He's the best. Right now, he truly embodies the "mad as hell" anchorman in Network. The Free Speech Rally he did: He brought up a letter about a FEMALE student being punished by her college for playing one of his lectures in class. Milo or Shapiro would be all fire and brimstone or just laugh at the girls school, but Jordan was actually near the point of tears, because each of those letters he gets form students truly underlines the severity of this culture right now; something he truly understands but not from a students perspective. It really gets to him on a number of levels, especially when people compare someone they don't agree with to Hitler, as if the appropriate response is to equate that person to the worst person ever, unironcially. He's the real deal because he's not expecting you to mobilize against other people, just to sort YOUR life out and YOUR problems, before you can even try to tell anyone how to fix theirs.
Well done. Mine is a mess! Between the sacks of gold coins, piles of Soros invoices and dirty magazines everywhere it's amazing I can control any of the banking system or media, let alone all of it! Oy.
But Marxism is, and its seeping into every bit of existing culture. Maybe to peg it as that is a little too on the ol' generalization nose, but these are collectivists we're talking about here. If they really championed individual thought, then they wouldn't come down on each other when they had one that went agains their narrative
dont engage him no this topic, he's a liar. cultural marxism is very real and has a long documented history. it is communist lowering of standards and promoting degeneracy of standards.
short version can be found in the yuri bezmenov video.
Liar? I'm just expressing an opinion. "Don't engage him on this topic" sounds quite Marxist too. You're not into free speech or the open exchange of ideas, are you?
Acknowledging that there is a history of some marxists behaving a certain way in the culture doesn't mean it's true that that is an actual and widespread problem today.
You suffer from the same inability to distinguish degrees of a problem that those on the far left do. Replace "white supremacy" with "cultural Marxism" and it's the same intellectual dishonesty and outrage mongering.
Are you an objective observer of reality? Are you completely without bias?
I'm sorry I don't think that's a fair connection, I pointed out some historic landmarks of cultural marxist thinking. I do take note you didn't address any of those four items I listed off the top of my head. Just because you haven't heard of these things doesn't mean they haven't shifted cultural norms, for the worse I might add.
You dope. I've heard of and studied the items you've mentioned, so spare me the YouTube sophistry. I just don't think their mere existence proves "cultural Marxism" to be a widespread problem, or even a unified identifiable movement, like you do.
Oh yeah? Many on the far left see "white supremacy" in everything, and overreact accordingly. Many on the far right see "cultural Marxism" in everything, and overreact accordingly. That's the only equivalency I'm pointing out.
Fair enough. But the extent to which both are true is where the real difference is, and is obviously something people wont approach unbiasedly. Like looking at a math problem you already know the answer to and working backwards to try to make it fit leaving out whatever you want.
And most sad of all is the loudest parroters of these viewpoints usually only know their side of the argument, so people who really could make conversation out of it will be drowned out by morons.
It seems to me the little lady has misunderstood the difference between being asked to refer to a person in a particular way and being asked to refer to a person in a particular way at the threat of legal action. Her husband or father should explain the difference to her so she doesn't embarrass herself again.
The problem is (((they))) don't have a decent brain between them. They try to claim the intellectual and moral high ground with nothing but the force of their emotion.
It's the equivalent of Jeanine Garafolo using an eyeroll as a punchline.
Peterson would mop the floor with this cunt, then after he did, she would accuse him of mind-raping her.
I didn't wade through the entire article (diarreah of the pen is a sure sign of what Carl Jung called "animus possession", aka bitch is nuts), but I found it interesting that in the first few paragraphs, she repeatedly tried to feminize Peterson.
What if Peterson fired back by calling her a bull dog butch, and saying she was pitifully trying to be one of the boys? Think he'd get a pass on that, like (((they))) constantly get on the other side?
They don't like him because they think he's alt-right, but they only think he's alt-right because he's been labelled that by people who don't like him.
Now, as I’ve said, I failed to get in on the ground floor of the “not using a person’s chosen address” industry which, in a simpler time, was known as “calling people names” and was considered bad manners. But since calling a certain University of Toronto professor “Jordan Pea-Headerson” is apparently the only thing standing between us and non-stop collectivist potato farming, I’ll do my part for the resistance.
Western civilization is, after all, a delicate thing. Today you agree to call Edda van Heemstra Hepburn-Ruston “Audrey Hepburn,” tomorrow we’re all fighting over water and gasoline in a post-apocalyptic hellscape. Even worse, some social justice warlord will ask you to call him “Immortan Joe,” and that’s not your real name, Joseph.
To fail to understand the situation this hard is really amazing. This broad is so stupid that Lindy West looks like Kant next to her.
I am afraid my English is too shit to express it efficiently enough and i am probably too thick as well but for example something like this.
For a guy who brings up the post-modernism boogeyman every 5 seconds he sure loves to redefine meanings of words and concepts based on "how useful they are" too.
I wouldn't say Peterson is trying to personify some external threat of "post-modernism", but for anyone who's ever spent time in the art/music world; he's not far off in thinking that those worlds are caught in so much malaise (and being as vocal as they are), that they wouldn't then try to actively control the realty around their worlds. That adage of "The world only makes sense if you force it to make sense" is not lost on my generation, so thats why you're getting this insanity coming from each subjective perception of every SJW. Nothing is ever non-marginalized, because nothing makes sense. Everything sucks. Which if the modern world were more exciting (i guess), then we wouldn't be in this phase of post-moderninity, where we're just raging against the malaise and discomfort that we're in the middle of now. We all feel this way but we don't know why, so it must be everyone else's fault. And with no more belief in religion, then social justice fills that gap, complete with dogma and everything.
We should be figuring out the best way to fill the hole where God used to be but i don't think going back to religion just because couple of faggots filled it with nonsense is the right thing to do like Peterson suggests.
I wouldn't say so either, and in fact thats what him and Harris argued over. But Peterson's point is that we're not innately good, and that religion has served a purpose to man to instal a functioning moral system. Of course it leads to dogmatic issues, which Harris as atheist argues. But Harris just believes we can be could without it, like the anarchists who believe in just throwing everything out and agreeing to just be cool to each other from here on out. Which is just naive. There's a great discussion between the too about it. I know Peterson can sing the virtues of christianity, but he also understands that just conforming to what he believe works isn't the answer either. But the truth is: theres a million ways to live your life, but only a finite number thats actually viable. Which is what his work is about. SORT YOURSELF OUT, but make sure its pragmatic enough to work and that it doesn't expect you or I to conform to its subjective terms
SORT YOURSELF OUT, but make sure its pragmatic enough to work and that it doesn't expect you or I to conform to its subjective terms
That's a great ethos to have in my opinion but as i said, i don't think Christianity and traditionalism are compatible with it or even that they are the best that we know of that work.
Defining what is a better way exactly is above my pay grade but i think fucking around with our consciousness (mahhhn) is where answers to this will come from. Way too many people independently of each other are having the same experiences and conclusions regarding meditation for example. That is something that should be explored and advocated, not trying to convince people that the Ten Commandments are pretty good idea.
a website on which students and parents could have courses rated for them by artificial intelligence that could detect a “postmodern cult course.”
Understandably, this plan to unleash grumpy-old-man Skynet on the academic world caused concern amongst his peers. The University of Toronto Faculty Association released a statement on Friday condemning Peterson’s website plan, without naming him directly; the group said it was “alarmed to learn that a web site may be under construction that is designed to place under surveillance certain kinds of academic content.”
interdasting...
the tl;dr is that she's pissed that he's going to go through with his website that scans for marxist cult indoctrination.. and that he's got a huge enough mob on his side that if the university tries to just ignore it or, worse, shut it down, that they're going to have a PR disaster on their hands from the backlash of his large support base.
If JBP is leveraging this mob he's managed to attract to push forward with this idea, rather than just get more patreon money and ego boost from viewcount, the guy is way more clever and enterprising than I'd have thought. Just a fantastic idea!
Not sure if you're being sarcastic here, but he's working with Dr. Jonathan Haidt on it, I believe. Plus input from other people. That, and he's going to start an online college with the Patreon money. Both pretty ambitious things.
I'm not being sarcastic. I somewhat agree that he's the stupid person's smart guy but if he continues to promote himself, gain a large following, and then use that social capital for something truly disruptive to leftist agendas, it'll be a fucking masterstroke
I wouldn't say he's the stupid persons smart guy; it's sort of a misnomer. Like people who say Scorcese is a director's director: It puts his films in a certain category that makes it seem like only certain people would get the nuance and themes he was aiming for (although you wouldn't say that about him these days). He's essentially just a pragmatist and a thinker who just trying to figure out how things have gotten THIS bad, alongside the rest of us. He a psychiatrist, so he has the edge in discerning observable actions and what they mean vs. the unconscious. Describing it as "cultural marxism" is just a starting point to unravel whats going on, although the collectivist mindset is constantly reinforced within its own community against people who stop towing the narrative (i.e.: what happened to Laci Green), so how could you think it isn't or it doesn't embody some idea of "cultural marxism"? It's like when your fruity conspiracy theories gets proven in one 60 Minutes piece: You just go "oh shit, maybe I....".
Him doing the online websites will probably catch him flack at UofT, but its just the free market at work: People don't want to spend money sending kids to that bullshit and these days why go into debt at bloated institutions when you can get the same (or a better) degree for cheaper on the internet?
Lets be honest, (((they))) probably love that Peterson shills for banking and giant military interests tied closely to a certain special desert nation, listen to the shit he has to say about pyschopathy in CEOs and the (((financial))) world.
Good goy, the hierarchy really is functioning optimally, anyone at the top is there through sheer merit because they deserve it.....
Plenty of the business leaders responsible for the financial collapse are still heading up banks all these years later. You don't have to move around finding new suckers to fleece when people don't catch on to what you're doing in the first place. Plus, there is actual research done on this showing that psychopathy really is way higher among CEOs than it is in any general population. But ahhh whadda I know, as long as he isn't on board with the trannys and making manspreading illegal, I guess he's better than nothing, he may love the big wig muckity mucks but lets not hold that against him.
I'm not being sarcastic. I somewhat agree that he's the stupid person's smart guy but if he continues to promote himself, gain a large following, and then use that social capital for something truly disruptive to leftist agendas, it'll be a fucking masterstroke
72 comments
1 Opprobriousness 2017-11-17
The spin they employ against this man is mind boggling.
The man took a stand against compelled speech and they have to resort to mentioning the alt-right in every article about him to try to smear him.
JP is a hero.
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
He's the best. Right now, he truly embodies the "mad as hell" anchorman in Network. The Free Speech Rally he did: He brought up a letter about a FEMALE student being punished by her college for playing one of his lectures in class. Milo or Shapiro would be all fire and brimstone or just laugh at the girls school, but Jordan was actually near the point of tears, because each of those letters he gets form students truly underlines the severity of this culture right now; something he truly understands but not from a students perspective. It really gets to him on a number of levels, especially when people compare someone they don't agree with to Hitler, as if the appropriate response is to equate that person to the worst person ever, unironcially. He's the real deal because he's not expecting you to mobilize against other people, just to sort YOUR life out and YOUR problems, before you can even try to tell anyone how to fix theirs.
1 LarryKleist711 2017-11-17
Hitler is the not the worst person ever. You take that shit back.
1 Mjr2031 2017-11-17
he just had a bad PR guy
1 momomike 2017-11-17
it’s almost always a woman writing these mentally-ill blogs disguised as news articles. wretched dirty conniving pieces of shit. just awful.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
i think a good strategy with all these buzzfeed tier writers is to ridicule them like ive done here.
point out their articles which are always laughable.
go to their social media point out how petty many of their posts are.
id be interested in doing this as a group or creating a website/ fb group / twitter accounts to centralize ridiculing these people.
they will need to watch their words and lie less as well as lose overall credibility.
thoughts gang?
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
SJW tactics.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
Oh look its the poster who says "cultural marxism" doesn't exist.
Yea were not gonna be listening to you.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Go clean your room before mom gets home.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
It's clean, so is my kitchen, living room home office and my car.
How about you?
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Well done. Mine is a mess! Between the sacks of gold coins, piles of Soros invoices and dirty magazines everywhere it's amazing I can control any of the banking system or media, let alone all of it! Oy.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
you're a low ranking jew
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
You got me there. So low ranking that all of my ancestors were Irish Catholics.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
Ahhh the Irish Catholics, perhaps the favorite tool of the jew.
Good on you.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Huh, I've never heard that one before. I'm pretty sure that at least 2 of my grandparents probably never met a Jew in their lives.
Oh well. I hope your car breaks down in Crown Heights you Pakistani bastard.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
ok Ted Kennedy
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
You lousy chowdahead!
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
"Cultural Marxism" isn't a thing.
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
But Marxism is, and its seeping into every bit of existing culture. Maybe to peg it as that is a little too on the ol' generalization nose, but these are collectivists we're talking about here. If they really championed individual thought, then they wouldn't come down on each other when they had one that went agains their narrative
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
dont engage him no this topic, he's a liar. cultural marxism is very real and has a long documented history. it is communist lowering of standards and promoting degeneracy of standards.
short version can be found in the yuri bezmenov video.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Liar? I'm just expressing an opinion. "Don't engage him on this topic" sounds quite Marxist too. You're not into free speech or the open exchange of ideas, are you?
Acknowledging that there is a history of some marxists behaving a certain way in the culture doesn't mean it's true that that is an actual and widespread problem today.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
ok well now youre actually having a conversation.
there is a history, they have leaders, books, funding and the problem is huge.
whats your counter argument to that?
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Is that an argument? You saying the problem is huge makes it so? Nah, I'm good.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
you asserting its not
is all that needs to be said then ey?
yeah no
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
One person says there is a widespread problem, the other person says there is not. On whom does the burden of proof rest?
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
Your definition of a widespread problem will not ever agree with mine, so whats the point? Youll just deny and deflect until the cows come home.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
You suffer from the same inability to distinguish degrees of a problem that those on the far left do. Replace "white supremacy" with "cultural Marxism" and it's the same intellectual dishonesty and outrage mongering.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
Do I?
Are you an objective observer of reality? Are you completely without bias?
I'm sorry I don't think that's a fair connection, I pointed out some historic landmarks of cultural marxist thinking. I do take note you didn't address any of those four items I listed off the top of my head. Just because you haven't heard of these things doesn't mean they haven't shifted cultural norms, for the worse I might add.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
You dope. I've heard of and studied the items you've mentioned, so spare me the YouTube sophistry. I just don't think their mere existence proves "cultural Marxism" to be a widespread problem, or even a unified identifiable movement, like you do.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
I understand your belief, you're not convincing anyone.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Okay Ahmed. Keep on fucking your cousin.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
durka durka
1 CoyoteeBongwater 2017-11-17
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Oh yeah? Many on the far left see "white supremacy" in everything, and overreact accordingly. Many on the far right see "cultural Marxism" in everything, and overreact accordingly. That's the only equivalency I'm pointing out.
1 CoyoteeBongwater 2017-11-17
Fair enough. But the extent to which both are true is where the real difference is, and is obviously something people wont approach unbiasedly. Like looking at a math problem you already know the answer to and working backwards to try to make it fit leaving out whatever you want.
And most sad of all is the loudest parroters of these viewpoints usually only know their side of the argument, so people who really could make conversation out of it will be drowned out by morons.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Agreed.
1 Dassadassabesdoe 2017-11-17
My pecka is engorged with cultural Marxism. Is that enough proof for you that it's a problem?
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
If the problem persists for more than 4 hours, start rounding up all the people wearing glasses.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Yeah, I'm just saying it's a gross overgeneralization. In some regards, society has never been more focused on the individual.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
Ayn Rand would disagree.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Well thankfully she's dead.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
Rest in Peace
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
oh yeah it fucking is.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Keep watching YouTube and blaming others for your unhappiness.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
keep being a jew
1 Canned_Laugh 2017-11-17
If they get guns banned or extremely regulated to the point you need permission from the state, it's a wrap Johnny, gulags in every corner of world.
1 Canned_Laugh 2017-11-17
The right to own a gun is literally the last line of defense against a dispotic state.
1 TotallyNotObsi 2017-11-17
Lol no
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
ignore them, promote his idea you agree with.
support him with shekels if you can / want to.
his self authoring program was great!
1 jasim18 2017-11-17
It seems to me the little lady has misunderstood the difference between being asked to refer to a person in a particular way and being asked to refer to a person in a particular way at the threat of legal action. Her husband or father should explain the difference to her so she doesn't embarrass herself again.
1 PMmeyourbetakeys 2017-11-17
Women should have a compulsory male intellectual chaperone when attempting to express thought.
1 Peckahnator 2017-11-17
Jordan is pure. No bully.
https://youtu.be/h4ftiL4c_CA
1 DaleThePaleMale 2017-11-17
He made it into my favorite sub-60 thousand dollar cartoon
1 3stepsbackward 2017-11-17
I support his conning of morons and stupid people.
1 Dassadassabesdoe 2017-11-17
I'm not reading that dumb slits online diary ramblings.
1 theantarctica 2017-11-17
This is Dave Foley's ex wife. Just a complete piece of shit.
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
is it really?
1 Dassadassabesdoe 2017-11-17
holy shit, i didnt even realize that. She is such a horrible self entitled psycho cunt.
1 joomommyhappy 2017-11-17
The problem is (((they))) don't have a decent brain between them. They try to claim the intellectual and moral high ground with nothing but the force of their emotion.
It's the equivalent of Jeanine Garafolo using an eyeroll as a punchline.
Peterson would mop the floor with this cunt, then after he did, she would accuse him of mind-raping her.
I didn't wade through the entire article (diarreah of the pen is a sure sign of what Carl Jung called "animus possession", aka bitch is nuts), but I found it interesting that in the first few paragraphs, she repeatedly tried to feminize Peterson.
What if Peterson fired back by calling her a bull dog butch, and saying she was pitifully trying to be one of the boys? Think he'd get a pass on that, like (((they))) constantly get on the other side?
1 DaleThePaleMale 2017-11-17
They don't like him because they think he's alt-right, but they only think he's alt-right because he's been labelled that by people who don't like him.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
What a monumentally cunty and vapid comment. Please, for the sake of humanity, pipe down.
1 illydelph 2017-11-17
It’s supposed to be (((3))) of them you goose.
1 PMmeyourbetakeys 2017-11-17
To fail to understand the situation this hard is really amazing. This broad is so stupid that Lindy West looks like Kant next to her.
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
So how would you tear Peterson's pop philosophy down?
1 PMmeyourbetakeys 2017-11-17
I am afraid my English is too shit to express it efficiently enough and i am probably too thick as well but for example something like this.
For a guy who brings up the post-modernism boogeyman every 5 seconds he sure loves to redefine meanings of words and concepts based on "how useful they are" too.
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
I wouldn't say Peterson is trying to personify some external threat of "post-modernism", but for anyone who's ever spent time in the art/music world; he's not far off in thinking that those worlds are caught in so much malaise (and being as vocal as they are), that they wouldn't then try to actively control the realty around their worlds. That adage of "The world only makes sense if you force it to make sense" is not lost on my generation, so thats why you're getting this insanity coming from each subjective perception of every SJW. Nothing is ever non-marginalized, because nothing makes sense. Everything sucks. Which if the modern world were more exciting (i guess), then we wouldn't be in this phase of post-moderninity, where we're just raging against the malaise and discomfort that we're in the middle of now. We all feel this way but we don't know why, so it must be everyone else's fault. And with no more belief in religion, then social justice fills that gap, complete with dogma and everything.
1 PMmeyourbetakeys 2017-11-17
We should be figuring out the best way to fill the hole where God used to be but i don't think going back to religion just because couple of faggots filled it with nonsense is the right thing to do like Peterson suggests.
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
I wouldn't say so either, and in fact thats what him and Harris argued over. But Peterson's point is that we're not innately good, and that religion has served a purpose to man to instal a functioning moral system. Of course it leads to dogmatic issues, which Harris as atheist argues. But Harris just believes we can be could without it, like the anarchists who believe in just throwing everything out and agreeing to just be cool to each other from here on out. Which is just naive. There's a great discussion between the too about it. I know Peterson can sing the virtues of christianity, but he also understands that just conforming to what he believe works isn't the answer either. But the truth is: theres a million ways to live your life, but only a finite number thats actually viable. Which is what his work is about. SORT YOURSELF OUT, but make sure its pragmatic enough to work and that it doesn't expect you or I to conform to its subjective terms
1 PMmeyourbetakeys 2017-11-17
That's a great ethos to have in my opinion but as i said, i don't think Christianity and traditionalism are compatible with it or even that they are the best that we know of that work.
Defining what is a better way exactly is above my pay grade but i think fucking around with our consciousness (mahhhn) is where answers to this will come from. Way too many people independently of each other are having the same experiences and conclusions regarding meditation for example. That is something that should be explored and advocated, not trying to convince people that the Ten Commandments are pretty good idea.
1 deep_legal_shit 2017-11-17
using diversity against them + zionism/israel is going to be their undoing
1 deep_legal_shit 2017-11-17
interdasting...
the tl;dr is that she's pissed that he's going to go through with his website that scans for marxist cult indoctrination.. and that he's got a huge enough mob on his side that if the university tries to just ignore it or, worse, shut it down, that they're going to have a PR disaster on their hands from the backlash of his large support base.
If JBP is leveraging this mob he's managed to attract to push forward with this idea, rather than just get more patreon money and ego boost from viewcount, the guy is way more clever and enterprising than I'd have thought. Just a fantastic idea!
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
Not sure if you're being sarcastic here, but he's working with Dr. Jonathan Haidt on it, I believe. Plus input from other people. That, and he's going to start an online college with the Patreon money. Both pretty ambitious things.
1 deep_legal_shit 2017-11-17
I'm not being sarcastic. I somewhat agree that he's the stupid person's smart guy but if he continues to promote himself, gain a large following, and then use that social capital for something truly disruptive to leftist agendas, it'll be a fucking masterstroke
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
I wouldn't say he's the stupid persons smart guy; it's sort of a misnomer. Like people who say Scorcese is a director's director: It puts his films in a certain category that makes it seem like only certain people would get the nuance and themes he was aiming for (although you wouldn't say that about him these days). He's essentially just a pragmatist and a thinker who just trying to figure out how things have gotten THIS bad, alongside the rest of us. He a psychiatrist, so he has the edge in discerning observable actions and what they mean vs. the unconscious. Describing it as "cultural marxism" is just a starting point to unravel whats going on, although the collectivist mindset is constantly reinforced within its own community against people who stop towing the narrative (i.e.: what happened to Laci Green), so how could you think it isn't or it doesn't embody some idea of "cultural marxism"? It's like when your fruity conspiracy theories gets proven in one 60 Minutes piece: You just go "oh shit, maybe I....".
Him doing the online websites will probably catch him flack at UofT, but its just the free market at work: People don't want to spend money sending kids to that bullshit and these days why go into debt at bloated institutions when you can get the same (or a better) degree for cheaper on the internet?
1 deep_legal_shit 2017-11-17
k
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
good talk
1 deep_legal_shit 2017-11-17
i didnt read
1 DeclanGunn 2017-11-17
Lets be honest, (((they))) probably love that Peterson shills for banking and giant military interests tied closely to a certain special desert nation, listen to the shit he has to say about pyschopathy in CEOs and the (((financial))) world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12TrvtDaFQE
Good goy, the hierarchy really is functioning optimally, anyone at the top is there through sheer merit because they deserve it.....
Plenty of the business leaders responsible for the financial collapse are still heading up banks all these years later. You don't have to move around finding new suckers to fleece when people don't catch on to what you're doing in the first place. Plus, there is actual research done on this showing that psychopathy really is way higher among CEOs than it is in any general population. But ahhh whadda I know, as long as he isn't on board with the trannys and making manspreading illegal, I guess he's better than nothing, he may love the big wig muckity mucks but lets not hold that against him.
1 PhilipMarma 2017-11-17
Well thankfully she's dead.
1 chickenfan1 2017-11-17
durka durka
1 Every1ShouldBKilled 2017-11-17
is it really?
1 Dassadassabesdoe 2017-11-17
holy shit, i didnt even realize that. She is such a horrible self entitled psycho cunt.
1 deep_legal_shit 2017-11-17
I'm not being sarcastic. I somewhat agree that he's the stupid person's smart guy but if he continues to promote himself, gain a large following, and then use that social capital for something truly disruptive to leftist agendas, it'll be a fucking masterstroke