/Peterson vs. Zizek/ OFFICIAL

This is the Chomsky/Foucault rap of this generation and it's bad, very, very bad and sad

Attached: peterson bear.png (853x543, 53K)

/moldbug/ here desu but I like both about equally, zizek is probably more rigorous and will come out ahead. Memerson is fun whenever he's dabbing on GQ or Sam Harris.

|
>
|
|

*sniff*

Why is this being billed like a football game? I’d rather watch a Jared Taylor YouTube debate.

Are there Zizek/Peterson fighters in M.U.G.E.N.? We should have a pre-fight to cast our predictions.

>Why is this being billed like a football game?
I wouldn't say that just the typical way anything is geared towards the lowest common denominator, Petersontards have a relationship with him like a televangelist

Attached: petertard.jpg (1080x483, 97K)

Peterson is a joke. He is probably going to start crying mid-debate.

you can say the same for Zizek lmao

owww boi.
Finally Hegelian vs. Redditor.
I can't wait for this.

What's wrong with crying in a debate? Zizek probably will say some bullshit about lacan when that happens.

"you zee you are crying for PRECISELY the opposite reason....."

>Redditor vs Redditor
FTFY

The point of a debate is to convince the audience of the superiority of your position. No one will trust the word of a grow man who cries in public.

>What's wrong with crying in a debate?
It places you at the bottom of the dominance hierarchy XD

>that pic
If women are the ultimate judge why didn't tidy his room for his mum?

lmao

She was blowing people apart in another thread while arguing for communism. Probably gets her kicks doing it anonymously since she has to keep up an exterior IRL.

He's not sexually interested in his mom.

>She was blowing people apart
aoc pls

>peterson is on a meat only diet
>good friday

I hope he's going to be okay

TONIGHT IS THE NIGHT THAT MARX WAS PROVED CORRECT THE CULTURAL SHIFT TO PRO-MARX THOUGHT WILL KICK OFF TONIGHT

Attached: oeof.jpg (600x1003, 149K)

Repeat with me: Is not wrong for men to cry

What a pleb

Do you have back-up plan if your stream gets shutdown, assumin gits yours?

I would love to watch a record of this tomorrow.

Marx is dead and is being sold

need a stream

There are so many peole it's getting cringey as hell.
Fuck that faggot who posted about butterfly, stupid cunt.

The spirit of Marx no longer haunts, it will embody the new politik body

was it the :3 guy?

pls

Watching a shitty arthouse film tonight instead. Prepare some quick rundowns for when it's over.

So he's sexually interested in Peterson?

can you link the thread? not surprised, ppl here like to think they know more than they do, every time i see someone on /pol/ say some shit like aoc being dumb its like, bro she would have no problem with you i promise lmao

So the only real option is accelerationism right?

No clue, they should have kept the stream private until the very last moment.
Fuck this

>stream chat

Attached: 1524903553877.jpg (500x270, 12K)

China has been proving Marx correct for decades. They’ve cynically used his methods of analysis to make themselves the central component of global capitalism.

China is leagues ahead of any of those in the West

Bet China didn't count on steak salesman with a grudge coming into White House.

>Debate
>Debate
>Debate

It won't be much of a debate. The format is known. It will be closer to two separate lectures/talks with a somewhat common theme.
I just don't want people to get their hopes up.

so you are telling me Zizek wont make Peterson cry?

Wrong, stop spreading misinformation. It’s wellknown that this is false.

Orange man's policies are too little too late

Attached: 1549040993987.png (472x555, 482K)

nah, it’s gonna be more like a summary execution

Last thread

No, Zizek is scared to go at it raw.

youtube.com/watch?v=MTtwrqtBI00
Around 13 minutes in, faggot.

Was “she” cause it looked to me like “she” was axing like the authoritarian communist straw man that lives in /pol/‘s imagination.

>Zizek deconstructs what happiness is
>Peterson doesn't get it and talks about Gulag Archipelago
>Zizek talks about how US is just as bad, how these kinds of comparisons are ideological
>Peterson doesn't get it and talks about Cultural Marxism
>Zizek calls Peterson out for pocketing the money
>Peterson doesn't get it and talks about Lobsters

Attached: Beckman.jpg (635x800, 116K)

You know it

Attached: index.jpg (223x226, 7K)

Thats because they were coming at her with, she was just responding to all comers not really laying out an argument kind of embarassing honestly, wish we’d impressed her, if it was her

He knows too much

Well why dont more marxists take the ZUCCpill

Attached: dgege.png (747x592, 481K)

sorry, *thats what they were coming at her with

>Marx is Hari Seldon
>Trump is the Mule

>China is still socialist. Muh stages!
This is one of my favorite post-USSR copes by communists.

>wanting to impress Alexandris Occasional-Cortex
yikes, try to keep it in your pants, incel

U.S. going at China, in a real-talk manner, would mean U.S. going at Chinese banking sector and their currency - so it is true that what U.S. is doing is too little if the goal is to cripple China's competition and economy - for now. Going at China this way would cause a lot of damage on U.S. too. Or maybe it is true that Orange just wants reciprocal trade and is fine with more-multipolar-than-not world in his first presidency.

To me, when I listen to people like Pompeo or what other officials in U.S. admin speak about China greater than Soviet threat, it just reads to me as psychosis. They genuinely believe countries that trade with China were coerced to it. I guess, China being the alternative to U.S. and the major blackspot in liberal globohomo is very annoying to U.S.

Attached: 1535707638606.png (595x698, 303K)

I'm feeling bad for redditson already

This. Youtube will almost certainly get shut down.

Attached: Shut_It_Down.webm (272x480, 1.06M)

What makes you guys think it was AOC? That's stupid

What is the general topic of the debate anyway? I don't think they are hugely different in some aspects.

AOC only posts on /pol/, she's the one making the bleached threads

Most of that was due to disease and was unintentional.

Please don't post pictures like that even in jest, it physically hurts to read

Happiness - capitalism vs Marxism

Stupid as fuck.

Top10 Upcoming Anime Fights

If youre familiar with her twitter or style of speaking it was dead, which got me thinking. Then someone dissed AOC and she took it way too personally. Then someone asked her if she was from NYC and she ignored it. There’s a Chapo thread up and she’s young and loves literature, plus the appeal of anonymity when you’re a public figure. Im sure shes a commie but she has to act like shes not and its not like she can debate commie points as herself. And the fact that she was far and away the smartest person in the thread. Just a lot of little things that add up to a gut certainty. Once ppl started talkimg about her as aoc she ghosted.

THE DAMN NEO MARXIST HACKERS SILENCING FREEDOM OF SPEECH

*dead on

>The goys don't suspect a thing

BASED
youtu.be/Zrsypgnpwl8

trikekrt

Attached: 1528338375373.webm (640x640, 2.07M)

China IS a bigger threat to the US than the USSR. They have 4x the population and are far more competent. China will rule the world in short-enough order, thankfully. Im not a Communist, but the US is so bad that anything would be an improvement.

The only reason the cold war was even as close as it was was the armies of Soviet sympathizers in the US and other Western governments who passed basically everything they could to Russia especially before 1968.

You forgot that she implied several times that she was high up in DSA and at one point called herself the next Lenin.

“She” seemed to openly admit it that those were her goals. I’ve always felt that socdems were just a Trojan horse for revolutionary communism, so I wouldn’t be surprised, but something about this person seemed more like a caricature than anything else.

>If youre familiar with her twitter or style of speaking
Those people all sound exactly the same though

Also she was not far and away the smartest person and the amount of dickriding for you to say that is embarrassing

t. butthurt /pol/tard who got btfo by aoc lmao

huh? Like last peterson zizek thread or what?

She made zero points that weren't refuted. Also argue for yourself instead of cheerleading some user, it's just sad

His trade war only provides the opportunity to prove that their production, rather than western consumption, is truly the central component of the whole system. The only chance the west has of overcoming China is to abandon capitalism, but the only people interested in doing that are those who want to see the west destroyed.

>something about this person seemed more like a caricature than anything else.It's literally just typical Mesitzo behavior. That's how they are.

Just browsing through the thread, she mentions something about how socialism has always been perverted by power hungry individuals. Which I don't disagree with, but that isn't a novel or clever thing to say.

This is Yea Forums geniuses, some neckbeard probably purposefully left out crumbs so he can get some yous.

Yeah kind of hard to follow cause others jumped in but start here and you can kind of tell when its her

I was merely contrasting China's status as perceived by other countries as alternative to U.S. triggering U.S. psychosis about existential-threat-to-US. They basically do business, they haven't tried to escalate the military games like USSR did (Cuban missile crisis for example) or NATO (Able Archer '83)

To me the way China as alternative-to-US registers as existential threat to U.S. in U.S. administration speaks more about the absolute sorry ass state of U.S. than it does about China's existential-threat-potential. Competition is good, competition keeps you on the edge, U.S. globohomo needs it to stay sharp.

youtu.be/1Q46AoR80M4 from the earlier thread

What is this AOC shit people are spreging about?

It’s not like her points were wildly mindblowing, she was just very solid and clearly the most educated on the subject and best at rhetoric. Just like youd expect from a politician. Shes no genius esotericist but good luck knocking her off in a debate

That last paragraph makes me cringe holy shit

Tell me how do you 'overcome capitalism' and what happens next? is China socialist, capitalist or what according to you?

Attached: 1539774341915.jpg (720x472, 28K)

kek

You that sure it was AOC, because they behaved like someone who was a lot less smart than they thought they were kinda like your average i/lit/erate
>not really laying out an argument kind of embarassing honestly,
A two year tour of duty on /pol/ will fix that, they'd have been eaten alive on there, I know I was going easy on them out of respect for the local board culture
Why do you say that, I mean if I understand your underlying point correctly the BEZOSpill would have worked better

No it's not, retard. The point of this debate is to expose a wider audience to your ideas. It doesn't matter if you win or lose. What matters is that they heard something they hadn't before. You don't have to win. You don't even have to be superior. You just have to be competent enough that five people in the audience -- who'd never heard of anticapitalism or Jung before -- go home and Google it after the debate.

Attached: bill waterson.jpg (1024x722, 173K)

It seems unlikely. People are claiming AOC was in the last thread but I don't think it is her. The poster was using slurs like "retard" and shit. I know if AOC did use slurs she obviously would never do it in public, but it genuinely doesn't seem like her style.

Imagine:

Zizek at his peak (circa 2008) vs. Pee-peerson

One can only dream.

Attached: ziz.png (720x457, 331K)

That wasnt her. There were a couple other more aggressive commies and others trolling. Only pay attention to the AOCsounding posts and you’ll see it.

Memerson about to be BTFO

Attached: C6EB350C-05AC-4C3E-8230-D2A6B9A665B0.jpg (640x711, 70K)

She was literally repeating the same marxist talking points that every single lit thread has when this debate comes up. Jesus christ if you're this starstruck by a fucking larping user I cant imagine how you act around actual celebrities

/pol/'s insistence they debated AOC might be the prime example of group sexual delusion within the past 20 years

Attached: oc30.jpg (800x523, 43K)

Im just saying my opinion man, you seem to have skin in the Matter

the only person saying it's AOC is this fanboy probably chapofaggot

It was her. If you were in the thread at the time it all unraveled too perfectly for it not be. Looking back at it now it’s easier to be skeptical, but there were building suspicions and then when someone named her she was gone

Imagine being this delusional. Imagine actually thinking that "exposing your ideas to a wider audience" while behaving like a fragile crybaby will be beneficial to your cause. Imagine bending over backwards this much to defend memerson.

imagine thinking there's anything in 'debate' other than road to communism

...or, user figured out that people thought he was AOC, decided to play along, and then took his out at exactly the right time. I remember when Yea Forums seriously thought Taylor Swift was a Yea Forumstard. Come on. Don't be that gullible user

Attached: oc2.jpg (1110x740, 88K)

Greetings from /pol/ remember kids, all federal burger politics is about is just holywood for ugly people
Nothing more

>or, user figured out that people thought he was AOC, decided to play along, and then took his out at exactly the right time.
Ever heard of occams razor? It sounds just like her from the start. It doesnt change to sound more like her as we went along
I’m not saying it was definitely her but if I had to bet my house, I’d bet it was.

I don't really see anything being debated though. That user was just proposing a modern soviet style revolution today. This seems like a conspiracy to me, truly in line with the spirit of pol. AOC is a commie revolutionary, Notre Dame was caused by muslims, Tarrant was mossad. You guys are too paranoid

>holywood for ugly people
did you come up with this? extremely accurate

So she really is stupid like /pol/ said
The saddest words...

Who are you rooting for, Mr /pol/?

here's the thing user. peterson's ideas are demonstrably flimsy. he just repackages watered down jungian psych with standard right wing talking points. Despite being a total psued, he's now one of the most visible public intellectuals. Why? Why, if he's so self-evidently full of shit, do people listen? Because people assume someone else has done the thinking for them. It genuinely does not matter if Peterson is a charlatan, as long as he's able to spew diarrhea into a thousand new minds. Do you think those thousand people will be responsible and filter everything that swims into their ken? (Shit, user, do you do that? You don't. Don't answer yes.) Of course not. They'll see a severe, well-dressed man with a doctorate degree who's taught at Harvard and delivered talks at Oxford debate another "public intellectual" and just assume he has something worth saying. And that's all you need.
You're not immune to propaganda, user. No one is.

Attached: garfield sayz.jpg (640x466, 29K)

Trying to convince yourself that it was AOC is more complex than some larping faggot lmao.

this is retarded it's way more likely that it was a larper than it was actually AOC who took time out of her day to debate /pol/tards for no fucking reason, jesus you people are faggots

Zizek he's more redpilled

>Anti-ideology ideology
>Interesting
>Why are you

I remember being sixteen

Is it really so far fetched that the Time cover 29 yo far left socialist has Lenin aspirations and indulges in anonymity on Yea Forums, and, naturally, on the board she’d most likely visit? Im not saying its her like these others but it does read like her and I wouldn’t be surprised. Anonymity would have a huge appeal to someone in her shoes.

>/pol/'s insistence they debated AOC
I'm sorry what? When did this happen? Why are anons getting stupider by the year?

So what's the point of watching this?

They weren’t larping as AOC. If you were actually in the thread you would know she came out the gate as a frothing communist, then when ppl started catching on she understandably ghosted. If someone were larping AOC they wouldn’t have been that extreme.

Imagine not having an ideology in the year 2019.

Attached: 1435300471846.png (180x180, 58K)

Once again 'pol' ie. the people debating her, never said it was her, we said repeatedly that it's just some girl. It is this one faggot who is daydreaming that his mommy celebrity came on his favorite forum and debated the poltards

>Is it really so far fetched that the Time cover 29 yo far left socialist has Lenin aspirations and indulges in anonymity on Yea Forums, and, naturally, on the board she’d most likely visit?
>indulges in anonymity on Yea Forums
How would you even know this?

MEMES SON

Attached: 1536697003026.png (673x673, 760K)

Last thread. Dont judge too quick, it just might have been her. Shes a literature fanatic and there are a lot of commie threads up.

>Dont judge too quick, it just might have been her.
Are you honestly brain-damaged?

Sure you can believe if that's what you wished were true, but it doesn't read like her at all. The paranoia that she is a lenin style far left revolutionary in secret is a pol conspiracy theory.

I’m not saying I know dummy, I’m saying would it be so far fetched if she did.
This is why she wiped the floor with everyone.

see

Attached: zizek.jpg (200x256, 15K)

You have no idea how politics works if you take her at face value, let alone revolutions.

I convince him to explore Peterson’s ideology more deeply: “Peterson’s big authority is Dostoevsky: if God doesn’t exist, then everything is permitted. But Jacques Lacan would say no, if God doesn’t exist, everything is prohibited. For believers, everything is permitted as you claim your activity is grounded in divine will.”

“My basic problem with Peterson is his term ‘postmodern neo-Marxism’, which is a very strange construct. Firstly, Marxism is in itself a modernist project. When postmodernism exploded in the 1980s, its main target was precisely this Marxist narrative, so it’s crazy to bring these terms together.”

independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/slavoj-zizek-interview-trump-brexit-metoo-jordan-peterson-debate-a8866516.html

Attached: apu gitar.jpg (1200x691, 81K)

How?

It’s well known that DSA is a trojan horse. It’s an open secret. Look it up, she’s been their pet project from the start.

get off it you crazy fuck before you start talking about concentration camp smokestacks

The post modern neo Marxist appropriation of thought into well defined lanes characterised by a common group mentality is quite visible on this site. I can see some people become quite paranoid at even the slightest hints, forming conspiracy theories from kernels of truth. In honesty, it is a reflection of their neuroses, projecting their confusion and trying to explain them away in simplistic fashions.

I'm looking forward to debating Ziz- I mean watching the debate. Jordan Peterson is a cool guy btw kids

lol you’re willfully dumb, im not the only one who realized it was her, it was a mass O shit moment

>it was a mass O shit moment
fucking retarded zoomer

Damn dat is Peterson innit

I wish I could bone her it

My guy if you genuinely believe that DSA is a trojan horse for marxist-leninists, you've never come within a hundred feet of a DSA meeting

I've seen this a lot from posters as well. How Peterson would destroy Zizek's postmodernism when he really isn't a postmodernist.

Why are all you fucks talking about another thread and not linking to it?

please get AOC's dick out of your mouth, user, this is too much

Yeah the biggest oh shit moment for me in that thread was not when I realized 1) it was aoc but rather 2) she had mentioned that DSA and Antifa were coordinating, she had previously noted that they took out Goldy, then clarified “not me personally, royal we” or whatever.
That means DSA has got hittas in these streets son. Imagine AOC doing like a mob boss, she sees Goldy always nagging her on twitter, sends the squad out, contacts facebook etc
Mad shit

>It’s well known that DSA is a trojan horse.
yes, it's full of cops trying to detect any actual leftist action, no different than the shit they were doing in the 1960s and 1970s. But DSA is so neckbeard and chapo-poisoned they don't actually do anything leftist anyway

This is why the left views the right as mouth breathing morons. Post modernism and cultural Marxism were not the same thing. They were two competing philosophies.

this post is the most embarrassing thing I have ever seen on the website that spawned r9k

The Right tends to view the Left as being morons for thinking that peterson is right wing

that guy is dumb af but there are definitely tankies in the DSA. Depends on the chapter though I guess. They're overwhelmingly authentic socialists though from my experience, but not many in the chapter near me actually read the socialist canon. Their reading group was mostly shit published in the last ~40 years, often oriented around American politics specifically and a lot of stuff about social justice in an American historical context.

Yeah I’m sure. we get it, you’re still assmad that AOC smoked you, stop being passive aggressive all over the thread. The rest of us are trying to have a discussion

...do you actually believe that antifa is some kind of coordinated lefty terrorist network, and not a bunch of larping bluehaired fat faggots who say "folks" and "yall" way too much? Jesus Christ and I say this as an antifascist

Attached: Antifalogo.svg_.png (2000x2000, 249K)

>someone advocated communism on Yea Forums
>it seemed like they knew a little bit about what they were talking about
>therefore it must be AOC
>muh hot brown meme goddess
Alright Yea Forums you're officially too stupid for me to waste my time here funposting with you anymore. I'm gone forever.

>That means DSA has got hittas in these streets son.
DSA has over 60,000 members (many of whom are secretly cops) and NYC is the biggest chapter. If people wanted to do some hardcore leftist action the DSA is the last place they'd do it. There are thousands of tinier actual leftist groups that don't cater to normies that are doing the antifa shit on the DL.
DSA consists entirely of Medicare-for-All, phonebanking, standing in picket lines and arguing internally about wheelchair accessibility

There are mad tankies in DSA, the fuck are you talking about? The majority of Antifa are tankies and the majority of Antifa are in DSA.

Peterson sucks but its really gay that Zizeks fanboys are so easily swindled

No you're a delusional fucking retard

NYC being the biggest chapter only strengthens the link to AOC.

>“not me personally, royal we”
royal we literally means "me personally", what an absolute fucking dumbass
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we

>being controlled by dumb stories.
AN UNMATCHED INTELLECT

shit I thought you were being serious.

Attached: willie wonka.jpg (720x404, 35K)

>DSA has got hittas in these streets son
I wish I'd taken pre-contact HIV preventatives before reading this

I'm a DSA member, you faggot. DSA tries to operate as a Big Tent leftist group. That means that extremists aren't welcome. Tankies and the DSA don't get along. They disavow each other all the time. DSA tankies don't actually want a revolution, they're just edgy leftypol users who like to quote Lenin. You don't know what you're talking about.

What’s your problem retard? I’ve said nothing but common sense, the fact that you’d quibble over this elementary shit lmao this board is embarassing. Do you want stats that prove that Antifa is commie? Are you serious?

>“not me personally, royal we”
That's a symptom of narcissism son
This is why I'm looking forward to this debate, how will juden petersen defend it to sniff twitch man's face
It's a really old saying, grognards used to tell it to young bucks who were getting caught up in a campaign's hype

China is a sluggish and inefficient country

>majority of antifa are tankies
Holy shit what a retard

Attached: man laugh.jpg (500x334, 52K)

he hates women and social democracy and loves capitalism, he's definitely center-right. There's more to left-right than just hating Jews or not

kek

Attached: mein_kek.jpg (228x309, 15K)

Why would I or any normal person give a shit about the infighting of mentally ill college freshmen who think talking like a black person on twitter is political discourse?

Don't worry user, it's just a few poltards. I don't know why AOC is being discussed on the literature board anyways. She has never publicity made a statement which is similar to that anons posts.

>he hates women
lmao

Any organized movement in america that is a threat to the capitalist status quo is most likely crawling with feds.

The lone wolves are the ones the goverment really has to watch out for

Yeah we got your retarded and incorrect take the first time picposter stop samefagging

What if instead of Jordan Peterson, it was Jerkin Peter’sson and he was a child molester

Attached: 32360EDA-3B8C-4AAD-8C6B-9698E7633629.jpg (220x220, 18K)

Jesus...hes gonna regret that form

>AOC
>Smartest person
Here’s how you know it wasn’t her dumb dumb

Because in a few months they've dragged the overton window further left than the Democratic Party has in the past eight years

>, it's just a few poltards
It literally isn't pol saying its aoc

damn smug anne frank is a qt

My irking about Peterson is his picking and choosing of right wing positions.

How can someone believe in capitalism/free markets but also support government healthcare (like juden supports). Makes no sense and shows Canadians aren’t exposed to enough minorities to know their destructive powers.

Attached: 4L_Tfdssyx4.jpg (1182x1800, 285K)

Isn't Zizek an Idealist? How does he fit Communism which is usually materialist under that?

You don’t know why because you just got here and you’re weighing in on a past thread that you haven’t even read through. Which is why you’ve incorrectly assumed the user was *trying* to sound like AOC. It was AOC going full communist and getting found out. It wasn’t an AOC larp.
And before you make another mistake that’s already been addressed in numerous threads, no, not every communist in the thread is her. There are many.

Not even that user, you're just being a retard. antifa is mostly made of anarchists

thanks stav

who /authoritariansocdem/ here?

Attached: 083E3A7C-4472-454F-A435-41F556B7241C.jpg (250x325, 19K)

What can one person do?

She’s definitely way more knowledgable about politics than any of us here. It’s easy to preen yourself and act like it’s not the case but when she actually dropped in you all looked like kindergartners. She was trying to debate communism and had to keep defining fucking fascism like this is high school.

my thoughts desu

Because Peterson isn't a political thinker. He's a conservative moralist larping as a political commentator. JBP is a secular preacher at heart who gestures towards the right because of Muh Religion

Attached: jbp.jpg (555x474, 46K)

Yeah, and this guy is actually peterson

>She’s definitely way more knowledgable about politics than any of us here
youre such a bootlicking little faggot

post a link to the fucking thread you assholes

But he is reintroducing these ideas with a modern interpretation, which keeps them fresh

Never say you're too young or too insignificant to change the world, user. Oswald was only 24.

Attached: extremistmilitary.jpg (621x414, 40K)

He’s more than slightly hamfisted and not at all comparable to the AOC situation, retard.
One reads like someone trying to get found out for yous, the other reads like AOC shooting the shit and going full commie and getting found out because of an incidental question about NYC and ghosting

Schizophrenic tranny: What's the purpose of spamming in multiple threads that AOC just visited Yea Forums and owned le fash chuds?
Do "real leftists" actually look up to her as a cool and edgy figure now? Because if so fucking hell nigga lmaoooooooooooooo

>It was AOC
there is no evidence for this just retards larping and meming

I prefer the canuck conman’s religion to the leftist religion of puling and managerial servitude

So never? Sam Harris absolutely shit on him multiple times

>no evidence
Wow you don’t say, would you like a fucking confirmation tweet dipshit?

Kek nice try bud

The fuck are you talking about dude

Last thread, start here I think

>There’s a Chapo thread up and she’s young and loves literature
there's no way in hell she likes Chapo. she cancelled on this Julia Salazar fundraiser in August when she realized they would be there. They've had Salazar and Cynthia Nixon on but AOC's had no contact with those guys at all
imgur.com/98eT652

>implying that servitude is leftist religion

Attached: stirner.jpg (1200x675, 120K)

He’s all over the place and unprincipled. He picks n chooses parts from every philosophy.

Preaches Capitalism
>wants huge government control over major sectors

Likes Christianity
>except the whole believing in Jesus thing

right wing politics
>blasts all ethnic identity politics WHILE being redpilled >on the race & IQ question...

He’s inconsistent as hell.

She probably listens to them (or likes them) but it'd be bad for her to associate with them. They're too edgy for her brand

I’m now convinced you are the AOC larper. No one would suck an imaginary dick this hard otherwise

No that’s not it bro, she starts chiming in here, you can tell by much better she writes than everyone

>had to keep defining fucking fascism like this is high school.
Their definition of fascism was sophomoric kid, Umberto Eco on ur-fascism isn't the end of discussion
The conversation might have gone somewhere interesting if they'd been willing to engage on the topic

the leftist religion is social justice

Here ignore other user

>authoritatively
Kek’d hard, you think this is good writing?
Her points are considered platitudes in the right wing and her info is slightly off.

>ideologies are always based on the perceptions and ideas of another person, never of the individual
Embarassing.

Attached: 1500673408120.png (493x276, 34K)

it's AOC you idiot

Attached: pagliacci_dab.gif (757x615, 190K)

Y are u still here
Be mad elsewhere
We get it
Ur mad
Its not aoc
Very compelling and very cool
Now go like u swore u would when u were very mad

Sure, go ahead kid
Caring that much about punctuation on an ephemeral forum actually suggests psychopathy

No, the real AOC would say
>ummmm can I get a *yikes*??? good thing y'all dusty old white men are on ur way out like wired headphones (fingernail emoji)
>257.6k retweet 1.3m like

Wow he doesn’t want pure capitalism you rly showed him

>here's the thing user. peterson's ideas are demonstrably flimsy
Can you demonstrate that?

imagine being this retarded

Attached: Your_opinion.jpg (394x403, 108K)

... authoritatively is a word.

Honestly I feel bad for anyone who isn’t rich already. Imagine having your future decided by corporate masters and illiterate third world peasants

are you a homo spic

And it doesn’t mean authoritarian

it's already the biggest ecomony in the world by far when adjusted for PPP

>unprincipled
Nietzsche blasted the idea of a unified system of thought a hundred years ago. He's not inconsistent but his placement on each axis is much more subtle (as is the case for anyone who can think) than dogmatists. its a matter of degree largely based on the persons inherent value hierarchy

What about PPP/capita ;)

can't argue with that

Attached: zizek_john_deere.png (964x898, 2.49M)

That’s unimpressive when you’ve got 1.3 billion people working like ants.

I had been reading Jung for a couple years and I was loving it. His ideas were helping my personal life and they gave perspective to current events. Then Jordan Peterson blew up, and now everyone just thinks I'm a Peterson worshipping incel because I'm a jungian. Oh well.

It doesnt have to precisely
>in an official capacity or with official sanction, and therefore requiring compliance or obedience.
she used it accurately

What are gibbering on about? Once you’re here you’re here forever.

I could forgive the others, but not the “free market but wants government control over healthcare” one. He’s never really pondered the inefficiencies or seen the data/adverse effects of it.

>Caring that much about punctuation on an ephemeral forum actually suggests psychopathy
Or newfaggotry and AOCery

Oh,I see. Fascism is when something occurs in an official capacity, she didn’t mean authoritarian at all

Is /ourguy/ still strokemode?

Attached: 2EBDF891-A962-42E7-8727-60C986B1733A.png (281x288, 372K)

I think his face has regained full functionality

>you're either a major capitalist with a dog-eat-dog mentality or you're a communist cuck with no sense of individuality
>you're either a nazi or a SJW that thinks race is a social construct
The guy's been on the public sphere for 4 years now and you people still manage to miss the point and misrepresent his major talking points despite the fact that he couldn't be clearer about his positions even if he tried. Isn't Yea Forums supposed to be one of the smartest boards on this site? How is it so hard to understand him while at the same time assuming you're above the things he says?

Attached: 1495498708805.jpg (300x364, 14K)

shes saying the president “expunging” other races by means of his office of authority, or “authoritatively”, is fascism. it doesnt have to apply specifically to an authoritarian

Engage kid There's a return of the repressed to take into account here cf. universals

>shes saying the president “expunging” other races by means of his office of authority, or “authoritatively”, is fascism.
And how else would the President do it? Without his official authority? Really it's just bad writing.

Cultural marxism would never exist without postmodernism. Postmodernism claims to be a critique of marxism and preestabilished ideologies in general but in reality it's just another avenue for marxism indoctrination, only with a different facade.

it would indeed have been redundant for her to say “president authoritatively expunging”, but she didn’t mention a president. the president was implied by the use of “authoritatively”.

You guys are missing the point that that's not even what Fascism is, and she has no idea what it is, and thinks it means 'genociding minorities'

"authoritatively close down the borders"
how else would they be cloes? it's clear as day whoever it was thought the word authoritative would lend the sense of "authoritarian," otherwise it's just saying that closing the borders is fascism

Keep telling yourself that.

But having such major differentiating positions makes very little sense.
How can he argue the free market is great because it gives people freedom to produce and purchase which leads to innovation and cheap goods in laptops, TVs, dentistry (in America), jeans, etc but thinks the government would be more efficient for the massively insane undertaking of healthcare? This isn’t a small detail like “a bit more regulation for drug makers”, this is around 15-20% of a countries entire damn economy!

Regarding the racial question, maybe he realizes that’s a subject even he can’t touch upon. I’ve seen numerous videos of him discussing the differences of IQ by race and yet he’s never called for limited immigration from low IQ countries or a IQ test for citizenship (unless I haven’t seen them).

Will youtube shutdown the stream?

how would you define it? she called it “hypernationalism with a concern for race” which basically matches my googled definition

based
thanks bro

fascism is when you don't let yourself get outvoted by third world scab labor

she didn’t say “authoritatively close down the borders”dude what are you trying to do here lmao, she said authoritatively expunging other races is fascism, theres nothing wrong with that

because in the first place japan would be fascist under her shitty definition

from watching peterson's q+a yesterday it seems clear that he's gonna attack the fundamental Marxist claims that i think zizek will not attempt to defend but will counter with NEOCHINA . he'll probably accept that a fully communist state is only viable after acceleration but will point to china as the hybrid the west needs to adopt.

That's incoherent son, postmodernism rejects grand narratives and tells, where Marxism posits a telos towards post scarcity full communism
Peterson does it better when he posits cultural marxism as something similar to the notion that western atheism is cultural christianity

>she said authoritatively expunging other races i
As opposed to unauthoritatively doing so, got it

>misrepresent his major talking points
Peterson inches towards the right, someone calls him on it, he squeals THAT'S NOT WHAT I MEANT and then when no one's looking he says more right-wing shit

the element of mass “expunging other races” already in the country doesnt fit japan though
im not doing a good job of paraphrasing her, she seemed like she had a handle on it tho

s/tells/telos

Grouped according to their several interests, individuals form classes; they form trade-unions when organized according to their several economic activities; but first and foremost they form the State, which is no mere matter of numbers, the suns of the individuals forming the majority. Fascism is therefore opposed to that form of democracy which equates a nation to the majority, lowering it to the level of the largest number (17); but it is the purest form of democracy if the nation be considered as it should be from the point of view of quality rather than quantity, as an idea, the mightiest because the most ethical, the most coherent, the truest, expressing itself in a people as the conscience and will of the few, if not, indeed, of one, and ending to express itself in the conscience and the will of the mass, of the whole group ethnically molded by natural and historical conditions into a nation, advancing, as one conscience and one will, along the self same line of development and spiritual formation (18). Not a race, nor a geographically defined region, but a people, historically perpetuating itself; a multitude unified by an idea and imbued with the will to live, the will to power, self-consciousness, personality (19).
In so far as it is embodied in a State, this higher personality becomes a nation. It is not the nation which generates the State; that is an antiquated naturalistic concept which afforded a basis for XIXth century publicity in favor of national governments. Rather is it the State which creates the nation, conferring volition and therefore real life on a people made aware of their moral unity.

worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm

think about it

Attached: hitler.jpg (615x409, 40K)

>googled definition
I'm not even right wing but if you read the Doctrine of Fascism it has nothing to do with race. The racial superiority was a Nazi thing, not fascism in general. I personally think the better way to look at it is having an outgroup or enemy rather than something necssarily racial (although the Nazi's proved the out group/enemy could easily be a race)

correct. itd be possible to bribe them to go to elsewhere for instance. shes saying specifically just removing them, which requires authority

>post Rhodesian Zimbabwe was fascist

>correct. itd be possible to bribe them to go to elsewhere for instance
fucking kek

im not talking about the practicality retard, im talking about the reason she used the word, which was for clarity. if she hadnt that might have been brought up as an option.

>, im talking about the reason she used the word
to rule out something nobody ever thinks of or proposes, right
authoritatively is almost never used in that context, she thought it suggested an authoritarian power

i read that as a list of your acceptable pronouns
was this the intended joke please confirm/deny

Ok thx

>Using a Google definition to understand the meaning of something
Try dwelling a little more faggot and perhaps the clearing will allow the true meaning to appear

Substitute "tells" with "telos"
But sure you may now refer to me with those pronouns if you want

based Heidegger user

How do I become a Zizek groupie? Will he take me back to his hotel room?

>to rule out something nobody ever thinks of or proposes, right
richard spencer and other people in the altright bring it up all the time, you have no idea what youre talking about. even if they didnt, which they do, that was the reason she used it. to mean forcefully expunging other races from an office of authority. in a word, authoritatively. you’re just wrong dude, move on

>she thought it suggested an authoritarian power
There would be better methods to do that if she really wanted to though

did you just claim Spencer isn't a nazi?

bring some *sniff*

literally what.

>. to mean forcefully expunging other races from an office of authority.
right, instead of forcefully expunging them otherwise lmao
>spencer
pretty sure he wants the government to pay them, which would be authoritative

He literally isn't. His overlap with the Nazi party line is like 18% at most.

Peterson backs out when people conflate him with the alt-right and extreme right. He never had a problem calling himself a conservative.

Remember this definition was put forward as a way of justifying beating up some little old lady, not spencer

i see
speaking of telos would it be correct to characterize existential nihilism, or absurdism, as being essentially the result of the tension between people's inherent tendency to ascribe teleology to nature, and the failure to do so?

peterson: marxism is like, holy cow man! the 6 million russians in those evil evil camps! it's like, how can you expect to go on unless you arbitrary set goals for yourself? and that's freedom of thought, and that's capitalism.

zizek: ok sho, i want ferst to address some little tidbit you said inshted of your main point, becaush it linksh up with an anecdotal talking point i have ushed again and again and sho on and there ish a joke i can tell with eet ethshetra shetra but more to the point! the hishtorical ashepcts of soviet communionism do not. represhent. the ideology. or critique. of. capital. and so on.

no they think authoritative means cooersive and since Spencer isn't cooersive he's not a Nazi. this is possibly the most toxic definition of facism ever created

This is going to be painful to watch

>muh postmodern neo-Marxism
postmodernism: US as Marxism-Leninism:USSR

golly gee bucko i just think that uh the current system is just fine be an individual and work under bourgeois managerialism itll be just fine clean ur room and improve yourself cuz real change is not. a path. you want. to go down.

zhee theeng ish moi problehm withsch dish idea of shanging thingsh is zhat change itshelf ish zhee shtandard idea, it ish almosht part of the conshstant shtruggle of shocietyee vish itshelf and therefore not violent enuff. eef vee want to shange thingsh vee should leave them ash they are.

>I'm a white nationalist who wants a homeland for his aryan brothers
>of course I love Hitler, why wouldn't you?
>Heil Trump! Heil victory!

>toxic
kek
pls tell me more about how the Real Revolution (tm) requires drowning the working class in third world scab labor and reducing them to political impotence

>only make vague normative claims
>whenever someone tries to rebut his position he immediately scurries back and goes full lobster and shouts how that's now what he meant while still refusing to make descriptive claim
>something about lobsters

Yeah that does sound like it could work
How would you square that with existential dread as the fear of acting due to action foreclosing other possibilities though?

Doesn't contradict anything I said. Also please point me to the exact place he says that he loves Hitler.

and sho on and sho on

he's so easy to refute it astound me that you people have to result to straw men. maybe you don't really hate him and are intimated by him

>t. never read Marx
it's neoliberalism and capitalist logic promoting and fostering large scale immigration you literal mong. the Soviets and Chinese had some of the strictest immigration/emmigration policies you could ever imagine

>She was blowing people apart

>it's neoliberalism and capitalist logic promoting and fostering large scale immigration you literal mong
No shit, and clowns like you are their useful idiots.
>the Chinese are leftist in any meaningful sense
lol

That's the point. Postmodernism is extremely hypocritical because it uses the veil of neutrality to push marxist talking points. The only reason we have people unironically claiming that race is a social construct and that traps are real women is because postmodernism paved the way for this excessive deconstruction of societal norms while giving a slight nudge for the acceptance of identity politics, which are deconstructive in nature.

goepilled?

>he think communism skews left historically
okay so your 15, good to know

Impress us with your 600 iq take then user. Jerking off about how smart you are and how dumb everyone is. Though since you're such a staggering intellectual you probably know this already.
Also who said I was trying to refute him?

Marxist talking points are talking about capitalism and class. "Postmodernists" do not, they like to talk about other things while pretending to be anti-capitalists.

is there a form of communism but w/o dirty minorities and Jewish subversion?

Neomarxist, then.

>jerking off about how smart you are and how dumb everyone is makes you just look like empty blowhard.
Proofreading helps too I guess. Inb4 trying to weasel out of by trying to pivot to me being esl or something.

there are communist parties in Europe like that

Attached: zizek_sex.jpg (600x300, 48K)

you no Zizek is persona non-grata of the progressive left for his stance on immigration, right? you sound like the only leftists you have engaged with intellectually are SJW cringe compilations

>Impress us with your 600 iq take then user.
what doe that have to do with no misrepresenting jordan peterson lol
i think of anything promotive of public power as radical rather than reactionary or whatever

Based historical relativist.

youre flat wrong and mad about it, you clearly have an overinflated ego about writing and are having trouble swallowing that you made an error. Im not saying this to insult you, im stating whats clearly the case, if i wanted to be less generous i could. you thought that she used it to mean specifically authoritarian, she didnt. she used it to mean an office of authority doing something, which as an adverb would be, guess what, authoritatively. the fact that authoritarian shares the root word and the authoritative act by the office of authority is also authoritarian is incidental. youve conceded that authoritatively is correct in context but assert that she only used it because she thought it meant authoritarian. you have no way to know that. all that we know is that she used it accurately.this is as thorough as i can be. If u still dont get it i dont give a fuck. you do you.

“Her” definition amounted to nothing more than “the set political ideologies we can justifiably use violence against.” Half of “her” posts were just bragging about how the left’s control of institutions made them unstoppable. It more like a /pol/tard’s fever dream than an actual attempt at debating communism or whatever you think was occurring.

>you no Zizek is persona non-grata of the progressive left for his stance on immigration, right?
who's talking about zizek? and anyway, even he is pretty weak on this issue, he just makes the obvious point that unlimited immigration is a disaster and that you can't import a revolutionary class
>you sound like the only leftists you have engaged with
i am a leftist

Regardless what you think of the two this event is too much of a meme to pass up.

Attached: 1498211671672.jpg (593x447, 100K)

>Claim he's so easy to refute user doesn't understand why Yea Forums brainlets 'cant refute him'
>Won't provide evidence on his own refutation of Peterson
>Make claim you won't back up or provide proof for
:thinking:

Something is either Marxist or it isn't. Marxism isn't a belief system, it's a theory about class.

lol

S M O K E D

Attached: CEEEF1F7-AFC9-4ED7-8759-E7427FDE5731.jpg (1440x907, 49K)

>Spencer thinks he's a Nazi
Doesn't mean he is a real Nazi, Hitler would have sent any of these pseuds who call themselves neo-Nazis to the concentration camp

Attached: okayToBeABrainlet.jpg (930x728, 46K)

What part of "workers of the WORLD, unite!" do you not understand?

Bumplock hit move to

You want me to refute the proposition that the current system is the best possible, or least detrimental, one? Seems pretty self-evidently false to me

>the USSR was leftist
>Mao's China was leftist
>Pol Pot's Cambodia was leftist
>Kim Il Sung's Korea was leftist
>Castro's Cuba was leftist
>North Vietnam was leftist

Attached: 1461802741762.jpg (500x322, 16K)

thats how i felt typing it

>he's a frogposter

Attached: 1534536181116.jpg (960x960, 43K)

>i am a leftist
so you think the left should be stooges for neoliberalism? what the fuck is wrong with you user

in my view people who experience existential nihilism are ones who had a structured way of thinking during childhood but were forced to abandon it due to skepticism, and existential dread is a symptom of that

So you can't. Got it. Thanks for the 77 iq take bud.

Are we really supposed to accept that Lacanian psychoanalysis, weird translations of Democritus and hegelian dialectics are essential to understand the current times?

>so you think the left should be stooges for neoliberalism
no, i think anyone who wants to bring in the third world is a neolib dupe and have no faith whatever in peoples who cannot even set up competent governments to contribute meaningfully to our cause

Yes, but the neomarxists did abandon their core, their traditional point of negation (and so affirmation, they assume the liberal stance of a middle, at least temporarily), hence the wide search for a replacement for the class struggle as historical determinant. But these new determinants are simply a product of capital, a second-order of class struggle, living within material as a dying aura, which paradoxically turns the critics into nothing more than the most critical economic liberals. They are simply diagnosing symptoms, acting as proletarians along the conveyor belts of information which self-resolves and devalorises any remaining vitality. All that is not uniform and saleable to the stamp-souled is plucked out before it can reach the machine - they are simply more picky about what gets packaged into the final box, what is allowed into the final uniforming process of the machine. This was largely because they became horrified at the sight of a particular form of capital and aligned with its seemingly benign, and temporary, opposition. The strategic blunders of the Spanish Civil War play out in marxist theory like the degradation of explosive powder in a flooded pillbox after a spring thaw. Whereas loyal marxists essentially became statisticians of what never was, attempting to revivify the powder for a storming of another Winter Palace.
It is no mistake that neomarxism and liberalism formed an alliance, nor that continued marxism, from within its degraded form, looks towards an ironic liberalism as the cure. Peterson and Adorno, for example, begin from the same fundamental question: how do we stop the ultimate enemy: the terror of fascism? And for all their seemingly explosive critiques, the neomarxist resolution is one of 'deepening alienation lmao' or 'dude just live in the contradiction it's as close as we're going to get lmao.' The left became the dominant academic form only insofar as it adopted liberal formalism - precisely to the extent that it manned the information processing centers with vigour it was welcomed as a temporary ally, as good Stakhanovites of the eternal counter-revolution.
Even value-form theory has been abandoned. This is seen clearly as hardened law within the Neue Marx-Lektüre, and ceremony by anyone who clings to the theory, although they don't really understand its meaning anyway. There is no real movement, all that remains is formal.

Attached: germain.jpg (721x960, 176K)

No one is bringing them over but the vast differences in environment and labour rights created by capitalism. Leftists can only decide if the process should be done humanely or channel it to improve both environments.

You're absolutely correct. We're not being overtaken by China, there isn't an opium crisis in US and Canada, we don't have emails proving the Sackler family expected massive deathtolls when lobbying for increased opium usage but did so regardless and became billionaires, we haven't spent the last 3 years peddling an insane conspiracy theory that a declining second rate power controls our gov't, we don't have trouble enforcing basic immigration law, and we certainly didn't have a much higher per capita rate of production under aristocracy

then you should be a communist

Yesh

>No one is bringing them over b
h1bs h2bs are imported scab labor
>channel it to improve both environments.
It doesn't imrpove both environments, it take from one and gives to the other (but mainly gives to large corporations)

Cultural marxism for the most part is a right wing invention. Marxism is a materialist philosophy, but at the same time Marx has influenced pretty much every thinker after him even those who absolutely hate him. That left wing idealists took a cultural turn has very little to do with what would actually be the "neo-marxist" position, which is represented by Zizek, Jodi Dean, Richard Wolff.

stalin was a centrist

Proof? The Frankfurt School, whatever you think of them, were a huge part of what became the postmodernist movement. They are essentially a microcosm of the postmodernist project (at least if we define it in a way similar to Peterson's non-hierarchical truth): the foundation of Marx's thought is abandoned for periphery ideas which are intended as a completion outside of the formula of truth, neither as supplement nor as heresy.
The great irony, what someone like Peterson could never get, is that liberalism was the original abandonment of truth. Its form denies its very possibility.

zenis

please dumb down this post

>he couldn't be clearer about his positions even if he tried.

Ahhh really? I have mixed feelings about this statement. Because i can't even clearly point at what Peterson is. He's all over the place. He talks about psychology, philosophy, economy, and so on. and yet I can't recall the time when he showed clear ideology in any of these fields. He only touches briefly on economy, on major talking points. He never comes up with a clear system we should follow, he's not an economist but why delve into the topic to such point? As far as philosophy goes he is also very unclear. He speaks about individualism and yet builds a strict framework of what to do to be fulfilled. There is also an idea of fulfillment and happiness. He sets the path for people but i never saw him explore base topics. Like why you should better yourself, what's the point of achieving all this objectives. It's all very surface level "fulfilled and happy" reasoning without deeper analysis of reality. He also delves into psychology(his field) and biology. Here i also have a few problems, he talks about his lobsters and natural mechanisms but again he never goes deeper into that, his unclear ideology urges to follow the natural cycle in some regards. But why follow it and not go against it? At the same time he often talks about following the greater goals, greater purpose. It go against primal naturalistic view of the world. Also there is an issue of "Postmodernism" and other things he go against....He never shows you a clear definition.

I see him as a influential speaker, closer to politician than to a philosopher....someone said preacher and i think that's a good definition. He's a modern preacher, he preaches vague ideology and emotions that come with it are bought by people.

>ftw dirt room

>There is also an idea of fulfillment and happiness
>happiness
well no wonder you don't understand what Peterson says, you've never put attention to it

He never deconstructed it. He talks about surface level from the beginning.

>I have mixed feelings about this statement.
>mixed
peterson is only doing what has been done since the beginning of thought but was "suppressed" by the philosophical distinction between nature and society. all ideas exist the hybrid phase space which the nature/society distinction attempts to distill. This has been the "hallmark" of the West and the way in which it has differentiated itself from primitive cultures but whats astonishing is that this distinction while it reached its peak with Kant never really occurred and was merely posited as the "ideal".

0-4 staying up all night a fucking up my schedule
5-9 go to sleep hoping for a vod

>Jodi Dean
Didn't expect to see that name around these parts, pardner.

>he never deconstructed it
what are you even talking about, he's a psychologist that shares ideas that he considers meaningful and cooperative towards the betterment of ethics and life and general, I really like what he says but in no ways is it novel, he literally just does a pop-culturalization of thinkers like Dostoyevski, Jung or Nietzsche (among others), his intention is getting people familiarized with these ideas, trying to analize him as something else than what I described earlier is retarded and clearly shows that you haven't spent 15 minutes trying to see what he's up to.

>h1bs h2bs are imported scab labor
They are coming over anyway on their own accord with or without the h1bs h2bs. that is to smooth and catalogue the transition.

>scab
No scab if there are no unions to begin with :^)

>It doesn't imrpove both environments, it take from one and gives to the other (but mainly gives to large corporations)
That is exactly my point, any approach has to improve both areas to actually prevent any needless immigration. If you are gonna parrot Nagle's talking point in her essay, at least be recognize her last one.

Why are there so many fucking cuckservatards and other right-wing trash on Yea Forums? Though you guys were the "big bad lefty boogieman"? Guess Yea Forums lied to me again.

Not really, not every philosophy proposes distinctions between nature and post conscience humanity. Some philosophers are even denying very idea of conscience. Personally I see it as a fluke too. There is no distinction between human and nature. Human is simply a complicated byproduct of nature. He perceives that complexity as something that is apart from nature. But this is wrong. The entire idea comes from flawed perception.

Is there a button for captions on the stream overlay? I wanna know before I get rekt for being disabled.

Attached: 1555013105188.png (831x799, 229K)

>They are coming over anyway on their own accord with or without the h1bs h2bs
dumb as fuck point, you can't work a professional job without a visa
>That is exactly my point, any approach has to improve both areas to actually prevent any needless immigratio
or just enforce the law, fuck off
>f you are gonna parrot Nagle's talking point
What's this thing where simple people refer a widely believed proposition to a recent controversy

That's exactly my problem i need to know why we accept ethics and what is the point of life betterment. There are still problems even if i ignore those two points. I don't see how you can achieve betterment of life with being vague ,it's like throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.

not him but the criticism as i see it is basically right. peterson takes for granted that people should work towards improving themselves, which is harmless enough, but he presents himself as if addressing people who lack meaning and purpose. the answer to "why is life worth living?" isn't "clean your room". it's pure question begging to simply assume outright that there is a purpose to life, and then offer that as a remedy to people who suffer from having no purpose in life.

he simply moves past nihilism without having addressed it satisfactorily, and tries to bombard you with practical advice until you forget why you're doing it. he even has entire lectures with the word nihilism in the title, where he spends the entire lecture avoiding the elephant in the room
he even admitted, and i know this and you don't because i'm a better jordon peterson fan than you ;^), that questions like "why is anything worth doing?" are uncomfortable and he just doesn't like thinking about them. that's literally his answer, when pressed

Does lit like zizek

>No scab if there are no unions to begin with :^)
wtf i love losing the value of my labor now

does

He's not an ideolouge is why you can't find one

yes. lit also likes peterson.

So what he is exactly according to you?
I described my view i wonder what others are thinking?

>That's exactly my problem i need to know why we accept ethics and what is the point of life betterment
To reduce suffering obviously sempai, he does goes relatively deep with these topics on his material.

I feel like his percieved vagueness comes from the fact that his 'public intellectual' stuff is really a dumbed down popularized version of his ideals. You can see that in different interviews he pretty much says the same shit over and over again because it's what seems to work as an introduction to his body of work, but that's definitely not all he has to say. His courses and talks are substancial enough for the public that he's aiming for, he's obviously not doing critiques of 'hard' philosophy as much as he has done psychological research so that's why I feel you're analyzing him wrong. I have not read Maps of Meaning but I'll take the wild guess that you could get the depth you are looking for within that book.

user, please stop. This is embarrassing, honestly.

Peterson isn't based enough to be an actual libertarian.

this /r9k/ shit has been going on for like one and a half threads by now. Just ignore it, maybe filter AOC for the time being.

Marxism is pseudo-intellectualism pure and simple.

>maps of meaning
Nah, he's still an incoherent fool. Here's an actual philosopher and cognitive scientist ripping him asunder.

psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/hot-thought/201803/jordan-petersons-murky-maps-meaning

>To reduce suffering obviously

Utilitarian approach generates old utilitarian problems. Man should clean his room and follow this advice to better himself. Man doesn't want to. Yet we tell him to do it because the outcome is reduction of overall suffering. This really go against the idea individualism.

I'm not really interested with Petersons work because all things I've seen so far are generally going against. Nonetheless i will probably check it out because of popularity and therefore relevancy to current events. Plights of society i guess.

If the likes of Einstein, Adorno, and Hobsbawm makes you think "pseudo-intellectual" I wonder what you think a "true intellectual" is.

>I wonder what you think a "true intellectual" is.
Not a marxist, that's for sure.

>I can't even name names
Have you ever read a book in your life, user?

Have you?
Rothbard's criticism's of marxism are spot on.

>anti-ideology ideology

Attached: 1385418643971.jpg (330x319, 47K)

Attached: 1555708714965.png (464x89, 7K)

>no argument
okay

Attached: 1463339580931.png (676x3825, 320K)

Peterson is a crypto-atheist

All boards report

Attached: 1555088511613.png (836x543, 826K)

liberals were the first deniers of reality

You are a second order pseud, you know that? You rely on first order pseuds to do the misunderstanding for you.

Attached: pseud.png (1653x1095, 618K)

guess I'll represent /out/ if not Yea Forums

hope they both embarrass themselves

Attached: the ethnostate plan.jpg (900x900, 140K)

we were talking about where to find depth in his theories, wether you agree with it or not is a completely different topic here, you should reconsider jumping into a discussion with HOT FACTS you read somewhere and feel they somehow fit because it makes you come off as an unsympathetic goblin

uhhh hey, you might be right, who knows? not me.

I’m in the DSA and i’m a eco facist the there’s no barrier to entry you people act like there a kabal or something but there just like any other political group really

Why are you in the DSA as an eco-fascist?

>if I draw a bunch of crap in mspaint it will count as an argument
lol

Attached: 1353029355032.png (976x1672, 190K)

>China has been proving Marx correct for decades.

What in tarnation? Marx isn't a single bit correct about his 'ideas'. Every philosopher in that day and age realized those criticisms and drawbacks of capitalism but they just shrugged it off because capitalism's first principles are always self-correcting even if it takes quite a while for the fix to kick in. Marx is unironically the prime example of a philosopher hack and equivalent to a modern day 'journalist'.

It's not whether you agree with his theories are not. It's that many of this theories have been falsified. What 'depth' are you looking for if his arguments are wrong to begin with? Also why would I need to be sympathetic to your attempt at finding depth in his work? Seems you're desperately clinging to ideas, regardless of whether they are right or wrong, just as long as they give you a sense of 'purpose' in your life.

you're right, China would probably not be as strong as a world power today if it wasn't for marxist darwinism - it's the concept where you apply hard marxism into the sociopolitical sphere and then you let the weaklings starve so you can then come back full force as a meganation of undead slaves with historically materialistic doom embedded. After all, what's more real than famine?

I guarantee you at least one of those kids is going to turn to drugs/radical politics

hotdogs, pre game meal

Attached: u2CQRLK5x-jTz1-6 (1).webm (480x480, 1.44M)

because fuck them

>It's not whether you agree with his theories are not. It's that many of this theories have been falsified.
>Seems you're desperately clinging to ideas, regardless of whether they are right or wrong, just as long as they give you a sense of 'purpose' in your life.

Wow I just got owned by FACTS and LOGIC. I am truly blind to the UNIVERSAL TRUTH.

You have the depth of a 13 year old atheist.

Not what I meant. Truth and Reality are not the same thing.
It is similar to this although I don't know if that will help you.
I do not really agree with Peterson's definition of postmodernism, even though there is some element of truth to it, but let us say there is a foundation of Marxist thought based on the struggle for gemeinwesen (human community), value-theory, class conflict/oppositional forces, materialist history, and alienation. With the Frankfurt School we see a number of problems arise: the failure of capitalism's contradictions to resolve in opposition, the tendency of workers to identify with and even resubjectivise through capital rather than form as a revolutionary proletariat, the remaining depth of the state which succeeds in mobilising capital into a more destructive form, and the technical apparatus subsuming all other means of value (which could be seen as even more disastrous than labour alienaton).
In short, the human becomes alienated from his alienation. Or even worse, he becomes a willing participant in the form of the state which mobilises capital into an even more monstrous form. What is the cause of this? Is it an inevitable outflow of the processes of capital? Or did Marx miss something critical in his analysis of first causes and the essence of domination? To give some perspective, we can imagine this process as in the splitting of a Venn diagram, the estuary where the brackish water and silt suggest to us an unknown yet vital territory, or within a factory as it converts its space for new machines and an updated technological line - the unused lends our eyes a sense of sentiment even though little has changed.
In other words, labour-value is seen in one of its instances, as a type which in turn becomes a form - the aura within the artwork is something of a proletarian, alienated by the mechanised labour process; sex is devalorised as an object of rebellion and becomes an agent of further repression; the state valorises the technical superstructure as a monstrous authoritarianism which destroys more than any before it. In these investigations we see a branching off which can either lead the stream towards a new river, a runnel or temporary overflow, or an alluvial fan in which the brook narrows into a distributary emptying into a marsh or bed of moss.

Does Zizek still have bell's palsy?

This is the periphery of the form I was discussing. The water remains water, yet it travels all new paths, and within its flowing territory may erode its origin. The old river may be overcome by the channel, especially if there is some force of intervention - a dam, diversion, or dike. The most clear example is that of fascism, the Frankfurt School was so opposed to fascism that they effectively abandoned their Marxist origins in favour of a critique of a particular state. In this we see an abandonment of almost every core idea: labour-value, alienation, gemeinwesen, class, materialism. Values are abandoned in fear of the enemy, and although sediment may flow for some time within the current's force eventually it settles on the riverbed.
There is nothing essentially wrong with this, it may even be necessary or right. But it does suggest the ephemeral nature of the values, branching off from the river invites the possibility that there can be no return, this may not be a braided stream. What is this new territory we are flowing into? Is it the alluvial end of the river, or the stream which never changes in its course?
Basically, I am saying that Marx was probably closer to the truth, but in stepping away from his territory they may have revealed something crucial in it. How much natural force does it have? Do its laws persist where they should not? A true test. The conclusion could be accidental, a result of their own formal periphery which loses its integrity within the greater force - as the ephemeral whirlpools fall within the stream's flow while the intermittent rises out of its constancy.

You're assuming far too much about my character. Also, ad hominems only display your own issues. Don't take it out on me that your 'daddy' is peddling sophistry, be mad at him. As for an alternative, you ought to read process philosophy/theology.

Two weiners, communism man?

FIGHT ME IRL IDC ANYMORE BRO

How does Zizek always get women that are out of his league and at least 10 years younger than him

Attached: zizek-wedding-photo.jpg (467x627, 53K)

the mail

Not sure why that's always posted. Think it's actually his daughter.

What does he have in the bag?

50 minutes left

No, that is his argentinian wife Analia Hounie. Born in 79 like his current wife.

Putting out chips and dip for my Peterson vs Zizek viewing party

Attached: 1534839548265.jpg (1080x1080, 1.2M)

will there be a Yea Forums thread? considering Yea Forums is pretentious garbage.

he's the Yea Forums class clown

I've just got banned for starting a thread on it, so...

kek

holy shit she is qt

A few more hotdogs

dlive.tv/Gatopicsa

enjoy a good stream

same here

oh that delusional antifa tankie? do people seriously believe THAT poster is aoc? lmfao
she's a socialist but not THAT kind

ty user

GO TO RIGHT NOW sli.do type code "DEBATE" and vote for the MEME QUESTION from DOROTHY FROM NJ,USA. Go go go go GOOOO!!!! HYPE! Borrow your energy!

Attached: 1.jpg (590x286, 13K)

what time's kickoff?

>is it really far ferched that out of the tens (or hundreds) of thousands of socialists, even if you concede that the poster was female and from new york, is this ONE specific person based solely on writing patterns?
yes

ty

Attached: DTWYAMPUQAIjPKC.jpg (747x993, 175K)

Arigato user-sama

Attached: D37EGDLW4AA9f0x.jpg (850x1061, 69K)

NOW

Attached: aaa.gif (400x265, 869K)

Absolutely cringe introduction holy shit even zizek is like what the fuck is this shit

why im laughing.... this is all so funy

Hey buckos,

My name is Jordan, and I understand every single one of you. All of you are depressed, fatherless, underachievers who spend every second of your lives grasping for some kind of meaning. You are everything human in the world. Honestly, have any of you ever gotten any structure? I mean, I guess it’s trivially entertaining making a hobby out of trolling as a projection of your own bloody insecurities, but you all take it to an axiomatic level. This is even sadder than collectivizing through identity politics on Facebook.

Don't be afraid to be an individual. Just hit life with your best shot. I’m pretty much there with you. I'm an accredited clinical psychologist, and tenured at the University of Toronto. What dreams do you have, other than “realize the potential defining my individual existence?" I also get my words twisted, and have a bloody hot interview (I just got her; Shit was SO illuminating). You are all people who should just improve yourselves. Thanks for listening.

Pic Related: It’s me and my interviewer.

Attached: lobsterman.png (234x248, 120K)

alright bucko.

Peterson is a cuck but Zizek is a literal communist
who are we rooting for?

strawpoll.me/17849356

>peterson voice is trembling
my heart

>REMEMBER THE 6 MILLION KULAKS

Attached: 1545769880743.jpg (111x95, 3K)

Why is he so nervous?

>posting it to pol
lol

Trembling at the bullshitting he is doing and hoping he doesn't get called out for it.

>stalin did nothing wrong
kill yourself

every board that is watching this shit, lit, tv, pol
any other? is b watching?

>keep saying bloody like he's a Brit
Canadians don't speak like this

Peterson is way too nervous wtf, sttutering and trembling, nailing that histerical high preoccupied voice

/his/.

Also, I like Peterson, but does he ever reference anyone other than Jung, Dostoevsky, or Solzhenitsyn?

Am I a brainlet for thinking Peterson isn't actually an advocate for capitalism?

Why is Peterson talking about how Marx failed to second guess himself and how his opinions can backfire when he himself is grooming his impressionable young followers to become right-wing during a time when the planet is catapulting towards climate catastrophe - this debate will not age well, this panglossian bullshit is going to hit the wall hard once we hit 1.5 or 2 degrees of warming and whole swathes of the planet are rendered uninhabitable

zizek has a disgusting voice, sounds like a fucking pig with his mouth full

at least he's not trembling like a little girl while he spats out bullshit

because he is

This is my intro to Zizek, I gotta say, I'm impressed so far. Comparing violence from good people motivated by religion and from Soviet absolutism is straight out of Jung himself.

summarise the points so far?

weak shit from zizek, i don't give a fuck about who's "equal" in a society of ease and comfort and at a time when the hardest hit are probably working class men, the real enemy is the status quo he has deluded himself into thinking we can simply modify

-hey Jordan, do you remember me from Biology? Freshman year? It's Laura. I just wanted to stop by since you missed the last reunion, I was looking for you. I always thought you were really smart and talented, but I could never work up the nerve to tell you. Anyway, I hope you're doing well...HAHA Just kidding, it's still Slavoj you fucking gullible idiot lmfao. Anyway, the gym awaits, see ya man good talk.

word salad
fucking based

Anybody have a good stream? I'm YouTube but it's quite shite.

dlive.tv/Gatopicsa
strims.gg/angelthump/chokk
twitch.tv/mawmaws

PETERSON GOOGLING A REBUTAL

Do you people really get impressed by this retard babbling? Have you never read proper philosophers like Kierkegaard or Aquinas?

Thanks

honestly they should both have their voiceboxes removed and replaced with a robot voice.

QUICK, GIVE HIM A GOOD ARGUMENT

Uh... uh.... PLASHTIC PENISHSES

>the virgin laptop
>THE CHAD SHEET OF PAPER

youtube.com/watch?v=WGRC5AA1wF0
more up to date stream

>Have you never read proper philosophers like Kierkegaard or Aquinas?
make me nigger

Attached: 1554282028469.png (801x767, 107K)

Just tuned in. What'd I miss?

Peterson has basically been reduced to a bull prepper.

Christcucks btfo

two retards talking past each other and making no points

Former Peterson followers as free trap girlfriends (male) for all Hegelians?

Attached: bingo.png (595x600, 317K)

BASED PRO-APARTHEID ZIZEK

this nigga needs to spit

he actually said the "black ruling class" is fake black nationalist and is just working with the white ruling class to keep blacks oppressed, and that this is all the result of colonialism aka white people did this

Would've been too much to hope for for him to mention the persecution of Boers.

That being said, Peterson is a faggot and I'd take Zizek over him anyday.

lmao zizek is killing him

Like a Jew, zizek will squirm on semantics when Peterson tries to nail down a Marxist. Zizek is just Kinda being a difficult cunt for no purpose.