Jordan Peterson interview on C4

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

The only slightly left leaning influence on lobbying are the unions, and the unions can’t get near the spending power of the Koch’s et al.

Again, take off the rose tinted glasses as again (quite a common theme here) you are wrong.


http://freebeacon.com/issues/labor-spent-billion-politics-2016/

Organized labor spent a record $1.7 billion on politics and lobbying during the 2016 election cycle, with the vast majority of money coming from member dues and supporting Democrats.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/us/politics/kochs-plan-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-campaign.html

The political network overseen by the conservative billionaires Charles G. and David H. Koch plans to spend close to $900 million on the 2016 campaign

Note, that the $900 million is comprised of a group of 300 people, not just the Koch brothers themselves.

Anyway, it clearly shows that you are wrong in your assertion that Unions cannot get near the spending of the Koch brothers, when indeed they spent almost double. What is this again, of yea, a FACT!

Want to go deeper? The Democrats outspent the GOP 2-1 in 2016. Yes, they spent double yet lost. Badly!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/04/14/somebody-just-put-a-price-tag-on-the-2016-election-its-a-doozy/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.13ac0c340a8e

Clinton's unsuccessful campaign ($768 million in spending) outspent Trump's successful one ($398 million) by nearly 2 to 1. The Democratic National Committee and left-leaning outside groups also outspent their Republican counterparts by considerable margins.

What does this say? That the Democrats are very very well funded (you are wrong again on the who spends more comment) but have ideas and policies that are just not popular with the public.

Perhaps if they stopped with the 'isms (Racism, Sexism, Feminism) and concentrated on making peoples lives better they would not be in the mess they are in, or they could just double down on their bat **** craziness and spend more money?

This ties in what Peterson is saying about Universities becoming indoctrination facilities. They exist outside of reality for most, which ironically is harming the Democrats more in the long run it seems.

20Cent

markodaly wrote: »

Lovely, but tell me again how War and international relations are right wing.
What next, Cancer and Aids are right wing?:D

US international relations are controlled by the republican party who are right wing. War and peace in the US is controlled by the republican party still right wing.

markodaly wrote: »

Yet again, you are wrong. Do you have a festish for telling lies and untruths?
So, again, tell me how Google and Facebook worked very hard to get Trump elected. Give me something solid rather than a tepid one liner.

You didn't know?
It's been widely reported.

markodaly wrote: »

bla bla....

Dyr

Brian? wrote: »

So we’re agreed. The left have little or no influence and even less power in the US.

I'll probably get carded on some trumped up charge for posting that and all, while you carry on your merry way unhindered, funny that.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Again, take off the rose tinted glasses as again (quite a common theme here) you are wrong.


http://freebeacon.com/issues/labor-spent-billion-politics-2016/



https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/us/politics/kochs-plan-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-campaign.html


Note, that the $900 million is comprised of a group of 300 people, not just the Koch brothers themselves.

Anyway, it clearly shows that you are wrong in your assertion that Unions cannot get near the spending of the Koch brothers, when indeed they spent almost double. What is this again, of yea, a FACT!

Want to go deeper? The Democrats outspent the GOP 2-1 in 2016. Yes, they spent double yet lost. Badly!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/04/14/somebody-just-put-a-price-tag-on-the-2016-election-its-a-doozy/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.13ac0c340a8e


What does this say? That the Democrats are very very well funded (you are wrong again on the who spends more comment) but have ideas and policies that are just not popular with the public.

Perhaps if they stopped with the 'isms (Racism, Sexism, Feminism) and concentrated on making peoples lives better they would not be in the mess they are in, or they could just double down on their bat **** craziness and spend more money?

This ties in what Peterson is saying about Universities becoming indoctrination facilities. They exist outside of reality for most, which ironically is harming the Democrats more in the long run it seems.

Are you considering the Democrats the left? They are not. It’s just another right wing party funded by different interest groups.

Brian?

Bambi wrote: »

I'll probably get carded on some trumped up charge for posting that and all, while you carry on your merry way unhindered, funny that.

Are you trying to be mysterious ? I have no idea what you mean by this.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

The qualifying part, which you mentioned in another post entirely? I didn't know you were writing chapters in each post.




Tell me when exactly this happened, as Trump only appointed one person to the SCOTUS, while Obama appointed two. Telling porkies?




This can be viewed twofold. One elections are one way to project power and as you and I both agree, it is lobbyists and money interests who control power. You just see it as being the realm of the Koch Brothers, while I see it as both the Koch Brothers and Soros and everyone in between.

Another way of looking at is, is that the general American public outright reject your ideas of what left wing is, be it Marxist, Socialist or Socialist Libertarian.




America economically is a country that promoted free markets since its foundation. Just because you view the world in Marxist terms does not mean that everyone else is a right winger. You are just showing yourself up here.

France has a different economic and social philosophy than say Germany. Them the breaks. Do you want the whole world to confirm to one single view, your view? A little bit authoritarian don't you think, you don't like diversity?

Obama had a super majority in 2008-2010. The mid terms will likely end up with a democratic controlled congress come November. These things normally go in cycles.

With Evangelicals, Conservatives, Laissez-Faire capitalists, you can add Unions, Activists, Silicon Valley, Mainstream Media, Hollywood and Universities to the list.

I am not stupid enough to believe that one single entity controls power in the US, nor am I stupid enough that one wing controls power in the US, unless you think one wing is those with money. But I qualify that with the level of stupidity.

I think I’ve over complicated the argument for you.

The democrats are less right wing than the GOP. They aren’t left wing.

professore

You guys are funny. Its all about power and money. No such thing as left and right except in deluded people's heads. Doesn't matter who is in Congress, or the White House, the policies don't change. The banks get bailed out, guantanamo keeps going, Israel is unquestioningly backed. All by divide and conquer.

Balf

professore wrote: »

You guys are funny. Its all about power and money. No such thing as left and right except in deluded people's heads. Doesn't matter who is in Congress, or the White House, the policies don't change. The banks get bailed out, guantanamo keeps going, Israel is unquestioningly backed. All by divide and conquer.

Certainly, that's what Luke Skywalker would contend.

And he's a very wise man.

markodaly

20Cent wrote: »

US international relations are controlled by the republican party who are right wing. War and peace in the US is controlled by the republican party still right wing.

As clear as mud. I guess Cancer is also controlled by the GOP.

You didn't know?
It's been widely reported.

Good, if it is so widely reported you should have no problem finding a link for me which says that Facebook, Google and Twitter worked hard to get Trump elected.

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

Are you considering the Democrats the left? They are not. It’s just another right wing party funded by different interest groups.

Define 'left' then?

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

I think I’ve over complicated the argument for you.

The democrats are less right wing than the GOP. They aren’t left wing.

Or, the GOP are less left wing than the Democrats.

But tell me, when exactly again did the GOP gain control of the SCOTUS, like you stated? You avoided that one!
Or your lie about who spent more money in 2016!

In fact you are so wrong on so many levels I am not surprised you want to 'simplify' the argument and believe me its not for me you are doing it for.

markodaly

professore wrote: »

You guys are funny. Its all about power and money. No such thing as left and right except in deluded people's heads. Doesn't matter who is in Congress, or the White House, the policies don't change. The banks get bailed out, guantanamo keeps going, Israel is unquestioningly backed. All by divide and conquer.

Perhaps, but maybe you should direct that at the people who started the whole 'right wingers control America' argument.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Or, the GOP are less left wing than the Democrats.

But tell me, when exactly again did the GOP gain control of the SCOTUS, like you stated? You avoided that one!
Or your lie about who spent more money in 2016!

Who appointed the supreme court justices?

You're not including Superpacs in your spending numbers.

In fact you are so wrong on so many levels I am not surprised you want to 'simplify' the argument and believe me its not for me you are doing it for.

I've simplified the argument because the minutiae is unnecessary to prove my point.

The GOOD and the Dems are 2 flavours of right wing parties. Are you arguing that the democrats are the left wing alternative? If so, that's completely wrong.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Define 'left' then?

Seriously? I have to do this?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

Seriously? I have to do this?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics

So the democratic party so. Right then.

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

Who appointed the supreme court justices?

Obama appointed 2 and Trump appointed 1. Tell me exactly when the SCOTUS swapped over.

You're not including Superpacs in your spending numbers.

They are not my numbers, they are from OpenSecrets.org. What are your numbers? I presented numbers and facts, you presented lies and mistruths.

I've simplified the argument because the minutiae is unnecessary to prove my point.

The GOOD and the Dems are 2 flavours of right wing parties. Are you arguing that the democrats are the left wing alternative? If so, that's completely wrong.

Your world view blinds you in your rational, only you cannot see it.

20Cent

markodaly wrote: »

As clear as mud. I guess Cancer is also controlled by the GOP.

Don't know how I can be clearer. All the big decisions in the US are taken by the republican party. They are in charge.

markodaly wrote: »

Good, if it is so widely reported you should have no problem finding a link for me which says that Facebook, Google and Twitter worked hard to get Trump elected.

This is Brad Parscale digital media director for Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

Brad Parscale: Well, we had our-- their staff embedded inside our offices.

Lesley Stahl: What?

Brad Parscale: Yeah, Facebook employees would show up for work every day in our offices.

Video of him saying it.
https://youtu.be/Z79DIgG6yuY

Theresa Wong giving a tour of the office where Trumps digital campaign headquarters.
https://twitter.com/bbcstories/status/896752720522100742

Peer reviewd paper about it.
Technology Firms Shape Political Communication: The Work of Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, and Google With Campaigns During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Cycle
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10584609.2017.1364814

Hector Savage

Pepefrogok wrote: »

Women need a leg up??? Jesus is 2018 man, try and not be so misogynistic ffs, women are equal to you and don't need your condescendin, all they need is equality of opportunity which I am glad to say they have in our country!

Indeed, these people don't realise how sexist and condescending they are - like Dave Schwimmer offering himself as a chaperone to aspiring young actresses - would ye gerrrruppp ourra da!!!

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

So the democratic party so. Right then.

No. If you think they are, it's completely pointless talking to you.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Obama appointed 2 and Trump appointed 1. Tell me exactly when the SCOTUS swapped over.



They are not my numbers, they are from OpenSecrets.org. What are your numbers? I presented numbers and facts, you presented lies and mistruths.




Your world view blinds you in your rational, only you cannot see it.

Oh the irony.

20Cent

George Soros selecting which university professors get hired.


Documents show ties between university, conservative donors

https://apnews.com/amp/0c87e4318bcc4eb9b8e69f9f54c7b889?__twitter_impression=true

FAIRFAX, Va. (AP) — Virginia's largest public university granted the conservative Charles Koch Foundation a say in the hiring and firing of professors in exchange for millions of dollars in donations, according to newly released documents.


Opps Koch brothers not Soros.

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

Oh the irony.

When exactly did the SCTOUS swap over to being right wing?
What are your numbers for funding into American politics?

markodaly

20Cent wrote: »

This is Brad Parscale digital media director for Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

Brad Parscale: Well, we had our-- their staff embedded inside our offices.

Lesley Stahl: What?

Brad Parscale: Yeah, Facebook employees would show up for work every day in our offices.

Video of him saying it.
https://youtu.be/Z79DIgG6yuY

Theresa Wong giving a tour of the office where Trumps digital campaign headquarters.
https://twitter.com/bbcstories/status/896752720522100742

Tech companies often let other companies hire their staff as consultants. It is the same with HP, Dell, IBM, Accenture and so on.
You are deliberately misunderstanding the situation. They wanted to use their platforms and paid the tech companies for these staff in order to better target their ads.

Very different to these tech companies banding together and having a deliberate strategy to elect someone.

All these guys, the Mark Zuckerbeg, Larry Page and so on lean Democrat. In fact it was their platforms that allowed Obama build up a head of steam and defeat Hillary in 2008.

Peer reviewd paper about it.
Technology Firms Shape Political Communication: The Work of Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, and Google With Campaigns During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Cycle
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10584609.2017.1364814

Do you bother even reading what you post anymore?

From the journal.

We offer an empirical analysis of the work technology firms do around electoral politics through interviews with staffers at these firms and digital and social media directors of 2016 U.S. presidential primary and general election campaigns, in addition to field observations at the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

Furthermore, Facebook, Twitter, and Google go beyond promoting their services and facilitating digital advertising buys, actively shaping campaign communication through their close collaboration with political staffers

As you note, nothing there about Facebook, Google or Twitter working hard to get Trump elected. What it does say is how these Tech companies uses their platform and offers it as a service to any political party out there, be it Democratic of Republican.

So, again you lie, lie, lie.

20Cent

markodaly wrote: »

Tech companies often let other companies hire their staff as consultants. It is the same with HP, Dell, IBM, Accenture and so on.
You are deliberately misunderstanding the situation. They wanted to use their platforms and paid the tech companies for these staff in order to better target their ads.

Very different to these tech companies banding together and having a deliberate strategy to elect someone.

All these guys, the Mark Zuckerbeg, Larry Page and so on lean Democrat. In fact it was their platforms that allowed Obama build up a head of steam and defeat Hillary in 2008.




Do you bother even reading what you post anymore?

From the journal.





As you note, nothing there about Facebook, Google or Twitter working hard to get Trump elected. What it does say is how these Tech companies uses their platform and offers it as a service to any political party out there, be it Democratic of Republican.

So, again you lie, lie, lie.

Backtracking now and moving the goalposts.
Those companies had employees embedded and working with the trump campaign. That's the claim I made and it has been shown to be true.


Anyway regarding Peterson he seems to be an accomplished academic and a good teacher. His self help stuff seems very shallow and he is cashing in so fair play to him.

Where I'd part ways with him is his marxists are conspiring to destroy society theory it's a bit mad.

MrKingsley

20Cent wrote: »

Backtracking now and moving the goalposts.
Those companies had employees embedded and working with the trump campaign. That's the claim I made and it has been shown to be true.


Anyway regarding Peterson he seems to be an accomplished academic and a good teacher. His self help stuff seems very shallow and he is cashing in so fair play to him.

Where I'd part ways with him is his marxists are conspiring to destroy society theory it's a bit mad.

Shallow is one word I wouldnt use to describe his self-help stuff. What makes you say that? I think that the advice he gives is understandable, practical and straight forward to think through albeit a lot harder to put into practise.

Id agree with you about the neo-marxist/postmodernist stuff. Whilst I think he has some good general points to make about it, it seems to consume him once he begins talking about it

20Cent

MrKingsley wrote: »

Shallow is one word I wouldnt use to describe his self-help stuff. What makes you say that? I think that the advice he gives is understandable, practical and straight forward to think through albeit a lot harder to put into practise.

Id agree with you about the neo-marxist/postmodernist stuff. Whilst I think he has some good general points to make about it, it seems to consume him once he begins talking about it

Stand up straight, clean your room, like your kids etc reminds me if a bit Chris Rock does about people boasting about doing obvious things.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Stand up straight, clean your room, like your kids etc reminds me if a bit Chris Rock does about people boasting about doing obvious things.

Well good for you that you have the drive and everything else to not need "obvious" help.
Plenty of people, especially young men don't. Higher unemployment, lower pay, worse mental health, lower educational attainment, all well-known issues. Peterson isn't telling people to see themselves as victims, he's giving what you see as obvious advice. He's actually bloody reaching people. And yet he's sneered at, as are the people he's reaching. The reaction to him shows the need for his message.

MrKingsley

20Cent wrote: »

Stand up straight, clean your room, like your kids etc reminds me if a bit Chris Rock does about people boasting about doing obvious things.

Well of course if we are going to break his message down into titles with 3 words it is going to seem straight forward, obvious and potentially shallow.

I have found that listening to him develop upon these ideas it is clear that these are not straight forward to everyone, myself included. I think that the following he has acquired is evidence that many people feel that way

20Cent

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well good for you that you have the drive and everything else to not need "obvious" help.
Plenty of people, especially young men don't. Higher unemployment, lower pay, worse mental health, lower educational attainment, all well-known issues. Peterson isn't telling people to see themselves as victims, he's giving what you see as obvious advice. He's actually bloody reaching people. And yet he's sneered at, as are the people he's reaching. The reaction to him shows the need for his message.

Hey if it helps people more power to them.
Alot of people enjoy which member of Boyzone are you quizes as well.

It's his conspiracy theories about postmodernist marxists destroying society that causes people to "sneer" or more roll their eyes imo.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Hey if it helps people more power to them.
Alot of people enjoy which member of Boyzone are you quizes as well.

It's his conspiracy theories about postmodernist marxists destroying society that causes people to "sneer" or more roll their eyes imo.

Seriously man, calling your posts disingenuous would be being very nice about them. You literally sneered in the same post and your previous one:

20Cent wrote: »

Stand up straight, clean your room, like your kids etc reminds me if a bit Chris Rock does about people boasting about doing obvious things.