Two rivals team up to combat greater evil

No, they team up with Land to take down the Cathedral.

Why do Landshits make a cult of personality out of an anti-humanist?

Transgender teenagers

Attached: that way.jpg (320x320, 23K)

brown people

free burned popcorn

>left vs right extravaganza
ah, boring
thanks user

Very, np

Peterson just got exposed as a dilettante, and a poor one at that.

1) Anyone who has taken a 100 level course on Marx could have given as good or better of a rundown and critique of the Communist Manifesto that Peterson gave.
2) No serious Marxist reads the meme pamphlet Marx wrote for uneducated workers, it's not an academic source, it's a propaganda piece.
3) Peterson, although claiming to have read and understood at least a modicum of Zizek's works, was not able to produce a single meaningful critique of his theory, even going so far as to be impressed with Zizek's take on Christianity
3a) Peterson is in many ways a scholar of religion, in particular Judeo-Christianity; he also critiques Marxism for being an athiest doctrine which rejects these principles. So if Peterson had done so much as read Zizek's wikipedia article, let alone an article on him in an encyclopedia of philosophy, let alone read one of his books on Christianity, he would have known this position and not been impressed by it. It means he didn't even watch Pervert's Guide to Ideology. Incredible lack of research.
4) Peterson did not stick to his position that Marxism was bad, instead retreating to a simple repetition of his individualism (at one point admitting that the heart of the individualism leads to the position that you must do what is best for the community anyways "good enough for you/your family isn't enough" which basically recasts JP's position as individually enlightened Marxism)
5) Peterson hasn't read Critique of the Gotha program which is shorter than the Manifesto and much more important (reminder this intellectual has been arguing against the evils of Marx for decades and hasn't even read him in any meaningful sense since he was 18).
6) By the end, Peterson wasn't even able to formulate an argument against the form of Marxism which Zizek promotes. His only point to the debate which had any relevance was to point out Capitalism's productive force, a fact that he also admits Marx agrees with and discusses at length in the Manifesto.
7) Peterson being pressed on and subsequently not able to name a single postmodern neomarxist needs no explication.

Peterson has been exposed as someone who has no real education (or perhaps intellectual interest) in political theory. I am actually amazed there are people who watched this debate and think Peterson managed even the bare minimum of understanding of both Marxist theory and the historical realities of capitalist dynamics.

>Judeo-Christianity
People still perpetuate this meme?

there is a bit of irony involved in that
the prophet of staunchly nihilistic entropy cult being a soft voiced pudgy british boomer chilling in asia is such a funny image

Honestly he has the right idea. He left the West before it went to shit.

It doesn't matter what you do, at the end of the day, Destiny still arrives.

Attached: 0nbz56jquzp21.jpg (882x757, 42K)

He's just a meme source, nobody would die for him.
Go with the flow and ponder about all the futures that are going to be canceled.

>rivals

Both con artist e-celebs. Their only enemy is your brain cells.

Jesus was jewish.

Now you did. Get ready for a flood of angry /pol/ infographics and Christian Identity copypastas

BASED AND REDPILLED
#BASED
#REDPILLED
#AND

Hillary in the next election.

Pic related is the buddy cop police chief, unless someone can think of a black person who fits better, then he's the whacky gadget inventor.

Attached: alex-jones.jpg (968x681, 43K)

I think the real joke here is most zizek fanboys are still liberal tranny worshipping stalinists that want to burn churches.

dat bias doe

Peterson because hed wearing a crew neck sweater with a tie on. Nigger get a v neck.

for the establishment? moldbug and uncle ted

But what Marx and his elitist intellectual followers believe he stands for doesn't really matter when 90% of modern self-titled Marxists *don't know* what he stands for, and instead run with the "meme pamphlet." What Marxism means in the public discourse is what matters - not what pseudo-intellectuals like yourself think about him.

The uneducated, disinterested workers are the majority, and they vote for populism. They don't care for nuance.

But who ever listened to Peterson for his political views anyway? As far as I'm concerned, not being a particular big "fan" but a hobbyist follower of his, his role (which he performed admirably) was to take a bundle of unpopular realist viewpoints and smuggling them into the populist-dominated public discourse.

All things considered, his original breakthrough came when he calmly dismantled mainstream media feminism and explaining the, at the time, less popular view that equal opportunities won't, and shouldn't, result in equal outcomes.

Then he provided a fairly rational alternative view on rioting and activism among youths who, quite frankly, don't even know what they're protesting for or against. I mean, surely we can agree that adult protesters boosting their numbers with kids and teens is problematic, right?

In my humble opinion - and that is all it is - he's gradually becoming irrelevant, but his role was never all that political. He just pointed out that far-right populism won't be beaten by far-left populism, and that false social progress isn't actually what progressives should be fighting for.

Peterson's "postmodern neomarxism" is literally just "Americanism", the same thought patterns we see in the social justice warriors of today are no stranger to the US.

>Some of us are still Marxists, you know

The greater good

>postmodern neomarxism
What Peterson means by this I think(he is not very clear about it) is that the academy developed this tendency to 'question metanarratives', meaning that all truth became conditioned by analysis of the power structures within which it was expressed, but that they have their own metanarratives(progress, antiracism, feminism, etc.) that they don't criticize in the same way, and these remind him of Marxism because of they use class warfare terminology.

This is something Foucault brought up decades ago and was attacked for(unsurprising since it's basically a giant fuck you to academia and door to reactionary criticism of progressive ideology)

>meaning that all truth became conditioned by analysis of the power structures
This is true, every society operates within some tradition which is conditioned by authority that curates it. There's nothing bad about this in and of itself but it kind of BTFOs the "autonomy/liberation" narrative. I mean when every liberation movement has a CIA agent and billions of Foundation dollars promoting academic/media astroturfing, how autonomous are you really? Most things Progressives believe were memed into their brains.

>This is something Foucault brought up decades ago

in which book?