Jordan Peterson interview on C4

WinnyThePoo

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I don't think you will be selling anything to anybody be it on earth, or on Mars. When you enter the real world away from your little college bubble and realise that the world does not give a damn about your gender studies PhD.

Your on a thread specifically about an academic.

Embarrassing.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Using violence or the threat of violence in order to suppress peoples ideas and speech.

Calling people Nazi's as a way to justify assaulting people. The 'It is OK to punch a Nazi' persona.

All these are fascist actions.

No. They are not.

Certainly not the 2nd point I’ve never seen an actual fascist accuse someone of being a Nazi in order to attack them.

The crux of your argument is that using political violence to stifle free speech makes you a fascist. It doesn’t. That’s like saying the ability to swim makes you a fish.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Have you? I hear their shick online and its all non-sense, its 'Everyone I disagree with is a Nazi'.

I haven’t. I don’t know any and don’t generally take an interest in their activities. I didn’t ask a question about them though, you did.

I think there is a hero complex among many of these misguided souls. They are so like their far right brethren it would make a very good Mel Brooks comedy.


It still does not explain why these idiots use fascists tendencies to try and silence people who are not even remotely fascists.

You’re making moving the goalposts to “fascist tendencies” now. Do you still mean violence to achieve a political aim?

Brian?

The Highwayman wrote: »

The fact you can use a computer or phone would imply your not a total idiot. However your post would.

You see how that works??????

I don’t see how that works. Am I more likely to understand the more question marks you add?

Brian?

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I don't think you will be selling anything to anybody be it on earth, or on Mars. When you enter the real world away from your little college bubble and realise that the world does not give a damn about your gender studies PhD.

I thought we were obliged to listen to anyone with a PhD? Like Mr Peterson l.

Did I miss where everyone turned on academics?

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

No. They are not.

Certainly not the 2nd point I’ve never seen an actual fascist accuse someone of being a Nazi in order to attack them.

The crux of your argument is that using political violence to stifle free speech makes you a fascist. It doesn’t. That’s like saying the ability to swim makes you a fish.

Fascists come in all guises. You do not have to be a skinhead, dressed in black to be one. For example the Muslim Brotherhood clearly have a fascist ideaology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamofascism

You have a very narrow world view if you think that ANTIFA do not act like fascists because all fascists must be actual Nazi's or something. Makes the world simple but we all know the world isn't simple.

I would argue that using violence to stifle free speech does indeed make you a fascist. What would you call it? Marxism? :rolleyes:

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

I haven’t. I don’t know any and don’t generally take an interest in their activities. I didn’t ask a question about them though, you did.

Yet, here you are defending them or at least minimizing what they do.

You do know that in the past ANTIFA have killed people? You describe yourself as a Socialist Liberation yet have no qualms about gangs of people, in masks assembling en mass and attacking people and trying to create mayhem. Are you OK with this in a free society because I am thinking that you care more about 'da Nazis' than a free society.

You don't have to be right winger to despise ANTIFA just as you dont have to be a left winger to despise actual Nazi's.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Fascists come in all guises. You do not have to be a skinhead, dressed in black to be one. For example the Muslim Brotherhood clearly have a fascist ideaology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamofascism
[
You have a very narrow world view if you think that ANTIFA do not act like fascists because all fascists must be actual Nazi's or something. Makes the world simple but we all know the world isn't simple.

I never said Antifa didn’t act like fascists. They do sometimes. But they are not fascists.

You think it’s a narrow view to want to call only actual fascists fascist? But then you get upset when Antifa broaden the definition, ironic eh?

I would argue that using violence to stifle free speech does indeed make you a fascist. What would you call it? Marxism? :rolleyes:

You can argue that until you’re blue in the face. But it’s wrong. Instead of this circular argument would you not just google “what is a fascist”?

Some marxists do use violence to stifle free speech. Does that make them fascist now?

.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Yet, here you are defending them or at least minimizing what they do.

I am doing neither.

You do know that in the past ANTIFA have killed people? You describe yourself as a Socialist Liberation yet have no qualms about gangs of people, in masks assembling en mass and attacking people and trying to create mayhem. Are you OK with this in a free society because I am thinking that you care more about 'da Nazis' than a free society.

You don't have to be right winger to despise ANTIFA just as you dont have to be a left winger to despise actual Nazi's.

You’re making a lot of assumptions there horse.

I have stated many times I don’t approve of Antifas methods. Many, many times.

I have also stated many, many times that I believe in the absolute right of free speech.

Agreed?

I do not approve of calling people fascists when they are not fascists. It’s a lazy slur that both sides use and need to stop.

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

I thought we were obliged to listen to anyone with a PhD? Like Mr Peterson l.

Did I miss where everyone turned on academics?

No, in a free society people are not obliged to listen to anyone, if they choose not to. But at the same time you are not obliged or have no right to shut them up either.

By the way, this tweedle-dee persona you carve out for yourself in this thread shows us that there is not much substance to your argument, if you can call those posts 'arguments' at all.

No one said that people are obliged to listen to Dr. Peterson but I suppose pretending that was the case and argue against it is easy. As you say, you are argumentative but this line of "The sky is not blue" is just a waste of time.

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

You’re making a lot of assumptions there horse.

First of all, I am not a horse.

You have called me that before so please stop. It is unbecoming and if you want to be taken seriously I would advise it.

Havockk

markodaly wrote: »

No, in a free society people are not obliged to listen to anyone, if they choose not to. But at the same time you are not obliged or have no right to shut them up either.

By the way, this tweedle-dee persona you carve out for yourself in this thread shows us that there is not much substance to your argument, if you can call those posts 'arguments' at all.

No one said that people are obliged to listen to Dr. Peterson but I suppose pretending that was the case and argue against it is easy. As you say, you are argumentative but this line of "The sky is not blue" is just a waste of time.

Regurgitated twaddle. Stop watching ignorance spreading machines like Paul Watson.

On second thoughts don't, I've not had this much of a laugh on the internet since yer man Spencer got a good punch in the bake!!

Havockk

markodaly wrote: »

if you want to be taken seriously I would advise it.

For focks sake Mark. I just wasted a good cup of coffee!!!!!!!!

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

I never said Antifa didn’t act like fascists. They do sometimes. But they are not fascists.

You talk about irony but ANTIFA using fascistic methods to stop and oppose 'fascists' is the height of irony. The far left and far right are two sides of the same coin, yet I have never seen people from the far right trying to no platform people and stop people from speaking. It seems the biggest threat of free speech, espcially on a University campus are from 'Anti-Fascists', the biggest irony of all.

You can argue that until you’re blue in the face. But it’s wrong. Instead of this circular argument would you not just google “what is a fascist”?

Again, it comes in all shapes and sizes. Things do not stand still. The Muslim Brotherhood are fascists for example, yet the 1930's centric view point of the world would not deem them one or even matter, but they are. ISIS would have been fascists. There are even some extreme Jewish groups in Israel who I would call fascists.

Some marxists do use violence to stifle free speech. Does that make them fascist now?

Yes.

Havockk

markodaly wrote: »

You talk about irony but ANTIFA using fascistic methods to stop and oppose 'fascists' is the height of irony. The far left and far right are two sides of the same coin, yet I have never seen people from the far right trying to no platform people and stop people from speaking. It seems the biggest threat of free speech, espcially on a University campus are from 'Anti-Fascists', the biggest irony of all.




Again, it comes in all shapes and sizes. Things do not stand still. The Muslim Brotherhood are fascists for example, yet the 1930's centric view point of the world would not deem them one or even matter, but they are. ISIS would have been fascists. There are even some extreme Jewish groups in Israel who I would call fascists.



Yes.

You've never seen people from the far-right try and platform people? Never? LOL

The cognitive dissonance in strong in this one.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

No, in a free society people are not obliged to listen to anyone, if they choose not to. But at the same time you are not obliged or have no right to shut them up either.

By the way, this tweedle-dee persona you carve out for yourself in this thread shows us that there is not much substance to your argument, if you can call those posts 'arguments' at all.

No one said that people are obliged to listen to Dr. Peterson but I suppose pretending that was the case and argue against it is easy. As you say, you are argumentative but this line of "The sky is not blue" is just a waste of time.

I wasn’t responding to you. So your tirade is wasted.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

I miss the times when everyone you disagreed with was not a fascist.

I miss them too.

What I miss more is when everyone you disagreed with was not a fascist.

You have the temerity to post this and then call all in sundry fascists. It would be hilarious, except it’s repeated over and over across boards.ie.

Havockk

Brian? wrote: »

I wasn’t responding to you. So your tirade is wasted.

Not wasted Brian, if ever we are feeling down, having a bad day, we can now always come back to this thread to cheer ourselves up

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

First of all, I am not a horse.

You have called me that before so please stop. It is unbecoming and if you want to be taken seriously I would advise it.

You’re not taking me seriously now, so I have little inclination to change.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

You talk about irony but ANTIFA using fascistic methods to stop and oppose 'fascists' is the height of irony. The far left and far right are two sides of the same coin, yet I have never seen people from the far right trying to no platform people and stop people from speaking. It seems the biggest threat of free speech, espcially on a University campus are from 'Anti-Fascists', the biggest irony of all.

Again, this is entirely based on the line of thinking that using violence for political ends makes you a fascist. It doesn’t. There’s a lot more you need to do and believe in.

Again, it comes in all shapes and sizes. Things do not stand still. The Muslim Brotherhood are fascists for example, yet the 1930's centric view point of the world would not deem them one or even matter, but they are. ISIS would have been fascists. There are even some extreme Jewish groups in Israel who I would call fascists.

You’ve broadened the definition of fascism so wide, that it’s essentially meaningless. Kudos.

Yes.

I think that’s my argument won. Whether you want to accept it or not.

You believe a lot more people are fascist than anyone I’ve ever encountered and have the gall to criticize people on the left for overusing the term. It’s almost genius.

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

I wasn’t responding to you. So your tirade is wasted.

Then, why respond? I suppose arguing against something is better then letting it stand.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Then, why respond? I suppose arguing against something is better then letting it stand.

I didn't want to let it stand.

Havockk

markodaly wrote: »

Then, why respond? I suppose arguing against something is better then letting it stand.

Can we get back to the lobster question now?

Malayalam

The Ad hominem is strong in this one...
:rolleyes:

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

Again, this is entirely based on the line of thinking that using violence for political ends makes you a fascist. It doesn’t. There’s a lot more you need to do and believe in.

Oh, OK. Your line of thinking is that only a white supremacist can only be fascists, therefore no one else is a fascist but these skin heads. Ah, such a nice simple world to live in. Black, white, good, evil, left wing, right wing. The ladybird outlook on the world.

You’ve broadened the definition of fascism so wide, that it’s essentially meaningless. Kudos.

Yet, you have never heard of the term Islamo-fascism? You are either naive, deliberately obtuse or just cant make yourself concede point.

I think that’s my argument won. Whether you want to accept it or not.

You didn't win anything, apart from may the post count on this thread. The only person who agrees with you is a troll, who wont be here all that long.

You believe a lot more people are fascist than anyone I’ve ever encountered and have the gall to criticize people on the left for overusing the term. It’s almost genius

OK, lets break this down to simple principles.

What is your terms of reference for a fascist and do you believe anyone else apart from a Nazi/White supremacist can be a fascist?

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

I didn't want to let it stand.

Yet you did because you didn't offer any rebuttal.

Havockk

markodaly wrote: »

What is your terms of reference for a fascist and do you believe anyone else apart from a Nazi/White supremacist can be a fascist?

Isn't it anyone who wears a starched shirt in a hue of blue, with a serotonin level of somewhere between a horse and a lobster?

Wibbs

Brian? wrote: »

Again, this is entirely based on the line of thinking that using violence for political ends makes you a fascist. It doesn’t. There’s a lot more you need to do and believe in.

You’ve broadened the definition of fascism so wide, that it’s essentially meaningless. Kudos.

To be fair B it's a very common conflation. "Fascist" in the vernacular has become far less a reference to the political ideology but rather a catchall term for violent bully boy silencing tactics for any political movement, Left/Right/Whatever you're having yourself that uses such tactics.

Sure we can argue it's not correct(literally not politically correct ), but not surprising so many might be confused and use it in that way.

Brian?

Wibbs wrote: »

To be fair B it's a very common conflation. "Fascist" in the vernacular has become far less a reference to the political ideology but rather a catchall term for violent bully boy silencing tactics for any political movement, Left/Right/Whatever you're having yourself that uses such tactics.

Yep. It’s quite common, but as you say below it’s also incorrect. Everyone who does it should be challenged on it. It’s lazy and lowers the standard of discussion.

Sure we can argue it's not correct(literally not politically correct ), but not surprising so many might be confused and use it in that way.

Not surprising. But irksome.

Havockk

Wibbs wrote: »

To be fair B it's a very common conflation. "Fascist" in the vernacular has become far less a reference to the political ideology but rather a catchall term for violent bully boy silencing tactics for any political movement, Left/Right/Whatever you're having yourself that uses such tactics.

Sure we can argue it's not correct(literally not politically correct ), but not surprising so many might be confused and use it in that way.

There is no argument, it's just not correct. It's not common vernacular for bullying tactics just because some fools use it incorrectly, and should be corrected accordingly.

I can respect the hell out of anyone who identifies on the right and argues their case, and I will argue in a similar respectful manner. But there is just no arguing with outright dumbness.