Comments by "LS O\x27Brien" (@lsobrien) on "Why Jordan Peterson is Wrong About Ideology" video.

  1. Another brilliant, well-informed video. I can't get over the absolute gall of Peterson attacking "dogmatic ideologues". His overwhelming fear of leftists, and the Bolsheviks he assumes they all really are, is garnered primarily from his veneration of pseudo-scientific Jungian archetypes (which once he was candid enough to compare with star signs). And is reinforced by a dogmatic interpretation of Russian literature and a neoconservative reading of the Cold War. For the latter he cites the Black Book of Communism. He tells audiences that Marx’s utopian schemes have led to 100 million deaths, “and that’s just a conservative estimate”. Given that the Black Book’s compiler has been criticised for inflating his estimate in order to get such a ‘nice,’ round figure (it lends the speeches of demagogues far more punch), Peterson is again eschewing the thorny matter of facts. Funnily enough, this total denunciation of an economic system, along with the messianic reaction entailed, in fact mirrors something from the early 20th century. Those who, citing the carnage of the First World War, Tran-Atlantic slavery, the virtual disappearance of the red races, Leopold’s Congo, the left-over feudal superstitions and pogroms, the millions dying as a result of either the limits of free markets, or the wilful malice of its practitioners (take the British response to the potato plague and multiple Indian famines), declared capitalism irredeemable. Followed by the pronouncement that their tragically compromised guidelines would solve all. But they, persecuted by the tsar’s secret police and hounded by armed right-wing thugs, perhaps had better justification when they succumbed to paranoia.
    103
  2.  @OjoRojo40  Agreed. Someone as contradictory and silly as Peterson is both easy and fun to tear down.
    6
  3. "There's nothing that's not in our grasp now, Russell, as a species. We can do whatever we want." Someone's got Pinker Brain.
    5
  4. Jordan Peterson: "the feminine dragon of Chaos proves a great danger to man's sense of Being, which begins with a clean bed. That is very important, I really think that. And this is something the Left doesn't understand, it doesn't even feature in the Communist Manifesto, which, let's say, is where all the trouble started. The pOsTmOdErNnEoMaRxIsTs of course, with their bloody, and, let's say, utopian pursuit of equity, which, erm, Pareto disproved anyway, and, to give the Devil his due, is... sob... have we talked about lipstick in the workplace yet?" You: "this man's thinking is first rate."
    4
  5.  @firebrand9578  Good points.
    4
  6.  @LucasDimoveo  Who's "we"? Sounds pretty ideological to me.
    3
  7. That's just a barely comprehensible way of saying "Peterson advises against dogmatism," which is something he clearly doesn't apply to himself (and is hardly earth-shattering).
    2
  8. Learn how to write and someone might take you seriously.
    2
  9.  @gorequillnachovidal  That's what's called a pivot, and a piss-poor one at that. Perhaps Peterson hasn't done a lecture on that particular fallacy (because it appears he does all your thinking for you).
    2
  10.  @gorequillnachovidal  I am at a loss for words. If you think that's a good response, there's really nothing I can say to help de-program you.
    2
  11.  @gorequillnachovidal  I'm well aware what your original point was. And it's still incorrect for the reason I stated.
    2
  12.  @damianbylightning6823  I liked his comment, you loon.
    2
  13.  @burnttoast111  Excellent response. I was about to point out the absurdity of comparing theoretical physics to one man's declaration of a immutable "science" of humanity that even its practitioners compare to astrology; but it couldn't compare. Thanks for taking the time.
    2
  14.  @politeiaentelecheia5679  If only Peterson took some of the advice he's so adamant at giving to others. He might not have made a laughing stock of himself in every debate he's ever had, for a start.
    1
  15.  @politeiaentelecheia5679  1. Because Peterson's one of the greatest purveyors of misinformation and bile in the public sphere, and 2. It's unreasonably fun to upset his cultists
    1
  16. You're wrong on both counts: the argument doesn't boil down to that, and Marxism is just as "broad" a tradition as liberalism (the creed most self-styled conservatives subscribe to).
    1
  17. No, an ideology doesn't necessarily do that at all. Famously, Marxists, for example, think dialectically about everything. For them, there's no room for blanket denunciations. You can also consider conservatives, who say everyone is bad; a lot of anarchists, who subscribe to a pessimistic view of human nature; and liberals, who (the smarter among them at least) believe everyone is both good and bad. The fact that you think as you do suggests you're ideologically possessed by Peterslam.
    1
  18.  @gorequillnachovidal  Have you read any Marx, or are you basing your opinion on Peterson's misreading of a pamphlet? Again, you're sounding completely ideologically possessed. (In case you're interested in personal study: the Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte would dispel that notion of yours/Peterson's. And Marx sought to attain for the proletariat the lives of the bourgeoisie - do you think he wanted to make them "evil"?)
    1
  19. This reads as if it was written by Peterson during his post-Zizek demolition, benzo-fueled coma stupor.
    1
  20. Do I need to be clearer? What you wrote is literally nonsense.
    1
  21. You: "see the way the debris shattered and plastered the track after that horrific train crash? Well, make sense of it."
    1
  22. Why should I? I don't have much faith in debate at the best of times, but - here? I don't know how I can explain this to you any clearer: what you wrote originally: Does. Not. Make. Any. Sense.
    1