Jordon Peterson DEFENDS Trump!

[BlueOak]

Its easier to vote for the wildcard or the different candidate when there is a high level of dissatisfaction, however that dissatisfaction comes about, whether its internal or external factors isn't my point. You need to be grounded enough in yourself and your understanding of life not to react like that, especially when you are angry with the current circumstances and looking to express that.

We obviously had Boris Johnson who despite acting the fool often enough was educated, but he used the characterization of a joker, or wildcard etc at first to get that dissatisfied vote. Its also helpful in dismissing some mistakes, because people expect a person playing the joker or even just 'one of the lads' to make mistakes. Its probably why he thought he was above the rules. Joe Rogan also uses the everyday man identity to allow for a lot of leeway.

What Trump's opponents in both parties can do is play the we are not Trump Role :D. They can say they are serious, not a joker or wildcard, they are proven or established in their roles, or they mean business. Which I think is contrast enough to win out this time, but it's close enough that I wouldn't call it yet. Elections are all about image for the crowd and behind that pleasing the billionaires anyway. 

I am no big Trump fan obviously but Peterson didn't say too much here that I take issue with, apart from the stupidity on Trump's anti-war stance, which the world almost had a major war from the assassination incident, but believe it or not Russia flew around every country to settle it down. Also his continued ham-fisted way he describes the left is always amusing, there are so many different viewpoints on the left, that any time a right-winger sums them up it shows how little they understand their political opponents. 

That said skeptical of big yes, a perfectly put point. He's 100% right that democrats bought into culture war fully, at the expense of everything else. I also see almost all politicians as being liars by the necessity for their careers, I don't think less of Trump for that than any of them.

Edited July 24, 2022 by BlueOak

[Bird Larry]

@Leo Gura Your hate for Trump is pure, understandably so. Though, don't You find him entertaining. 

Edited July 24, 2022 by Bird Larry

[Danioover9000]

@Bird Larry

  I have a love and hate relationship with Trump. I loved how he was just able to be charismatic and leverage the population's dissatisfaction while trolling the left, but also hate how it's so obvious to me he's a con artist, but most people it's not, and most people fall for it. So I have to find it funny and entertaining to not go mad.

   Humour is also subjective, so some people may find it very entertaining, some are deadpan, others are offended. It's relativel really.

   At least JP came across as more reasonable in the video, aside from the anti left attitude, about some pitfalls of Trump, but not enough that it alienated him from his fan base.

[Heart of Space]

Jordan Peterson would defend someone as backwards as Ted Haggard if he had the chance pre-meth and gay hookers.

He's so high on his Jesus farts he doesn't see the world clearly.  And he disguises his fundamental Judeo Christian biases with the superficial apparence of being a high falutin intellectual while being a genuinely bright person and great public speaker.  

He also has to regularly suck up to his conservative male audience off so they buy his books.  

I bet he takes issue with Trump on some level.  He's partly playing politics with his audience.  He is definitely an intellectual weasel though.  He constantly tries to squirm his way out of stupid positions and has Ben Shapiro'd weaker debaters whom have no business having an argument with him.  

I sound so mean, but honestly I'd love to talk to him and I'd be super nice.  I really relate to JP types on a cultural level.

 

Edited July 24, 2022 by Heart of Space

[StarStruck]

I held him in so high regard

[BuddhistLover]

I voted for Joe Biden in a heartbeat. The conservatives can create excuses all day, like: "Joe Biden is ruining the economy." But in reality Joe Biden is bringing down gas prices right now, he got us out of covid, and now Joe Biden is getting us out of the economic crisis. He also did a good job keeping us out of that war. He's really done his part to take care of everyone duteously. He's really politically smart, and a really great dude. 

[Danioover9000]

   Was worth mentioning is that this is a video were Kyle is the interviewer? In such a case, if a person is doing the interviewing, that person has the advantage of setting the entire frame of the conversation, discussion or debate in this case. Literally the interviewer can paint you into a good or bad light depending on how he/she phrases the questions on tonality and body language alone. For example, in this thread, the OP sets the tone with the title 'Jordan Peterson DEFENDS Trump!', in a click bait manner, and his opening post written 'disgusting', followed by a link to a clipped video of a discussion between Kyle and Jordan. Already sets the tone of this thread and tries to control the type of discourse of our posts, to cater to left leaning users with a bone to pick against JP, simple but effective framing, and most of us already falling victim to this framework.

   I feel that, because it's JP, and how common it is to cast hate immediately in this forum, that generalization of JP's character muddies any nuanced views about his perspectives, and having nuanced discussions of his values, cognitive and moral development, personality typing, states of being, life experiences, other lines of development and other related topics were we could try having a tier 2 type of discourse. However, this thread is slowly becoming a tier 1 discourse, where we talk a bit more about our grievances against JP, and is ok to character assassinate him. While it's worth calling out his faults, it's not worth it to dog pile hate and glee on top of it.

[Danioover9000]

   This video is a good example to follow and to balance this thread with:

    Also highlights the necessary accuracy needed to judge based on language and text, if you suspend or ban a user. You can use the general message of the warning, but you have to actually highlight the wording that led to the ban. Because of this, JP had enough room to flip and reframe the problem onto Twitter while making it a political, trans issue, while adding on his anti left narrative, when in reality the issue could have been that this Eben Page user was triggered and report the post. This post should have been carefully reviewed by a staff member than the A.I algorithm, as the account isn't some random user, it's a famous person. 

Edited July 24, 2022 by Danioover9000

[Hardkill]

21 hours ago, Razard86 said:

I like you, you are deeply rooted in the history. Well I do know that it was proven that Al Gore was supposed to win the Election against George Bush. And even though you are correct about the Popular Vote we both know that the Popular Vote when it comes to the Presidency is a waste of time. That relic from Slavery called the Electoral College is the end all be all and the Politicians strategically campaign with that in mind. 

So while its true Hilary won the popular vote that is just a consolation prize because she traveled the country targeting the areas based on Electoral College votes not based on population. 

I believe the same reason that Trump won is the same reason that Biden won. Biden was a protest vote also, since Trump basically was the worst President that ever presided over a national emergency in history. He is like the polar opposite of Lincoln. Even Republican voters voted for Biden. Biden is not more popular than Obama, but as you stated EVEN Georgia voted for him. I live in Georgia and Georgia is Republican. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Georgia_(U.S._state)#:~:text=However the state of Georgia,PVI rating of R%2B3.

When the next elections come Georgia will go back to being Republican they won't be a true swing state till like 10 years from now.

Those results happened because majority of the Democratic Platform the public supports. The only issues that the general public has with the Democratic party is their support of minorities which the majority of America still has issues with (mostly the Boomers) and as a result Republicans can pull votes using Christianity and talking about Dems restricting freedoms like business and guns to get them on their side. You know, use fear tactics.

Even though the electoral college is what ultimately decides who becomes president and who doesn't, the results of the popular vote for each presidential election since 1992 still point out that more individual Americans have always voted for the Democratic candidate than the Republican nominee since since the early 90s (except for 2004). Also, again, since the 1930s the Total number of Democratic senators in every congressional term has almost always represented some majority of the American people. Why is that?

You say that the majority of the people in the US actually support the Democratic platform. Why is that even though most Americans are stupid and vote base on their gut emotional instincts and the Republican Party has generally been better than the Democratic Party at using fear, anger, and other emotions for rallying up voters?

It's still not clear to me.

 

[UnbornTao]

@Danioover9000 you sound really emotionally invested in this character, and upset for whatever reason.

Dropping these kind of things can be useful.

 

[Arcangelo]

12 hours ago, Heart of Space said:

He's so high on his Jesus farts

LOL irl

[BlueOak]

How much we focus on conclusions rather than experience shapes it as either a T2 or T1 discussion.

It's also worth remembering that when someone is angry at something they see on an ongoing basis, let's say you see someone repeatedly hating on JP or Trump for a particular issue, it is often part of themselves they are experiencing. Experience, unless it's something you experienced with them, is very difficult and unhelpful to question. You can point people at it but beyond that it's not going to help much. While conclusions and their formed beliefs can always be looked at.

[Bando]

23 hours ago, Yarco said:

I'm curious if you've ever been politically open-minded enough to deeply explore the arguments behind something like holocaust denial for yourself, or if it's something that seems so absurd to you that you just take it as a given or not worth your time, similar to flat earth.

Every perspective does have some truth to it but some ideas are so filled with shit its not even worth digging into. Do you really believe the holocaust itself was fake? If so what exactly is your argument? 

[Danioover9000]

@UnbornTao

14 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

@Danioover9000 you sound really emotionally invested in this character, and upset for whatever reason.

Dropping these kind of things can be useful.

 

   Not really. Most of ya'll are more emotional about this than me.

[Jodistrict]

11 hours ago, BlueOak said:

How much we focus on conclusions rather than experience shapes it as either a T2 or T1 discussion.

It's also worth remembering that when someone is angry at something they see on an ongoing basis, let's say you see someone repeatedly hating on JP or Trump for a particular issue, it is often part of themselves they are experiencing. Experience, unless it's something you experienced with them, is very difficult and unhelpful to question. You can point people at it but beyond that it's not going to help much. While conclusions and their formed beliefs can always be looked at.

If you become emotionally upset by an external entity it is always useful to examine your projections onto that entity.  However, that doesn't mean the criticisms of that entity aren't still objectively true.  With Trump, I think the most direct way to see that truth is to do a google search of all the people that were damaged by Trump University to see what happens to people who give their trust to a con artist. With JP, it takes more work to see through his pseudo-intellectual facade.  

[Danioover9000]

@UnbornTao

3 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

I don't care. I just noticed that about you. Not to be rude or anything.

To clarify, I meant emotionally-invested, not emotional. One can be emotional. My point was that you seem to be emotionally attached to this character.

   Nope, neither emotional attachment nor investment. Like you, I just notice how emotional this is getting for other users here.

[Yog]

On 7/24/2022 at 8:33 PM, Danioover9000 said:

the OP sets the tone with the title 'Jordan Peterson DEFENDS Trump!', in a click bait manner

I was going to write something similar but decided to not do so, just to see how other users will react and if they will actually watch the video and judge it by themselves, or roll with OPs take.

I remember OP opening a similar thread about Joe Rogan, with the same clickbait all caps thing in it. Watched the video and found nothing resembling the title, especially the all-caped word.

Stricly judging by these 2 threads, I must admit, I am a bit confused. So far, I get the vibe, that if someone is not fully and all against the person that OP dislikes then he is pro-him. On the other hand, I am not expecting anything that medieval from anyone here. So there my confusion lies. Whatever the case is, it's definitely not good for a nuanced discussion.

[Danioover9000]

@Yog

15 hours ago, Yog said:

I was going to write something similar but decided to not do so, just to see how other users will react and if they will actually watch the video and judge it by themselves, or roll with OPs take.

I remember OP opening a similar thread about Joe Rogan, with the same clickbait all caps thing in it. Watched the video and found nothing resembling the title, especially the all-caped word.

Stricly judging by these 2 threads, I must admit, I am a bit confused. So far, I get the vibe, that if someone is not fully and all against the person that OP dislikes then he is pro-him. On the other hand, I am not expecting anything that medieval from anyone here. So there my confusion lies. Whatever the case is, it's definitely not good for a nuanced discussion.

   Yes, OP has had a history of making click baiting titles, trolling and exaggerating opening posts. This behaviour is common to those who've spent too much time consuming social media, and Tik Tok. He actually was banned before, so how he got back I don't know. Unfortunately, because it's chronologically the most important post, it sets the tone and framework for further discussions, that have made this thread more binary than nuanced.

[Scholar]

 

 

[BlueOak]

On 7/25/2022 at 6:59 PM, Jodistrict said:

If you become emotionally upset by an external entity it is always useful to examine your projections onto that entity.  However, that doesn't mean the criticisms of that entity aren't still objectively true.  With Trump, I think the most direct way to see that truth is to do a google search of all the people that were damaged by Trump University to see what happens to people who give their trust to a con artist. With JP, it takes more work to see through his pseudo-intellectual facade.  

Mine was not a value judgment post.

1) You frame it this way because you are categorizing you and trump as just two separate entities, rather than you reacting to yourself, and the meaning/emotion you assign to the words you hear and actions you see.

2) Having an emotional or intellectual reaction doesn't mean your reaction was not beneficial/appropriate for you personally, or a wider collective.

If you want me to add labels, it doesn't mean to say a reaction is good/bad, helpful/unhelpful etc only that you are having it. This can come from unrealized parts of yourself but it can also come from parts you are aware of to some degree, often there is more there to see/feel/understand, which is why we are experiencing a situation. Life doesn't tend to put things in front of us that are unhelpful to our development, even if we really hate them.

If I were to question your experience of it, I would be falling into the trap I spoke of. I can only show you that all reactions, come from you, no matter what anyone does, all of it is from you.

Edited July 28, 2022 by BlueOak