Ben Shapiro

[KirkDuyt]

So half of the population are either stupid or evil and they're all of the people on the right?

I know this forum is incredibly left wing but ffs

Someone needs to provide a counterweight to Ben and Jordan triggering the snowflake libs.

 

[Synco]

What's stupid in this world is debatable. Don't you think?

It is, in a general way. But at some point people also draw conclusions and make judgements, obviously.

 

[e.cantona]

It is, in a general way. But at some point people also draw conclusions and make judgements, obviously.

All people who don't think like me are stupid?

 

[NotThatSoph]

All people who don't think like me are stupid?

Why do this?

 

[LuisNaniencia]

I'm a big fan of Jordan Peterson, the ideas he expresses on many things I agree with. He's not perfect that's for sure, but people who disagree with his opinion on things like gender equality quickly focus on anything he's got wrong and use it to discount all of his opinions.

Personally I wouldn't discount anything he says to do with clinical psychology as he is demonstrably an expert in the field.

I do think though that his followers should be aware he claims to be an expert in fields where he isn't, and that he uses this deception to promote an ideology despite claiming he isn't an ideologue.

 

[Suv666]

Ben Shapiro is an idiot's idea of a smart guy

 

[nimic]

Personally I wouldn't discount anything he says to do with clinical psychology as he is demonstrably an expert in the field.

I do think though that his followers should be aware he claims to be an expert in fields where he isn't, and that he uses this deception to promote an ideology despite claiming he isn't an ideologue.

But how else am I going to learn how to clean my room and go to bed early if not through analogies involving lobsters or feminist-Marxist chaos dragons?

 

[dumbo]

Ask yourselves, do I really want to make the battlefield for distinguishing disagreement from wrongheadedness, the fecking Ben Shapiro thread.

 

[KirkDuyt]

All people who don't think like me are stupid?

I was mostly just being a tit with the all right wing people are stupid remark. Though I do believe that people like Ben Shapiro willfully manipulate the ignorant in order to gain profit. As do extremely wealthy right wing politicians who get poor people to believe they have their best interest at heart.

Disclaimer: my father was a communist.

 

[pierrethesnack]

I was mostly just being a tit with the all right wing people are stupid remark.

Don't worry, most conservatives know that this is how left wingers see them, it's been brought up and analyzed by several notable conservative thinkers over the last 50 years. The implication is always that anyone not on board with the brilliant vision of the anointed are either morally flawed or intellectually challenged.

 

[RedC]

So half of the population are either stupid or evil and they're all of the people on the right?

I know this forum is incredibly left wing but ffs

At least half of all populations are stupid, yes.

 

[nimic]

Don't worry, most conservatives know that this is how left wingers see them, it's been brought up and analyzed by several notable conservative thinkers over the last 50 years. The implication is always that anyone not on board with the brilliant vision of the anointed are either morally flawed or intellectually challenged.

Well, the important part is that you somehow found a way to make yourself the victim.

 

[Fridge chutney]

Don't worry, most conservatives know that this is how left wingers see them, it's been brought up and analyzed by several notable conservative thinkers over the last 50 years. The implication is always that anyone not on board with the brilliant vision of the anointed are either morally flawed or intellectually challenged.

Thanks, Ben.

 

[Fridge chutney]

Ben Shapiro reminds me of Tucker Carlson. They build strawman arguments and create faux outrage amongst their followings using selective "facts" to draw disingenuous or inaccurate conclusions to stir up division and hate. They are cretins.

 

[pierrethesnack]

Well, the important part is that you somehow found a way to make yourself the victim.

Not victim, just quite useful to be aware of.

 

[sun_tzu]

Ben Shapiro reminds me of Tucker Carlson. They build strawman arguments and create faux outrage amongst their followings using selective "facts" to draw disingenuous or inaccurate conclusions to stir up division and hate. They are cretins.

Yeah.. basically I'm shocked he's not standing as a republican candidate somewhere this year as matt geits is basically a bad shapiro tribute act

I also can't stop thinking of an evil Sheldon Cooper every time shapiro talks which i find almost as off-putting as what he actually says

 

[Fingeredmouse]

Not victim, just quite useful to be aware of.

How is it useful?

 

[KirkDuyt]

Don't worry, most conservatives know that this is how left wingers see them, it's been brought up and analyzed by several notable conservative thinkers over the last 50 years. The implication is always that anyone not on board with the brilliant vision of the anointed are either morally flawed or intellectually challenged.

It's funny because you can swap the terms left winger and conservative and it would be just as true. Or change them to Liverpool fans and United fans or people who sneeze like a normal person and people who wierdly pinch their nose and sort of implode.

It's a bit like the Ben Shapiro's of the world yelling that left wing people are snowflakes, yet completely loose their shite when someone jokingly says they're stupid.

That being said if after all is said and done someone still votes for Trump in november, he's either evil or stupid. No two ways about it.

 

[nimic]

Yeah.. basically I'm shocked he's not standing as a republican candidate somewhere this year as matt geits is basically a bad shapiro tribute act

I also can't stop thinking of an evil Sheldon Cooper every time shapiro talks which i find almost as off-putting as what he actually says

It's Ben Shapiro's wet dream to stand for office. The issue is that he's not a good speaker, a good writer or a good debater. The fact that the GOP hasn't tried to put him in congress yet is probably the best proof that he's bad at all of those things, because they put basically anyone in there. There's like nine Q-anon wackos running in November, but Ben Shapiro is where they draw the line.

That being said if after all is said and done someone still votes for Trump in november, he's either evil or stupid. No two ways about it.

Or ignorant, which isn't necessarily the same thing as stupid.

 

[pierrethesnack]

It's funny because you can swap the terms left winger and conservative and it would be just as true. Or change them to Liverpool fans and United fans or people who sneeze like a normal person and people who wierdly pinch their nose and sort of implode.

It's a bit like the Ben Shapiro's of the world yelling that left wing people are snowflakes, yet completely loose their shite when someone jokingly says they're stupid.

That being said if after all is said and done someone still votes for Trump in november, he's either evil or stupid. No two ways about it.

Nope, it wouldn't. It's always true to some extent between groups with different views on things, but there's an inherent difference when it comes to people with an unconstrained view on human nature, because these people will always see conservatives as a hindrance to creating a good world for everyone.

Which isn't stupid at all, I understand it very well, but I just happen to disagree with it.

How is it useful?

Because many people on the left will try to trap you by discrediting your morals or intellect by constrasting a) their benign vision with b) your unwillingness/inability to get on board with the vision. Which is a false premise, but very useful and effective, nonetheless.

 

[berbatrick]

Nope, it wouldn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Majority

 

[Suv666]

I'm a big fan of Jordan Peterson, the ideas he expresses on many things I agree with. He's not perfect that's for sure, but people who disagree with his opinion on things like gender equality quickly focus on anything he's got wrong and use it to discount all of his opinions.

Can you please explain what actually are postmodern marxists and cultural marxism? Cause it seems to me like typical right wing bullshit of creating loose labels and shoving in everyone you dont agree with into it. Also there are loads of videos on Youtube if you are really want to know where and why Peterson's theories are wrong.










Bonus video on Ben Shapiro if you're interested

 

[Suedesi]

 

[Charlie Foley]

“Postmodern Marxists” ffs

 

[Suv666]

So half of the population are either stupid or evil and they're all of the people on the right?

I know this forum is incredibly left wing but ffs

The kind of people Ben Shapiro and Peterson represent, yeah. I personally dont have any problem with anyone who is economically conservative or is religious, but if your political idealogy is about opressing women and minorities then you're an asshole.

 

[Fingeredmouse]

Because many people on the left will try to trap you by discrediting your morals or intellect by constrasting a) their benign vision with b) your unwillingness/inability to get on board with the vision. Which is a false premise, but very useful and effective, nonetheless.

Strikes me that assuming this holds true consistently is a false premise unlikely to lead to any capacity to discuss properly.
I would argue that you could certainly make the case that such an assumption is as likely to be true for any who have a strongly held conviction in their beliefs. I still can't see how this'd be useful however.

 

[pierrethesnack]

Can you please explain what actually are postmodern marxists and cultural marxism?

He just means patterns of thought influenced by deconstructionism in postmodernism and the material dichotomy from Marxism, which is pretty much the basis of much far left thinking. The fact that Derrida didn't talk about college campuses or whatnot is beside the point.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Nope, it wouldn't. It's always true to some extent between groups with different views on things, but there's an inherent difference when it comes to people with an unconstrained view on human nature, because these people will always see conservatives as a hindrance to creating a good world for everyone.

Which isn't stupid at all, I understand it very well, but I just happen to disagree with it.

That's fair enough, but the very essence of conservatism is based on resistance to progress. Especially progress that impacts your own wealth, privelige, standing and whatnot.

I can, for instance simply not see any other motivation for wealthy people to not want to pay higher taxes than greed. These conservatives want to uphold the status quo because the status quo is in their favour. In order the do this, they try to convince the mob that they have their best interest at heart with lies and false promises. This has happened since the beginning of time. There is a podcast called Thr history of Rome that goes into great detail about the machinations the patrician class used to keep the poor stupid and under the illussion that they were championing their rights even though they gave feck all about them.

Conservatism is calculated and cynical in my opinion, whereas progressives who veer to the extreme left are idealistic to a point of naivity.

 

[nimic]

He just means patterns of thought influenced by deconstructionism in postmodernism and the material dichotomy from Marxism, which is pretty much the basis of much far left thinking. The fact that Derrida didn't talk about college campuses or whatnot is beside the point.

What patterns of thought, specifically?

 

[berbatrick]

It's absolutely wrong to say that it is the left alone that casts itself as the moral faction and the others as the immoral ones.
The abortion vote calls itself the moral majority and its opponents participants in a genocide. Monarchism, votes for only landowners, votes for only men, votes for only whites, have all been conservatives causes *with moral arguments*. Those arguments may be gone today because they lost and the culture and economy mostly rejected them, but they cast opponents of monarchism or supporters of women' suffrage, for example, as trying to upset the divine/natural order of things.
From a modern standpoint, defending that natural order hardly seems like a moral argument, sine those morals of male superiority or the divinity of kings have been mosty reduced from society. But there is a modern parallel -defending the natural order of billionaires and starving people, created as the natural result of dominance hierarchies (Peterson) or as the result of hard work and genius versus laziness and conformity (Ayn Rand, Ron Haskins, Lawrence Mead), and so moral and natural order defences of inequality are still a core part of conservative thought.

 

[fergieisold]

Personally I wouldn't discount anything he says to do with clinical psychology as he is demonstrably an expert in the field.

I do think though that his followers should be aware he claims to be an expert in fields where he isn't, and that he uses this deception to promote an ideology despite claiming he isn't an ideologue.

yeh, when I say I’m a big fan I mean from a psychology point of view. I do also agree with many things he says about things like the gender pay gap and why equality of opportunity is desirable over equality of outcomes.

now I know he has brought in elements of other fields to support his arguments but I’ve not seen him claim hes an expert in them.

Can you please explain what actually are postmodern marxists and cultural marxism? Cause it seems to me like typical right wing bullshit of creating loose labels and shoving in everyone you dont agree with into it. Also there are loads of videos on Youtube if you are really want to know where and why Peterson's theories are wrong.










Bonus video on Ben Shapiro if you're interested

I have absolutely no idea. When I say I’m a big fan it’s to do with mainly what I’ve seen on his motivational work and also his opinion on the gender pay gap etc. the fact he sees some factions of the left as illiberal is also something I agree with.

 

[Suv666]

He just means patterns of thought influenced by deconstructionism in postmodernism and the material dichotomy from Marxism, which is pretty much the basis of much far left thinking. The fact that Derrida didn't talk about college campuses or whatnot is beside the point.

Postmodernism and Marxism are inherently conflicting idealogy. A reconcillation between the two is absurd. Postmodernism is against grand narratives, and Marxism is based on the grandest narrative ever. If you're a postmodernist you cant be a Marxist and vice versa. Marxists likewise have been dismissive of postmodernism and claim its not a valid philosophy and more of a cultural thing. There have been multiple books written on the subject-
David Harvey- The Condition of Postmodernity
Alex Callinicos- Against Postmodernism: A Marxist Critique

Yes, a connection between postmodernism and Marxism does exist, many famous thinkers were involved in leftist politics at one point in their lives but its purely genealogical.

The Cultural Marxism bs is basically the Nazi propaganda of "Cultural Bolshevism" which the Nazis claimed was the degeneration of German culture. Sound familiar? Womens rights, being accepting of homosexuality, abstract art all were signs of a plot by the Bolsheviks to take over German society.
Lets not forget people are quick to point out the Frankfurt school, which consists of a of Jewish thinkers, being part of this plot to take over the world. So add in a dash of anti-semitism as well.
I dont think Peterson is a Nazi btw, he's an ultra consertviive Christian who sees postmodernism as a threat to religion as postmodernism breaks down meaning and points to a world devoid of God. His lectures are based on very superficial readings of Marxism and Postmodernism. i would urge you to actually read the works and decide for yourself.

 

[Halftrack]

He just means patterns of thought influenced by deconstructionism in postmodernism and the material dichotomy from Marxism, which is pretty much the basis of much far left thinking. The fact that Derrida didn't talk about college campuses or whatnot is beside the point.

You've clearly put more thought into his words than he did. The guy basically had to admit to knowing nothing about Marxism in his debate with Slavoj Zizek, nor could he give a single example of one of these post-modern cultural Marxist that have apparently taken over higher learning. Not to mention post-modernism and Marxism are essentially mutually exclusive.

He's using buzzwords to rile up ignorant rubes against leftist thought because it scares and offends him.

 

[Fridge chutney]

Postmodernism and Marxism are inherently conflicting idealogy. A reconcillation between the two is absurd. Postmodernism is against grand narratives, and Marxism is based on the grandest narrative ever. If you're a postmodernist you cant be a Marxist and vice versa. Marxists likewise have been dismissive of postmodernism and claim its not a valid philosophy and more of a cultural thing. There have been multiple books written on the subject-
David Harvey- The Condition of Postmodernity
Alex Callinicos- Against Postmodernism: A Marxist Critique

Yes, a connection between postmodernism and Marxism does exist, many famous thinkers were involved in leftist politics at one point in their lives but its purely genealogical.

The Cultural Marxism bs is basically the Nazi propaganda of "Cultural Bolshevism" which the Nazis claimed was the degeneration of German culture. Sound familiar? Womens rights, being accepting of homosexuality, abstract art all were signs of a plot by the Bolsheviks to take over German society.
Lets not forget people are quick to point out the Frankfurt school, which consists of a of Jewish thinkers, being part of this plot to take over the world. So add in a dash of anti-semitism as well.
I dont think Peterson is a Nazi btw, he's an ultra consertviive Christian who sees postmodernism as a threat to religion as postmodernism breaks down meaning and points to a world devoid of God. His lectures are based on very superficial readings of Marxism and Postmodernism. i would urge you to actually read the works and decide for yourself.

This is a really insightful post. Thank you.

 

[Halftrack]

I have absolutely no idea. When I say I’m a big fan it’s to do with mainly what I’ve seen on his motivational work and also his opinion on the gender pay gap etc. the fact he sees some factions of the left as illiberal is also something I agree with.

In the sense that liberalism is an entirely separate ideology, I guess that's true. In the sense that he thinks leftists want to limit people's freedoms, let's just say that he's a hypocrite and leave it at that.

As for Peterson's views on the gender pay gap, they are contradicted by available data, so it would be interesting to hear what about them you agree with.

 

[fergieisold]

In the sense that liberalism is an entirely separate ideology, I guess that's true. In the sense that he thinks leftists want to limit people's freedoms, let's just say that he's a hypocrite and leave it at that.

As for Peterson's views on the gender pay gap, they are contradicted by available data, so it would be interesting to hear what about them you agree with.

Which aspects exactly. As far as I've seen he's right when he says gender has only a small part to play in the pay gap. I think most people know that by now though?

 

[NotThatSoph]

Which aspects exactly. As far as I've seen he's right when he says gender has only a small part to play in the pay gap. I think most people know that by now though?

The economists don't. The following is a decent overview on the topic, including some discussion on methodology and how not to do things.

 

[fergieisold]

The economists don't. The following is a decent overview on the topic, including some discussion on methodology and how not to do things.

I'll take time to read this. My opinion is that straight up sexism only explains part of the wage gap, there's so many other reasons that go into creating the gap.

 

[Raoul]

Postmodernism and Marxism are inherently conflicting idealogy. A reconcillation between the two is absurd. Postmodernism is against grand narratives, and Marxism is based on the grandest narrative ever. If you're a postmodernist you cant be a Marxist and vice versa. Marxists likewise have been dismissive of postmodernism and claim its not a valid philosophy and more of a cultural thing. There have been multiple books written on the subject-
David Harvey- The Condition of Postmodernity
Alex Callinicos- Against Postmodernism: A Marxist Critique

Yes, a connection between postmodernism and Marxism does exist, many famous thinkers were involved in leftist politics at one point in their lives but its purely genealogical.

The Cultural Marxism bs is basically the Nazi propaganda of "Cultural Bolshevism" which the Nazis claimed was the degeneration of German culture. Sound familiar? Womens rights, being accepting of homosexuality, abstract art all were signs of a plot by the Bolsheviks to take over German society.
Lets not forget people are quick to point out the Frankfurt school, which consists of a of Jewish thinkers, being part of this plot to take over the world. So add in a dash of anti-semitism as well.
I dont think Peterson is a Nazi btw, he's an ultra consertviive Christian who sees postmodernism as a threat to religion as postmodernism breaks down meaning and points to a world devoid of God. His lectures are based on very superficial readings of Marxism and Postmodernism. i would urge you to actually read the works and decide for yourself.

Top post.

 

[pierrethesnack]

Postmodernism and Marxism are inherently conflicting idealogy. A reconcillation between the two is absurd. Postmodernism is against grand narratives, and Marxism is based on the grandest narrative ever. If you're a postmodernist you cant be a Marxist and vice versa. Marxists likewise have been dismissive of postmodernism and claim its not a valid philosophy and more of a cultural thing. There have been multiple books written on the subject-
David Harvey- The Condition of Postmodernity
Alex Callinicos- Against Postmodernism: A Marxist Critique

I'm sure all that's true, but again, it doesn't really matter whether they're formally conflicting to a person versed in ideology and philosphy. That doesn't mean that strong elements from them can't coexist as a cultural construct in people's minds on a large scale.