The Intellectual Wank Dad [ ot ] jordan peterson Jordan Peterson JORDAN PETERSON

[Assimilate]

Man the NYT piece on Peterson gets better the more deeper you go, some hilarious shit that hasn't been quoted:

He looks down as he walks. He paces. He pleads — he often sounds frustrated, like you’ve just said something absurd and he’s trying to correct you without raising his voice. He speaks for over an hour without any notes. He runs his hands over his face when it’s all too much. He cries often.

 

I ask him about the retro clothes and phrases. He calls it his prairie populism.

“That’s what happens when you rescue your father from the belly of the whale,” he says. “You rediscover your tradition.”

“It made sense in a primordial way when he breaks down Adam and Eve, the snake and chaos,” Mr. Arar says. “Eve made Adam self-conscious. Women make men self-conscious because they’re the ultimate judge. I was like, ‘Wow this is really true.’”

 

The changes in his life include starting to clean his room. “My mom’s been nagging me for years, but I’ve never done it until Dr. Peterson,” he says.

 

Agreeing, Mr. Arar gave off the same guttural m-hmm that Mr. Peterson does.

 

There are now regular Jordan Peterson discussion groups. The one in Toronto meets once a week at a restaurant called Hemingway’s and is run by Chris Shepherd, who used to be a professional pickup artist who coached men on how to get laid fast at a club but is now a dating coach.

 

Over his bed is a painting celebrating electrification in the Soviet Union.

 

Mr. Peterson’s office has objects scattered and strewn throughout: There is a hat from a gulag, some steampunk masks he thought were cool, stacks of papers and cords, and a Kermit puppet his sister sent him because his fans joke that his voice, high and hoarse, sounds like the Muppet.

 

Stro, you're laughing at things that members of this forum, especially a place like Ree, are a representation of. Ree gets emotional and lit over defending Marvel movies and Nintendo. At least Peterson hangs some dark art up on his walls, and not pictures of anime and nintendo figurines

 

[Human Snorenado]

For someone that advocates taking personal responsibility in your life his message of radical redistribution of pussy to help quell the society destroying urges of men who just can't help themselves otherwise is, uh... well, I see why etoilet is a fan.

 

[Assimilate]

For someone that advocates taking personal responsibility in your life his message of radical redistribution of pussy to help quell the society destroying urges of men who just can't help themselves otherwise is, uh... well, I see why etoilet is a fan.

 

Men should take personal responsibility in getting pussy?

Do tell how you'd go about that breh. Rape?

 

[Great Rumbler]

For someone that advocates taking personal responsibility in your life his message of radical redistribution of pussy to help quell the society destroying urges of men who just can't help themselves otherwise is, uh... well, I see why etoilet is a fan.

 

Men should take personal responsibility in getting pussy?

Go out and talk to girls like they're regular human beings instead of posting angrily on the internet about how hot guys are getting all the chicks?

[VomKriege]

Don't have an opinion on Peterson, haven't listened to him, don't have an opinion. Academics turning into pseudo media stars is never a turn for the best, science and the media cycle are like oil and water.

[Assimilate]

For someone that advocates taking personal responsibility in your life his message of radical redistribution of pussy to help quell the society destroying urges of men who just can't help themselves otherwise is, uh... well, I see why etoilet is a fan.

 

Men should take personal responsibility in getting pussy?

Go out and talk to girls like they're regular human beings instead of posting angrily on the internet about how hot guys are getting all the chicks?

Wow dog you're so fucking smart, who would've thought that?

You can only set yourself up to the highest of your abilities, and then the woman still has to CHOOSE you. That's the point. At the end of the day it's out of your control.

[HardcoreRetro]

Go out and talk to girls like they're regular human beings instead of posting angrily on the internet about how hot guys are getting all the chicks?

You know why these 4s are really scared of better looking women?

Because 7 8 9.

[Great Rumbler]

For someone that advocates taking personal responsibility in your life his message of radical redistribution of pussy to help quell the society destroying urges of men who just can't help themselves otherwise is, uh... well, I see why etoilet is a fan.

 

Men should take personal responsibility in getting pussy?

Go out and talk to girls like they're regular human beings instead of posting angrily on the internet about how hot guys are getting all the chicks?

Wow dog you're so fucking smart, who would've thought that?

You can only set yourself up to the highest of your abilities, and then the woman still has to CHOOSE you. That's the point. At the end of the day it's out of your control.

wow it's almost like women are independent entities with their own hopes and dreams and not mere constructs gifted to us from god for our male pleasures

[Human Snorenado]

For someone that advocates taking personal responsibility in your life his message of radical redistribution of pussy to help quell the society destroying urges of men who just can't help themselves otherwise is, uh... well, I see why etoilet is a fan.

 

Men should take personal responsibility in getting pussy?

Go out and talk to girls like they're regular human beings instead of posting angrily on the internet about how hot guys are getting all the chicks?

Wow dog you're so fucking smart, who would've thought that?

You can only set yourself up to the highest of your abilities, and then the woman still has to CHOOSE you. That's the point. At the end of the day it's out of your control.

wow it's almost like women are independent entities with their own hopes and dreams and not mere constructs gifted to us from god for our male pleasures

FAKE NEWS

[Assimilate]

For someone that advocates taking personal responsibility in your life his message of radical redistribution of pussy to help quell the society destroying urges of men who just can't help themselves otherwise is, uh... well, I see why etoilet is a fan.

 

Men should take personal responsibility in getting pussy?

Go out and talk to girls like they're regular human beings instead of posting angrily on the internet about how hot guys are getting all the chicks?

Wow dog you're so fucking smart, who would've thought that?

You can only set yourself up to the highest of your abilities, and then the woman still has to CHOOSE you. That's the point. At the end of the day it's out of your control.

wow it's almost like women are independent entities with their own hopes and dreams and not mere constructs gifted to us from god for our male pleasures

No, dog, the point Peterson is making is that through political pressure and societal shaming women are being fooled into thinking that working full time, not raising families, not wanting children, is what they really want. That women are equal to men in every way, that they should have multiple sex partners just because.

This an 'experiment' that patriarchy is 'bad' will go wrong considering it goes against millions of years of evolution .

[Great Rumbler]

lol these dumb women amirite

[Coitus]

Yo, Peterson really did the "we need traditional norms about sexuality so blue balls don't turn men into mass murderers" bit.

I'm going to have to actually read this piece.

Why does that seem like a far fetched possibility to you? Don't radical muslims get teenage boys to blow themselves up on the promise of 72 virgins waiting for them?

I actually do somewhat think that sexual frustration/repression can lead to aggression and anti-social behavior.

I don't see how enforcing "traditional norms" would somehow get incels laid though. I can't follow that train of thought in any way that isn't completely damning.

I'm speaking from observation and personal experience here but i see it. I see exactly what he's talking about. The difference between the states and latin america is huge in this respect. I've said it before in the relationship thread, i feel bad for guys in the states right now.

Guys growing up now have it hard. Despite the availability of tinder and all that, it's harder. And what i find really funny is that these 'white knight' dudes that follow the current 'guidelines' and push for these norms are the ones that will get burned the most.

When Peterson says only the most powerful, better looking guys will get females he's right. In the states i see women that are like 4s at best act like the biggest fucking snobs. I can't imagine what your average guy will do in this environment. I can only see a lot more of these 'incel' incidences growing.

...and what takeaway from this are we supposed to take other than "Women need to be put back in their place"?

Should we take away the pill? their franchise? reinstate coverture?

I don't have a solution at the moment. Maybe some social awakening?

Though, I think the solution will eventually come about naturally after women start to realize it kind of sucks having to choose from the abundance of unemployed/underemployed beta males. Not every opportunistic female will find themselves a Prince Harry. They won't like it when they realize that.

I'm speaking from observation and personal experience here but i see it. I see exactly what he's talking about. The difference between the states and latin america is huge in this respect. I've said it before in the relationship thread, i feel bad for guys in the states right now.

Data would be more convincing.

Yeah, i agree that's why you should probably listen more carefully to what Peterson says. This is his profession. He has the data for you.

Pictures of dragons aren’t data.

[HardcoreRetro]

Professor Peterson offers you three pokeballs. Which one do you pick?

The woman with a bit of grass on the field, the wet one or the hot one?

[Assimilate]

I wonder how white knighting works out for some of you. 

Pictures of dragons aren’t data.

 

[Coitus]

Who gets more pussy, white knights or angry sad sacks with a surrogate YouTube father?

[agrajag]

You guys took a major downgrade when you swapped etoilet for assface. At least he isn't posting pictures of children in prison camps yet.

[D3RANG3D]

When does the purveyor of L's get to come back?

[agrajag]

When does the purveyor of L's get to come back?

He's back spewing verbal diarrhea in the politics thread

[Nintex]

FIRST YOU GET DA MONEY
THEN YOU GET THE POWAH
WHEN YOU GET DA POWAH AND THE MONEY
YO GET THE WOMEN

The deranged theories of these nutcases still come down to Scarface quotes. 

[etiolate]

Despite what you might have read in Teen Vogue, Marx didn't invent communism or socialism. And Marxism-Leninism was basically Lenin and Trotsky going "this won't work! here's what will!"

And then Stalin went "anyway, fuck those guys, time to settle my long term inferiority complex growing up in the Russian caste system by taking it out on the world at large!"

Most importantly, Marx was absolutely obsessed with historical determinism to a level that he didn't bother elaborating on how his ultimate states come about because it considered it scientifically proven to happen because he said so. And often would attack his followers who tried to explain it, especially the transition period to communism, for undermining the science. One result of this, and what Lenin and Stalin both had to grapple with is that Marx's very specific stages didn't apply to Russia, like, at all, they were written for the UK and a prospective unified and industrial German state that didn't even come to exist until a few years before Marx died and years after he wrote the Manifesto. (His opinion on France was all over the place, like everyone else's opinions on France always.)

Marx wrote Communist Manifesto. Marx wrote about communism. He wrote it was coming and there'd be revolutionary violence.

I pointed out every part of the Manifesto that lead to the death of millions. The ideas therein were carried out and were deadly. They then were repeated in China and Zimbabwe.

You should have been honest and stated exactly what you were doing: That's not real socialism!

But you tried to weasel around the awful thing that you, culry and Mandark were doing. Nah. Fuck you. Enjoy your Holodomor images. I don't know why anyone thought the images would stop by banning me a couple of days. I said they would happen until an apology was made. I don't see an apology. I just see more terrible behavior.

As for the images, they do several things: Apply a serious topic at a visceral level for a community of people who can't handle serious topics. They then repeat over and over, making it feel cheap because that's what happens to serious topics in the hands of jackasses., they get cheapened. They also hold the forum up, hostage-like, in  way that represents Soviet interrogations. Let's call it the gun pointed at you on the table.

No interest in discussing Peterson or anything with this forum. Complete waste of time. I would like to say that you can google "enforced monogamy" and find the research papers and literature on it. It's a social sciences and biology term. It basically means socially preferenced and standardized monogamy.

I'm more interested in pointing out the behavior here of people towards incels. Incels are downtrodden people. Not every one is a madman. Most are just socially awkward and starving for confidence. Many just may not be good looking. These are people who likely got bullied a lot and this forum sees them as their own bullying target. It takes a real piece of shit to want to hate on the already beat down. But that's what this place is about. A bunch of meek people looking for anything or anyone they can be above so they can step all over them.

For some reason, you thought you could be that way with me, but I don't fuck around. You can see people that showed up in this thread once I was gone. You're scared of me, as well you should be. I'm not meek and I actually point out what you are.

For the few that aren't like that and for the many who are, I'm just going to sum it up with this video. Don't cast your pearls before swine.



Now I'll soon be banned so this is getting locked.

[Great Rumbler]

*wet fart sound*

[Mandark]

Despite what you might have read in Teen Vogue, Marx didn't invent communism or socialism. And Marxism-Leninism was basically Lenin and Trotsky going "this won't work! here's what will!"

And then Stalin went "anyway, fuck those guys, time to settle my long term inferiority complex growing up in the Russian caste system by taking it out on the world at large!"

Most importantly, Marx was absolutely obsessed with historical determinism to a level that he didn't bother elaborating on how his ultimate states come about because it considered it scientifically proven to happen because he said so. And often would attack his followers who tried to explain it, especially the transition period to communism, for undermining the science. One result of this, and what Lenin and Stalin both had to grapple with is that Marx's very specific stages didn't apply to Russia, like, at all, they were written for the UK and a prospective unified and industrial German state that didn't even come to exist until a few years before Marx died and years after he wrote the Manifesto. (His opinion on France was all over the place, like everyone else's opinions on France always.)

Marx wrote Communist Manifesto. Marx wrote about communism. He wrote it was coming and there'd be revolutionary violence.

I pointed out every part of the Manifesto that lead to the death of millions. The ideas therein were carried out and were deadly. They then were repeated in China and Zimbabwe.

You should have been honest and stated exactly what you were doing: That's not real socialism!

But you tried to weasel around the awful thing that you, culry and Mandark were doing.

benjipwns...................................... welcome to the #Resistance

[team filler]

 

[agrajag]

The mods are out to get me. They're tyrants trying to stifle my free speech. I'm simply too real for them.

*posts pages of NSFW images of dying starving children and verbal diarrhea across multiple threads, gets banned*

See? I told you. Tyrants! Despots!

[Assimilate]

Who gets more pussy, white knights or angry sad sacks with a surrogate YouTube father?

I'd say it's a push.

But i can at least feel a bit of sympathy for the 'sad sacks' because they aren't being little fucking pussies trying to white knight their way into some girls pants and still failing miserably when the brash guy at the party gets her anyways. 

[Leadbelly]

This debate seems a bit weird to me. I feel as if Peterson isn't actually addressing the actual subject of the debate. It seems like the argument he is making is a different debate. Political correctness in some general sense is the idea that certain points of view and ideas shouldn't be expressed. Peterson seems to have made it about his general gripes with Left wing politics.

Although they are related, he isn't explicitly saying why 'political correctness' is a bad thing or counter-productive. He is arguing why identity politics is a bad thing.

[Mandark]

[Momo]

This debate seems a bit weird to me. I feel as if Peterson isn't actually addressing the actual subject of the debate. It seems like the argument he is making is a different debate. Political correctness in some general sense is the idea that certain points of view and ideas shouldn't be expressed. Peterson seems to have made about his general gripes with Left wing politics.

Although they are related, he isn't explicitly saying why 'political correctness' is a bad thing or counter-productive. He is arguing why identity politics is a bad thing.

Stephen Fry makes a joke at 1:25 ish when the moderator asks him what people will see when they look back at this debate - 'Well they will wonder why political correctness isnt being discussed' 

[Leadbelly]

This debate seems a bit weird to me. I feel as if Peterson isn't actually addressing the actual subject of the debate. It seems like the argument he is making is a different debate. Political correctness in some general sense is the idea that certain points of view and ideas shouldn't be expressed. Peterson seems to have made about his general gripes with Left wing politics.

Although they are related, he isn't explicitly saying why 'political correctness' is a bad thing or counter-productive. He is arguing why identity politics is a bad thing.

Stephen Fry makes a joke at 1:25 ish when the moderator asks him what people will see when they look back at this debate - 'Well they will wonder why political correctness isnt being discussed' 

lol

[Mandark]

I think I missed making this point, but I don't think someone can honestly say "political correctness" (ie having speech informally restricted by the threat of social sanctions if you use speech against certain groups) is a malign force while also arguing that women's speech would be improved if they had to limit what they said by an implicit threat of violence.

Not that Peterson's ever actually coherent, but y'know.

[Momo]

like for real tho, if etiolate isnt here anymore, no need to obsess over JP, no one else cares, there's 3 other people on the panel.

[Mandark]

like for real tho, if etiolate isnt here anymore, no need to obsess over JP, no one else cares, there's 3 other people on the panel.

half your posts are complaining about what other people are talking about, like you paid for a subscription to this site

[Momo]

like for real tho, if etiolate isnt here anymore, no need to obsess over JP, no one else cares, there's 3 other people on the panel.

half your posts are complaining about what other people are talking about, like you paid for a subscription to this site

it wouldn't be if this wasn't a 31 page thread talking almost exclusively about JP, someone we all seem to agree isnt specifically interesting, yet discuss every day.

[agrajag]

Regardless of how much Etiolate might have protested at this notion, he created this thread to be about his love towards JP, this is the de facto JP thread.

[Mandark]

I don't think Peterson's uninteresting, just wildly wrong. But he's at least idiosyncratic and provides a lot of entertaining material.

Compare that to Dave Rubin, who's basically Glenn Reynolds 2.0. Talking about him would be boring as shit.

[Momo]

alright sure, fine. week long orgy and stuff, i'll leave it, but hopefully after we can talk about Stephen Fry and others 

[Momo]

I don't think Peterson's uninteresting, just wildly wrong. But he's at least idiosyncratic and provides a lot of entertaining material.

Compare that to Dave Rubin, who's basically Glenn Reynolds 2.0. Talking about him would be boring as shit.

I mean Carl of Akkad is interesting in that 'entertainment' regard also but I doubt anyone here wants to talk about his ass. Anyway i'll post some stuff after you guys are done grave stomping.

[Leadbelly]

I've always found Stephen Fry to be boring so probably not.

I actually think he is quite amusing in this debate.

[Kara]

Good podcast. Living in a country where racelessnes is so core to the whole idea (with some obvious practical problems), it's always interesting to contrast with the situation in the Americas.

They don't release often (it's tied to their magazine iirc), but I recommend them for anyone who doesn't mind Latin American analysis from a somewhat left anglophone academic perspective.

[Oblivion]

Momo-kun, I like ya, but YOU'RE the one who posted that PC debate with Peterson! 

[Momo]

Momo-kun, I like ya, but YOU'RE the one who posted that PC debate with Peterson! 

once again there are like 3 other panelists, I'm not going ignore interesting content because I cant trust people to behave (imo of course).

[Oblivion]

Those three are fairly well known (at least in political circles) but JP is the - as the great David Brooks proclaimed - "the most important intellectual in the western hemisphere". He's the one that's in the news all the time, so he's the one who most people are going to focus on (whether that be his fans or enemies). I don't see what's wrong with that.

[agrajag]

I'm not going ignore interesting content because I cant trust people to behave (imo of course).

That sounds like something Etiolate would say

 

[Momo]

Someone has to take the filler likes 

[agrajag]

Dear lord, I just skimmed through some of the video Momo posted... all of Etoilet's ramblings about communist atrocities is parroting Peterson almost verbatim. Gotta get a mind of your own, sunshine!

 

[Assimilate]

Dear lord, I just skimmed through some of the video Momo posted... all of Etoilet's ramblings about communist atrocities is parroting Peterson almost verbatim. Gotta get a mind of your own, sunshine!

 

And you go by what? bullshit you see on CNN? or maybe some poorly googled articles you picked up on your way to enlightenment?

[agrajag]

 

[Oblivion]

Not to belabor the point, Assimilate, but your comments on Venezuela, CNN, and now Jordan Peterson seem to paint a particular impression regarding your political beliefs...

[Mandark]

I appreciate Assimilate trying to step in to fill the void, but it's not the same.

et really thought Peterson had revealed some dark, forbidden knowledge. You get the sense Assimilate's just trying to get an argument going while he waits for the laundry to finish.

[Mandark]

"You cucks are awfully dismissive of a guy with actual credentials and research on the topic of..."

*googles Jordan Peterson for the first time ever*

"chaos dragons?"

[Assimilate]

Yeah, that he's fucking dumb.

For a second there i was respecting our exchanges... now you've insulted me, sir.

Not to belabor the point, Assimilate, but your comments on Venezuela, CNN, and now Jordan Peterson seem to paint a particular impression regarding your political beliefs...

I don't have political beliefs. I don't like politics. I go with what makes sense to me, what seems backed by evidence and what i have experienced in life. Like i said before and was mocked profusely... I voted Obama twice. If i were black i know i know i'd still be an 'uncle tom'

But real quick... what about Venezuela? I've been to Venezuela recently (right before the starvation crisis) for work. Do tell me what your thoughts on that situation are and how i'm wrong, or how you think my views are wrong on that.

I appreciate Assimilate trying to step in to fill the void, but it's not the same.

et really thought Peterson had revealed some dark, forbidden knowledge. You get the sense Assimilate's just trying to get an argument going while he waits for the laundry to finish.

Laundry? Motherfucker that's what a girlfriend is for 

[jakefromstatefarm]

Actual reactionaries, especially the meaner ones, think Peterson is a fairly boring pro-liberalism conservative (ie right-center/center-right) and they would be mostly correct on that. The idea that because he doesn't like modern feminism or pronouns that begin with xyz, he's actually aligned with people who want to overturn democracy or global capitalism is silly. When he isn't the middle of lecturing on his Jungian/Darwinian/Gnostic blend (he's a little less Christian than I originally thought, but in a way that makes him even less of a reactionary), he's a fairly standard knee-jerking Canadian conservative boomer, right down to failing to properly label what he's arguing against ("post-modern marxism", which is a misnomer for the typical "PC Culture" academia or maybe even Harold Bloom's School of Resentment).

sure, but this particular misnomer he’s committed to and the narrative (read: top-down conspiracy) that goes along with it was invented/propagated by actual reactionaries. Surely that’s at least a little relevant.

The fact the charts are already going up is a bit of a rhetorical obstacle for anyone who thinks there is a huge economical/political problem with society, left or right.

the main objection raised towards pinkers work for 15 years now has been that he manipulates the charts to point up, or otherwise handwaves them away when they don’t.

[jakefromstatefarm]

Also, don’t mean to beat a dead horsefucker or anything, but p sure we buried the lede here:

I'm more interested in pointing out the behavior here of people towards incels. Incels are downtrodden people. Not every one is a madman. Most are just socially awkward and starving for confidence. Many just may not be good looking. These are people who likely got bullied a lot and this forum sees them as their own bullying target. It takes a real piece of shit to want to hate on the already beat down. But that's what this place is about. A bunch of meek people looking for anything or anyone they can be above so they can step all over them.

that the rest of the forum gets blamed for not being sympathetic enough might be the most appropriate way et could’ve signed off

[benjipwns]

Marx wrote Communist Manifesto. Marx wrote about communism. He wrote it was coming and there'd be revolutionary violence.

I pointed out every part of the Manifesto that lead to the death of millions. The ideas therein were carried out and were deadly. They then were repeated in China and Zimbabwe.

You should have been honest and stated exactly what you were doing: That's not real socialism!

But you tried to weasel around the awful thing that you, culry and Mandark were doing. Nah. Fuck you. Enjoy your Holodomor images. I don't know why anyone thought the images would stop by banning me a couple of days. I said they would happen until an apology was made. I don't see an apology. I just see more terrible behavior.

As for the images, they do several things: Apply a serious topic at a visceral level for a community of people who can't handle serious topics. They then repeat over and over, making it feel cheap because that's what happens to serious topics in the hands of jackasses., they get cheapened. They also hold the forum up, hostage-like, in  way that represents Soviet interrogations. Let's call it the gun pointed at you on the table.

A good version of The Manifesto to pick up is the version with Gareth Stedman Jones' extended historiography as an "introduction" (it's actually like 80% of the physical book) that I think is from Penguin Books. It rather extensively covers the history of the writing of The Manifesto by Marx and Engels and properly places its "final form" (Engels re-edited the thing multiple times, including long after Marx's death, especially translations) as a rush job to meet the Revolutionary Wave of 1848 that had already begun.

The notion of revolutionary violence is not exclusive to Marx, nor communism, especially in the wake of the French Revolution where the very concept of revolutions was identified as violent by Burke and other conservatives. Marx and Engels came up intellectually in this same period so it's not shocking that seeing the events of 1848 all over Yurop that they wrote their own version in the same, especially to get it out there in time. I'd have to look it up but I don't think The Manifesto was very successful for decades not "taking off" really until well after Marx died and disappointed everyone with Capital.

Unfortunate that you were banned, even for revolutionary hostage taking only to be faced with Israeli like negotiation tactics by DogMod, but perhaps your new found interest in The Manifesto (or your sparking of interest in any others left in the bubble) will want to look into this version of the work for that introduction. Even if to properly acquire it from the internet store rather than contribute to profit making.

Giving a single work, or a single man, too much power is one of Peterson's main problems. Thinking that it's a "not real communism" argument to refuse to remove agency from people like Lenin, Stalin and Mao who wrote extensively in their own theory and place it in the long dead (even then) Marx's hands for a single work he wrote is a rather troubling anti-intellectual route to take. Especially since, again, despite what Teen Vogue wrote, Marx didn't invent communism or socialism. He simply discovered the divine word of the science of socialism that all his predecessors had missed in their sickening and uninformed utopianism about an achieved state of socialism where things just simply work out because they do.

[Assimilate]

Marx wrote Communist Manifesto. Marx wrote about communism. He wrote it was coming and there'd be revolutionary violence.

I pointed out every part of the Manifesto that lead to the death of millions. The ideas therein were carried out and were deadly. They then were repeated in China and Zimbabwe.

You should have been honest and stated exactly what you were doing: That's not real socialism!

But you tried to weasel around the awful thing that you, culry and Mandark were doing. Nah. Fuck you. Enjoy your Holodomor images. I don't know why anyone thought the images would stop by banning me a couple of days. I said they would happen until an apology was made. I don't see an apology. I just see more terrible behavior.

As for the images, they do several things: Apply a serious topic at a visceral level for a community of people who can't handle serious topics. They then repeat over and over, making it feel cheap because that's what happens to serious topics in the hands of jackasses., they get cheapened. They also hold the forum up, hostage-like, in  way that represents Soviet interrogations. Let's call it the gun pointed at you on the table.

A good version of The Manifesto to pick up is the version with Gareth Stedman Jones' extended historiography as an "introduction" (it's actually like 80% of the physical book) that I think is from Penguin Books. It rather extensively covers the history of the writing of The Manifesto by Marx and Engels and properly places its "final form" (Engels re-edited the thing multiple times, including long after Marx's death, especially translations) as a rush job to meet the Revolutionary Wave of 1848 that had already begun.

The notion of revolutionary violence is not exclusive to Marx, nor communism, especially in the wake of the French Revolution where the very concept of revolutions was identified as violent by Burke and other conservatives. Marx and Engels came up intellectually in this same period so it's not shocking that seeing the events of 1848 all over Yurop that they wrote their own version in the same, especially to get it out there in time. I'd have to look it up but I don't think The Manifesto was very successful for decades not "taking off" really until well after Marx died and disappointed everyone with Capital.

Unfortunate that you were banned, even for revolutionary hostage taking only to be faced with Israeli like negotiation tactics by DogMod, but perhaps your new found interest in The Manifesto (or your sparking of interest in any others left in the bubble) will want to look into this version of the work for that introduction. Even if to properly acquire it from the internet store rather than contribute to profit making.

Giving a single work, or a single man, too much power is one of Peterson's main problems. Thinking that it's a "not real communism" argument to refuse to remove agency from people like Lenin, Stalin and Mao who wrote extensively in their own theory and place it in the long dead (even then) Marx's hands for a single work he wrote is a rather troubling anti-intellectual route to take. Especially since, again, despite what Teen Vogue wrote, Marx didn't invent communism or socialism. He simply discovered the divine word of the science of socialism that all his predecessors had missed in their sickening and uninformed utopianism about an achieved state of socialism where things just simply work out because they do.

Is benji and etoilet the same person? 

[Mandark]

A good version of The Manifesto to pick up is the version with Gareth Stedman Jones' extended historiography as an "introduction" (it's actually like 80% of the physical book) that I think is from Penguin Books. It rather extensively covers the history of the writing of The Manifesto by Marx and Engels and properly places its "final form" (Engels re-edited the thing multiple times, including long after Marx's death, especially translations) as a rush job to meet the Revolutionary Wave of 1848 that had already begun.

The notion of revolutionary violence is not exclusive to Marx, nor communism, especially in the wake of the French Revolution where the very concept of revolutions was identified as violent by Burke and other conservatives. Marx and Engels came up intellectually in this same period so it's not shocking that seeing the events of 1848 all over Yurop that they wrote their own version in the same, especially to get it out there in time. I'd have to look it up but I don't think The Manifesto was very successful for decades not "taking off" really until well after Marx died and disappointed everyone with Capital.

Unfortunate that you were banned, even for revolutionary hostage taking only to be faced with Israeli like negotiation tactics by DogMod, but perhaps your new found interest in The Manifesto (or your sparking of interest in any others left in the bubble) will want to look into this version of the work for that introduction. Even if to properly acquire it from the internet store rather than contribute to profit making.

Giving a single work, or a single man, too much power is one of Peterson's main problems. Thinking that it's a "not real communism" argument to refuse to remove agency from people like Lenin, Stalin and Mao who wrote extensively in their own theory and place it in the long dead (even then) Marx's hands for a single work he wrote is a rather troubling anti-intellectual route to take. Especially since, again, despite what Teen Vogue wrote, Marx didn't invent communism or socialism. He simply discovered the divine word of the science of socialism that all his predecessors had missed in their sickening and uninformed utopianism about an achieved state of socialism where things just simply work out because they do.

(in an amazingly good Hagrid impersonation) "Yer a tankie, benji!"

[Mandark]

Also, don’t mean to beat a dead horsefucker or anything, but p sure we buried the lede here:

I'm more interested in pointing out the behavior here of people towards incels. Incels are downtrodden people. Not every one is a madman. Most are just socially awkward and starving for confidence. Many just may not be good looking. These are people who likely got bullied a lot and this forum sees them as their own bullying target. It takes a real piece of shit to want to hate on the already beat down. But that's what this place is about. A bunch of meek people looking for anything or anyone they can be above so they can step all over them.

that the rest of the forum gets blamed for not being sympathetic enough might be the most appropriate way et could’ve signed off

This, more than anything, is in line with how et's traditionally thought of stuff, even before he got explicitly political. I also think it's kind of indicative of the way a lot of people push back against "identity politics" and I've absolutely got a Nola-length carepost in me on this.

[benjipwns]

Ironically, I've come around strongly to the position that the Holomodor was less deliberate savagery than the result of a cornucopia of disastrous decisions combined with an institutional mindset that didn't particularly care much about anything like that as long as it wasn't happening visibly in places like Leningrad and Moscow...

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Similarly, I think there's at least some value in the bureaucratic inertia argument that the "Hitler didn't know!" historians best popularized.

[close]

[Mandark]

I haven't read that much but the "working towards the Fuhrer" frame makes intuitive sense to me.

[jakefromstatefarm]

Giving a single work, or a single man, too much power is one of Peterson's main problems. Thinking that it's a "not real communism" argument to refuse to remove agency from people like Lenin, Stalin and Mao who wrote extensively in their own theory and place it in the long dead (even then) Marx's hands for a single work he wrote is a rather troubling anti-intellectual route to take.

and it’s not exclusive to Peterson, it happens in everyday discourse all the time. I’d push this a step further and say that any narrative that solely -and maybe even primarily- attributes monumental social change to any written sources, esp. canonical ones, is overly ambitious. There’s been a lot of recent (read: past ~25 years) work done on the French enlightenment that suggests that the most widely propagated and causally efficacious literature before and during the revolution wasn’t Rousseau, montesquieu, Voltaire, but instead run of the mill pamphletry fit for common consumption. You can likewise look at Quentin skinners case against reading too much into the private possessions of authors in order to draw inferences about ‘influence’. The texture of social reality is ultimately too complicated to settle for such univocal explanations. How much of the 1968 student protests was actually Marcuse’s fault? I’m skeptical towards any narrative that answers that question with: “a large portion of it” -simply because that seems like a cute way to efface the grievances of the actual people on the ground.

Especially since, again, despite what Teen Vogue wrote, Marx didn't invent communism or socialism. He simply discovered the divine word of the science of socialism that all his predecessors had missed in their sickening and uninformed utopianism about an achieved state of socialism where things just simply work out because they do.

Saint-Simon and Comte annihilated

This, more than anything, is in line with how et's traditionally thought of stuff, even before he got explicitly political. I also think it's kind of indicative of the way a lot of people push back against "identity politics" and I've absolutely got a Nola-length carepost in me on this.

i showed you mine now you

Ironically, I've come around strongly to the position that the Holomodor was less deliberate savagery than the result of a cornucopia of disastrous decisions combined with an institutional mindset that didn't particularly care much about anything like that as long as it wasn't happening visibly in places like Leningrad and Moscow...

funnily enough, this is literally the most contentious area within soviet scholarship. Pinning the famine on Moscow’s desire to break the Ukrainian nationalists kulaks is an argument that is as old as the height of the Cold War. It’s also one that’s routinely challenged.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

harvest of sorrow has been sitting on my bedroom floor for like, 4 years now

[close]