>Why do people find Jordan Peterson so convincing? Because the left doesn't have its own house in order >Slavoj Zizek
>The Canadian clinical psychologist and university professor has become hugely popular for his 'anti-PC' views and is beloved of many on the alt-right. He's appealing for a number of reasons, most of them connected to the left-wing people he opposes
>The wide popularity of Jordan Peterson, a once-obscure Canadian clinical psychologist and university professor who has become beloved of the alt-right, is a proof that the liberal-conservative “silent majority” finally found its voice. Peterson, who has said that the idea of white privilege is a "Marxist lie" and theorised that "radical feminists" don't speak out about human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia because of "their unconscious wish for brutal male domination", is fast becoming a mainstream commentator.
>His advantages over the previous anti-LGBT+ star Milo Yiannopoulos are obvious. Yiannopoulos was witty, fast-talking, full of jokes and sarcasms, and openly gay – he resembled, in many features, the culture he was attacking. Peterson is his opposite: he combines a “common sense” approach and (the appearance of) cold scientific argumentation with a bitter rage at a threat to the liberal basics of our societies – his stance is: “Enough is enough! I cannot stand it anymore!”
>It is easy to discern the cracks in his advocacy of cold facts against “political correctness”: not only is he often relying on unverified theories, but the big problem is the paranoiac construct which he uses to interpret what he sees as facts. "Facts are facts," he likes to say, before going on to say that "the idea that women were oppressed throughout history is an appalling theory"...
Zizek is dumb. I believe he applauded Merkel for going against the will of the general population in declaring that they would admit millions of refugees from Africa in the Middle East, so he's useless. Just another virtue signaller who leftists like because they can feel edgy listening to him.
Hunter Murphy
Peterson responded!!! Oh no no no no no
Leo Ross
That's his communism showing. He still looks at the world and sees 1910 where Africa is partitioned amongst European colonial powers and China isn't a thing.
It overwhelms his slavic heritage. Southern Slavs in particular are very resistant to "white privilege" bullshit, because they themselves have been occupied and oppressed by a non-european power for so long
Henry Rivera
>Zizek paraded around as part of DiEM with Varoufakis, another shit lib, demanding more "democracy in Europe", as in, more gibs for Greeks and more refugees because it's our moral duty >Praises leaders for being anti-democratic in the name of European Values (tm) Well, which is it? It's like Democratic Centralism v.2, Electric Bogaloo, where the liberal parties represent the will of the people because they said so and they're on the right side of history.
Luis Campbell
Zizek went back and forth with Chomsky for a while, so maybe he'll step up to the plate with Peterson
Henry Thomas
Peterson's got one trick and Zizek, well *sniffs*
Oliver Gomez
>That's his communism showing. He still looks at the world and sees 1910 where Africa is partitioned amongst European colonial powers and China isn't a thing. well said user I like Zizek (even though he's a fucking marxist) but this was a terrible article.
Mason Davis
Oy vey! Peterson argues with leftist media golems! That must PROVE that he is truly /ourgoy/!
Oh, wait... He's anti-white, too...
Charles Rogers
>1 post by this ID >anti-Peterson >memeflag show us the leaf, faggot
Isaac Flores
funny coincidence here because zizek plagiarized kmac in one of his "books"
Ryan Dawson - War By Deception [contains info on how ((neocons)) used 9/11 to get us into Iraq] >youtube.com/watch?v=UoB80Yk9NYg
Israel Mossad Chief - Juval Aviv, (mossad agent on whom the movie 'Munich' is based) >youtube.com/watch?v=FR7ioRALGaw tries to cover for Israel but ends up admitting a lot
2.40 'there is no doubt that there were various Israeli teams in America... who were MONITORING terrorist networks...
3.08 'Israel had [the 9/11] information that they were giving the American government..' continues to blame the CIA for storing bombs in the towers
Robert Gutierrez
>Why the homophobia? because it's funny. usually this leaf shill posts with a NazBol flag >in all fields
Gabriel Wood
Zizek is actually retarded, yes.
Henry Moore
So I read the article and Zizek basically says nothing in it, but still calls Jordan Peterson deplorable, but criticizes The Left for being too politically correct, while agreeing with the general thrust of their program, because it's our moral duty. I guess it'll be all good as long as Europeans and Muslims can make a few racist jokes at each other, right? Surely, it won't cause the whole thing to go to shit, as most Muslim countries seem to. What a fucking luminary.
Also, attributing the wars in the Middle East to Global Capitalism (tm) is a bit of a joke, seeing as they are in fact caused by Israel. But, global capitalism is basically on par with magic in Leftism, shit just happens and it's always caused by capitalism.
Lucas Russell
Zizek's entire thing is baseless moralism. By his own philosophical presumptions, he should be a moral nihilist, yet he holds 100% to standard enlightenment/liberal soyboy morality. This is a problem with all communists, who really don't seem to be capable of understanding meta-ethics or any sort of "real" philosophy. They only understand brainlet-tier shit like Marx.
Jackson Perry
yeah you dont have an external agenda at all its totally worthwhile to read all of this nah fuck off leaf
Jose Parker
This is like the a battle for ultimate /lit/ meme status they're going wild over there
Jaxon Harris
Progressivism is just secularized Christianity with a Calvinist bent so it's understandable.
>let's go kill all the reactionary oppressors (tm) and their families! >but don't you dare suggest excluding an African migrant you fucking BIGOT! it's our moral duty to care for them! Think of our common humanity!
literally religious warriors
Jaxon Cook
Zizek is a commie who wants to say racist jokes and fuck chicks. The SJW's have really put a dent in his shtick. The college girls don't spread for ol' Zizek like they used to. Maybe throwing shit at Peterson will do the trick?
He's pure scumbag left.
Aaron Stewart
>former cinema critic tries to criticize actual scientist lmao, I forgot how pathetic leftards are
Levi Clark
Zizek is not a moralist at all. He's an Althusserist. Read "Virtue and Terror". I have no idea how you'd reach that conclusion.
Austin Ward
>This is like the a battle for ultimate /lit/ meme status >they're going wild over there >
Camden Bell
Respect for Zizek lost.
I’m not a devout follower of JBP, but I know most of Zizeks points are completely out of context.
Luis Sullivan
>Zizek is not a moralist at all. Yes he is. You, like him, are just too low IQ to understand what the term means.
Logan Martin
That has always been the problem with dialectical materialism.
Kevin Hill
Time to hit the books.
Easton Scott
>Zizek is not a moralist at all. He's an Althusserist. >le kill your wife and pretend you read Capital man That's even worse.
Parker Murphy
Peterson oversimplifies Jung's work. I don't like him.
Ryder Reed
It won't help you, since you don't have the intelligence to understand meta-ethics. Like Zizek and virtually all Marxists.
Levi Taylor
If I'm honest, I've never been able to make head or tail out of most what Zizek said, samed goes for Chomsky. They all are marxists and therefore materialists, yet are strangely idealistic in their persuade of (((equality))). To me both come across as impotent intellectuals that simply can't let go of their marxist beliefs. What people also have to realise is that Marx' theories are highly descriptive (and to be honest very accurate for a 19./early 20. century society) but they very rarely tell you what to do, apart from destrying that what we have in a fundamental way.
Christian Murphy
One reason why he's hard to unterstand could be the fact that he speaks in a second language though.
David Butler
No one regards the labor theory of value as correct, so the entire edifice of Marxism basically falls apart. Instead you get reformist Marxism, Leninism etc. which end up in centralization of state power since no Communists have figured out how to accomplish abolishing private property, work, social classes, etc.
Josiah White
*pursuit
Grayson Young
A marxist uses strawmen, and insinuates/associates deplorable types to destroy an opponent.
That's surprising.
Grayson Nguyen
Chomsky isn't to bad to wrap your head around. Zizek is just deliberately optuse and likes to masturbate about his non ideological ideology while looking deaply into the eyes of his tiny portrait of Stalin.
Adrian Gonzalez
I don't like Althusser either, nor Zizek, ultimately.
Aiden Ramirez
>No one regards the labor theory of value as correct This. If anyone wants supplementary reading on this then here.
Jack Edwards
Chomsky is not a Marxist. He is more of a non-Marxist socialist that descended from the liberal traditions. It's easy to tell.
>Equality This is such a repeated meme, but communism is not about equality. Marx was not an egalitarian, and he regarded "equality" as you mention it as an empty abstraction.
Matthew Moore
>No one regards the labor theory of value as correct. It was pretty accurate in a 19th century context, also his theory on the accumulation of wealth is widely seen as correct on the political left (Peterson says it's all due to the Pareto Principle). I think to give marxism the final blow, one should finally destroy their philosophy of dialectical materialism. Allthough, thaat would still leave us with the problem of neo-marxism/postmodernism and identity politics, these theories are very seductive for the 'oppressed', because they basically come from our human past in tribalism.
Andrew Sullivan
It's 10 posts into the thread how many fucking posts do you expect him to have?
Julian Gonzalez
You bette throw out Smith and Ricardo as well.
Hunter Bennett
sorry for greentexting everything.
Ayden Allen
Dialectical Materialism didn't even exist in Marx's lifetime, it was invented by the USSR as a formal State ideology.
Modern "neo-Marxism" is hardly even Marxist in the first place. It's definitely Leftist, but focuses primarily on the identitarian struggle by Oppressed Groups against the Oppressor (tm), as designated by the liberal elite. The high-low vs. middle conflict is typical of leftist politics in general.
Mostly outdated, yes, though some principles like e.g. Ricardian comparative advantage are still useful. It's not that different than saying that classical mechanics is outdated due to quantum mechanics existing. Modern economics developed from classical theories that used the labor theory of value, but fundamentally, they are wrong (imo), even though they eventually led to better theories.
Colton Ortiz
>dialectical materialism
Pretty easily shown to be false. Sure, much conflict is motivated by material needs, but clearly not all of it.
Material needs don't explain why people strap bombs to themselves and blow themselves up while shouting the name of their god. IT doesn't explain why migrants in the most advanced welfare states in the world murder their caretakers. It doesn't explain why a mugger shoots someone after getting his wallet.
Bentley Lewis
I know that Chomsky calls himself a left-wing libertarian/Anarcho Syndicalist but I simply can't see how it's suppossed to work. Non-Marxist socialist simply reminds me of sth like a vegan lion. What was Marx, What is communism about if not equality ?
Bentley Diaz
peterson fucking destroys his critics time and time again.
Why has Sup Forums turned on him? I (personally) love what this man stands for, would not go as far as calling him a father figure though, is it perhaps the cult that he has generated that Sup Forums hates and not the substance itself?
Nathaniel Edwards
Of course dialectical/historical materialism (allthough you're right, the exact term didn't exist but the concept did) existed it was the basis for marxism/leninism. Your neo marxism part is the same what I've written in a previous post and I agree with you.
Thomas Lopez
>much conflict is motivated by material needs, but clearly not all of it. These people should maybe read Shakespeares Romeo and Juliet to see that maybe even most conflicts aren't about material things.
Brandon Jenkins
Because Sup Forums (and Sup Forums in general) is first and foremost contrarian. JBP has started to become popular, so now everyone pretends they always thought he was an idiot.
I don't think accusations of cultishness really stand up. He's obviously got a very devoted following. He's charismatic. In another age he might have been a prophet or reformer. But the things he teaches and the values he imparts are explicitly anti-cultish. He extols the virtues of telling the truth, skepticism, individuality and responsibility. Kinda hard to start a cult like that.
Anthony Taylor
/sci/ pls
Juan Evans
Because he's philosemitic, and also because Individualism (tm) is bad.
Mason Torres
Pure *sniff* ideology
Jeremiah Phillips
Zizek is smart, you cannot compare with this Peterson clown.
Christopher Wood
My sides. I can't wait to see JP having an in-person conversation with Zizek.
The reason that I write about lobsters is because there’s [...] Let me *sniff* just get this straight. You’re saying that *touches nose* we should *touches nose* organise our societies along the lines of *pulls shirt* the lobsters?
Andrew Bell
YOU FUCKING NIGGER YOU STOLE MY THREAD I ALREADY POSTED THIS NOONE REPLIED REEEEEEEEEE
Cooper Wilson
>Pretty easily shown to be false
Dialectical materialism can't be "shown to be false". It's not a factual assertion, it's a heuristic which is supposed to help you percieve patterns you'd otherwise miss.
Christopher Hitchens loved it, despite denouncing Marxism and becoming a self-confessed giant neocon, because it's a useful way of looking at the world.
Thomas Morris
Ooh, JP has already replied, and rather sharply. The battle is joined. A debate between these two could be fun, although these sorts of debates never seem to resolve anything. (Probably both of them are thinking about expanding their respective audiences.)
Cooper Sanders
its not antidemocratic you ignorant populist, look up "representative democracy"
Sup Forums cant even politics 101 I keep educating them every post baka
Parker Cook
Anybody know - does Zizek actually write his books, or are they written by assistants and whatnot?
Brayden Barnes
>implying Sup Forums know what that means
Jordan Jones
literally everything Sup Forums knows about economics is tom woods, peter schiff, marx and Volkswagen
Aiden Wilson
Representative democracy is hardly democratic, and is definitely bad.
Aiden Sanchez
I find them both interesting, even noam chomsky to an extent, but maybe someone could answer this for me: what can they accomplish? Talk is cheap, how can they change the system? I've seen Jared Taylor give the same speechfor over 20 years, but nothing changes.
Josiah Collins
BLOODSPORTS >yfw peterstein vs zizek on racewarski
Christopher Allen
*Sniff*
Jace Jenkins
Who's worse, Zizek or Chomsky?
Brody Sullivan
Chomsky actually thinks Europe can take in all the refugees, Zizek sees how retarded it is *sniff*
Caleb Martinez
I believe Zizek is often misrepresented through the very mechanism which dominates the problem for the 'left' and the 'right' His indefinable nature. Would of voted Trump, is against gun control yet active in liberal democratic projects which infuriates the sensibilities of the current model. To think outside the box you need to see what the box is.
Justin Roberts
Based zizek
Elijah Rogers
So can any of you guys explain some of Zizeks main ideas to me? What has he contributed besides reviewing films?
Landon Harris
Zizek just wants it to be controlled (tm), he wouldn't adovcate for actually deporting anyone because that would be a affront to European Enlightenment Values. He will still counter-signal shitlibs though, have to stay on brand.
He said he would vote for trump because he thought it would make the radical left wake up and fix its problems. Zizek's problem is that he's too invested in Marxism to have an accurate view of the left. The basic thrust of leftism isn't anti-capitalism or Marxism or whatever, it's high-low vs. middle. Post-Holocaust we have racial minorities vs. whites instead of capitalists vs. proletarians, but the same structure remains.
Charles Martinez
Wow, Peterson just challenged a parody account of Zizek on Twitter. How rational...
Hudson Butler
The way I see it it's part of the problem to want to change it. We don't know what the problem is. To do nothing seems abhorrent in the current ideology.
Kayden Parker
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD
Brandon Bennett
You’re a faggot who hasn’t even scratched the surface of understanding Jung enough to know what is oversimplification and what is not. Fucking Dunning-Kruger lmao
Leo Rivera
The ghost of Marxism or a Marxism which does not definable exist unless as a trope. The thrust of ideas as an individual is always present as a symbolic narrative. Do people decide what they believe because it is the overarching idea of the cause or are they told it's what they believe in which case both are false.
Alexander Gonzalez
>Progressivism is just secularized Christianity with a Calvinist bent so it's understandable.
retard bullshit.
Blake Ortiz
your room is filthy, isn't it?
Michael Cox
Is there anything to Zizek other then slyly contradicting liberal left ideas while using over confusing theory language to prevent any leftist from disagreeing with him?
Peterson may not be rigorous but it's better than Lanacianism, and at least he seems to be emotionally invested in it unlike Zizek. I'd really like to see a debate though. it would at least be an interesting battle of charlatans.
Jaxon Jenkins
Nobody really knows, even his followers just spout shit he said in his film reviews.
>If I'm honest, I've never been able to make head or tail out of most what Zizek said, samed goes for Chomsky.
zizek writes like foucault or derrida or any of those post modern douchebags. They don't believe in the concept of truth but in presenting their thoughts to an audience, they are relying upon the conept of truth- that what they are saying is necessary or valuable in some way.
Since they can't explain this logical inconsistency they just babble in unintelligible gibberish. Philosophers before postmodernism searched for truth and presented ideas, philosophers since post modernism just babble gibberish in an imitation of philosophy. it's all about form, not content.
Lucas Clark
JBP is gonna mop the floor with him.
Cameron Baker
Zizek namedrops Lacan in order to claim that a person is behaving pathologically when they have negative feelings towards an entity that wrongs them or reduces their quality of life or works against their interest, using the example of a jealous husband “even if his wife was cheating on him, it would still be pathological to be jealous” , the Nazis “even if the Jews did stab Germany in the back, spread cultural depravity, kidnap and kill Christian children , it would still be pathological to be anti Semitic “ and anti-immigrant populists “even if refugees did want to turn Europe into an Islamic state and contain high % of terrorists and rapists relative to European citizens and are opposed to assimilating to our core values and way of life , it would still be pathological to be opposed to mass refugee influx”
Zizek is a retarded cuck whose main skill is spewing his worthless value judgments in that typical postmodern patter in order to give it a facade of intellectual worth or authority.
Any sensible human being can refute zizek’s moronic stance by slapping him or punching him in the face then asking him why he is angry at you. Of course it is healthy and valid to feel negatively towards people who harm or betray or lie to you or threaten your way of life.
Tyler Garcia
How can he? He can only outsmart soyboy alt right and dumb women
Aaron Allen
The idea of a dialectic itself is a false premise from the start because it sets an objective and external standard by which to observe any point of history through a clearly delineated set of mechanics rather than a complex and changing set of conditions which result from human agency. People are participants and conductors, not passengers blindly allowing themselves to be led by cause and effect.
Tyler Hernandez
I like a lot of what Peterson says but up to a point he's trapped in a cabinet.
Joshua Gutierrez
Isn't this guy pretty much king soy boy?
Jordan Myers
He actually has a point. Just because someone has harmed you, resentment can be pathological because it prevents you from moving past the harm done to you.
Owen Lee
The reason they write like that is not always so consciously malevolent. It is often -a subconsciously acquired habit from reading other people who write that way -assuming that their audience is familiar with the jargon of their field (though this point applies to vocabulary more than he obscure , indirect way they decide to make their points and their sentence structure ) -a desire they acquire to make points using the most appropriate single word possible , e.g. like how I decided to use the word obscure rather than saying “difficult to see”. Tgey’d Simply have a larger number of less common words like that at their disposal -they get pleasure from writing and expressing themselves in a way that seems eloquent or cool to them
But a lot of the time it is simply to dress up stupid ideas as intellectual and authoritative and make themselves seem smarter
Christopher Allen
Because you don't understand it this makes it disregard-able. And throw in a few pejorative's for good measure. You can understand - This is the middle class lie.
Adam Edwards
>Zizek
Look, it's Vee IRL.
Parker Cox
Zizek mostly has female following. JP has soyboy rejects as his following
Dominic Turner
are you one of those
>mexican intellectuals
we keep hearing about?
Elijah Baker
He is very much like a jew. Once you see past his smoke screen it is easy to spot his lies. He will open his essays with stories about something terrible that happened under communism in the USSR but by the end he has tried to insert subtle arguments about how it wasnt really *that* bad, and how capitalist societies are actually more dangerous. Hes a degenerate cokehead that likes a comfy life, money, and young pussy by posing as an intelectual.
Nathan Reed
you, my friend, are a mong. "Negative" emotions like hate or jealousy have a function in human society, that's why we evolved with those emotions.. Those emotions inform us that we need to be conscious of our defense and that an external force intends to do us wrong.
Jace Harris
>-a subconsciously acquired habit
nonsense. It's intentionally done to camouflage the reality that they have nothing to say
