. I think I may pick up a Spectator subscription

[Anonymous No.10662245]

>>10661177
Hitchens claims there is no longer a solution so might as well have a last drink on the sinking ship and try to enjoy what's left.

[Anonymous No.10662252]

>>10662237
>resorting to literally attacking "prose style"
fucking kek
the ABSOLUTE resentment

[Anonymous No.10662287]

>>10662237
>I think I may pick up a Spectator subscription
I was thinking the same, seems like a decent enough magazine.

[Anonymous No.10662297]

>>10662245

[Anonymous No.10662313]

>>10661686
It's much simpler than this. We don't need any of the psycho-hegelianism or other materialist explanations, it is simply:
>you live within a state
>therefore, to function amicably within that state you must conform to its political nomos
In liberalism this is, in many ways, deepened:
>we have escaped the state of nature through a contract with society
>therefore, each is bound to engage in the social contract so as to not revert to the state of nature
There is nothing inherently marxist or revolutionary about pointing this out, it is simply how it is. The reason why it is given a revolutionary spin is because the cultural laws of the citizenry have become automatic, or appear to, and thus degeneracy of the original contracts has given way to new forms.
This is a major reason for the schism on the Right and Left, and why there is a tendency on the part of conservatives to take up more radical theories.
One might say that where the Left is oriented through future shock the Right has been divided by past shock - traditions have been brought to ruin, or there is now foundational nomos for the conservative to even hold onto and engage in contracts of social preservation. Such continuation of the past even seems absurd, the values are too far gone; and as he suggests in the article, it is shocking that what we consider as old values would simply entail a return to liberal uncertainty over progress. There is only a vague sense of a last stand of morality, or a fading memory of what seemed like a hardened order which seems somehow soft compared to what is before us.
The conservative sense of time is now lost, which is why there is a risk for dangerous sentimentality towards unknown orders - which is why the two perspectives are so similar. Peterson clings onto hope while Hitchens falls into pessimism, and here they meet in despair to preserve a shell of the old values or see them wiped away. In a sense, they are both saying, 'It is over.' Only in their actions do they exhibit divergent paths to the same end.
And it is fitting, considering how liberal society is built upon such loyal opposition and essentially fuels its progress through such conflict. If there is no longer a king to resolve the dispute then the dispute must intensify until he returns. The hierarchy of liberalism exists within this chasm, and its material structures arise as a counter to this dark, world-piercing column which forever threatens its provisional Law.
At its core liberalism is a coalition opposed to the old regime, and they overcome its power through at once emptying themselves into and against the other. This is their power, a deep creativity through liquidation of the old society, all at a surface of material engagement. And the great paradox of liberalism is that we must hold onto traditions, or the future of them, while never admitting that we are crestfallen.

[Anonymous No.10662330]

The simple truth behind this article is that people have been wishing for a while for a Hitchens to grapple with Peterson's ideas. Unfortunately it isn't Peter they wanted.
Christopher, despite ultimately backing Bush's Iraq invasion, was THE proto-SJW in a lot of ways, and as such, the public has been lamenting the fact that he didn't live long enough for the spectacle of defending his ideology against the current counter movement.
Right on cue, here comes Peter yet again to drag out his brother's corpse for another puppet show. However he's always lacked the fire power of his older brother, since breathless, stammering, gobbling noises don't quite qualify as artillery.
Is Peter Hitchens the British Jeb Bush?

[Anonymous No.10662335]

>>10662181
>anything to the right of mao is right-wing
how about no?
peterson is a centrist at best

[Anonymous No.10662355]

I dont get the hatred for Peterson. A lot of his stuff is "Don't be a faggot" dressed up in philosophical jargon

[Anonymous No.10662363]

>>10662180
>>10662214
>socially conservative
>pro-gay rights
>is down with gender ideology shit as long as it isn't state-enforced
>pro-sexual revolution
>pro-women rights

How's he conservative?
You guys are so fucking delusional it's not even funny

[Anonymous No.10662366]

>>10662335
name 1 person more to the right than Peterson that isn't considered fringe

[Anonymous No.10662369]

>>10662355
I don't think anyone except for the left would particularly mind Peterson if it weren't for the following which hails him as a Messiah and tries to push him (see: this board as of late).

[Anonymous No.10662377]

>>10662355
The guy is not that bad, I mean he's just a status quo man. His fans are the kind of guys that start clapping and cheering, when he says masculinity can be OK however, as if it's an unique opinion.

[Anonymous No.10662384]

>>10662363
>women's rights is a culture war issue
LARP

[Anonymous No.10662387]

>>10662363
you americans are so fucking delusional and ahistorical, is not even funny anymore

also in what sense is Peterson pro-gay rights, pro-gender ideology and pro-sexual revolution?

and in which sense has any non-fringe conservative been anti-women rights in the last 50 years?

[Anonymous No.10662391]

>>10662366
farage
drumpf

[Anonymous No.10662393]

>>10662313
>no foundational nomos
>each side overcomes

[Anonymous No.10662396]

>>10662387
>and in which sense has any non-fringe conservative been anti-women rights in the last 50 years?
This.
I'd really love to know what is entailed on the anti-women rights side of the political aisle lol

[Anonymous No.10662398]

Monkeys throwing shit at each other ayyyyyyyyy lmaooooo

[Anonymous No.10662401]

>>10662387
>>10662384
Explain what makes him socially conservative

[Anonymous No.10662405]

>>10662401
>my argument got BTFO, please it's your turn now =(

[Anonymous No.10662412]

>>10662391
in what sense are they more right wing than Peterson? I don't see any clear area in which you can say that.

[Anonymous No.10662415]

>>10662384
>>10662387
he supports gay marriage
he's willing to call non-binary people by their pronouns if it isn't totalitarian style state enforcement
he is not a sexual dogmatist

>>10662405
>didn't even address my arguments
>btfo
lmfao

How's Peterson socially conservative?
He's as liberal as it comes

[Anonymous No.10662422]

>>10662387
Peterson is just a liberal who cares about freedom of speech, he's not conservative at all.

If you'd ask him if he wanted to ban gay marriage, take away the female vote and recriminalise sex outside of wedlock he would say he wouldn't.

[Anonymous No.10662423]

>>10662049
>non-ideology isn't its own ideology
>the deep centre isn't political
>atheism isn't a belief
>this is not a fedora

[Anonymous No.10662428]

>>10662366
Communist China.

[Anonymous No.10662439]

>>10662401
he is socially conservative in the following senses:
- is skeptic about the sexual revolution and what the consequences will be
- is skeptic about a majority of women choosing career above family
- is against radical open borders policies even though he has no problem with some degree of selected immigration
- is skeptic about the position of islam in western countries
- is skeptic about people in general choosing alternative lifestyles that don't involve marrying and creating a family unless they have a very good reason not to do it
- is skeptic about men and women competition
- in general, he wants to look back at tradition and only throw away the parts of it that won't cause many unexpected consequences when ignored

[Anonymous No.10662447]

>>10662415
>he supports gay marriage
source please
i watched him address this during one of his patreon sessions and he said that he was worried about the damage gay marriage could possibly carry to marriage as an social institution. however he also gave a complete answer and thought it was troubling that there wasn't an easy fix.
i didn't realize "conservative" mean "ideologically close minded"
>he's willing to call non-binary people by their pronouns
how is this a conservative or liberal issue
>he is not a sexual dogmatist
I'm sure I'll regret this but I have to ask what exactly you mean by "sexual dogmatist"

it is interesting to note that all of your examples of what makes a conservative have to do with sex. anything you need to get off your chest?

[Anonymous No.10662461]

>>10661177
It's probably his only good point, and it's not even that good. Peterson's schtick isn't about adapting or reconciling with the world around us. Peterson gives us guidelines on how to change the world into a better place by individual action.

[Anonymous No.10662463]

>>10662415
>he supports gay marriage
>he's willing to call non-binary people by their pronouns if it isn't totalitarian style state enforcement
>he is not a sexual dogmatist
where has he supported gay marriage? and just because he said he won't be causing a scene every time he crosses a tranny in real life doesn't mean he is up for their ideology, he has said many times he believes most kids with gender dysphoria will just grow out of it at some point and be just gay.

>he is not a sexual dogmatist
maybe not, but he is not a progressive either, he has an skeptic point of view towards those issues and even though he can be convinced on some of them i don't think he sees them as "liberation" necessarily

[Anonymous No.10662495]

>>10662439
>even any trace of skepticism to minor gender issues makes you conservative, even though you fully support basically all civil rights/liberal agenda
lmfao

[Anonymous No.10662507]

Why would anyone like Peter Hitchens, though?

[Anonymous No.10662514]

>>10662495
>skepticism
>you fully support basically all civil rights/liberal agenda
what the fuck, how can you support something and be skeptic of it at the same time? Being skeptic literally means that you don't think it's a good idea to mess with it without being careful what you are doing, and that you can't control the consequences of tinkering with those traditional institutions

just because he doesn't openly calls it satan while brandishing the bible above his head doesn't mean he is not literally conservative about those institutions. Conservative doesn't mean no change ever, conservative just means no change without a very good reason to do it.

it's like you have this cartoon image of a conservatism in your head that no real person has ever supported

[Anonymous No.10662521]

>>10662514
>it's like you have this cartoon image of a conservatism in your head that no real person has ever supported
You're so embedded in your degenerate progressive secular materialist culture that you literally can't conceive of actual conservatives?

[Anonymous No.10662531]

>>10662521
>he uses non-western metrics to label social opinions in western culture

[Anonymous No.10662537]

>>10662521
i can conceive if actual traditionalists

i can't conceive of what you call "actual conservatives" because those never existed, conservatism has always been about liberalism and thus degenerate

[Anonymous No.10662545]

>>10662521
>claims to be conservative
>casually throws away 2000 years of western culture for the adoption of non-western values b/c they fit his larp better

[Anonymous No.10662548]

>>10662330
Who is Chirstopher? I've only heard of Peter Hitchens.

[Anonymous No.10662554]

>>10662548
Christopher Hitchens, reformed Marxist and intellectual badboy
*wiggles eyebrow*

[Anonymous No.10662555]

>>10662521
Shut up Muhammad.

[Anonymous No.10662564]

>>10662531
>>10662537
>>10662545
>>10662555
There are actual conservatives in the West as well, they're monarchists and traditional Catholics. They're increasingly rare, but they exist.

[Anonymous No.10662570]

>>10662564
>They're increasingly rare
Good

[Anonymous No.10662575]

>>10662564
>monarchists
kek
thanks for identifying yourself as a fucking retard

[Anonymous No.10662576]

>>10662564
conservatism has always been liberalism, what you are talking about is reactionaries

[Anonymous No.10662584]

>>10662537
Ever heard about Edmund Burke, *my friend*?

[Anonymous No.10662585]

>>10662463
>>10662514
>>10662531
>>10662537
>>10662545
>>10662555
This is how you view the political spectrum

[Anonymous No.10662590]

>>10662575
I'm not saying I'm one of them, just saying they exist.

>>10662576
>conservatism has always been liberalism
Only in America which is a revolutionary liberal state founded on enlightenment values.

[Anonymous No.10662593]

>>10662585
Alright I'll entertain you
You tell us what an authentic, functionally "conservative" society would look like, and we'll tell you whether you're an ideologue or not.

[Anonymous No.10662598]

>>10662593
First you explain how Peterson is a conservative when he's basically down with every single liberal political point

[Anonymous No.10662600]

>>10662593
Christian monarchy accompanied by Internet is a curious combination. I can't really imagine it. "Better" is what I have to say. Less Jews, too.

[Anonymous No.10662613]

>>10662514
>conservative doesn't mean no change ever, conservative just means no change without a very good reason to do it.
>I'll twist the definitions as much as possible to fit my agenda

[Anonymous No.10662626]

>>10662593
A conservative society would ban internet pornography, and reintroduce grammar schools, and last but not least give sufficient public funding to the railways.

[Anonymous No.10662630]

>>10662613
Edmund Burke the creator of conservatism literally said this, not sure what kind of cartoon villain image you have of conservatives but it has nothing to do with real life

[Anonymous No.10662631]

>>10662613
>Conservative doesn't mean no change ever, conservative just means no change without a very good reason to do it.
That's the original meaning. Nowadays it's identical with 'liberal' in that it doesn't really carry any of that origin.

[Anonymous No.10662648]

>>10662598
>First you explain how Peterson is a conservative when he's basically down with every single liberal political point
Are you just playing dumb or have you actually failed to notice the absolute state of modern liberals?
If by liberals you mean "1700s enlightenment values" then, yeah, I guess you got me. My question to you would then be at what point does yesterday's liberalism become today's conservatism. Never?

[Anonymous No.10662656]

>>10662626
>internet porn
>grammar schools
>railways
This strikes me as an incomplete picture of a society. What a surprise.

[Anonymous No.10662658]

Guys, guys! Stop arguing over semantics!
Conservative: liberal with a 15 year delay. This is the correct definition.

[Anonymous No.10662662]

>>10662600
You can't imagine it because under a monarchy the internet wouldn't exist or at least would not be publicly accessible. Impossible to control.

[Anonymous No.10662677]

>>10662656
Jesus Christ, read a book, mate.

[Anonymous No.10662679]

>>10662630
>>10662631
>>10662648
A conservative preserves both customs and institutions

Peterson is not religious
Peterson approves of basically every single development of civil rights that happened throughout the 20th century and early 21st century
His "skeptcism" of certain developments not even once means he wants to infringe upon personal freedoms or said rights

What the fuck is he trying to conserve?

Like >>10662585 said, your view of the political landscape of today is very, very shifted from the actual center

[Anonymous No.10662684]

>>10661941

This is a pretty shallow interpretation based on her appearance, because she was a moron well before the first picture.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-ezbk0AOCI

[Anonymous No.10662686]

>>10662677
>Jesus Christ, read a book, mate.
I'll take this as a concession of your defeat. Thanks for playing.

[Anonymous No.10662696]

>>10662679
just because he is autistic about totalitarianism and doesn't want to legislate about things doesn't mean he doesn't literally want to conserve traditional institutions

>approves of basically every single development of civil rights that happened throughout the 20th century and early 21st century
so do 99% of current year conservatives? i am not sure what kind of mythical conservatives are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.10662700]

>>10662662
The Chinese seem to do a pretty good job at it. They're a great example of making authoritarianism work with modern technology.

[Anonymous No.10662701]

>>10662679
Claiming that Peterson is not religious is absurd.
Your idea of the political center is 100% LARP motivated. We're never going back to feudalism, or whatever it is that you want. I'm not saying this to rub it in or whatever, I'm saying it because our society has naturally evolved beyond the limitations of such a system. It's literally not functional anymore.

[Anonymous No.10662709]

>>10662700
China isn't a monarchy, retard.

[Anonymous No.10662711]

>>10661956

A cultural outlook that valued self-reliance and self-improvement, which we have instead exchanged for victimhood narratives and total abrogation of any personal responsibility to better oneself.

[Anonymous No.10662714]

>>10662696
What does he want to conserve?

>>10662701
>>10662701
>Your idea of the political center is 100% LARP motivated. We're never going back to feudalism, or whatever it is that you want.
Cute strawman
Peterson is dead-on centrist

[Anonymous No.10662726]

>>10662686
And I'll assume you don't read books. Cheers.

[Anonymous No.10662730]

>>10662714
>What does he want to conserve?
the family, christianity, capitalism, individualism

what does your mythical conservative want to conserve that Peterson doesn't?

[Anonymous No.10662731]

>>10661063
I really want to see Peterson take on an actual opponent like Zizek. This Cathy Newman tier shit just feeds the braindead ideological 'war' surrounding him.

[Anonymous No.10662734]

>>10662709
The same tactics would work as well for a monarchy.

Saudi Arabia also has a deliberate internet strategy that deals with dissent and the like.

[Anonymous No.10662736]

>>10662696
The only thing Peterson is "conserving" is modern capitalism where you work and have a family, a house and a car.

[Anonymous No.10662740]

>>10661940
>waah I refuse to adjust

[Anonymous No.10662743]

>>10662391

I don't think that Trump is further to the right of Peterson. Trump is economically minded and that's what drives his policy of populist-centered nationalism lite and dialing back government interventionism, which comes across as vaguely libertarian.

Peterson is motivated by spiritual and philosophical concerns, rooted in his understanding/interpretation of modern psychology and biology. He's a fairly traditional individualist, who would not have seemed right-wing at all probably 30 or 40 years ago.

Farage I would put "right" of both of them, because he's an avowed nationalist and opponent of creeping globalist bureaucracy.

[Anonymous No.10662745]

>>10662731
Zizek is a terrible debater, he just has 3 or 4 memes he reuses for every situation and overwhelms any interlocutor with sheer energy, so he kind of "wins" but the discussion goes nowhere

[Anonymous No.10662749]

>>10662711

>we've lost a cultural outlook that valued self-improvement

speak for yourself, in the UK we've still not managed to fully overcome a rigorous class system

[Anonymous No.10662754]

>>10662736
so the same as every other single conservative party in the current world? i think you are talking about reactionaries which is a different thing

[Anonymous No.10662757]

>>10662711
>self-reliance and self-improvement
Both modern inventions. Products of individualism.

[Anonymous No.10662758]

>>10662377
>as if it's an unique opinion.
it's extremely rare in today's mainstream
nice psyops

[Anonymous No.10662761]

>>10662736

>modern capitalism
>house

[Anonymous No.10662767]

>>10662730
>the family
you mean traditional family? he supports gay rights

>christianity
he's not a christian. he does not advocate for any particular religion

>capitalism
>individualism

lmfao so being anything but an anti-capitalist means you're conservative?

[Anonymous No.10662775]

>>10662749
>self improvement is about class
>>10662757
>individualism didn't exist before shemales
lolok

[Anonymous No.10662777]

>>10662731
>actual opponents
>le sniffing ideology man

[Anonymous No.10662781]

>>10662758
No it isn't, you put words in the mouth of your imagined enemies.

[Anonymous No.10662785]

>>10662749

Well, it's true in the context of American society, which was literally built by Europeans fleeing more oppressive/strict class systems and seeking their own fortune. And that's being lost.

>>10662757

Okay. And?

[Anonymous No.10662794]

>>10662767
>he supports gay rights
except he never said he does, he just does in your mind for some reason

>he's not a christian. he does not advocate for any particular religion
he literally says christianity is fundamental to the west and other religions may be incompatible with our society

>lmfao so being anything but an anti-capitalist means you're conservative?
At this point you just have insanely high standards for being a conservative that no existing conservative actually meets.

We are talking about conservatives here, they are everywhere, it's not hard to be one. Not sure where your high standards came from. At least name 1 single conservative that meets the requirements so we know what the fuck you are talking about

[Anonymous No.10662797]

>>10662736
>>10662754
>>10662767
Now we got to the very root of the issue

/lit/ (or /leftypol/) actually believes not being a communist = being socially conservative. Just delete this thread

[Anonymous No.10662798]

>>10662711
name literally TWO (2) examples of this vaunted "self-reliance and self-improvement" culture

the fucking problem with Peterson is he's implanted this imagined nostalgia for a culture that never existed amongst disaffected millennials that weren't around to know that

[Anonymous No.10662802]

>>10662743

To expand on Peterson v. Trump, they're kind of like "words" vs. "actions". Peterson is giving advice to listless men that is exemplified by the life Trump has secured for himself, insofar as proactively seeking his own destiny and fortune by cultivating his own talents.

[Anonymous No.10662825]

>>10661847
I sympathise with people like Hitchens and Peterson but I can't figure out what it is exactly that they're afraid of, apart from society becoming less conducive to Christian morality, thereby damning everyone.

[Anonymous No.10662832]

>>10662798

The "Manifest Destiny" paradigm of Americanism which saw millions of people strike out into unknown territories to seek their own fortunes, succeeding on their own merit.

The fact successive waves of European immigrants (Anglos & Scots, Germans, Italians, Irish, etc.) came to a country which secured their basic freedoms without giving them handouts and assimilated them all into the most powerful nation on earth.

The fact the above culture, with the economic liberty and free market afforded its citizen, managed to contribute fantastic scientific advances.

[Anonymous No.10662837]

>>10662825
>but I can't figure out what it is exactly that they're afraid of
for one thing our societies are literally having to import the new generations from more traditional societies and expecting that we can just brainwash them to carry on our legacy

[Anonymous No.10662839]

>>10662797
And /pol/ believes in a neomarxist boogeyman that wants to split up his family apparently. Did I get that right?

[Anonymous No.10662846]

>>10662797
this
just disregard the crypto-pinkos on this board

[Anonymous No.10662853]

>>10662837
what

[Anonymous No.10662856]

>>10662825
>but I can't figure out what it is exactly that they're afraid of
It doesn't get more explicit than "this law limits freedom of speech". Are you a total moron, by chance?

[Anonymous No.10662862]

>>10662832
Your individualist idealism is based on a great economic period, but society can't always be like that, in fact capitalism is constructed in such a way the bubble will always break.

[Anonymous No.10662863]

>>10662832

How do you propose exactly we replicate a frontier society, the economy of which was driven by people moving into uninhabited prime agricultural land and/or mineral wealth, in 2017?

that's "lost" because it could only occur within the very specific set of historical circumstances that it did occur in

[Anonymous No.10662875]

>>10662797
you are so deep into the left's brainwashing that you don't even notice anymore that arguing that Peterson is socially conservative doesn't mean arguing that he is bad.

[Anonymous No.10662885]

>>10661941

You know, this is the poem that sent me far-left and made me realize what fucking idiots the alt-right are. Because I watched the video, and it has nothing to do with being a slut, its about how men sexualize her all the time and then call her a slut if she rejects them OR gets with them. That's when I found the alt-right don't actually have a clue what they're talking about, they just use tabloid memes to trick people into being scared of strawman and joining them.

[Anonymous No.10662895]

>thread about actual book
>tumbleweed

>thread about nonentity pop-thinker
>10000000 replies

i fucking hate you people

[Anonymous No.10662898]

>>10662885
it's still unseemly for a lady to recite a poem called "i'm a slut" even if it has some sort of social criticism under it

[Anonymous No.10662902]

>>10662885
>You know, this is the poem that sent me far-left and made me realize what fucking idiots the alt-right are. Because I watched the video
A champion of truth you are.
>>10662885
>its about how men sexualize her all the time and then call her a slut if she rejects them OR gets with them
This doesn't actually happen though. Maybe like 5% of men would do this, it's in no way indicative of the norm. So you were swayed to a total political paradigm shift by a video begging to be a victim based on something that never actually occurs. Yep, you're a leftist alright.

[Anonymous No.10662906]

>>10662885
>it has nothing to do with being a slut
>its about how men sexualize her
>if [...] she [...] gets with them
really makes you think

[Anonymous No.10662912]

>>10661063
>think this is mainly because those young men cannot work out how to behave correctly towards modern young women. These young women’s minds have been trained to mistrust masculinity. But in their hearts they still despise feeble, feminised men. The outcome is that men are trapped in a minefield, in the midst of a quicksand. Whether you stand still or move, it will still destroy you. I do not know how anyone copes with it, or ever could.

CONSERVATIVES ACTUALLY UNIRONICALLY BELIEVE THIS

[Anonymous No.10662917]

>>10662898
Why do you think that's the case?

[Anonymous No.10662922]

>>10662917
a sense of common decency and etiquette

[Anonymous No.10662937]

>>10662902
Feminists and so on aren't neccesarily targeting the norm, if you don't sexually harass women, they're not talking about you, bucko. Grow a pair and quit being so easily frightened. All women experience this sort of thing and have to deal with it, and that 5% accumulates into significant numbers.

[Anonymous No.10662940]

>>10662922
Look around you my man

[Anonymous No.10662985]

>>10662740
This but unironically

[Anonymous No.10662987]

>>10662736
Sounds bretty gud to me

[Anonymous No.10662988]

>>10662937
>Feminists and so on aren't neccesarily targeting the norm
>All women experience this sort of thing and have to deal with it, and that 5% accumulates into significant numbers.
So do we need your revolution or not. I can't really tell.

[Anonymous No.10663010]

>>10662937
>Feminists and so on aren't neccesarily targeting the norm
>All women experience this sort of thing
Imagine being so fucking dumb you can't even go 2 seconds without directly contradicting yourself. Feminism is all about solving problems that don't really exist, because it's nice to be a victim in today's political landscape, it makes you some kind of special moral highground, even if you have to fabricate that victimization. Pretty damn pathetic desu. Doubly so when you consider there are real problems in the world relevant to their agenda but that are ignored for the sake of domestic whining. If a tiny fraction of the menstruation geared towards harassing regular citizens and demanding special treatment in America were focused female genital mutilation in places like Africa, or their total lack of rights in the middle east, they might actually effect some meaningful change. Of course that's not the point is it, feminists don't want equality (that's what they already have) they want to be special, to have an identity handed to them instead of making their own, they want the easiness of belonging to a group, the poor harassed women of the world, who hold basically all power in relationships, massively preferential treatment by the justice system, affirmative action quotas on their side for jobs and school, and on and on and on.

[Anonymous No.10663023]

>>10662885
>people think you're a slut if you don't have sex with someone
this is your brain on leftism

[Anonymous No.10663044]

>>10662902

You know, if you actually listened to what women say you might think differently.

[Anonymous No.10663048]

>>10663044
>actually listened to what women say
literally always a mistake

[Anonymous No.10663060]

>>10663044

They have nothing interesting to say

[Anonymous No.10663075]

>>10663044
No you're conflating listening to woman with agreeing with them uncritically. You're also forgetting an incredibly important fact, no woman with actual self worth is a feminist. It's the same with the 'alt-right' faggots, they have no qualities or identity of their own to value, so they adopt themselves into this collective which replaces the need to produce or be anything worthwhile instead regurgitating normative demands. And so it is precisely because I have suffered to actually listen to women that I say what I do, functional females would never say something like
>>10662885
>men sexualize her all the time and then call her a slut if she rejects them OR gets with them
let alone try and use this noise as some kind of political platform.

[Anonymous No.10663116]

>>10661300
LOL, the bulk of Peterson's work is completely apolitical. His psychology is stellar and has nothing to do with left wing right wing. I really wish people who only know Peterson from sensationalist culture war politics would stop giving their hot takes.

[Anonymous No.10663155]

>>10662987
Hell yes it does, being a white male (Slavs, Italians not included) during the 1960's was probably very, very good. But the battle for muh car and wife is futile nowadays.

[Anonymous No.10663198]

>>10662736
Sounds excellent, don't forget cohesive national values and a destiny.

[Anonymous No.10663208]

>>10661458
Literally nobody actually thinks this, right?

[Anonymous No.10663209]

>>10661063
>Hitchens Vs Peterson: Dawn of Morality
>Now that I seem to have become a prophet of doom, I wonder whether I should have been a guru instead. Doom doesn’t sell. Bookshops hide my books in back rooms. My recorded harangues and TV appearances reach a few thousand dedicated YouTube enthusiasts. But Dr Jordan B. Peterson, supposedly as reactionary as I am, speaks to millions. His new book 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos adorns the front table of every Waterstones.
Lmao, holy shit Hitchens, those are some sour grapes.

[Anonymous No.10663229]

>>10663116
>psyche is stellar
don’t deserve to draw another breath, i hope you accidentally get run over by a car

[Anonymous No.10663244]

>>10661555
it really isn't though, an American style conservative would be, in Britain, something like a nationalist agitator or Italian regional seperatist

[Anonymous No.10663246]

>>10661063

[Anonymous No.10663258]

>>10662101
how often does anyone experienced ego death after a glass of milk?

[Anonymous No.10663275]

>>10663198
Why is that pyramid upside down?

[Anonymous No.10663299]

>>10663229
You sound very upset, I'm sorry but his success as a psychologist is simply undeniable

[Anonymous No.10663308]

>>10661063
Hey inferior Hitchens, eat your limey heart out.
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/958587519641284609

[Anonymous No.10663316]

>>10663299
>his success as a psychologist
>psychologist
>successful

[Anonymous No.10663329]

>>10663316
>Psychology doesn't real

[Anonymous No.10663336]

>>10663329
>implying it's not a racket
read Denial of Death if you want to be done with the psyches

[Anonymous No.10663341]

>>10663316
Mark Zuckeberg studied psychology. Mass psychology is strategy analysis, essentially.

[Anonymous No.10663347]

>>10661810
>he hasn't taken the cunt pill
It literally is, it's all about getting it in, everything you see around you right now exists because some fag was trying to get his balls massaged.

[Anonymous No.10663361]

>>10663299
>please dont insult my cult leader

[Anonymous No.10663412]

>>10662912
For the vast majority of me it's true. Most women can't bring themselves to see inadequate men as human. Whenever one of us enters their field of vision they feel an intense disgust.

[Anonymous No.10663425]

>>10662853
fucking retard, you must be eiter retarted or full of ideology if you cant understand what he is saying

[Anonymous No.10663447]

>>10663425
What's the problem, bucko? You should sort yourself out so you can compete with the immigrants in this wonderful global economy. Start by cleaning your room, and get skilled so you can enter the market.

[Anonymous No.10663454]

>>10661063
>the atheist brother died and the Christian brother lives
What did God mean by that?

[Anonymous No.10663487]

>>10663454
God favours cyclists and public transport.

[Anonymous No.10663530]

>>10662008
>government banned it because they don't want YOU to SUCCEED
you sound like one of those retards who think the government is hiding the cure to cancer from us.

[Anonymous No.10663555]

>>10662076
He's right about drugs though. Drug people are fucking scum and making their vices legal just places the burden on us when they all turn into fuckwits

[Anonymous No.10663571]

>>10663530
Yeah but why is it banned? It has no side effects as far as I know

[Anonymous No.10663587]

>>10662094
>>10661941

Yeah i agree with this anon second is cute first is boring looking

Also second poem sounds more promising even tho i havent seen the videos

[Anonymous No.10663625]

>>10661063
I just watched the channel 4 interview again with Kathy Newman. Any leftists who think she exposed him as a sexist, how blind they are. He dropped truth bombs all over her and on her audience. They're THERE, and those who understand and listen can SEE them, but those who are ideologically possessed don't think there are any bombs. There's just a fine drizzle in the air, a light mist of moisture, refreshing in small doses, because they are refreshed to think they've had their views confirmed. They have no idea the big steamy pile of shit that he just expertly turned their views into. No, he didn't TURN them into anything, but merely exposed them for what they are. God bless Dr. Jordan B Peterson.

[Anonymous No.10663632]

>>10661941
Which would you rather marry?

[Anonymous No.10663765]

>>10661081
/ourguy/ confirmed

[Anonymous No.10664107]

>>10663625
Newman is just a shitty confrontional interviewer, dude. She had an interview with Žižek where she was equally annoying and answered with the same kind of "so, you're saying that [intentional misrepresention]". Plenty of TV figures do this with intellectuals to provide a spectacle.

[Anonymous No.10664307]

>>10664107
She utilized identity politics, defended the wage gap, suggested that men and women are NOT treated equally in the west, conflated him with the alt-right, and it was all through the filter of cultural Marxist ideology. That is not truth. Dr. Peterson speaks truth, and truth will win every time in an arena of words and not violence.