Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
A Horse Named Stranger

U.S. Politics: Oh Donnie Boy, the Feds are calling...

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

I think Peterson has potential to derail this thread too, but I also believe he is a kind of perfect example of what conservative "reasonable" politics have become in America. I don't want to derail the thread, but I do think a systematic deconstruction of the walking fallacy that is JP might help us better understand the nightmare the U.S. has become. That's just me though.  :) 

I'm certain it will derail this thread. I do think Peterson is a case study on what is going wrong on both the left and the right, and why nobody can hear each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Paladin of Ice said:

Yeah, Spencer is pretty much a bullshit artist.

On the Statue of Liberty it says:

Quote

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Spencer would re-write it as:

Well, just fuck you foreign people. Go away.

So much for his cultural preservation.

Edited by OldGimletEye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So SweetPea, who not long ago claimed to definitely NOT be an alt-right troll now tells us he "follows" a number of alt-right figures and that these guys are "misunderstood."

Ok.

As for cultural changes... Blah. Modernity and technological progress are what's really destroying what some people present as their "culture," though tbh I doubt they care. All too often what they want to defend is half-fictional to begin with, and a convenient excuse to reject the very idea of having to live with people behaving (and looking) slightly different.

I'd take most of these "culture warriors" more seriously if they were actually involved in cultural affairs to begin with. But most of them have yet to actually learn what their culture is ; most of them aren't exactly involved in the arts, literature, cuisine, or music, and their knowledge of history tends to be sketchy (and seriously biased) at best. If they understood what culture is, they would understand that immigration is barely a threat to it. But they don't, because they don't really care about culture, and are only using it to promote neo-nazi views.

5 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I'm certain it will derail this thread. I do think Peterson is a case study on what is going wrong on both the left and the right, and why nobody can hear each other.

I don't know much about JP but from what I can tell he can be summed up as being the newest version of the conservative intellectual. I'd compare him to William F. Buckley Jr. having seen both on tv.
And like Buckley back in the day, it seems to me that quite often JP doesn't know jack shit about what he's talking about. He's more articulate than your average conservative, I'll give him that, but he's basically spewing the same bullshit on individual rights, free speech, social evolutions, economics... etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rippounet said:

I don't know much about JP but from what I can tell he can be summed up as being the newest version of the conservative intellectual. I'd compare him to William F. Buckley Jr. having seen both on tv.
And like Buckley back in the day, it seems to me that quite often JP doesn't know jack shit about what he's talking about. He's more articulate than your average conservative, I'll give him that, but he's basically spewing the same bullshit on individual rights, free speech, social evolutions, economics... etc.

It depends what bits of those things you think are bullshit. I do think he speaks with a lot of certainty on many issues, and its quite often misplaced certainty. But he does have some value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

It depends what bits of those things you think are bullshit.

I'd say his positions on Marxism or "neo-Marxism" are utter rubbish, to such a point that I don't think he understands what Marxism is at all. Like many conservatives he seems to equate Marxism with Communism and Marxism-Leninism, except he manages to add gender theory, women's rights, or the defense of LGBTQ individuals in there. It somehow allows him to link modern liberal thought with the atrocities of Stalin and Mao ; he may be articulate in doing so, but for a political viewpoint, it's as intelligent and subtle as what you find in the comments section at Breitbart.

Of course, it allows him to victimize white males by pretending that they are the ones being oppressed by a dominant "neo-marxist" ideology. Throw in there a bit of bad faith about climate change or the gender pay gap, and one has to wonder why this guy is even considered an intellectual to begin with. The tensions between liberalism and conservatism or between Marxism and individual rights are considerably more subtle and paradoxical than he will ever admit, and he has become the voice not just of angry white men, but also of the dominant neo-liberal ideology that focuses on individual rights at the expense of the social contract and collective responsibility.

42 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

It depends what bits of those things you think are bullshit. I do think he speaks with a lot of certainty on many issues, and its quite often misplaced certainty. But he does have some value.

He's a useful idiot perhaps, in that if this is the best type of intellectual the right can muster in 2018 2019 then the present-day conservative movement is even more worthless than I imagined, and that's really saying something.

 

Edited by Rippounet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

I'd say his positions on Marxism or "neo-Marxism" are utter rubbish, to such a point that I don't think he understands what Marxism is at all. Like many conservatives he seems to equate Marxism with Communism and Marxism-Leninism, except he manages to add gender theory, women's rights, or the defense of LGBTQ individuals in there. It somehow allows him to link modern liberal thought with the atrocities of Stalin and Mao ; he may be articulate in doing so, but from a political viewpoint, it's as intelligent and subtle as what you find in the comments section at Breitbart.

Even right of center luminaries like Peter North have proclaimed they are Marxist of right. In short a bit of Marxist analysis of political economy or history ought not be that controversial (even if you disagree with Marxist solutions).

Now, if JP were the "classical liberal" that he claims, then it seems to me that he would adamantly oppose the white identity politics of people like Spencer and make it clear he wants nothing to do with the alt right.  But, I don't see him doing him do that and instead has become a sort of hero to them.

Also, he often, it seems to me, confuses post modernism with Marxism, when in fact, Marxist have often butted heads with post modernism.

Now I will say this, I dislike post modernism, for reasons I have stated. And when people, like Peterson or his predecessor Hicks attack it, I just can't find myself wanting to come to its defense. But, certainly I don't buy everything either are selling. I certainly don't buy Hicks' love of Ayn Rand (who was an economics idiot anyway) or Peterson's garbage. He seemingly confuses a lot of stuff. And I certainly, have issues with "classic liberals" often being completely obtuse to the issues of class, race, gender and so forth, pretending people always act as hyper rational individuals.

Edited by OldGimletEye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve heard Peterson come out so many times against Spencer , the Alt Right and the Nazis that I think it’s pretty disingenuous to suggest he’s courting them or has any love for them at all. 

In fact one of the reasons Peterson gets so much love from the right is because of the way he is reported. If you see the media talking about Peterson using terms like Nazi or Alt right , and you know it’s untrue then what else do you stop trusting. It just buys into everything they believe about a left wing media hooked on smears and hyperbole.

I think Peterson is a slimey character and can’t be pinned down on a lot of subjects, mainly because of how often his words get misrepresented, and his views on religion and whatever the hell modern Marxism is don’t seem to hold much weight with me. He’s really not the intellectual giant a lot of people hold him up to be, I mean Joe Rogan has given him a bigger kicking than most people I’ve seen. 

But like I said, his popularity is due to him being a reaction to a lot of progressive left ideology that many assume to be untouchable, and he fills a gap for many and talks to people who get forgotten quite often. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Heartofice said:

I’ve heard Peterson come out so many times against Spencer , the Alt Right and the Nazis that I think it’s pretty disingenuous to suggest he’s courting them or has any love for them at all. 

I'm not one to spend hours watching Peterson. If this is in fact the case, then fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SweetPea said:

Demographic changes can't cause cultural changes in directions one would not prefer?

...

Of course they do, just look at the general increase in non-adherents in formerly christian demographics in the west. Plenty of deeply religious people are uncomfortable with that, doesn't mean they get to dictate the behaviour of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Lol, you guys must all have cabin fever or something, three pages of of this stuff!

Happy New Year, y’all!

Haha, my life is this stuff. I guess I should be on break...back to course work next week. :worried:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Are you really going to equate migration to the deliberate and systematic extermination of a group of people for belonging to an ethnicity or religion?

No, and that isn't what I said. I was specifically talking about importing millions of people from wildly different cultures, as is the case in several European countries today. There is nothing organic about that cultural exchange. In my opinion. If you consider that to be organic and natural, good for you. I think it's wrong.   (the whole reason I'm mentioning this is in reference to the alt-right being a global movement, not limited to the US)

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

So SweetPea, who not long ago claimed to definitely NOT be an alt-right troll now tells us he "follows" a number of alt-right figures and that these guys are "misunderstood."

I'm not an alt-right troll, and I do follow a number of alt-right figures, no contradiction there. And yes, some of them are misunderstood (by several posters here), as evidence by the misrepresentations I've pointed out above. It just really bothers me. I don't care if you hate someone with a passion, but don't misrepresent them, or lie about their position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DMC said:

I won't stipulate to that until Josh Friedman gets to finish Sarah Connor Chronicles, which is never.  Skynet is omnipresent, and that's not gonna change with John Connor as a stupid kid.

Complete Topic Derail for a second, but this. 10000x this. That show broke me emotionally.

Apprently Josh Friedman was part of the writers room when they were writing Terminator 6 or T3 try 3 or whatever the reboot that's not a reboot but is is that's coming out, so that gives me a small sparkle of hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your obsession with the "natural" and, even more so, with the "organic" suggests that indeed, you have fallen for fascist propaganda. The analogy between the nation and the body, the insistence that all cultural expression be "organic" (while organizing grand spectacles of said organicness) and the associated cult of purity were precisely what made fascism and Nazism such terrible ideologies. The main target of ire may have shifted from Jews to Muslims, but the underlying analogy is the same - and it will lead to the same kind of regime if unchecked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

I’ve heard Peterson come out so many times against Spencer , the Alt Right and the Nazis that I think it’s pretty disingenuous to suggest he’s courting them or has any love for them at all. 

Absolutely, and to add to this, it goes both ways. It's an interesting situation where they both dislike eachother, but hate it even more that they are constantly lumped together in the same category.

It's a technique used to discredit people using guilt by association. It's simple and it works. Not that long ago Sam Harris was (unironically) wondering if he can talk to someone who was four degrees of separation away from a KKK member or a nazi or something. I can't remember the details of the story, but it was a funny example of how effective this technique is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Of course, it allows him to victimize white males by pretending that they are the ones being oppressed by a dominant "neo-marxist" ideology. Throw in there a bit of bad faith about climate change or the gender pay gap, and one has to wonder why this guy is even considered an intellectual to begin with.

At the heart of practically all of these movements (right or left) is the idea that somebody is not getting what they justly deserve and therefore resources (wealth, social status, positions at powerful institutions, etc.) should be redistributed to correct this. This idea has always been surrounded by explanations for why it is the case -- some more reasonable than others (at least from a 21st century perspective). From what's happening today, it appears to me that the more intense the competition for resources, the less the explanatory fluff matters. A bit of jargon, something to indicate whose side you're on and voila: instant intellectualism. It works both for the right and for the left, though the leftist version is a bit trickier as it has to accommodate multiple groups some of which share nothing except their hatred for a common enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Altherion said:

At the heart of practically all of these movements (right or left) is the idea that somebody is not getting what they justly deserve and therefore resources (wealth, social status, positions at powerful institutions, etc.) should be redistributed to correct this. This idea has always been surrounded by explanations for why it is the case -- some more reasonable than others (at least from a 21st century perspective). From what's happening today, it appears to me that the more intense the competition for resources, the less the explanatory fluff matters. A bit of jargon, something to indicate whose side you're on and voila: instant intellectualism. It works both for the right and for the left, though the leftist version is a bit trickier as it has to accommodate multiple groups some of which share nothing except their hatred for a common enemy.

You're not wrong, but this type of "both-sides"-ism obscures the fact that among the various narratives of this or that group being abused there are some with far more merit than others.
In fact, one of the few things you and I may agree on is the fact that the multiplication of such narratives is meant precisely to obscure this fact.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SweetPea said:

No, and that isn't what I said. I was specifically talking about importing millions of people from wildly different cultures, as is the case in several European countries today. There is nothing organic about that cultural exchange. In my opinion. If you consider that to be organic and natural, good for you. I think it's wrong.   (the whole reason I'm mentioning this is in reference to the alt-right being a global movement, not limited to the US) 

...

Utterly normal part of European history. Even immigrants keeping part of their culture alive is a long standing tradition. The Netherlands still has french-speaking churches which originated in the late 1500s when French speaking Calvinists fled the success of the Spanish armies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walloon_church

Of course alt-right types generally will claim that those historical movements were somehow different in kind to what is happening today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

You're not wrong, but this type of "both-sides"-ism obscures the fact that among the various narratives of this or that group being abused there are some with far more merit than others.
In fact, one of the few things you and I may agree on is the fact that the multiplication of such narratives is meant precisely to obscure this fact.
 

Peterson, like certain sorts of people, on the alt right, like to portray themselves as objective thinkers who are just calling balls and strikes.
But, really, just how objective is Peterson? I don't think very. From what I recall his whole claim to fame got started because of his hyperbolic misrepresentation about a Canadian Hate Crime Law.
He then links Marxism with post modernism, when both those ideologies have had their own arguments.
He then goes on and makes economic claims, that are dubious at best. I wonder if he has bothered to read the Raj Chetty paper on race and income inequality. Or papers about the disastrous effects of Redlining.
 I wonder if he has bothered to read Alan Manning whose written a lot about monopsony power and the growing evidence that it exist.
And I wonder if he has pondered anything about conservative screw ups and dipshittery during the GFC.
Evidently, he worries about a marxist takeover, which doesn't seem to imminent, particularly in the US, where even the most leftwing politicians, like AOC, don't exactly call for the proletariat to take over the means of production.
Peterson might be an accomplished psychologist, but it seems to me he tried to switch lanes, as it were, without doing any actual proper preparation before switching lanes. And I think we know how that often works out.

Edited by OldGimletEye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×