ITT: Lectures on history or philosophy that have blown your mind

>Jordan Peterson

I sure do love psychiatrists pretending to be philosophers on Youtube.

>Based on user being a contrarian faggot.
>Guy become's popular on the internet, so now some people are mandated to be aimlessly critical.

More like:
>guy is unknown charlatan
>people don't bring him up
>guy becomes famous charlatan
>people talk about what a fraud he is

>psychiatrist
he's a psychologist
pls

Did japmoot remove (You)'s?
I didn't get one here.

t. triggered because he called out the left for being overly sensitive free speech hating faggots that ruined the humanities

I don't think he's a charletan. He has some tendencies to use semantics in a decieving way which ruins some of his legit interesting points and he's always walking dangerously close to just seeing what he wants to see in things, but I think he's a genuinely well-meaning person seeking truth.

it was obvious to me from day one when I heard the joe rogan podcast that this is the exact response that he was going to get. Not tackling any of his ideas directly, but just trying to attack his credentials. Pathetic.

I usually don't like Ted Talks, but this one really made me think

youtube.com/watch?v=-yFhR1fKWG0

go back to /tv/ you pedo retard

Here

He talks himself into circles and says very little about the topics he is engaging in. Just listen to that segment about religion on the JRE for instance, the nigga walks away from every point that Joe makes, brings up entirely unrelated points like the flood myths and takes jabs at Marxism whenever he can despite it having nothing to do with the conversation.

If you are a vitriolic anti-Marxist, then sure, Peterson is your guy but he should shut the fuck up about everything else.

ah yes, of course its commie LARPers who hate him because he blows their false god the fuck out

Nigga I literally just said if you want anti-Marxist stuff, go to Peterson. That's literally all he knows.

That's a very odd thing to call someone a liar about.

Last night I had a dream that I was missing some of my front tooth, I have all my teeth in real life so does that make me a liar? Do you know what dreams are?

>sam hyde
>/tv/

wat

Only people with Veeky Forums pass gets (You)'s now.

youtube.com/watch?v=9Bd-4NpVcJo

very interesting lecture about the role of sea power in the early modern era and what lessons can be learned for contemporary maritime strategy and international relations

>ur a commie! stop being mean, commie!

t. Peterson

It was obvious to me when I watched five random lectures of his about five very different topics, and in each one he started talking about gulags and the sixty million people who were starved there while being forced to squat 600 lbs all day that he has no idea what he is talking about.

>hurrr ur comunist!
Am not, I dislike collectivism, however I can realize that the death toll in the USSR has to do with incompetence, not with PURE EVIIIIIL as he claims.
China, Russia, Vietnam, all of the Asian states have a long standing history, including before communism was even conceived, of starving their own people.

not an argument. Go get triggered over made up pronouns somewhere else faggot

How is "you are a commie" an argument?

>Jordan Peterson
>Still pushes le Gulag Archipelago

I am not a commie but I am a historian. This guy and this book are trash.

He finds a way to mention this book on every lecture of his.
I am watching a lecture called "Osiris, Set, Isis and Horus" right now, and he mentions it within 10 minutes of starting.

because the other guy was saying that Peterson sucks, but its pretty clear he only says that becauze Peterson calls out cultural marxism and the horribleness of communism in general

Original quote:
> Just listen to that segment about religion on the JRE for instance, the nigga walks away from every point that Joe makes, brings up entirely unrelated points like the flood myths and takes jabs at Marxism whenever he can despite it having nothing to do with the conversation.

I think there are arguments here. Mainly, that Peterson will repeat the same thing regardless of what he is asked.
Also see Now make a counter argument that isn't "if you dislike people not answering your question and instead repeating something random they already said in all their past lectures, you are a communist".

>however I can realize that the death toll in the USSR has to do with incompetence, not with PURE EVIIIIIL
His point is that to get at the suffering and horror you have to use that sort of religious language. That's why he uses it. You summing up the soviet union as "incompetence" is exactly the type of statement devoid of content that he's talking about.

>You summing up the soviet union as "incompetence" is exactly the type of statement devoid of content that he's talking about.

You mean a correct statement?
I wish he'd make such statements himself, rather than insult people who do.

On biosemiotics
It's transdisciplinary so it includes a ton of science aswell.
Be prepared to learn new words, the level of discourse is insane- over 9000
media.uoregon.edu/channel/archives/5936

yeah, the original point was that Peterson calls out marxism. Thats it. If you dont like him based entirely on the point that he is critical of marxism then its pretty fair to say you are a commieboo who simply doesnt like hearing a guy be critical of the way cultural marxism has ruined the humanities and is waging some autistic culture war that everyone is sick of.

Cultural Marxism doesn't exist.

Marxism is inherently economic. It cannot and would not involve culture alone.

SJW shit is just liberalism taken to its most radical extreme.

If you are holding a lecture about ancient egyptian gods, and it takes you 50 minutes to get to ancient Egypt, because you keep talking about USSR gulags, there is something wrong with you.
I don't need to be a communist to be upset by him shoving his reverse-communism into EVERYTHING he talks about, regardless of the relation or lack of relation to communism.

If you are happy to find references to Stalin in the sports news, a cook book, the nutritional information of a bar of chocolate and the instruction manual for a lawn mower, thats your issue. Most people don't think showing gulag rhetoric in every lecture is a good idea.

>Cultural Marxism doesn't exist.

It clearly does though, and your continued denial of this only makes you look more and more like a biased marxist. Are you really going to deny the whole SJW phenomenon? You do realize Peterson got sort of famous because he refused to call students shit like "xer", right?

>cultural marxism

>if you disagree with me you are a marxist
Stop that.

>lol its not evil, just "incompetent xD!"

Define cultural marxism and explain why the use of marx's name in the name of this phenomenon is legitimate
Without buzzword

That's not Marxism you dumb fucking cunt

SJWs are liberals wholly divorced from the Marxist tradition. They don't care about labor or even the accumulation of capital. They just do weird and extreme shit in pursuit of their concept of justice.

>It clearly does though, and your continued denial of this only makes you look more and more like a biased marxist.
Sorry to break it to you if you are from /pol/, but most of Veeky Forums know enough about marx to know that "cultural marxism" is an oxymoron. You don't need to be a marxist to not believe in retarded memes.
Feel free to try to explain how marxist economic determinism is compatible with your "cultural marxism" conspiracy though.

This really reshaped my understanding of the role of the South in US history up to the civil war. Matt Karp is one of the best young historians out there.

Start at 5:27.

m.soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-house/episode-50-akp-50th-episode-ergenekon-extravaganza-101716

>who is Gramsci

>what is cultural hegemony

>SJW shit is just liberalism taken to its most radical extreme.

no. Its authoritarian leftist acting as word police and engaging in witch hunts on those guilty of wrong think. Its not liberal at all.

You do realize there's a difference between a Communist (people like Adorno) supporting Communism and discussing it and spreading its ideas than Cultural Marxism (which is an alleged conspiracy theory and plot), correct?

The essence of marxism is class struggle to abolish dialectical opposition. When that fail, frankfurters switched class to social group which can be construed as oppressed. Third world, women, gays, etc. Cultural marxism is not everything it is said to be, it shouldnt even be used. But dialectic science and its deployment in the history of struggle is totally marxism. Sjw is all about that.

>When that fail
>1960

If anything, it looked like commies are winning at the time.

You didnt even try to do what I asked you to do
Define cultural marxism and justify calling it cultural marxism, without buzzword

>The essence of marxism is class struggle to abolish dialectical opposition. When that fail, frankfurters switched class to social group which can be construed as oppressed.
Ridiculous.
See:
academia.edu/10149049/The_Origins_and_Ideological_Function_of_Cultural_Marxism

>But dialectic science and its deployment in the history of struggle is totally marxism. Sjw is all about that.
Trying to change society via culture is the opposite of marxist. You're back to hegelian idealism

>I maintain that our society is in such an emergency situation, and that it has become the normal state of affairs. Different opinions and 'philosophies' can no longer compete peacefully for adherence and persuasion on rational grounds: the 'marketplace of ideas' is organized and delimited by those who determine the national and the individual interest. In this society, for which the ideologists have proclaimed the 'end of ideology', the false consciousness has become the general consciousness--from the government down to its last objects. The small and powerless minorities which struggle against the false consciousness and its beneficiaries must be helped: their continued existence is more important than the preservation of abused rights and liberties which grant constitutional powers to those who oppress these minorities. It should be evident by now that the exercise of civil rights by those who don't have them presupposes the withdrawal of civil rights from those who prevent their exercise, and that liberation of the Damned of the Earth presupposes suppression not only of their old but also of their new masters.

from Repressive Tolerance by Marcuse

marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetolerance.htm

Also, youre pretending as if Gramsci never existed or his thoughts on how society is controlled through culture.

Stop pretending that Marxism has nothing to do with waging an autistic culture war just because it failed miserably and is now a lolscow.

It failed in the sense that the revolution didnt came from proletariat, the major oppressed. What was happening in the sixties can still be thought of as historical dialectic, so I agree.

Stop watching conspiracy videos and actually read Hegel, Marx and the people from the Frankfurt School, retard.

>hur dur I will base my opinions on secondary sources rather than actually reading what the original people said

>You didnt even try to do what I asked you to do

I told you about cultural hegemony user and Gramsci. Gramsci, who was a marxist. The whole idea is to wage a culture war so that people are then mentally ready for marxism because marxist believe the ONLY reason people hate it is because they have been brainwashed by culture into hating it.

youtube.com/watch?v=XMSlgrgmmTs

once again, it seems like you guys hate the term cultural marxism simply because it contains the name of Marx.

You can say its practice is illiberal, but these folks are just pursuing liberal values of natural rights. It's got much more to do with Rousseau and Mill than with Marx.

I did my thesis on hegelianism at Udm with Taylor.

Nobody gives a fuck about marcuse except stormfags. And marcuse is postmodern garbage.

Progressivism not liberalism.

That article is about antisemitism. Who are you fooling, hedoesnt adress the problem.

>Nobody gives a fuck about marcuse except stormfags

you are factually wrong based on the fact that SJW exist and exist to such an extent that they are in popular culture and not just some little meme group. Not an argument

>And marcuse is...garbage.

as are all marxist ideas.

Nice try.

Not really, no. Identity politics movements where bourgeois gays demand legal protection from the bourgeoisie at large doesn't connect to the material dialectic.

There was no "turn to culture" that /pol/ types imagine in the Marxist tradition. The closest you'll get is Zizek, a meme philosopher who tries to redirect liberal discussions of "oppression" and "marginalization" toward their economic basis.

>It's got much more to do with Rousseau and Mill than with Marx.

lol no. Its funny watching you guys scramble to disassociate this autistic laughing stock from Marxism

>All you Marxists are wrong
>REAL Marxism is when chicks dye their hair green

>lose argument

>engage in strawman

not an argument

Progessivism is entirely derived from liberal ideals

Nigga this whole thread has been you evading arguments and calling people marxists as if that proves them wrong.

Stop bringing up these flesh&blood strawmen as if you prove me wrong by posting random twitter idiots.

>you are factually wrong based on the fact that SJW exist and exist to such an extent that they are in popular culture and not just some little meme group. Not an argument
You give marcuse way too much credit, cultural developments are not the result of some individual's conspiracy, and marcuse's influence in particular is basically non existent. And retards have always existed.

>as are all marxist ideas.
There's nothing marxist about marcuse's idealism.

But SJWs don't care about Marcuse. Or Marx. Or Gramsci.

No continuity can be drawn from the Marxist tradition toward modern SJW navel-gazing.

This is the classic conservative misstep, where you guys trip over your own feet to connect your disparate foes together into some kind of grand conspiracy.

While I understand what you're saying and you're not wrong that there are people out there who criticize just to criticize, but the fact that someone becomes more popular/famous guarantees their arguments are going to face more criticism. Deeper criticism. Better criticism from people who are genuinely interested in the conversation. Regardless of the field or what they're trying to say. It comes with the territory. And all criticism is not bad.

So much for a thread about lectures

why do you think a self proclaimed communist professor would freely talk about how much he hates white people to the point where he wants to genocide them and then have nothing happen to him at all?

Are you really so naive as to believe this "FUCKING WHITE MALES!" mentality has nothing to do with marxism?

meant for

Marcuse was a Marxist, but a shitty and heterodox one who nobody except from some Brazilian professors cares about.

Modern Marxism is mostly involved with analysis of how capitalism is driving and potentially destroying modern human society.

I proclaim myself a follower of whatever views you support.
I am also gay.

Thus followers of whatever views you support are all gay.

See the argument? Neither do I. Yet thats entirely your last several posts.

>Are you really so naive as to believe this "FUCKING WHITE MALES!" mentality has nothing to do with marxism?
Mind quoting anything from marx that supports your position?

Serious question, why is the Gulag Archipelago trash? Honest question. No agenda. I want to know why you think this.

No, your claims of all SJWs being secret Marxists has been soundly defeated.

You can ask a 15-year-old genderqueer pansexual to explain Marxism at gunpoint, and I assure you all you'll receive are blank stares.

>open thread to find some fascinating lectures
>discover that it is mainly full of shitposting retards

Because it is a nasty mix of facts that are supported by citations, and urban myths.
You can't easily attack it for lack of credibility, because the gray dull everyday stuff are indeed credible, and its only the extreme shit thats lacking citations.

Like a Wikipedia article that has several sources for all the mundane common sense stuff, and then drops a bomb bullshit claim which lacks a citation, yet the people using it point you to the long list of other citations for its other claims, thus this one must be true as well.

Bruh "white genocide" is an alt-right buzzword for interracial marriage

The professor was trying to satirize that in an edgy and retarded way

user, SJW exist. Their entire ethos is based entirely on Marcuse. Why are you trying to deny it? "not muh real marxism!" isnt really an excuse either.

>But SJWs don't care about Marcuse. Or Marx. Or Gramsci.

based on what? You saying so because it benefits your argument right now? They obviosly do care about marcuse since their entire ideology is based on him.

Marcuse was in the fucking Sparticist Uprising and is refered to as the Father of the New Left. How can you deny his involvement and importance to that?

>This is the classic conservative misstep, where you guys trip over your own feet to connect your disparate foes together into some kind of grand conspiracy.

more like marxist denying their retarded bastard child (much like how Marx denied his bastard child he conceived with his little peasant girl slave)

Marxism includes nothing about "fucking white males".

"Fucking white males" types very rarely have any interest in labor and capital.

You're confusing two phenomena that both confuse and disturb you.

/pol/ ruins literally every discussion

Posting on that board should result in a 3-hour cooldown before posting elsewhere

>>You mean a correct statement?
Is it incompetence? Yes. How did that incomptence come about? Through an ideology, which he defines as an imcomplete system, and his definition of evil is believing that you already know everything. Considering that he brings this up almost every video as you say, one would think you'd pick up on this. The way you want to attribute it to ONE thing is exactly what he's warning against doing.

>You can't easily attack it for lack of credibility, because the gray dull everyday stuff are indeed credible, and its only the extreme shit thats lacking citations.

So like all history then. 70% are actual historical facts, the rest are educated conjectures by historians.

The New Left is non-Marxist! That's the fucking point!

>Mind quoting anything from marx that supports your position?

false equivalency. sexual orientation and extremely racist/self hatred views are in no way similar.

not an argument

>The professor was trying to satirize that in an edgy and retarded way

sure thing. Except he also had said previously how the massacre of all the whites in Haiti was a "good thing" and the guy will face no punishment from the university. So the idea that he doesnt actually hold these beliefs is pretty shit excuse, also based on the fact that this guy called for genocide of a race and will face no punishment is a glaring example of hypocrisy

>So like all history then. 70% are actual historical facts, the rest are educated conjectures by historians.

Except that if I say the Celts didn't really attack the Roman legions in Britain with a two million men army I am not called a Marxist for doing so, and told to look at all the evidence that Romans did in fact go to Britain.

>guys post a lecture

>"bahh fuck this guy he trashes marx! he sucks!"

>"thats not a really valid reason to say the guy sucks"

>"FUCK YOU NOT MUH REAL MARXISM!"

>"THIS IS ALL /POL/ FAULT!"

really made me think. You guys start an autistic argument, lose it, and then blame the /pol/ boogeyman. dont respond to this because Im not going to read it anyway

man, this guy is just all shock value.

>false equivalency. sexual orientation and extremely racist/self hatred views are in no way similar.

Replace sexual orientation with racism then, the example still stands.
You pick one moron from Twitter and deduce that all the views he holds are objectively false, and all other people who follow them are also morons.

Learn basic logic.

>fake quote
Well, you instantly lose the argument.