/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12806315]

>dry boomer professor
vs
>charismatic zoomer old commie

Honestly who will win? Peterson talks about real stuff that happens on earth, but is sort of a chore if you put him besides someone thats fun; Zizek talks pure drivel, but is hilarious so people tends to agree with him even his talking useless nonsense. Its really hard to predict the outcome of this match.

[Anonymous No.12806323]

who's wife hotter?

[Anonymous No.12806348]

>>12806315
>Peterson will spend hours trying to define truth
>zizek will make a completely incomprehensible argument based on facts he couldn't possibly have
>YouTube will be flooded by PETERSON DESTROYS LIBTARD
>news outlets will be flooded with "Jordan Peterson's harmful ideology is finally being challenged and that's a good thing"
Battle of the big brains.

[Anonymous No.12806353]

>>12806315
It will probably turn out like the Chomsky vs. Foucault debate where they both ended talking about different subjects

[Anonymous No.12806354]

>>12806323
Zizek's without a doubt

[Anonymous No.12806357]

>>12806353
This. They will probably end up talking past each other.

[Anonymous No.12806362]

>>12806323
>>12806354
but peterson has a family. zizek is a spinster.

[Anonymous No.12806372]

>>12806315
How is Zizek the zoomer?
He's 70 years old.

[Anonymous No.12806382]

>>12806372
Also Peterson is much closer to being Gen-X than a Baby Boomer being born in the 60s.

[Anonymous No.12806383]

>>12806315
>that title
Hope zizek makes it very clear at the beginning; happiness, no thank you

[Anonymous No.12806389]

>>12806315
The one who can speak in a semi understandable way and isn't physically repulsive to listen to.

[Anonymous No.12806391]

>>12806353
>chomsky and foucault didn't understand each other
explain which subjects?

[Anonymous No.12806392]

>>12806315
Petersonfags on damage control already. Pathetic

[Anonymous No.12806399]

>>12806372
Damn, he looks pretty good for being 70.

[Anonymous No.12806406]

>>12806315
Peterson will spend whole time explaining why Lacan isn't psychology. Zizek will spend whole time explaining why postmodernism is not Marxism. None of the audience will understand they're talking about different discourses and will choose the narrative the they prefer. People get paid and the dialectic dies yet more.

[Anonymous No.12806429]

>>12806391
Chomsky talked about a universal capacity for creativity as inherent to all humans while Foucault argued against an anthropocentric view of creativity.
When they started talking politics it becomes more interesting but Foucault seems hamstrung in the face of Chomsky's anarchism.
Foucault's central argument in the politics portion is that even anarcho-syndicalists and their efforts are doused in the ideologies of the status quo of control.
He almost elicits a "why try, cuz ideology" sort of logic.

[Anonymous No.12806437]

Zizek, slavoj. Dislike him. A cheap sensationalist, clumsy and verbose. A communist, a claptrap novelist and a slapdash custodian. Some of his scenes are extraordinarily dull. Nobody takes his inaccessible Marxism seriously. A grandiloquent clown. Zizek's buffoonery is so patent that it unites in disdain absolutely everyone above a certain level of intelligence, in absolutely perfect undifferentiated unanimity. If anyone listens to this with even mild approbation, they do stand inescapably below this intellectual ceiling; not probably; not almost certainly but perforce and automatically.

When you claim that someone is empirically mistaken, even in a single instance let alone "often", you immediately adopt the onus of providing a verbatim quote, not a mangled beyond recognition paraphrase, of at bare minimum one empirical proposition posited by your opponent, followed by your specific evidence to the contrary. You automatically and exclusively commit yourself to this rational option and no other.

If what follows is anything else, anything at all, you instantaneously expurgate from your audience absolutely every genuinely intelligent person - every single one - who pays you the slightest attention for any reason apart from trivial amusement.

And yes, just for that.

Peterson, Jordan. Dislike him. A depressed psychologist, cringeworthy and unhellpful. A charaltan, a wannabe psychiatrist and a slapdash father. Some of his advice is extraordinarily amusing. Nobody takes his platitudinous journalism seriously.
Political Correctness Gone Mad. His best work, though an obvious and shameless imitation of Zizek's "Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism?"
Maps of Meaning. Dislike it intensely.
12 Rules of Life. Dislike it intensely. Ghastly clichéd.

[Anonymous No.12806441]

>>12806362
Zizek has a son.

[Anonymous No.12806444]

>>12806362
Zizek has a wife and children.

[Anonymous No.12806521]

>>12806437
These stopped being funny a long time ago anon. Keep whatever's left of your dignity.

[Anonymous No.12806525]

>>12806521
shut up you lunatic

[Anonymous No.12806546]

>>12806315
I hope someone records a transcript of the event; I can't stand to listen to Zizek's voice.

[Anonymous No.12806554]

I don’t think peterson understands what he is in for

[Anonymous No.12806562]

>>12806315
in the RT interview that just came out, Slavoj says that it's basically going to be a town hall type event, with both of them addressing the crowd mostly. They'll only adress each other for 10 minutes. Apparently Zizek was afraid of Petersons Big Brain and by that I mean the trick he does where he cites like 40 books and journals that no one's ever heard of or can check to justify his points.

[Anonymous No.12806571]

>>12806315
>Peterson talks about real stuff that happens on Earth
What is that supposed to mean? Peterson's arguments against Marxism are comical at best and, at worst, betray a dangerous ignorance of even the rudiments of the ideas he tries to deal with. He's a hack self-help guru who talks with grandiloquence and uses philosophical terminology so as to seem knowledgeable when, in reality, he's merely a layman.

[Anonymous No.12806586]

>>12806571
how come his critics always go ad hominem and never ad res?
>self-help guru
so what?
>grandiloquence
so what?
>knowledgeable terminology
so what?

[Anonymous No.12806604]

>>12806437
The interesting thing about Zizek is not the conclusions, but the questions he asks. Quite a lot of the dilemmas he shows are very interesting, whereas Peterson has begun to dictate how to live life. Petersons old youtube lectures were a lot more interesting because he mainly asked questions and didn't come with a lot of unbacked conclusions.

[Anonymous No.12806615]

>>12806586
Not him but most of Peterson's arguments are basically just whining about Marxism-Leninism and conflating it with all Marxism and then saying Hierarchy and Christian religion are necessary for order or whatever.

[Anonymous No.12806664]

>>12806315
Zizek is also a professor

[Anonymous No.12806674]

>>12806562
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTtwrqtBI00
Nice find. At around 13 minutes he talks about it and his tactics.

Hope JP takes notes so he can BTFO him.

[Anonymous No.12806700]

The best thing that can happen is that psychoanalysis is a waste of time and is subsequently cleansed from all academic institutions.

As far as the debate itself goes, my money is on Zizek just because he has a sense of humor.

[Anonymous No.12806705]

>>12806674
>That is the limit of Guardian. Guardian is part of the establishment
>Let's face it, what Americans are doing [in Venezuela] is a well planned operation also
Zizek is still redpilled, I see.

[Anonymous No.12806711]

>>12806705
he also called Peterson controlled opposition, which he totally is. he might own him effortlessly with a couple jabs.

[Anonymous No.12806715]

>>12806711
>controlled opposition
controlled by who?
opposed to whom?

[Anonymous No.12806719]

>>12806711
he's like the jester in King Lear

[Anonymous No.12806729]

>>12806315
As much as I hate that old commie he's going to destroy peterstein.

[Anonymous No.12806733]

>>12806715
controlled by the ones hes supposedly denouncing (state enforced political correctness, etc). he states in the interview "peterson avowed bernie sanders", that fact alone blows peterson and anything he "stands" for completely.

[Anonymous No.12806742]

>>12806586
They don't. You can read many articles critiquing Peterson's ideas with evidence given. I can see how someone who only browses forums and watches right wing YouTube would think this, though.

Peterson primary critique of Marxism goes something like this: '..And the postmodern neo-marxist types want TOTAL equality! And it's like... NO! YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT! People are fundamentally different! You tried it in the 20th century and it led to disastrous results! Equality of opportunity not equality of outcome! Muh individualism!', etc.
However this betrays an ignorance on Peterson's part. Marx (along with Engels) were not egalitarians. They recognised that talks of 'equality' in the abstract were meaningless if one does not define what they mean by equality. Marx sought only for the equality of class, to abolish class distinctions. This does not preclude individuality, it only abolishes those despotic systems which enslave the individual. Peterson does not address this and instead opts to attack the abstract notion of equality, which Marxism doesn't opine.

Peterson's attempt at justifying these systems approximates to 'well hierarchies exist in nature', which, regardless of the fact that it is a shameless example of the naturalistic fallacy, still does not address class abolitionism. Indeed, Peterson's simplistic lobster example can only work under the assumption that capitalist systems are inherently meritocratic and exhibit total equality of opportunity. This is patently not the case.

I don't think Peterson has adequately addressed any of the points Marxism makes. He mostly prances around the issue, attacking one abstract notion after another, without ever getting into the particulars. His views on 'equality of opportunity' vs 'equality of outcome' are absurd, given the fact that equality of opportunity could never exist so long as there are differences amongst people. All in all, he seems to be just a psychologist with minimal understanding of philosophy and thus should not be taken seriously on philosophical topics.

[Anonymous No.12806757]

Jordung Pebbleson very wise shaman. Tell Grug, "Grug only. Not tribe. Grug want tribe? Clean cave, bad Grug!"
Then Grug see Jordung with longnose at Holobunga feast. Grug start to think. Why longnose have special feast just for longnose, if tribe so bad? Why Jordung go to feast?

[Anonymous No.12806778]

>>12806757
Grug just want meaning to life. Why grug must smash big tooth cat? Why big tooth cat want hurt grug? Make grug sad he must smash cat.

[Anonymous No.12806856]

>>12806757
Thank you for this post. I liked it a lot, it's a very good post.

[Anonymous No.12806914]

>>12806674
killer interview. petersen is finished.

also look at how genuine he is when addressing the debate thing. petersen is only seeing shekels. zizek is in just for the fun.

[Anonymous No.12806926]

>>12806389
Which one is that?

[Anonymous No.12806964]

>>12806700
Jp can be funny and advocates humor. He watches the simpsons so he's automatically based

[Anonymous No.12806967]

>>12806757
>guy makes it out of shithole Canada nowhere and establishes himself
>surely I must blame this system

[Anonymous No.12806973]

>>12806964
>He watches the simpsons
yikes. dropped hard.

[Anonymous No.12807001]

>>12806973
Pleb opinion. Seasons 1-9 are art

[Anonymous No.12807002]

>>12806315
they're both honestly stupid
žižek is an OK philosopher but as a person he is stupid

[Anonymous No.12807006]

>>12806562
>the trick he does where he cites like the same 3 books that everyone's heard of
Peterson is not known for his eclectic use of sources. Solzhenitsyn, Dostoyevsky, Jung. When he really gets going he paraphrases Pareto; wow so obscure! If he brings up Hicks in this debate it's an automatic loss so he can't use that one.

[Anonymous No.12807009]

>>12806354
you're thinking of his ex wife

>>12806362
he has a son and peterson's daughter has something wrong with her

[Anonymous No.12807012]

>>12806964
But Zizek is a kino-sseur

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqpxT_iJ8Mc

[TSJ !ujoY1xUXb. No.12807141]

>>12806742
Can you make a critique of Zizek? I think they're both not good representatives for this debate.

[Anonymous No.12807158]

>>12807141
>I think they're both not good representatives for this debate
then
then surely you should be the one making a critique of Zizek

[Anonymous No.12807201]

>>12807006
he's not known for his use of "sources" because no one's bothered to press him about it because it's a waste of time. politicians do this kind of shit all the time. Peterson will say a "study" or whatever has found certain statistics and use that to make a point. Anyone knows that any "study" needs to be read carefully because the statistics can be construed ot make a wide variety of arguments, many of them conflicting. This isnt anything anyone can do in a live debate and so usually whoever does it gets to make their point without being challenged and they seem smart.

[Anonymous No.12807226]

>>12807009
milkies

[Anonymous No.12807231]

>>12807201
nah he's not bad for that at all. have you ever watched Chomsky debate?
>well it was reported in an Isreali journal my a guy called Ihrab Brahim published in '96 which has all the facts, it's not translated into English but let me paraphrase

[Anonymous No.12807243]

>>12806967
JBP is a globalist stooge with plenty of shady connections buddy there's a reason he gets called juden peterstein

[Anonymous No.12807248]

>>12807001
sneed
>>12806973
sneed
>>12806964
sneed

[Anonymous No.12807250]

>>12807231
chomskys only slightly less a fraud than peterson though

[Anonymous No.12807264]

>>12806383
good god what a terrible pic
so simplistic, is this how people actually think about the world or is it just intelligenceinsulting marketing?

[Anonymous No.12807266]

>>12806315
Based zizek

[Anonymous No.12807327]

>>12806733
>"peterson avowed bernie sanders"
Really? I heard "he doesn't vote Bernie sanders"

[Anonymous No.12807339]

>>12806733
>>12807327
Peterson was a member of the NDP in Canada, which is our socialist party. Even in his current boomer state, he would still be considered left wing in the US for supporting things like universal healthcare. The left in America is like the moderate right in Canada.

[Anonymous No.12807389]

>>12807339
That was when he was a kid right? His political opinion could have always changed though. And it is not like what he is advocating now is remotely left wing even not an economic. Hell he is probably supporting capitalism as its current state. Is that NDP's position too?

Finally what exact word did Zizek say about what Peterson would do to Sanders? Coz I distinctly heard 'doesn't vote for' not 'avowed'

[Anonymous No.12807397]

>>12807389
Considering Peterson is Canadian I don't think he votes for any presidential candidate

[Anonymous No.12807410]

>>12807397
Oh I don't think he meant literally, but like he wouldn't vote Bernie if he was american.

[Anonymous No.12807413]

Why do people listen to a fucking psychologist (not a real science btw) talk about philosophy

[Anonymous No.12807452]

>>12807413
For the exact same reason they spend time on 4chan listening to even less educated people and discussing it with them. How is this a mystery to you if you're so well versed in philosophy and human psychology?

[Anonymous No.12807454]

>>12806315
>Dr. Jordan Peterson
>Slavoj Zizek
Why is only one presented with title? Zizek have both a PhD and a D.A. Anyway, regardless of how the debate ends the aftermath will be a shitshow.

[Anonymous No.12807544]

>>12807389
>it is not like what he is advocating now is remotely left wing even not an economic
please enlighten me on all the right wing economic beliefs that Peterson has
>he is probably supporting capitalism as its current state. Is that NDP's position too?
yes

[Anonymous No.12807639]

>>12807452
i'm not, that's why I'm asking
nobody wants to listen to my brainlet takes on philosophy

[Anonymous No.12807654]

>>12807544
>right wing economic beliefs that Peterson has
all the standard neoliberalism stuff I guess...
>yes
No wonder NDP fucking sucks. Wasn't it supposed to be some socialist state.

[Anonymous No.12807675]

>>12807654
define neoliberalism

[Anonymous No.12807676]

>>12806315
Which one is the bigger shabbos goy

[Anonymous No.12807684]

>>12807675
Market-based solutions for every problem in the world

[Anonymous No.12807694]

>>12807327
>>12807389
Zizek said he would vote Trump. So does this make Peterson a neomarxist and Zizek right wing?

[Anonymous No.12807708]

>>12807639
lying on the internet anonymously isn't good for your soul anon

[Anonymous No.12807713]

>>12807676
Peterson loves Jews. Zizek on the other hand seems mostly indifferent.

[Anonymous No.12807716]

>>12807694
Are you serious senpai? He said that Hillary vs Trump he would rather vote Trump to A C C E L E R A T E

[Anonymous No.12807719]

>>12806323
>>12806315

[Anonymous No.12807725]

>>12807708
I'm not though, I'm very dumb. It's just that Peterson seems to make a bunch of basic mistakes when it comes to talking about philosophy. Or that's what the smart people say, I wouldn't know.

[Anonymous No.12807734]

>>12806315
Which one do you think has the higher IQ? I would say Zizek almost definitely.

[Anonymous No.12807736]

>>12807716
Wait a minute so Zizek is a right wing accelerationist?

[Anonymous No.12807743]

>>12807725
You should know that that's not necessarily because he's a psychologist.

[Anonymous No.12807754]

>>12807736
no, a left-wing accellerationist, like Marx himself.

[Anonymous No.12807755]

>>12807743
Correct. I certainly didn't phrase that correctly

[Anonymous No.12807759]

>>12807736
No the idea was to vote Trump so the Left could be revitalized at the outrage that Trump will cause. he is left wing accelerationist before Land came along

[Anonymous No.12807766]

>>12806315
Who would win in a physical confrontation? Peterson is a scrawny weakling who gets BTFO by apple cider, whilw Zizek is a big fat slob.

[Anonymous No.12807774]

>>12807766
Zizek is like 70

[Anonymous No.12807778]

>>12807766
Seems like it'd be easy to fuck Zizek up without actually swinging at him. Most of your work would be done by his own mucous.

[Anonymous No.12807779]

Where does Zizek stand on the topic of Israel and Zionism?

[Anonymous No.12807781]

>>12807779
His views on jews are marx's

[Anonymous No.12807784]

>>12807781
which is what exactly

[Anonymous No.12807788]

>>12807784
They gotta give up the whole Jew thing.

[Anonymous No.12807793]

>>12807788
Why does Peterson, in contrast, love Jews so much

[Anonymous No.12807802]

>>12807779
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/445381-racism-alive-europe-israel/

Slavoj Zizek: Racism is alive and well in both Europe and Israel – with different victims

[Anonymous No.12807821]

>>12807781
>>12807788
But Marx was literally a Jew himself.

[Anonymous No.12807828]

>>12807774
Yeah but Peterson isn't exactly in his prime either and look how frail and weak he is. Zizek at least looks like he has some strength.

[Anonymous No.12807834]

>>12807821
He was the son of a convert and was very critical of other jews, no matter how much /pol/ says that they act like a hivemind.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/index.htm

[Anonymous No.12807836]

I hope Peterson drops the whole "furrowed brow staring at his feet" while Zizek is up there telling his usual holocaust/communist jokes. They actually have a lot to agree on, except for where Zizek will inevitably tell Peterson that he does not go far enough and that JP propagates the same system that failed all of the teenagers he reaches out to.

[Anonymous No.12807857]

stupid meme debate

[Anonymous No.12807861]

>>12807836
>JP propagates the same system that failed all of the teenagers he reaches out to.
This is a really good point. I never thought about that but it's true.

[Anonymous No.12807866]

>>12807684
Sounds pretty good to me.

[Anonymous No.12807867]

>>12807836
What do Peterson and Zizek agree on?

[Anonymous No.12807892]

>>12807867
They both have critiques of modern society that KIND OF meet up, the problem is Zizek is viewing things from a Hegelian dialectic perspective where society and it's ideology is constantly fighting within itself as well as outside of itself while Peterson views things from a clinical perspective that views the failings of modern society as a type of sickness that can be cured.

[Anonymous No.12807896]

>>12807676
peterson attended a trilateral commission meeting or something like that, that sets the barpretty high. dont know anything about zizek tho

[Anonymous No.12807934]

>>12807654
the left wing in North America has been neoliberal for like 70 years anon

[Anonymous No.12807942]

Is there a such thing as non-Marxist communism?

[Anonymous No.12807944]

>>12807866
Game theory is only going to be helpful if you take social markets and utility into account, but it's very difficult to quantify social utility. I assume the other poster meant purely economic markets, but I'm not sure.

[Anonymous No.12807956]

>>12807942
Short answer: Yes. In the form of the earlier utopian socialists, anarchists, and christian communists.
Long answer: You'd have to give a definition of communism first.

>>12807934
"I believe that democracy has so far disappeared in the United States that no “two evils” exist. There is but one evil party with two names, and it will be elected despite all I can do or say."

[Anonymous No.12807963]

>>12807956
What differentiates these other forms of communism from Marxism?

[Anonymous No.12807968]

>>12807942
Marxism is mainly communism with materialism + Hegelian dialectic, so just replace those things with something else. I don't know if any communists today reject Marxist thinking though.

[Anonymous No.12807983]

>>12807968
Is there like a right wing Nationalist Communism

[Anonymous No.12807984]

>>12807963
Well, marxism is first and foremost a framework through which to understand history, politics, sociology, economics, philosophy... It's very unlikely that those who wrote after Marx weren't influenced by him in anyway, even anarchists are.
Not even all marxists support the massive authoritarian one-party states that socialism went with in the twentieth century. Some of them, like Rosa, were critiquing bolshevism in 1918. There's no unified political project that can be called "marxist" communism.

[Anonymous No.12807989]

>>12807983
Maybe National Bolshevism, but that's still built on Marx, at least historically.

[Anonymous No.12807996]

>>12807942
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorstein_Veblen

[Anonymous No.12808020]

>>12807944
> I assume the other poster meant purely economic markets, but I'm not sure.
I did mean that thanks

[Anonymous No.12808043]

>>12807983
bit of a contradiction in terms. right-wing implies hierarchy of some sort, and the only hierarchy in a nazbol system is racial, and even then that's not a given. Relatively 'equal' races might still be happier living segregated

communism wants no political or economic hierarchy, it is basically as far left as you can go. On the very opposite side you would have divine right Monarchy with a system of capital-owning blood nobility beneath it taxing serfs, and probably a 'every man rules over his wife and children' doctrine as well. Inserting hierarchy into every aspect of the society basically. There is a contradiction in terms here of course- the absolute authority of the monarch would be 'limited' by the power structures like nobility or patriarchy.

Neither of these ideal systems makes any sense from an engineering standpoint, the balance of powers is not stable. pretty much all of human history is a shuffling flux of authoritarian minorities(who gain power in various ways) competing with each other for dominion over masses that are either brainwashed or physically subdued, and usually both.

[Anonymous No.12808055]

anyone who doesnt think peterson will get absolutely destroyed is retarded

he couldnt even respond appropriately to that talking head black guy that turned everything into mug racism

[Anonymous No.12808069]

Peterson is a complete fucking idiot but even he should be able to easily humiliate the Slovenian clown. But the true loser of the match will be idiots wasting their time listening to these two Youtuber-tier hacks.>>12806315

[Anonymous No.12808100]

I've been wondering about something for a while.
How many frames deep into the ironic are we when we discuss Memerson?

[Anonymous No.12808146]

>>12807676
During the debate with David Horowitz, Zizek said to him that he's like those bankers who helped Hitler

[Anonymous No.12808193]

>>12807989
Wasn't Stalin basically a nationalist communist?

[Anonymous No.12808231]

>>12807243
Please elaborate .

[Anonymous No.12808236]

>>12808100
probably about the same depth as zizek, depending on the anon.

[Anonymous No.12808241]

>>12808043
What about a society where there is a heirarchy and not everyone is equal, but at the same time everyone's basic needs are taken care of and it's not like the every man for himself system we have under capitalism? Is there anything like that?

[Anonymous No.12808244]

>>12807413
Argument from authority is so fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.12808263]

>>12808241
Marx and Engels were not egalitarians, stop it with this nonsense.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_03_18.htm

[Anonymous No.12808429]

Why does someone have to win? Americans and "winning," I swear.

Zizek will, though. He knows what he's talking about and isn't spouting pseudoscience and literal Nazi propaganda. "Cultural marxism." Lmao.

[Anonymous No.12808437]

>>12808429
>Jordan "most of my friends are Jews" Peterstein
>a Nazi
not even close

[Anonymous No.12808440]

>>12806315
"zoomer old commie"? Zizek has no zoomer characteristics at all. He's an eccentric capitalist-sceptic who loves jokes about Czechoslovakia.

[Anonymous No.12808441]

>>12808055
Only discord trannies hate Jordan Peterson.
He's an entry level alt lite who misgendered a pack of mentally ill freaks.
Only discord trannies think this is a big deal.
Stay mad though.

[Anonymous No.12808526]

>>12806437
When did this meme start?

[Anonymous No.12808533]

>>12807006
>Solzhenitsyn
>a source

Just like a steer's arsehole it's a source of bullshit.

[Anonymous No.12808535]

>>12806348
prescient

[Anonymous No.12808544]

>one obnoxious dick
vs
>other obnoxious dick
I can't wait!

[Anonymous No.12808549]

>>12808437

He have to be a nazi to repeat nazi propaganda.

[Anonymous No.12808553]

>>12808544
Fuck off, retard. Get hit by a car while you're at it. The world doesn't need people as thick-headed as you.

[Anonymous No.12808559]

>>12808549
>t nazi propaganda.
your entire worldview is a hilarious memed shitheap

[Anonymous No.12808566]

>>12808553
*sniffs*

[Anonymous No.12808571]

>>12808566
Sorry, Jew. I've got no shekels here. Now get the fuck out before I kick your ass.

[Anonymous No.12808579]

>>12808559

Cultural marxism is literally nazi propaganda made up by nazis.

[Anonymous No.12808590]

>>12808571
*loudly inhales nose mucus every 10 seconds*

[Anonymous No.12808593]

>>12808579
it's actually just the blindingly obvious observation that people make ''''class'''' based arguments reminiscent of Marx

[Anonymous No.12808602]

>>12808593

No, it's actually just propaganda made up by conspiracy theorist fascists in the 1930s. By nazis. JP repeats therefore he is repeating nazi propaganda.

Crazy and hard to follow, I know.

[Anonymous No.12808630]

>>12808602
Nazis also made the observation that the sun was in the sky, i guess that,s also 'nazi propaganda' and not something incredibly obvious

[Anonymous No.12808645]

>>12808602
>Some nazi propaganda agreed with this thus it must be wrong.

Grow up.

[Anonymous No.12808821]

>>12808630
>>12808645
>I can change the historical definition of terms to fit my ideological bent
fuck off postmodernism scum

[Anonymous No.12808849]

>>12808821
you could instead explain why you're so opposed to noticing the similarity between agitating for 'oppressed proles' or 'opressed races, genders, etc'.

Because it's very similar rhetoric, and the people involved seem to get along with each other rather well, marxist anger at woke liberals notwithstanding, the two will rub shoulders at Harvard.

[Anonymous No.12808880]

>>12808630
>>12808645

Clear JP fans since these arguments are absolute shit. Just wow.

[Anonymous No.12808886]

>>12808880
Right whereas 'it can't be true because nazis said something similar to it' is the peak of rational discourse

[Anonymous No.12808898]

>>12806437
>A grandiloquent clown. Zizek's buffoonery is so patent that it unites in disdain absolutely everyone above a certain level of intelligence, in absolutely perfect undifferentiated unanimity. If anyone listens to this with even mild approbation, they do stand inescapably below this intellectual ceiling; not probably; not almost certainly but perforce and automatically.
>When you claim that someone is empirically mistaken, even in a single instance let alone "often", you immediately adopt the onus of providing a verbatim quote, not a mangled beyond recognition paraphrase, of at bare minimum one empirical proposition posited by your opponent, followed by your specific evidence to the contrary. You automatically and exclusively commit yourself to this rational option and no other.
>If what follows is anything else, anything at all, you instantaneously expurgate from your audience absolutely every genuinely intelligent person - every single one - who pays you the slightest attention for any reason apart from trivial amusement.
>And yes, just for that.
What's funny about Nabokov's dismissal of authors is his truncated style. If you're going to imitate him, do it properly.

[Anonymous No.12808909]

>>12806323
Peterson’s wife is actually an interest to me. It seems from his own recollection that she is nothing more than a shrill feminist harpy that he married in his thirties. As wholesome as the idea that he married his childhood sweetheart, it is somewhat diminished when you consider that she had a decade to herself in her twenties undoubtedly doing some purile self-exploration.
From his current discussions she seems to be overly critical of his appearance, giving him a disturbingly restrictive diet that leaves him a gaunt old man. She was likely very attractive as a younger woman and so demonstatrates Peterson’s value and credibility as a source of wisdom for young men.

[Anonymous No.12808940]

>>12808886

The nazis literally started the bullshit. The nazis made it up. How hard is that to comprehend? It's bullshit. Absolute bullshit propaganda as all propaganda is.

[Anonymous No.12808945]

>>12806437
Brother

[Anonymous No.12808968]

>>12808940
When you're not in your echo chamber you have to actually explain why the point is wrong. Associating it with some bogeyman doesn't count as an argument. There is zero reason that Nazis couldn't have coherent critcisms of marxists or associated people, they were enemies.

[Anonymous No.12809027]

>>12808968
>Associating it with some bogeyman
Anon, the Nazi's associated it with the Nazi's, it's not some unfounded assertion. Are you asking for a detailed rundown of the conspiracy theory or a rundown on the thinkers the theory blames? Either way you should probably do some reading of your own on this topic first. Have you read much postmodernism/Frankfurt school?

[Anonymous No.12809036]

>>12808968
The Nazis actually didnt have any criticisms of Marxism. It was literally just the same ad hominem capitalists use against marxism today. The Nazis actually made more cogent points against capitalism than Marxism.

That being said, the "legitimate" fascists (pre WW1) were some what interesting because they attacked Marxism from a sort of nietzchean perspective, and attacked capitalism from a sort of marxist perspective. In this way, fascism originally was a combination of the dynamism and will to power of individualist anarchism with the anti-bougoise anti-elitist class struggle focus of Marxism.

[Anonymous No.12809039]

>>12806382
>beeing a Gen X boomer

[Anonymous No.12809045]

>>12806354
he's eastern european, 90% of women there are far above the global average

[Anonymous No.12809051]

>>12808849
wait, what are you even trying to say? because some people think certain races are oppressed, therefore it's Marxism? you do know Marx would argue directly against modern forms of identity politics, right?

[Anonymous No.12809067]

>>12806315
okay but where is nick land?

[Anonymous No.12809076]

>>12809067
has nick land ever mentioned peterson? id be interested to see what he thinks about him given that they both tend to be lumped together even though they are obviously very different.

[Anonymous No.12809088]

>>12809051
No just that people see the two things and find them similar, that's why the 'cultural' modifier comes before 'marxist'.

Look it's a stupid term whatever, but everybody not wilfully denying this stuff can see that there is a giant assortment of people who view society in terms of 'classes' opressing other classes, and Marxism and idpol are both examples of it.

[Anonymous No.12809100]

>>12809088
thats been the case since forever you idiot. ancient greece and rome had slave and peasant revolts all the time. the idea of one group of people oppressing another group of people is not a marxist invention

[Anonymous No.12809112]

>>12809088
cultural Marxism is about the wilful infliltration of Marxist intellectuals into western society in order to collapse the social order in order to have the chance to continue the Soviet revolution. That is what the Nazi's were talking about when they invented the term.

[Anonymous No.12809131]

>>12807339
The NDP isn't even remotely close to socialist.

[Anonymous No.12809159]

>>12809131
they literally started as the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation m8, the next most socialist party is probably the Marxist-Leninists

[Anonymous No.12809167]

>>12806674
keked at Zizek admitting being afraid of memerson

[Anonymous No.12809192]

>>12809076
>has nick land ever mentioned peterson?

[Anonymous No.12809193]

>>12806315
Why is Zizek such a slob?

[Anonymous No.12809198]

>>12809088
>>12809051
saying cultural marxism makes no sense it's like saying hegelian materialism makes no sense, so marxism is already meaningless by that logic

[Anonymous No.12809199]

>>12806348
At least Foucault is interesting, Chomsky is a hack

[Anonymous No.12809202]

>>12806429
Chomsky is an idiot

[Anonymous No.12809214]

>>12806429
Foucault made the(now considered reactionary) point that academia was itself a power structure and that the ideologies coming out of it were informed by that. This was one of the central pillars of Moldbug's autism

Chomsky's answer to this(not in that debate I just remember him saying this years later) was that MIT just allows him to exist even though he's supposedly subversive.

[Anonymous No.12809261]

>>12808526
http://wmjas.wikidot.com/nabokov-s-recommendations

[Anonymous No.12809272]

>>12806315

Peterson spouts archaic red scare memes. No intellectualism, pure meme arguments.

[Anonymous No.12809278]

>>12808909
Source on all of this? Big if true

[Anonymous No.12809281]

zizek will probably noshow it

[Anonymous No.12809283]

>>12809272
are you one of those holodomor deniers?

[Anonymous No.12809288]

>>12809272
Im curious what you think 'intellectualism' is

[Anonymous No.12809296]

>>12809272
Communism was a legitimate cause for fear no matter how frame it. The world would be far better place if McCarthy had been able to remove them.

[Anonymous No.12809320]

>>12809296

>capitalist cuckold

[Anonymous No.12809340]

>>12809159
The NDP have always been capitalists. Nothing they promote is even close to socialism. There are no popular socialist parties in either Canada or the United States.

[Anonymous No.12809348]

>>12809340
as long as you don't say stuff like 'the nordic socialist model' then

[Anonymous No.12809359]

Why are all marxists so unlikable? Is it just because of the historical genocides and famines?

[Anonymous No.12809370]

>>12806315

the charismatic cocaine connoisseur communist of course

[Anonymous No.12809805]

Well on one hand you have this musty, old guy who looks like a primate and isn't even from any relevant country who just endlessly critiques and reacts to whatever issue he's not even trained for because he'd rather be talking about psychoanalysis and you're not even sure he's quite all there in the head

and on the other you have this awe-inspiring martyr for the overlooked who might not even have what it takes but makes you proud every time he gets up because he's just plain good

so it seems pretty obvious to me, retards.

[Anonymous No.12809849]

>>12808909

Peterson probably has multiple affairs. Looking at him you just know he's into the daddy dom kink and has some 25 year old piece of ass with daddy issues on the side.

[Anonymous No.12809855]

>>12809805
dont underestimate zizeks charisma and ingenuity.

[Anonymous No.12809856]

>>12809359

Stop generalizing you neaderthal

[Anonymous No.12809868]

>>12809849
Peterson has struggled with lifelong depression plus a whole bunch of other shit I can't be bothered to remember right now, no way he's the kind of guy with the energy to pursue multiple affairs.

[Anonymous No.12809870]

>>12809805
>awe-inspiring martyr for the overlooked
oh jesus christ dude, go outside

[Anonymous No.12809872]

>>12809868
hes obsessed with status, p sure he tries to cope it with some young chick fix.

[Anonymous No.12809925]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dNbWGaaxWM

[Anonymous No.12809926]

>>12809192
WTF I hate Nick Land now

[Anonymous No.12809991]

>>12808193
Most of communists were nationalists, but that didn't "unmarx" them. You westerners have strange perception of communism.

[Anonymous No.12810017]

>>12809320
Not sympathetic with capitalists at all. But the inherent anti-nation/anti-state attitude of the far-left makes them an inherent threat to any state oriented society than anything else.

[Anonymous No.12810059]

>>12809925
>Zizek is allowed to say "Nigger"
Based

[Anonymous No.12810161]

>>12809805
>awe-inspiring martyr for the overlooked who might not even have what it takes but makes you proud every time he gets up because he's just plain good
Are you serious right now?

[Anonymous No.12810191]

>>12809805
>awe-inspiring martyr
lol
you dont know the meaning of the term

[Anonymous No.12810275]

>>12806315
>Peterson talks about real stuff that happens on earth
like conspiracies that Alexa is programmed to make you like Stalinism

[Anonymous No.12810616]

>>12806674
>lower-class English soccer fans [...] are the worst
norfpilled

[Anonymous No.12810643]

Its not even going to be a debate. Zizek said they both get 30 minutes to state their case then for 10 converse with each other. Zizek said his goal is to just shill Bernie to college kids or something lmao

[Anonymous No.12811045]

>>12807725
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCWdA5XhGmY

[Anonymous No.12811055]

>>12807774
Zizek looks more muscular though.

[Anonymous No.12811078]

>>12807983
Ceausescu

[Anonymous No.12811091]

>>12808533
This. I only accept Grover Furr and Jason Unruhe as sources.

[Anonymous No.12811096]

>>12810643
>Zizek said his goal is to just shill Bernie to college kids or something lmao
kek, Yang is the new Bernie, nobody likes government social programs that do nothing (see California), but $1000 are forever

[Anonymous No.12811104]

>>12808849
>you could instead explain why you're so opposed to noticing the similarity between agitating for 'oppressed proles' or 'opressed races, genders, etc'.

There is no real connection. Was the South Marxist because of Segregation? This is the level of thought you're working with.

[Anonymous No.12811110]

>>12809067
Yeah and Marie Kondo too?

[Anonymous No.12811112]

>>12806615
>Marxism-Leninism
>n-n-not muh true marxism!

[Anonymous No.12811119]

>>12811096
>not being tariqgang

[Anonymous No.12811141]

>>12811112
I didn't say it wasn't true Marxism. It's just not the only form of Marxism.

[Anonymous No.12811152]

>>12807983
NAZBOL GANG

[Anonymous No.12811164]

>>12807009
>you're thinking of his ex wife
both are hotter than anything peterson has ever touched, which is really rather impressive, considering zizek's outward appearance is a sniveling slobbering mess. zizek truly is a based daddy.

[Anonymous No.12811166]

>>12806615
>wtf this doesn't apply to me, stop being so judgemental you bigot
specify what makes the brands of Marxism that are being wrongfully slandered by association with Marxism-Leninism different philosophically or fuck off

[Anonymous No.12811194]

>>12811096
the people who push yang are irony poisoned nihilists and lumpen prole scum (neets)

Bernies main base would be the working class

[Anonymous No.12811199]

>>12808898
that's an actual quote, pleb

[Anonymous No.12811205]

>>12811166
Rojava type Libertarian Socialism, Luxemburgism, literally any type of non-Hierarchial left wing ideology or non-tankie Marxism

[Anonymous No.12811206]

zizek will just walk in there and say there is no such thing as happiness, then throw down a smoke bomb and dissapear into the night, only saying "peace"

[Anonymous No.12811223]

>>12811205
get that low-effort shit out of here. all you did was list off a couple variants of socialism/communism which according to you aren't like Marxism-Leninism without any further explanation.

[Anonymous No.12811226]

>>12811194
>chapo faggot
Berines base is NYC hipsters most people in the working class think he's a commie faggot or just weak.

[Anonymous No.12811227]

>>12811223
They don't believe in centralized vanguard parties like M-L? If you don't know the difference between Rojava or Rosa Luxemburg and Stalinist Russia what are you even doing on a literature board?

[Anonymous No.12811231]

>>12811227
>it's not my job to educate you :^)
this isn't twitter, sweety

[Anonymous No.12811237]

>>12811227
And which criticisms of memerson don't apply to them? If you don't know what they are, what are you doing claiming that they don't apply to your variants of communism? Go on now, actually engage with the arguments instead of making broad statements that barely mean anything.

[Anonymous No.12811244]

>>12811237
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCWdA5XhGmY

>communism is when government do stuff and if you were in charge of government DO NOT assume that you wouldn't use your power to kill 50 gadjillion people ,bucko

[Anonymous No.12811245]

>>12806700
>Psychoanalysis is a waste of time
Spotted the pseud.

[Anonymous No.12811258]

>>12809805
>awe-inspiring martyr
I wouldn't go that far, but yeah Zizek is a pretty interesting guy.

[Anonymous No.12811260]

>>12811244
>probably exposed to peterson only via secondary sources with a clear political slant presenting cherrypicked soundbits
>reposts these videos when he gets into arguments about the topics they deal with, because he is either too lazy or too stupid to formulate an argument in his own words
embarrassing

[Anonymous No.12811267]

>>12807454
Because Zizek is not a pretencious asshole who thinks a piece of paper from a University makes his opinions any more valid or meaningful.
He understands that ideas should be taken on their own merit.
Authority as Truth vs Truth as Authority.

[Anonymous No.12811269]

>>12811244
I bet you send contrapoint videos to your friends

[Anonymous No.12811276]

>>12807009
Based retard fucker

[Anonymous No.12811281]

>>12811119
he is pretty based tbf

[Anonymous No.12811285]

>>12811194
>the people who push yang are irony poisoned nihilists and lumpen prole scum (neets)
... and that's a good thing. here's why

[Anonymous No.12811292]

>>12811206
he said he would do it just to shill for Bernie to JP fans, too bad this is Yang country now

[Anonymous No.12811300]

>>12811194
>>12811226
Bernie has no chance either way, a bunch of black girls will just get into the podium and twerk him out of the primaries, and he will say nothing

[Anonymous No.12811308]

>>12811227
>Rojava
you mean a normie social democracy literally shilled by the army of the US is now the new standard for Marxism? lol, i knew leftist had fallen low, but not this low

[Anonymous No.12811313]

>>12811281
I'd unironically vote for him if he ever ran

[Anonymous No.12811314]

>>12811292
the best thing about your obnoxious forced memeing is that yang is going to lose and basically your faggotry is all for nothing

You want to know the most fucked up thing about the neets, and neets that suppurt yang?

They are anarchists who think they are fascists.

Rejection of work is literally one of the planks of post left anarchism

[Anonymous No.12811315]

>>12811267
>is not a pretencious asshole who thinks a piece of paper from a University makes his opinions any more valid or meaningful.
and yet he shilled on several articles for Avital Ronel to treat her students and abuse her power however she saw fit because she's a "respected academic"

[Anonymous No.12811325]

>>12811314
>the best thing about your obnoxious forced memeing is that yang is going to lose and basically your faggotry is all for nothing
retard, it's about forcing the democrats to have to explicitly argue against free money for all, and have to explicitly say that they only support free money for some of their constituencies

the primaries will be glorious and there's nothing you can do about it

[Anonymous No.12811348]

In nazi germany neets were sent to ze camps. Did you know that? The derlicts were given a black badge and then gassed. Thats the most retarded thing about these pol faggots.

In soviet russia it was illegall to be a neet, they would send you to the gulag for not having a job.

Neets arent working class either, they dont earn a wage, they attack "wagies".
They dont run a business or earn profit either, so they cant be capitlists.

So we get to the heart of the matter, all the faggots that are jerking off to yang are neets who would have realized by now that they are anarchists if they actually spent time reading a book instead of watching anime.

Because they live outside of the capitalist system.

Neets are natural born anarchists

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbmWs6Jf5dc

[Anonymous No.12811351]

>>12806757
Good post