my favourite thing about peterson is his genius debunking of communism where he thinks "class" in marxism means lower,middle and upper.What a fucking retard
From Marx to Lenin and beyond, the focus of their ire was the bourgeoisie - the well-to-do middle class and those aspiring to it. The first section of Marx's "The Communist Manifesto" was entirely focused on the inherent struggle between the industrial working class (proletariat) and the bourgeoisie.
I'm interested to hear about anything you've read that suggests Marxism wasn't largely predicated upon "class struggle" between lower, middle and upper classes?
i dont disagree with you but the guy clearly has no idea what class means in marxist context.His argument is you cant have a classless society because some people would work harder and save their money (thereby becoming upper class) and others wouldnt (becoming lower class).This is clearly him not understanding what "classless" refers to
"I'm interested to hear about anything you've read that suggests Marxism wasn't largely predicated upon "class struggle" between lower, middle and upper classes?"
Marxism is based on class struggle but its between two classes,not three.The proletariat and the bourgeoisie.The bourgeoisie are usually better off than proletariat but no marxist thinks class struggle is done after all people have the same amount of money
Yes but at the time of Marx's writings the "upper class" was minuscule and basically only Tsarist. It was an omnipotent and irremovable force on a par with the Egyptian or Roman models of pharaohs/emperors. They weren't even considered a class because they weren't, more a demi-god like presence whose removal was near unimaginable.
He didn't factor them in because they didn't fit the criteria of what we consider upper class - blue blood, landowning, old money etc.
It's true money and wealth play a great deal in terms of class but focusing on it is missing what Marx had to say.Again,communism means a society that functions in a radically different way in terms of material production and Peterson clearly thinks a communist society is just a capitalist society where somebody took all the money and divided it equally
The problem that Jordan highlights, is that it's already been tried & failed. Innate elements of humanity don't conform to the model, but why would we worry about science & shit. We're all worth the same, right? Let's reset everyone's sub karma back to zero, see how THAT plays-out first. Also, how do we enact this utopian Marxism without force? Who do we choose to be above everyone else in terms of force?
I don't know about "tried and failed".Both my parent were factory workers in Yugoslavia and the both prefer socialism to capitalism.Marx don't believe "people are all the same" or anything similar to that."how do we enact Marxism without force?" Marx never claimed socialism will be established peacefully that's why its class conflict.Saying communism is authoritarian isn't a good argument imo because most Marxist provide much more elaborate criticism of authoritarianism being natural to capitalism
Fair points. I'm not adequately educated on Marx's doctrine to really get into it if I'm honest, but Jordan seems to have well-backed points & seems viscerally honest & interested in truth, unlike some other internet heads like Stefan Molyneux who more want to win debates.
I definitely agree he's better than molyneux but I still wish there were better anti communist intellectuals because I'm tired of people namedropping 1984 like it's genius (I'm pretty sure Peterson did that) not even bothering to Google Orwell and see he's a socialist
Yeah well....that is a very mean thing to say and I hope that despite our differences in opinion we can still smile together.Something I always say: laughter and smiles bring us closer to eachother more than a hundred hugs could" just my two cents.
Marxism is based on class struggle but its between two classes,not three.The proletariat and the bourgeoisie.The bourgeoisie are usually better off than proletariat but no marxist thinks class struggle is done after all people have the same amount of money
"The same amount of money" is a bit of an oversimplification, but Marx did believe that property ownership was the root of all class struggle (and all struggle was class struggle). And that through the dictatorship of the proletariat eventually communism, or the "end of history," the moneyless, classless, conflictless society will inevitably emerge. What Peterson points out is that a) there aren't two distinct classes of haves and have nots and b) there are all kinds of non-wealth-relalted ways you can sort people into classes that would be grounds for conflict and originators of dominance hierarchies.
What Peterson calls "Neomarxists" aren't necessarily classical Marxists. The actual economic theory of Marx has been so utterly discredited by theorists and reality that you won't find any serious economists who still use his framework. What he refers to are people who basically stripped out Marx' conflict theory and apply it to other dichotomies, rather than to "proletariat" and "capitalists." "Whites" and "PoC," men and women, able-bodied and disabled, etc. Of course that's all completely devoid of a sophisticated explanation, as Marx himself at least attempted to provide.
My favorite thing about Peterson is that his self help woo-woo philosophy is about honesty and taking responsibility but he hides the money he makes on patreon because it hurts the image of a persecuted pariah that he's spent so much time cultivating.
Where should the line be drawn? Should he release monthly reports detailing his net worth broken down in savings/investments/assets?
Or alternatively, perhaps when he says "Tell the truth" it's just self-evident that that doesn't mean let the world know your inner monologue and let people know your net worth broken down and let people know every little secret you have.
The level with which you're meant to "Tell the truth" is just self-evident to reasonable people.
Somebody who can recognise that "Tell the truth" doesn't mean shining a light on every aspect of your life for the world to see, but rather it means that you should say what you think to be true. It means speak the truth because it will help you transform the known into the unknown.
No, honestly your rhetoric read likes something a cult follower would recite.
I really don't understand why your type has attached themselves to such an obvious huckster like Peterson. He's clearly in it for the money. We can eternally debate where the line falls in respect to "responsibility" but come on... you know it feels wrong that Papa is hiding how much he gets from his twinks.
I assume they're homosexuals who grew up without a stable father figure. As adults they confuse sexual desires with desires for the older r male role model they never had. Peterson becomes not only their adoptive father figure but an imagined romantic partner. They want silver fox daddy to pound and punish them, while also offering salient advice about saving western civilization from the SJW tranny Caliphate.
I have to break character for a second. The weird obsession white nationalists have with traps, futas, dickgirls and IRL tgirls, pretty much confirms this. Way to kill off your own ideology.
JP fans are white nationalists? So all those letters he receives from people claiming that he helped prevent them from becoming white nationalists don't exist?
Yes, Joe Rogan was a regular on O&A, & has also said multiple times that his show was & is inspired by O&A, so should be ok.
Jordan Peterson seems like an intelligent truth-seeker, quite intelligent & insightful. Him playing with those kekistan dudes seems ill-advised... but I aint messing with them, get meme'd to death.
52 comments
1 Ifuckmymomanddad 2018-01-30
The only good thing Jordan peterson did was that self authoring program. His public alt right grifter persona sucks dick.
1 CONCHOPETEghostcock 2018-01-30
Hes not alt-right. Hes left of center
1 TheDarkFezRises 2018-01-30
Ignore Young Turks posters
1 McGowan9 2018-01-30
He's a centrist, you dumbbell. Listen to what he actually says.
1 Opprobriousness 2018-01-30
No! Its easier to just ascribe beliefs to him and then judge him on those.
1 zenicaone 2018-01-30
go clean your room
1 yeahheymate 2018-01-30
my favourite thing about peterson is his genius debunking of communism where he thinks "class" in marxism means lower,middle and upper.What a fucking retard
1 CONCHOPETEghostcock 2018-01-30
He talks about how upper, middle and lower are transformed by marxism into Base and Superstructure
1 McGowan9 2018-01-30
From Marx to Lenin and beyond, the focus of their ire was the bourgeoisie - the well-to-do middle class and those aspiring to it. The first section of Marx's "The Communist Manifesto" was entirely focused on the inherent struggle between the industrial working class (proletariat) and the bourgeoisie.
I'm interested to hear about anything you've read that suggests Marxism wasn't largely predicated upon "class struggle" between lower, middle and upper classes?
1 simon160389 2018-01-30
I live two streets away from Marx's grave. Not as well kept as one would think
1 McGowan9 2018-01-30
No shit. I grew up in Highgate.
1 CONCHOPETEghostcock 2018-01-30
Fucking moocher aint getting free landscaping now. Engels' dad isnt around to pay for everything he wants
1 Carbonainducedcoma 2018-01-30
Groucho’s or Zeppo’s?
1 yeahheymate 2018-01-30
i dont disagree with you but the guy clearly has no idea what class means in marxist context.His argument is you cant have a classless society because some people would work harder and save their money (thereby becoming upper class) and others wouldnt (becoming lower class).This is clearly him not understanding what "classless" refers to
"I'm interested to hear about anything you've read that suggests Marxism wasn't largely predicated upon "class struggle" between lower, middle and upper classes?"
Marxism is based on class struggle but its between two classes,not three.The proletariat and the bourgeoisie.The bourgeoisie are usually better off than proletariat but no marxist thinks class struggle is done after all people have the same amount of money
1 McGowan9 2018-01-30
Yes but at the time of Marx's writings the "upper class" was minuscule and basically only Tsarist. It was an omnipotent and irremovable force on a par with the Egyptian or Roman models of pharaohs/emperors. They weren't even considered a class because they weren't, more a demi-god like presence whose removal was near unimaginable.
He didn't factor them in because they didn't fit the criteria of what we consider upper class - blue blood, landowning, old money etc.
1 yeahheymate 2018-01-30
It's true money and wealth play a great deal in terms of class but focusing on it is missing what Marx had to say.Again,communism means a society that functions in a radically different way in terms of material production and Peterson clearly thinks a communist society is just a capitalist society where somebody took all the money and divided it equally
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
The full realisation of communism would be classless, moneyless and stateless. That's what it is by definition.
1 McGowan9 2018-01-30
The post seems to have been muted/disappeared by the faggot mods. Oh well, catch you on the other side.
1 Toss__Pot 2018-01-30
The problem that Jordan highlights, is that it's already been tried & failed. Innate elements of humanity don't conform to the model, but why would we worry about science & shit. We're all worth the same, right? Let's reset everyone's sub karma back to zero, see how THAT plays-out first. Also, how do we enact this utopian Marxism without force? Who do we choose to be above everyone else in terms of force?
peckas
1 yeahheymate 2018-01-30
I don't know about "tried and failed".Both my parent were factory workers in Yugoslavia and the both prefer socialism to capitalism.Marx don't believe "people are all the same" or anything similar to that."how do we enact Marxism without force?" Marx never claimed socialism will be established peacefully that's why its class conflict.Saying communism is authoritarian isn't a good argument imo because most Marxist provide much more elaborate criticism of authoritarianism being natural to capitalism
1 Toss__Pot 2018-01-30
Fair points. I'm not adequately educated on Marx's doctrine to really get into it if I'm honest, but Jordan seems to have well-backed points & seems viscerally honest & interested in truth, unlike some other internet heads like Stefan Molyneux who more want to win debates.
1 yeahheymate 2018-01-30
I definitely agree he's better than molyneux but I still wish there were better anti communist intellectuals because I'm tired of people namedropping 1984 like it's genius (I'm pretty sure Peterson did that) not even bothering to Google Orwell and see he's a socialist
1 burlapsack69 2018-01-30
I wish your parents would have had the decency to chug bearing grease before having a retarded child. imo
1 yeahheymate 2018-01-30
Yeah well....that is a very mean thing to say and I hope that despite our differences in opinion we can still smile together.Something I always say: laughter and smiles bring us closer to eachother more than a hundred hugs could" just my two cents.
1 d4n4n 2018-01-30
"The same amount of money" is a bit of an oversimplification, but Marx did believe that property ownership was the root of all class struggle (and all struggle was class struggle). And that through the dictatorship of the proletariat eventually communism, or the "end of history," the moneyless, classless, conflictless society will inevitably emerge. What Peterson points out is that a) there aren't two distinct classes of haves and have nots and b) there are all kinds of non-wealth-relalted ways you can sort people into classes that would be grounds for conflict and originators of dominance hierarchies.
What Peterson calls "Neomarxists" aren't necessarily classical Marxists. The actual economic theory of Marx has been so utterly discredited by theorists and reality that you won't find any serious economists who still use his framework. What he refers to are people who basically stripped out Marx' conflict theory and apply it to other dichotomies, rather than to "proletariat" and "capitalists." "Whites" and "PoC," men and women, able-bodied and disabled, etc. Of course that's all completely devoid of a sophisticated explanation, as Marx himself at least attempted to provide.
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
My favorite thing about Peterson is that his self help woo-woo philosophy is about honesty and taking responsibility but he hides the money he makes on patreon because it hurts the image of a persecuted pariah that he's spent so much time cultivating.
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Should he tell you how much money he has in the bank as well if he wants to be consistent about telling the truth?
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
Yes. Anyone taking up a moral position should be transparent.
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Where should the line be drawn? Should he release monthly reports detailing his net worth broken down in savings/investments/assets?
Or alternatively, perhaps when he says "Tell the truth" it's just self-evident that that doesn't mean let the world know your inner monologue and let people know your net worth broken down and let people know every little secret you have.
The level with which you're meant to "Tell the truth" is just self-evident to reasonable people.
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
So literally meaningless self help woo-woo garbage. Thanks for proving my point.
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Or you just don't fall under the category of reasonable people.
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
Or "reasonable people" is just a non scientific term you made up for the sake of this argument.
Seriously, what is a "reasonable person"?
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Somebody who can recognise that "Tell the truth" doesn't mean shining a light on every aspect of your life for the world to see, but rather it means that you should say what you think to be true. It means speak the truth because it will help you transform the known into the unknown.
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
You sound like somebody running a pyramid scheme.
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Yeah you are
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
No, honestly your rhetoric read likes something a cult follower would recite.
I really don't understand why your type has attached themselves to such an obvious huckster like Peterson. He's clearly in it for the money. We can eternally debate where the line falls in respect to "responsibility" but come on... you know it feels wrong that Papa is hiding how much he gets from his twinks.
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Good thing I'm not paying him. How can something false resonate with people so deeply?
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
I assume they're homosexuals who grew up without a stable father figure. As adults they confuse sexual desires with desires for the older r male role model they never had. Peterson becomes not only their adoptive father figure but an imagined romantic partner. They want silver fox daddy to pound and punish them, while also offering salient advice about saving western civilization from the SJW tranny Caliphate.
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Yeah no doubt, no doubt.
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
Well, whats your take? Why do you think so many young white men want to have sex with an obscure Canadian psychologist?
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Cause girls are gross and white is right, duh
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
I have to break character for a second. The weird obsession white nationalists have with traps, futas, dickgirls and IRL tgirls, pretty much confirms this. Way to kill off your own ideology.
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
JP fans are white nationalists? So all those letters he receives from people claiming that he helped prevent them from becoming white nationalists don't exist?
1 TinKnockinMoroccan 2018-01-30
That's just called autism.
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Oh right, duh
1 Toss__Pot 2018-01-30
Yes, Joe Rogan was a regular on O&A, & has also said multiple times that his show was & is inspired by O&A, so should be ok.
Jordan Peterson seems like an intelligent truth-seeker, quite intelligent & insightful. Him playing with those kekistan dudes seems ill-advised... but I aint messing with them, get meme'd to death.
1 Doubleteamthesetits 2018-01-30
This is for queers
1 McGowan9 2018-01-30
Reading and ideas are for fags, right Opie?
1 CoyoteeBongwater 2018-01-30
i would say kinda.
that's a good idea for a strawpoll.me/42ckaSSfUCk
1 PeeSoup3030 2018-01-30
I like Jordan Peterson but can't stand that stupid canadian accent.
1 McGowan9 2018-01-30
He sounds like Kermit.
1 A_Friendly_Creeper 2018-01-30
Tss, mods? What are they driving souped up Honda Civics or sumptin?
1 littlepeteferguson 2018-01-30
Please stop shilling this dude, thanks
1 frrunkis 2018-01-30
Yeah you are