Jordan Peterson interview on C4

s7ryf3925pivug

Leftist extremists don't justify the ideologies of rightist extremists. Leftist extremists are also fringe groups. It's disingenuous to portray them as representative of the mainstream. They are the counterparts of the alt right.

Pa ElGrande

Thought-Criminal Jordan Peterson Versus Cathy Newman & The Baader-Meinhof Gang



A dystopian future indeed if this is allowed to continue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKcWu0tsiZM

20Cent

Mickeywish wrote: »

If Cathy lived in 1930's Germany I think she would be one of the millions who just "knew" that Jews where inferior. The power of group think is so very dangerous as we have witnessed in the last century.

Aaaaannnd we have a Godwin.

Max Prophet

20Cent wrote: »

Aaaaannnd we have a Godwin.

There was one earlier in case you missed it.....

20Cent wrote: »

Its a little known fact but Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot all began their careers campaigning for preferred pronouns.

Pa ElGrande

Royce Stocky Stage wrote: »

Leftist extremists don't justify the ideologies of rightist extremists. Leftist extremists are also fringe groups. It's disingenuous to portray them as representative of the mainstream. They are the counterparts of the alt right.

The Alt right is just a nebulous claim made by a failed politician. It is not representative of any political ideology and is just used by political hacks to frame any number of disaffected voters (i.e. the basket of deplorables) that could not be categorised into a group that fit the identity politics within the various Democrat party caucus groups.

Leftist extremists on the other hand are very real and were being given a free hand to operate earlier in 2017 in Democrat controlled cities before the connections became obvious and they were ordered back.

johnp001

Condemning anything just on the basis of it being defined as "extremism" is a slippery slope. The Overton window can easily be moved making yesterday's centrist today's extremist.
It's usually easy enough to find a valid reason to criticise ideologies on their merits rather than having to rely on a judgement based on their current level of acceptance by the general population. Using extremism as a reason to condemn something is just lazy.

And to quote Chomsky:
"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum...."

And he would know all about this as a major proponent of this tactic himself [URL='https://www.corbettreport.com/meet-noam-chomsky-academic-gatekeeper-video/]
Meet Noam Chomsky, Academic Gatekeeper[/URL]

s7ryf3925pivug

Hillary didn't coin 'alt right'. The term is clear enough I think. Stick with wing nuts if you prefer though.

Antifa are a disaster. There is no evidence of links with the democrats in that link, just a claim. I am aware that some of these groups are fake puppets of the far right. Others are sponsored by Russia. Others are just violent idiots.

The thing about extremism doesn't relate to my point. People on this thread are linking absurd and extreme left entities and claiming this is representative of mainstream thought or show the direction things are going. It's not. Hippies and communists have been around a long time. Wing nuts have too. Pointing out hippies are full of rubbish doesn't mean it's okay to be a wing nut. Saying mainstream institutions are all communists and hippies is just a lie. It seems to me that these new right movements are based on a dishonest view of what the mainstream is.

silverharp

Royce Stocky Stage wrote: »

Hillary didn't coin 'alt right'. The term is clear enough I think. Stick with wing nuts if you prefer though.

Antifa are a disaster. There is no evidence of links with the democrats in that link, just a claim. I am aware that some of these groups are fake puppets of the far right. Others are sponsored by Russia. Others are just violent idiots.

The thing about extremism doesn't relate to my point. People on this thread are linking absurd and extreme left entities and claiming this is representative of mainstream thought or show the direction things are going. It's not. Hippies and communists have been around a long time. Wing nuts have too. Pointing out hippies are full of rubbish doesn't mean it's okay to be a wing nut. Saying mainstream institutions are all communists and hippies is just a lie. It seems to me that these new right movements are based on a dishonest view of what the mainstream is.

it depends, if you see someone with a flag with a hammer and sickle on it, thats pretty extreme yet it acceptable to have them at normal public events.

Pa ElGrande

Royce Stocky Stage wrote: »

It seems to me that these new right movements are based on a dishonest view of what the mainstream is.

It is just the return of the classical liberals, the progressives who commandeered the Liberal label throughout the 20th century are disintegrating and reverting back to their socialist origins.

FA Hayek wrote:

The picture generally given of the relative position of the three parties does more to obscure than to elucidate their true relations. They are usually represented as different positions on a line, with the socialists on the left, the conservatives on the right, and the liberals somewhere in the middle. Nothing could be more misleading. If we want a diagram, it would be more appropriate to arrange them in a triangle with the conservatives occupying one corner, with the socialists pulling toward the second and the liberals toward the third. But, as the socialists have for a long time been able to pull harder, the conservatives have tended to follow the socialist rather than the liberal direction and have adopted at appropriate intervals of time those ideas made respectable by radical propaganda. It has been regularly the conservatives who have compromised with socialism and stolen its thunder. Advocates of the Middle Way with no goal of their own, conservatives have been guided by the belief that the truth must lie somewhere between the extremes—with the result that they have shifted their position every time a more extreme movement appeared on either wing.

source

s7ryf3925pivug

silverharp wrote: »

it depends, if you see someone with a flag with a hammer and sickle on it, thats pretty extreme yet it acceptable to have them at normal public events.

Wtf.

Bizarre and outrageous.

They're random ****tards though. Shockingly ignorant they may be. That this was presumably tolerated doesn't mean it was thought to be okay.

markodaly

silverharp wrote: »

^^^

couldnt make it to the end of that video

I know right.

Your job prospects is literally only available in further academia or working for feminists advocacy groups. But you have to pay them almost €7000 euro first to be 'woke'. What a scam.

She loves the diversity of students, but I somehow doubt she would like diversity of thought or if someone tried to challenge some of her home truths.

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

That’s the most detailed ad hominem attacks I’ve ever seen.

I do not think you know what Ad hominem means.

SeanW

20Cent wrote: »

Jaysus you'd think he saved the world from alien invasion.

Post-modernism is much more insidious.

It's a college.

No.

He's protesting/arguing against college rules and regulations.

No. His argument is against laws that force a particular language to be used. I.E. laws that make it a crime not to affirm someone's ... claim to be something other than what they are. What he heard from the college was legal advice stemming from Ontario and (if C16 passes) Canadian legislation.

If his fanboys experienced one fraction of the discrimination, fear and silencing that minorities face every day they would have something to cry about. So ironic they call the other side snowflakes.

He and his so called "fanboys" are lied about, demonised and intimidated as matter of routine. If you think being a white conservative is so easy, try to organise a college speaking tour for Ben Shapiro or Nigel Farage, Milo Y, Laura Southern etc. Then tell me about "discrimination, fear and silencing".

"Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low." Wallace Sayre.

Really? The ability to brainwash the next generation is "stakes so low?" The reason people who've been to college tend to lean left of those who have not is because colleges in the West are stacked with vermin like these: http://www.professorwatchlist.org/

Little should one wonder how much power the Post-Modernist Left now has in our imperiled society, it would be like stacking the colleges with Nazis and then wondering why all the students graduated sporting narrow mustaches and jabbering about how great Naziism is. And the stakes really are high - people come out of these indoctrination centres and into positions where they can do real damage, like politics and media.

Pa ElGrande

Royce Stocky Stage wrote: »

Wtf.

Bizarre and outrageous.

They're random ****tards though. Shockingly ignorant they may be. That this was presumably tolerated doesn't mean it was thought to be okay.

The sign in the back reads "seize him by the means of production". This is standard operating procedure for socialists to attach themselves to others protest marches. Sinn Fein and other socialist political parties often employ this tactic in this country. Most people chose to ignore the oppression and destruction imposed by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics with the excuse that was not real socialism.

Noel82

20Cent wrote: »

Aaaaannnd we have a Godwin.

Herb Powell

SeanW wrote: »

Really? The ability to brainwash the next generation is "stakes so low?" The reason people who've been to college tend to lean left of those who have not is because colleges in the West are stacked with vermin like these: http://www.professorwatchlist.org/

Little should one wonder how much power the Post-Modernist Left now has in our imperiled society, it would be like stacking the colleges with Nazis and then wondering why all the students graduated sporting narrow mustaches and jabbering about how great Naziism is. And the stakes really are high - people come out of these indoctrination centres and into positions where they can do real damage, like politics and media.

Oooooooooh dear

pemay

Herb Powell wrote: »

Oooooooooh dear

Herb Powell?

Herb f**king Powell?!

Man, how long has it been?! I had to think fast there, knew it couldn't be anyone else, good old Herb, good ol' Herb "Black Tuesday" Powell!

Remember that time back in college, do you? How could you forget, says you! You smeared pig fat all over your face and swore "that's the last time you'll see me peeping through a hedge crooked, let me tell ya!"

Ah jaysus, good times, wha'? And sure where would you leave the time you went leppin' across the street like a mad yoke to the Reichstag, sure they couldn't tell you not to put your flute away, they couldn't!

Ye mad yoke, Herb

Mickeyswish

Cathy displays traits of group think, beliefs are based on the number of people who hold those beliefs and the social status of those who hold those beliefs. It is a vulnerability in human psychology, thankfully there are people such as Jordan Peterson who can base their beliefs on facts and sound logic.

The dangers of group think can be seen looking back through history at the likes of National Socialism in Germany for example. Someone controlled by group think will also blurt out "Godwins Law" in a Pavlovian manner if they here anything to related to German National Socialism. They heard enough people say it so they think it is cool to say it.

Group think is dangerous in other ways, for example the 2004 tsunami, many people died because they looked to other people's reactions to assess the danger rather than using the facts and evidence to assess the danger. It's like when the fire alarm.sounds in an office, people look to others to see what they should do rather than exit the building.

Intothesea

In this interview it seems as if Cathy Newman was taking on the apparent persona and not just the illogical angles of online neo-feminists. The very specific gauche combative approach and word-for-word script the likes of which are replicated throughout cyberspace between ostensibly normal people and 3rd-wavers certainly provokes the same sort of disbelief, anyway.

Maybe she thought literally speaking up for the neo-feminist sisterhood would be politically expedient, and especially if Peterson came off as anything less than a gentleman. Fair play to JP for side-stepping this balderdash. Very instructive


As well, is Peterson (or anyone else making a heart-felt effort to address disaffected young people in the west) relating the rise of post-modern/post-Marxist philosophical inculcation in western universities to the solidification of neo-liberal economic and social approaches in these societies, as a reactionary move? If this holds, the overall picture and reasons for it would become quite a bit clearer. I notice that Peterson points to the university issues driving the mass neo-feminist wave, but he doesn't go so far as to relate it to the zero-sum value that modern economic/social approaches deliver very specifically to the western man. Is anyone addressing this part of the map online?

20Cent

SeanW wrote: »

No. His argument is against laws that force a particular language to be used. I.E. laws that make it a crime not to affirm someone's ... claim to be something other than what they are. What he heard from the college was legal advice stemming from Ontario and (if C16 passes) Canadian legislation.

The monsters, you can't even call black people the N word these days PC gone mad.

SeanW wrote: »

He and his so called "fanboys" are lied about, demonised and intimidated as matter of routine. If you think being a white conservative is so easy, try to organise a college speaking tour for Ben Shapiro or Nigel Farage, Milo Y, Laura Southern etc. Then tell me about "discrimination, fear and silencing".

The poor things, you can't go into a college and put up a photo of a student calling her a pervert or advocating for sex with children these days without someone getting mad!

SeanW wrote: »

Really? The ability to brainwash the next generation is "stakes so low?" The reason people who've been to college tend to lean left of those who have not is because colleges in the West are stacked with vermin like these: http://www.professorwatchlist.org/

Little should one wonder how much power the Post-Modernist Left now has in our imperiled society, it would be like stacking the colleges with Nazis and then wondering why all the students graduated sporting narrow mustaches and jabbering about how great Naziism is. And the stakes really are high - people come out of these indoctrination centres and into positions where they can do real damage, like politics and media.

Ze students making lists of vermin teachers doesn't sound fascist at all does it.

silverharp

20Cent wrote: »

T


Ze students making lists of vermin teachers doesn't sound fascist at all does it.

fk right off with those makeyuppy genders, there are only 2 genders :pac:

bnt

The brouhaha over this interview has crossed the Atlantic, and is now in The Atlantic - the magazine. Their most popular article today is a deconstruction of the interviewer's technique: Why Can't People Hear What Jordan Peterson Is Saying?.

Pa ElGrande

20Cent wrote: »

The monsters, you can't even call black people the N word these days PC gone mad.

I'm offended by your cisnormative heteronormative imperialist white supremacist capitalist racial microaggression. The correct term is people of color.

Pepefrogok

20Cent wrote: »

The monsters, you can't even call black people the N word these days PC gone mad.



The poor things, you can't go into a college and put up a photo of a student calling her a pervert or advocating for sex with children these days without someone getting mad!




Ze students making lists of vermin teachers doesn't sound fascist at all does it.

Remember that time when you complained that someone godwin'd the thread only for it to turn out you had already done it earlier lol that was really funny!

Saruhashi

Peterson: We diverged from lobsters evolutionary history about 350 million years ago. And lobsters exist in hierarchies. They have a nervous system attuned to the hierarchy. And that nervous system runs on serotonin just like ours. The nervous system of the lobster and the human being is so similar that anti-depressants work on lobsters. And it’s part of my attempt to demonstrate that the idea of hierarchy has absolutely nothing to do with socio-cultural construction, which it doesn’t.

Newman: Let me get this straight. You’re saying that we should organize our societies along the lines of the lobsters?

Amazing.

Pa ElGrande

Saruhashi wrote: »

[
Newman: Let me get this straight. You’re saying that we should organize our societies along the lines of the lobsters?

Amazing.

Tongue in cheek this is likely based on her work experience. Lobsters are known as bottom feeders and going on past form the channel4 news department seems to be organised along those lines already.

Herb Powell

pemay wrote: »

Herb Powell?

Herb f**king Powell?!

Man, how long has it been?! I had to think fast there, knew it couldn't be anyone else, good old Herb, good ol' Herb "Black Tuesday" Powell!

Remember that time back in college, do you? How could you forget, says you! You smeared pig fat all over your face and swore "that's the last time you'll see me peeping through a hedge crooked, let me tell ya!"

Ah jaysus, good times, wha'? And sure where would you leave the time you went leppin' across the street like a mad yoke to the Reichstag, sure they couldn't tell you not to put your flute away, they couldn't!

Ye mad yoke, Herb

How's the head?

Wombatman

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

It is just the return of the classical liberals, the progressives who commandeered the Liberal label throughout the 20th century are disintegrating and reverting back to their socialist origins.

Doesn't Peterson describe himself as a classic British liberal?

Huntergonzo

I'm new to Peterson but he seemed to do very well in that interview, although the interviewer was a mindless drone so it couldn't have been too difficult for him.

However I have looked at one or two of his other videos and I find if he doesn't like a question (eg Do you believe in god?), he'll torture it with scrutiny and essentially tell you the question is wrong.

Early days for me though so I could be wrong, but that is an early impression.

SeanW

20Cent wrote: »

The monsters, you can't even call black people the N word these days PC gone mad.

Nice, start your "argument" by slandering your opponent by playing the race card, even though race has nothing to do with this.

For the record:

1. No free society jails people just for using the N-word. Bill C16 and the regional law aims to criminalise a failure to adhere to SJW norms.
2. The n-word is not an accurate description for a black person. It's a slur. "Man", "male", "Sir" etc. are accurate terms for a person with XX chromosomes.

I ask you now to withdraw your scurrilous assertion that this debate has anything to do with racism.

The poor things, you can't go into a college and put up a photo of a student calling her a pervert or advocating for sex with children these days without someone getting mad!

You say Ben Shapiro and Nigel Farage go around to colleges putting up posters accusing students of being perverts? Please show me your evidence.

Antifa have a simple message - we will use any means including terrorism, to silence people we disagree with. Are you defending Antifa? If so, why?

Ze students making lists of vermin teachers doesn't sound fascist at all does it.

You're right. It is not fascist.

Demonising individuals because of their group, advocating that people in serious trauma should be let die because of their skin colour, advocating the murder of children with mental disabilities, anti semitism, calling for people who disagree with you to be executed, (or maybe just raped), spreading blood libels against Jews, seems to be just fine by the Post-Modernists, despite much of it being literally copied from Nazi Germany or Stalin's USSR, and some other ... unorthodox ideas about math and science that would not be out of place in a Middle Ages witch trial.

Fr Tod Umptious

First time ever hearing of this guy.

It was one way traffic, the interviewer was totally out of her depth due to lack of preparation.

He really made some really good points.

Knex*

Saruhashi wrote: »

Peterson: We diverged from lobsters evolutionary history about 350 million years ago. And lobsters exist in hierarchies. They have a nervous system attuned to the hierarchy. And that nervous system runs on serotonin just like ours. The nervous system of the lobster and the human being is so similar that anti-depressants work on lobsters. And it’s part of my attempt to demonstrate that the idea of hierarchy has absolutely nothing to do with socio-cultural construction, which it doesn’t.

Newman: Let me get this straight. You’re saying that we should organize our societies along the lines of the lobsters?

Amazing.

Reminded me of this a bit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nS41-JeZ3EE

20Cent

SeanW wrote: »

Nice, start your "argument" by slandering your opponent by playing the race card, even though race has nothing to do with this.

For the record:

1. No free society jails people just for using the N-word. Bill C16 and the regional law aims to criminalise a failure to adhere to SJW norms.
2. The n-word is not an accurate description for a black person. It's a slur. "Man", "male", "Sir" etc. are accurate terms for a person with XX chromosomes.

I ask you now to withdraw your scurrilous assertion that this debate has anything to do with racism.

Now I know how Peterson felt.
So what you are saying is ...........

C 16 is an amendment to the the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code. They are saying that even if someone has xx chomosomes but identifies as female we should respect that. Calling a female He all the time is a form of bullying.

SeanW wrote: »

You say Ben Shapiro and Nigel Farage go around to colleges putting up posters accusing students of being perverts? Please show me your evidence.

Was referring to Milo. He went to a college and put a photo of a trans student up on a screen to slag off https://youtu.be/h2oV1QKUMdM and humiliate. The student was actually in the room at the time. Shapiro also has form attacking trans people.

SeanW wrote: »

Antifa have a simple message - we will use any means including terrorism, to silence people we disagree with. Are you defending Antifa? If so, why?

So what your saying is ......

SeanW wrote: »

You're right. It is not fascist.

Demonising individuals because of their group, advocating that people in serious trauma should be let die because of their skin colour, advocating the murder of children with mental disabilities, anti semitism, calling for people who disagree with you to be executed, (or maybe just raped), spreading blood libels against Jews, seems to be just fine by the Post-Modernists, despite much of it being literally copied from Nazi Germany or Stalin's USSR, and some other ... unorthodox ideas about math and science that would not be out of place in a Middle Ages witch trial.

This is literally what you are arguing against. Attacking people because of their words or beliefs!!!!

Max Prophet

20Cent wrote: »

Now I know how Peterson felt.
So what you are saying is ...........

C 16 is an amendment to the the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code. They are saying that even if someone has xx chomosomes but identifies as female we should respect that. Calling a female He all the time is a form of bullying.



Was referring to Milo. He went to a college and put a photo of a trans student up on a screen to slag off https://youtu.be/h2oV1QKUMdM and humiliate. The student was actually in the room at the time. Shapiro also has form attacking trans people.




So what your saying is ......



This is literally what you are arguing against. Attacking people because of their words or beliefs!!!!

Did you watch the interview yet?

20Cent

Max Prophet wrote: »

Did you watch the interview yet?

Yeah she was terrible and he wiped the floor with her.

Fr Tod Umptious

20Cent wrote: »

Now I know how Peterson felt.
So what you are saying is ...........

C 16 is an amendment to the the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code. They are saying that even if someone has xx chomosomes but identifies as female we should respect that. Calling a female He all the time is a form of bullying.



Was referring to Milo. He went to a college and put a photo of a trans student up on a screen to slag off https://youtu.be/h2oV1QKUMdM and humiliate. The student was actually in the room at the time. Shapiro also has form attacking trans people.




So what your saying is ......



This is literally what you are arguing against. Attacking people because of their words or beliefs!!!!

So I'm sure then you would be fine with someone who says that Michael Brown deserved what he got because he was black ?

If it's ok for someone to be allowed believe and say that a white man should be denied medical help because they are white, then someone else can be allowed to believe and say that a black person can be denied the same because they are black.

Brian?

SeanW wrote: »

Nice, start your "argument" by slandering your opponent by playing the race card, even though race has nothing to do with this.

For the record:

1. No free society jails people just for using the N-word. Bill C16 and the regional law aims to criminalise a failure to adhere to SJW norms.
2. The n-word is not an accurate description for a black person. It's a slur. "Man", "male", "Sir" etc. are accurate terms for a person with XX chromosomes.

I ask you now to withdraw your scurrilous assertion that this debate has anything to do with racism.


You say Ben Shapiro and Nigel Farage go around to colleges putting up posters accusing students of being perverts? Please show me your evidence.

No. He didn’t.

Antifa have a simple message - we will use any means including terrorism, to silence people we disagree with. Are you defending Antifa? If so, why?

What acts of terrorism have Antifa committed?

You're right. It is not fascist.

Demonising individuals because of their group, advocating that people in serious trauma should be let die because of their skin colour, advocating the murder of children with mental disabilities, anti semitism, calling for people who disagree with you to be executed, (or maybe just raped), spreading blood libels against Jews, seems to be just fine by the Post-Modernists, despite much of it being literally copied from Nazi Germany or Stalin's USSR, and some other ... unorthodox ideas about math and science that would not be out of place in a Middle Ages witch trial.

What do you propose we do about these professors? Should we silence them? I would prefer if we present logical arguments as to why they’re incorrect.

Fr Tod Umptious

Brian? wrote: »

What do you propose we do about these professors? Should we silence them? I would prefer if we present logical arguments as to why they’re incorrect.

But how much outrage is there about those professors and their comments ?
I have never heard them before and obviously as a result neither have I heard the outrage.

Are they put down to the ramblings of fools ?

Had someone with a more "right wing" view made similar comments about others would we hear more about it ?

Ulysses Gaze

20Cent wrote: »

Yeah she was terrible and he wiped the floor with her.

Would you disagree with many of the arguments he puts forward in the interview?

Ulysses Gaze

Brian? wrote: »

What do you propose we do about these professors? Should we silence them? I would prefer if we present logical arguments as to why they’re incorrect.

No. But we should openly lampoon them for the nonsense that they are.

Brian?

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But how much outrage is there about those professors and their comments ?
I have never heard them before and obviously as a result neither have I heard the outrage.

Are they put down to the ramblings of fools ?

Had someone with a more "right wing" view made similar comments about others would we hear more about it ?

So be outraged. It adds nothing to this argument to point out idiots being idiots. It's nothing to do with left/right wing.

Brian?

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

No. But we should openly lampoon them for the nonsense that they are.

I agree.

SSr0

Brian? wrote: »

What acts of terrorism have Antifa committed?

Are you having a fücking laugh or what?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/antifa-domestic-terrorists-us-security-agencies-homeland-security-fbi-a7927881.html

Sure what would the US Homeland Security know, huh?

CarlosHarpic

Brian? wrote: »

What acts of terrorism have Antifa committed?

We still do not know for sure the motivations behind the Las Vegas mass slaughter.

Rory28

CarlosHarpic wrote: »

We still do not know for sure the motivations behind the Las Vegas mass slaughter.

Ridiculous. That guy was a sick fcuk. There is your motivation.

johnp001

I listened to Karen Straughan's commentary on the Newman-Peterson interview.
(Link to relevant section of video)

She references an analysis of the violent language used on the internet in its aftermath which gave the following results:
Cathy Newman’s feminist fans aimed 30 times more violent sexist abuse at Peterson & his supporters than vice-versa

Adding up all the tweets, retweets and likes we find the following totals:

Non-sexist violence aimed at Newman or her supporters: 2

Sexist violence aimed at Newman or her supporters: 0

Non-sexist violence aimed at Peterson or his supporters: 8

Sexist violence aimed at Peterson or his supporters: 55

Will I Am Not

Rory28 wrote: »

Ridiculous. That guy was a sick fcuk. There is your motivation.

You could say that about any person that goes out and intentionally kills strangers.

Rory28

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

You could say that about any person that goes out and intentionally kills strangers.

But to link him to antifa is absurd. i hate antifa as much as the next guy but antifa didnt shoot up the las vegas strip.

cantdecide

johnp001 wrote: »

I listened to Karen Straughan's commentary on the Newman-Peterson interview.
(Link to relevant section of video)

She references an analysis of the violent language used on the internet in its aftermath which gave the following results:
Cathy Newman’s feminist fans aimed 30 times more violent sexist abuse at Peterson & his supporters than vice-versa

I see where you're going wrong there. You see, the far left have a free pass on reprehensible behaviour on account of being drunk on righteous moral superiority.

If you're far left, hate is perfectly admirable when leveled against 'haters' (assuming that objectively, your 'haters' are indeed full of hate).

conorhal

Brian? wrote: »

What do you propose we do about these professors? Should we silence them? I would prefer if we present logical arguments as to why they’re incorrect.

I would prefer that the courses they taught actually debated the philosophy they present honestly and allow it to be critiqued as part of the course.

I would prefer that universities were real safe spaces, safe spaces in which honest debate and dialogue were permitted.
A course that presents ideas that cannot be critiqued isn't teaching, it's indocrtinating.
Take the case of Lindsay Shepherd.
In a class debating communications, Shepherd, a teaching assistant, played an interview from a local news network with Peterson debating Bill C16.
For doing so she was reported for creating a transphobic and toxic enviornment and sanctioned for playing a video that one of the pannel of university staff questioning her described as akin to playing one of Hitler's speaches to her students.

When university lecturers are stifiling intelectual debate and demanding ideological purity without question on pain of sanctions in their classes, they could be at the very least described as, failing at their job to educate critical thinkers.