Numerous anti-intellectual leftist sit around scratching their heads about how to deal with Peterson calling them out...

>numerous anti-intellectual leftist sit around scratching their heads about how to deal with Peterson calling them out on their bullshit
>Ira "Literally Who" Wells writes a hit piece on him, calling him the dumb persons idea of a smart man
>Peterson calls him out and challenges him to a debate
>Ira runs away from it with his tail between his legs like a bitch
>Channel 4 tries to ambush Peterson, he turns it around and ends up BTFO Cathy Numan instead
>they try to save face after this disaster by claiming Cathy was harassed, when its soon revealed that Peterson received much more and violent threats
>Zizek writes an article on Peterson
>Its mostly just typical Zizek bitching about capitalism in his own colorful way and writes like 2 sentences that just amount to "I dont like Peterson"
>Peterson calls him out on this
>he writes another article to be more in depth
>just ends up being the exact same thing, with him now attacking strawman arguments Peterson never said
>Peterson challanges him to a debate, he never responds
>Zizeks article outright admits the left is on its last legs and this is why they havent been able to counter anything from Peterson

Peterson is damn near unstoppable at this point. Is this it for the left wing ideologues? Will he actually be the one who crushes neo-marxism for good?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=jIOX1hVRE8Y
youtube.com/watch?v=bkGJyxdCexs
youtube.com/watch?v=L_Ko2895D2E
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

The bright side of all this is the Right has an opportunity to morally redeem itself from its history of aligning with the wealthy corrupt upper classes. The left has largely abandoned principles of genuine equality and freedom (anti-capitalism, etc) to make the wealthy feel good about themselves for engaging in ever more absurd acts of sexual deviancy and fueling identarian nonsense among the poor, having sided quite decisively with the neoliberals in power. It is left to the right now (libertarians excluded), which still holds to *some* sense of morality beyond the acquisition of wealth, to take up the cause of the people and make up for its past sins by crushing the bourgeois degenerates forever.

Leftism has developed into nothing more than a cheap fad (adored by the youth and adopts blindly by adults who fancy themselves hip)
It will not "die" but it cannot live in its current form

Can you give one example? This reads like you feel emotionally its true but you have no real ideas about politicz.

all this about a leaf that shat talked trannies a few times

what a time to be alive

Drumph is addicted to prossies is that the degenerate sex you refer to?

>"You're a pseudointellectual!"
I think this is very popular because of how much we're told in the modern world that this is a "knowledge economy" now and we're all inferior to the "creative class", so intelligence has become the most valuable attribute to possess

>tfw the cultural war of the western world, and the ideological zeitgeist battleground of our generation, culminating in one of the most heated and devicive election in modern US history, all started over video games

I mean it seems patently obvious if you look at what the left has become today, at least in the United States where pro-labor politics have been dead in the water since the cold war. The civil rights movement was their last real success, leading to the left here today being filled with ethnotribalists and secular activists. One need only look at the defeat of Bernie Sanders, the last gasp of Old Labor in the US. There was also the candidate Jim Webb, who has spoken frequently of bridging racial divides in order to help the poor fight for their common interests more effectively, was barely even noticed as a candidate. Instead the winner of their nomination was Hillary Clinton, possibly the best example of neoliberal corruption and nepotism, who adopted pro-gay and pro-minority rhetoric in order to empower herself despite the fact that the only "leftish" elements of her platform were so minor and so limited in scope as to do next to nothing for actual poor people, only to enable those women and minorities already occupying the middle-manager class.

Really the left needs Christianity in order to return to its place of moral righteousness. Failing that, we must hope the right, never having given up Christ but rarely having genuinely lived up to His principles, may finally correct itself in trying to fill that vacuum

Trump is a neoliberal who adopted populist rhetoric in order to gain power. He was never truly right wing.

Lmao
Literally the first thing he did was pull out of tpp

After the Lindsay Shephard affair, even more professors at the university realized just how bad the problem was. Academia was the last bastion this SJW has, and its under attack, and they know it, and they have no idea how to stop it.

youtube.com/watch?v=jIOX1hVRE8Y

>he thinks goobergaters voted or have ever been relevant

nobody actually gives a shit about your hobby, and certainly not the great mass of people that decide elections

>making sure people are forced to declare themselves as male or female is an important issue that will be remembered in history
>humor is a proper justification to remove basic freedoms and liberties from westerners

All he does is beat on the dead horse of SJWs while regurgitating muh hundred gorillion. Tbh I don’t see how any serious (read old school, class focused, non SJW) leftist couldn’t wipe the floor with him. I’m sure Chomsky would put him in his place like he did with Molymeme.

>Tbh I don’t see how any serious (read old school, class focused, non SJW) leftist couldn’t wipe the floor with him.
because they cant. All you can do is flounder because he is articulating exactly why and how the left has gained their retarded hold of academia and pop culture. Good job showcasing what belligerent stormfags lefties are though with your "muh gorillion" comment

Top minds who argue with a quotebot on twitter(without knowing it's a quotebot)
Truly an outstanding intellect

Hear hear

>Christianity
Christianity, and before it, paganism, got us into this mess.

Once again, he, like you, just hates on retarded liberals and then claim that this is the left. Peterson actually puts Marxism and postmodernism together in the same sentence as if they are in any way compatible. He has no idea what he’s talking about, and if you think he is anything but a hack for teenagers then neither do you.

was interesting and then you had to go and shit it up with the bearded sky man nonsense

>unironcially using the "t-those are just liberals!" line when all this stupid ID politics shit can not only be traced directly to neo-marxism, but is now only pushed by them.
Yeah, exactly what I expected. And you also have no actual argument against Peterson only "he doesnt know what hes talking about!" vagueness with no specific examples, just like what Zizek did. What this really comes down to is you know Peterson is starting a movement that will eventually BTFO your entire world view and turn it into nothing more than the irrelevent meme it deserves to be, and you have NO idea on how to stop that from happening.

I find it funny when people (especially here on 4chin) still think Peterson was wrong about C-16 and even dare to suggest that the Lindsey incident was nothing noteworthy and not fucking proof that Peterson was right all along.

When had a thread about exactly that the other day. They were fucking idiots who clearly had no idea what that case was even about and tried to justify the university by using the "they are a private institution and can do as they please!" despite the fact that its a public university and that they apologized to Lindsey. They really were stormfag tier delusional to the point where you could lay it all out right in front of them and they would just ignore it and just keep spouting their meme talking points.

This makes me wonder: Are these people SJWs who are trying to infiltrate this place, SJWs who have always been here or just simply ignorant about how hard the shit has hit the fan in the past 5 years? How can anyone living in the west who is in their 20s not notice this? Is it because they're not in college?

I honestly dont know if its all just some shill point of trying to convince the world the devil doesnt exist, or they are simply useful idiots who have no real idea what they are doing. This is so obvious to everyone that its become a staple of pop culture now. The one thing they usually say that tips me off that they know and are just hiding it is that if you really put them up against the wall and they know it, they will usually say something along the lines of "well dont we have bigger problems than just a few left leaning college professors?" or "they arent even in power like in the government, what does it matter?"

>or they are simply useful idiots who have no real idea what they are doing.
I used to be just that before I got into college and got a taste of the SJW poison first hand. And I'm fucking German. I can fathom how bad it must be in the anglosphere.

>"well dont we have bigger problems than just a few left leaning college professors?"
My favorite argument is that these type of people think that 90% of professors being left leaning being proof of leftist ideology being scientifically correct as opposed to academia becoming an echo chamber which doesn't tolerate dissent. They justify their power and control by appealing to that very power, because after all, if they were so wrong, they woudln't be in charge. Which is actually right-wing as fuck, ironically.

I just told you what my problem with him is. Post-modern neo Marxism that he always bitches about is a fantasy. It’s literally an oxymoron, as postmodernism and Marxism are wholly and completely incompatible. Then in the same breath he’ll draw on Nietzsche’s idess without realizing the irony considering that Nietzsche is easily the single largest influence on postmodernists. In short he has no ideological or philosophical consistency, and his talking points are directed against obvious retards who he conflates with Marxists because he has the philosophical education of a high schooler. Then acts as if he just BTFO’d Marxism when the Marxian left has been levelling criticisms of liberals and proto-SJWs since the fucking 90s. Pic related

Intersectional social justice is both post structuralist (gender is a social construct, muh tabula rasa, etc etc) and neo-marxist (class struggle applied to race and gender as opposed to economics). How is post-modern neo-marxism not an adequate description of cancerous SJW ideology?

>Post-modern neo Marxism that he always bitches about is a fantasy
no it isnt. You are just either really stupid, or you are intentionally trying to downplay this, just like we were discussing above you. EVERYTIME you guys give this shill line, hoping desperately everyone will just believe you. Youre also being a dunderhead and ignoring the aspect of NEO (new) Marxism. All of this idenetentarian is tied DIRECTLY to Critical Theory. Marcuse was literally called "The Father of the New Left"

The problem is that you constantly strawman the point instead of realizing neo-marxism is something that evolved over time from various marxist philsophers (Luckas, Marcuse, Adorno, ect) from the Frankfurt School. Youre so boring and predictable that youre next line will be "thats just a conspiracy theory!"

youtube.com/watch?v=bkGJyxdCexs

he knows that and even acknowledges that the ideologies are incompatible. what he's pointing out is that neo-marxists use postmodernism as sword and shield for advancing their ideology. they use it to critique the west and then cower behind it as defense when people start firing back at them.

What just doesn't seem right with that is the chronology. Post modernism was already around during the cold war. The time period when the Soviet Union existed. It didn't spring into existence after

Neo-marxism is not Marxism, you fucking idiot. the USSR was Marxist, not neo-marxist.

New left was also during that time period. Not after and it died down

i don't think he's ever put a time period on when he thinks it started. whenever i've heard him speak about it he's usually talking about people using those tactics in the present.

Neo-Marxism evolved outside of the soviet union, in the west, mostly during the interwar period well on through to the 60s. It came about right along with Foucault for example.

And yet he constantly tries to connect his evil academic boogeyman to the USSR and Marxism in its classic incarnation.

>it died down
No, they just stopped being edgy kids and started going into academia, politics, and media.

Well then you just have to draw the conclusion that he says post modernism has been hijacked and thus he doesn't actually refute the ideas of postmodernism themselves

well sure, but that's because he doesn't like either and neo-marxism was birthed out of marxism even though it's not the same thing.

No he doesnt. He just points out their similar methods in their roots in Marxist ideology. You would know this if you ever actually bothered listening to any of his multiple lectures, which are free on youtube, instead of just bitching about him with your pals on leftypol.

I thought is debate against David Benatar was pretty embarrassing desu, he should study more philosophy

The new left has very little to do with intersectional social justice m8. Pretty sure anyone who took part in the social revolutions of the 60s would be disgusted by that crap. SJWs aren't the new left, they're the nu-left.

So you're saying that neo-nazis are okay, because they are not real nazis and only real nazism can lead to the holocaust, which is why we shoudln't worry about them? Jesus Christ, are you incapable of abstract thought?

I don't think that all this developped from just one current. These waves of feminism were still going on too you know. Or are you arguing for an eventual synthesis having taken place

This current wave of feminism is tied directly to that shit though, and its not really that new. Camille Paglia for example constantly bitches about turd wave feminism and has been doing so since the late 80s (same time PC culture crept into the zeitgeist)

i'm pretty sure his issue is primarily with the neo-marxists. his critique on just post-modernism has been pretty light. when talking about post-modernism alone the strongest thing i've heard him say about it is that they've only got it half-right.

>Yes there are infinite interpretations, but there are not infinite valid interpretations.

that's basically the strongest critique he's given on postmodernism on its own. when he gets riled up is when he talks about the neo-marxists that utilize the halfbaked version of postmodernism.

>Everything is valid therefore we're going with our ideas and burning everything else to the ground.

i think that's his interpretation of the postmodern neo-marxist argument.

I think there is quite a bit of dicersity in the feminist camp though, Hillary Clinton style neoliberal feminists still exist

You just said neo-Marxists aren’t Marxists, but nobody would suggest that neo-Nazis aren’t Nazis. Either this neo-Marxist boogeyman is Marxist, in which case it is not connected to the SJW insanity, or it is not. Make up your fucking mind, because you can’t be a Marxist while saying that class is not the ultimate dividing line of society cutting across all other social divisions. You can’t be a Marxist and an identitarian. You can’t be a Marxist and an intersectionalist. In other words, you can’t be a Marxist and what Peterson is constantly bitching about at the same time.

But which are the neomarxists. All those college people who were pro C-16?

Neo nazis have very little in common with their ideological predecessors of the 1920s and 1930s. Especially the skinhead types of the 80s and 90s. The alt-right is much closer to what Nazism used to be, but just because skinheads would seem like ridiculous degenerates to an actual nation socialist in 1933, doesn't mean they aren't fucking Nazis. Stop obfuscating the issue, leftist. I'm onto your tactics.

Peterson is a shit frog. Like no one worth anything actually cares about his winmy ass shit teir garbage.

>Either this neo-Marxist boogeyman is Marxist
They are, in the idea that its based on Marxism, its just not soviet style Marxism for example.

t. tranny

Also, your constant use of "boogeyman" as a desperate attempt to deligitamize something that obviously does exist as a school of thought only makes you look stupid.

Yeah, diversity of all different flavors of shit. Theres the cynical hllary clinton types, and theres also the batshit left wing ideologue types. Just imagine a world were these looney toons are in charge of some government burue that regulates sexual relations between men and women lol
youtube.com/watch?v=L_Ko2895D2E

those ones, sjws at large, antifa, and the kind of people that went after weinstein at evergreen.

i think weinstein has a view that's pretty similar to my own in that i still believe in the left, but the far left pushing for radical equity(to steal his buzzword) are the ones that are the problem. i imagine this is the same group that peterson is railing against.

pretty much every western leftist at this point. the "white left" as the Chinese call them.

What? Chomsky debated Molyneux??

See here we get at the meat of my problems with peterson: he is a psychoanalyst. He says shit like " feminists dont criticize the saudis because they want to be handled roughly by dominant men" and stuff like that. 'neomarxist' seems like a label applied to people who do not neccessarily fall under this school of thought rather they are profiled by Peterson as those people and after that you get a narrative how 'they' as a collective use postmodernism as a weapon even though these people couldn't really operate like that because they aren't bearly as united as the narrative makes them seem

Hope this thread will be up because I'm going to sleep. Will check thread tomorrow

Peterson is an idiot, but he's good at trolling socjus faggots and has a functional spine, so that means he may as well be an intellectual and moral giant of the modern era. I disagree with him on a lot of things but the excesses of the left are far too obvious and far too obnoxious to be disputed anymore as far as I am concerned.

I like how Peterson draws a distinction between "equality of opportunity" and "equality of outcome". Conservatives aim for the former; liberals the latter.

>He says shit like " feminists dont criticize the saudis because they want to be handled roughly by dominant men"
Peterson has literally never said that. He rarely speaks about Islam and I don't recall him ever mentioning Saudi Arabia. Also please stop denying the intersectional social justice isn't a problem.

Liberals aim for the former, commies for the latter.

user, Neo-Marxism is a real school of thought. Just because you've never heard of it and are ignorant of your own meme movement doesnt mean it doesnt exist and/or is just something the right made up. Marcuse, Gramsci, Luckaks, The Frankfurt School in general. These are all things that made up Neo-Marxism. Critical Theory being the biggest one.

He did say that iirc but I couldn't source you on that
It is real but it's the profiling that stinks here and makes things not really cohesive, and you seem to be profiling me too kek

Sorry that people disagree with your internet dad user. Maybe you'll find someway to tune out his critics in the future.

t. xir

>"Peterson is a far right nazi racist!"

>"Peterson is just a self help guru!"

>"Peterson is a cult leader!"

>"Peterson has a patreon account!"

>"Peterson is just a fill in father figure for people!"

>"Peterson is [insert character assassination]!"

every left wing nonargument against Peterson in every thread

Like clockwork.

>>"Peterson is just a self help guru!"
This is probably the funniest out of all the arguments put forth by his detractors. He is a fucking clinical psychologist.

ok, so do you have any argument to articulate against Peterson?

>Liberals aim for the former
Don't liberals support affirmative action? That is anti-meritocratic.

American ""liberals"" have very little to do with liberalism. Here is Europe what we call liberalism is closer to American libertarianism or classical liberalism, except not as autistic and partially subverted by neo-liberalism.

Postmodernism isn’t based on Marxism, they are entirely and wholly incompatible. You can’t be both at the same time anymore than you can be a Marxist and a classical liberal.

Nowhere in the comment you replied to was anyone talking about postmodernism, but if you're trying to make the argument I think you're trying to make then this comment

already addressed it.

The guy is just some psychologist who is against SJW, his knowledge in other fields is very limited.

I keep hearing this argument but then you say he's wrong and that gender and sex are completely different

Everything people refer to as neo-Marxism is basically postmodernism. Even the Frankfurt school has a highly postmodern methodology, to the point where I hesitate to call it Marxism at all.

First of all, his anti-communist spew is based on the same ideological misconceptions and misinformation that all liberals like him fall trap to.

Second, his rejection of postmodernity is a misunderstanding of what postmodernity is, and is instead a Nietzschean critique of Christianity.


Finally, he fantasizes about punching children and writes a self-help book with an anecdote about it.

Not even calling OP a nazi, this just isn't a history thread. It's contemporary politics.

>& Humanities

Leftism is a absolute joke. Always smug, elitist and dismissive. Unbearable.

I really like the ROTC edit of this

>&whatever the fuck you want just call it humanities

Political science is a humanity user.

I thought it was a science :^)

>Finally, he fantasizes about punching children
to be fair, he was a little crabby. (ha ha)

This thread isn't about political science.

if petey pete shat in the street, he'd be petey pajeet

I'm an unironic Nazi and I dislike Peterson.

>Anti-capitalism = freedom
LMFAO

>provide a REAL argument!
>no not like that!

>he fantasizes about punching children
I've heard he's in favor of spankings but I've never seen him say its okay to punch a kid

>"I remember taking my daughter to the playground once when she was about two. She was playing on the monkey bars, hanging in mid-air. A particularly provocative little monster of about the same age was standing above her on the same bar she was gripping. I watched him move towards her. Our eyes locked. He slowly and deliberately stepped on her hands, with increasing force, over and over, as he stared me down. He knew exactly what he was doing. Up yours, Daddy-O - that was his philosophy. He had already concluded that adults were contemptible, and that he could safely defy them. (Too bad, then, that he was destined to become one.) That was the hopeless future his parents had saddled him with. To his great and salutary shock, I picked him bodily off the playground structure, and threw him thirty feet down the field."

>"No, I didn't. I just took my daughter somewhere else. But it would have been better for him if I had."

From "12 Rules for Life" by Jordan B. Peterson

Sounds like the kid had it coming.

>a two year old child has a fully realized philosophical outlook and intentionally harms others as an act of rebellion

>some little shit was stepping on my daughter's hands while she's trying to play
>I wish I threw that fucker around like a football
he literally just sounds like a normal father

Have you ever met a two year old? They know exactly what they're doing.