GordonGekko
Footballguy
VIDEO: Why Don't Leftists Like Facts? | With Jordan Peterson May 8, 2022
Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro discuss why leftists do everything they possibly can to avoid facts.
".... if you stand up against the radical left, you’re in a group that also has Nazis in it; because the Nazis also stand up against the radical left. So it’s perfectly reasonable— from a strategic perspective— for the radical leftists to say well you’re against us, how do we know you’re not a Nazi? It’s like well, statistically, I’m probably not. So there’s that. But you could say at least the question is open. But, but then the next part of it comes is that— ..... because if I’m reasonable and I’m standing up against the radical left and they admit that I’m reasonable, then there has to be an admission that reasonable people could stand up against the radical left; which kind of implies that the radical left isn’t that reasonable. And so, well, they’re not going to go there. Of course they’re not that reasonable, they’re unreasonable beyond belief...."
"..... Overwhelmingly. But they’re very well organized, and verbal, and prepared minority. And they’ve occupied powerful positions in many, many institutions. HR— one of the things that I can’t figure out right now is for anybody who’s running a company that’s listening they should think this through, like to let these postmodern neo-Marxists into your company through the guise of human resources is an absolute catastrophe; you’re going to pay for that. It’s the ideology that drives post modern neo-Marxism, this identity politics— what, the identity politics movement and it’s insistence on equality of outcome is a powerfully anti-capitalistic. It’s powerfully anti-Western. Why you would let that into your company is so that you can look good socially that say is beyond me it’s a big mistake...."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrqqpUQtFwc
https://erikamentari.wordpress.com/2018/02/27/jre-1070-jordan-peterson-transcript/
VIDEO: Jordan Peterson – Compassion and Envy Drive the Left Aug 8, 2018
Jordan Peterson talks about what drives the left.
"....Equality of outcome. I can’t imagine anything we can possibly strive for in our society that would make it into hell faster than equality of outcome. Like, the historical— the historical evidence for the pathology of that root is so strong, it’s like, you have to be historically ignorant beyond belief, or malevolent, or resentful beyond comprehension in order to think that that’s a good idea or to argue for that....."
"....If we’re going to play this game called capitalism— which we are all agreeing is probably at least in the models that we have right now is the best one that we have— if we’re all going to play this game, if someone decides to be the Michael Jordan of capitalism; you can’t stop them. You can’t say no, no, no, no you’re playing this game too well, you’re playing this game too hard, you’re too obsessed with this game. ....And you know there’s a couple of things that are really worth delving into in regards to that too because there’s this sort of Marxist notion that all of this inequality is generated as a consequence of capitalism. And that’s actually technically false because if you look at— there seems to be something like a law of nature that’s described by this statistical model called the Pareto distribution..... And it basically suggests that in any creative domain there is going to be a small number of people will do almost all of the output but it doesn’t just apply to human beings, it applies to the heights of trees in the Amazon rain forest, it applies to the size of cities, and it applies to the mass of stars; which is— and it’s something like the more you have the more you get...... But this- this- this phenomena where a small number of people end up controlling a tremendous proportion of the resource is not only limited to money; and doesn’t only occur in capitalist societies. It occurs everywhere; it’s like a natural law...."
"....How much tyranny you have to impose in order to produce something like equality of outcome? And Thomas Sowell has talked a little about this too. He said— what the people who are agitating for equality of outcome don’t understand is that you have to cede so much power to the authorities to the government in order to ensure equality of outcome that a tyranny is inevitable. And that’s right. And the other— another problem with equality of outcome, this is also a big technical problem; it’s like, well, what measure of outcome? You know, there’s lots of outcomes; like, how happy are you, how much pain are you in, how healthy are you, how much money do you have, how much opportunity for movement forward do you have, what’s the width of your social connections, like, what’s the quality of your friendships? Do you have exposure to arts and literature, like, you know you can multiply the number of dimensions of evaluations between people, innumerably, right? ...."
"......Because there’s all sorts of ways to classify people. You’re going to get equality of outcome on every one of those measures? It’s like, is everyone going to have to be equally happy in their relationship? And if not, why not? Why stop with economic, why stop with pay? There’s no place to stop. So, and that’s a huge technical problem because there is no place to stop there will be no stopping. It’s like nobody can have anything else— nobody can have anything else that everyone else doesn’t have at the same time. That’s the ultimate outcome of equality of outcome. Well, you think about what that would mean? It’s terrible. Well, instantly you think, oh, well, there’s nothing but a tyrannical system could impose that...."
"....Like, nobody likes the fact that homeless people exist ....and so if you have some compassion, then you think well we got to do more for the poor and dispossessed. It’s like, okay, that’s an understandable sentiment. But the problem is, is that the people....that desire to help is contaminated by resentment and ideological certainty, and then also by something that’s George Orwell pointed out so nicely in his book, Road To Wigan Pier...... It’s like, the typical middle class socialist— this was his diagnosis and he was a socialist, by the way— his diagnosis was, the typical middle-class, intellectual socialist doesn’t like the poor. In fact, they don’t want to have anything to do with the poor, they’re contemptuous of the poor; but they hate the rich. And I think it’s even more devious than that because I think who they hate are the successful. Some of the successful are rich but really who they hate is the successful. It’s like Cain and Abel. It’s the retelling of Cain and Abel.....and the people who are really driven by the radical left ideology, the real radicals, they’re almost all driven by by resentment and hatred, as far as I’m concerned...."
"....Everyone’s a victim. You can tell that story. The problem is, if you tell that story and you start to act it out, you make all of that worse. That’s the problem....It’s a much better game to play individual, it’s like; get your act together, stand up in the world, make something of yourself, stay away from the ideological oversimplifications, set your house order— ... set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world......"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2_ltkEyi0I
https://erikamentari.wordpress.com/2018/02/27/jre-1070-jordan-peterson-transcript/
VIDEO: Jordan Peterson & Ben Shapiro - Why the Left Hates the Hierarchy "Jealous of the Successful" Dec 18, 2018
Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro talk more politics and meaning.
Jordan B. Peterson's taught mythology to lawyers, doctors and business people, consulted for the UN Secretary General, helped his clinical clients manage depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, anxiety, and schizophrenia, served as an adviser to senior partners of major Canadian law firms, and lectured extensively in North America and Europe. With his students and colleagues at Harvard and the University of Toronto, Dr. Peterson has published over a hundred scientific papers, transforming the modern understanding of personality, while his book Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief revolutionized the psychology of religion. His latest book is 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5uE9CbQutE
VIDEO: Jordan Peterson: The fatal flaw in leftist American politics | Big Think Apr 12, 2018
What is political extremism? Professor of psychology Jordan Peterson points out that America knows what right-wing radicalism looks like: white nationalism. "What's interesting is that on the conservative side of the spectrum, we've figured out how to box-in the radicals and say, 'No, you're outside the domain of acceptable opinion,'" says Peterson. But where's that line for the Left? There is no universal marker of what extreme liberalism looks like, which is devastating to the ideology itself but also to political discourse as a whole...."
Peterson is happy to suggest such a marker: "The doctrine of equality of outcome. It seems to me that that's where people who are thoughtful on the Left should draw the line, and say no. Equality of opportunity? [That's] not only fair enough, but laudable. But equality of outcome…? It's like: 'No, you've crossed the line. We're not going there with you.....'"
Peterson argues that it's the ethical responsibility of left-leaning people to identify liberal extremism and distinguish themselves from it the same way conservatives distance themselves from the doctrine of racial superiority. Failing to recognize such extremism may be liberalism's fatal flaw....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UVUnUnWfHI
VIDEO: Joe Rogan - Jordan Peterson: Why Identity Politics Lead to Totalitarian Oppression Nov 29, 2018
".....Well, the thing is, like most things, it’s complicated, you know? So, are men and women more similar or more different? Well, it depends on how you define the terms first. But they’re more similar. Well why? Well, they’re the same species. So we could start with that. But the question is what are the differences and how do they manifest themselves and are those manifestations important? ...So, relatively small differences in the average can produce walloping differences at the extremes. People don’t understand that. It’s not surprising because it actually requires a fairly sophisticated grasp of statistics, but when we’re talking about things like differential outcome in the workplace, um, then you have to take a sophisticated statistical approach to it, or you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about..... And that unfortunately many of the people who are talking about gender differences they have no idea what they are talking about, they don’t know the literature, they don’t know there is a literature..... They don’t understand biology, like the social constructionist types, the women’s studies types, the neo-Marxists, they don’t give a damn about biology. It’s like they inhabit some disembodied universe...."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtFFlDMnaJs
https://erikamentari.wordpress.com/2018/02/27/jre-1070-jordan-peterson-transcript/
******
Disclaimer: (I paired up the videos above with Joe Rogan/Jordan Peterson transcripts from JRE#1070 to add context to Peterson's viewpoints on equality of outcome and how it's been weaponized without real purpose nor real function by the radical left. Point to note, Peterson is from Canada so some of his perspective is clearly within the lenses of specific politics in his own country. Also Peterson tends to interchange the terms "left" and "radical left" at times. Clearly he's not treating the entire Democratic Party in the United States as a monolith. )
“The world is inexhaustible, we can each have a unique destiny” – Jordan Peterson
Jordan Peterson points out that the (radical) left don't like facts because it forces them to continue to unpack the entire story while it's the easier and lazier path to only deal with the first half of the narrative - that systems and hierarchies in place are corrupt and move towards greater evil and must be aggressively and even violently opposed. And thus relying on half the story creates an excuse and moral justification to do anything and everything to broker war against your perceived "enemy"
So what is the rest of the narrative?
Peterson believes that the basis of identity politics is a pathology built upon misguided "compassion" for those who submit completely to their ideology and then pair that with envy, resentment and eventual violence to anyone deemed more "successful" than them. ( He cites the classic religious story of Cain and Abel) And part of the reason that the path to violence is so easy is because there are no guardrails. There is no limit to the the radical leftist ideology. There is no "going too far"
But what is equality of outcome? Peterson argues that it's impossible to achieve and even moreso undesirable to achieve. Impossible because it's there is no equality of outcome in nature, much of that driven by natural selection, which is always on the hunt to weed us out of existence. And that there are too many variables in real day to day life to try to sort out this mythical "equality". Undesirable because the only large scale methodology to even attempt such a massive misguided social "experiment" can only happen with a completely tyrannical authoritarian regime, filled with those who actually hate the successful but secretly despise the downtrodden that their virtue signals claim are their wards and need their constant watchful protection from all "institutions" save their own. And that the real loss of this madness is real individual agency.
Peterson describes the allure of the radical left, particularly on the young, poor and outraged, where any form of success that is paired with relentless spirit, morality, ethics and real virtue will been seen as a "judge" on the inaction of the fully woke to move beyond blame. Which lines up with the standard Gekko-ism that it's very little about you that angers people, it's how what you do and say and what you are makes others feel about themselves in either a positive or negative light. And if it's wholly negative, then they despise you and seek to hunt you down. Your "success" can only be tolerated if it's considered arbitrary, because it would remove the function of merit upon the pathway towards real achievement.
But here's where the cycle gets ugly and stays deadly. Peterson talks about the role of intersectionality within identity politics as the main driver for the radical left. He points out that if you fill the world with victims, and break then down in more and more groups, eventually they will fall into a group that will have to take it's turn as being the "oppressor" of someone else. Exponentially turning everyone into a victim requires exponentially forcing someone to take the role of the "oppressor" Thus the saying, "The Radical Left Eats Itself" and the basic Gekko-ism that everyone is on the cancel culture list, everyone is going to get hunted eventually, some people's names are just written a little further down. Because if the Republicans and Conservatives are eventually wiped out, who becomes the new "right wing"? The moderates won't be seen as in the middle anymore. They'll be the new immediate targets. The undecideds will be seen as not ideologically committed enough and will be hunted down too. And of course, all your children will have to take their turn lined up against that wall. Because cultural and social terrorists are really no different than any other terrorists, to justify their outrage, someone needs to eventually fail the increasing standards of said purity tests and be burned alive to defend the moral justification built around hiding that clear resentment and envy.
Is Jordan Peterson right? Are there no limits in place for the radical left?
*******
Here's my own answer -
VIDEO: 'Do You Believe That Men Can Become Pregnant?': Dan Bishop Questions Pro-Choice House Witnesses May 19, 2022
At yesterday's House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC) questioned pro-choice witnesses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LudP6s_Is0k
'Do You Believe That Men Can Become Pregnant?'
"Yes"
*******
^
That's just plain idiotic. If you say that's idiotic, you'll be labeled a bigot and transphobic and any other number of smears. But there is just a level of complete insanity there that goes beyond total comprehension. So yes, I agree with Jordan Peterson, there are clearly no limits on the radical left, no guard rails, no borders, no ceiling to just whatever they want to make up out of thin air whenever it's politically expedient to do so.
Facts don't give one single damn about anyone's feelings, and the radical left is only concerned with feelings because it's the cheapest dirtiest way to manipulate other people. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. You are not however entitled to your own personal set of facts because it fits a particular woke agenda.
That's my viewpoint. What is your viewpoint on what Jordan Peterson has to say about all this?
Do you agree? Do you agree that the (radical) left doesn't like facts?
“The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.” -Ayn Rand
Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro discuss why leftists do everything they possibly can to avoid facts.
".... if you stand up against the radical left, you’re in a group that also has Nazis in it; because the Nazis also stand up against the radical left. So it’s perfectly reasonable— from a strategic perspective— for the radical leftists to say well you’re against us, how do we know you’re not a Nazi? It’s like well, statistically, I’m probably not. So there’s that. But you could say at least the question is open. But, but then the next part of it comes is that— ..... because if I’m reasonable and I’m standing up against the radical left and they admit that I’m reasonable, then there has to be an admission that reasonable people could stand up against the radical left; which kind of implies that the radical left isn’t that reasonable. And so, well, they’re not going to go there. Of course they’re not that reasonable, they’re unreasonable beyond belief...."
"..... Overwhelmingly. But they’re very well organized, and verbal, and prepared minority. And they’ve occupied powerful positions in many, many institutions. HR— one of the things that I can’t figure out right now is for anybody who’s running a company that’s listening they should think this through, like to let these postmodern neo-Marxists into your company through the guise of human resources is an absolute catastrophe; you’re going to pay for that. It’s the ideology that drives post modern neo-Marxism, this identity politics— what, the identity politics movement and it’s insistence on equality of outcome is a powerfully anti-capitalistic. It’s powerfully anti-Western. Why you would let that into your company is so that you can look good socially that say is beyond me it’s a big mistake...."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrqqpUQtFwc
https://erikamentari.wordpress.com/2018/02/27/jre-1070-jordan-peterson-transcript/
VIDEO: Jordan Peterson – Compassion and Envy Drive the Left Aug 8, 2018
Jordan Peterson talks about what drives the left.
"....Equality of outcome. I can’t imagine anything we can possibly strive for in our society that would make it into hell faster than equality of outcome. Like, the historical— the historical evidence for the pathology of that root is so strong, it’s like, you have to be historically ignorant beyond belief, or malevolent, or resentful beyond comprehension in order to think that that’s a good idea or to argue for that....."
"....If we’re going to play this game called capitalism— which we are all agreeing is probably at least in the models that we have right now is the best one that we have— if we’re all going to play this game, if someone decides to be the Michael Jordan of capitalism; you can’t stop them. You can’t say no, no, no, no you’re playing this game too well, you’re playing this game too hard, you’re too obsessed with this game. ....And you know there’s a couple of things that are really worth delving into in regards to that too because there’s this sort of Marxist notion that all of this inequality is generated as a consequence of capitalism. And that’s actually technically false because if you look at— there seems to be something like a law of nature that’s described by this statistical model called the Pareto distribution..... And it basically suggests that in any creative domain there is going to be a small number of people will do almost all of the output but it doesn’t just apply to human beings, it applies to the heights of trees in the Amazon rain forest, it applies to the size of cities, and it applies to the mass of stars; which is— and it’s something like the more you have the more you get...... But this- this- this phenomena where a small number of people end up controlling a tremendous proportion of the resource is not only limited to money; and doesn’t only occur in capitalist societies. It occurs everywhere; it’s like a natural law...."
"....How much tyranny you have to impose in order to produce something like equality of outcome? And Thomas Sowell has talked a little about this too. He said— what the people who are agitating for equality of outcome don’t understand is that you have to cede so much power to the authorities to the government in order to ensure equality of outcome that a tyranny is inevitable. And that’s right. And the other— another problem with equality of outcome, this is also a big technical problem; it’s like, well, what measure of outcome? You know, there’s lots of outcomes; like, how happy are you, how much pain are you in, how healthy are you, how much money do you have, how much opportunity for movement forward do you have, what’s the width of your social connections, like, what’s the quality of your friendships? Do you have exposure to arts and literature, like, you know you can multiply the number of dimensions of evaluations between people, innumerably, right? ...."
"......Because there’s all sorts of ways to classify people. You’re going to get equality of outcome on every one of those measures? It’s like, is everyone going to have to be equally happy in their relationship? And if not, why not? Why stop with economic, why stop with pay? There’s no place to stop. So, and that’s a huge technical problem because there is no place to stop there will be no stopping. It’s like nobody can have anything else— nobody can have anything else that everyone else doesn’t have at the same time. That’s the ultimate outcome of equality of outcome. Well, you think about what that would mean? It’s terrible. Well, instantly you think, oh, well, there’s nothing but a tyrannical system could impose that...."
"....Like, nobody likes the fact that homeless people exist ....and so if you have some compassion, then you think well we got to do more for the poor and dispossessed. It’s like, okay, that’s an understandable sentiment. But the problem is, is that the people....that desire to help is contaminated by resentment and ideological certainty, and then also by something that’s George Orwell pointed out so nicely in his book, Road To Wigan Pier...... It’s like, the typical middle class socialist— this was his diagnosis and he was a socialist, by the way— his diagnosis was, the typical middle-class, intellectual socialist doesn’t like the poor. In fact, they don’t want to have anything to do with the poor, they’re contemptuous of the poor; but they hate the rich. And I think it’s even more devious than that because I think who they hate are the successful. Some of the successful are rich but really who they hate is the successful. It’s like Cain and Abel. It’s the retelling of Cain and Abel.....and the people who are really driven by the radical left ideology, the real radicals, they’re almost all driven by by resentment and hatred, as far as I’m concerned...."
"....Everyone’s a victim. You can tell that story. The problem is, if you tell that story and you start to act it out, you make all of that worse. That’s the problem....It’s a much better game to play individual, it’s like; get your act together, stand up in the world, make something of yourself, stay away from the ideological oversimplifications, set your house order— ... set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world......"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2_ltkEyi0I
https://erikamentari.wordpress.com/2018/02/27/jre-1070-jordan-peterson-transcript/
VIDEO: Jordan Peterson & Ben Shapiro - Why the Left Hates the Hierarchy "Jealous of the Successful" Dec 18, 2018
Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro talk more politics and meaning.
Jordan B. Peterson's taught mythology to lawyers, doctors and business people, consulted for the UN Secretary General, helped his clinical clients manage depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, anxiety, and schizophrenia, served as an adviser to senior partners of major Canadian law firms, and lectured extensively in North America and Europe. With his students and colleagues at Harvard and the University of Toronto, Dr. Peterson has published over a hundred scientific papers, transforming the modern understanding of personality, while his book Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief revolutionized the psychology of religion. His latest book is 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5uE9CbQutE
VIDEO: Jordan Peterson: The fatal flaw in leftist American politics | Big Think Apr 12, 2018
What is political extremism? Professor of psychology Jordan Peterson points out that America knows what right-wing radicalism looks like: white nationalism. "What's interesting is that on the conservative side of the spectrum, we've figured out how to box-in the radicals and say, 'No, you're outside the domain of acceptable opinion,'" says Peterson. But where's that line for the Left? There is no universal marker of what extreme liberalism looks like, which is devastating to the ideology itself but also to political discourse as a whole...."
Peterson is happy to suggest such a marker: "The doctrine of equality of outcome. It seems to me that that's where people who are thoughtful on the Left should draw the line, and say no. Equality of opportunity? [That's] not only fair enough, but laudable. But equality of outcome…? It's like: 'No, you've crossed the line. We're not going there with you.....'"
Peterson argues that it's the ethical responsibility of left-leaning people to identify liberal extremism and distinguish themselves from it the same way conservatives distance themselves from the doctrine of racial superiority. Failing to recognize such extremism may be liberalism's fatal flaw....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UVUnUnWfHI
VIDEO: Joe Rogan - Jordan Peterson: Why Identity Politics Lead to Totalitarian Oppression Nov 29, 2018
".....Well, the thing is, like most things, it’s complicated, you know? So, are men and women more similar or more different? Well, it depends on how you define the terms first. But they’re more similar. Well why? Well, they’re the same species. So we could start with that. But the question is what are the differences and how do they manifest themselves and are those manifestations important? ...So, relatively small differences in the average can produce walloping differences at the extremes. People don’t understand that. It’s not surprising because it actually requires a fairly sophisticated grasp of statistics, but when we’re talking about things like differential outcome in the workplace, um, then you have to take a sophisticated statistical approach to it, or you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about..... And that unfortunately many of the people who are talking about gender differences they have no idea what they are talking about, they don’t know the literature, they don’t know there is a literature..... They don’t understand biology, like the social constructionist types, the women’s studies types, the neo-Marxists, they don’t give a damn about biology. It’s like they inhabit some disembodied universe...."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtFFlDMnaJs
https://erikamentari.wordpress.com/2018/02/27/jre-1070-jordan-peterson-transcript/
******
Disclaimer: (I paired up the videos above with Joe Rogan/Jordan Peterson transcripts from JRE#1070 to add context to Peterson's viewpoints on equality of outcome and how it's been weaponized without real purpose nor real function by the radical left. Point to note, Peterson is from Canada so some of his perspective is clearly within the lenses of specific politics in his own country. Also Peterson tends to interchange the terms "left" and "radical left" at times. Clearly he's not treating the entire Democratic Party in the United States as a monolith. )
“The world is inexhaustible, we can each have a unique destiny” – Jordan Peterson
Jordan Peterson points out that the (radical) left don't like facts because it forces them to continue to unpack the entire story while it's the easier and lazier path to only deal with the first half of the narrative - that systems and hierarchies in place are corrupt and move towards greater evil and must be aggressively and even violently opposed. And thus relying on half the story creates an excuse and moral justification to do anything and everything to broker war against your perceived "enemy"
So what is the rest of the narrative?
Peterson believes that the basis of identity politics is a pathology built upon misguided "compassion" for those who submit completely to their ideology and then pair that with envy, resentment and eventual violence to anyone deemed more "successful" than them. ( He cites the classic religious story of Cain and Abel) And part of the reason that the path to violence is so easy is because there are no guardrails. There is no limit to the the radical leftist ideology. There is no "going too far"
But what is equality of outcome? Peterson argues that it's impossible to achieve and even moreso undesirable to achieve. Impossible because it's there is no equality of outcome in nature, much of that driven by natural selection, which is always on the hunt to weed us out of existence. And that there are too many variables in real day to day life to try to sort out this mythical "equality". Undesirable because the only large scale methodology to even attempt such a massive misguided social "experiment" can only happen with a completely tyrannical authoritarian regime, filled with those who actually hate the successful but secretly despise the downtrodden that their virtue signals claim are their wards and need their constant watchful protection from all "institutions" save their own. And that the real loss of this madness is real individual agency.
Peterson describes the allure of the radical left, particularly on the young, poor and outraged, where any form of success that is paired with relentless spirit, morality, ethics and real virtue will been seen as a "judge" on the inaction of the fully woke to move beyond blame. Which lines up with the standard Gekko-ism that it's very little about you that angers people, it's how what you do and say and what you are makes others feel about themselves in either a positive or negative light. And if it's wholly negative, then they despise you and seek to hunt you down. Your "success" can only be tolerated if it's considered arbitrary, because it would remove the function of merit upon the pathway towards real achievement.
But here's where the cycle gets ugly and stays deadly. Peterson talks about the role of intersectionality within identity politics as the main driver for the radical left. He points out that if you fill the world with victims, and break then down in more and more groups, eventually they will fall into a group that will have to take it's turn as being the "oppressor" of someone else. Exponentially turning everyone into a victim requires exponentially forcing someone to take the role of the "oppressor" Thus the saying, "The Radical Left Eats Itself" and the basic Gekko-ism that everyone is on the cancel culture list, everyone is going to get hunted eventually, some people's names are just written a little further down. Because if the Republicans and Conservatives are eventually wiped out, who becomes the new "right wing"? The moderates won't be seen as in the middle anymore. They'll be the new immediate targets. The undecideds will be seen as not ideologically committed enough and will be hunted down too. And of course, all your children will have to take their turn lined up against that wall. Because cultural and social terrorists are really no different than any other terrorists, to justify their outrage, someone needs to eventually fail the increasing standards of said purity tests and be burned alive to defend the moral justification built around hiding that clear resentment and envy.
Is Jordan Peterson right? Are there no limits in place for the radical left?
*******
Here's my own answer -
VIDEO: 'Do You Believe That Men Can Become Pregnant?': Dan Bishop Questions Pro-Choice House Witnesses May 19, 2022
At yesterday's House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC) questioned pro-choice witnesses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LudP6s_Is0k
'Do You Believe That Men Can Become Pregnant?'
"Yes"
*******
^
That's just plain idiotic. If you say that's idiotic, you'll be labeled a bigot and transphobic and any other number of smears. But there is just a level of complete insanity there that goes beyond total comprehension. So yes, I agree with Jordan Peterson, there are clearly no limits on the radical left, no guard rails, no borders, no ceiling to just whatever they want to make up out of thin air whenever it's politically expedient to do so.
Facts don't give one single damn about anyone's feelings, and the radical left is only concerned with feelings because it's the cheapest dirtiest way to manipulate other people. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. You are not however entitled to your own personal set of facts because it fits a particular woke agenda.
That's my viewpoint. What is your viewpoint on what Jordan Peterson has to say about all this?
Do you agree? Do you agree that the (radical) left doesn't like facts?
“The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.” -Ayn Rand
Last edited by a moderator:
