When will leftypol stop posting damage control threads because Zizek lost?

t faggot
implying you're not a shill for the only actual enemy

He said some things that go against the leftist insanity group think so he must be a nazi.

>JBP
>/pol/'s idol

It's just an easy term for leftists to lump anybody on the right who's not a straight up neocon. Never mind that most people actually alt-right think that Peterson is a well-paid shill

Nobody is a card-carrying member of the alt-right. You are labeled it by someone who believes you fit the category.

By that token, it's simply something that exists in someone else's head.

The debate was boring.

They didn't really say anything new.
Zizek called Peterson stupid or made a mockery of his position every now and then but Peterson would respond with a perfectly logical rebuttal.
I zoned out when zizek tried to engage Peterson in religious terms because it's just boring silliness.
I don't even know if they had a point of contention that wasn't resolved within a couple minutes. Zizek has some illusive belief in marxism and Peterson criticizes something that Peterson claims to the descendant of Marxism but Zizek sees it as more of a bastardization.

The left is literally the fifth column of the enemy subverting from within.

lot more people unironically self-identify as "alt right" than anyone was ever self-identifying as "sjws"
sjw was ENTIRELY a strawman meme to train gamerfaggots to radicalize against

and "alt-right" was a rebranding effort by the far right to make themselves sound more appealing.

Zizek is redpilled tho

Attached: CDC85AD5-9C31-4DB7-8604-E09A1B00E7C5.jpg (1200x675, 81K)

fake tweet, you just cropped out the bottom part (fake tweet by blabla) when people called you out on your shit

Hero of the left looks like a brain damaged hobo fuck

Attached: 1532575237675.jpg (500x500, 26K)

Chapo is brigading literally everywhere. It's all they know how to do

Zizek is complicated. A lot of the left has abandoned him because he refuses to go along with their new idpol campaign. He thinks gays and trannies distract from the goal of the left, and is anti-white guilt.

Alt right is a catch all term for anyone under the age of 40 that isn't a raging lefty

Like leftist, sjw, and so on and sho forth

I guess they can relate to him because they have brain damage.

Unless your that spencer faggot controlled op who refers to himself as at-right.

>says as he posts /leftypol/ damage control
For G-d's sake can we get some real decisive fucking damage for once?

Even with the Mueller report, it's just a bipartisan slugfest. I'm sick of two LARPing corporate shills pretending to fight infinitely to no further development or advancement

this attitude is just to preserve their delusion that they are free-thinking political philosophers who happen to have all arrived at the conclusion of hating feminists and immigrants by logical deduction.

Most of pol loathe the dude as far as I know

This

I have to admit that Pan-Europeanism in the form of the EU is indeed disastrous for the Europeans involved.

>this is the best I could construct after 30 hours of hard work.

Attached: 1550303265660.jpg (480x480, 7K)

based cocaine man
also he shits on SJWs all the time

>all arrived at the conclusion of hating feminists and immigrants by logical deduction.
as opposed to your intellectual position of?

Pushing for a white state or even reduced immigration isn't something you find in the "alt-right" in the first place. The alt-right is just the collective name for all the grifters who keep trying to sell repackaged neocon bs to young people.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA PETERSON JUST POSTED THIS ON TWITTER!!!! MAXIMUM DAMAGE CONTROL.

Attached: JP cope.jpg (480x360, 21K)

easy to do when your parents pay for your internet and you're 29

these commies need to leave immediately, usually low-effort shitposts are endearing but the ones they do are so bland that they are annoying

He literally got disowned by the left for being too against immigrants and lgbt stuff, the dude is probably more socially conservative than patreonson funnily enough.

>Zizek lost, LMAO
>JP lost, LMAO

Nigga, none of them lost if anything the so-called "debate" end up in an agreeing term right there if you even called that debate at all.

>hating

Zizek is against the modern left moreso because they have abandoned class-only policies, and are forcing social justice into that same mold. Zizek HAS to be against that shit because it takes away from the class fight, aka the main thing he cares about.

And yet we have the New Zealand shooter and the Unite the Right rally. The alt-right exists, just as much as the SJW raging lefties exist.

Someone on Dissenter posted this

>As someone who watched the debate live, row S in the orchestra pit if you are curious, I have a few observations of my own. It's true that Jordan Peterson spent his first half hour criticizing the communist manifesto. What is not stated in this article is that the debate was put together at short notice and Peterson was not familiar with Zizek's work (something he said in his opening statement). He was told he would be debating a Marxist. As he later comments to Zizek on the stage "you are an odd Marxist to have a conversation with" he also asked Zizek why he labelled himself a Marxist when most of his ideas seemed to be original concepts and not a defence of Marxism. At which point Zizek revealed himself self as more of an Engelist (might have been something else) and cited a number of more obscure works that he based his thoughts on. He did not say that he wasn't a Marxist however.

>In the closing remarks, Peterson hoped that people would go away from the debate believing in the power of communication between opposing ideas and Zizek hoped that people would reject the simple opposition between Postmodernism and the Alt-right. That being a left-leaning person did not mean you had to be politically correct.

1/2

Attached: 1555745172770.png (719x718, 641K)

>The subject of happiness was only spoken of at the tail end only, both agreeing that happiness was more usefully considered a byproduct than an end in itself. The premise of the debate is at fault more than the participants. They billed it as Marxism, Capitalism and happiness. Zizek isn't a traditional Marxist, Peterson isn't an expert on capitalism or Marxism, he a psychologist. If anything they should have left the topic as Happiness and allowed both personalities to discuss it from there own viewpoints. They did finally come to a point of disagreement. How social change can best be brought about. Zizek advocates for large scale social action and Peterson promotes individual action but is not against large scale change. everything leading up to his should have been the pre-debate discussion and THIS should have been the topic.

theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/20/jordan-peterson-slavoj-zizek-happiness-capitalism-marxism

Attached: original_result2.png (512x512, 354K)

Holy damage control