This guy is completely on the money. Both sides of the political spectrum need to stop shutting down and de-platforming each other by calling them bigots, racists, sexists, SJWs, snowflakes and whatever else. I admit, i've called people SJWs and snowflakes many times because they said something I don't agree with but i'm slowly learning that we each need to listen to each other and be able to form our own views and without total freedom of speech, that is not possible.
Yes. He was. Hitler, like Stalin and Mao was a Socialist. His party was called the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei ( National Socialist German Workers Party). He was a Socialist, just like all leftists.
Felix Snowcat No. Jordan Peterson is one of the most arrogant and "holier than thou" people of our generation. The fact that he equates the far left, which hates western civilization, to the far right, which wants to preserve western civilization, is asinine. I can't wait till this guy fades away-- I hate him so much.
I think a lot of what the 'social justice' extremists say is just ideological rhetoric and it's quite scary how they've convinced themselves that what they're speaking is the truth. Not only that, but the fact that people can have their careers and reputations ruined by somebody calling them a [insert buzzword here] is terrifying. If somebody is being genuinely racist, sexist or whatever then the best thing to do is argue against them and try and correct them. I agree, calling somebody and SJW or snowflake isn't as powerful as calling somebody a racist or whatever else but we all need to talk and listen to each other on an even playing field. If we don't, then the ideologues will just continue spouting their rhetoric and dangerous extremism on both sides of the political spectrum will flourish.
@Felix Snowcat look at you - trying to tell people it would be nice if they tried talking to one another to actually get what and why they are upset and that do you get? a bunch of stooges telling you that you're wrong (to put it polite)... keep it up !
+Fake News Wow, you are just as radical (may be even more) than the far left. People like you are the problem (on both left and right). And no I don't think the Far Left and the far right are equally stupid.
+Roman King Unfortunately, there's a reason why progressive media loves presenting Jordan Peterson. It's because his extreme views about individualism are setting up dissidents to be ineffectual against an organized progressive movement.
no they're not. His 'extreme individualism' has helped pull quite a few people back from the brink of descending into collectivist brainwashing- both of the left and the right. Also the channel 4 interview should be one example out of many that shows the 'progressive media' do not like him. I still consider myself a 'progressive' but am thoroughly appalled why much of what currently passes under that word - most of it stripped of any meaningful liberal values.
+Simon Sharp The progressive movement is a branch of Marxist philosophy that broke off from the communist branch back in the 1920s. In terms of Orwell's 1984, Peterson is an Emmanuel Goldstein figure for the masses to hate, and for dissidents to latch on to. I think the term "brainwashing" is rather strong.
Don't let difficult political circumstances corrupt you and push you to the extremes. That is hell. It is dogma and rigidity, it is truth subordinated to tribalism. Don't let bitterness win your heart. Be a maverick amidst conformity.
The problem is that if one side is extreme and the other isn't, the extreme will win. In the past, the extremists were usually an underground movement. Amazingly, the extremists in this situation are the mainstream voices and politicians. Almost like some people in power planned it this way. Nah, that's crazy talk, and will remain so right up until the new Stasi knocks at your door.
Radicals are needed sometimes moderate people never bring big changes into society its not always about hate it can based on logical perspecive aswell.
Astral Frost well having a tribe has benefits to the happiness of a species. Family, friendship and love. We are social creatures. Without one, you will lead a depressed life. However; if a tribe is ruled by a tyrant then that is when tribalism becomes a problem. But you shouldn't condemn the tribe, only the tyrants that live in it.
He is no, he is on the radical right just listen to him, he makes it a virtue to be responsible for yourself, but gives the impression people on the left are not. I have heard this quite a few times from Right leaning people. ie "i have always worked since i was 14" "never relied on the state", " never claimed welfare" never been unemployed" . "i wish i could sleep all day ". .Lots of assumptions given out - only people like him/her do this, so if you left wing your lazy, non achiever scumbag. etc that is the assertion Peterson is speaking to a bubble which is academia, so if your in the elite belong there and if you not your trash
He makes it a virtue to be responsible for yourself and not to use societal and family structures avoid the pain of becoming the best most actualised version of yourself because that leads to a personal hell of your own construction. Petersons agenda is WAY beyond the left/right false dichotomy. Go listen to his 2016 personality lecture series to get a good sense of why his so scary for ideologues on both the left and right, he puts forward arguments that are outside of the traditional right/left dialectical and towards a society that does its best to allow people to self actualise.
Mulberry is one of the archetypical miscronstruers of his message. These people can be on either the radical right or left, but also among the so-called centrists or establishment/MSM types.. Actual individual, enlgihtened responsibility is not really popular with many people at all. Hard work and scary as hell.
I have never heard anyone put into words what I learned to do from my Political Science education. I do fragment my beliefs and have internal debates on issues constantly attempting to push each viewpoint further through "the power of the better argument". One way I often do this is reading books on topics I initially know I will detest. Inevitably I will find arguments or ideas that challenge my preconceived notions and continue the dialog again and again. An even better way is having civil dialog with those who challenge my ideas. I do not argue...I shut up and listen. One of the best political discussions I have ever had was with a radiator repairman in a garage. His logic, examples, and deep understanding of issues made this a conversation I will not soon forget.
I love your comment! It reminds me when I was in seventh and eighth grade I had a teacher Mr H. He had our class perform a reenactment of the signing of the Declaration. He is signed rolls 2 various students. I had been teacher's pet in 7th grade but wound up rebelling in the 8th and was way down on his list. I learned later that he bragged about me to the class my younger sister was in. But I believe the bragging was only about how I was able to read Edgar Allan Poe well. Meanwhile back at the convention, he assigned me to be Edmund Randolph. So I dutifully did my research and found out that I had to be pro-slavery. I could not begin to Fathom how someone could be pro-slavery but I had to do that. I was already distressed about that until I learned that Randolph also defended Aaron Burr in his trial for killing Alexander Hamilton and at that point wailed, mr. H hates me! But it was the singular most important educational lesson I ever got in school and having to be on the other side and find ways of understanding the other side. On top of it I'm a Libra, so that's a bit of an LOL. But from then on, I've always been suspect of dividing groups up in the US vs them fashion. It's difficult and perhaps useless do you think you can change someone else's mind. But the worst of it is, most of the time you make an enemy and become an enemy. And then nothing is accomplished. Anyway thank you for sharing your view
If that's the case then how can we escape the sprint to the left or the right? If men do not have agency enough then it ca be inhumane not to lead them.
And that is why I tune into Peterson. Most commentators these days are just political ideologues. I don't trust their conclusions when they ALWAYS land on the same side of the political divide. You know their analysis was filtered through a thick bias lens. Its not hard to see which way Peterson leans, but he is not just another conservative aggrieved by the left, he appears to deal with these social science issues, issue by issue. Thats more authentic, and thats where credibility comes from.
+Dan S You're falling into the trap the progressive establishment has set for you. That's why they invite Peterson to appear in the media routinely: in order to convince dissidents in today's progressive society to act as "one-man bands." If you decide not to be political, you will end up suffering at the hands of those who have decided to be political. If you develop yourself into the world's most impressive individual, you will still lose to a team of mediocrities if you are merely an individual.
I'm not sure where you're getting this 'Peterson is a trap set by the progressives' line from but there's nothing to back it up. He is not saying develop yourself into and individual in the way you seem to have interpreted it. You can be an individual and have the ability to form with other people. Its not a choice between being a 'lonely individual' or a 'brainwashed collective' member. And neither is he saying not to be political - he is advocating for not being drawn into the pathology and collectivism of the radical left OR right.
Simon Sharp Well said. I guess we are living in times of polarization now. There is black and white but 99% of reality are in greyscale and ignored by most people for the sake of the argument. I see this behavior on all sides at the moment. But maybe only because I am trapped in it as well^^
+Simon Sharp "I'm not sure where you're getting this..." It comes from Peterson himself, who has said that he is pleased to attract people who might otherwise have bought into some variety of dissident right thinking. While I grant that Peterson may be useful as a life coach for people who have personal problems, he has no solutions for the major political issues of the day. To borrow from Orwell's Animal Farm, Peterson wants you to be Boxer the horse who always exerts himself to "try harder" but never challenges the system in any meaningful way. If every challenge to the establishment is some form of "radicalism" from either the left or right, then Peterson's advice to be "moderate" means ultimately embracing the establishment. That is why Peterson's views are an outlet that the establishment embraces, which is why he is always appearing in the mainstream media.
I wish people could universally understand these ideas, that we need honest dialog between both sides instead of all the idiotic name calling and slanderous vitriol that we see everywhere.
+Sean Mcneme Dialogue is great and wonderful, but what do you have to talk about when this is the opinion of progressive leaders: th-cam.com/video/QT767j5KkZQ/w-d-xo.html ?
“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville Political correctness is about restraint by one group over another for the sole purpose of gaining power. Not for what someone has done but for what they may do because of the group they were born into. It is claiming all men are rapists to prevent one rape. That all are racists to prevent one act of racism. It is condemning and judging all to be guilty who belong to any group that is deemed evil or for having done evil. It is class warfare using moral condemnation as its weapon. This is the new socialism created in universities.
The basic rule, according to Peterson: “You need a meaning in your life that enables you to bear the suffering of your life without becoming corrupted, and you have to build yourself in to something that you can actually respect so you can see yourself bearing that terrible existential burden properly, and then you don’t lose hope and you don’t lose meaning because you’re strong enough to stand up underneath that burden, and then there’s something about you that you can respect, and then maybe other people can respect, and it will help bring suffering in the world to an end, and it will help people develop fully as individuals and will help us avoid the dehumanizing, rigid, sterile uniformity of the nationalistic left [he meant right --ed] and the appalling devouring chaos of the radical left"
I found your comments so intriguing and compelling I am stopping right here to watch the video. Sometimes I read the comments first before watching and that was my intention this time but now as I say I want to watch after hearing what you said
So I listened to JP and I will probably listen to it again later because there was a lot to it in the sense of richness. I liked the way he spoke of( he said battle) but I'm going to say competition of the Mind. This was when he was talking about how people in general are not taught to think. I like to deeply process something that I think is worthwhile.
+Kent MacIsacc What is your take on corporate cultures? Do you think corporations are foolish in trying to create one for themselves? That's an example of an ideology on a smaller level.
Well, if you think freedom lies in the Constitution, the progressive establishment (not just the far left) ultimately wants to neuter it. The Tea Party/Alt-Right/American patriots want to preserve it. It may be tempting to sit things out and not be political, but if you refuse to play politics, you will be played by those who do.
My only contention is he should not downplay rights in favor of responsibility. He should defend the entire Bill of Rights as vehemently as he defends free speech, and he can do that while simultaneously advocating a rigorous adoption of responsibility. They aren't mutually exclusive. I also feel he should replace the word "divine" with sovereign as it pertains to the individual. The Western experiment was recognizing the sovereignty of the individual, at least in the US with the establishment of our Constitutional Republic, the individual was sovereign over his self and his property and his pursuit of happiness insofar as he did not infringe on his neighbor's right to do the same. Other than those two (minor) quibbles, they may very well be semantics, the man is absolutely brilliant beyond measure. I've listened to hours upon hours of his lectures. What a treasure.
Unfortunately, Peterson isn't quite the champion of free speech that you might initially assume. See Millennial Woes' video on Peterson to find out his rather narrow limits on the subject.
What he's talking about is what I have been attempting over the last year and it's exhausting. I'll agree with one side or the other in order to understand an issue, but parsing the data into something more objectively truthful has been very difficult. However, it is a satisfying endeavor because instead of trying to win arguments, I try to learn information, and that is what I see as valuable.
Nailed it on the head with the 'divine individual' which is another way of saying 'transcendence of the individual to the divine' - this is exactly what a lot of Eastern traditions such as Buddhism, Daoism and even sects of Hinduism emphasise greatly through such concepts as Nirvana, Shunyatah and Moksha. The 'individual', the 'self', is subordinated to the Divine Individual, the Self, and the two become one in the mind, where before there was always a gap, which suffering (mental or spiritual) tends to fill. In this way, the individual no longer competes with others or one's self - the individual is fulfilled, and this fulfills the world around them as a result, the two being inextricably linked as always.
Someone please do a body language interpretation of the person to Jordan's left, some of this Persons facial expressions are priceless. Then Peterson mentions freedom of speech...squirm...nervous glance to someone off camera. Makes me wonder exactly how far to the "left" of Jordan Peterson that Person was.
Bang on. Been thinking this for a while. And I believe that countries that keep that balance of Left and Right really seem to prosper. In Canada I know it's been a tug of war back and forth. Right now the Left has the momentum, but that's changing. I hope. In Europe you see that the Left has held on for quite a while, now the Right is pushing back. But it still seems that both sides seem are still on the extremes. Not sure on that so please correct me if I'm wrong. One thing I think that is a definite contributor to the widening gap between the 2 sides, is Social Media. It basically turns most everyone into rude, ignorant know it alls. And I'm just as guilty. Before Social Media, politics was contentious, and it led to arguments here and there. But kept a level of civility to the conversation. Which in turn, didn't cause such resentment and anger that ppl could be persuaded into changing their minds on issues. With the hostility in Social Media. No matter how many facts you have to support your position. The other side will either justify it away, ignore it, and this puts a real road block in having effective debate. Go on FB and read the comments under any news story. And you will see what I mean. Time to change the way I communicate on line.
Kman31ca True. I've tried my best to stay away from news stories and the daily mail yet in times of weakness I go back on in curiosity. And my self confidence further plunges down to the bottom. Deciding to go to the comments on msn one day is a decision I'll forever regret. I want to forget everything. I want to show emotion and not be called a beta. I want controlled immigration without being called a nazi. I want to hug it out with immigrants who are good people and not rapists or murderers. I just want to live my life without worrying of people looking at me with a grade in a picture on the internet and them going "you had it easy Marxist". In fact when I do get my grades I'm hiding. Making sure the picture of me never gets out.
I love that, you have to have different personalities holding different viewpoints and arguing for each, that is thinking... It is hard and you have to be trained to do that.
This should be shown to everyone who is firm and arrogant in their liberal or conservative views, and people who don't think but just rely on their inherent prejudices. Which is like 90% of people. They could really benefit from this.
MrElculver2424 Nice idea. I'd suggest you post this videos link in a daily mail article as that's where the negative, extreme,nasty close minded right are and then post this on CNN or something.
"In order to think, you need to fragment yourself up into opposing perspectives ... and let [them] have a battle in the theater of your imagination" ...this is an approach of extremes - basically letting your biases rage, while trying to create new countering biases inside the mind - but artificial biases cannot counter real biases. A better approach is to observe your biases and recognize them as such, letting them fall away.
@@gilian2587 David Hume famously said, "reason is the slave of the passions" - the difficulty is that biases are so powerful that they take control. "Not taking them seriously" is exactly right, but quite difficult for most people to do.
A spigot is turned right to allow water to flow, which is great when and as long as you need water at the time. The spigot must eventually be turned right to control or stop the flow of water though.
@@iamtrashman4998 Jordan Peterson enjoys being compared to Kermit - he thinks that it is funny, so he sometimes bring a Kermit puppet with him and jokes around with it, lol.
I always thought that there was no definitive answer to which idealogy was right (left or right) but felt that it depends on the environment we are provided with. Different policies fit different times, and there is rarely one right way.
I am glad to see that Peterson's interpretations and analyses are in accord with my own -- presumably, if there is a complete truth, we all should get there if we think straight. And certainly, free thinking is necessary, and so is courage, and humanity, and personal honor. The Middle Path is always the true one.
I like the grey zone that exists between the individual and the nation. Between the individual mind as it progresses into group identity. For example - if enough individuals of a certain mind come together freely and create a horribly destructive group, is this really a break in Peterson's logic. It is perhaps something like original sin - that human individuals can be extreme and if that extremeness (right or left politically, but the binaries are open to many more delineations) suits the needs of the extreme group in a certain version of reality or existence, then how can you begrudge them their extremeness? Does it all come down to what is pragmatic for a certain group at a certain time? Or is it up to the organic sway of wise individuals to change the group identity as circumstances change? And ultimately I think there is a huge urge in the human psyche to seek for, discover and then implement the organized group that defies or wins over and against any change in reality. Something like the All-system- akin to the God particle and very much akin to religious thought. The search for the timeless and unchanging right answer that is in all places and all times the right answer, for everyone. This is a very strong urge because people dislike dynamism and change, they much prefer stability and permanence - perhaps precisely because they know they will never attain to it.
While i 100% agree... Asking people to be rational thoughtful careful and respectful is a bit much in our time and place. There's gotta be at least 100,000 x more effort, energy and money put into keeping people ignorant and helpless, when it comes to critical thinking, or intellectual thought. I grew up an artist/designer and went to a top tear design/art school, only to start a career into something that quickly sucked me dry moraly, and ethically, to the point that i was greatly depressed, and suicidal. The realization hit me that in this line of communication problem solving, me, my peers, and my co workers, are only trying to create mindless consumption habits for the people I wished so much more for. Designers could change the world overnight if they wanted to. We could be spreading GENUINE messages of thoughtfulness, carefulness and reinforce moraly and ethically positive communication. However there is no money in this, from the systems point of view the success is generated by a population of people who are reckless, careless, and happily ignorant. Its no accident that the schools, and the employers are all for the grand manipulation of the peoples dreams, wants, and needs. Otherwise there is no money it.
But the thing is, you put forth your ideas, no matter how biased and wrong they might be, for other people to set you straight. What's stopping other people from being equally, if not more biased towards the same things? I guess that's where the conversation part comes in, so instead of letting people just 'correct' you, you listen to them and form your own opinion based on the new knowledge you've gained, and the original knowledge you had.
The problem is when an extremist side of the balance labels the opposite regular side as extremists so they can have a perfect excuse to act their extremist schedule based on defending from the other side. So the side in which the regular was labeled extremists by the extremists from the opposite side naturally dislikes it and tends to go to the extreme points of their views to counter that situation. And that brings things to an unbalanced unstabled situation
Is it "Less Slenderman" that sits in the shadow of that doorway? I had to look twice at this video because i got distracted as hell of that guy in the door!
This makes me wonder what Dr Peterson makes of the "Westernized/semi-westernized" non-West places in the world like Japan, South Korea (probably the most interesting example), Singapore, Mexico, and India. For that matter, how compatible or incompatible are South America, Africa, Oceania (Polynesia etc) and Eastern Europe with the West proper? Makes me wish he had a interview or series on cultural geography.
1. Kermit says free speech is a fundamental non-debatable value of western civilization, and that you must hear different viewpoints to recognize and correct your own bias 2. Bans Faith Goldy from panel discussion on free speech for having other opinions he dislikes
Crazy socks + suit-and-tie. It's an interesting message to send. "Take me seriously, but I am creative, I have hidden depths, and I'm approachable". But it's only a message, not necessarily the truth. Like most of us, Peterson has managed (or manufactured) this image for specific results. He dresses this way so that people will think of him in very certain ways.
seems to me that the only person manufacturing an image here is you. take your amateur analysis of the man's clothes to a fashion forum, no one gives a shit.
Conclusion for real (revolutionary) Marxists: Peterson does raise some valid points that we should keep in mind in our critical evaluation of our own mistakes and current thinking and tactics. We must remember that Marx & Engels called their world-view "scientific socialism", i.e., free of emotionally-induced excesses or stupidity. "Spite generally plays the basest of roles in politics." -- Lenin. And we should always keep in mind that: "...trends in political life are distinct in spite of the fact that individuals may change freely from one trend to another, and in spite of all attempts and efforts to amalgamate trends." -- Lenin. [couldn't get relevant italics in this word processor] Peterson is a very shrewd and subtle defender of capitalism (and by extension US Imperialism), who hides his real agenda under a lot of good common sense. It would be a grave mistake to reject EVERYTHING he says. It would be a very unscientific emotional 'knee-jerk' reaction indeed.
I love JP, but at 3:00, this line was darkly comical: ""Free speech is the cornerstone of our civilisation. I don't think it's reasonable to even have a debate about that""
This opinion about why we need the left AND the right makes me believe in the future of the world again! I hope this belief about why we need them spreads since I'm seeing alot of people thinking we need only the other.
Right well what people such as urself don’t understand is that the combination of right wing and left wing is national socialism and fascism. Which is why it’s so effective.
Conservative Puritan You are making things up in your head, not good to judge others entirely on mannerisms. That is Jordan's wife, so you are incorrect.
When Peterson speaks of the left and the right he bases his comments on long established research on political belief in the social sciences. A lot of this research was done shortly after WWII with the aim of understanding the rise of Hitler. The social scientists who did the research were mostly leftists (in some cases Marxist) and they defined fascism as extreme right. Now that doesn't mean the research is worthless. I find a lot of it interesting and there is clearly some truth in it. But in my opinion it suffers badly from the questions having been framed by people with a particular view of the world at a particular time in history. I don't think this research has dated very well and a lot of it could do with being revisited today. For example the right in this research is typically characterised as authoritarian while people on the left are described as being more empathetic and open to new ideas. Yet I find modern leftists to be extremely authoritarian. Many seem so closed to any new idea that they try to shout down every contrary opinion. And the identity politics of the modern left views people as primarily instances of their group identity, which is fundamentally incompatible with empathy which requires you to view others primarily as people like yourself. By contrast it is those on the right these days who are challenging authority, sometimes like Peterson, at the risk of their careers. The right also seems a lot more open to civilised discussion. And the politics of the right these days is based on individual rights and freedoms whereby others are seen as primarily people like yourself and is therefore a lot more compatible with empathy
Then you aren't listening carefully... authoritarianism exists at BOTH/near the absolute ideological horizon lines (extremes) and Peterson (and many others) consistantly point that out... The far Left's PC atomizing incessantness mirrors the far Right's ultr-defensiveness to modulation... from a dualistic perspective (where reactionary ideological encampments formulate) it's totally predictable... To exist in a practical and political sense in a navigatable reasoned centrality (centredness) is VERY, VERY difficult for most people... sadly...
Patrick Kehoe Exactly. Peterson emphazises the authoritarian characteristics of the far-left in many interviews. I like the horseshoe metaphor for the political spectre very much. The extremes are closer to each other than all the nuances between them.
Sooo lets jest keep perpetuating the left right paradigm with some kind of relevance in today's world. The left-right zeitgeist is dead. Let it die. stick a fork in it, and good riddance.
While I don't find the right as generous as you do, I agree there is a lot of closed-mindedness on both sides. I got curious tonight about what really is on the farthest left of the spectrum and what is really on the far right. Ultimately, I think it's Anarchy on both ends. Imvho.
This guy is completely on the money. Both sides of the political spectrum need to stop shutting down and de-platforming each other by calling them bigots, racists, sexists, SJWs, snowflakes and whatever else. I admit, i've called people SJWs and snowflakes many times because they said something I don't agree with but i'm slowly learning that we each need to listen to each other and be able to form our own views and without total freedom of speech, that is not possible.
Yes. He was. Hitler, like Stalin and Mao was a Socialist. His party was called the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei ( National Socialist German Workers Party). He was a Socialist, just like all leftists.
Felix Snowcat No. Jordan Peterson is one of the most arrogant and "holier than thou" people of our generation. The fact that he equates the far left, which hates western civilization, to the far right, which wants to preserve western civilization, is asinine.
I can't wait till this guy fades away-- I hate him so much.
I think a lot of what the 'social justice' extremists say is just ideological rhetoric and it's quite scary how they've convinced themselves that what they're speaking is the truth. Not only that, but the fact that people can have their careers and reputations ruined by somebody calling them a [insert buzzword here] is terrifying. If somebody is being genuinely racist, sexist or whatever then the best thing to do is argue against them and try and correct them. I agree, calling somebody and SJW or snowflake isn't as powerful as calling somebody a racist or whatever else but we all need to talk and listen to each other on an even playing field. If we don't, then the ideologues will just continue spouting their rhetoric and dangerous extremism on both sides of the political spectrum will flourish.
@Felix Snowcat look at you - trying to tell people it would be nice if they tried talking to one another to actually get what and why they are upset and that do you get? a bunch of stooges telling you that you're wrong (to put it polite)... keep it up !
+Fake News Wow, you are just as radical (may be even more) than the far left. People like you are the problem (on both left and right). And no I don't think the Far Left and the far right are equally stupid.
Man i love the guy. He is such an intelligent person, I feel more enlightened, every time I hear from him.
yeah, but this socks...huhh man, these socks...
+Roman King Unfortunately, there's a reason why progressive media loves presenting Jordan Peterson. It's because his extreme views about individualism are setting up dissidents to be ineffectual against an organized progressive movement.
no they're not. His 'extreme individualism' has helped pull quite a few people back from the brink of descending into collectivist brainwashing- both of the left and the right.
Also the channel 4 interview should be one example out of many that shows the 'progressive media' do not like him. I still consider myself a 'progressive' but am thoroughly appalled why much of what currently passes under that word - most of it stripped of any meaningful liberal values.
+Simon Sharp The progressive movement is a branch of Marxist philosophy that broke off from the communist branch back in the 1920s.
In terms of Orwell's 1984, Peterson is an Emmanuel Goldstein figure for the masses to hate, and for dissidents to latch on to.
I think the term "brainwashing" is rather strong.
@Serpins If you were ten times smarter, you'd be 10% as smart as Peterson.
Don't let difficult political circumstances corrupt you and push you to the extremes. That is hell. It is dogma and rigidity, it is truth subordinated to tribalism. Don't let bitterness win your heart. Be a maverick amidst conformity.
The problem is that if one side is extreme and the other isn't, the extreme will win. In the past, the extremists were usually an underground movement. Amazingly, the extremists in this situation are the mainstream voices and politicians. Almost like some people in power planned it this way.
Nah, that's crazy talk, and will remain so right up until the new Stasi knocks at your door.
Radicals are needed sometimes moderate people never bring big changes into society its not always about hate it can based on logical perspecive aswell.
Astral Frost I don't want to throw leftists from helicopters but when they start talking about gulags my hands are tied.
Astral Frost well having a tribe has benefits to the happiness of a species. Family, friendship and love. We are social creatures. Without one, you will lead a depressed life. However; if a tribe is ruled by a tyrant then that is when tribalism becomes a problem. But you shouldn't condemn the tribe, only the tyrants that live in it.
Astral Frost so its not OK to be white
Jordon Peterson the Radical Moderate 😃. Anyone who can tick off the far-right and the far -left at the same time has to be doing something right!
He is no, he is on the radical right just listen to him, he makes it a virtue to be responsible for yourself, but gives the impression people on the left are not. I have heard this quite a few times from Right leaning people. ie "i have always worked since i was 14" "never relied on the state", " never claimed welfare" never been unemployed" . "i wish i could sleep all day ". .Lots of assumptions given out - only people like him/her do this, so if you left wing your lazy, non achiever scumbag. etc that is the assertion Peterson is speaking to a bubble which is academia, so if your in the elite belong there and if you not your trash
He makes it a virtue to be responsible for yourself and not to use societal and family structures avoid the pain of becoming the best most actualised version of yourself because that leads to a personal hell of your own construction.
Petersons agenda is WAY beyond the left/right false dichotomy. Go listen to his 2016 personality lecture series to get a good sense of why his so scary for ideologues on both the left and right, he puts forward arguments that are outside of the traditional right/left dialectical and towards a society that does its best to allow people to self actualise.
Amen
Mulberry is one of the archetypical miscronstruers of his message. These people can be on either the radical right or left, but also among the so-called centrists or establishment/MSM types.. Actual individual, enlgihtened responsibility is not really popular with many people at all. Hard work and scary as hell.
Stupid sarcasm
I have never heard anyone put into words what I learned to do from my Political Science education. I do fragment my beliefs and have internal debates on issues constantly attempting to push each viewpoint further through "the power of the better argument". One way I often do this is reading books on topics I initially know I will detest. Inevitably I will find arguments or ideas that challenge my preconceived notions and continue the dialog again and again. An even better way is having civil dialog with those who challenge my ideas. I do not argue...I shut up and listen. One of the best political discussions I have ever had was with a radiator repairman in a garage. His logic, examples, and deep understanding of issues made this a conversation I will not soon forget.
I love your comment! It reminds me when I was in seventh and eighth grade I had a teacher Mr H. He had our class perform a reenactment of the signing of the Declaration. He is signed rolls 2 various students. I had been teacher's pet in 7th grade but wound up rebelling in the 8th and was way down on his list. I learned later that he bragged about me to the class my younger sister was in. But I believe the bragging was only about how I was able to read Edgar Allan Poe well. Meanwhile back at the convention, he assigned me to be Edmund Randolph. So I dutifully did my research and found out that I had to be pro-slavery. I could not begin to Fathom how someone could be pro-slavery but I had to do that. I was already distressed about that until I learned that Randolph also defended Aaron Burr in his trial for killing Alexander Hamilton and at that point wailed, mr. H hates me! But it was the singular most important educational lesson I ever got in school and having to be on the other side and find ways of understanding the other side. On top of it I'm a Libra, so that's a bit of an LOL. But from then on, I've always been suspect of dividing groups up in the US vs them fashion. It's difficult and perhaps useless do you think you can change someone else's mind. But the worst of it is, most of the time you make an enemy and become an enemy. And then nothing is accomplished. Anyway thank you for sharing your view
Most people don't think - he's absolutely right. Most people only emote and confuse it with thought.
If that's the case then how can we escape the sprint to the left or the right?
If men do not have agency enough then it ca be inhumane not to lead them.
Other people confuse it with pointing at TH-cam videos and saying "yerp! what he said!"
Folk Aart social media and groupthink are also modern “gods”.
And that is why I tune into Peterson. Most commentators these days are just political ideologues. I don't trust their conclusions when they ALWAYS land on the same side of the political divide. You know their analysis was filtered through a thick bias lens. Its not hard to see which way Peterson leans, but he is not just another conservative aggrieved by the left, he appears to deal with these social science issues, issue by issue. Thats more authentic, and thats where credibility comes from.
Dan S True, but Peterson refers to himself as classic liberal, not as conservative.
+Dan S You're falling into the trap the progressive establishment has set for you. That's why they invite Peterson to appear in the media routinely: in order to convince dissidents in today's progressive society to act as "one-man bands."
If you decide not to be political, you will end up suffering at the hands of those who have decided to be political.
If you develop yourself into the world's most impressive individual, you will still lose to a team of mediocrities if you are merely an individual.
I'm not sure where you're getting this 'Peterson is a trap set by the progressives' line from but there's nothing to back it up.
He is not saying develop yourself into and individual in the way you seem to have interpreted it. You can be an individual and have the ability to form with other people. Its not a choice between being a 'lonely individual' or a 'brainwashed collective' member.
And neither is he saying not to be political - he is advocating for not being drawn into the pathology and collectivism of the radical left OR right.
Simon Sharp Well said. I guess we are living in times of polarization now. There is black and white but 99% of reality are in greyscale and ignored by most people for the sake of the argument.
I see this behavior on all sides at the moment. But maybe only because I am trapped in it as well^^
+Simon Sharp "I'm not sure where you're getting this..."
It comes from Peterson himself, who has said that he is pleased to attract people who might otherwise have bought into some variety of dissident right thinking. While I grant that Peterson may be useful as a life coach for people who have personal problems, he has no solutions for the major political issues of the day.
To borrow from Orwell's Animal Farm, Peterson wants you to be Boxer the horse who always exerts himself to "try harder" but never challenges the system in any meaningful way.
If every challenge to the establishment is some form of "radicalism" from either the left or right, then Peterson's advice to be "moderate" means ultimately embracing the establishment. That is why Peterson's views are an outlet that the establishment embraces, which is why he is always appearing in the mainstream media.
I wish people could universally understand these ideas, that we need honest dialog between both sides instead of all the idiotic name calling and slanderous vitriol that we see everywhere.
+Sean Mcneme Dialogue is great and wonderful, but what do you have to talk about when this is the opinion of progressive leaders: th-cam.com/video/QT767j5KkZQ/w-d-xo.html ?
“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville Political correctness is about restraint by one group over another for the sole purpose of gaining power. Not for what someone has done but for what they may do because of the group they were born into. It is claiming all men are rapists to prevent one rape. That all are racists to prevent one act of racism. It is condemning and judging all to be guilty who belong to any group that is deemed evil or for having done evil. It is class warfare using moral condemnation as its weapon. This is the new socialism created in universities.
Outstanding! Well said!
I was just scrolling through the comments. well said. smart and gorgeous.
That's what makes left a little bit more dangerous then the right.
The basic rule, according to Peterson: “You need a meaning in your life that enables you to bear the suffering of your life without becoming corrupted, and you have to build yourself in to something that you can actually respect so you can see yourself bearing that terrible existential burden properly, and then you don’t lose hope and you don’t lose meaning because you’re strong enough to stand up underneath that burden, and then there’s something about you that you can respect, and then maybe other people can respect, and it will help bring suffering in the world to an end, and it will help people develop fully as individuals and will help us avoid the dehumanizing, rigid, sterile uniformity of the nationalistic left [he meant right --ed] and the appalling devouring chaos of the radical left"
I found your comments so intriguing and compelling I am stopping right here to watch the video. Sometimes I read the comments first before watching and that was my intention this time but now as I say I want to watch after hearing what you said
So I listened to JP and I will probably listen to it again later because there was a lot to it in the sense of richness. I liked the way he spoke of( he said battle) but I'm going to say competition of the Mind. This was when he was talking about how people in general are not taught to think. I like to deeply process something that I think is worthwhile.
I have battles with myself all the time, so I can think? I thought I was just crazy!
The thrall in which an ideology holds a people is best measured by their collective inability to imagine alternatives.
Kent, great comment. Are you quoting someone?
I only wish it were short and 'catchy' bcuz then it would make a great bumper sticker!
+Kent MacIsacc What is your take on corporate cultures? Do you think corporations are foolish in trying to create one for themselves? That's an example of an ideology on a smaller level.
Awesome statement, Kent! I hope it's your own because it's brilliant
Ps... just put that in my Great Quotes document with your name
Freedom is in the middle. Screw extremists i.e not just terrorists but far right and far left
Well, if you think freedom lies in the Constitution, the progressive establishment (not just the far left) ultimately wants to neuter it. The Tea Party/Alt-Right/American patriots want to preserve it.
It may be tempting to sit things out and not be political, but if you refuse to play politics, you will be played by those who do.
Few have spoken to my inner sense of truth when I hear it like Jordan Peterson. He has a way of getting to the heart and mind.
yeah he 's got it when he's irritated by something; shows he's passionate about certain things
Anal frost
Kermit is sunbathing in Peterson’s truth and logic.
Oh my goodness I just realized how similar his voice is to Kermit.
My only contention is he should not downplay rights in favor of responsibility. He should defend the entire Bill of Rights as vehemently as he defends free speech, and he can do that while simultaneously advocating a rigorous adoption of responsibility. They aren't mutually exclusive.
I also feel he should replace the word "divine" with sovereign as it pertains to the individual. The Western experiment was recognizing the sovereignty of the individual, at least in the US with the establishment of our Constitutional Republic, the individual was sovereign over his self and his property and his pursuit of happiness insofar as he did not infringe on his neighbor's right to do the same.
Other than those two (minor) quibbles, they may very well be semantics, the man is absolutely brilliant beyond measure. I've listened to hours upon hours of his lectures. What a treasure.
Unfortunately, Peterson isn't quite the champion of free speech that you might initially assume. See Millennial Woes' video on Peterson to find out his rather narrow limits on the subject.
Kermit the Frog literally died from JBP's logic and intelligence.
You Are Dead he's just awe struck with knowledge and wisdom
If you look at Kermit while he talks, it sounds just like him
That’s hilarious, it’s true.
Amazing speech as usual.
ps: I almost shit on my pants when I noticed there is a dude behind that door, listening to Jordan P. in the shadows hahahaha
What he's talking about is what I have been attempting over the last year and it's exhausting. I'll agree with one side or the other in order to understand an issue, but parsing the data into something more objectively truthful has been very difficult. However, it is a satisfying endeavor because instead of trying to win arguments, I try to learn information, and that is what I see as valuable.
Fear those who view this man as their enemy, for they are enemies of us all.
Nailed it on the head with the 'divine individual' which is another way of saying 'transcendence of the individual to the divine' - this is exactly what a lot of Eastern traditions such as Buddhism, Daoism and even sects of Hinduism emphasise greatly through such concepts as Nirvana, Shunyatah and Moksha. The 'individual', the 'self', is subordinated to the Divine Individual, the Self, and the two become one in the mind, where before there was always a gap, which suffering (mental or spiritual) tends to fill. In this way, the individual no longer competes with others or one's self - the individual is fulfilled, and this fulfills the world around them as a result, the two being inextricably linked as always.
Someone please do a body language interpretation of the person to Jordan's left, some of this Persons facial expressions are priceless.
Then Peterson mentions freedom of speech...squirm...nervous glance to someone off camera.
Makes me wonder exactly how far to the "left" of Jordan Peterson that Person was.
Don’t be too harsh. She’s not used to thinking that hard
The Kermit... ☠️🤣
I love his shoes
The left and right is a black and white fallacy.
Bang on. Been thinking this for a while. And I believe that countries that keep that balance of Left and Right really seem to prosper. In Canada I know it's been a tug of war back and forth. Right now the Left has the momentum, but that's changing. I hope. In Europe you see that the Left has held on for quite a while, now the Right is pushing back. But it still seems that both sides seem are still on the extremes. Not sure on that so please correct me if I'm wrong.
One thing I think that is a definite contributor to the widening gap between the 2 sides, is Social Media. It basically turns most everyone into rude, ignorant know it alls. And I'm just as guilty. Before Social Media, politics was contentious, and it led to arguments here and there. But kept a level of civility to the conversation. Which in turn, didn't cause such resentment and anger that ppl could be persuaded into changing their minds on issues.
With the hostility in Social Media. No matter how many facts you have to support your position. The other side will either justify it away, ignore it, and this puts a real road block in having effective debate. Go on FB and read the comments under any news story. And you will see what I mean.
Time to change the way I communicate on line.
Kman31ca True. I've tried my best to stay away from news stories and the daily mail yet in times of weakness I go back on in curiosity. And my self confidence further plunges down to the bottom. Deciding to go to the comments on msn one day is a decision I'll forever regret. I want to forget everything. I want to show emotion and not be called a beta. I want controlled immigration without being called a nazi. I want to hug it out with immigrants who are good people and not rapists or murderers. I just want to live my life without worrying of people looking at me with a grade in a picture on the internet and them going "you had it easy Marxist". In fact when I do get my grades I'm hiding. Making sure the picture of me never gets out.
What's young Brendan Fraser doing there in the background?
Lol
Time travel was involved
This is what WISDOM looks like. An understanding of life that goes beyond extremism.
Great talk.
I love that, you have to have different personalities holding different viewpoints and arguing for each, that is thinking... It is hard and you have to be trained to do that.
Great lecture!
This should be shown to everyone who is firm and arrogant in their liberal or conservative views, and people who don't think but just rely on their inherent prejudices. Which is like 90% of people. They could really benefit from this.
MrElculver2424 Nice idea. I'd suggest you post this videos link in a daily mail article as that's where the negative, extreme,nasty close minded right are and then post this on CNN or something.
"In order to think, you need to fragment yourself up into opposing perspectives ... and let [them] have a battle in the theater of your imagination"
...this is an approach of extremes - basically letting your biases rage, while trying to create new countering biases inside the mind - but artificial biases cannot counter real biases.
A better approach is to observe your biases and recognize them as such, letting them fall away.
Biases may have some utility as long as you don't take them too seriously.
@@gilian2587 David Hume famously said, "reason is the slave of the passions" - the difficulty is that biases are so powerful that they take control. "Not taking them seriously" is exactly right, but quite difficult for most people to do.
That’s fair, but how does one recognize their own biases without competing ideas?
On this, Peterson and I are in agreement.
Brilliant.
Why is it I feel so compelled to skip a Jordan Peterson commercial so that I can watch a Jordan Pearson video!
Don't usually get to see Peterson's socks. Good stuff.
A spigot is turned right to allow water to flow, which is great when and as long as you need water at the time. The spigot must eventually be turned right to control or stop the flow of water though.
....aand again a good video with him! I enjoy his balanced and reflected way.
Lol, I just noticed the person sitting in the doorway.
Why is there a Kermit the frog?
Kek wills it.
A comfort pillow 😆
@@iamtrashman4998
Jordan Peterson enjoys being compared to Kermit - he thinks that it is funny, so he sometimes bring a Kermit puppet with him and jokes around with it, lol.
Love him for everything..rare men among blind sheeps.
The idea of personal responsibility. That is something I can get behind.
True. All the crap that's going on has pushed me from centre left to quite far (tho not extreme) right.
Anarchism mate ...... its the only way
robzrob So, you ignored what this video said by moving from moderation to extremism, instead of finding a compromisse?
That baby was pretty distraught to discover it hadn't been thinking properly
I always thought that there was no definitive answer to which idealogy was right (left or right) but felt that it depends on the environment we are provided with. Different policies fit different times, and there is rarely one right way.
I am glad to see that Peterson's interpretations and analyses are in accord with my own -- presumably, if there is a complete truth, we all should get there if we think straight. And certainly, free thinking is necessary, and so is courage, and humanity, and personal honor. The Middle Path is always the true one.
THIS NEED TO BE SHARED AND TALKED RIGHT THE FUCK NOW.
I like the grey zone that exists between the individual and the nation. Between the individual mind as it progresses into group identity. For example - if enough individuals of a certain mind come together freely and create a horribly destructive group, is this really a break in Peterson's logic. It is perhaps something like original sin - that human individuals can be extreme and if that extremeness (right or left politically, but the binaries are open to many more delineations) suits the needs of the extreme group in a certain version of reality or existence, then how can you begrudge them their extremeness? Does it all come down to what is pragmatic for a certain group at a certain time? Or is it up to the organic sway of wise individuals to change the group identity as circumstances change? And ultimately I think there is a huge urge in the human psyche to seek for, discover and then implement the organized group that defies or wins over and against any change in reality. Something like the All-system- akin to the God particle and very much akin to religious thought. The search for the timeless and unchanging right answer that is in all places and all times the right answer, for everyone. This is a very strong urge because people dislike dynamism and change, they much prefer stability and permanence - perhaps precisely because they know they will never attain to it.
While i 100% agree... Asking people to be rational thoughtful careful and respectful is a bit much in our time and place. There's gotta be at least 100,000 x more effort, energy and money put into keeping people ignorant and helpless, when it comes to critical thinking, or intellectual thought. I grew up an artist/designer and went to a top tear design/art school, only to start a career into something that quickly sucked me dry moraly, and ethically, to the point that i was greatly depressed, and suicidal. The realization hit me that in this line of communication problem solving, me, my peers, and my co workers, are only trying to create mindless consumption habits for the people I wished so much more for. Designers could change the world overnight if they wanted to. We could be spreading GENUINE messages of thoughtfulness, carefulness and reinforce moraly and ethically positive communication. However there is no money in this, from the systems point of view the success is generated by a population of people who are reckless, careless, and happily ignorant. Its no accident that the schools, and the employers are all for the grand manipulation of the peoples dreams, wants, and needs. Otherwise there is no money it.
Jordan is inspired, and an inspiration.
Thanks for sharing this I needed to hear someone powerfully reasonable
Read some Hamilton and Jefferson. And top it off with some Rousseau.
Bravo!
But the thing is, you put forth your ideas, no matter how biased and wrong they might be, for other people to set you straight.
What's stopping other people from being equally, if not more biased towards the same things?
I guess that's where the conversation part comes in, so instead of letting people just 'correct' you, you listen to them and form your own opinion based on the new knowledge you've gained, and the original knowledge you had.
Haha, 4 minutes in until I noticed Kermit sitting there next to Jordan
Good the see he is making a point the call it out as the radical element of the left and right
Not to the individual, to the aggregate of individuals
i call this man my new food. i want him for breakfast, launch and dinner. he's food for thoughts for real.
I would like to hear him explain the people who just change political leanings overnight ? Are they so agreeable that they can’t think for themselves?
The problem is when an extremist side of the balance labels the opposite regular side as extremists so they can have a perfect excuse to act their extremist schedule based on defending from the other side. So the side in which the regular was labeled extremists by the extremists from the opposite side naturally dislikes it and tends to go to the extreme points of their views to counter that situation. And that brings things to an unbalanced unstabled situation
Yeah you already see that with the Right thanks to the Left's stupidity.
Is it "Less Slenderman" that sits in the shadow of that doorway? I had to look twice at this video because i got distracted as hell of that guy in the door!
This makes me wonder what Dr Peterson makes of the "Westernized/semi-westernized" non-West places in the world like Japan, South Korea (probably the most interesting example), Singapore, Mexico, and India. For that matter, how compatible or incompatible are South America, Africa, Oceania (Polynesia etc) and Eastern Europe with the West proper? Makes me wish he had a interview or series on cultural geography.
where's the full video. I've stopped watching JB Peterson videos that are CUT or Edited.
I align in a central point of view with slight authoritarian views and agree that all extremes of the compass are bad but that could be my bias
1. Kermit says free speech is a fundamental non-debatable value of western civilization, and that you must hear different viewpoints to recognize and correct your own bias
2. Bans Faith Goldy from panel discussion on free speech for having other opinions he dislikes
If only they'd work together, then the best of both possible worlds can create a balanced world.
Half way through this is some pretty good stuff
Crazy socks + suit-and-tie. It's an interesting message to send. "Take me seriously, but I am creative, I have hidden depths, and I'm approachable". But it's only a message, not necessarily the truth. Like most of us, Peterson has managed (or manufactured) this image for specific results. He dresses this way so that people will think of him in very certain ways.
I'm, idk. I just like to think he made a joyful choice. It's possible
seems to me that the only person manufacturing an image here is you. take your amateur analysis of the man's clothes to a fashion forum, no one gives a shit.
Time for the order of the Right at the current moment.
awww somebody gifted him Kermit.. so thoughtful!
Good to see Kermit showing up to some sophisticated political lectures these days.
Whom does the Kermit and the handbag belong to????
At 8:40 he says "left" twice but I think he meant "right" for the first?
Yep.
I get that his point is that we -should- pick up our responsibility.. problem is. Millions upon millions won't.
It *was* called "checks & balances" and actually worked really well for our country before the TDS epidemic...
CNN top story; Jordan Peterson swags a stylish purse with Kermit the frog
Tremendous communicator this dude is.
Flashforward 7 years later, Peterson is an absolute right winger that has no issues flirting and getting along with racist & fascists.
Conclusion for real (revolutionary) Marxists: Peterson does raise some valid points that we should keep in mind in our critical evaluation of our own mistakes and current thinking and tactics. We must remember that Marx & Engels called their world-view "scientific socialism", i.e., free of emotionally-induced excesses or stupidity. "Spite generally plays the basest of roles in politics." -- Lenin.
And we should always keep in mind that: "...trends in political life are distinct in spite of the fact that individuals may change freely from one trend to another, and in spite of all attempts and efforts to amalgamate trends." -- Lenin. [couldn't get relevant italics in this word processor]
Peterson is a very shrewd and subtle defender of capitalism (and by extension US Imperialism), who hides his real agenda under a lot of good common sense. It would be a grave mistake to reject EVERYTHING he says. It would be a very unscientific emotional 'knee-jerk' reaction indeed.
I love JP, but at 3:00, this line was darkly comical: ""Free speech is the cornerstone of our civilisation. I don't think it's reasonable to even have a debate about that""
Thanks Again Mr.Peterson ✌🏻🇺🇸
Never seen America this disgraceful about there own country
6:00 Oh no he used the Collective word! Communism! Communism!
Lol
This opinion about why we need the left AND the right makes me believe in the future of the world again! I hope this belief about why we need them spreads since I'm seeing alot of people thinking we need only the other.
Right well what people such as urself don’t understand is that the combination of right wing and left wing is national socialism and fascism. Which is why it’s so effective.
As if he has to defend Socratic dialogue...
Why do so many people think of Jordan as en extremist? Please let me know, I want to see why.
We need more moderate left-wingers and moderate right-wingers. Maybe some radical centrists too.
This man is the R E A L MVP
Why does he have a Kermit The Frog and a spotted purse?
Sounds like Hegal
Does anyone know anything about the woman staring at Jordan Peterson? She does not look impressed.
Conservative Puritan You are making things up in your head, not good to judge others entirely on mannerisms. That is Jordan's wife, so you are incorrect.
2 wings same turkey.
Why isnt he my president?
When Peterson speaks of the left and the right he bases his comments on long established research on political belief in the social sciences. A lot of this research was done shortly after WWII with the aim of understanding the rise of Hitler. The social scientists who did the research were mostly leftists (in some cases Marxist) and they defined fascism as extreme right. Now that doesn't mean the research is worthless. I find a lot of it interesting and there is clearly some truth in it. But in my opinion it suffers badly from the questions having been framed by people with a particular view of the world at a particular time in history. I don't think this research has dated very well and a lot of it could do with being revisited today.
For example the right in this research is typically characterised as authoritarian while people on the left are described as being more empathetic and open to new ideas. Yet I find modern leftists to be extremely authoritarian. Many seem so closed to any new idea that they try to shout down every contrary opinion. And the identity politics of the modern left views people as primarily instances of their group identity, which is fundamentally incompatible with empathy which requires you to view others primarily as people like yourself. By contrast it is those on the right these days who are challenging authority, sometimes like Peterson, at the risk of their careers. The right also seems a lot more open to civilised discussion. And the politics of the right these days is based on individual rights and freedoms whereby others are seen as primarily people like yourself and is therefore a lot more compatible with empathy
well said, Ian
Then you aren't listening carefully... authoritarianism exists at BOTH/near the absolute ideological horizon lines (extremes) and Peterson (and many others) consistantly point that out... The far Left's PC atomizing incessantness mirrors the far Right's ultr-defensiveness to modulation... from a dualistic perspective (where reactionary ideological encampments formulate) it's totally predictable... To exist in a practical and political sense in a navigatable reasoned centrality (centredness) is VERY, VERY difficult for most people... sadly...
Patrick Kehoe Exactly. Peterson emphazises the authoritarian characteristics of the far-left in many interviews. I like the horseshoe metaphor for the political spectre very much. The extremes are closer to each other than all the nuances between them.
Sooo lets jest keep perpetuating the left right paradigm with some kind of relevance in today's world. The left-right zeitgeist is dead. Let it die. stick a fork in it, and good riddance.
While I don't find the right as generous as you do, I agree there is a lot of closed-mindedness on both sides. I got curious tonight about what really is on the farthest left of the spectrum and what is really on the far right. Ultimately, I think it's Anarchy on both ends. Imvho.
People like you can bring them back and we should. Most are save able
Possibly the best civics less ever--in less than 10 minutes!
He mis-spoke a little about the national de-humanizing of the left - I'm pretty sure he meant right and was juxtaposing the polarity of the extremes.
It seems like a lot of (weak) people have substituted the religious dogma with ideological dogma to fill the emptyness inside them.
Far right? You mean normal hard working human beings?