Isn't it sad how a smart yet unremarkable guy like Peterson

Peterson is the radical right's daddy figure, he's their god you mongoloid

*brain swells to infinity as you ascend to centrist valhalla*

>>9841552
You don't know a single thing about the world from your insulated bubble. If you take even a brief moment to check /pol/, you'd realize that the radical right hates him for not naming (((them))). You're stuck too far up your communist asshole to realize this, unfortunately.

>>9841537
The only person Jordan Peterson BTFOd is himself when he mentions another thinker pretending to understand them

>>9841562
1. both sides are retards who are too lazy and cowardly to question things using their own faculties
2. /pol/ is not somewhere to go to broaden the perspectives of people in insulated bubbles
3. i am an ubermensch, so, y'know.

>>9841552
That might be true but that doesn't mean he actually serves their idiotic goals. They're clueless idiots as much as the radical left. Peterson even pointed out how the alt right is projecting its childishness when it raves on with its nationalism, and how contradictory it is to identify the state with the promise of individualism.

>>9841552
i want to fuck all those daddyless fucks until they love me like the daddy they need

>>9841574
>hurr durr I'm gonna bash the "radical right" without ever taking a moment to figure out what they believe
>hurr durr anybody to the right of Karl Marx is part of the "radical right"

I can't wait until one of you scrawny ANTIFags gets their "ubermensch" skull cracked open at the next conservative speaker protest. You're in for a rude awakening when you take your tough guy talk into the real world.

>>9841552
t. clueless anon

>>9841574
Is Hugh Mungus a radical right winger?

>>9841627
>>>hurr durr anybody to the right of Karl Marx is part of the "radical right"
Peterson literally thinks anyone to the left of him is a postmodernmarxistfeministmulticulturalisttransactivistsjw. He's no better.

>>9841627
what was your first sexual experience like anon?

>>9841652
The algorithm that harmed Hugh Mungus is postmodernism in the sense that he uses the word.
The other identifier is the desire to tear down the patriarchy.

>>9841652
Have you even listened to his lectures? He insists on the necessity of left-wing politics, but he prefers Old Left politics to New Left politics.

It's funny because in that sense, he is just like /lit/.

>>9841654
I taught my woman to ride the tiger.

>>9841672
The Old Left was Marxist

>>9841794
Not necessarily. It can be plain old socialist. He was a member of the New Democratic Party, which subscribes to social democracy.

Now when he talks about the left, he seems to mean center-left, which focuses on redistribution of wealth.

>>9841813
Lol. Soc Dems like the DSA? Yeah not Marxist at all.

>>9841831
That's not the point, anon.

>>9841813
Yep. He was a supporter of the NPD party here in Canada for several decades.

Also, Peterson is making supreme bank appealing to uneducated dumbos on both sides of the political spectrum. His growing popularity is fascinatinf to follow imo.

The nu-right are centrist democrats. Listen to Peterson, Scott Adams, and your average centrist who isn't communist-leaning and they are nearly indistinguishable. The next real battle is between (((communistas))) and left leaning socialists. Bernie eternally BTFO

He didn't btfo of anything. Le rational centrism is dying, and society is becoming more polarized: most fence sitters will inevitably pick a team whether they're explicit about or not.

>>9841873
>society is becoming more polarized
Give evidence. I'm not convinced, just because radicals are the biggest loudmouths and are screeching all over the internet these days isn't proof that this is actually happening.

>>9841868
May you live well in communism

>>9841813
>Not necessarily
Same could be said for the new left

>>9841873
Formerly leftist academic concepts like intersectionality and privilege theory being spammed popular culture. Formerly obscure far right thinkers and memes becoming ubiquitous on the internet. Yes these people are the minority still , but the true believers in every large movement had been the minority. Those in the centre will fall in line with whichever is closer to them whether they agree with every thing or not.

>>9841701
that hardly sounds consensual

>>9841537
He incorrectly uses the term nihilist frequently.

>>9841868
Followed by the battle for food

>>9841537
i bet you're a fucking autistic virgin

>>9841813
>Peterson is a succdem
Not surprised.

Peterson did some interesting work on the psychology of meaning but honestly even that was flawed by his desire to make it fit with neuroscientific understandings that are themselves horrifically incomplete.

His political analysis are mostly just psuedo-psychology. He is seemingly incapable of understanding analysis that doesn't work on an idealised notion of the individual somehow severed from our social circumstances. He's a useful source for people to justify their views with academic-sounding language that they don't really understand and basically means nothing anyway.

>>9842193
I mean just look at some of his videos, like the thing about "oedipal feminists" is genuinely bizarre. Feminists aren't dividing the world into "infant and predator", they're just trying to analyse a world in which women have less power than men. But this short-circuits Peterson because it uses collective terminology in a way he dislikes - even as he's prepared to apply totalizing neuroscience with the illusion that it describes how the individual mind works, when in fatc it simply reduces us all to pre-determined human behavior based on supposedly scientific models that are based on very little reliable scientific evidence.

Stop making Peterson threads. Sage

>>9841537
What does the sage button do Excalibur? Does it make people talk about literature? How do I program in a sage discussion?

>>9842206
No. He base his reasoning on evolutionary behavior. Human beings are living organism, all of our behavior is based on millions and millions of years of trying to survive. There is no truth for him except Darwinian truth. That is truth is what helps you survive.

File: economics.jpg (70KB, 750x550px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 750x550px

>>9842206
>Feminists aren't dividing the world into "infant and predator"
>they're just trying to analyse a world in which women have less power than men.
they have no idea what they're doing. what they say is irrelevant.

>>9842310
I bet you have no idea about what ghey're saying. Also who is "they"? Which feminists exactly? It's not like it's a homogeneous group.

>>9841887
It needs to become more polarized. The right goes in cycles of tolerating leftist subversion until they decide not to. Things eventually come to a head and after it flows over the rim, it eventually subsides leaving something of substance until leftist subversion begins to foment again. I don't think it's more polarized than it has been in the past, but the rise of the SJW movement is seeing more push back, political entities are less cooperative and productive now than they have been for several decades. We see organized mass protests turning to riots over the election of a US president, media completely dropping all pretense for impartiality, and the list goes on.

>>9842667
At the moment I see both the right and the left in desperate need of some sort of revival. Neocons and Neolibs have their books in deep, SJWs are retarded, and /pol/lacks are retarded.

I see the right wing as having less deep problems fundamentally though because I get this general impression the left is more in love with its own bullshit.

>>9842415
>Which feminists exactly? It's not like it's a homogeneous group.
all of them.

>>9841648
no, he's just a Mexican-American Republican with a whole lot of love for his community

>>9841980
t. effiminate ANTIFAggot who can hardly get their woman to gasp, let alone have their woman scream their name

>>9841552
Is that why he agrees with Jung on the interdependency of the male and female? Was Jung an alt right figurehead in disguise as well and we just never realized it?

Retarded shit. The radical left wants to propose that women don't need men to survive, and the radical right wants to propose that men don't need women to grow and mature. Both sides are immature here, the Jungian analysis is that the masculine and the feminine require a healthy relationship with each other in order to grow, and addresses issues in either's maturation and individuation in reference to its relationship to the other.

What's even more ironic is that this type of wisdom doesn't culminate from a purely masculine spirit. In fact, I would say that Peterson and even Jung were more in touch with their feminine than with their masculine. The whole image of the Sage has always been associated with the gentle old man for a reason. You become wiser when you mature and proper maturation relies on a healthy relationship with the feminine for men and vice versa for women.