Jordan Peterson

Pin said:
The Government and Politics of France
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Pin said:
The far left isn't very profitable because their interests run directly counter to the interests of billionaires. The only example of far left media outlets that come to mind is Mother Jones and independent media outlets that almost nobody has heard of because they're not subsidized by rich people. There's an acceptable window of opinion that's allowed before a smaller media firm gets bought by a larger one.

Being antagonistic to capitalism is not a good business strategy. Billionaires do not fund and subsidize Socialists and Communists for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...
This isn't true, either rationally or empirically.

If there's a market for an idea, it can and will and has been sold, almost regardless of what that is.
 
philostam said:
I don't understand what you guys are even disagreeing about. Nothing that @Pin wrote seems controversial to me
Click to expand...
Oh I never said Pin was controversial I was just asking questions.
philostam said:
Maybe you can tell us, @Reason, how do you categorise left and right, and what are the defying features of each camp?

EDIT: I guess you're categorising media outlets.
Click to expand...
I suppose that categorizations are always somewhat subjective so it is useful to know what someone means when they say 'right' or 'left'.
Personally I think if you're going to analyze you have to add in a second of axis of Populistic vs Establishment.

You have the populistic leftists, the democratic establishment, the republican establishment, the populistic right and of course the far left and the far right. Far left in the form of Antifa or BLM and far right in the form of Neo-Nazis or ethno-nationalists.
Rather than breaking them down in terms purely Left/Right I would break down the media apparatus in America like this:

Legacy Media (Fox, MSNBC, CNN, PBS): Relics of the television era, very pro-establishment. Probably with a slight left leaning bias overall (except for Fox) but their main task is to kiss the ass of establishment Republicans and Democrats so that they can get exclusive interviews and other goodies. Legacy media is slowly dying and is running more and more tabloid-style garbage stories that get a lot of clicks to stay alive longer, which is ironically destroying their credibility and accelerating their decline.

Missing Link Media (Ben Shapiro Show, Vice, etc.): A hybrid of old and new formats these shows exist with high amounts of overhead expenses and must rely on donations or corporate sponsorship to stay afloat. Political Variety exists along with a variety of levels of ass kissery to the establishment Democrats or Republicans

New Media (The Post Millennial, RealClear Politics, independent journalists, YouTube content creators, political bloggers): Existing with little overhead expenses these outfits can get a lot of information gathered, aggregated, and distributed with little need for cash injections. The least influenced by establishment due to their relatively recent appearance on the national stage. Being outsiders they will scarcely be getting much from the establishment of both parties and are dismissed and maligned because the major parties and corporations can't force them to disappear stories quite as easily.

Extremist Media (The Daily Stormer, BLM, Antifa groups, Alt-Right blogs): Not so subtly plotting the tearing down of American government and society, these whackos survive off of the naïve and disenfranchised who donate to the cause. Not much relationship to the establishment directly (with the exception of BLM) but potentially useful to unscrupulous political actors who don't mind keeping snakes in their backyard in hopes that they'll bite their enemies.

So in summary it matters not only the nature of the political bias but also whether or not the outlet is in bed with the establishment of both parties and with America's corporate world.
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
This isn't true, either rationally or empirically.

If there's a market for an idea, it can and will and has been sold, almost regardless of what that is.
Click to expand...
That's logically true but there isn't enough of an empirical basis for that conclusion with respect to each portion of the political spectrum. In most of the developed world there historically has been a range of "acceptable" ideas. My hypothesis is that this level of convergence with respect to public discourse and policy started after WWII in most NATO countries.

That said, it would take awhile to prove this because I'd have to grade policy proposals of most legislatures after WWII. Before a "market" for certain ideas is established, there's got to be conducive conditions for its flourishing. Market conditions don't emerge arbitrarily.
 
Reason said:
Oh I never said Pin was controversial I was just asking questions.

I suppose that categorizations are always somewhat subjective so it is useful to know what someone means when they say 'right' or 'left'.
Personally I think if you're going to analyze you have to add in a second of axis of Populistic vs Establishment.

You have the populistic leftists, the democratic establishment, the republican establishment, the populistic right and of course the far left and the far right. Far left in the form of Antifa or BLM and far right in the form of Neo-Nazis or ethno-nationalists.
Rather than breaking them down in terms purely Left/Right I would break down the media apparatus in America like this:

Legacy Media (Fox, MSNBC, CNN, PBS): Relics of the television era, very pro-establishment. Probably with a slight left leaning bias overall (except for Fox) but their main task is to kiss the ass of establishment Republicans and Democrats so that they can get exclusive interviews and other goodies. Legacy media is slowly dying and is running more and more tabloid-style garbage stories that get a lot of clicks to stay alive longer, which is ironically destroying their credibility and accelerating their decline.

Missing Link Media (Ben Shapiro Show, Vice, etc.): A hybrid of old and new formats these shows exist with high amounts of overhead expenses and must rely on donations or corporate sponsorship to stay afloat. Political Variety exists along with a variety of levels of ass kissery to the establishment Democrats or Republicans

New Media (The Post Millennial, RealClear Politics, independent journalists, YouTube content creators, political bloggers): Existing with little overhead expenses these outfits can get a lot of information gathered, aggregated, and distributed with little need for cash injections. The least influenced by establishment due to their relatively recent appearance on the national stage. Being outsiders they will scarcely be getting much from the establishment of both parties and are dismissed and maligned because the major parties and corporations can't force them to disappear stories quite as easily.

Extremist Media (The Daily Stormer, BLM, Antifa groups, Alt-Right blogs): Not so subtly plotting the tearing down of American government and society, these whackos survive off of the naïve and disenfranchised who donate to the cause. Not much relationship to the establishment directly (with the exception of BLM) but potentially useful to unscrupulous political actors who don't mind keeping snakes in their backyard in hopes that they'll bite their enemies.

So in summary it matters not only the nature of the political bias but also whether or not the outlet is in bed with the establishment of both parties and with America's corporate world.
Click to expand...
This categorization that you did is quite good for describing the American context. While I do have my disagreements, ultimately though, it's not too different from how I see things.
 
Last edited:
INTP. He has strong Ti when combined with Ne can seem a bit Ni. I have listened to many other INTP psychologists speak many of times and they all gravitate to the Big 5. The truth is "personality" ( the foundation of the psyche ) isn't Enneagram, MBTI, or Big 5 alone. It's all 3! Enneagram - first 9 months of life in the womb, MBTI/Cognitive Functions - first 4-5 years after birth, Big 5/Character Traits - next 5-6 years ages 5-10 or 11. After that our brains tell our bodies to grow so we can use what we now have, and from ages 10/11 to 20/25 it's about learning actions and their reactions. People may think INFJs and INTPs are very different looking at the cognitive functions, but INTJ Dr. Dario Nardi's EEG studies on MBTI types show INFJs are 2% more right-brained overall and INTPs are 2% more left-brained overall. They are the 2 closest to the center. INTJs are 4% right-brained overall; which makes INTPs and INTJs the 2 equally closest types to INFJs. INFPs are 4% left-brained. INFP, INTP "CENTER" INFJ, INTJ. See the flip flop between INT and INF from center outwards? Ps are are on one side and Js on the other too. His work revealed some interesting things.
 
When Jordan Peterson Comes Over & You Haven't Cleaned Your Room
 
I remember seeing this screenshot, or was it a video, of him in his house, surrounded by soviet memorabilia, flags and books. It reminded me of a greasy professor in my uni who would teach Turkish history and would moan all day about how evil Turks are by nature. Complete cognitive dissonance.
 
niar said:
I remember seeing this screenshot, or was it a video, of him in his house, surrounded by soviet memorabilia, flags and books. It reminded me of a greasy professor in my uni who would teach Turkish history and would moan all day about how evil Turks are by nature. Complete cognitive dissonance.
Click to expand...
I don't follow
 
Cornerstone said:
I think they meant a Greek professor.
Click to expand...

:laughing: they hate Turkey so they must be greek, that's a leap.I think they were german although I'm not sure of his ancestry, and a greek one would partially explain his vitriol. But generally just an islamophone who at the same time greately admired turkish culure. Quite similar to JP fetishising the soviet era and simultaneously fearfully hating it. @Reason
 
Reason said:
Am I understanding correctly that the assumption you are making here is you can only own Soviet artwork if you approve of the Soviet Union?
Click to expand...

I think I answered this already. Considering the extent of the threat that he touts Soviets and Marxists are posing, to have his room dressed in Soviet symbols from top to bottom, falls in line with his general psychotic behavior and paranoia. Irrc he was diagnosed with schizophreneia at some point and refused to accept the diagnosis. Regardless of who he is, it's really sad to see a person who's clearly unwell put book sales and clout over mental health, and to see his family support this and not get him the help he needs.
 
niar said:
I think I answered this already. Considering the extent of the threat that he touts Soviets and Marxists are posing, to have his room dressed in Soviet symbols from top to bottom, falls in line with his general psychotic behavior and paranoia. Irrc he was diagnosed with schizophreneia at some point and refused to accept the diagnosis. Regardless of who he is, it's really sad to see a person who's clearly unwell put book sales and clout over mental health, and to see his family support this and not get him the help he needs.
Click to expand...

Schizophrenia and psychosis can be a transition state it is not always a lifelong illness, they are somewhat common in spiritual circles. A good example of how the medical system treats people in this general area is near death experiences, people come back after dying and say they met god and get sent straight to the psychiatrist that will then tell them they are wrong (I'm not exaggerating there are reports of exactly this). Anyway, my point is that it is not a great idea to render his character bad because he had symptoms of schizophrenia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top