Jordan Peterson

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Cheb » Wed Jul 04, 2018 11:53 pm

I had only read hit pieces about him in the media painting him as a Neo-Nazi until about a week ago. After I watched him speak, I think he's actually quite moderate, and certainly no Nazi. I like his viewpoints.

I've ordered his book. Should be a good read.
Image
Cheb
 
Posts: 3846
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:00 pm
Location: West Coast is best coast
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 330 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Ken Carson » Tue Jul 10, 2018 8:21 am

Here is an article that basically sums up the Jordan Peterson saga: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2018/0 ... turn-right

He is a leftist writer who accurately identifies how the radicals on the left are completely failing to denounce Peterson, and turning people against the left. It s what I have been trying to tell Corsair and Babe for like 18 months.
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 177 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby RedLeader » Tue Jul 10, 2018 8:32 am

Ken Carson wrote:Here is an article that basically sums up the Jordan Peterson saga: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2018/0 ... turn-right

He is a leftist writer who accurately identifies how the radicals on the left are completely failing to denounce Peterson, and turning people against the left. It s what I have been trying to tell Corsair and Babe for like 18 months.


You and everyone else with half a brain.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2743
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 103 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:12 am

Ken Carson wrote:Here is an article that basically sums up the Jordan Peterson saga: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2018/0 ... turn-right

He is a leftist writer who accurately identifies how the radicals on the left are completely failing to denounce Peterson, and turning people against the left. It s what I have been trying to tell Corsair and Babe for like 18 months.


Yup. Good summation in that article.

I disagree with the author that JP is "regressive", but it's just an opinion he shared without clarification other than calling him traditional. I don't think all traditional values are regressive, but obviously some are just as some non-traditional/progressive values could be argued as regressive (such as identity politics).

I also disagree with the statement that the "right" doesn't care about issues like free speech and tolerance. I strongly believe that both right and the left care about those issues, but it's the extremes/radicals on each side whose actions (like these Durham politicians) are a detriment to those that share that party platform, which is to your point Ken.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12723
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Buc2 » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:14 am

Ken Carson wrote:Here is an article that basically sums up the Jordan Peterson saga: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2018/0 ... turn-right

He is a leftist writer who accurately identifies how the radicals on the left are completely failing to denounce Peterson, and turning people against the left. It s what I have been trying to tell Corsair and Babe for like 18 months.

I found this quote particularly interesting:
...every time some city pitches a fit about Jordan B. Peterson, all they are doing is bringing more people into his orbit. If the goal is really to shut him up, trying to de-platform the man is going to do anything but.

I'm a good example of this. I never even thought about watching the sitcom, Last Man Standing, until ABC cancelled it and, whether rightly or wrongly, was accused of cancelling it because they didn't like the stars right-leaning character portrayal. Since then, I've watched every episode of it on Netflix. It was actually good comedy series imo.

The only thing the author of that article wrote that I took umbrage to was saying that the right doesn't care about tolerance or free speech. This is a patently false. Myself and most conservatives I know are living proof of that misconception / misrepresentation.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10989
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 919 times
Been thanked: 381 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Ken Carson » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:44 am

Many people have commented that free speech has traditionally been a left wing issue, which in this country it has. The most likely to try to censor in the last 50 years are religious people, or in the 1970s when people were fighting to be able to protest the Vietnam War. Even today, there s the president telling athlete to shut up and dribble or stand up fo the anthem. I realize those aren’t perfect first amendment cases, but you get the point.

That said, it is pretty clear to everyone who is paying attention that the radical left is trying to legislate speech it disagrees with, or shut it down with violence or other means. And I refuse to not call that out.

It’s felt lonely, but with this article in one of Seattle’s liberal publications, it appears that left dissent is potentially catching on. Once we root out some of the radicals who have coopted our party, we can ge back to true progressive policy making.
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 177 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Ken Carson » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:22 am

Good article here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nation ... ality/amp/

It’s from a right-wing perspective but I agree with two of his three points where the left needs to stop. I don’t think that the anti-Israel sentiment on the left is anti-Semitic, but waxing poetic about leftist maniacs has always bothered me, and identity politics is a cancer to progress.

Jordan Peterson has often said th left needs to define when it has gone too far, and I agree that we do. If for no other reason than to wrest back control of progressive policy making from radicals.
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 177 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:58 am

Ken Carson wrote:Good article here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nation ... ality/amp/

It’s from a right-wing perspective but I agree with two of his three points where the left needs to stop. I don’t think that the anti-Israel sentiment on the left is anti-Semitic, but waxing poetic about leftist maniacs has always bothered me, and identity politics is a cancer to progress.

Jordan Peterson has often said th left needs to define when it has gone too far, and I agree that we do. If for no other reason than to wrest back control of progressive policy making from radicals.


I agree, but in regards to criticism of Israel the article pointed out (properly imo) that it is fine for perfectly reasonable/justified people to chastise Israel. But the there should be line drawn when reasonable criticism starts to bleed over into support of anti-Semitic organizations like Hamas or people like Farrakhan, Linda Sarsour, etc. I think that is a fair argument and expectation of reasonable people on the left. Some domestic analogies (to a lesser degree) is that you can oppose Trump without joining or supporting groups like Antifa, or inversely you could be critical of the leftist policies without supporting neo-nazi groups.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12723
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:11 am

Ken Carson wrote:Good article here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nation ... ality/amp/

It’s from a right-wing perspective but I agree with two of his three points where the left needs to stop. I don’t think that the anti-Israel sentiment on the left is anti-Semitic, but waxing poetic about leftist maniacs has always bothered me, and identity politics is a cancer to progress.

Jordan Peterson has often said th left needs to define when it has gone too far, and I agree that we do. If for no other reason than to wrest back control of progressive policy making from radicals.

That's the thing about Dr. Peterson. He gets vilified by the kids on the left who are the recipients of his criticism and deified by the right who can't stand them even though Peterson himself is not a right winger.

But while Dr. Peterson's point is completely correct that the SJW fringe left is out to lunch when they insist on what pronouns another person uses and quite literally trying to alter the diction of the country, it's not a profound statement of genius to point that out. And I think when he's telling the left to police up it's own, he's saying so.

From my understanding, Dr. Peterson has a lot of insights on other topics, but for now he seems content to do the talking head circuit and keep picking the low hanging fruit that is 19 year old kids who are just now starting to realize what politics is, and the media who enable them. All it does is give mental masturbation to the right who wants to pile on.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13187
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 629 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:24 am

I agree he talks about college kids often and he has discussed why

1.). Those are the people he sees most often as he works with them everday

2.) he has actually gone out of his way to say it’s not the kids so much he is attacking but rather universities in general and the radical leftist ideology that is often espoused by both the faculty and administration. He sees the brainwashing of the students by this group as a serious threat to liberalism


As for the ideas he is attacking bring low hanging fruit that is associated with just the radical left, I don’t agree with that. Identity politics is rampant across the left — not just on topics like gender and race either. The entire platform of many of the Democrat socialists is identity politics against the so called 1%

Not to mention when he talks about the radical left trying to silence the opposition he isn’t talking about a fringe group either. Unfortunately that seems to be a growing tactic that is becoming commonplace
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5967
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 282 times
Been thanked: 275 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:36 am

Zarniwoop wrote:I agree he talks about college kids often and he has discussed why

1.). Those are the people he sees most often as he works with them everday

2.) he has actually gone out of his way to say it’s not the kids so much he is attacking but rather universities in general and the radical leftist ideology that is often espoused by both the faculty and administration. He sees the brainwashing of the students by this group as a serious threat to liberalism


As for the ideas he is attacking bring low hanging fruit that is associated with just the radical left, I don’t agree with that. Identity politics is rampant across the left — not just on topics like gender and race either. The entire platform of many of the Democrat socialists is identity politics against the so called 1%

Not to mention when he talks about the radical left trying to silence the opposition he isn’t talking about a fringe group either. Unfortunately that seems to be a growing tactic that is becoming commonplace

Identity politics is rampant across the country in general. The right uses patriotic imagery, religious zeal, a buncha guns, and super-veterans to draw a distinct line between the two viewpoints and you are just as quick to get smashed by your own side on the right as well as the left if you stray from orthodoxy.

Just ask Tomi Laren. She suggested in one of her final word segments that Republicans should not push for an overturn of Roe and focus on things that help the GOP win, and she got destroyed by her own fans.

Again, it's not wrong for Dr. Peterson to suggest the left police up it's radicals that bang the table with ridiculous positions, but it's wrong to suggest the problem exists solely on the political left. And I think even Dr. Peterson would agree that the white nationalist movement undermines conservatism the same way Antifa undermines progressivism.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13187
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 629 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:39 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
Ken Carson wrote:Good article here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nation ... ality/amp/

It’s from a right-wing perspective but I agree with two of his three points where the left needs to stop. I don’t think that the anti-Israel sentiment on the left is anti-Semitic, but waxing poetic about leftist maniacs has always bothered me, and identity politics is a cancer to progress.

Jordan Peterson has often said th left needs to define when it has gone too far, and I agree that we do. If for no other reason than to wrest back control of progressive policy making from radicals.

That's the thing about Dr. Peterson. He gets vilified by the kids on the left who are the recipients of his criticism and deified by the right who can't stand them even though Peterson himself is not a right winger.

But while Dr. Peterson's point is completely correct that the SJW fringe left is out to lunch when they insist on what pronouns another person uses and quite literally trying to alter the diction of the country, it's not a profound statement of genius to point that out. And I think when he's telling the left to police up it's own, he's saying so.

From my understanding, Dr. Peterson has a lot of insights on other topics, but for now he seems content to do the talking head circuit and keep picking the low hanging fruit that is 19 year old kids who are just now starting to realize what politics is, and the media who enable them. All it does is give mental masturbation to the right who wants to pile on.


If this is your understanding I'd say your purview is pretty limited and seems to be caricature of how critics attempt to portray him (i.e. his audience is just young white males). Not sure what you mean by 'talking head circuit' but he is/was promoting a book. However he does many long form discussions and is on a tour doing the same. I applaud JP for his willingness to engage with his critics in open dialogue and something so that his ideas can be critiqued. It's something we need more of and a big reason the "IDW" has such a growing platform. People desire more than the templated cable news segments or edited clips.

JP isn't political and he isn't some right-winger. But he does speak to values like individualism and personal responsibility, how those values came to be and why they are important and should be conserved.

Like it was discussed previously in this thread (and you even eluded to) much of what JP talks about wouldn't even been a blimp on the radar or considered profound in the slightest 15-20 years ago in western society b/c of these topics were not considered partisan. But the left has moved so far towards collectivism that now these sentiments of individualism and personal responsibility are critiqued as right wing ideals.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12723
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:46 am

DreadNaught wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:That's the thing about Dr. Peterson. He gets vilified by the kids on the left who are the recipients of his criticism and deified by the right who can't stand them even though Peterson himself is not a right winger.

But while Dr. Peterson's point is completely correct that the SJW fringe left is out to lunch when they insist on what pronouns another person uses and quite literally trying to alter the diction of the country, it's not a profound statement of genius to point that out. And I think when he's telling the left to police up it's own, he's saying so.

From my understanding, Dr. Peterson has a lot of insights on other topics, but for now he seems content to do the talking head circuit and keep picking the low hanging fruit that is 19 year old kids who are just now starting to realize what politics is, and the media who enable them. All it does is give mental masturbation to the right who wants to pile on.


If this is your understanding I'd say your purview is pretty limited and seems to be caricature of how critics attempt to portray him (i.e. his audience is just young white males). Not sure what you mean by 'talking head circuit' but he is/was promoting a book. However he does many long form discussions and is on a tour doing the same. I applaud JP for his willingness to engage with his critics in open dialogue and something so that his ideas can be critiqued. It's something we need more of and a big reason the "IDW" has such a growing platform. People desire more than the templated cable news segments or edited clips.

JP isn't political and he isn't some right-winger. But he does speak to values like individualism and personal responsibility, how those values came to be and why they are important and should be conserved.

Like it was discussed previously in this thread (and you even eluded to) much of what JP talks about wouldn't even been a blimp on the radar or considered profound in the slightest 15-20 years ago in western society b/c of these topics were not considered partisan. But the left has moved so far towards collectivism that now these sentiments of individualism and personal responsibility are critiqued as right wing ideals.

You took everything I wrote and put it through a right wing filter. JP is giving due criticism to a group of wingnuts and you show it as being indicative of the left as a whole.

If I took a look at those titki torch weilding faggots on the right and declared them as being indicative of the entire right wing, I'd be challenged by every conservative here to prove it. Why? because it's not true. Jordan Peterson criticizing skinheads would not make it true either.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13187
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 629 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:48 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
Zarniwoop wrote:I agree he talks about college kids often and he has discussed why

1.). Those are the people he sees most often as he works with them everday

2.) he has actually gone out of his way to say it’s not the kids so much he is attacking but rather universities in general and the radical leftist ideology that is often espoused by both the faculty and administration. He sees the brainwashing of the students by this group as a serious threat to liberalism


As for the ideas he is attacking bring low hanging fruit that is associated with just the radical left, I don’t agree with that. Identity politics is rampant across the left — not just on topics like gender and race either. The entire platform of many of the Democrat socialists is identity politics against the so called 1%

Not to mention when he talks about the radical left trying to silence the opposition he isn’t talking about a fringe group either. Unfortunately that seems to be a growing tactic that is becoming commonplace

Identity politics is rampant across the country in general. The right uses patriotic imagery, religious zeal, a buncha guns, and super-veterans to draw a distinct line between the two viewpoints and you are just as quick to get smashed by your own side on the right as well as the left if you stray from orthodoxy.

Just ask Tomi Laren. She suggested in one of her final word segments that Republicans should not push for an overturn of Roe and focus on things that help the GOP win, and she got destroyed by her own fans.

Again, it's not wrong for Dr. Peterson to suggest the left police up it's radicals that bang the table with ridiculous positions, but it's wrong to suggest the problem exists solely on the political left. And I think even Dr. Peterson would agree that the white nationalist movement undermines conservatism the same way Antifa undermines progressivism.


Where did he suggest radicals/extreme ideologues are elusive to the left? He's talked about how identity politics on the right is equally bad. I believe he just feels the larger threat right now is on the radical left for the reasons pointed out in Ken's article (the left not identifying and calling out their own extremists) whereas on the right it's easier to identify the symptoms and thus contain it.

JP is an anti-extremist when it comes to ideology. Which if there is a common thread among the folks associated with the "IDW" it's that regardless of their political or religious affiliation they are all anti-extremism and open to discussing their ideas.
Last edited by DreadNaught on Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12723
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:52 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
If this is your understanding I'd say your purview is pretty limited and seems to be caricature of how critics attempt to portray him (i.e. his audience is just young white males). Not sure what you mean by 'talking head circuit' but he is/was promoting a book. However he does many long form discussions and is on a tour doing the same. I applaud JP for his willingness to engage with his critics in open dialogue and something so that his ideas can be critiqued. It's something we need more of and a big reason the "IDW" has such a growing platform. People desire more than the templated cable news segments or edited clips.

JP isn't political and he isn't some right-winger. But he does speak to values like individualism and personal responsibility, how those values came to be and why they are important and should be conserved.

Like it was discussed previously in this thread (and you even eluded to) much of what JP talks about wouldn't even been a blimp on the radar or considered profound in the slightest 15-20 years ago in western society b/c of these topics were not considered partisan. But the left has moved so far towards collectivism that now these sentiments of individualism and personal responsibility are critiqued as right wing ideals.

You took everything I wrote and put it through a right wing filter. JP is giving due criticism to a group of wingnuts and you show it as being indicative of the left as a whole.

If I took a look at those titki torch weilding faggots on the right and declared them as being indicative of the entire right wing, I'd be challenged by every conservative here to prove it. Why? because it's not true. Jordan Peterson criticizing skinheads would not make it true either.


Allow me to rephrase, It is my opinion that the Democratic platform has started to drift away from classically liberal ideals like individualism and personal responsibility over the past 15-20 years. This doesn't mean every Democrat, but moreso the ideals of the party. It is b/c of this that leftist media critics attack, willfully misrepresent, and caricaturize JP the way they do.

I respect that you may disagree.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12723
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:00 am

DreadNaught wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:You took everything I wrote and put it through a right wing filter. JP is giving due criticism to a group of wingnuts and you show it as being indicative of the left as a whole.

If I took a look at those titki torch weilding faggots on the right and declared them as being indicative of the entire right wing, I'd be challenged by every conservative here to prove it. Why? because it's not true. Jordan Peterson criticizing skinheads would not make it true either.


Allow me to rephrase, It is my opinion that the Democratic platform has moved away from classically liberal ideals like individualism and personal responsibility over the past 15-20 years. This doesn't mean every Democrat, but moreso the ideals of the party.

I respect that you may disagree.

I do disagree because the complete opposite is true. The democrat party has moved steadily to the right in the last 30 years while using identity politics to pay lip service to minorities and look where it got them. It's only since 2016 that the party has begun to shake that off and that is precisely why Bernie Sanders is such a big deal and precisely why the democrats are in the midst of a civil war right now.

If the left wing populists succeed in their hostile takeover of the DNC, (which I hope they do) we'll actually have a right vs. left battle in the halls of congress rather than a right vs. center left battle that the GOP has clearly won.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13187
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 629 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Ken Carson » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:01 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:Again, it's not wrong for Dr. Peterson to suggest the left police up it's radicals that bang the table with ridiculous positions, but it's wrong to suggest the problem exists solely on the political left. And I think even Dr. Peterson would agree that the white nationalist movement undermines conservatism the same way Antifa undermines progressivism.


Yeah, he has repeatedly said that he hates when the right plays identity politics. I posted a long form quote from him earlier in this thread where he rips anyone who thinks that their whiteness means anything in regards to accomplishments.

His point, echoed in the article I posted, is that it's pretty well-established that when people on the right make claims of ethnic superiority and nationalism, they should be forcibly removed from the mainstream political discussion. As you point out, there are probably more places where the right should police their own, so unlike Peterson, I don't think that's a closed topic. However, the left has not found a category of thought to exclude from political discourse. And I find that to be a fair criticism. If people who praise Mao or talk about Fidel Castro's healthcare and education system design aren't called out, who would be? If Antifa is not condemned by liberals, then what do we even stand for?
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 177 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:05 am

The left is absolutely marching towards collectivism as a group. There is nothing wrong about that statement. Universal healthcare is not a fringe left idea. Free college is becoming more main stream. Govt providing jobs is too. All of that is a form of collectivism
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5967
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 282 times
Been thanked: 275 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Ken Carson » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:05 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
Allow me to rephrase, It is my opinion that the Democratic platform has moved away from classically liberal ideals like individualism and personal responsibility over the past 15-20 years. This doesn't mean every Democrat, but moreso the ideals of the party.

I respect that you may disagree.

I do disagree because the complete opposite is true. The democrat party has moved steadily to the right in the last 30 years while using identity politics to pay lip service to minorities and look where it got them. It's only since 2016 that the party has begun to shake that off and that is precisely why Bernie Sanders is such a big deal and precisely why the democrats are in the midst of a civil war right now.

If the left wing populists succeed in their hostile takeover of the DNC, (which I hope they do) we'll actually have a right vs. left battle in the halls of congress rather than a right vs. center left battle that the GOP has clearly won.

Wow, we see our party completely differently. I do agree that the corporate Democrats are a blight and need to get the hell out, but I don’t agree that they should be replaced with radicals who play identity politics.
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 177 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:07 am

Wait, the left has moved right? Lol
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5967
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 282 times
Been thanked: 275 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:18 am

Ken Carson wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:I do disagree because the complete opposite is true. The democrat party has moved steadily to the right in the last 30 years while using identity politics to pay lip service to minorities and look where it got them. It's only since 2016 that the party has begun to shake that off and that is precisely why Bernie Sanders is such a big deal and precisely why the democrats are in the midst of a civil war right now.

If the left wing populists succeed in their hostile takeover of the DNC, (which I hope they do) we'll actually have a right vs. left battle in the halls of congress rather than a right vs. center left battle that the GOP has clearly won.

Wow, we see our party completely differently. I do agree that the corporate Democrats are a blight and need to get the hell out, but I don’t agree that they should be replaced with radicals who play identity politics.

No they should be replaced by populists who are focused on things the people DO want.

The polling is in. 65% want Medicare for all and it jumps to 75% when presented as a public option.
76% of the country want a minimum wage of at least $10 an hour.
78% of the country wants corporate money out of politics
60% of the country wants tuition free college.
80% of the country opposes any increase of troop levels in Afghanistan.
61% of the country wants full legalization of marijuana.

These things are not radical. these things are not identity politics. These are things the American people have said they want and democrats who run on these things can win. Democrats running on "(republican candidate) is a racist, sexist, homophobe, POS." do not and have not for quite some time.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13187
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 629 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:24 am

Zarniwoop wrote:Wait, the left has moved right? Lol

Don't confuse ideology with party.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13187
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 629 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:46 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
Ken Carson wrote:Wow, we see our party completely differently. I do agree that the corporate Democrats are a blight and need to get the hell out, but I don’t agree that they should be replaced with radicals who play identity politics.

No they should be replaced by populists who are focused on things the people DO want.

The polling is in. 65% want Medicare for all and it jumps to 75% when presented as a public option.
76% of the country want a minimum wage of at least $10 an hour.
78% of the country wants corporate money out of politics
60% of the country wants tuition free college.
80% of the country opposes any increase of troop levels in Afghanistan.
61% of the country wants full legalization of marijuana.

These things are not radical. these things are not identity politics. These are things the American people have said they want and democrats who run on these things can win. Democrats running on "(republican candidate) is a racist, sexist, homophobe, POS." do not and have not for quite some time.


I don't think Ken or anyone here would argue otherwise. Those are good issues to for Dems to run on of that is what the people want. I've been saying for months that Dems need craft better messaging than just #Resist.

But unfortunately this resistance movement has allowed radicals into the tent and what we're discussing is how it would it would better for both the Dems and society as a whole if Dems would draw clear lines around radical ideals just as it's better for Republicans and society as a whole to do the same with the extremists on the right. This way we can return to civil discourse between reasonable thinking people on issues instead of the allowing the fringes who play identity politics to get involved.

To be fair, I think what we are seeing occur on the left is similar in a way to what happened on the right w/ the inception of the tea-party after the election of Obama. The tea-party was a populist movement on the right that allowed radicals on the right (synonymous w/ racists/neo-nazis) into that tent. A big difference is that tea party didn't control institutions like the MSM or Universities like the left does by in large.

Anyways, I'm all for Dems to run on the platform you posted. I support some of those issues and am lukewarm on others and would like understand the details of how it would be paid for (the "free" stuff or expansion of other programs).
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12723
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:58 am

DreadNaught wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:No they should be replaced by populists who are focused on things the people DO want.

The polling is in. 65% want Medicare for all and it jumps to 75% when presented as a public option.
76% of the country want a minimum wage of at least $10 an hour.
78% of the country wants corporate money out of politics
60% of the country wants tuition free college.
80% of the country opposes any increase of troop levels in Afghanistan.
61% of the country wants full legalization of marijuana.

These things are not radical. these things are not identity politics. These are things the American people have said they want and democrats who run on these things can win. Democrats running on "(republican candidate) is a racist, sexist, homophobe, POS." do not and have not for quite some time.


I don't think Ken or anyone here would argue otherwise. Those are good issues to for Dems to run on of that is what the people want. I've been saying for months that Dems need craft better messaging than just #Resist.

But unfortunately this resistance movement has allowed radicals into the tent and what we're discussing is how it would it would better for both the Dems and society as a whole if Dems would draw clear lines around radical ideals just as it's better for Republicans and society as a whole to do the same with the extremists on the right. This way we can return to civil discourse between reasonable thinking people on issues instead of the allowing the fringes who play identity politics to get involved.

To be fair, I think what we are seeing occur on the left is similar in a way to what happened on the right w/ the inception of the tea-party after the election of Obama. The tea-party was a populist movement on the right that allowed radicals on the right (synonymous w/ racists/neo-nazis) into that tent. A big difference is that tea party didn't control institutions like the MSM or Universities like the left does by in large.

Anyways, I'm all for Dems to run on the platform you posted. I support some of those issues and am lukewarm on others and would like understand the details of how it would be paid for (the "free" stuff or expansion of other programs).

You are right that the Republicans had a very similar internal fight with the tea party movement. Over here on the left, we had Occupy, but it was co-opted by the establishment and fizzled out so here we go again.

It's going to take multiple election cycles to see how much of an impact this movement can make, but the goal here is to win back as many legislative seats as possible that were squandered trying to shame people into voting for democrats and actually draw a non-corporatist party line that seeks to rally people to these policy items and make them happen.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13187
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 629 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:03 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
Zarniwoop wrote:Wait, the left has moved right? Lol

Don't confuse ideology with party.





Nearly every single one of your politicians has run on platforms of raising taxes on the rich....supporting some role of gov't in healthcare (whether it be ACA or single payer)...nearly all want free college.....all of them still support RvW....all of them want more federal intrusion into politics...etc etc. They have all wanted these things both in practice and in theory.

The entire country has shifted left (and in some instances its a very good thing -- until recently the left did a fairly good, not great job on social issues and 4A)....but as you would expect the D's are shifting left faster.

The only right position that the left has adopted over the last 30 years is their hatred of free speech.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5967
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 282 times
Been thanked: 275 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:14 am

Zarniwoop wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:Don't confuse ideology with party.





Nearly every single one of your politicians has run on platforms of raising taxes on the rich....supporting some role of gov't in healthcare (whether it be ACA or single payer)...nearly all want free college.....all of them still support RvW....all of them want more federal intrusion into politics...etc etc. They have all wanted these things both in practice and in theory.

The entire country has shifted left (and in some instances its a very good thing -- until recently the left did a fairly good, not great job on social issues and 4A)....but as you would expect the D's are shifting left faster.

The only right position that the left has adopted over the last 30 years is their hatred of free speech.

I don't want to derail this thread anymore so I'll give you the last word. I completely disagree with you. but the last word is yours on this.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13187
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 629 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:45 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:Identity politics is rampant across the country in general. The right uses patriotic imagery, religious zeal, a buncha guns, and super-veterans to draw a distinct line between the two viewpoints and you are just as quick to get smashed by your own side on the right as well as the left if you stray from orthodoxy.


You're mischaracterizing identity politics on the right there.

Patriotism, religion, gun ownership, and the military are all groups/ideals that are NOT bound by specific identity or immutable traits. It's misguided imo to imply an individual must be on the the right (or it's a right wing strategy) if they are a Christian who served their country and choose to exercise their 2A rights. To me that is just a person expressing their individual liberty and not political at all. Take Prime for example, he's black, owns a gun, and would probably consider himself a Patriot or atleast supportive of Patriotism as an good value for any citizen regardless of country. But none of that would put him on the right politically and I don't believe he considers himself a 'Republican' or even a 'conservative'. Any person regardless of race, sex, or sexual preference can be included in any of those groups you named. That is the opposite of identity politics as those groups you named are ALL inclusive, whereas w/ identity politics people are specifically separated based NOT on ideas or even values, but rather their immutable traits and those traits somehow give opinions more or less validity depending on some odd selective hierarchy of historical oppression.

The only identity politics I see getting played on right is with the extremists (neo-nazis, racists) who believe there skin color makes them somehow superior. We all agree that is a deplorable ideology.

I know we've spent enough time for one day on this so I appreciate the discussion on this. Til next time comrade. ;)
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12723
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:03 pm

DreadNaught wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:Identity politics is rampant across the country in general. The right uses patriotic imagery, religious zeal, a buncha guns, and super-veterans to draw a distinct line between the two viewpoints and you are just as quick to get smashed by your own side on the right as well as the left if you stray from orthodoxy.


You're mischaracterizing identity politics on the right there.

Patriotism, religion, gun ownership, and the military are all groups/ideals that are NOT bound by specific identity or immutable traits. It's pretty misguided to imply an individual must be on the the right (or it's a right wing strategy) if they are a Christian who served their country and choose to exercise their 2A rights. To me that is just a person expressing their individual liberty and not political at all. Take Prime for example, he's black, owns a gun, and would probably consider himself a Patriot or atleast supportive of Patriotism as an good value. But none of that would put him on the right politically and I don't believe he considers himself a 'Republican' or even a 'conservative'. Any person regardless of race, sex, or sexual preference can be included in any of those groups you named. That is the opposite of identity politics as those groups you named are ALL inclusive, whereas w/ identity politics people are specifically separated based NOT on ideas, but rather their immutable traits and those traits somehow give opinions more or less validity.

The only identity politics I see getting played on right is with the extremists (neo-nazis, racists) who believe there skin color makes them somehow superior. We all agree that is a deplorable ideology.

I think you're mischaracterizing Identity politics. Or at least limiting it to race, sex, or sexual orientation. It's much broader than that.

I'll give you an example. "I'm a veteran and I think X". That is identity politics particularly when topic X is unrelated to being a veteran. The person saying that lays out a credential intended to give brevity to his thoughts on X.

Then there's gatekeeping in Identity politics. "You can't be pro-choice and call yourself a conservative." Otherwise known as a "No true Scotsman" fallacy.

Point being. Identity politics is a "Who I am trumps who you are and what you think because who I am makes me right." And it very much exists in the right wing.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13187
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 629 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:29 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
You're mischaracterizing identity politics on the right there.

Patriotism, religion, gun ownership, and the military are all groups/ideals that are NOT bound by specific identity or immutable traits. It's pretty misguided to imply an individual must be on the the right (or it's a right wing strategy) if they are a Christian who served their country and choose to exercise their 2A rights. To me that is just a person expressing their individual liberty and not political at all. Take Prime for example, he's black, owns a gun, and would probably consider himself a Patriot or atleast supportive of Patriotism as an good value. But none of that would put him on the right politically and I don't believe he considers himself a 'Republican' or even a 'conservative'. Any person regardless of race, sex, or sexual preference can be included in any of those groups you named. That is the opposite of identity politics as those groups you named are ALL inclusive, whereas w/ identity politics people are specifically separated based NOT on ideas, but rather their immutable traits and those traits somehow give opinions more or less validity.

The only identity politics I see getting played on right is with the extremists (neo-nazis, racists) who believe there skin color makes them somehow superior. We all agree that is a deplorable ideology.

I think you're mischaracterizing Identity politics. Or at least limiting it to race, sex, or sexual orientation. It's much broader than that.

I'll give you an example. "I'm a veteran and I think X". That is identity politics particularly when topic X is unrelated to being a veteran. The person saying that lays out a credential intended to give brevity to his thoughts on X.

Then there's gatekeeping in Identity politics. "You can't be pro-choice and call yourself a conservative." Otherwise known as a "No true Scotsman" fallacy.

Point being. Identity politics is a "Who I am trumps who you are and what you think because who I am makes me right." And it very much exists in the right wing.


Fair enough, I disagree with that broader definition but even if that were the case I still don't believe that broader definition should have any validity in discourse/discussion and those who attempt to employ such a strategy should be called out. Perhaps we can agree the identity politics specific to immutable traits (race, gender, sexual preference) as I mentioned is a more predominate strategy used on the left than on the right.

But you're right that your broader definition is used on both sides and we hopefully can agree that either definition of identity politics is not useful in meaningful discussion.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12723
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Jordan Peterson

Postby Ken Carson » Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:05 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
You're mischaracterizing identity politics on the right there.

Patriotism, religion, gun ownership, and the military are all groups/ideals that are NOT bound by specific identity or immutable traits. It's pretty misguided to imply an individual must be on the the right (or it's a right wing strategy) if they are a Christian who served their country and choose to exercise their 2A rights. To me that is just a person expressing their individual liberty and not political at all. Take Prime for example, he's black, owns a gun, and would probably consider himself a Patriot or atleast supportive of Patriotism as an good value. But none of that would put him on the right politically and I don't believe he considers himself a 'Republican' or even a 'conservative'. Any person regardless of race, sex, or sexual preference can be included in any of those groups you named. That is the opposite of identity politics as those groups you named are ALL inclusive, whereas w/ identity politics people are specifically separated based NOT on ideas, but rather their immutable traits and those traits somehow give opinions more or less validity.

The only identity politics I see getting played on right is with the extremists (neo-nazis, racists) who believe there skin color makes them somehow superior. We all agree that is a deplorable ideology.

I think you're mischaracterizing Identity politics. Or at least limiting it to race, sex, or sexual orientation. It's much broader than that.

I'll give you an example. "I'm a veteran and I think X". That is identity politics particularly when topic X is unrelated to being a veteran. The person saying that lays out a credential intended to give brevity to his thoughts on X.

Then there's gatekeeping in Identity politics. "You can't be pro-choice and call yourself a conservative." Otherwise known as a "No true Scotsman" fallacy.

Point being. Identity politics is a "Who I am trumps who you are and what you think because who I am makes me right." And it very much exists in the right wing.


I think identity politics is deeper than either of those things. It's a way of seeing the world, fundamentally. If you believe that American society is an oppressive patriarchy, then you will approach all your political positions that way. If you believe America is a white supremacist country, same thing. If you believe that America is transphobic, again, same deal. You see the world in a us vs them mentality across numerous points of identity, with a goal of egalitarianism in some form. It's essentially tribalism at a dozen levels or more, and fundamentally collectivist, not individualistic.

To use your veteran example, if a veteran says 'I'm a veteran, and I think that abortion is murder,' he or she isn't playing identity politics. There isn't some grouping of veterans vs non veterans in the arena of abortion. At worst, the veteran is trying to give more weight to a individual opinion, which any reasonable person can say 'being a veteran has nothing to do with abortion, give me another reason to continue this discussion.' However, if a woman says 'I'm a woman, and I think that men shouldn't have a say in what I do with my body,' well, that is identity politics. The woman is saying that her opinion is more valid than a man's because she is a woman. Her being a woman does not give her any more or less moral superiority when debating whether abortion should be legal, nor should being a man undermine men from forming an opinion as to the moral nature of abortion.

The overall problems with identity politics is that 1.) there is no end to the intersectionality of different ways to categorize people until you reduce everyone to individuals, and 2.) the privileged identities are completely arbitrary (gender, race/ethnicity, sexuality vs. age, socioeconomic class, health) and not rational (black, latino vs Asian).
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 177 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests