Comments by "buddermonger2000" (@buddermonger2000) on "Jordan B Peterson" channel.

My issue is that while this perfectly describes the internal divide of the west and allows a clarity of view on the situation that we currently face at home, it takes a divide not present in Russia, a cultural misunderstanding of the way Christianity works in Russia, and the facsimile played by Russia to drum up nationalist support for the war and then spins it into a narrative which doesn't actually apply in this war. This essay, though well-written and well-spoken leads astray all who hear it and plays into the natural tendency of the West to see themselves as the ones at fault. It's the same thing the left does when it pushes its authoritarianism. It is the same facsimile which allows the flourishing of the Marxist takeover of the West in the absence of God. But you fail to see the reasons for this war, why the West is supplying Ukraine (a place we don't care about), and the limitations Russia faces. Russia is a dying nation which no longer controls the avenues of attack. It does not matter if the West didn't have these new Marxist cultural values it matters that Russia does not hold control. Russia is the giant which seeks domination of all avenues of invasion from its homeland. But it is one without the population to do so any longer. It is the last war Russia can even launch. For you I recommend listening to Peter Zeihan a man who looks at things without the cultural lens that you navigate so eloquently. Zeihan quite masterfully outlines the issues which plague the modern Russian Federation (and indeed Ukraine and Belarus as well), and shows exactly why this war is happening. The issues are such of an inability to perform modern battlefield tactics and thus realizing that the situation is such that Russia coming for the rest of the NATO alliance (an inevitable outcome as Russia is in a desperate push to reach its historic avenues of invasion by force) will result in Russia truly falling into the corner that is so feared. As long as no troops set foot on Russian, Ukrainian, or Belarusian soil then Russia is not cornered. Russia has ground. Russia will not be forced into nukes. If Russia is subject to the humiliating defeat which would come if it invades the west proper, then it truly is forced to use the nukes and it is the outcome which is most desired to be avoided. Without the decimation of the Russian army in Ukraine however then Russia comes full force into the NATO realm and triggers the inevitable series of events which leads to the 10 minute war which would mark the end of history. Furthermore I would like to address this idea of yours that the current global order would be possible to maintain going forward. No I must apologize but said order is going away no matter what. It is an inevitability at this point. Covid and the Russian invasion have truly shown that the order is on the out-and-out. What comes next is the normal state of the world without this global order. The Americans have already decided consistently that since the end of the Soviet Union that it no longer desires to keep up the globalized order and prefers to deal with regional issues. It desires little to deal with Eurasia anymore and prefers to now deal with the islands outside of the continent. This is the end of the globalized order as we see it. No-one who wants it can keep it intact. The time to decide how the world would go forward was in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union but in the US's continued lack of desire to make a choice in the matter and focus on its issues at home it has since abandoned that idea to let it run entirely on inertia which is now running out due to issues such as demographics within the world. This world system is at its end. There is no saving it. I understand that on the face of it the radical left has gone unabashedly in support of somewhere that we simply do not care about. That is not in our sphere of desired influence and has no bearing on ourselves without further look. However in looking deeper we find the true source of the problem which I've outlined here in this response. One which is far more dangerous than simply supporting a nation at war against the Russians. It's the less risky path in an attempt to prevent a situation which leads inevitably to the destruction of all mankind. In being the only path which prevents that destruction it is of strategic and moral imperative to support Ukraine in its defense. And to this I'd like to ask you to expand your view, outlines, and analysis to the material which does affect the cultural. As such a student of history I would ask you to study economies, demographics, and geography. At least enough to see how they interact and influence the development of countries and cultures. In learning of these you may yet get an understanding of the world which is more clear than nearly anyone else in all faculties of life than simply of the great influence you are on the cultural front.
24
Well no. If anything I imagine some of this is just to catch onto the weaknesses which have come from the larger corporations. Remember when they scooped up Gina Carano after she was canceled? As far as I can tell the entire idea of the Daily Wire expanding as a company is simply to offer as much creative freedom as possible to prominent figures on the more mainstream right. Even The Blaze is much more prominent in this aspect as it's basically a bunch of talk shows and the like. However the daily wire is a news organization (which you can take however you like their quality of reporting) which is moving into other media production. Fox and Vice already have done this. It's not even an uncharted path in that sense. So pulling in the prominent cultural figures, creating movies to as well influence culture, seems to all be in service of this goal. The idea is to influence culture with better ideas and communication. Instead of just ranting about it trying to DO something about it. You have things like "What is a woman?" but you also have things like "Run, hide, fight" and now with Jordan Peterson (who I'd call one of the linchpins of the modern mainstream cultural force of the right) it just seems like they're doing their best to finally fight culture on the cultural front. These things are basically to better color their brand and overall de-color the current tinge they have from those who don't really identify politically. At least that's how I see the whole trajectory going.
5
@retro2103 He's not of the traditional tribe which people associate with the right wing. However, I've never really found any disingenuousness from him in speaking and he seems to be remarkably candid. Outright lying I find very hard to believe.
2
These are the kinds of conversations I like to have with people.
2
Jordan Peterson looks entirely in his element here
1
Worth noting that for Singapore the entire country was created effectively as a Chinese exclave and given that in Asia they effectively own the economy in many of the countries there they're effectively the jews of the East. So when the British decolonized they made Isreal in the East. And for Rwanda what happened there is that they effectively Eliminated their ethnic tensions since they killed an entire ethnicity. It's an absolutely horrific way in which to let out the Steam which inhibits social cohesion but it did let it out and due to that it's probably one of the most socially cohesive post-colonial states. Most other states don't have that due to effectively being a hodgepodge of ethnicities which were grouped together for political purposes in Europe and really didn't mix well beforehand so what you're seeing is the long process of attempting to integrate everyone within those countries to form new national identities. And of course Rwanda skipped the process entirely by going full brutality for about 3 months. Before any economic freedom can occur you have to have the trust in your society beforehand. Mostly trust in your neighbor to not steal your stuff and then trust in the society to not try to swindle you once you get past that level which you've touched on.
1
I honestly don't have much to relate here besides my mother having been a single parent. However despite my father being mostly absentee, I did have versions of a father figure from young. And in fact arguably my hardest time was around 8 when I lost any semblance of one for years until my current stepfather. By which point the relationship never really took off and we've always been kind of distant. In my household my stepbrother and I have a very good relationship, we have good relationships with our respective parents, our parents have a relationship we're mostly not privy to but doesn't seem too troubled (however I've never had that ability to sense the nuances of relationships), but the biggest friction are the children with the opposite parents. It's worth noting that my stepbrother was 17 when I was 11. I'm not quite sure how that has affected my development looking back as I developed social problems after having to change schools and now have a very barren social network. It took me a lot of time how to learn how to socialize again after about 6 years or so of effectively forced introversion (due to my poor socialization skills I didn't make bridges very easily and burned them later due to mistakes I wouldn't have made had I been better socialized, and in addition to this i had no way to attempt to even meet with people outside of school). And thus I've been behind on that front. And honestly I may even be misattributing the poor socialization because well I don't really know. All I know is that I seemed to have been missing components in my social skills and it hampered me for a great deal of time. I'd imagine it likely relates looking back at that fact but I'm not sure to what degree it makes sense. Would likely need a professional for that.
1
@camanderson9132 His view on it is not Russian propaganda. It's simply one which he was woefully lacking in understanding. He's primary front is the cultural one. And on that note I actually believe that his move to the daily wire plus makes a lot of sense and if anything will do more to make even more the right the larger tent than it would've otherwise. If his recent interviews are at all to go by it doesn't look like he's going any more into an echo chamber than he already was. However, his success on the cultural front and the cultural lens does not necessarily make sense in the context of the Russo-Ukrainian war. It's a cultural lens which includes Russia in the context of the west rather than one primarily at odds with it which I believe serves as a much better representation of Russia as despite their western influence, their biggest influences were the orthodox Christians which have a markedly different development from the catholics and the protestant outcrop on their society as well their Mongol institutions. On top of that, the cultural lens falls apart in the context of the geopolitical. Here this war is almost exclusively geopolitical. It's really not one rationalized well in the cultural context which is why his video so much missed the mark.
1