Our modern Solzhenitsyn

The different voice that Jordan Peterson provides to the array of criticism of the socialist utopias so many seem to believe an actual possibility, in spite of the universal and disastrous failures every such experiment has created, is that he brings a psychological dimension to the arguments that are an important and in his hands devastating addition to the traditional economic and philosophical arguments that have tended to dominate such debates. His has been amongst the most important additions to the criticisms of the left that may have arisen in the present generation. His ability to explain has been recognised in that he has been asked to write The Gulag Archipelago: A New Foreword for the fiftieth anniversary edition commemorating its first publication in 1968. It is a long intro which is worth the time it takes to read it through.

Why, for example, is it still acceptable—and in polite company—to profess the philosophy of a Communist or, if not that, to at least admire the work of Marx? Why is it still acceptable to regard the Marxist doctrine as essentially accurate in its diagnosis of the hypothetical evils of the free-market, democratic West; to still consider that doctrine “progressive,” and fit for the compassionate and proper thinking person? Twenty-five million dead through internal repression in the Soviet Union (according to The Black Book of Communism). Sixty million dead in Mao’s China (and an all-too-likely return to autocratic oppression in that country in the near future). The horrors of Cambodia’s Killing Fields, with their two million corpses. The barely animate body politic of Cuba, where people struggle even now to feed themselves. Venezuela, where it has now been made illegal to attribute a child’s death in hospital to starvation. No political experiment has ever been tried so widely, with so many disparate people, in so many different countries (with such different histories) and failed so absolutely and so catastrophically. Is it mere ignorance (albeit of the most inexcusable kind) that allows today’s Marxists to flaunt their continued allegiance—to present it as compassion and care? Or is it, instead, envy of the successful, in near-infinite proportions? Or something akin to hatred for mankind itself? How much proof do we need? Why do we still avert our eyes from the truth?

Perhaps we simply lack sophistication. Perhaps we just can’t understand. Perhaps our tendency toward compassion is so powerfully necessary in the intimacy of our families and friendships that we cannot contemplate its limitations, its inability to scale, and its propensity to mutate into hatred of the oppressor, rather than allegiance with the oppressed. Perhaps we cannot comprehend the limitations and dangers of the utopian vision given our definite need to contemplate and to strive for a better tomorrow. We certainly don’t seem to imagine, for example, that the hypothesis of some state of future perfection—for example, the truly egalitarian and permanent brotherhood of man—can be used to justify any and all sacrifices whatsoever (the pristine and heavenly end making all conceivable means not only acceptable but morally required). There is simply no price too great to pay in pursuit of the ultimate utopia. (This is particularly true if it is someone else who foots the bill.) And it is clearly the case that we require a future toward which to orient ourselves—to provide meaning in our life, psychologically speaking. It is for that reason we see the same need expressed collectively, on a much larger scale, in the Judeo-Christian vision of the Promised Land, and the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. And it is also clearly the case that sacrifice is necessary to bring that desired end state into being. That’s the discovery of the future itself: the necessity to forego instantaneous gratification in the present, to delay, to bargain with fate so that the future can be better; twinned with the necessity to let go, to burn off, to separate wheat from chaff, and to sacrifice what is presently unworthy, so that tomorrow can be better than today. But limits need to be placed around who or what is deemed dispensable.

And when you’ve read the intro you can then watch this.

You have never seen him so angry.

AND THEN THIS: This is Jordan Peterson’s video intro to the book. He states right at the start that writing this introduction is the greatest honour that has been bestowed upon him.

This entry was posted in Conservative politics, Philosophy. Bookmark the permalink.

103 Responses to Our modern Solzhenitsyn

  1. Rae

    Meh. He couldn’t even explain his lobster theory without constant reference to his notes in the interview with Cathy Newman. He is not and will never be comparable to Solzhenitsyn.

  2. .

    I like JP but he’s not remarkable, the fact is that academia is so looney that he seems like a miracle.

  3. Roger

    It would not be just to glibly dismiss Peterson’s importance at present, but to place him in the same league as Solzhenitsyn, who experienced actual denunciation, imprisonment and exile is over reach. Our modern Solzhenitsyn will come forth a generation or so hence, and not with a multi-million dollar publishing deal, the associated fanfare and a three piece suit.

  4. AussieMAGA

    btfo’ing dumb feminists with verbiage. zzzzzzzz

    What’s this guy’s formula?
    – adopt a gaunt, affected manner
    – refuse to humour transvestites and basic bitch anti-SJWism to gain notoriety/popularity
    – pander to the group identity of Christians
    – facilitate the feigning of intellectuality amongst audience by spouting incoherent Jungian psychobabble and existential philosophy
    – rehash some tired ‘personal development’ themes

    Clean your room and don’t forget to buy the book, Bucko.

  5. Iampeter

    What’s worse, someone who honestly supports socialism, or someone who claims to be its critic, while in principle and through sheer ignorance of the concepts involved, supports it anyway?

    Peterson is the latter.

    Also that video is awful, full of his usual confused nonsense, with his total failure to defend free speech sticking out to me in particular. Instead of arguing against the existence of hate speech laws, he ends up getting stuck on the semantics of whether he was joking or not. This is fail. Peterson is hopeless and people elevating him to levels he does not deserve are just refusing to break from the herd and see the emperor is stark naked.

  6. RobK

    He’s taken on a big job. There needs to be more of it. I think he’s a good player for the team of free thinking. It’s an area that many people need to be exposed to in order to get their brain working. Little steps.

  7. Ian Hunter

    The attraction of communism to intellectuals/artists/bureaucrats/politicians/academics – all the chattering classes is simply to ensure the proletariat will support their preferred lifestyle. Alternatives such as a life of manual labour on a production line are unbearable. The proletariat also find such a life unbearable.

    So until all free stuff can be provided by super robots the dream/desire for freedom from work cannot disappear. Of course in such an event both the robots and us will realise there is no point in our continued existence.

  8. rickw

    What a horrible, stupid, unoriginal, feminist idiot.

    The factories that churn out these destructive robots need to be razed.

  9. Old School Conservative

    Peterson delivered commonsense with the support of extensive research.
    I like the way he is even handed in criticising the identity politics of the left as well as that of the right.
    He clearly set up the dividing line between himself and the amorphous “alt right’.
    The attempted “gotcha” question was dealt with intelligently too.

    He did well and got an opportunity to explain his theories in depth. A well spent hour and a half.

  10. NB

    Three points:
    1) The interviewer has been on a panel with a Burmese comedian, but hasn’t bothered to examine the pug case in her own country, and has every excuse for not doing so. Peterson says: ‘That’s exactly what you would believe if you were inclined to persecute comedians.’

    2) Peterson’s characterisation of her position as not representing her own life experiences, but emerging from an ideology, and largely predictable as a consequence, is true. Listening to the interviewer has all the interest of listening to a clock ticking. Of course, NPC comes to mind.

    3) In line with points 1 and 2, the interviewer is fundamentally uninteresting. I have seen this dullness descend upon very bright people after coming into contact with cultural Marxism and its attendant beliefs. It destroys, or at best, flattens, lively minds.

  11. I am bespoke

    I have relative in the UK who is a devout Corbyn supporter went to see JP and has read his book. He sill is a lefty but we can at least have a discussion without every thing revolving around race and conceded the structural problems within the EU/UN.

    JP ticks all the credentialist boxes that makes him less easy to dismiss then Milo.

    And if the alt-right AussieMAGA, Iampeter and creepy Rae hate him that’s a bonus.

  12. duncanm

    That intro dissolves into Peterson academic verbiage – wasn’t it supposed to be an intro into one of the definitive stories of the last century ?

    …. but this struck a chord with me:

    Perhaps our tendency toward compassion is so powerfully necessary in the intimacy of our families and friendships that we cannot contemplate its limitations, its inability to scale, and its propensity to mutate into hatred of the oppressor, rather than allegiance with the oppressed.

  13. manalive

    Perhaps we cannot comprehend the limitations and dangers of the utopian vision given our definite need to contemplate and to strive for a better tomorrow …

    For example in a TV interview given by celebrated Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm where he was asked if in 1934 he had known that millions were dying in the Soviet experiment would that have made any difference to his commitment he answered “probably not” and further asked had the “radiant tomorrow” actually been create the loss of 15, 20 million people might have been justified he answered “yes”.

  14. Gilas

    Rae
    #2856044, posted on November 3, 2018 at 8:55 pm
    .
    #2856048, posted on November 3, 2018 at 9:00 pm
    AussieMAGA
    #2856073, posted on November 3, 2018 at 9:31 pm
    Iampeter
    #2856077, posted on November 3, 2018 at 9:37 pm

    WTF??
    Did you watch the same video I did?

    I am still amazed at his calm, reasoned responses to the viscid effluent leaving the bitch’s mouth.
    It’s so easy to criticise someone who did the hard work to analyse, encapsulate the evils of the left and who had the courage to stand up against their vitriol and lies.
    In one of JBP’s earlier videos he smiled, as he quietly acknowledged he had found a way to monetise SJW attacks…
    More power to him!

    You are welcome to do better.

  15. Derp

    TBH he is always angry and that is his greatest weakness.
    It may work ok for uni lectures but canny interviewers will just prod him enough to set him off and turn away viewers.

  16. Iampeter

    WTF??
    Did you watch the same video I did?

    Yea dude, did you? I mean right out the gate, his first sentence was how he thinks people are hungry for a discussion about “responsibility and meaning” and we’ve been “too focused on rights”. Do you understand what he is saying there?

    I didn’t make this point as clear as I should in my original post so here goes: comparing Peterson to Solzhenitsyn is apt, but not the way that Steve Kate’s intends. Both are anti-West, anti-individual rights, collectivists and mystics. It speaks volumes to the intellectual bankruptcy of the West that these villainous leftists, are held in such high regard by people who claim to be fighting the left.

  17. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Peterson is doing a good job bringing critique of received leftist wisdoms into the foreground of the cultural debate. His style is attractive to millions of young people, especially men.

    Amor Towles ‘A Gentleman in Moscow’ is a book that can do similar service if it is set for school reading. It is an easy read for senior year high school students and will set them thinking as Animal Farm does about the venality of totalitarian philosophies and the practice of them in communist societies; it may also get them to see that socialism is simply a rebranding of communism. My review of the book here.

    In the form of a gentle fable, the book places emphasis on individual self-responsibility and the power of the human spirit to find ways around totalitarian oppression. It gives a chilling account of the banality of such evils, the everyday and pervasive horror of communism when it is lived.

  18. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Gilas, stupid people and trolls are everywhere these days. Even on Catallaxy. 🙂

  19. Myrddin Seren

    Roger

    Brace – I am going to posit a contrary note on your comment:

    It would not be just to glibly dismiss Peterson’s importance at present, but to place him in the same league as Solzhenitsyn, who experienced actual denunciation, imprisonment and exile is over reach.

    Not trying to place JBP in the same historical status as AS. However – different time, different place, different influence.

    Firstly – the exile part is probably the only reason we know Solzhenitsyn. If he had wound up in the cellar at the Lubyanka , he might just be an historical footnote in ‘The Black Book of Communism’.’

    And how many of the Post-1989 generation even know about Alexander Solzhenitsyn and the Gulag Archipelago ? And if the Antifa and ‘Democratic’ Socialists are anything to judge by – those Post-89ers who do know would re-instate the Gulag in a heart beat.

    Our modern Solzhenitsyn will come forth a generation or so hence...,

    Chinese Communist Party Minions: ‘Hey look, President for Life. There is always a chance a leading critic and dissenter will emerge and, from exile, will write devastating historical critiques about us ‘.

    President for Life: ‘Hold my beer. Surveillance State, Social Credit System, Media Control and Gulags. Also, do not make the mistake of letting critics go.’

    The ‘exile’ part was a mistake by the decrepit Soviets, not likely to be repeated. So don’t hold your breath waiting 20 years or so for someone to emerge from wherever – and write about, for example, how Australia slid in to a surveillance-control state that criminalised non-PC thought crimes.

    …and not with a multi-million dollar publishing deal, the associated fanfare and a three piece suit.

    If he can cut through to anyone and he does it by people volunteering their money, instead of the vast chambers of tax payer funded media on the PC Left, good luck to him. The battle for minds is now. A generation of two hence might as well be never.

  20. Myrddin Seren

    Amor Towles ‘A Gentleman in Moscow’ is a book that can do similar service if it is set for school reading.

    It is an easy read for senior year high school students and will set them thinking as Animal Farm does about the venality of totalitarian philosophies and the practice of them in communist societies; it may also get them to see that socialism is simply a rebranding of communism

    Ummm – good luck at getting that past the Teachers’ Federation and the boards that set the curriculum. Expect that one to get the Fahrenheit 451 treatment.

  21. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    “too focused on rights”.

    Triggly-puff type rights. Her right to throw away her disabled child perhaps? You are deliberately misreading Peterson because you want to push some loony libertarian flakish agenda.

    Both are anti-West, anti-individual rights, collectivists and mystics.

    Russians are Russians first and foremost. Solly is also a man of his time and place, and suffered badly for it. OK by me. I can’t see Peterson as anti all basic human rights. He’s hardly a collectivist unless you take a very warped view of his encouragement of many to consider an individualist position; yes, he may be a bit of a mystic at heart, but so are half or more of the human population. It may be in our genes. Bear with it.

  22. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Stimpy!! In here now. These people need some sanity from one who knows. 🙂

  23. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Ummm – good luck at getting that past the Teachers’ Federation and the boards that set the curriculum. Expect that one to get the Fahrenheit 451 treatment.

    You’d have better luck with ‘A Gentleman’ than with a lot of other books, Myrddin. It was on President Obama’s President’s Reading List for a long time; also top of the New York Times Bestseller list, and has sold millions of copies worldwide. There are existing study guides (haven’t perused them, and teachers may like to debate some of the interpretations – all good imho).

    Amor Towles wrote to me and congratulated me on seeing some things in his book not particularly noticed by all. ‘Perceptive review’ was his term for mine, which makes reference to Jordan Peterson at its conclusion. We don’t want children to read long tomes of ideological fervor, from either the right or the left. They won’t anyway. So this book provides a good starting point for all sorts of discussions. Kids today find Solly rather heavy going. ‘A Gentleman’ is soon to be made into a TV series, so is fairly topical still.

  24. Myrddin Seren

    You’d have better luck with ‘A Gentleman’ than with a lot of other books, Myrddin.

    I don’t have any school-age kids, Lizzie.

    You do and I presume all at private schools. You are in a better position to test this than me, within your own sphere of interaction and with a school or schools that might at least give you a hearing because School Fees $$.

    But in the public school system – who would champion the addition of ‘A Gentleman in Moscow’ with the curriculum boards ? Kevin Donnelly ? They despise him.

  25. Old School Conservative

    comparing Peterson to Solzhenitsyn is apt, but not the way that Steve Kate’s intends. Both are anti-West, anti-individual rights…

    Exactly where in the interview or “12 rules for life” or on his YouTube channel is there any evidence of this?

  26. I am bespoke

    Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.
    #2856382, posted on November 4, 2018 at 10:51 am
    Gilas, stupid people and trolls are everywhere these days. Even on Catallaxy. 🙂

    Hey that’s mean don’t lump in with the trolls.

  27. calli

    She got to seven minutes and she wanted to kill little girls.

    Some “feminist”.

  28. Iampeter

    Peterson is doing a good job bringing critique of received leftist wisdoms into the foreground of the cultural debate.

    Except all he is doing is spouting leftist “wisdom”. You’re ignoring what he’s saying because he is pissing off SJW’s, which is a very shallow approach to ideas.

    Gilas, stupid people and trolls are everywhere these days. Even on Catallaxy.

    Dismissing people who disagree with you as trolls is what triggered lefties do all the time.

    Triggly-puff type rights. Her right to throw away her disabled child perhaps? You are deliberately misreading Peterson because you want to push some loony libertarian flakish agenda.

    He said rights and freedom. He said these were shallow. He says stuff like this and worse ALL the time. I don’t think you’ve actually listened to enough of him. He is a far-left, authoritarian, but joining those dots requires more than a totally shallow understanding of the ideas involved.
    The only agenda I have is one of individual rights and rights protecting government. If you’re dismissing that as “loony libertarian agenda” then you’re hardly an alternative to the left yourself. As is often the case with Cat posters, it takes one or two posts before you’re arguments are indistinguishable from that of any socialists I might talk to.

    Russians are Russians first and foremost. Solly is also a man of his time and place, and suffered badly for it.

    But I’m a Russian and I reject collectivism totally. You’re entire approach to thinking is that of a collectivist. The idea that people are individuals and need to think for themselves is as incomprehensible to you as it is to Peterson.

    This is the problem: before you can begin to oppose the left you need to learn what an alternative would actually look like. Once you’ve learnt this, you’ll see why Peterson is no ally to those of us who are actually right wing. Although I think once you’ve learnt this, you wouldn’t oppose the left, you’d join them.

  29. Snoopy

    You are deliberately misreading Peterson because you want to push some loony libertarian flakish agenda.

    Fair but not at all harsh.

  30. Tintarella di Luna

    Whoever said Jordan Peterson was using notes in his Cathy Newman interview in January this year clearly didn’t watch the interview.

    Jordan Peterson had no notes but Cathy Newman did – and unfortunately even after the ‘gotcha’ enema delivered by Peterson her constipated ego so full of itself made it impossible to comprehend the simple premise that there was a 350-billion year evolutionary basis of hierarchy.

  31. Tintarella di Luna

    I am still amazed at his calm, reasoned responses to the viscid effluent leaving the bitch’s mouth.
    It’s so easy to criticise someone who did the hard work to analyse, encapsulate the evils of the left and who had the courage to stand up against their vitriol and lies.
    In one of JBP’s earlier videos he smiled, as he quietly acknowledged he had found a way to monetise SJW attacks…

    Well said Gilas – so glad Peterson is raking in the dough and he doesn’t gloat he’s humbly just astounded. All power to him. I admire him enormously basically because he’s not a know-it-all and is unembarrassed to say “I don’t know”. How is able to stomach fools is the true measure of his patience and forbearance.

  32. Rafe Champion

    Ummm – good luck at getting that past the Teachers’ Federation and the boards that set the curriculum. Expect that one to get the Fahrenheit 451 treatment.

    Amazing to find Fahrenheit 451 on the HSC reading list in NSW last year!?

    Someone blundered:)

  33. Tintarella di Luna

    If he can cut through to anyone and he does it by people volunteering their money, instead of the vast chambers of tax payer funded media on the PC Left, good luck to him. The battle for minds is now. A generation of two hence might as well be never.

    I agree with you Myrddin Seren: But the hour cometh, and now is. and Jordan Peterson has emerged.

  34. .

    I am still amazed at his calm, reasoned responses to the viscid effluent leaving the bitch’s mouth.
    It’s so easy to criticise someone who did the hard work to analyse, encapsulate the evils of the left and who had the courage to stand up against their vitriol and lies.
    In one of JBP’s earlier videos he smiled, as he quietly acknowledged he had found a way to monetise SJW attacks…

    I’m not criticising Peterson. I quite like him. I don’t think he’s remarkable. That’s my opinion. I might be wrong.

    Others have noted how loopy the interviewer is – my point still stands. Peterson is only remarkable because the academy is looney (this is actually why he adds value – he has the sanity and guts to say no to this nonsense). I did not say he is incapable or isn’t a very valuable commentator in current year.

    …and no I have not watched it. I don’t watch everything that gets posted here and I cannot expect everyone to watch the lengthy videos I post.

  35. Myrddin Seren

    Amazing to find Fahrenheit 451 on the HSC reading list in NSW last year!?

    Someone blundered:)

    No no no. It’s viewed as a How To manual – like ‘1984’ and ‘The Hunger Games’.

  36. Rafe Champion

    Looking for Fahrenheit 451 in HSC English in NSW.

    Hard to find, strangely in ESL Prose Fiction, p 23. Came to notice because my Chinese wife is coaching a young relative who is doing HSC on student visa from Beijing.

    Many other good books on the list including Shakespeare and T S Eliot, also Orwell 1984 (page 17) and Huxley Brave New World.

  37. I am bespoke

    Still waiting for Imp to move from simplistic proclamations to actual ideas.

  38. Hay Stockard

    I totally endorse what Myrddin Seren said. Not just. because they beat me to saying it.

  39. Rae

    His style is attractive to millions of young people, especially men.

    Your current menopausal status doesn’t fit that narrative, Hun.

    But this bit of self-description fits you to a tee:

    stupid people and trolls are everywhere these days

  40. Rae

    Whoever said Jordan Peterson was using notes in his Cathy Newman interview in January this year clearly didn’t watch the interview.

    I said it, Hun. And I also pointed it out way back when the interview was a hot topic on the Cat.

    The Lobster discussion and Petersons constant referring to notes starts at 26.00 minutes.

    Jordan Peterson/Cathy Newman Interview

  41. .

    He refers to notes for three minutes in a 29 minute interview and she has them the whole time…what is your point Grigory?

  42. Rae

    Did you watch the same video I did?

    Yeah, I might as well respond to you too, Gilas.

    I most certainly did watch the interview, a number times, when it was a hot topic on the Cat some months ago. And I commented then on how good the interview was for both participants, with the exception that Peterson kept looking down at his notes for the whole of the Lobster theory discussion.

    But, I wasn’t wearing your blinkers.

    Watch it again if you like. Just from the 26.00 minutes mark. I’ve linked it upthread.

    [PS. My link is to the original interview, not the later edited version.]

  43. .

    I think we can conclude that GQ is a joke. It should be called Gynocracy Quarterly.

  44. I am bespoke

    what is your point Grigory?

    To fixate on the trivial is his MO.

  45. Muddy

    Tintarella di Luna
    #2856439, posted on November 4, 2018 at 11:57 am

    If he can cut through to anyone and he does it by people volunteering their money, instead of the vast chambers of tax payer funded media on the PC Left, good luck to him. The battle for minds is now. A generation of two hence might as well be never.

    I agree with you Myrddin Seren: But the hour cometh, and now is. and Jordan Peterson has emerged.

    I don’t know enough about Jordan Peterson to comment on him, however in a broader sense, I absolutely agree with Myrddin and Tinta: There is no tomorrow. Cognitively speaking, we need a Berserker, or, more likely, Berserkers. We need to seek redemption for several decades of ‘Meh.’ To avoid being erased from future recordings of history.
    Apathy emasculates, atrophies. Then …
    Rigour mortis.
    Dust.

    To borrow from the title of a history of the CIA:
    A Legacy of Ashes.

  46. Rae
    #2856480, posted on November 4, 2018 at 12:45 pm

    Whoever said Jordan Peterson was using notes in his Cathy Newman interview in January this year clearly didn’t watch the interview.

    I said it, Hun. And I also pointed it out way back when the interview was a hot topic on the Cat.

    The Lobster discussion and Petersons constant referring to notes starts at 26.00 minutes.

    You are confusing Peterson’s body language when he is thinking and recalling. THERE ARE NO NOTES on the table to Peterson’s right. Only a glass of water on a coaster.
    Unless you think Peterson has notes on the ground hidden from our view, either you are mistaken, are experiencing confirmation bias or are a liar. Which is it?

    p.s. There are varies times when the camera pans towards and around the table. You can clearly see the water glass and a coaster that is exactly the same shape and size as the one in front of the harpie. NO NOTES.
    Rae is peddling #FakeNews

    p.p.s Those who are doubtful can also watch parts of hundreds of hours of Peterson lectures when he exhibits the exact same body posturing when he is recalling. He often looks away from the audience to his left/right and to the ground, even when he is on his feet.

  47. Gilas

    Tinta, I agree 1000%.
    Ci capiamo perfettamente!

    Rae,
    JBP had no notes in the Newman interview.
    As I wrote, criticism is all-too easy, maybe the critics can do better.
    I’d welcome that.

  48. Rafe Champion

    Can someone explain what substantial issue is resolved if we manage to get clear about the use of notes?

  49. Muddy

    He often looks away from the audience to his left/right and to the ground, even when he is on his feet.

    Body language specialists postulate that eye movement may correlate to the accessing of certain types of memory. i.e. Looking to the top left to access audio memory, bottom right for visual etc. (I cannot recall which is which right now, I just gave those as examples). It is only a theory of course, and there are always exceptions, however this may explain Dr. Peterson’s visual behaviour.

  50. Iampeter

    Still waiting for Imp to move from simplistic proclamations to actual ideas.

    It’s the other way around.
    Trying to get you to think about the ideas is exactly what I’m trying to do, but you’re only interested in simplistic pronouncements.
    This is why you can’t see that what Peterson advocates is no different to what any leftist advocates, just much more confused.

  51. Muddy

    Rafe Champion
    #2856547, posted on November 4, 2018 at 2:09 pm

    Can someone explain what substantial issue is resolved if we manage to get clear about the use of notes?

    Good golly, Rafe! Did you not get the SMS? It’s not about quality anymore, but rather quantity.
    Oh, and ‘substantial’ is a racist, homofauxbic, white-privilege-bastard-patriarchal word now. Repent or take your chances in the zerolag (the new ‘improved’ gulag for those who refuse to regress).

  52. I am bespoke

    Imp: No you are!!!

  53. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Gilas, I wasn’t referring to you in my comment about trolls. Apologies if my meaning was imprecise.

    You’re entire approach to thinking is that of a collectivist.

    Well, Iampeter, you are certainly an individualist in your approach to grammar and I am certainly a collectivist with regard to that, although you unfairly characterise me as socialist-leaning in other ways. 🙂

    I am no socialist in either my thinking or inclinations, which are entirely anti-totalitarian and anti-collectivist. Strangely, and if we are casting around Nasturtiums, then I must say that I think your single-minded pursuit of an absolute end point of ‘freedom’ and ‘rights’ to the detriment of any other consideration or point along the way is rather totalitarian in style. It’s your way, or no way.

    Rather dangerous thinking, imho, dearie.

    As for Rae, we all know Rae is Grigory. Hates women and in particular hates me.
    I am a very happy menopausist, Grigs, much loved and still sexy, you dry old bone of a bloke (if you must attack ad hominum).

    I also have hefty three sons, so I know quite a bit about young men. 😀

    All privately educated, as is my daughter, Myrddin, but it is a little late now to change the direction of their schooling. I have done my best and schools tremble as I approach. I will however work for the upcoming generations in public schools; my many and varied tribe of rellies. They deserve better than they get.

  54. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    … three hefty sons, that is. Wretched computer infill fail.

    Actually, one of them is a little less hefty than the other two.
    Perhaps he’s still growing. 🙂

  55. Tintarella di Luna

    As I wrote, criticism is all-too easy, maybe the critics can do better.

    Not the critics I’ve read or listened to, some are on par but none is able to underpin their criticism with the same breadth and depth of clinical experience and scholarship that underpins what Jordan Peterson articulates – that’s what I find remarkable. He may be unremarkable in that is just a man and what he says is well established, but the fact that he has to say it over and over is a sign of the remarkable times in which we live.

  56. Tintarella di Luna

    Tinta, I agree 1000%.
    Ci capiamo perfettamente!

    Certo Gilas

    Jordan Peterson had no notes whatsoever in that interview with Cathy Newman, why would he have notes when he knows his subject so well? given that the discussion on lobster hierarchy is in Rule No 1 of his book and would have discussed it many many times.

    He often looks away from the audience to his left/right and to the ground, even when he is on his feet.

    Certainly have seen Jordan Peterson do that when he was speaking here in Sydney. He chooses his words very very carefully because of those who would excoriate him should he choose the wrong word. He is always under a lot of pressure from the “So you’re saying …” crowd and I love how he insists on correcting their BS and does not proceed until the correction is acknowledged and accepted.

  57. Tintarella di Luna

    There is no tomorrow. Cognitively speaking, we need a Berserker, or, more likely, Berserkers. We need to seek redemption for several decades of ‘Meh.’ To avoid being erased from future recordings of history.
    Apathy emasculates, atrophies. Then …
    Rigour mortis.
    Dust.

    rats’ feet over broken glass comes to mind and straw-filled headpiece and codpiece

  58. Iampeter

    I am no socialist in either my thinking or inclinations, which are entirely anti-totalitarian and anti-collectivist.

    If that were true, then you wouldn’t have proceeded to put “freedom” and “rights” in quotation marks, or suggest “other considerations”, whatever that means.

    It’s your way, or no way.

    It’s the right way or the wrong way. You don’t understand either sides, have no alternatives to collectivism and so end up supporting it without having the clarity to realize it, or the significance of doing so.

    People too ignorant to realize they are advancing the principles of socialism are much worse than actual socialists.

    This is why Peterson and he’s mindless drone fans are the real enemy.

  59. I am bespoke

    Imp: I can’t explain why but your wrong!!!

  60. Rae

    As for Rae, we all know Rae is Grigory.

    Lol

  61. Dr Fred Lenin

    The mention of antifa amuses me ,how can you be anti fascist when you are a fascist? Antifa .the brownshirts of the global communist fascists , Hitlers fellow socialists ,he would be proud of you ,” mein kampf “lives ! Even have their IGFarben Krup clones , soros and mates .

  62. Tim Neilson

    If that were true, then you wouldn’t have proceeded to put “freedom” and “rights” in quotation marks, or suggest “other considerations”, whatever that means.

    Putting “rights” in quotation marks is an indication that Lizzie may in fact understand how confused the use of terminology is in this area.

    Go away and read Hohfeld’s “Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning”, and if you’re capable of understanding it you may start to develop some idea of the complexity of the issues involved in applying any concept of “rights” in the world we actually inhabit.
    (Personally I’d alter Hohfeld’s categories by using Salmond’s word “liberty” where Hohfeld uses “privilege”, but maybe that evidences a defect in my understanding of Hohfeld.)

    It’s the right way or the wrong way. You don’t understand either sides, have no alternatives to collectivism and so end up supporting it without having the clarity to realize it, or the significance of doing so.

    People too ignorant to realize they are advancing the principles of socialism are much worse than actual socialists.

    This is why Peterson and he’s mindless drone fans are the real enemy.

    Nothing totalitarian about this !

  63. whirrwhirr

    Dr Fred Lenin
    #2856657, posted on November 4, 2018 at 4:49 pm

    You obviously know nothing about antifa, beside what you have been fed by Murdoch and Breitbart et al. One of the guiding principals of antifa tactics is direct action. You do not see antifa running to the cops or the state or any authorities to deal with fascists, they do it themselves. Whether you agree with the tactics used, the use of violence or their targets; to argue that antifa is the puppet of any authority is moronic- let alone the puppet some mythical ‘global communist fascists’. Antifa is a decidedly anti-authoritarian, anti-statist tactic, that see liberals- be they Dems, Labour, Greens, as complicit in allowing fascism to re-emerge in Western democracies. If you have been following anything outside of the Trump propaganda in the past 2 years, you would have noted his administration cracking down on dissent, the expanded surveillance on activists, the use of an increasingly militarised police force to shut down protests while protecting white supremacists and other ‘fine people’. If you fail to acknowledge where the real threat of fascism is coming from, you are deluded.

  64. .

    f you have been following anything outside of the Trump propaganda in the past 2 years, you would have noted his administration cracking down on dissent, the expanded surveillance on activists, the use of an increasingly militarised police force to shut down protests while protecting white supremacists and other ‘fine people’.

    That seems very close to Obama – replace white supremacists with convicted terrorists.

  65. whirrwhirr
    #2856697, posted on November 4, 2018 at 6:45 pm

    Jesus H Christ, are there no end to the number of fvckwits in this World?
    The end of corporal punishment and good old bullying has allowed the imbecile to prosper and have the confidence to spout their moronic opinions.
    Wizzwizz yippeee here is a case in point.

  66. Iampeter

    Putting “rights” in quotation marks is an indication that Lizzie may in fact understand how confused the use of terminology is in this area.

    It indicates that she doesn’t know what she’s talking about and neither do you. There is ZERO complexity in applying rights to the world we live in, you just have to know what the concept means and how to use it. It is the very basics of politics. The ABC’s of politics.
    The issue is, politics is a very abstract science and so to even engage in the basics you have to be a pretty advanced level thinker and most people today don’t know how to think. Most posters here can’t string two thoughts together without completely contradicting themselves.

    Nothing totalitarian about this !

    Obviously. There’s nothing totalitarian in repeatedly and patiently pointing out and explaining that you don’t know what you’re talking about. The fact that you would even think this is “totalitarian” means you don’t what that word means either, thus proving my point, that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

  67. I am bespoke

    Posted before but seems appropriate.

  68. I am bespoke

    Imp: I will through a tanty….

  69. Ellen of Tasmania

    He often looks away from the audience to his left/right and to the ground, even when he is on his feet.

    I think you might find that this is common amongst introverts, even when, as in this interview, they are speaking one on one.

  70. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Putting “rights” in quotation marks is an indication that Lizzie may in fact understand how confused the use of terminology is in this area.

    As indeed I do, Tim Nielson. And one cannot even begin to spell out ‘other considerations’ to blind ideologues such as Iampeter, let alone try to instil into that WhirrWhirring head some comprehension of the thuggish and essentially fascist nature of ‘direct action’ behaviour such as Antifa engage in against citiizens minding their own business.

    Both of these commenters are marching to the tune of ‘historical inevitability’. A very nasty piece of music.

  71. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    He is always under a lot of pressure from the “So you’re saying …” crowd and I love how he insists on correcting their BS and does not proceed until the correction is acknowledged and accepted.

    Yes, he shows great strength and control by doing this. It is by no means easy.

  72. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Caught in the spaminator. I’ll try again:

    Putting “rights” in quotation marks is an indication that Lizzie may in fact understand how confused the use of terminology is in this area.

    As indeed I do, Tim Nielson. And one cannot even begin to spell out ‘other considerations’ to blind ideologues such as Iampeter, let alone bother trying to convince WhirrWhirr of the thuggish and essentially fascist nature of ‘direct action’ behaviour such as Antifa engage in against citizens minding their own business.

    Both of these commenters are marching to the dangerous tune of ‘historical inevitability’.

  73. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Sorry folks, still in moderation. Have to await some live person offering release from whatever sin I have committed, for it is totally opaque to me when I examine the blocked comment.

  74. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Last try, just for experimental purposes. Sorry to interrupt normal programming.

    Putting “rights” in quotation marks is an indication that Lizzie may in fact understand how confused the use of terminology is in this area.

    As indeed I do, Tim Nielson. And one cannot even begin to spell out ‘other considerations’ to blind ideologues such as Iampeter, let alone bother trying to convince WhirrWhirr of the thuggish and essentially fascist nature of ‘direct action’ behaviour such as Antifa engage in against citizens minding their own business.

  75. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Nope. I thought historical inevitability might have been a trigger but I left it off and same result.
    An innocuous comment slammed into the slammer.

  76. whirrwhirr

    .
    #2856698, posted on November 4, 2018 at 6:49 pm

    That seems very close to Obama – replace white supremacists with convicted terrorists.

    That might be true if it were not for a little FBI project called COINTEL, and Bill Ayres and was actually convicted of anything, or Bernardine Dohrn was convicted of any Weather Underground activities or if Obama hadn’t actually denounced the acts of The WU. That said Obama was quite happy to expand the powers of the US state to detain its own citizens with the NDAA in 2012, so I’ve got no time for him either

  77. Tim Neilson

    Iampeter
    #2856707, posted on November 4, 2018 at 7:06 pm

    As an example, do you think that the “right” to free speech and the “right” to due process before the law are of the same nature?
    It’s not an altogether easy question, but if you can’t articulate why Hohfeld or Salmond wouldn’t categorise free speech as a “right” but might categorise due process as a “right”, you haven’t even begun to understand the issues.

  78. Rae

    He often looks away from the audience to his left/right and to the ground, even when he is on his feet.

    I think you might find that this is common amongst introverts, even when, as in this interview, they are speaking one on one.

    Lol. You said that with a straight face, too. Well done.

    Jordan Peterson is definitely not an introvert.

  79. Snoopy

    Jordan Peterson is definitely not an introvert.

    He’s a sneak reader?

  80. .

    COINTEL

    Fast and Furious
    IRS targeting scandal (for which they apologised)

    No, I don’t like any of the above, regardless of who is in the firing line.

  81. Tintarella di Luna

    He’s a sneak reader?

    He reads invisible notes which aren’t there and can’t be seen. Sneaky eh?

  82. Gilas

    Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.
    #2856587, posted on November 4, 2018 at 2:58 pm

    Just saw this.
    No problemo Lizzie.
    Your comments are clear and always welcome.

  83. Gilas

    whirrwhirr
    #2856697, posted on November 4, 2018 at 6:45 pm

    Welcome to our latest troll!
    You have a long and illustrious tradition to live up to.
    Best wishes.

  84. whirrwhirr

    Gilas
    #2856908, posted on November 5, 2018 at 7:06 am

    Welcome to our latest troll!
    You have a long and illustrious tradition to live up to.
    Best wishes.

    thank you. I only pop my head up when someone makes a muppet statement. Have to keep you lot honest!

  85. I am bespoke

    whirrwhirr

    Do you deplore all the activities of Coitel?

    The administration has no control over state law enforcement.

  86. .

    thank you. I only pop my head up when someone makes a muppet statement. Have to keep you lot honest!

    Fast and Furious
    IRS targeting scandal (for which they apologised)
    Benghazi

  87. The BigBlueCat

    Jordan Peterson is definitely not an introvert.

    How would you know? Have you psych tested him? Introverts can be very good at role playing. Introversion speaks to their preferred behaviors, but the can exhibit extrovert behavior when necessary. There’s no way of knowing if he’s an introvert or an extrovert without testing him.

  88. whirrwhirr

    I am bespoke
    #2856951, posted on November 5, 2018 at 9:13 am

    whirrwhirr

    Do you deplore all the activities of Coitel?

    The administration has no control over state law enforcement.

    Do you mean the FBI program COINTELPRO? Which is what I was referring to yesterday. If so then of course I disapprove, it was one of the worst examples of tyranny of the United States. But I assume you have an alternative narrative of what occurred, as you bring up the IRS and state law enforcement.

  89. whirrwhirr

    .
    #2856962, posted on November 5, 2018 at 9:46 am

    Fast and Furious

    from what I remember about the case it was a clusterf*ck by the FBI and the Obama admin. Any President who has to invoke executive privilege is a coward

    IRS targeting scandal (for which they apologised)

    I assume you are talking about COINTELPRO, but you will have to direct me to something that elucidates your point because we might have read some different history. As for an apology- is that all it would have taken for Stalin to get your tick of approval?

    Benghazi

    yeah that is a quagmire of a debate. Obama is complicate for having the US is Libya in the first place. And Hillary and co. were complicate in trying to cover their arses after the attack.

  90. whirrwhirr

    .
    #2856971, posted on November 5, 2018 at 9:59 am

    What about MK Ultra?

    um… I’ll save you the time and say that I don’t approve of the notion of state power and any of its machinations

  91. Iampeter

    As an example, do you think that the “right” to free speech and the “right” to due process before the law are of the same nature?
    It’s not an altogether easy question, but if you can’t articulate why Hohfeld or Salmond wouldn’t categorise free speech as a “right” but might categorise due process as a “right”, you haven’t even begun to understand the issues.

    These questions sound are a consequence of no understanding of the concept of rights.

    So I don’t know who Hohfeld or Salmond are, but they clearly don’t know what rights are, so I don’t know why you’re bringing them up.

  92. I am bespoke

    whirrwhirr
    #2856969, posted on November 5, 2018 at 9:58 am

    Do you mean the FBI program COINTELPRO? Which is what I was referring to yesterday.

    Yes

    If so then of course I disapprove, it was one of the worst examples of tyranny of the United States.

    Good to no. I was just curios if it was only certain targets.

    But I assume you have an alternative narrative of what occurred,

    No but I have some sympathy to the need of countering domestic terrorists.

    as you bring up the IRS

    I didn’t.

    and state law enforcement.

    That was in response to your earlier comment.

  93. I am bespoke

    So I don’t know who Hohfeld or Salmond are, but they clearly don’t know what rights are

    I didn’t have to use the Imp converter for that one. :))

  94. whirrwhirr

    I am bespoke
    #2857076, posted on November 5, 2018 at 12:01 pm

    Sorry the IRS thing was dot. And I was referring to the nation state of the US. Some under caffeinated replies from me

  95. I am bespoke

    Stick around I think you’ll find plenty of people concerned about State over reach.

  96. Iampeter

    Iam bespoke, you’re posts are funnier than you realize but not in the way you intended.
    This one is a particular favorite of mine:

    Imp: I can’t explain why but your wrong!!!

    What an own goal. LOL.

  97. Tim Neilson"?

    Iampeter
    #2857115, posted on November 5, 2018 at 1:18 pm

    So I don’t know who Hohfeld or Salmond are, but they clearly don’t know what rights are

    Someone who says something so unutterably stupid and conceited has no business criticising anyone else’s comments.

  98. I am bespoke

    Your making it to easy Imp, try again.

  99. Iampeter

    As indeed I do, Tim Nielson. And one cannot even begin to spell out ‘other considerations’ to blind ideologues such as Iampeter,

    That’s because as I said, you are politically illiterate. You’re not explaining anything because you don’t know what you’re talking about.
    Politics is about freedom vs force, or individualism vs collectivism and there are no other considerations. This is just total confusion on your part re the very basics of the subject you’re trying to discuss.
    You, Tim, Kates and many other posters here, are completely disintegrated and confused thinkers and that’s what appeals to you about Peterson.

    So all you can do is spout total gibberish, while role-play having an intellectual discussion.

  100. Iampeter

    Someone who says something so unutterably stupid and conceited has no business criticising anyone else’s comments.

    What do you mean? You don’t understand what rights are as we can see from the bizarre questions you’re asking which you seem to have gotten from randoms you’ve read who are as confused as you are.
    Obviously I’m going to criticize your nonsense.

  101. .

    What are rights Peter?

    We should also all lookup MKOFTEN, the Collins Elite and Project Mockingbird.

    The CIA are a very weird mob. They could almost pass for ethnic immigrants in Australia.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.