Jordan Peterson

[Mary's Confidant]

he says without reservation that it should be legal to deny service to gay people. it's on tape. stop trying to deny reality. just deal with reality

should it also be OK to deny service to black people?

You don't get to tell me what reality is, I get to listen and make that determination for myself. Please provide the full talk of Dr. Peterson and I'll listen and admit if i was wrong. I won't defend someone who thinks it's okay to turn away people based on a protected class (with the exception that people should not be runout of the public square by asking them to do things against their religious beliefs).

I've seen you misquote Dr. Peterson a number of times, or at best, be selective in your interpretation. I'll amend my statement or change my view if he's advocating for open discrimination. I believe he said businesses should have the right to turn people away for a number of reasons but I need to hear his full opinion to understand his stance.

 

[UncleBuck]

You don't get to tell me what reality is

yes i do

I'll listen and admit if i was wrong.

jim jeffries: making people bake a cake for a gay wedding

jordan peterson: making them do it?

jj: yeah

jp: i don't think that's a very good idea

jj: so should they be able to deny making a cake for a black couple if they don't like black people?

jp: allowed to? probably

I won't defend someone who thinks it's okay to turn away people based on a protected class

you're doing that right now by defending this fucking racist nazi

I've seen you misquote Dr. Peterson a number of times

name one time then

 

[Mary's Confidant]

1. yes i do



2.

jim jeffries: making people bake a cake for a gay wedding

jordan peterson: making them do it?

jj: yeah

jp: i don't think that's a very good idea

jj: so should they be able to deny making a cake for a black couple if they don't like black people?

jp: allowed to? probably



3.
you're doing that right now by defending this fucking racist nazi


4.
name one time then

1. I'll amend my previous statement: You can claim any reality you want but I don't have to accept it especially when you appear to be of the same ilk as the ideologically driven.

2. What's this supposed to prove? I'm on the fence with this, I think it's poor business practice and a way to fail by doing such heinous things. On the other hand, should people be allowed to do what they want in their business? I'm not certain, I see both sides and I think I agree with you on this but I doubt we agree on scope. I don't think you should be able to say no to someone for being black, asian, gay, or any number of protected classes. I do think businesses should have the right of refusal if they cite a violation of conscience or religious conflict. It's a slippery slope, and the people on both sides of this equation rarely want to have this discussion.

3. I think calling him a racist nazi shows exactly your motivations. You have no interest in considering anything he says, it's far easier for you to draw a tacit "idea association" from Hitler and KKK to Peterson. It's absurd.

4. See above. Calling him a racist nazi is probably a good start. He's never once said anything against homosexuals or black people or any non-white group. If you can find him committing hate speech, instead of simply defending people's rights for hate speech, please post it up. You're saying some hateful shit about Peterson and he'd defend your right, no matter how incorrect you are.

 

[UncleBuck]

3. I think calling him a racist nazi shows exactly your motivations. You have no interest in considering anything he says

jordan peterson says we need to "defend western civilization" from "cultural marxism"

"cultural marxism" is a conspiracy theory originally used by hitler. it posits that jews are agitating black people and homosexuals and muslim people to destroy society and order.

i just showed jordan peterson saying without hesitation that businesses should be allowed to deny service to black people if they don't like black people and you're still defending him.

you are in a cult and having a hard time accepting reality.

 

[Heisenberg]

what is your informed opinion on peterson's repeated assertions that we need to "defend western civilization" from "cultural marxism" with respect to the fact that these exact same conspiracy theories (which originated under hitler) are also repeated by such figures as KKK grand wizard david duke and white supremacist phillipe rushton?

I have only heard snippets of JP's political views from his own mouth. My extent of the man's outlook is limited to the 3-4 hour interview he did with Sam Harris in which he spends half of it arguing the absurd idea that anything which is useful is true. He wasn't suggesting some sort of metaphor or some evolutionary situation where usefulness outweighs accuracy (though he did launch from a similar stance), he was literally saying that if something is useful then it is true. He then persisted in spite of Sam offering numerous examples of times when such a proposition would be absurd.

Normally I try to be careful not to condemn someone's positions based on other unrelated positions they may have, but when someone has such an approach to truth it forces those listening to be cynical and ask, is he saying stuff because he thinks there is good evidence and arguments for it, or is he saying it because he finds it useful? It demands that one consider his motivations and agenda.

That's a game I don't know why anyone would want to play. I have enough lectures and audio books and podcast commentary to listen to already. Even though I make an effort to include opposing and alternative views in my audio consumption, I have to prioritize, and I don't think anything JP has to say is worth the energy it takes to listen. If he does happen to have a few good ideas, let someone else say them.

 

[UncleBuck]

I have only heard snippets of JP's political views from his own mouth. My extent of the man's outlook is limited to the 3-4 hour interview he did with Sam Harris in which he spends half of it arguing the absurd idea that anything which is useful is true. He wasn't suggesting some sort of metaphor or some evolutionary situation where usefulness outweighs accuracy (though he did launch from a similar stance), he was literally saying that if something is useful then it is true. He then persisted in spite of Sam offering numerous examples of times when such a proposition would be absurd.

Normally I try to be careful not to condemn someone's positions based on other unrelated positions they may have, but when someone has such an approach to truth it forces those listening to be cynical and ask, is he saying stuff because he thinks there is good evidence and arguments for it, or is he saying it because he finds it useful? It demands that one consider his motivations and agenda.

That's a game I don't know why anyone would want to play. I have enough lectures and audio books and podcast commentary to listen to already. Even though I make an effort to include opposing and alternative views in my audio consumption, I have to prioritize, and I don't think anything JP has to say is worth the energy it takes to listen. If he does happen to have a few good ideas, let someone else say them.

incredibly disappointed that that you refuse to stand up to these frauds pushing repackaged white supremacy on us.

 

[Mary's Confidant]

jordan peterson says we need to "defend western civilization" from "cultural marxism"

"cultural marxism" is a conspiracy theory originally used by hitler. it posits that jews are agitating black people and homosexuals and muslim people to destroy society and order.

i just showed jordan peterson saying without hesitation that businesses should be allowed to deny service to black people if they don't like black people and you're still defending him.

you are in a cult and having a hard time accepting reality.

Enjoy your reality UncleBuck, it's a barren wasteland.

Are you saying Cultural marixsm has never existed? In any form? And has Jordan Peterson said "jews are agitating black people and homosexuals and muslims"? Has he said anything remotely close to that?

I went and read some of that interview transcript. He's walking a tight rope between individual autonomy and forced action by a government. Oh, and BTW, he immediately admitted it was mistake to say that after he thought it through and the interviewer pointed out Civil Rights. But since that didn't serve your purpose you left that snippet out.

Let me ask you: do you believe the Law should've required that baker to accommodate the gay couple?

 

[Heisenberg]

incredibly disappointed that that you refuse to stand up to these frauds pushing repackaged white supremacy on us.

I'll have to find a way to live with your disappointment.

 

[UncleBuck]

I'll have to find a way to live with your disappointment.

probably with the comfortable privilege of the white moderate

 

[UncleBuck]

Enjoy your reality UncleBuck

it's your reality too, you are just willfully trying to deny it

has Jordan Peterson said "jews are agitating black people and homosexuals and muslims"? Has he said anything remotely close to that?

yes, all the time. he frequently posits that "cultural marxism" is a ruse to destroy "western civilization" (a codeword used by neo-nazis and white supremacists)

I went and read some of that interview transcript. He's walking a tight rope between individual autonomy and forced action by a government.

jim jeffries: making people bake a cake for a gay wedding

jordan peterson: making them do it?

jj: yeah

jp: i don't think that's a very good idea

jj: so should they be able to deny making a cake for a black couple if they don't like black people?

jp: allowed to? probably

Let me ask you: do you believe the Law should've required that baker to accommodate the gay couple?

absolutely. anything else would be bigotry that only a rat fucker like jordan peterson would advocate for

 

[Heisenberg]

probably with the comfortable privilege of the white moderate

Probably? Why hedge your bets? Obviously, if I don't feel that I want my mind littered with the rhetorical ramblings of JP, that must mean I have no strong feelings about the issues he speaks on. It must mean that if someone in my life expressed the same arguments, I wouldn't say anything to counter them.

Even though I spend hours of everyday addressing alternative medicine, conspiracy theories, and other crap that Alex Jones endorses, I've never watched or payed attention to anything he has to say. That must mean I'm actually neutral on those issues.

And although I've argued extensively in these forums against creationist talking points used abundantly by people like Ken Ham and William Craig, I've never denounced them by name. I guess I must actually be on the fence about intelligent design.

I never realized the world could be so black and white. Thanks for opening my eyes!

 

[ginjawarrior]

yes i do



jim jeffries: making people bake a cake for a gay wedding

jordan peterson: making them do it?

jj: yeah

jp: i don't think that's a very good idea

jj: so should they be able to deny making a cake for a black couple if they don't like black people?

jp: allowed to? probably

4.min 40 seconds in till 5min 25

your missing quite a bit of text there buck enough just a couple of seconds more and you'll hear peterson saying it doesnt mean it was right.

and then a couple of tens of seconds later you'll hear peterson saying he's wrong....

name one time then

see above..

cherry picking and selective editing is misquoting

 

[Heisenberg]

So, part of my trimming routine is to catch up on shows. One of the shows in my backlog folder is Jim Jefferies. Low and behold, one of episodes waiting for me was with the JP interview. While I didn't come away liking JP any more, I did come away with renewed disdain for people willing to distort reality to serve their own agenda.

Buck, while you are upset that I don't pay attention to JP, it's actions like yours that sour me on the whole issue. You can't be trusted. I have no idea if your feelings are genuine or simply constructed to manipulate people into agreeing with you. Not only did you cherry pick the interview to say what you wanted, but your signature pic is of a child that is known to have actually not been detained in any way. Either you think people are stupid enough to not see through your tactics, or you simply don't mind pretending for the sake of keeping the argument going.

The irony is that I probably agree with you on almost all of these issues. I think separating families is abhorrent, that people who would refuse to serve customers based on race, religion or creed are morally repugnant, and that the planet would be better off if groups like white supremacists and incels would just kill themselves and rid us of their filth-pig rhetoric. For all intents and purposes I could be your ally, but you are a perfect example of the left eating its own for the sake of promoting purity politics that exist only within your own mind. If you have to change reality in order to be mad at it, then what you're mad at isn't actually reality.

You haven't actually given me any good reason to dislike JP, or Trump, or the white power propaganda machine, what you have given me is reason to believe that you are cut from the same cloth.

 

[UncleBuck]

Probably? Why hedge your bets? Obviously, if I don't feel that I want my mind littered with the rhetorical ramblings of JP, that must mean I have no strong feelings about the issues he speaks on. It must mean that if someone in my life expressed the same arguments, I wouldn't say anything to counter them.

Even though I spend hours of everyday addressing alternative medicine, conspiracy theories, and other crap that Alex Jones endorses, I've never watched or payed attention to anything he has to say. That must mean I'm actually neutral on those issues.

And although I've argued extensively in these forums against creationist talking points used abundantly by people like Ken Ham and William Craig, I've never denounced them by name. I guess I must actually be on the fence about intelligent design.

I never realized the world could be so black and white. Thanks for opening my eyes!

the fascists count on your politeness. they thank you, i'm sure, for refusing to vehemently denounce their twisted ideology and condemn them personally for their work to destroy america

 

[UncleBuck]

you'll hear peterson saying it doesnt mean it was right.

and then a couple of tens of seconds later you'll hear peterson saying he's wrong....

ok

he still said people should be allowed to deny service to gay people and black people, if they do not like black people

not based on some bad faith, false pretense about a "sincerely held religious belief" which we all know is bullshit cover anyway, but just if they don't like black people.

there is a reason why peterson's audience is predominantly and overwhelmingly disaffected, angry, racist young white males

 

[UncleBuck]

disdain for people willing to distort reality to serve their own agenda.

like poisoning the minds of millions of vulnerable angry white kids by telling them that "cultural marxists" are going to "destroy western civilization" in order to indoctrinate them into white supremacy, neo-nazism, and fascism?

i haven't seen much disdain from you about that

your signature pic is of a child that is known to have actually not been detained in any way.

ok

how about the 2500 others that have been ripped from their mothers and thrown into concentration camps then?

 

[UncleBuck]

neo-nazi militias are having torchlit marches in the streets and killing people but hey, buck used a picture to illustrate a point! just as bad!

peterson is out here repackaging nazi propaganda tactics to vulnerable, disaffected, angry young white males by the millions but hey, buck forgot to mention that he doesn't think his own belief that you should be allowed to kick black people out of stores if you don't like them might not be right, just as bad!

fuck having "allies" like that. you guys are as bad as the nazis as far as i'm concerned. fuck your pseudo-intellectualism and nazi apologism.

 

[ginjawarrior]

like poisoning the minds of millions of vulnerable angry white kids by telling them that "cultural marxists" are going to "destroy western civilization" in order to indoctrinate them into white supremacy, neo-nazism, and fascism?

yeah he's not doing that.

i've asked many times now what would be a suitable phrase to use to describe the far left movement of identity politics

cause it really does exist at the end of the Jim Jeffreys interveiw jj himself talks about some universities being out of control

is jj indoctrinating vulnerable white kids by bringing it up? or did he need to use the magic words first?

 

[ginjawarrior]

neo-nazi militias are having torchlit marches in the streets and killing people but hey, buck used a picture to illustrate a point! just as bad!

peterson is out here repackaging nazi propaganda tactics to vulnerable, disaffected, angry young white males by the millions but hey, buck forgot to mention that he doesn't think his own belief that you should be allowed to kick black people out of stores if you don't like them might not be right, just as bad!

fuck having "allies" like that. you guys are as bad as the nazis as far as i'm concerned. fuck your pseudo-intellectualism and nazi apologism.

View attachment 4155411

so we're as bad as nazi's now?

 

[UncleBuck]

yeah he's not doing that.

fuck you, asshole