Comments by "Jack Haveman" (@JackHaveman52) on "Liberty Vault" channel.

One reason is that when he asks a question, he allows the person to answer. He doesn't interrupt or try to yell over him and then dismiss them by abruptly ending the interview. You can actually learn something about the person's ideas when you watch his interviews.
4
@chickenlover657 I've read Marx and this is a great discussion.
1
@chickenlover657 Do you know I think is ridiculous. That you make a snarky claim about not reading Marx and yet you actually say NOTHING about this discussion OR Marx's writings. NOT ONE WORD. Your comment means nothing until you back it up and prove that what's being said is ridiculous or just plain wrong. Your comment is no better than a troll and apparently it's working. However, you're not about to discuss the video or what was said in it. You only talk people. To quote....Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt. Take that any way you want.
1
@chickenlover657 They did discuss how slogans are used by Marxists, actually people in general but how Marx's slogans are always about tearing society apart. "Workers of the world unite" which implies the "class struggle" and the need of the proletariat to "take over the means of production". All slogans and all calling for the division of the people into groups which they define. They mention how people are still doing it through slogans like "DEI" and "gender affirming care". Strangely, it's the radical socialists who're always repeating these phrases like mantras of the deified or good. How can these phrases be negative when they sound so virtuous? How can this be? I don't know because their discussion didn't cause me to think about what they just said. (that's extreme sarcasm, by the way).
1
@chickenlover657 One of the things about socialist thinking is that socialism is an evolving phenomenon based on the idea of the dialectic. Marx's brand of socialism is the product of the socialist ideas that came before him. To be socialist does NOT mean that you're Marxist. Socialism comes in various guises. Mussolini was a socialist but had different socialist ideas than Lenin and Lenin, the Bolshevik, had different ideas than the rival socialist Mensheviks. Today's socialist are different again than Marxists, who emphasised class as the great divider of society. American socialists don't do that due to the fact that socialists 50 to 60 years ago concluded that the western workers were not about to foster revolution because things were going to well for them. So they changed their emphasis to identity, namely race, gender or sexuality. Same claims of oppression and inequality but from a different viewpoint. "We have nothing to lose but our chains" has been a slogan of the radical socialist for over 150 years among others. Orwell spoke about Party slogans in his writings, especially in his books "Animal Farm" and "1984". That was over 70 years ago. They're still using them. In Lenin's time it was the "class struggle", and "workers taking over the means of production". Now it's "white supremacy", "white fragility", "Diversity, equity and inclusion". Different slogans for different times. Thoughtlessly repeated with no need to think about it. The slogan is the truth, until a "new truth" is revealed. No need to talk further than that. The truth, their truth, is self evident until we need a "new truth". That's the sloganeering. They didn't have the communication apparatus like we do today so they don't have the number of slogans and catch-phrases that we do now. However, it doesn't negate the mindset of the simplistic summation to be explanation enough for complex socialist ideas. It's enough to repeat the slogan. The rest, to their mind, is just window dressing.
1
@chickenlover657 You missed my point. They're all versions of Socialism. Socialism definition: a political and economic theory of social organisation which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. Different individuals have different ideas on how it should be manifested but that definition brings it to its basics. As for the Frankfurt School, I've read Marcuse and I also know that the group are Marxist philosophers, who have advanced Marxist thought into different Critical Theories. I've read some of the material and it's based on Socialist and Marxist ideas but advanced, through the dialectic, so to evolve along with societal conditions. I'm sure that Peterson is no fan of the Frankfurt School for just that reason. In fact, it's how he came to fame. He fought back against Critical Queer Theory at the University of Toronto, specifically the infamous Bill C-16 which had it's roots in Critical Theory and Identity politics, which both came from the Frankfurt School which grew out of Marxism and Socialist thought. That's when he suggested that one could be prosecuted for misgendering and was told that he was being reactionary and bigoted. Turns out, he was correct. He's dead set against the ideas of those from the Frankfurt School as well as the Postmodernists.
1
@chickenlover657 Marx influenced a lot of the modern Socialist thought. You can't even begin to talk about communism and radical socialism without reference to Marx. His influence is huge. I can't recall any direct mention of the Marcuse, Aldorno or Horkenheimer but he's definitely NOT a fan of identity politics which grew out of their beliefs. He has talked about the Postmodernists, specifically Foucault and Derrida and he's been quite outspoken on their socialist ideas....also influenced by Marx and others. You can no more separate Marx from Communism than you could Jesus from Christianity. Marx is the most influential communist or socialist who ever lived. Every modern socialist has been influenced by his writings. It's pointless to try and separate Marx and communism as they're so tightly woven together. One thing that influenced Marx was the teachings of Hegel and the Hegelian dialectic. If you can figure that idea out, it's so convoluted that it's nearly impossible, you'll better understand how socialist ideas progress. It explains the modern ideas of the progressive, an updated brand of socialism. It'll also shows how Marx is a central figure in the progression of Socialism.
1
@chickenlover657 I never said that Marx was the father of Communism. I said that he was the most influential of all the communists. I even mentioned Hegel as an influence on his thinking. Rousseau was as well and so were the socialists of the French Revolution and they all preceded him. As for the Frankfurt School, they were also highly influenced by Marx and even called themselves "Marxists". However, it would seem that you don't even get my reference to Hegel of the Hegelian dialectic. Hegel said that society leaps ahead in leaps and bounds and Socialists adopted this idea as a part of the evolution of Socialism, including Marx. It's why Mao called his socialist plan "The Great Leap Forward". It was in homage to Hegel. Hegel and Marx both influenced the Bolsheviks, who supported the Frankfort School, who came up with Critical Theory. These groups and individuals, who were all recognised as great Socialist thinkers, influenced the Postmodernists and they were big influences on the modern progressives, like Ibram X. Kendi, Kimberly Crenshaw, Derek Bell, Robin DiAngelo, Michael Dyson and others. It's all a progression. I would invite you to read their work and then you'll see how this all ties in together. You are right, though. The Frankfurt School are deeply responsible for the mess we're in now but they're not alone. There are a lot of Socialist thinkers who added to this mix and before we beat this thing, I'm sure there will be a lot more.
1
@chickenlover657 Yet, you haven't said one thing that he said that's false. What did he say that's so wrong? I've been waiting but all you've done is take jabs at his character but you've not offered one thing to back up your claim of his ignorance. Now back it up.
1
@chickenlover657 This is copied and pasted from YOUR comment. "JBP and his collocutor are either misinformed, disingenuous or plain intellectually dishonest and manipulative." Who do you think we're talking about? That's quite the assault on Jordan's character, too. Also, Marx has had a huge effect on the ideals of socialism. To pretend that he hasn't is being wilfully blind. I even went to great lengths to show the progression of the socialist movement. I gave multiple names, their socialist movements and how they were all linked to one another and especially to Marx. It's YOU who doesn't want to acknowledge or address anything I said. Then you've insinuated that his audience is ignorant. Well thank you for your incite into people that you don't know or have even met. Thank you for implying that I'm ignorant. I think that I've shown you that I do know about this subject and that I'm not ignorant on the subject. I've read a LOT more on it than you have or we'd be having a discussion on what you DO know and have to offer. However, you won't do that. You attack his character with your accusations of his dishonesty and manipulative behaviour. I think that your entire opinion is based on your hatred of the man....nothing else.
1
@chickenlover657 Calling someone manipulative and dishonest is an assault on someone's character. It's also an assault on someone's character to call their audience "ignorant'. I've not said that I've read more than an historian, whatever that means. I've said that I've PROBABLY read more about it than you. YOU are the one that brought up the Frankfurt School, not me. You're the one who said that the new left has been influenced by that school and NOT Marx. I went through a long description about how the socialists were influenced by each other but now YOU don't want to discuss other socialists, just the ones that you want to talk about. So here goes using YOUR rules. From the Encyclopedia Britannica: Frankfurt School, group of researchers associated with the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, who applied Marxism to a radical interdisciplinary social theory. From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: social theorists in the Western European Marxist tradition known as the Frankfurt School. From the Jacobin Society: Carl Grünberg, the institute’s (the Frankfurt School) first director, officially gave it a Marxist orientation. From ScienceDirect: primarily influenced by Marxism, the Frankfurt School rejected an orthodox reading of Marx and represented a different form of Marxism than their Bolshevik contemporaries. I can do this all day. They were most definitely influenced by Karl Marx. So give it up.
1
@robkocol5664 Maybe it's because it's easier to pretend to care than it is to actually care. Take the axiom "Give a man a fish and he eats today. Teach a man to fish and he'll eat for the rest of his life" One gets immediate satisfaction from giving a man a fish and he can flagrantly show his benevolence on a daily basis and do so for life. Teach a man to fish and your benevolence fades with time. It also encourages those, who are looking for power, to create a situation where the beneficiary of that daily fish, becomes reliant on those who are the provider. However, if someone teaches that person how to fish, that power is gone. It's a combination of narcissism through being an altruist and using your altruism to maintain their dependence on their benefactors. They feel that they should have power because they're the ones with the knowledge to give you a good life. If the "downtrodden" learn to build their own good life, the elitist loses value and power. So, who cares more? The one that maintains their status as the benefactor or the one that is willing to allow others to be their own benefactor? I'm sure that the answer is obvious to most people. It's about ego.
1
That was quite the mouthful. Ramble on.
1
What made you decide that your rule is necessary? Are you implying that they've never read the book? Please explain why you'd want to censor anyone's speech?
1
@ryandudley3616 That debate, with Zizek, was 5 1/2 years ago. Zizek has been a student of Marx and Hegel for decades. He's specialised in their work. Peterson has read a lot of stuff, including Marx and Hegel but he's a clinical psychologist. Political philosophy, especially surrounding Marx and Hegel is Zisek's speciality. Of course he's going to be more knowledgeable than someone who has a different professional focus. You said that "these" guys are grifters. Are you talking about Zizek and Peterson? Or the guy in the video and Peterson? Be a little more specific.
1
Really. She called out Kamala in the Democrat primaries and effectively drove Harris out of the running as the Democrat candidate for president. Harris had ZERO votes after that. Over the next few days, she was the number one search word, on Google, to find out who she was but the Democrats didn't invite her to the next debate, effectively dropping her as a candidate. WHY.....when she put on such a strong showing in the debates. I'd say that it was the Democrats who exercised their power to get rid of her because they saw her as a threat to THEIR money and power. They did to her what they had done to Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020. Do as they say or you are OUT!!!!! She's out.
1
Once again, you're resorting to talking about people and not ideas. Your sneering comment is designed to demonise his health issues and subsequent addictions and implies that he's not to be listened to because he's a "less than" human. Leave the gossip behind and talk about his ideas.
1
@chickenlover657 What are you pointing at? "He's a druggie and he won't shut-up". That's one deep observation. SMH. Now, you're trying to dismiss me with that smart remark about how I'm pouting. It appears that's the go-to when having discussions. You've just proved the validity of that quote from Eleanor Roosevelt.
1