What's he up to these days?

I enjoy him for his lectures too. I don't really care about this tranny drama cause I don't have too strong an opinion either way. I think maybe Peterson is being a little brash but I don't necessarily think he's wrong.

He's only being brash because his Job is at stake and he doesn't want a repeat of the horrors of the early-middle 20th century and he just sees what's going on in Canada atm as baby-steps in that direction

He's a bit of an alarmist, but I don't see why anyone cares about him all that much, whether they're really mad about him or whether they think he's a hero. All this pronoun stuff is extremely low stakes for every party involved, whether they'll admit it or not.

Outside of that, he has some interesting interpretations of mythology and probably some valuable work in psychology, but that's about it.

>hehe guys sjws arent that much of a problem come on now

Ignore the carnage, political suppression, media collusion, ideological takeover of the universities and all that. Progressives are totes not a threat at all. Just like smoke some weed and relax brah.

I'll admit he's right about feminism and women's studies departments. His defense of traditionalism is retarded though, and the pronoun law in particular just doesn't really matter

>hehe who cares about leftists shitting all over the word and more importantly spirit of freedom, adventure and inquisitivity our ancestors raised our culture with lol, words are dangerous and damaging so we must limit ourselves

It's important that we keep all of the terrorism in the brown countries and outside of the white countries, because white people are more important

Are you saying white people should govern muslim countries and teach them not to kill people? Didn't work so well last time we tried that.

White people don't blow people up or run trucks through crowds. I'd argue they're more valuable.

please delete this photo

White people have done that before. And the vast majority of brown people do not dot hat.

I don't recall many Christian suicide bombers. Can't think of a single one actually.

Anyway, are you saying arabs are worth more than Europeans? Why should we flood the continent with an obviously hostile population? It's pure madness. I don't actually care that much about race even though I want to keep racial cohesion and ethnic stability, what matters much more to me is faith, culture and ideology.

Now if they want to blow themselves up in the middle-east then that's their issue, liberals taught me that colonialism is bad and that every volk should be self governed so it's up to them to solve it. Now if Christians which to seek refuge here then I have nothing against that, don't care what race they are.

>but I don't see why anyone cares about him all that much

Because we need as many people as him as possible speaking to a large audience. We're drowning in ideology here and noone seems to raise the alarm, all they want to do is play the opposite identity politics of the 'other side' and claim moral superiority.

>I don't recall many Christian suicide bombers

You don't need suicide bombers if you have an actual military at your disposal

The pronoun law isn't going to limit anything other than how you're supposed to address people if you work in the public sector

the invasion of iraq by the US was bad
the invasion of europe by muslims is also bad

>first they came for the public sector workers

>This kike puppet here is totes a Christian warlord

That's not the point. This law is a test run to see if anyone will protest from having their speech controlled. The left-wing ideologues are going to just chip-chip-chip.

It's subtle but there's a huge fucking difference between creating a list of things you can't say to creating a list of things you have to say or face criminal charges. Just think about that for a moment.

>Human life
>Having some sort of inherent and equal value

You have to try harder than that to justify your positions.

Technically you won't have to use their pronouns. You just can't use pronouns that aren't theirs.

You are forced to partake in the delusions of people who ought to be in mental hospitals. It's pure insanity.
>You don't have to address me as Your Highness Emperor Napoleon, you just can't address me as anything else~

>not realizing the zionists and the filthy rich politically involved christian ideologues are part of the same club

They both want Israeli supremacy in the area, its just that their motives differ, but don't fool yourself into thinking they're not the best of friends.

I doubt any true Christian ideologue would want war and instability anywhere. It's just something that's politically expedient to call yourself in America. Saudis and Jews can go fuck themselves, as can the Amerikwan establishment.

That is how I feel about human life, honestly. I'm sorry you disagree.

Transgender people and people who prefer not to identify with a gender aren't insane.

>Transgender people and people who prefer not to identify with a gender aren't insane.
[citation needed]
Unless you radically alter the definition of mental illness they fit like a glove in that category.

no true scotsman

It doesn't necessarily cause suffering or hinder your ability to function, which is what mental illnesses do.

>All this pronoun stuff is extremely low stakes for every party involved

Unless you live in Canada, in which case you'll have the law on your ass for using the wrong ones.

Anyone want to see the Canadian approach to free speech? Pic related, it's a riot.

Not at all, it goes against the religion and flooding the west with sheepfuckers also isn't very high on the Christian agenda.

>Technically you won't have to use their pronouns. You just can't use pronouns that aren't theirs.

What did he mean by this?

You can just use their name.

That's just your interpretation of the religion.

>It doesn't necessarily cause suffering or hinder your ability to function
Actually it does both, as does homosexuality but to a lesser extent. If it was a mental disorder which did not lead to suffering then why all this ruckus about having to use their made up bullshit words? Why even try to be something they're not if they are alright in their current state? Transgenderism stems from deep mental issues which ought to be addressed by a psychiatric rather than be acknowledged and affirmed by the rest of society.

>alarmist

Considering the state that Canada is in I would not say it's alarmist at all.

The one thing that annoys me about Peterson is that he doesn't go the extra step and point to our Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the real problem in this country. It has done us so much harm to replace the bottom-up common law system with the top-down code law system. When I tell people that I would like to see the Charter abolished they imagine me as some sort of authoritarian dictator when the great irony is that the Charter is inherently authoritarian because it took away our common law rights by declaration, and then decided which rights it would confer back to us (which left out property rights, free speech, etc.) Then I ask them, do you think Canadians didn't have rights and freedoms before 1982? They are always struck dumb.

The whole thing is a farce disguised with sweet sounding language.
>muh rights and freedoms!
but very few Canadians understand that we underwent a total regime change and irreversibly changed the course of this country from what the 1867 BNA Act wanted for us.

But what if they identify as Two Spirit/etc, in which I can't ask "What is your name?" as I would have to ask "What is their names?"

I'd be guilty of hate speech for trying to find out.

It only applies to gender.

>Truthful statements can be presented in a manner that would meet the definition of hate speech, and not all truthful statements must be free from restriction..

Seriously Canada?

lel I trool /lit by posting ideologue only teenagers would be impressed by, you all mad

A lot of transgender people seem to get along fine from what I've seen. I agree that some of them care too much about pronouns, though.

No, it's THE interpretation.

Two Spirit is a gender.

>That pic

>from what I've seen
Shooting spree killers also seem fine to people until the moment they snap. In the case of trannies they most often kill themselves though. If you think that's just fine and dandy then I suppose we are done here but I do not think so and that they are healthy which is why I oppose it being socially accepted as something that's okay. If you're not just baiting how about you read this thing written by a homo supporter which lays out how we came to this point:

c2cjournal.ca/2016/12/not-my-rights-movement/

Jesus Christ is that photo real?

This guy is kind of getting too deep into the Anti-SJW corners of the internet. It's cool if you want to be an Internet Intellectual but even the Hitchens bros wouldn't talk to Joe Rogan for three hours or make an appearance on Louder with Crowded.

The Supreme Court is packed with professional sjws. For most of our history the Liberal Party has been firmly in charge and boy does it ever show. For example affirmative action "rights" are written into the Charter of Rights and Freedoms i.e. the Canadian constitution. It's literally unconstitutional to complain about affirmative action.

Imagine if elementary school teachers formed a junta to rule a country and you have Canada in a nutshell.

>tfw a crossdressing faggot tells me he's a woman and I have to respect his mental illness

Jesus. The day doctors start getting fined for refusing to give teenagers hormone blockers is the day I move to Ireland or Russia

41% of trannies have attempted suicide. The majority suffer from clinical depression and a slew of accompanying mental issues. If that doesn't qualify as hindering one's ability to function, I don't know what does.

Yes. Everything you see on the internet is bona fide.

It's important not to import third world problems into our countries.

They shouldn't be our countries. They should be everyone's countries.

wouldn't it be a tad crowded

not really, see youtube.com/watch?v=r_iNRGac_uM

>should

I mean that was fun but that has no bearing on reality at all

> no bearing on reality at all
Welcome to the world of liberal logic

What the fuck does /pol/ have to with peterson? Hes a fucking lefty.

He's actually stupidly centrist to be fair

I'm friends with his son, maybe I'll get to meet him one day :3

/pol/ isn't a person

YOU're not a person

>Hes a fucking lefty.
Actually he's mostly apolitical and anti-ideology.

>anti-ideology.
The fuck does this mean, that he agrees with your basic tenets?

Please contain your autism, Zizek.

>anti-ideology.
What a meme, this is what religious people describe themselves as when they're pretending that their beliefs aren't a form of ideology.

Peterson says that ideology essentially acts like a parasite attached to religious thought. Ideology is how 160 million people die in a living hell in 2/3 of the 20th century. There is no such thing as innocuous ideology.

>He's a bit of an alarmist
what's that shit about frogs and boiling water? yeah just wait until the situation becomes completely terrible to voice your concerns, good plan. also a good alarm alerts you to danger before it becomes dire. you don't want your smoke detector going off after your house has already completely ablaze.

Your own group is always more important.

Our spokesfrog was almost starting to boil. The water is already scathing hot.

really wish he wasn't a leaf, i find it too difficult not to hate him because of it.

b8 m8 r8 etc

Nazi Germany didn't happen overnight.

he's the only leaf worth saving from the day of the rake desu

I'm stupid, what are the differences between religion and ideology?

Ideology never tells the entire story. Try to tell a radical feminist that the supposed society(e.g the patriarchy) we live in that she hates so much, is also the society that gave her a roof over her head, an ability to take a shower everyday, never having the need to go hungry and gave her a university education, and see how she reacts.

How is that different from religion?

It's different from religion, if you are talking about religion in broad strokes.

Fundamentalist religious people commit the same mistake. They essentially ideologize their religion.

But very few religious people are in practice as ideological as a revolutionary Communist, or a Nazi.

That's probably because you only notice the committed ideologues. A lot of people say things like "I could be considered a communist/socialist/etc, yes" and never go beyond that.

Yeah, but the point is that everyone believes in something.

And the goal is to believe in something that represents the world to the best of your ability, and then it becomes extremely problematic to believe in only one side of a story, such as a Communist ignoring the fact that workers can be extremely successful and earn a lot of money in a capitalistic system, or a Nazi ignoring the fact that people of different ethnicities and races can co-exist fine in the same space.

It basically is

>Yeah, but the point is that everyone believes in something.

I agree.

>And the goal is to believe in something that represents the world to the best of your ability, and then it becomes extremely problematic to believe in only one side of a story,

This could easily be applied to religion too.. I really can't see where religion ends and where ideology begins.

he posted a link to a /pol/ thread on his twitter feed just a few weeks ago

>I really can't see where religion ends and where ideology begins.

Well I tried to give you an idea.

I can do another.

Take some politician in America who has made it his sole political goal to outlaw homosexuality and abortion.

Now think about that for a second, he has read a select few passages in a book of at least a thousand pages, and turned those into a political ideology.

I think this is the wrong way to be doing politics. And I also think it's a wrong way to be doing religion.

I mean, this just seems unusually convenient for the religious. They get to define religion as universally good and brand the "bad" parts as ideology.

Not to go off track but homosexuality and abortion WAS highly inappropriate shall we say. What you're saying is basically that billions of people were(and are) ideologues who don't see 'the whole picture' because they oppose homosexuality and abortion directly because it contradicts the teachings of the Bible. This does not seem like a reasonable definition to me.

>What you're saying is basically that billions of people were(and are) ideologues who don't see 'the whole picture' because they oppose homosexuality and abortion directly because it contradicts the teachings of the Bible.

Yes, and that is what I am saying.

If abortion and homosexuality is the most important things to you where politics is concerned, be my guest, but I think you are misunderstanding your religion if you're doing that, because there's literally thousands of other parables of importance and wisdom in that book that has literally nothing to do with politics.

Abortion is a very political issue because it has to do with the rights of the mother vs rights of the unborn and our collective morality as a society. It's a proxy for how we treat our weakest and most vulnerable citizens.

Religious ideologues do get involved and the topic of abortion is often used to devalue political debate but it comes up so often because it seems to strike a nerve in everyone

He's absolutely not