This is great because Peterson has been using apocalyptic crisis constantly. Like he can absolutely talk for hours inventing doomsday scenarios because some company had an lgbtq flag or something.
All that aisde, i'm always amazed how repetitive his content is. I would watch a short clip of him every once in a while when I see one here and even at that pace I find him so tiring. I undersand that there are people out there who think that obsessing over the culture war is the imporant thing to do but I honestly can't understand how they manage to listen to the same 5 things over and over again from this dude. He is giving a different interview every week repeating the same dumb shit for years.
I donāt think his head is in it any more. Heās a deeply depressed and angry person who thought he would get legitimacy though popularityā¦and it just made him more depressed and angry. Heās not ok.
"You really start to see a man who believes he has no control over his life. Most likely because he feels out of control." [https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxrAzJBKNTDCdWkX1B0qDM4z2TPUQPxuGw?si=xgtr6xqZZMcbB0eS](https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxrAzJBKNTDCdWkX1B0qDM4z2TPUQPxuGw?si=xgtr6xqZZMcbB0eS)
Thank youā¦itās tough watching somebody who so obviously needs help.
I would have empathy for him if he wasnāt so virulently damaging toā¦other people who need help.
With him i'm never sure what is the case tbh. He does look constantly angry. On the other hand this anger combined with big words and long sentences is seen as some intellectual superiority by his fans. The whole "passionate professor fighting against the big evil woke-ness" persona is appealing and has been used with some modification by many conservatives. So yeah, it's really hard to know. There is some madness there but there is also a certain dose of play I think.
I keep having this debate with myself and my wife. Is he stupid ? Is he lacking self-awareness ? Is he just scamming ?
Who really knows but the guy is a freak.
> Is he stupid ?
No, that would be an insufficient explanation. He was a professor in Psychology after all. Outside of his field he does say stupid shit. I always think it is more that he underestimates his audience. He really thinks he is smarter than he really is.
If you go look back to his 2015 lectures and before, he is now doing what he explained back then: how Hitler was able to convince an audience, by telling them what they wanted to hear. Peterson is doing this. His lectures on Disgust are also interesting. He basically laid the gameplan back then for what he is doing now.
>Is he lacking self-awareness ?
I think this is true. He seems to be a narcissist. They have the tendency to twist reality to fit their narrative. He also has a victim mentality, because he often feels wronged. I think he is delusional to some extent. Some of his lies are pretty obvious, eg. staying awake for 25 days, not being able to handle a droplet of apple cider, reading 200 books on climate change, etc... He pretends to be more than he is. His narcissistic mind won't let him see the reality of it all, his fragile ego wouldn't be able to handle it and he would simply implode. Look up 'narcissistic collapse', I think Peterson experienced this on several occasions.
>Is he just scamming ?
Yes, he is scamming. He has endorsed the Heartland institute and their projects in some of his tweets. He started saying fracking is good, when he started getting paid, by the owners of a fracking business.
Adding my own: Is he delusional?
Yes. Simply read his book Maps of Meaning and it will become clear how crazy he really is.
JBP is to academia as Trump is to politics.
Both realized that they could seize their moment with little to stop them other than social convention.
This is commonly known as a sociopath and has a lot of overlap with narcissistic traits.
The real trick is having just enough charisma to start a following, aka a cult.
> The real trick is having just enough charisma to start a following, aka a cult.
Or just latching on to enough uncharismatic basement dwelling blackpilled chumps. There are more people than ever to sell snake oil to, and a LOT of unloved and unfulfilled people out there who want someone to blame for it.
My wife and used to have the same debate. I've been aware of this guy ever since he broke onto the scene during the protests at UoT. My wife was even a fan of his for a bit.
I think he was rocketed into the spotlight, which he did not expect, and lost his mind trying to keep up with his new found popularity. At one point I think he actually believed in the trash he was peddling but he's always been kind of a dumb smart guy...someone who takes a lot of mental shortcuts...the dunning kruger effect personified. That coupled with the raking in of cash caused him to start saying shit just to maintain his popularity.
At some point he lost control because he very obviously (to me, anyway) lacks mental fortitude. He turned to drugs, then ran off to Russia. When he came back he was still the same asshole, but different. I think he's back to believing the shit he says, but more due to irreversible brain damage than anything else.
He knows who he is appealing to, and how they will respond to, and frame, his rhetoric.
The entire argument was meant to make an anti-vaxx, anti-masker cum with self-righteousness or whatever.
The sole fact that you don't see it and need to hear it is weird.
According to him 10% raise of the price = 20% of the poor to die. He literally doesn't have a video where he is not throwing some doomsday scenarios.
You gotta be watching a different video or have poor comprehension. There is no way you think giving examples of an opposing belief is the same as creating doomsday scenarios
He has such big relentless mad uncle at Christmas lunch energy. All bright eyes, pulsing neck and grating voice.
You can almost play JBP bingo even with this short clip too: knights and dragons? Tick. Evil spirits speaking out of meat puppets? Tick.
>He has such big relentless mad uncle at Christmas lunch energy.Ā
Yeah, exactly. Constantly demanding attention, thinking that his opinions are edgy and unique, constantly angry.
>You can almost play JBP bingo even with this short clip too: knights and dragons? Tick. Evil spirits speaking out of meat puppets? Tick.
Literally 5 things he repeats over and over again.
That's the mantra. Repeat ad infinitum and reach the proper mindset. Instead of the traditional meditation goal of reducing stress, improving mental focus and cultivatating inner peace, the Rightwing Mantra's goal is to agitate, distract and cloud judgement and cultivate outrage.
The message there wasnāt against apocalyptic messaging, it was specifically about catastrophism as a means of power consolidation.
Legitimate faults aside, Peterson isnāt parading his apocalyptic thinking around as a justification to be given political power for him to wield by his own arbitrationā¦ which is what he would have to be doing to be hypocritical in this context.
Peterson has been using catastrophism literally all the time. Just to what he said here:
Raise prices by 10% = 20 million dead.
He is constantly inventing doomsday scenarios that appeal to stupid people.
It sounds like you're making two different points here:
1. Rising energy costs will not devastate the poor.
2. Catastrophizing about rising energy costs is hypocritical here because.... Peterson supports using compulsion to drive down energy costs?
Do you believe #1? And what kind of compulsion is Peterson advocating to keep energy costs low? It's not something I've seen him talk about.
30 years of being a university lecturer and publisher and putting vids online for free for people to critique...its almost as if he knows some things.....?
What exactly do you mean by that? Last time I saw Peterson go in the arena it turned out that he knows nothing about Marxism despite speaking with confidence about it for 10+ years.
I don't remember him going "in the arena" after that.....all I remember is him being going to podcasts of people who share the same views as him. He is literally a keyboard warrior too my dude. When was the last time he challenged somebody in a live show? Isn't he just writing mean tweets for the last 5+ years or something?
It's a fair criticism to throw at him though. If he wants to critique Marxism then he really needs to do more than read the manifesto. Even Marx alone is arguably insufficient as there is over a century of development of Marx's original ideas. At best he is critiquing something he doesn't understand well enough to really be making such broad claims, at worst Peterson is acting in bad faith and made up his mind long ago and won't even neutrally engage with it. I am fairly sure if Peterson wanted to go into the arena he could. But in academia the arena isn't podcasts, online debates, and one off talks, its publications and peer review. Where is Peterson on that front, and I mean recently not decades ago in a field irrelevant to his current diatribe.
It's weird that his fans are not bothered by that. Before the debate with Zizek Peterson had been talking about Marxism and communism for years. He even collected Soviet propaganda pieces from what I remember. How do you end up doing that and not even reading Marx?
What I found really bizarre is that after that his fans somehow did some crazy mental gymnastics and convinced themselves that the debate with Zizek was a "draw" while it was clear that Zizek couldn't find a common ground with a person who barely had an idea what Marx has said. How his fans end up still believing that Peterson is not full of shit after that is beyond my understanding.
My guess is because the fans do the same thing, and are shopping for someone with a doctorate who agrees with them. I figure what is appealing about Peterson is he reduces debate to a contest of "who sounds smarter and scores the most witty jabs". Academia as sport in a sense, actual academic debate is not about winning its about rigorously weighing up evidence/context/experience towards a conclusion. Which no one can actually do in the context of an hour and half long podcast. Peterson for example attacks feminism as if its one agreed upon thing and not an umbrella term drawing of critical theory, sociological theories, poltical theories, intersectionality, psychology, medicine etc. its the same with Marxism. Peterson simplifies the field, at times defines it incorrectly, and then attacks his version of understanding. A bit like how some of his fans approach areas they don't fully agree with or understand. Just see how often people reject the concept of toxic masculinity without even definig the term correctly or engaging with Conells work. Frankly most probably don't even know who Conell is despite them being the originator of hegemonic masculinity in the first place. In academia that kind of oversight would get a paper rejected.
Peterson is perfectly primed for what online spaces consider debate, just see how often people make a broad claim and then post a single source. An academic paper has between 80-100 different sources and most of the claims are quite simplistic. A thesis in the area that Peterson claims to be an expert in would contain somewhere between 300-600. The world of what constitutes evidence is very different in standard. But Peterson really leans into the idea of quips, "owning" opponents, just dropping articles without really exploring things like methodology. Peterson takes the credibility of academia but treats internet discourse as its equivalent. Which probably endears him to groups who want to think internet debate is the same thing as research. Or as I would, maybe unfairly, describe as the "who needs University when we have YouTube" types.
Hey, that's a great comment and a perfect summary of what Peterson does and what is his appeal. Would love to have it as a copy pasta in hand.
It's true that many complex issues have been simplified to youtube debaters looking for "zingers". Peterson was actually one of the first few ones that had this type of moment in the culture war sphere with that show where they were discussing feminism. At some point the "PROFESSOR DESTROYS STUPID FEMINIST LIVE ON A TV SHOW" youtube videos were recommended all the time.
This approach tho leads to more and more superficial debates and less and less curiosity from all parts involved. For a university professor it looks like Peterson rarely approaches anything (if ever) anything with an open mind. What I also dislike is that him and the other people on his camp are so focused on looking for zingers and "owning" the libs that they completely dehumanize the groups they talk about.
Trans people are now not people, they are seen as something that you are ''pro'' or ''against'' or as some ''agenda''. Peterson is a professor constantly talking about researches, studies and academia and constantly being bothered by trans people but he almost never sits with the actual people to understand more about them. It's like they are not people. Like....if you want to explore the issue just sit with them and talk. Don't just repost shitty research on twitter.
30 years of University lectures about human behaviour while others sit behind phones and critique. If others here have videos or lectures that i can watch id be happy too, otherwise i dont give their expert reddit view much weight
Donald Trump seems to be using the Tyrant book to a T when it comes to gaining support by playing on fear and reversing ādegeneracyā. Even Mussolini got immensely popular by constantly referring to a time Italy was āgreatā and he will take them back to it..
Mark Fisher, RIP. The book is *Capitalist Realism* and it seriously changed my life. Everyone should read it.
As an aside, this is a great example of how you can see that conservatives either literally donāt have the cognitive capacity to think outside of these social constructs, or are unwilling to because of their class interests. I donāt particularly care about getting into the nitty-gritty of which side JP sits on. Either way, he sounds ignorant and unimaginative, which he is.
They aren't acting in their class interest tho, they're acting in their *perceived* class interest. They need something to shake them to show them where they really stand.
Til then it's the old saying, every American believes they're a millionaire in the making, this goes doubly for conservatives.
Long after humans are dead the space rocks will continue trading positions with each other using the currency of gravity and speed. It's a booming market baby
This argument kind of makes the same mistake that everyone who criticizes the apocalyptic results of communism in practice. The problem is always cronyism. Which runs counter to the ideals of both systems. That is the red thread of rot that runs through both systems and corrupts them.
True people can ruin any system. I take it more as a comment on the unwillingness to be imaginative in the face of a failing system. Not just capitalism but climate change, fossil fuels, education, etc. Thatās not to say there are not people who are trying to better these systems but this video in particular makes him seem hopeless to try and change anything
Specifically it isnāt addressing just any change. The video is against one specific type of change: justifying authoritarian control over peopleās lives.
Funny how he likes to use the word āapocalypseā to describe how his enemies believe in one, as if the word itself came from a source of teachings heās very familiar with and he personally believes. I wonder what that is š¤
Then he goes on to support the candidate who routinely screams things like, āWeāre being invaded by rapists and criminals and democracy will end, and our traditional way of life will be destroyed if you donāt go for me!!!!ā
I get that both of these guys' whole schtick is just making up stories to fit their warped sense of reality, but to make the claim about rising renewable energy costs the same week we see France go into negative prices for energy is completely laughable
https://fortune.com/2024/06/16/electricity-prices-france-negative-renewable-energy-supply-solar-power-wind-turbines/
Peterson is revealing something serious here about his belief system. He views his own personal death as equally as important as mass death caused by things like Climate Change or war. This is very important to understand about Peterson; his ideology is so self centered and self aggrandizing that \*he thinks the heat death of the globe is just as important as his own death.\*
Very serious man. Not a parody of himself at all.
Because he says so. He's a climate change denialist, so he doesn't actually respect, or understand, the scope and scale of what's being discussed. He's traded his intellectual credibility for clout with his equally delusional followers.
He explicitly states here that death is an apocolypse. No it's not. Death is death. It's part of the cycle of life. It is not the same thing as the heat death of the species. Unless you don't care about that, and pretend as though your own death is as meaningful as the death of the species, which he explicitly states here to be the case.
ā¦ thatās not what heās saying. Heās saying that *from an individualās perspective* the apocalypse is always happening because they die and everyone and everything they know dies.
Jesus fucking Christ. Heās trying to explain that thatās how *people* experience the world. Not that him personally dying is the same as the species dying.
How did you miss the part where he explicitly says āitās not just that me and you dieā and goes on to talk about how everyone and everything around one dies.
Ah yes, and now we're down the "You just need to listen more" pipeline that Peterson proponents bang on about. "If just read this book, and listen to this lecture you'll see that what he's saying actually means the opposite of what he said!"
Peterson is a fool, and the only people more foolish then him are the people who defend him. Go listen to the guy that sits on a street corner. You'll get more wisdom from him then Peterson.
My man. Itās the next sentence.
Someone being a dumbass doesnāt give you a free pass to simply make up what theyāre saying.
Edit: realised Iām talking to a communist. Thereās no reasoning with you people
The death of an individual to that individual is as bad, if not worse than, the death of the entire planet because their life is as precious to them as the life of the planet itself.
To deny this is to create a hierarchy of worth that places the individual's life below that of anything above 2 lives of random people or non-human animals.
The very idea of collectivism is the antithesis of removing the value of the individual because if you remove the value of the individual the collective is empty of meaning too, without the individual having value the collective can do what it wants to all the individuals it's created from.
Damn dude, if you'd prefer to witness the destruction of the entire planet rather than die a normal, peaceful death yourself, you're *deeeeply* fucked up.
I'm not saying I agree with this I'm saying that collectivism creates a value of equality therefore a single death and a mass death or even the death of the planet must include equal feelings of absence or sadness.
I don't think that's true. Morally I believe all people are equal, but I'd be a lot sadder if my son died than if you did. Being a collectivist doesn't preclude you from having friends and caring about them more than you care about others.
People like Peterson does not have "objective" value system. He has highly egocentric value system where he derives hierarchy of value based on how something makes him feel. That is why highy reasonable person will not agree with him. I for example understand his perspective, but do not agree. I understand that he process reality different than me, he is higher on delusion scale.
Big scary hypotheticals.
I guess in this hyper individualized society it's a lot better that we have individuals that indirectly kill groups of people with their decisions. Cuz that does happen constantly, but we let it rock. Maybe we need to value the collective a lil bit more.
"Your nervous system has indicated by the paralysis of your fear..."
lolololol
He sounds like that middle school kid who is so impressed with himself over how much he likes to read. Just string together a convoluted sentence and then pretend you're some sort of esoteric genius if someone has the gall to say something other than,
"Right." on repeat
Sorry, Jordan, the body responds to perceived threats in a manner the amygdala interprets as fear and serves up either fight, flight, freeze or fawn as our menu of responsesā¦.unless we regain contact with our physical experiences that allow the cortex (the adult in the brain) to step in and apply reality to the situation, which can include reframing the body responses as a different emotion, such as excitement or, at the very least, put the brakes on irrational behavior responses.
Iām sorry, havenāt both these guys built their names on presenting āCultural Marxismā as an apocalyptic crisis and why you should give them money to hear their words more?
Hey who is this guy, he looks familiar? He has lobsters on his jacket... Oh right, this is the guy who talks about lobsters! Aren't they older than trees or something, and aren't they very dominant? crazy stuff man, I want to be a dominant lobster. This guy is really insightful, I would never have realized how dominant lobsters are. Anybody know if he has like a patreon or something, or maybe some branded merch I can buy to support him? We need to make sure he can keep an eye out for tyrants, i hate tyrants. anyway who's voting for trump?
Peterson means 'the devil'. I think he believes the devil is real.
You can deduce this from his book Maps of Meaning. Another indication is that he urged his students to read Jeffrey Burton Russell's books. Similar are his musings on 'Paradise Lost'.
I wonder does Peterson believe that Churchil extended the Emergency Powers Act in 1940 because he was "too small a knight" to fight the Nazi "Dragon" ?
Jeezus Christ. Just babbling out hypocritical word salads with no shame or irony.
This is the guy whoās at the vanguard of a movement who believes that equal rights are an apocalyptic crisis that require extreme solutions like disqualifying leftists for political office.
But yeahā¦Covid was fake and Trudeau was using it to get rich off the WEFā¦and he wants to stop people from driving soā¦uhā¦I forget what that conspiracy theory is. Totally sane.
I legitimately feel sorry for the folks who've been duped into believing that Peterson or Lindsay are relevantly credentialed or informed enough to have any real insight into the nature of "Tyrants" or "Real Leaders". Also, this conversation is just a bunch of bloviating about "No True Scotsman"
What's gnarly about both of these dudes is that they've cultivated audiences who seem completely incapable of asking for even the slightest amount of evidence.
Really odd.
He is describing Trump's current campaign strategy... Trump keeps telling everyone how everything is so terrible now and then just bald face lies about crime, the economy, world conflict and then follows up with only he can solve all these problems.
Can't Mr. Jordan see that Trump is using fear to con all his alt-righties?
Peterson rebuking religion here?
* Every prophet in the Old Testament had a tendency to scare their public into submission.
* The concept of 'apocalypse' itself is expressed in the bible. It's fearmongering about the future.
Who is the tyrant really?
no it isn't. apocalypse means "to reveal."
>Every prophet in the Old Testament had a tendency to scare their public into submission.
you idiots are always claiming that there is no hell because it isn't talked about in the old testament, so how is that even possible?
>The concept of 'apocalypse' itself is expressed in the bible. It's fearmongering about the future.
how is heaven fearmongering? have you even read the book?
one of the top comments above is:
>āit is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalismā
how is that fantasy about destroying society to create a fake communist heaven better than the reality of God bring heaven to His people?
Is the implication that any leader who gives a shit about real crises like climate change or COVID is a tyrant? Only people who don't give a shit about anything aside from business interests go brrrr are real leaders.
Dudeās been slowly morphing into the riddler with his attire and asinine hyper generalized answers to questions lol āwell who bloody knows what an idea is?!ā
Goodness. Ok, well it's pretty selective to choose global warming as being the fear worthy of highlighting here. Why not the fear of the establishment that Trump uses?
Don't get me wrong, to a certain extent I agree with his underlying message that tyrants rely on fear to gain support, but let's not put blinders on here. We should be concerned about these tactics regardless of which side uses them.
As much as I loathe this man, this is one thing I think he does well. He disarms the people who would make fun of his stupid-ass lobster philosophy by just confidently embracing it and making it his thing. It's smart. If only he ever said anything that is anywhere near as smart.
Haven't listened to Jordan talk in a while but the appearance of the sole real world (being generous) example being climate change is really striking.
Cause you could run this argument.
I mean it's not great because while there might always be a crisis somewhere there isn't always one everywhere the way this universalising logic suggests.
But if you did actually run this argument there would be a lot of tyrants. But you don't get a lot of examples. Funny isn't it.
Btw, is an armed robbery a crisis?
Establishing your criteria for a situation, doesnāt make you an expert in alleviating the consequences of prior choices.
Or, in determining who has to āpay the priceā for addressing those issues.
Well, if your definition of "tyrant" is "a leader who uses compulsion on the population they lead to prevent bad things from happening", then every leader of every country ever is a tyrant. Compulsion is a necessary part of running a country. Imagine if taxes were entirely voluntary and laws were more like suggestions. Life would be so much worse for everybody. The important distinction to make here is whether the amount and kind of compulsion is justified and adequate, whether the crisis or "apocalypse" is real and warrants responding to, and whether the leader in question allows for mechanisms to ensure that they're capable of being held accountable by their population.
Peterson glosses over all that, because being vague af and ignoring all nuance allows him to demonize the left. Notice how his one example is climate change, a crisis that is very much real and justifies action? Rather than choosing any of the dozens of imaginary boogeymen that the right likes to prop up to make their votership perpetually afraid, he chooses an issue that allows him to paint the left in a bad light.
Exactly. You could choose to use his model to evaluate the world, but if you want to take it seriously you will end up finding a lot of tyrants. Including on some views your boss who demands you cover the lunch rush at late notice.
Perhaps that's correct but if so, I would suggest that Peterson has a myopic focus.
Peterson is talking, in apocalyptic terms, about how tyrants use apocalyptic language to desensitize populations to the advent of authoritarianism - without any sense of irony or apparent awareness of his own hipocrisy.
Ah, the hallmark of a great interviewer - a guy who just nods along and periodically says "yeah, yeah" or "that's right" or "of course".
He graduated magna cum on my face from the Lex Friedman school of journalism and ballwashing.
I upvoted this three times now
š Bless your stained brain
Let em cook
Thatās right.
Let him cock
James's stupidity is outstripped only by his confidence in his own bullshit.
That's right of course
It's the joe rogan method, and considering he's the biggest podcaster in the world, the right seems to realize it works
This is great because Peterson has been using apocalyptic crisis constantly. Like he can absolutely talk for hours inventing doomsday scenarios because some company had an lgbtq flag or something. All that aisde, i'm always amazed how repetitive his content is. I would watch a short clip of him every once in a while when I see one here and even at that pace I find him so tiring. I undersand that there are people out there who think that obsessing over the culture war is the imporant thing to do but I honestly can't understand how they manage to listen to the same 5 things over and over again from this dude. He is giving a different interview every week repeating the same dumb shit for years.
I donāt think his head is in it any more. Heās a deeply depressed and angry person who thought he would get legitimacy though popularityā¦and it just made him more depressed and angry. Heās not ok.
"You really start to see a man who believes he has no control over his life. Most likely because he feels out of control." [https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxrAzJBKNTDCdWkX1B0qDM4z2TPUQPxuGw?si=xgtr6xqZZMcbB0eS](https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxrAzJBKNTDCdWkX1B0qDM4z2TPUQPxuGw?si=xgtr6xqZZMcbB0eS)
Thank youā¦itās tough watching somebody who so obviously needs help. I would have empathy for him if he wasnāt so virulently damaging toā¦other people who need help.
With him i'm never sure what is the case tbh. He does look constantly angry. On the other hand this anger combined with big words and long sentences is seen as some intellectual superiority by his fans. The whole "passionate professor fighting against the big evil woke-ness" persona is appealing and has been used with some modification by many conservatives. So yeah, it's really hard to know. There is some madness there but there is also a certain dose of play I think.
He literally did it right here. You raise prices by 10% you'll wipe 20 million people!
It's astounding how lacking in self-awareness he is. It's just amazing.
I think it's on purpose, like scammers. They don't even want to waste time on someone with logic, so they will just get that right out of the way.
Hes smart enough to know how full of shit he is, but it pays the bills
Those Prince of Gotham blazers and vinegar detoxes don't pay for themselves, fam.
I keep having this debate with myself and my wife. Is he stupid ? Is he lacking self-awareness ? Is he just scamming ? Who really knows but the guy is a freak.
> Is he stupid ? No, that would be an insufficient explanation. He was a professor in Psychology after all. Outside of his field he does say stupid shit. I always think it is more that he underestimates his audience. He really thinks he is smarter than he really is. If you go look back to his 2015 lectures and before, he is now doing what he explained back then: how Hitler was able to convince an audience, by telling them what they wanted to hear. Peterson is doing this. His lectures on Disgust are also interesting. He basically laid the gameplan back then for what he is doing now. >Is he lacking self-awareness ? I think this is true. He seems to be a narcissist. They have the tendency to twist reality to fit their narrative. He also has a victim mentality, because he often feels wronged. I think he is delusional to some extent. Some of his lies are pretty obvious, eg. staying awake for 25 days, not being able to handle a droplet of apple cider, reading 200 books on climate change, etc... He pretends to be more than he is. His narcissistic mind won't let him see the reality of it all, his fragile ego wouldn't be able to handle it and he would simply implode. Look up 'narcissistic collapse', I think Peterson experienced this on several occasions. >Is he just scamming ? Yes, he is scamming. He has endorsed the Heartland institute and their projects in some of his tweets. He started saying fracking is good, when he started getting paid, by the owners of a fracking business. Adding my own: Is he delusional? Yes. Simply read his book Maps of Meaning and it will become clear how crazy he really is.
JBP is to academia as Trump is to politics. Both realized that they could seize their moment with little to stop them other than social convention. This is commonly known as a sociopath and has a lot of overlap with narcissistic traits. The real trick is having just enough charisma to start a following, aka a cult.
I think they both are sociopaths and they both have received support from people with victim mentalities.
> The real trick is having just enough charisma to start a following, aka a cult. Or just latching on to enough uncharismatic basement dwelling blackpilled chumps. There are more people than ever to sell snake oil to, and a LOT of unloved and unfulfilled people out there who want someone to blame for it.
My wife and used to have the same debate. I've been aware of this guy ever since he broke onto the scene during the protests at UoT. My wife was even a fan of his for a bit. I think he was rocketed into the spotlight, which he did not expect, and lost his mind trying to keep up with his new found popularity. At one point I think he actually believed in the trash he was peddling but he's always been kind of a dumb smart guy...someone who takes a lot of mental shortcuts...the dunning kruger effect personified. That coupled with the raking in of cash caused him to start saying shit just to maintain his popularity. At some point he lost control because he very obviously (to me, anyway) lacks mental fortitude. He turned to drugs, then ran off to Russia. When he came back he was still the same asshole, but different. I think he's back to believing the shit he says, but more due to irreversible brain damage than anything else.
He knows who he is appealing to, and how they will respond to, and frame, his rhetoric. The entire argument was meant to make an anti-vaxx, anti-masker cum with self-righteousness or whatever.
The āor whateverā at the end there made me chuckle
I'm amazed that there is such a huge crowd not seeing that. Grown ups who will eat literally anything he says.
For fucking real. Even in 2 minutes he somehow manages to contradict himself.
How is giving an example of someone who uses those tactics contradictory?
Because he does it all the time. He does it in this video too.
He gives examples all the time?
I mean....literally in this video he has a doomsday scenario.
Where?
The sole fact that you don't see it and need to hear it is weird. According to him 10% raise of the price = 20% of the poor to die. He literally doesn't have a video where he is not throwing some doomsday scenarios.
You gotta be watching a different video or have poor comprehension. There is no way you think giving examples of an opposing belief is the same as creating doomsday scenarios
The fact that it's even plausible, is stunning.
Did you miss the part where he says thats what other people say?
It's the whole MAGA spiel. It's also the whole anti-wokism spiel.
That guy is in love with the sound of his own voice.
The sound of doors creaking endlessly in echoes of deep dark creepiness?
Sounds oversimplified but is absolutely true. He left every other job he had only to become a full time right wing influencer.
He has such big relentless mad uncle at Christmas lunch energy. All bright eyes, pulsing neck and grating voice. You can almost play JBP bingo even with this short clip too: knights and dragons? Tick. Evil spirits speaking out of meat puppets? Tick.
>He has such big relentless mad uncle at Christmas lunch energy.Ā Yeah, exactly. Constantly demanding attention, thinking that his opinions are edgy and unique, constantly angry. >You can almost play JBP bingo even with this short clip too: knights and dragons? Tick. Evil spirits speaking out of meat puppets? Tick. Literally 5 things he repeats over and over again.
Enjoying his blood-splattered suit too
Haha arenāt they lobsters? His signature dominance hierarchy crustacean?
It's a freaking philosophical Mantra, of course it repeats
lol what philosophical mantra? It's the same conspiracy theory about the evil left mixed with some doomsday scenarios he has invented.
That's the mantra. Repeat ad infinitum and reach the proper mindset. Instead of the traditional meditation goal of reducing stress, improving mental focus and cultivatating inner peace, the Rightwing Mantra's goal is to agitate, distract and cloud judgement and cultivate outrage.
I get what you mean, sorry, first time I didn't get it. You are absolutely right. Constant outrage is the mantra for them.
Theyāre dumb and angry
well it makes him rich so he has a motive
The message there wasnāt against apocalyptic messaging, it was specifically about catastrophism as a means of power consolidation. Legitimate faults aside, Peterson isnāt parading his apocalyptic thinking around as a justification to be given political power for him to wield by his own arbitrationā¦ which is what he would have to be doing to be hypocritical in this context.
Peterson has been using catastrophism literally all the time. Just to what he said here: Raise prices by 10% = 20 million dead. He is constantly inventing doomsday scenarios that appeal to stupid people.
It sounds like you're making two different points here: 1. Rising energy costs will not devastate the poor. 2. Catastrophizing about rising energy costs is hypocritical here because.... Peterson supports using compulsion to drive down energy costs? Do you believe #1? And what kind of compulsion is Peterson advocating to keep energy costs low? It's not something I've seen him talk about.
In isolation maybe. When placed in the wider context of commentary of Climate Change, it absolutely is about apocalyptic messaging
They all act like he is stupid when they canāt even understand what heās talking about.
30 years of being a university lecturer and publisher and putting vids online for free for people to critique...its almost as if he knows some things.....?
He has also been talking about Marxism for that many years but it turned out that he had only read the manifesto......
Beautiful example of keyboard warriors throwing stones but thats always the way -few will go in the arena
What exactly do you mean by that? Last time I saw Peterson go in the arena it turned out that he knows nothing about Marxism despite speaking with confidence about it for 10+ years. I don't remember him going "in the arena" after that.....all I remember is him being going to podcasts of people who share the same views as him. He is literally a keyboard warrior too my dude. When was the last time he challenged somebody in a live show? Isn't he just writing mean tweets for the last 5+ years or something?
It's a fair criticism to throw at him though. If he wants to critique Marxism then he really needs to do more than read the manifesto. Even Marx alone is arguably insufficient as there is over a century of development of Marx's original ideas. At best he is critiquing something he doesn't understand well enough to really be making such broad claims, at worst Peterson is acting in bad faith and made up his mind long ago and won't even neutrally engage with it. I am fairly sure if Peterson wanted to go into the arena he could. But in academia the arena isn't podcasts, online debates, and one off talks, its publications and peer review. Where is Peterson on that front, and I mean recently not decades ago in a field irrelevant to his current diatribe.
It's weird that his fans are not bothered by that. Before the debate with Zizek Peterson had been talking about Marxism and communism for years. He even collected Soviet propaganda pieces from what I remember. How do you end up doing that and not even reading Marx? What I found really bizarre is that after that his fans somehow did some crazy mental gymnastics and convinced themselves that the debate with Zizek was a "draw" while it was clear that Zizek couldn't find a common ground with a person who barely had an idea what Marx has said. How his fans end up still believing that Peterson is not full of shit after that is beyond my understanding.
My guess is because the fans do the same thing, and are shopping for someone with a doctorate who agrees with them. I figure what is appealing about Peterson is he reduces debate to a contest of "who sounds smarter and scores the most witty jabs". Academia as sport in a sense, actual academic debate is not about winning its about rigorously weighing up evidence/context/experience towards a conclusion. Which no one can actually do in the context of an hour and half long podcast. Peterson for example attacks feminism as if its one agreed upon thing and not an umbrella term drawing of critical theory, sociological theories, poltical theories, intersectionality, psychology, medicine etc. its the same with Marxism. Peterson simplifies the field, at times defines it incorrectly, and then attacks his version of understanding. A bit like how some of his fans approach areas they don't fully agree with or understand. Just see how often people reject the concept of toxic masculinity without even definig the term correctly or engaging with Conells work. Frankly most probably don't even know who Conell is despite them being the originator of hegemonic masculinity in the first place. In academia that kind of oversight would get a paper rejected. Peterson is perfectly primed for what online spaces consider debate, just see how often people make a broad claim and then post a single source. An academic paper has between 80-100 different sources and most of the claims are quite simplistic. A thesis in the area that Peterson claims to be an expert in would contain somewhere between 300-600. The world of what constitutes evidence is very different in standard. But Peterson really leans into the idea of quips, "owning" opponents, just dropping articles without really exploring things like methodology. Peterson takes the credibility of academia but treats internet discourse as its equivalent. Which probably endears him to groups who want to think internet debate is the same thing as research. Or as I would, maybe unfairly, describe as the "who needs University when we have YouTube" types.
Hey, that's a great comment and a perfect summary of what Peterson does and what is his appeal. Would love to have it as a copy pasta in hand. It's true that many complex issues have been simplified to youtube debaters looking for "zingers". Peterson was actually one of the first few ones that had this type of moment in the culture war sphere with that show where they were discussing feminism. At some point the "PROFESSOR DESTROYS STUPID FEMINIST LIVE ON A TV SHOW" youtube videos were recommended all the time. This approach tho leads to more and more superficial debates and less and less curiosity from all parts involved. For a university professor it looks like Peterson rarely approaches anything (if ever) anything with an open mind. What I also dislike is that him and the other people on his camp are so focused on looking for zingers and "owning" the libs that they completely dehumanize the groups they talk about. Trans people are now not people, they are seen as something that you are ''pro'' or ''against'' or as some ''agenda''. Peterson is a professor constantly talking about researches, studies and academia and constantly being bothered by trans people but he almost never sits with the actual people to understand more about them. It's like they are not people. Like....if you want to explore the issue just sit with them and talk. Don't just repost shitty research on twitter.
30 years of University lectures about human behaviour while others sit behind phones and critique. If others here have videos or lectures that i can watch id be happy too, otherwise i dont give their expert reddit view much weight
"People must be Youtube celebrities, or I will not listen to their arguments. Even if the arguments are perfectly sound and reasonable."
Also 30 years of talking about Marxism without having read Marx......
Real leaders do what they please for things that I like. Tyrants work toward consensus on proposals I donāt agree with.
Donald Trump seems to be using the Tyrant book to a T when it comes to gaining support by playing on fear and reversing ādegeneracyā. Even Mussolini got immensely popular by constantly referring to a time Italy was āgreatā and he will take them back to it..
Tell 'em, Niccolo
Reminds me of that quote āit is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalismā
Mark Fisher, RIP. The book is *Capitalist Realism* and it seriously changed my life. Everyone should read it. As an aside, this is a great example of how you can see that conservatives either literally donāt have the cognitive capacity to think outside of these social constructs, or are unwilling to because of their class interests. I donāt particularly care about getting into the nitty-gritty of which side JP sits on. Either way, he sounds ignorant and unimaginative, which he is.
They aren't acting in their class interest tho, they're acting in their *perceived* class interest. They need something to shake them to show them where they really stand. Til then it's the old saying, every American believes they're a millionaire in the making, this goes doubly for conservatives.
People like Peterson definitely have the capacity. But he is a paid propagandist, by oil money.
D3nse text. Someone needs to simplify it without hurting the key points. More ppl might read it then.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This comment was removed for breaking the subreddit rule against uncivil and antagonistic behaviour.
This comment was removed for breaking the subreddit rule against uncivil and antagonistic behaviour.
Long after humans are dead the space rocks will continue trading positions with each other using the currency of gravity and speed. It's a booming market baby
This argument kind of makes the same mistake that everyone who criticizes the apocalyptic results of communism in practice. The problem is always cronyism. Which runs counter to the ideals of both systems. That is the red thread of rot that runs through both systems and corrupts them.
True people can ruin any system. I take it more as a comment on the unwillingness to be imaginative in the face of a failing system. Not just capitalism but climate change, fossil fuels, education, etc. Thatās not to say there are not people who are trying to better these systems but this video in particular makes him seem hopeless to try and change anything
Specifically it isnāt addressing just any change. The video is against one specific type of change: justifying authoritarian control over peopleās lives.
Funny how he likes to use the word āapocalypseā to describe how his enemies believe in one, as if the word itself came from a source of teachings heās very familiar with and he personally believes. I wonder what that is š¤
Then he goes on to support the candidate who routinely screams things like, āWeāre being invaded by rapists and criminals and democracy will end, and our traditional way of life will be destroyed if you donāt go for me!!!!ā
I get that both of these guys' whole schtick is just making up stories to fit their warped sense of reality, but to make the claim about rising renewable energy costs the same week we see France go into negative prices for energy is completely laughable https://fortune.com/2024/06/16/electricity-prices-france-negative-renewable-energy-supply-solar-power-wind-turbines/
BUT DA OIL JOBS
You can take the shill out of the petrostate, but you canāt take the petrostate out of the shill.
Peterson is revealing something serious here about his belief system. He views his own personal death as equally as important as mass death caused by things like Climate Change or war. This is very important to understand about Peterson; his ideology is so self centered and self aggrandizing that \*he thinks the heat death of the globe is just as important as his own death.\* Very serious man. Not a parody of himself at all.
The guy is detached. The fact we die means weāre constantly in an apocalypse? The word loses all meaning.
How on earth did you come to that conclusion from this clip?
Because he says so. He's a climate change denialist, so he doesn't actually respect, or understand, the scope and scale of what's being discussed. He's traded his intellectual credibility for clout with his equally delusional followers. He explicitly states here that death is an apocolypse. No it's not. Death is death. It's part of the cycle of life. It is not the same thing as the heat death of the species. Unless you don't care about that, and pretend as though your own death is as meaningful as the death of the species, which he explicitly states here to be the case.
ā¦ thatās not what heās saying. Heās saying that *from an individualās perspective* the apocalypse is always happening because they die and everyone and everything they know dies.
Right. From his perspective, his death matters as much as the death as the entire species. That's what I said, and that's what he said.
Jesus fucking Christ. Heās trying to explain that thatās how *people* experience the world. Not that him personally dying is the same as the species dying. How did you miss the part where he explicitly says āitās not just that me and you dieā and goes on to talk about how everyone and everything around one dies.
Ah yes, and now we're down the "You just need to listen more" pipeline that Peterson proponents bang on about. "If just read this book, and listen to this lecture you'll see that what he's saying actually means the opposite of what he said!" Peterson is a fool, and the only people more foolish then him are the people who defend him. Go listen to the guy that sits on a street corner. You'll get more wisdom from him then Peterson.
My man. Itās the next sentence. Someone being a dumbass doesnāt give you a free pass to simply make up what theyāre saying. Edit: realised Iām talking to a communist. Thereās no reasoning with you people
Which is a very revealing thing to say. Its very genuinely a sociopaths view of the world.
The death of an individual to that individual is as bad, if not worse than, the death of the entire planet because their life is as precious to them as the life of the planet itself. To deny this is to create a hierarchy of worth that places the individual's life below that of anything above 2 lives of random people or non-human animals. The very idea of collectivism is the antithesis of removing the value of the individual because if you remove the value of the individual the collective is empty of meaning too, without the individual having value the collective can do what it wants to all the individuals it's created from.
Damn dude, if you'd prefer to witness the destruction of the entire planet rather than die a normal, peaceful death yourself, you're *deeeeply* fucked up.
I'm not saying I agree with this I'm saying that collectivism creates a value of equality therefore a single death and a mass death or even the death of the planet must include equal feelings of absence or sadness.
I don't think that's true. Morally I believe all people are equal, but I'd be a lot sadder if my son died than if you did. Being a collectivist doesn't preclude you from having friends and caring about them more than you care about others.
Doesn't that mean your son's individual life is higher in the hierarchy of value you see the world through?
It means he means more *to me*, but I'm not deluded into believing he's worth more than anyone else in an objective sense.
People like Peterson does not have "objective" value system. He has highly egocentric value system where he derives hierarchy of value based on how something makes him feel. That is why highy reasonable person will not agree with him. I for example understand his perspective, but do not agree. I understand that he process reality different than me, he is higher on delusion scale.
You wrote very well put argument and these monkeys gave you downvotes. Is downvoting not agreeing?
Tragically binary reductive thinking.
Mmmm yes very deep I never thought about that. I am very proud of you. *psssst* we have a Peter's son breach. Ready your Benzos everyone.
Big scary hypotheticals. I guess in this hyper individualized society it's a lot better that we have individuals that indirectly kill groups of people with their decisions. Cuz that does happen constantly, but we let it rock. Maybe we need to value the collective a lil bit more.
I completely agree that a balance of collective and individual thinking is essential to a happy and healthy society
Being a communist and all, you'd sure know a lot about being a parody.
Ah yes, the 'malignant left and their climate scam'. If you listen to this clown long enough he does take you off the rails into crazy town.
"Your nervous system has indicated by the paralysis of your fear..." lolololol He sounds like that middle school kid who is so impressed with himself over how much he likes to read. Just string together a convoluted sentence and then pretend you're some sort of esoteric genius if someone has the gall to say something other than, "Right." on repeat
Sorry, Jordan, the body responds to perceived threats in a manner the amygdala interprets as fear and serves up either fight, flight, freeze or fawn as our menu of responsesā¦.unless we regain contact with our physical experiences that allow the cortex (the adult in the brain) to step in and apply reality to the situation, which can include reframing the body responses as a different emotion, such as excitement or, at the very least, put the brakes on irrational behavior responses.
The catastrophic jacket is frightening me: tyrant.
Iām sorry, havenāt both these guys built their names on presenting āCultural Marxismā as an apocalyptic crisis and why you should give them money to hear their words more?
Hey who is this guy, he looks familiar? He has lobsters on his jacket... Oh right, this is the guy who talks about lobsters! Aren't they older than trees or something, and aren't they very dominant? crazy stuff man, I want to be a dominant lobster. This guy is really insightful, I would never have realized how dominant lobsters are. Anybody know if he has like a patreon or something, or maybe some branded merch I can buy to support him? We need to make sure he can keep an eye out for tyrants, i hate tyrants. anyway who's voting for trump?
First comment on the suit all this way down.
This "[great cosmic joker](https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/cosmic_joker)"?..
Peterson means 'the devil'. I think he believes the devil is real. You can deduce this from his book Maps of Meaning. Another indication is that he urged his students to read Jeffrey Burton Russell's books. Similar are his musings on 'Paradise Lost'.
Thanks for this.Ā Him uttering it with a straight face is still funny.Ā
What a load of shit.
I wonder does Peterson believe that Churchil extended the Emergency Powers Act in 1940 because he was "too small a knight" to fight the Nazi "Dragon" ?
Is that David S. Pumpkins? Did JP forget to clean his interview jacket?
The real tyrant is whoever thought that suit was a good idea.
Clown jackets are a pretty obvious giveaway
Yeah, good job criticising tyranny, Dr "we should have socially-enforces monogamy"
It's like JPs manager said, "You're coming off too professional, get a little wacky with your wardrobe. Think less professor, more clowny magician."
LOL I love the interviewer saying "thats right" so emphatically
it's always heartwarming to see what the comments on r/joerogan look like these days
For every normal person you see on r/JoeRogan there are ten absolute doorknobs in the real world.
Canāt we just ignore this complete muppet already? Let him and Brand crawl up each otherās fannieās and just stay there
This guy agrees with everything that manic Kermit says. Not even a conversation.
So literally anyone that tries to solve a problem, got it.
Jeezus Christ. Just babbling out hypocritical word salads with no shame or irony. This is the guy whoās at the vanguard of a movement who believes that equal rights are an apocalyptic crisis that require extreme solutions like disqualifying leftists for political office. But yeahā¦Covid was fake and Trudeau was using it to get rich off the WEFā¦and he wants to stop people from driving soā¦uhā¦I forget what that conspiracy theory is. Totally sane.
This is not a complicated question that requires great academic skill to answer, lol
I legitimately feel sorry for the folks who've been duped into believing that Peterson or Lindsay are relevantly credentialed or informed enough to have any real insight into the nature of "Tyrants" or "Real Leaders". Also, this conversation is just a bunch of bloviating about "No True Scotsman"
What's gnarly about both of these dudes is that they've cultivated audiences who seem completely incapable of asking for even the slightest amount of evidence.
He described Trump perfectly.
Really odd. He is describing Trump's current campaign strategy... Trump keeps telling everyone how everything is so terrible now and then just bald face lies about crime, the economy, world conflict and then follows up with only he can solve all these problems. Can't Mr. Jordan see that Trump is using fear to con all his alt-righties?
Well by this logic he is a tyrant himself given his fear mongering about the trans/university issue that started his entire career?
Netenyahu
Peterson rebuking religion here? * Every prophet in the Old Testament had a tendency to scare their public into submission. * The concept of 'apocalypse' itself is expressed in the bible. It's fearmongering about the future. Who is the tyrant really?
no it isn't. apocalypse means "to reveal." >Every prophet in the Old Testament had a tendency to scare their public into submission. you idiots are always claiming that there is no hell because it isn't talked about in the old testament, so how is that even possible? >The concept of 'apocalypse' itself is expressed in the bible. It's fearmongering about the future. how is heaven fearmongering? have you even read the book? one of the top comments above is: >āit is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalismā how is that fantasy about destroying society to create a fake communist heaven better than the reality of God bring heaven to His people?
Is the implication that any leader who gives a shit about real crises like climate change or COVID is a tyrant? Only people who don't give a shit about anything aside from business interests go brrrr are real leaders.
"That's right" x 100
Dudeās been slowly morphing into the riddler with his attire and asinine hyper generalized answers to questions lol āwell who bloody knows what an idea is?!ā
Sometimes, there is a crisis.
How to propaganda with JP
He's describing trump entirely here
Netanyahu!
Does dude have little lobsters all over his suit? Is does that have some special meaning?
Tyrants are also usually the official heads of the country not powerless minorities you don't like you absolute cabbage.
Poor Jordan. When all you have is a hammer everything is a nail. Oh and projection.
Am I really the first one in here to ask why he has lobsters on his jacket???
I just canāt with these jackets.
How to dress properly
So his revealed truth is that everyone will die. Wow! I had no idea.
So many loose threads. Dude is losing his gripā¦ and itās probably the Leftās fault.
I don't know that this is the best title to have verbatim relayed though?
JBP is to MAGA what Aleksandr Dugin is to the Kremlin. High wizard of the court.
Goodness. Ok, well it's pretty selective to choose global warming as being the fear worthy of highlighting here. Why not the fear of the establishment that Trump uses? Don't get me wrong, to a certain extent I agree with his underlying message that tyrants rely on fear to gain support, but let's not put blinders on here. We should be concerned about these tactics regardless of which side uses them.
Peterson is becoming more clownish. Climate change is real . Sadly, no cares enough to do anything about it .
āThatās right. Thatās right. Thatās exactly right. Right.ā
Is the tyrant the one in the lobster suit?
I'm sorry this is the first time I'm seeing him wearing a lobster jacket and I'm dying laughing I can't. Is he pushing this branding forreal?
As much as I loathe this man, this is one thing I think he does well. He disarms the people who would make fun of his stupid-ass lobster philosophy by just confidently embracing it and making it his thing. It's smart. If only he ever said anything that is anywhere near as smart.
damn right! I stopped giving him my attention even for hate watching, but this one caught my eye for sure
Somebody get the muzzle please
Haven't listened to Jordan talk in a while but the appearance of the sole real world (being generous) example being climate change is really striking. Cause you could run this argument. I mean it's not great because while there might always be a crisis somewhere there isn't always one everywhere the way this universalising logic suggests. But if you did actually run this argument there would be a lot of tyrants. But you don't get a lot of examples. Funny isn't it. Btw, is an armed robbery a crisis?
What a pos
Can this twat waffle just wear a sensible jacket for once in his life?
He is literally the Onceler.
Fear sells We saw that all over the world as leaders grasped fpr more power amd rich got richer
Fear sells We saw that all over the world as leaders grasped fpr more power amd rich got richer
The guy is an absolute fruit loop.
JBP has an irrelevant position at this point. He's too insane.
Compulsion and the tyranny of addiction - guess he should know his topic!
JPs taste in fashion suggests slight lunacy.
JP is a a super dedicated maitre d at Red Lobster.
Lobsters are bugs and JP is covered with bugs
Establishing your criteria for a situation, doesnāt make you an expert in alleviating the consequences of prior choices. Or, in determining who has to āpay the priceā for addressing those issues.
Wtf does the B stand for? Why stop calling him Jordan Peterson?
Balthazar
Bernt
Beavis AND Butthead
How to dress properly
Is Peterson wrong in this case? Or is this sub just shitting on every idea that comes out of Petersonās mouth?
Well, if your definition of "tyrant" is "a leader who uses compulsion on the population they lead to prevent bad things from happening", then every leader of every country ever is a tyrant. Compulsion is a necessary part of running a country. Imagine if taxes were entirely voluntary and laws were more like suggestions. Life would be so much worse for everybody. The important distinction to make here is whether the amount and kind of compulsion is justified and adequate, whether the crisis or "apocalypse" is real and warrants responding to, and whether the leader in question allows for mechanisms to ensure that they're capable of being held accountable by their population. Peterson glosses over all that, because being vague af and ignoring all nuance allows him to demonize the left. Notice how his one example is climate change, a crisis that is very much real and justifies action? Rather than choosing any of the dozens of imaginary boogeymen that the right likes to prop up to make their votership perpetually afraid, he chooses an issue that allows him to paint the left in a bad light.
Exactly. You could choose to use his model to evaluate the world, but if you want to take it seriously you will end up finding a lot of tyrants. Including on some views your boss who demands you cover the lunch rush at late notice. Perhaps that's correct but if so, I would suggest that Peterson has a myopic focus.
Peterson is talking, in apocalyptic terms, about how tyrants use apocalyptic language to desensitize populations to the advent of authoritarianism - without any sense of irony or apparent awareness of his own hipocrisy.
Didn't watch this video, but this sub pretty much shitting all the time about him.
Generally I think itās fair. Peterson is far from what he was in 2018. Heās become a parody of himself. But not everything he says is garbage.
By his own definition JP is a tyrant.