chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
suffering
A Necessary Ingredient
that can't be avoided. It can be minimized according to Jordan Peterson only if the individual can break free of collectivism. Your first obligation is to yourself. If you can't take care of you, you will be used by them and they will bring you down to where you won't be able to recognize yourself. Feminism is a great example. The system is rigged by patriarchy. You don't have a chance until you elect more Democrats. So instead of working as an individual to improve your situation, you must dedicate yourself to collectivism against the men who are in your way. Don't buy into that kind of stuff. Take care of yourself and only then can you take care of your family which is your second obligation.
Home
 

annabenedetti

Well-known member
suffering
A Necessary Ingredient
that can't be avoided. It can be minimized according to Jordan Peterson only if the individual can break free of collectivism. Your first obligation is to yourself. If you can't take care of you, you will be used by them and they will bring you down to where you won't be able to recognize yourself. Feminism is a great example. The system is rigged by patriarchy. You don't have a chance until you elect more Democrats. So instead of working as an individual to improve your situation, you must dedicate yourself to collectivism against the men who are in your way. Don't buy into that kind of stuff. Take care of yourself and only then can you take care of your family which is your second obligation.
Home

Collectivism isn't a bad word, and neither is individualism. They each reflect the dominant social structures of their respective cultures, and elevating without reservation the individualism of the U.S. (or Canada, Australia or Germany, for example) over the collectivism of South America, the Near and Far East, Africa, or Italy (to name a few), is the wrong argument to be making.

Both have their advantages and drawbacks, and because society is made up of individuals, both societies have individuals who will chafe at the social requirements of their respective culture, and those who find reassurance in them. That doesn't condemn either kind of society or person, and both kinds fall on a continuum - for example, immigrants to an individualistic culture from a collectivistic culture will bring their culture with them and there will likely be a blending of the two.

Having said that: you still haven't answered my earlier question. Would a good parent (in daily life, not in an oxygen mask kind of emergency) give their children the consistent message of "I come first?"
 

ok doser

Well-known member
The father must think first of himself, in order to be fit to lead, to provide, etc

Same with the mother and her roles
 

annabenedetti

Well-known member
Parent: "Group pressure for the most part will determine your views on a particular issue. Only the enlightened person will resist being formed by the group they identify with. Only the enlightened person has a chance at being an individual who is control of what they believe."

Also parent: "It's time for church."

Child: "I don't want to go to church anymore, I believe religion is just a human construct."

Parent: "Get your butt in the car. If I say you're going to church, you're going to church."

Child: "I thought you wanted me to be in control of what I believe?"

Parent: "Only when what you believe matches what I believe. Otherwise, I'm in control of what you believe."

...

Parent: "Break free of collectivism!"

Child: "They're having a voter registration drive at school, I'm going to register with the Democratic Party."

Parent: "You do that and I'll have your stuff waiting on the front porch when you get back, and don't come home for Christmas. There will be no baby killers in this house."

Child: "I'm not a baby killer, but I think the GOP harbors racists and is poisoned by power and dark money."

Parent: "Who cares what you think. Think about the baby. You HAVE to vote Republican. There is no other choice. Some kids never learn..."
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
suffering A Necessary Ingredient that can't be avoided. It can be minimized according to Jordan Peterson
But not (and I'm guessing here) his wife.

Your first obligation is to yourself.
Ah, just so. I'll never forget when Jesus said, "Blessed are the poor, but don't forget to get yours first..." Must have been something like that.

Feminism is a great example.
It's terrific, isn't it.
 

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
gratitude
A First Step
to improving yourself. Your are not a victim. Be thankful for who you are and where you are at. Tomorrow you can be a better person by changing one thing. You are in control and the choice you make will make a difference. This is an example of the dangerous stuff Jordan Peterson is peddling. It's no wonder why they don't like him.
Home
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
gratitude
A First Step
to improving yourself. Your are not a victim. Be thankful for who you are and where you are at. Tomorrow you can be a better person by changing one thing. You are in control and the choice you make will make a difference. This is an example of the dangerous stuff Jordan Peterson is peddling. It's no wonder why they don't like him.
Home
And Hitler loved the interstate, but don't undersell what Peterson is fighting. From a lovely article by Tabatha Southey in Mclean's.

“Postmodern neo-Marxism” is Peterson’s nemesis...[it] is a conspiracy theory holding that an international cabal of Marxist academics, realizing that traditional Marxism is unlikely to triumph any time soon, is out to destroy Western civilization by undermining its cultural values with “cultural” taken out of the name so it doesn’t sound quite so similar to the literal Nazi conspiracy theory of “cultural Bolshevism.
"...He doesn’t call for a “white ethnostate,” but he does retweet Daily Caller articles with opening lines like: “Yet again an American city is being torn apart by black rioters.” He has dedicated two-and-a-half-hour-long YouTube videos to “identity politics and the Marxist lie of white privilege.

Peterson claims that “If you worry about hurting people’s feelings and disturbing the social structure, you’re not going to put your ideas forward...”

Stay with me. This line is going to come back to haunt him. This posture that being offended is the price of free speech and meaningful progress.

It was a video that brought J-man back into the news this week. In July, he posted a video on his YouTube page laying out a plan to launch a website on which students and parents could have courses rated for them by artificial intelligence that could detect a “postmodern cult course.” His aim, he explained, was to cut off “the supply to the people that are running the indoctrination cults.” Ultimately, the champion of free speech said, he hoped the project would shut down whole departments that upset him.

One has to wonder why Dr. Pettyson felt the need to resort to artificial intelligence. He’s already concluded that the entire fields of “women’s studies, and all the ethnic studies and racial studies groups” “have to go,”and that sociology, anthropology, English literature, and education are all “corrupt.”
That's right, the man who decries hypersensitivity and rallies under the flag of necessary offense in public discourse isn't keen on speech he finds offensive when aimed at his ox. In fact, he wants it destroyed. It is in this realization alone that anyone with an actual ounce of intellectual integrity on the right, assuming, should feel obliged to admit he sounds like the very thing he paints as an enemy of public virtue.

A bit more then, because it's a great sum.
What he’s telling you is that certain people—most of them women and minorities—are trying to destroy not only our freedom to spite nonbinary university students for kicks, but all of Western civilization and the idea of objective truth itself. He’s telling you that when someone tells you racism is still a problem and that something should be done about it, they are, at best, a dupe and, at worst, part of a Marxist conspiracy to destroy your way of life.

It's why he's so appealing among the right, because he sounds smart and agrees with their phobias. And to be fair he is smart, but rather than his intelligence to rigorously inform his position and others, he tends to use it as a vehicle for elevating nonsense to respectability, if mostly among those who lack his academic chops and the means to test his memes critically.

Among the turds gems he polishes? Feminists have an "unconscious wish for brutal male domination."

And the equally problematic idea that the spike of violence and the public face of neo-Nazis, indeed the resurgence of white supremacists writ large is properly set, wait for it, at the feet of the left. That's right, the left. Says Peterson, "I've studied Nazism for four decades. And I understand if very well. And I can tell you there are some awful people lurking in the corners. They're ready to come out. And if the radical left keeps pushing the way it's pushing, they're going to come."

That's right, ladies and gentlemen, that's his position. It's a variation on the old tried and true, "Raped? Of course she was. Did you see how she was dressed?"

Here's another:
“[We cannot] allow people who are manipulating us with historical ignorance and philosophical sleight of hand to render us so [redacted] guilty about what our ancestors may or may not have done, that we allow our shame and our guilt to be used as tools to manipulate us into accepting a future that we do not want to have.”

So, at bedrock Peterson accomplishes two things with his rhetoric that appeal to the far right. First, he labels Western academia as part of a conspiracy, a grand Marxist scheme for world domination (largely founded by the French, which is funny enough). Making it easy to disregard and suspect at best, or dissolve and destroy at worst, the principle means of opposing smartly wrapped crapola of the sort he's selling and the general foundational tenets of that right. Secondly, he absolves the present of any obligation to the past, so far as that past is connected to exploitation and inequity, by connecting it to that same Marxist plot.

It's neat work, if you don't get it.

 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
I am sure there are those who find your words somewhat comforting
Hey, silence where a reasonable man would speak is a sort of assent.

Or, I'm sure you have a problem you aren't handling, which is as good as silence.

You're extolling the virtues of a man who thinks feminists want to be brutally dominated. A goof who on the one hand decries the thin skinned academics and speaks to the necessity of offense while creating a thing to edit speech as he attempts to destroy and devalue opposition.
 
Top