/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21876411]

Kek imagine getting lapped so hard by fucking stephen fry that you don’t even notice it lmao

[Anonymous No.21876418]

imagine watching Peterson at all

[Anonymous No.21876428]

>>21876411
It's not hard to lap someone who is that much of a pseud.

[Anonymous No.21876457]

>>21876411
I have to disagree. Fry is a lot better read than Peterson but he was arrogant, rambly and incoherent here. Fry is a classic English liberal humanist, cultured but fuzzy thinking. Peterson, despite his limitations, always argues incisively and clearly. Fry acted a little arrogantly by doing this interview in the way he did because he's not a thinker, he's an author/TV personality and doesn't have many useful things to say in front of Peterson's audience.

[Anonymous No.21876459]

Imagine being that obsessed with a celebrity psychotherapist that you post about him since 1000 days or more, each time he makes a media headline

[Anonymous No.21876467]

quickly someone make a zizek thread so the permanent shitting of this board is in balance

[Anonymous No.21876468]

Who is steven fry and why is he so fat and strokey looking?

[Anonymous No.21876478]

>>21876468
>Who is steven fry
english dude who invented fish and chips
>why is he so fat and strokey looking
he probably still eats it daily

[Anonymous No.21876486]

>>21876457
>Fry is a lot better read than Peterson but he was arrogant, rambly and incoherent here.
Spot on, unfortunately. I usually quite enjoy Fry talking but he has a tendency to not listen, here very manifest.

[Anonymous No.21876501]

>>21876468
He's a fag comedian who writes bad poetry and has a twink zoomer husband (pic-related).

[Anonymous No.21876514]

>>21876457
>>21876486
People who hate Peterson live in a different reality. They're literally team chud/tranny/schizo/libtard--an amagamation more queer than Frye and his husband.

[Anonymous No.21876556]

>>21876514
>>21876501
Holy shit you guys were serious hahahahahaha what

[Anonymous No.21876595]

>>21876468
Educate yourself zoomer. Also, it's british genetics.

[Anonymous No.21876618]

>>21876514
>a 65 dating someone so young he still has acne
Fry's MAP rights saga when

[Anonymous No.21876650]

>>21876501

[Anonymous No.21876666]

>>21876457
Peterson refuses to define the word "God" and "Believe" and "In" yet you claim he is clear and incisive? LOL

[Anonymous No.21876685]

>>21876666
That depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is.

[Anonymous No.21876698]

>>21876685
That depends on what the meaning of the word "meaning" is.

[Anonymous No.21876713]

>>21876411
It's been a while since I saw this, but I remember how, for the most part, Fry barely addresses anything that Peterson proposes and just spouts his own opinions vaguely connected to the topic without listening.

[Anonymous No.21876731]

>>21876501
>zoomer
the bloke is 35, so there is still some semblance of hope for you, poof.

[Anonymous No.21876764]

>>21876713
Peterson does this whenever economics are brought up. He goes on his spiel about the "Pareto Law" and how it's a walloping problem concerning the concentration of wealth and power, but then never actually engages with this very real and present problem in our current society, which is getting worse all the time by the way. He's even worse now that he's publicly stated partisan allegiance, because instead of actually investigating real solutions, he can just default to "this party good, that party bad". Peterson has managed to dumb himself down even more, which is quite the staggering accomplishment.

[Anonymous No.21876776]

>>21876731
>35 year-old twink desperately styling himself as a teenage zoom zoom to maintain the pederastic fantasy of his sugar daddy
I'd say there's hope for you but odds are you're too lazy and have never been cute.

[Anonymous No.21876782]

>>21876764
Because what are you going to do about it? Someone is always going to have power. Giving a state power to reorder the economy however it wants doesnt solve anything, it just gives a different small group of people power

[Anonymous No.21876807]

>>21876764
>RICH PEOPLE HORDE ALL THE MONEY AND IF THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO WE'D ALL HAVE MORE!
He offers it as a criticism of leftist-liberal policies that don't actually address reality. For example, he'll highlight the hypocrisy of couching energy policy in the above by pointing out it affects the poor by increasing basic cost of living. The political language of wealth redistribution is almost always propaganda servicing an agenda and has been such going back as far as you're willing to look.

[Anonymous No.21876810]

>>21876776
>Hoodie and coat combo
>Dressing like a zoomer
My fiend, you are genuinely retarded. Also, I called you a poof as a joke but you didn't need to out yourself to be an actual faggot. Don't forget to stock up on Prep when meeting sugar daddies.

[Anonymous No.21876860]

>>21876810
>triggered by making fun of zoomers
That logo is peak zoom zoom nonsense (not to mention the haircut). If you're going to keep seething over a joke just take it to Twitter, faggot. Otherwise shut the fuck up and go back to your Tumblr diary.

[Anonymous No.21876863]

>>21876782
>>21876807
The whole premise of the USA in particular was explicitly the question "How do we ensure the ongoing decentralization of power?". The entire apparatus of the government was designed, intentionally, to ensure power flowed "from the people, for the people, by the people". In so far as this is no longer the case, it is due to the corruption of that original goal. To simply say "Oh well, power always centralizes so might as well accept increasingly being a slave or a serf" is cowardly and defeatist. There is definitely a middle ground between "Giving a state power to reorder the economy" and allowing centralized capital to manipulate the market.

[Anonymous No.21876899]

>>21876860
>using "triggered"
>saying I need to go to Tumblr or Twitter
>backtracking by saying it's a joke
>talking about brands and haircuts like a faggot
Lol
You have an atrophied brain and a pathetic fetish for zoomers "broseph". Look in the mirror if you haven't removed it yet for dysmorphia related reasons, fat fuck.

[Anonymous No.21876919]

>>21876863
Power vacuums are vulnerable to mafias. And the us is hardly ruled by corporations. Look at the federal reserve, the state and federal governments, the banking industry.

What do you suggest, in terms of things which have actually existed?

[Anonymous No.21876924]

>>21876899
>no you
Frfr.

[Anonymous No.21876933]

>>21876457
>Peterson, despite his limitations, always argues incisively and clearly.

It is not possible to finally determine how or whether something is meaningful by observing the objective features of that thing. Value is not invariant, in contrast to objective reality; furthermore, it is not possible to derive an ought from an is (this is the “naturalistic fallacy” of David Hume). It is possible, however, to determine the conditional meaning of something, by observing how behavior (one’s own behavior, or someone else’s) is conducted in the presence of that thing (or in its absence). “Things” (objects, processes) emerge—into subjective experience, at least—as a consequence of behaviors. Let us say, for the sake of example, that behavior “a” produces phenomenon “b” (always remembering that we are talking about behavior in a particular context). Behavior “a” consequently increases in frequency. It can be deduced, then, that phenomenon “b” is regarded as positive, by the agent under observation, in the particular “context” constituting the observed situation. If behavior “a” decreases in frequency, the opposite conclusion can be reasonably reached. The observed agent regards “b” as negative.

This is a random passage from Maps of Meaning.

[Anonymous No.21876946]

>>21876924
Obsessed with zoomers. This is why your mother cries herself to sleep every night

[Anonymous No.21876961]

>>21876863
>I believe in fantasy and don't realize I'm playing make believe with my political beliefs
You're the type of midwit Peterson is warning about. There has always been a small group of elites who decide who is suitable for public office (as well as who gets a platform from which to speak). Social media has disrupted this balance and we've witnessed the attempt to redefine basic rights and blow up traditional institutions as a result. Peterson isn't saying that all heirarchies are just and will often reference the fact they tend to become corrupt over time (i.e. you're making a strawman and being willfully filtered from his actual point).

[Anonymous No.21876965]

>>21876946
>REEEEEEEEE YO MAMA
Straight bussin. No cap.

[Anonymous No.21876974]

>>21876457
>Peterson, despite his limitations, always argues incisively and clearly.
u wot
Peterson is alright but this is not true, the guy is a rambler.

[Anonymous No.21876977]

>>21876411
peterson is such a try hard. can't stand that fuckin guy. tells zoomers to clean their rooms while his daughter flaunts her tits on instagram all day and while he nearly dies from an addition to pharmaceutical pills. maybe he should clean his own fuckin room and shut the fuck up

[Anonymous No.21876982]

>>21876965
Fat

[Anonymous No.21876986]

>>21876919
I think every system needs checks and balances. The US constitution almost got this right, but obviously there was still enough room for corruption to overwhelm the system
>>21876961
What are you talking about? What fantasy are you referring to, my statement that there is a middle ground between government tyranny and corporate/mafia tyranny? Allow me to inverse what Peterson says in the form of a question, do you believe that a truly just hierarchy is impossible? Will all hierarchies everywhere always succumb to corruption? Try interacting with what I am saying instead of jumping to the most brain dead insult that every mental deficient on this God forsaken board instantly reaches for: "midwit", the use of which ironically marks it's user as such.

[Anonymous No.21876990]

>>21876974
>clinical psychologist who spent decades personally helping hundreds of people severely afflicted by mental illness
>academic who published dozens of widely cited papers ranging in subjects varying from practical counseling, historical/philosophical roots of psychology, research paradigms in neurology...
>research scientist working on the operationalization of personality constructs as well as the neurobiological basis of addiction
>university professor who mentored dozens of grad students into academic, research, and counseling careers
>assisted in the development of software that increases the likelihood of at-risk students reaching graduation as a side project
>accidentally became internationally famous and ended up publishing 2 best selling books (so far) as well as organizing lectures in various countries throughout the world
inb4
>he's a drug addict tho!
>his office was messy once!
>er...you don't have a dad!
>er...wash your dick!
>his daughter is a slut!
>he likes the Jews!
>he's controlled opposition!
Still triggering trannies who don't like the truth, libtards who propagandize, racists he won't associate with, and pseuds who can't tell the difference between a media personality and real life

[Anonymous No.21876994]

>>21876977
>he's a drug addict
>his daughter is a slut
>messyoffice.jpeg
>you don't have a dad
>wash your penis
>you're Jordan/Mikhala
>he cried in public
>he associates with Jews
>controlled opposition
Ad homs that distract from his arguments are all they have. The sad thing is that they're the same ones over and over and have been for years. The fun thing is that it's easy to point to where his credability comes from and the positive things he's been doing for years and make these people seethe.

[Anonymous No.21876998]

>>21876863
>Peterson: it would be productive to involve men in the conversation about violence against women in a way that doesn't label masculinity as inherently negative
>Libtard: so you're saying in order to make men care about rape women have to be returned to the status of men's property
>Peterson: the rise of identitarianism is linked to reactionary politics that sublimate personal resentment into collectivistic extremism
>Chud: so you're saying white people don't have group interests and therefore shouldn't exist
>Peterson: transgender ideology specifically targets a group of people likely to be confused and open to mental pathologies via social contagion--we shouldn't give hormones to children let alone surgically mutilate minors
>Tranny: so you're literal nazi saying we're a disease and we should be exterminated like one
>Peterson: anonymity increases the likelihood of pathological behavior so perhaps one way to alleviate the negative repurcussions of its overall influence would be to segregate accounts on these specific widely used social media websites--it's definitely better than secret and selective control of the public narrative as it exists now
>/pol/tard: so you're saying you want everyone everwhere to be tied to whatever they say and do at all times...I'm a freedom fighter [goes to another thread to post about AOC's asshole while writing "nig*er" 50 times]
Basically, Peterson will touch a nerve by simply pointing out something that is blatantly ignored in the way an ideological group frames an issue. He exposes ideological blindspots in a simple and straightforward way; this leads to the fellow travellors of whichever idea is being discussed having a breakdown and exposing themselves. He's valuable as a media personality if even for that reason alone (inb4 CONTROLLED OPPOSITION DA JEEWZ THO!

[Anonymous No.21876999]

>>21876990
Not reading all this bullshit my guy. Peterson's dialogues are like your post, excessively long for the context and tangential.

[Anonymous No.21877000]

>>21876990
You failed to actually address the matter at hand. He literally has multi-hour conversations about God all the while staunchly refusing to define basic words in relation to God. This is the polar opposite of "clear" and "Incisive".

[Anonymous No.21877003]

>>21876990
>he likes the Jews!
This is a misrepresentation. He is an apologist for jewish hegemony within their host states.

[Anonymous No.21877005]

>>21876986
>makes shit up about idealized democracy (that never existed)
>claims his political beliefs are in line with the above (how can you be against them)
>asserts that Peterson wants to maintain hierarchies that subvert this idealized democracy (which is a lie)
You're a retard who is too stupid to understand you're being disingenuous.

[Anonymous No.21877008]

>>21876998
What does any of that have to do with the post you replied to?

[Anonymous No.21877012]

>>21876994
there's no need to attack his individual claims when he is perceived as a general grifter. why would anyone waste their time refuting anything he says. he can barely make a point to joe rogan, much less anyone else.
you wanna talk about his cringe videos crying over twitter tweets after he went to daily mail for the shapiro bucks?
dude's a fucking grifter. the fact that he repeats crowd pleasing aphorisms does not change this fact in the least.

[Anonymous No.21877013]

>>21877003
Delusional rationalization/disorganized thinking:
There are facts about the world. For example, that media manipulates people, Jews work in media, and psychologists study the mind. However, what a delusional person does is take such facts and use them to confirm a specific narrative (this is known as being selectively coherent). The elements of the narrative aren't actually proven by the facts but the delusional person (or ideologue) confuses their truth with the truth of their narrative. For example: Peterson is a psychologist (fact), associates with Jews (fact), and works in media (fact); therefore he is a skilled manipulator and part of a conspiracy headed by Jews. (This is the delusional rationalization part). The facts don't prove the narrative yet if you look you'll notice they are what is carrying the weight of the argument being made by people who mentally adhere to the narrative--if you deny the narrative these ideologues will confuse this with denying the facts. (That's the disordered thinking part).

Basically, the dangerous thing about paranoid narratives is that they have the appearance of being logically consistent within themselves and noticing the sleight of hand that takes place between the facts and the narrative isn't always easy to do. However, it's quite easy to see why certain narratives are simply absurd (e.g. looking at the advanced teachings of a cult versus those they use to hook people in).

Peterson isn't the crescendo of a multi-millenia conspiracy headed by a cabal of Jews who want you to not have sex. You haven't figured it all out and you aren't interpreting 5D chess. What you are doing is building a selectively coherent narrative based on truisms and confusing that they necessarily connect to your version of reality. If you find yourselves doing this seek professional help.

[Anonymous No.21877014]

>>21877005
Tell us your view of the USA constitution and quit dancing around the issue with vagaries.

[Anonymous No.21877018]

>>21877008
>Peterson will touch a nerve by simply pointing out something that is blatantly ignored in the way an ideological group frames an issue. He exposes ideological blindspots in a simple and straightforward way; this leads to the fellow travellors of whichever idea is being discussed having a breakdown and exposing themselves.
That describes you pretty well.

[Anonymous No.21877021]

>>21876990
You forgot his creepy dream about his grandma's pubic hair.

[Anonymous No.21877020]

>>21877008
I think that it is just boilerplate that they are copy/paste spamming. They cannot hope to keep up at this point. The house of cards is already in freefall.

[Anonymous No.21877023]

>>21877012
In regard to the nonsense that Peterson is against online privacy:
>he isn't saying anonymity on the internet shouldn't exist
>he isn't even saying the option for anonymity should be taken away on the specific websites to which he's referring
>he is putting forward the idea for it to be debated in the public sphere
>he is correct when he says anonymous accounts incentivise trolling (e.g. memeflags)
>segregation isn't a perfect solution, that's why he is encouraging a discussion, but it is a better option than what is currently used (e.g. shadowbanning comments)
Remember: Peterson's critics (be they libtards, trannies, conspiracy schizos, etc.) are always disingenuous and will mischaracterize what he actually says while making baseless ad hominem attacks toward his character.

A common example: they will characterize severe withdrawal from a doctor prescribed medication as a character defining drug addiction and will conveniently ignore that immediately after he completed/published his second worldwide bestselling book, organized and completed a sold out international lecture tour, started an interview series viewed by millions, published multiple articles, etc. In short: you can't trust such people and you should research it for yourself.

[Anonymous No.21877032]

>>21876411
God I hate fags so much…

[Anonymous No.21877034]

>>21877018
He hasn't touched a nerve, I actually quite like listening to Peterson, I just wish he wouldn't shy away from specifics in certain areas. Also his playing coy with definitions of God is somewhat tedious and he clearly does this because he holds beliefs he knows are indefensible. But he's still an interesting character. You can have criticisms of a person without it amounting to "touching a nerve", although I can see why you'd be infected with this kind of thinking seeing how rampant it is on 4chan.

[Anonymous No.21877036]

>>21877032
give in to your lust, child

[Anonymous No.21877038]

>>21877014
>THE USA CONSTITUTION IS ON MY SIDE!
Thanks for proving my point. I'm not going to slide about the constitution because the actual point of this discussion was your mischaracterization of how Peterson characterizes hierarchies. He doesn't say all economic hierarchies are justified and he doesn't say to do nothing when they are not. As far as the constitution is concerned he has done a lot more toward the maintenance of the first amendment than you will ever do in your lifetime.

[Anonymous No.21877045]

Well, deconstruction of the petersonians should not be too difficult at this point. They are not addressing any points, just spamming rhetoric that is generally related.

[Anonymous No.21877063]

>>21877045
this was my conclusion too. it's just a bunch of think-tanked bullshit. peterson was almost worth paying attention to when he was riding the high of a billion xanaxes, but now that he's a washed up recovering drug addict everyone can see that he's just another bag of wind on the internet

[Anonymous No.21877072]

>>21877038
You appear to be very defensive when I'm genuinely just trying to have a conversation. When I have heard him, he mentions the Pareto Law and then they move on to a different topic. What remedies has he mentioned that might help? I'm specifically referencing his conversation with Glenn Loury which I found to be pretty unhelpful. He acknowledges that the Pareto Law in economics means that huge portions of the bottom of the distribution are left with extremely little power to better their position in life, and that as economic power centralizes, social mobility becomes harder. What is his solution to this? What would a solution even look like? Should we not bother with a solution since those people are just getting what they deserve and they just better work as hard as they can, even when the deck is stacked against them? Almost a 2 hour discussion and nothing particularly useful came of it! "Hey, maybe if the ultra rich adopted a pot latch culture where they give their wealth away, that'd be great!" You want to talk about a fantasy?

[Anonymous No.21877075]

also, for any conservatives in this thread, do fucking better with who you support. stop choking on whatever swill gets shoved your direction by the idea bartender. take a look in the glass once in a while, make sure there's not a roach in it

[Anonymous No.21877087]

>>21877045
Peterson is basically lukewarm Nrx that stops before going all the way. He has the same "christianity and tradition as social technology" kind of take on society, and the emphasis on evopsych. The jungian stuff is another story but in terms of politics that's what he reminds me of.

[Anonymous No.21877092]

>>21877072
in my opinion, the wealthy class should peer pressure each other into giving handouts to their own communities. participate in philanthropy, write off student loans, build a library that isn't just political propaganda
pay it forward policies and horizontal pressure work. when people see the most successful americans just building up their own massive estates, it turns you into a target to be envied and taken down

[Anonymous No.21877105]

>>21877092
The problem is evolutionary mechanics begin to play a role here. The most philanthropic people spend their money in unprofitable ways, thus their fortunes see less returns. The most hawkish who only spend to maximize profits see their fortunes grow faster. This means, basically by definition, the largest fortunes will be held by the most cynical, the most hawkish, and the most non-philanthropic people.

[Anonymous No.21877107]

>>21877092
That's just renaissance Italy with extra steps

[Anonymous No.21877115]

>>21877075
>make sure there's not a roach in it
The roach-free swills are few and far between, fren.

[Anonymous No.21877117]

>>21876411
Stephen Fry is unequivocally a nonce.

[Anonymous No.21877122]

>>21877107
i don't see anything wrong with renaissance italy though. our american conservative rich business tycoons are too self absorbed with Randian thought. "I've got mine, fuck you don't tell me what to do".

I appreciate objectivism and it has merits, but if you're sitting at the top of shit mountain with all the dung beetles fighting for your shit, you'd think it's time to revisit strategy

[Anonymous No.21877126]

>>21877072
Again, he brings up Pareto as a means to demonstrate that wealth inequality arises naturally. He doesn't say that this is necessarily a just outcome and when it comes to hierarchies he doesn't say that they are always optimized (he frequently mentions their tendency to become corrupt). When it comes to social policy the above has to be taken into account when politicians proselytize their mandate by simply stating the outcome entirely divorced from the reality of their supposed solutions (e.g. energy policy that directly impacts the basic cost of living and affects the poor moreso than others). There isn't a simple and general way to overcome the inevitability of wealth inequality but policies that directly and negatively impact the standard of living for the underclass as well as the working poor shouldn't be brushed away as servicing redistribution.

[Anonymous No.21877147]

>>21877126
The thing is that the policies which would actually help the working class are literally the reverse of what the left promotes. Lowering their income tax, loosening regulation on small business, not printing tons of money, not having mass immigration, actually policing bad neighborhoods ie executing criminals, tariffs on imports, etc.

The literal only thing the left did for the working class was unions and that came with its own set of problems

[Anonymous No.21877155]

>>21877126
>Pareto as a means to demonstrate that wealth inequality arises naturally
This is why he is referred to as "controlled opposition". Society itself is entirely about subverting what occurs naturally. It's about liberating man from the tyranny of nature, and advanced societies are about also liberating man from the tyranny of other men. Simply to state, as Peterson does, that this is a deep problem that stems from nature is only helpful if it serves in the process of actually formulating a solution. When it's used to shut down proposed solutions, it is simply a tool being used to perpetuate the concentration of power.

[Anonymous No.21877162]

I hope no one murders Peterson. The last thing I want is for him to ascend to martyrdom. The all meat diet and benzos aren't doing him any favors though. I am waiting for him to go full Jack Murphy meltdown.

[Anonymous No.21877171]

>>21877147
I think the borders and income issues are fascinating because 2015 Bernie Sanders championed those things in a way that would actually help the working class. Remember when he said open borders was a Koch Brothers proposal? He also favored universal programs in regard to health and education to help take the financial burden for necessary conditions of thriving off of working class people so they would have more chance to get ahead in life. But of course, the Democratic party machine obliterated those things in the service of those with capital, those who have pushed Neo-Liberalism like Hilary and Biden to the forefront of politics.

[Anonymous No.21877186]

>>21877162
It would be quite funny, though. Dimwits already venerate him, can't imagine the next step.

[Anonymous No.21877196]

>>21877171
Not him, but Bernie is and always was, a hyper capitalist. He did not sell out. His current state was a foregone conclusion. He is as much a charlatan as Peterson.

[Anonymous No.21877205]

>>21877122
We'd need to be caught between two great powers for our fracturous despots to think us worth investing in

[Anonymous No.21877216]

>>21877171
Yeah that variety of socdem stuff seems mostly fine to me even though I have doubts about some of it

[Anonymous No.21877225]

>>21877205
we are though aren't we? caught between eastern/chinese interests and western neo-liberalism?

[Anonymous No.21877228]

>>21877186
>It would be quite funny, though
We would be hearing all kinds of good noise like -
>they could never argue in good faith
>the only way they could stop him was by killing him
His ardent followers would ascent to the most insufferable heights of faggotry - well beyond the current state. He would leave the place of their father figure and become their god.

[Anonymous No.21877235]

>>21877147
Correct and unions are hardly a good solution. I've been involved with them and, this will sound like retard-tier hyperbole but it's true, there were literally 2 avowed communists on the steering committee. (I'll say one of them was a fairly interesting old guy from South America though--he wasn't an idiot).
>>21877155
>"controlled opposition"
Stupid conspiracy theory. Present hard evidence that he's part of a cabal operating in the shadows or just shut the fuck up/take it it to /pol/.

[Anonymous No.21877238]

>>21877228
*ascend

[Anonymous No.21877293]

>>21877235
>Stupid conspiracy theory. Present hard evidence that he's part of a cabal operating in the shadows or just shut the fuck up/take it it to /pol/
I didn't say he was, I said that is why some people call him that.

[Anonymous No.21877814]

>>21876666
>>21876685
>>21876698
But "belief" is a foundational concept in epistemology and "meaning" isn't far off. Both of them, I'm sure, have been interpreted in many different ways. Therefore, it does make sense to clarify the percipitant ambiguity as Peterson seems to attempt to do, never with any follow up from anyone. "God" too, given the Jungian psychological reduction of God. Same when belief under one theory is reduced simply to what is implied by ones behavior. Is the root of this bizarre reaction to Jordan here simply because people don't understand what he's saying... or do they think perhaps that he's asking "It depends what you mean by x, y and z" rhetorically?.. Help me out here /lit/ bros

[Anonymous No.21877823]

>>21877814
Peterson won't talk about his inner beliefs because he's just playing a character. He's "playing a personality" like Alex Jones admits to in court.

[Anonymous No.21877840]

>>21877823
Except if Peterson were playing a character, he'd be motivated by evidence that religion is a net positive to psychological health or something. Even in a cynical interpretation like this, comparing him to a bs supp salesmen with a sandyhook on his record... seems a bit incongruent.

[Anonymous No.21877846]

>>21877840
Alex Jones is more fun. Nobody gives a shit about sandy hook.

[Anonymous No.21877848]

>>21876457
peterson has never said something clear or incisive during his entire career
>>21876933
lmao wrecked

[Anonymous No.21877862]

>>21877846
What's the deal with sandy hook anyway? Is it q tier shenanigans or a possible actual false flag

[Anonymous No.21877867]

>>21877862
It looks like they groomed a mental invalid into a crime. Many such cases!

[Anonymous No.21877870]

>>21877840
I don't understand why people put JP on such a pedestal. Is it because he uses "long words" with varying degrees of accuracy? Is he the pied piper of pseuds? That must be his role here. Rednecks and meatheads are drawn to Alex Jones in seemingly the same way that urban pseuds are drawn to Peterson.

His supporters clearly aren't shills, there are certainly people out there who like what he has to say. My only response is that when you're older you'll understand.

[Anonymous No.21877877]

>>21877870
That's a lot of pejoratives you have there. Mind if I ask you to post your wrist?

[Anonymous No.21877878]

>>21877870
As it stands, you couldn't simply save us all the time and disabuse Peterson fans of their ignorance?

[Anonymous No.21877894]

>>21877878
I tend to ramble at times, thanks for wasting a few breaths on my pitiful rhetoric.

[Anonymous No.21877895]

>>21877862
There was weird stuff. I believe that there were legit crisis actors on scene that were recognized from other events. There was so much fakey that dudes like Jones thought that the whole thing was fake, which is probably not the case. As far as false flags go, the feds have already admitted to doing MK Ultra. That is how they got Uncle Ted. Their shooter is probably from their newer revision of MK.

[Anonymous No.21877899]

>>21877895
For me my favorite what in the fuck really happened false flag kino is the oklahoma city bombing and terrance yeakey.

[Anonymous No.21877921]

>>21877895
something that a lot of people don't consider enough, is that it's possible for a false flag to occur in a real location with real people. not everyone has to be in on it, just a few key players really

[Anonymous No.21877922]

>>21876411
i still remember that mega-hyped, ticketed "debate" years ago with the dumb jew bitch from the NYT and the rocking black intellection versus peterstein and fry. Was not expecting Fry to make them all look like fucking monkeys, then. Guess he's still got it.

Also I'm not watching a gay ass podcast.

[Anonymous No.21877934]

>>21877899
Well, regarding OKC, there was a string of articles that were published regarding the Elohim connection that disrupted the official narrative. Remember, the official fed line was that they had never heard of the guy until the bombing. That was from less than a week after his apprehension. The articles outlined that he was under investigation and that they knew that he was building a bomb. He found the bug and ditched his surveillance detail. They needed to maintain the narrative of ''we never heard of the guy'' because of how embarrassing it was. NBC deboonked all of the articles as ridiculous fairy tails - and then claimed the story as their own eight years after deboonking them. There is some pretty incontrovertible evidence like the ATF having a detail on scene within a handful of minutes, tooled up in gear that takes more time to don than their response time. They were literally kitted up in a room across the street because they knew that the truck was going to come.

[Anonymous No.21877941]

>>21877107
sounds good to me

[Anonymous No.21877944]

Why do people follow celebrities they hate so much? Like that Andrew Tate, people know all about his hustler school and watch every video he's in.

[Anonymous No.21877953]

>>21877944
Unresolved anger/resentment issues, I figure. I really don't understand spending time in your day to not only read something that upsets you, but then go out of your way to continually remind yourself about it.

There's better use of time than being upset everyday.

[Anonymous No.21877965]

>>21877921
I mean, everything could be real, with everyone being a legit participant, and just the narrative is skewed. That is how the Bloody Sunday incident played out. The official report had soldiers claiming that they saw dudes firing on them with weapons. When the documents became public, the soldiers disavowed the official reports and stated that they were never the ones that made the original claims.

[Anonymous No.21877968]

>>21877922
But the machines were supposed to kill you.

[Anonymous No.21878137]

>>21876411
Fry is an absolute retard. There isn’t any doubt. Peterson is well beyond his professional scope and I’ll admit has some interesting takes on Jung.

I can’t beleive anyone here even considers watching it. Let alone agreeing with fry. He’s a literal clown

[Anonymous No.21878191]

>>21878137
I'm kind of shocked to hear someone say that. I find Fry to be quite humorous, self deprecating, witty and intelligent.

[Anonymous No.21878200]

>>21876501
>>21876514
Reminder that when he was in his 20s he literally wrote a play about a child getting groomed and fucked by his male teacher and it being good and arousing. And then he gay marries some guy at most like a third of his age.

Why does no one point out all this creepy shit? Is he gonna be the next Jimmy Saville once he dies?

[Anonymous No.21878313]

>>21876990
As a fan of Peterson
>inb4 fag
I am somewhat perplexed by his activity on twitter. Calling him a pseud is a lazy criticism, but when he talks about setting your own house in order before criticizing the world (one of his rules) and then acts the way he does on twitter, I scratch my head a little. Can he not clearly see how directly he is violating this rule? I personally think his prognostications are overly doom-y, and I find his assessment of modern life to be oversimplified yet paradoxically vague and non-committal. There’s probably a better way to manage the way he’s going about this whole thing, but idk what that is since after all, I’m just a poster on a Mongolian basket weaving board. I do think my criticisms are solid though, and that he is definitely not a “pseud” or whatever the fuck these other autists who hate him claim he is.

[Anonymous No.21878442]

>>21877087
>Peterson is basically lukewarm Nrx that stops before going all the way.

Peterson is a buckbroken loser. There's no making peace with liberalism, classical or otherwise. There's no point in seeking a subservient place within this system and then pretending you have status (like he does).

[Anonymous No.21878452]

>>21877235
>Stupid conspiracy theory
Peterson is a card-carrying UN think tanker. He worked directly for Jim Balsille, a known bagman for the Soros organization. What "hard" evidence do you need, bucko? All of it is literally on his resume.

[Anonymous No.21878455]

>>21877235
>Stupid conspiracy theory.

[Anonymous No.21878484]

>>21876514
Stephen Fry is the modern day Alcibiades

[Anonymous No.21878546]

>memerson
worthless drug addict and effeminate canadian pseud that got publicly owned by a drooling slovenian

[Anonymous No.21878620]

>>21877036
No you wretched homo