"The thing about Marxists is that they exist beyond comprehension. Really, if you look into it, it's just crazy...

Jordan "What do Jung, Heidegger, and Nietzsche have in common" Peterson

This. For a psychologist anyone who wants to subvert the status quo is unhealthy. That's way most of them can't understand socialism and why most of them are brainlets.

more like Juden Patreon

>cursing people who further your agenda
you retards were DOA.

>To understand socialism and why it would work you must see it from a philosophical point of view.
This is the most retarded thing I've ever read, congratulations.

I'd go even further and claim that, if Peterson actually wrote any of this, he has absolutely no idea about classical Marxism (let alone the more recent variations) and not even about sociology's theories of conflict. What he says may suffice (and even conveniently oppose) under the views of SJWs (which, after all, know just as little as he does about conflict, with their intersectionality movement), but he is absolutely fighting a losing battle whenever he tries to make philosophical claims. For someone who says has learned from Jung he is failing pretty hard at the Jungian approach

he was a spy for the allies look it up

maybe if you have some of this for breakfast you'll things more clearly

But was he an antisemite?

Take note kids: this is the exact same thing the Marxists of the last century thought.

What happens after the revolution? Even if all of Marx's dreams came true, human life would be just as miserable and purposeless as before, if not more. That's what Jordan Peterson often tries to draw attention to.
>b-b-bt he doesn't understand Marx!!! Men after the revolution will be a completely different being, a free individual yadayada

youtu.be/IvBm0ZUfe7I
This?

>the absolute state of people too dumb to read Marx and instead latch on to the excrement of Marxist thought and justify doing this by citing the number of years that have passed since the coming of the Lord

>The thing about Marxists is that they exist beyond comprehension.
Literally everything is beyond comprehension when you're disingenuous.

>the utopian visions of Genesis.
The issue with this is your understanding of history depends on factious prejudice accounts from Jewish plagiarists rationalizing their state. There occurred an actual fall, of sorts, which can be dated historically to around the time of the agricultural revolution. This is when humanities epistemological and practical orientation towards nature became abstracted and instrumentalized. Those technological [in the broadest sense] developments eventually became autonomous and took control away from real humans; this is the source of generalized disempowerment, infantilization and dependence today. Technology controls us, we don't control technology.

>Humans are always meant to be in a state of conflict, like how two brothers compete for the same woman.
That may be so if you believe man is just another beast which seems to be Petersons understanding of man. His understanding of society is Malthusian.

>Which is why I think Christianity has much to say.
Peterson seems to be saying Judaism has a lot to teach us from what I can tell, Jesus doesn't seem to be of much interest him. :-P

A feeling of purposelessness and miserableness are the psychosomatic results of alienation

Can you fuck off? Have you even read anything today? Your shit does not belong on this board. We could be discussing literature but every thread is either a real Jordan Peterson thread or a thread making fun of Jordan Peterson threads.

>factious
* fictitious

>dude communism will cure depression and make life meaningful

you have to believe that otherwise you wasted probably a decade of your life reading Marxist literature

It would, though. La revolucion is not only an economic change but a complete change of paradigm in our understanding of the humanity. La revolucion doesn't stop until everyone is happy.

>I kind of doubt he actually said that
No shit, it's a shitty caricature meme
>God is Red
> you need to clean your room and accept malevolence before you even begin to think about how you're going to avoid the gulag

Psychology can only rationally be situated historically. You can't speak of mental life outside of any environment. Most people today are rendered impotent as a result of late capitalism.

or you just shoot the depressed in your marxist utopia, problem solved

maybe, but nothing about that statement you quoted seems all that “anti-semetic” to me. the idea that different peoples had different predispositions was assumed by everyone back then, and still today, and with good reason. But there’s also the possibility he had to write stuff like that to maintain appearances with the Germans.

>late capitalism

How much longer do you think capitalism has?
>inb4 hurr this is the end of history

ancient egypt had wage labor pal, that's capitalism according to Marx's definition. I don't even agree with that, if everyone became a free lancer today I wouldn't see it as a system collapse, it's just market economy which exists for centuries in various degrees and will continue to exists for centuries to come.

>human life would be just as miserable and purposeless as before, if not more.
It is almost as if that is not his goal in the first place but to eliminating the need for class and state...

then explain the alienation meme

You are incredibly ignorant and I doubt you have read anything related to Marx or capitalism or any economic system for that matter. Just because you would call something capitalism doesn't make it so, you are comparing apples and oranges.

A proletariat's alienation from his labor?

>The thing about Marxists is that they exist beyond comprehension.

Is he arguing for or against Marxism?

it's not a real quote you dummy

There didn't exist any large scale private enterprise in Ancient Egypt. The state mobilized labour for large scale state projects but it wasn't for any return on investment but for pure ideological purposes e.g. building pyramids or managing the water supply which gave the state massive powers. Artisans typically owned their own tools and made their own goods which they sold to merchants, factories never really took off in any big way in antiquity.

Egypt is an example of Asiatic Despotism, not something good but not capitalism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiatic_mode_of_production

You do what someone else commands you to do because there's no other option not because you understand why you should for ends you don't care to understand. This has been the case since the end of the palaeolithic. All civilization has essiently been based on some form of alienation.

What kind of a psychologist struggles with the concept of collectivism?

Ah yes the daily Veeky Forums thread where the retarded commies get triggered by Peterson

It's a critique of the capitalistic system, brainlet. It's not in any shape or form a solution. Do the bare minimum and read a fucking wiki article on the subject before exposing your general lack of a high school level education.

They may understand collectivism as an abstraction, but the people who strives for collectivism often do it because they aren't capable of thriving on their own in an individualist society. So Peterson, because he's a psychologist and not a philosopher, when he studies socialism (just as he does with postmodernism) he doesn't study socialism in itself but the psychology of socialists, and, because of his normative standards, he deems them mentally unhealthy for not fitting in society. Of course they not fit, but he doesn't get that's the very reason why socialism is needed.

By understanding all of this it's easy to understand why he can't see the merits of socialism. He can't help himself. He's incapable of seeing the big picture.

This, Peterson is a psychologist, not a philosopher, not a sociologist, not an economist, and most importantly not someone who sees the forest for the trees when it comes to society.

Great post.

...

>speed speed speed.jpg
is he a landian?

stop responding to yourself, memerson aside it was just a meaningless post throwing the word philosophy around without saying anything of value

yes

>I kind of doubt he actually said that, but the reason why Peterson doesn't understand socialism is because he sees it from the perspective of a psychologist instead of a philosopher, so all he sees are a bunch of inadequate, mentally unhealthy people latching to an utopian idea, hoping it will solve their inadequacies.

>This. For a psychologist anyone who wants to subvert the status quo is unhealthy.

In all honesty this is a very rational explanation. Now the problem is when an outsider like him comes along and even suggest leftists are maladapted (many of them are, let's be honest any movement has its fair share of damaged people) the leftists work themselves into a defensive frenzy and start labelling everything with the "F" word, which only confirms Kermit's points. It's like the Streisand effect, the more leftists fight him the strongest he becomes.

I highly doubt it

It's funny that you and Peterson both fail to see that by labeling entire swaths of people mentally ill and dehumanizing them ("leftists", "marxists", "post modernists") you set upon the same path as the Nazi's. Even if it's true that some people who make up the modern left are devious or misleading in their ways, to then label everyone who associates with them as equally reprehensible rather than misled sheep is dangerous. It's understandable for ignorant students to fall for this kinds of "Us vs Them" mentality but for Peterson, who references Nietzsche as often as he does, to not see this is kind of unforgivable.

Lmao what the fuck is wrong with you? almost as mentally deranged as poltards. You just quoted the ONLY words of Jung on jews, in his 40books and 60 years career. Jung was asked by the nazis to come to berlin to check on hitler, he told them to fuck off. take your meds.

Peterson is whack honestly. But he has the merit to quote the most insightful authors of the last centuries. Everyone is better off reading his sources.

I was a leftist you know, clearly I had issues. Now that doesn't make things like critical theory wrong or mischievous, they are clearly on to something, I am just saying if you are attracted to this kind of thing in the first place life must not be working out for you, successful people can afford to just stay milquetoast centrist liberals and don't rock the boat because they have something to lose. Saying that doesn't make me a nazi, that's just as fallacious as when Peterson says "letting people pick their pronouns is a slippery slope to gulags".

How does Peterson further my agenda?

I want Nicky on the Russel podcast.

Imagine the battle of word salad

pseud acceptance

>if you are attracted to this kind of thing in the first place life must not be working out for you, successful people can afford to just stay milquetoast centrist liberals and don't rock the boat because they have something to lose.
So anybody who looks at the West's decline into hedonistic pleasure and conspicuous consumption with contempt is not speaking out because hey at least they have a big screen TV and high speed internet? That is a very simplistic view of society, culture, and people as a whole, especially when you take that perspective from a small group of suburbanite teenagers and apply them to everyone who complains about this sinking ship. Also I'm not calling anyone a Nazi in a literal sense, but rather by dismissing people for their supposed ideology or "identity" as an "other" or an enemy, people like Peterson promote tribalism and being reactionary rather than compromise or even conversation.

Honestly I like a lot of what Peterson has to say when it comes to individuals and how people should rely on themselves for their identity rather than giving themselves over to a larger ideological body, but he is way too conservative and traditional when it comes to looking at society as a whole and worst of all he seems like a person who believes in the end of history.

>so all he sees are a bunch of inadequate, mentally unhealthy people latching to an utopian idea, hoping it will solve their inadequacies.
This statement doesn't make me think he's wrong.

no

All Petersonites are melodramatic faggots

youtube.com/watch?v=ZQTGc4uaiRM

He's against identitarianism, not socialism. His main concern is that simplistic ideologies that group people based on factors like race, gender, and class are not strong enough to sustain a productive world-view on which to build a society. He worries that we'll see a repeat of communism in that a political movement of the resentful will lower everybody to their level.

No, he is staunchly against socialism even though on some interviews he has conceded that wealth needs to be fed to the lowest caste in society, he still believes that any kind of "marxist" ideology will always end in genocide.

Marxism was one of the foundational ideas behind the rise of sociology. The theories of conflict are literally just Marxism abstracted from the economic realm (and I'm not saying this to criticize them).

Peterson has often said he was more influenced by Piaget than Jung. Either way, it's stupid to hold someone to the standard of someone else's thought. We can (and should) have many deep differences between our views and those who formed our intellectual framework while still being loyal to them.

Do you think he would consider the beta uprising a form of marxism?

Define "beta uprising"

Capitalism will end once the Oligarchs take control. We are nearing that phase. Welcome to Feudalism 2.0.

Really makes you think

>jung

He should just kill himself at this point

He has stated many times that he's center-left on economic issues (this by Canadian standards). He's not anti-socialist. He hasn't "conceded" that the poor need to be "fed" - he's expressed deep concern for the prioritization of the bottom 80%'s dignity as the Pareto distribution leaves them behind (which is a statistical inevitability in any society - even socialist and communist). His views in that respect are a hybrid of socialism and paternal Catholicism/Orthodoxy, which has always been sympathetic to socialism's goal of ensuring the dignity of the masses.

You're just wrong.

Do you think you've made a point? Peterson does call himself a classic liberal and he is pretty well defined as center left, but as with all people his thought process is much more complex than that. I remember an interview where he said universal income was a completely stupid idea, yet he also believes that the poor need a way to get back into the "game" of capitalism. He is too focused on the psychoanalysis of the vocal minority of the progressive left than he is in actually discussing economic policy because he is a psychologist and not an economist nor is he a philosopher.

>he said universal income was a completely stupid idea, yet he also believes that the poor need a way to get back into the "game" of capitalism.

>yet

don't you mean 'and'

My point was that he's sympathetic to what has classically been referred to as socialism. Your point seems to be that his lack of sympathy with an isolated, far left trend makes him a right-winger. And for that manner, "classical liberal" includes New Deal and Great Society Democrats these days. It's a catch all that refers to anything vaguely liberal rather than left.

I'm not the one in need to sharpening, bucko.

>My point was that he's sympathetic to what has classically been referred to as socialism
And I think that is your opinion and not his.

Maybe we should make a new board for all the lit marxists? They can get triggered by Peterson in their own little board? Then they would stop spamming threads about him

This guy rooms >not beautiful

So what's your alternative?

Socialism is indeed a belief system, which is why it should never be taken seriously as an economic standard, much less as the basis of a system of government.

>La revolucion doesn't stop until everyone is happy

This was embarrassing. It would somehow be less cringey if he were wearing a Guy Fawkes mask.

I'm sure these words cut him deeply.
Especially "desu."

Considering he went on a twitter rant against a Zizek quotebot because Zizek wrote a pretty tame article about him, it wouldn't surprise me.

desu

Hey Jordan, congrats on the yuge book sales.

>he went on a twitter rant against a Zizek quotebot
That was a Chad move and you know it very well.

>So what's your alternative?
Simplicity, frugality, asceticism, celibacy.

>because Zizek wrote a pretty tame article about him, it wouldn't surprise me.
he probably doesn't know that Zizek doesn't even care about the articles he writes, and he just does it for the $$$

>he went on a twitter rant against a Zizek quotebot
I'm imagining him droning on in his canadian kermit voice at one of those arcade machines (like in the movie Big) only of zizek instead of a "psychic gypsy" and every time he stops a piece of paper with a zizek quote comes out and he starts again

Fuck off tradfag

Nietzsche is pro-Jewish though. He sees Jews as Ubermensch potential

Jordan Peterson has more impact on the world than 99% of today's academics. It's like people have forgotten, it's the big men that change history. Peterson, Bryan Caplan, Nehisi Coates, Zizek, Scott Alexander, these are today's thought leaders.

>please keep listening to me. I have no real applicable life skills and will die.

Reading his sources has been amazing

You're like a cult. You believe all this crazy shit with no emperical evidence to support it and preach it as fact to anyone who will listen. People have believed batshit crazy religious ideas for all of human history with nothing to back them up. There's almost nothing in your biology that separates you from any of them. They we're just as smart as you are, and you have fallen into the exact same behavioral pattern. You're in a cult. Get some fresh air.

>just as fallacious as when Peterson says "letting people pick their pronouns is a slippery slope to gulags".

This is not his position. You can argue that the government legally requiring you to comply with pronoun demands isn't the crossing of the Rubicon he claims it to be, but saying he's arguing that people picking their pronouns is the point of contention is being either insincere or not familiar with the discussion.

I do think it would be interesting to see him have some arguments with better representatives of the left. I think it's a bit disingenuous to claim he promotes such tribalism while at the same time he keeps pushing so hard against white identitarianism.

You're the one in a cult, defending capitalism when it has completely dehumanize you.

100 IQ

(source needed)