Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Liberal cities are facing an Exodus

Good grief.

Let's see, release rapists, murders and some otherwise mean thugs out of prison and then put people in prison for not social distancing - let me do the math ➖➕➗

Speaking of Chaos:

From JBP Weekly

August 24, 2020 | DR. JORDAN B. PETERSON



Taoist Philosophy and the Judeo-Christian Ethic
The following is from a previous draft of Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life

The Taoist philosophy is predicated on the idea that experience itself consists of the eternal interplay of yang and yin, each of which can and does transform itself into the other. The former, “masculine,” is the order that restricts, constrains, tyrannizes and protects. The latter, “feminine,” is the chaos that undermines, threatens, revitalizes and renews. For the Taoists, this is eternal reality, always, everywhere. Wherever you are, there are things you know, things you can predict, things you can control. That is order. Wherever you are, there are things you do not understand, that exceed your domain of comprehension and articulation, that confuse and undermine you. That is chaos. Thus, experience is made of the known, and the unknown, explored and unexplored territory, the enlightened day and the dark underworld, wakefulness and unconsciousness.

For Christians, the road to salvation, the imitation of Christ, is most fundamentally the attempt to act as befits something made in the image of God: that is, the attempt to mediate between chaos and order in a manner that maintains the balance between both, and that allows creation to continue unfolding, in the best of possible manners. This is the attempt to establish the Kingdom of God on earth, to make Heaven bloom here and now, instead of the hell that could obtain. The deepest of experiential meanings is to be found in that attempt – in fact, meaning as a phenomenological and perhaps even a biological or neurological phenomenon appears precisely to be the experience that marks success in such an endeavor. Why would it not? If that is the proper place to be, and the most appropriate manner in which to act, why would we not be powerfully guided toward it by the most ancient and profound of our instincts? For the Taoists, similarly, the Tao—right being—for all intents and purposes, can be found at the juncture of chaos and order. This is the spiritual place where the water of life flows, parching the physical and spiritual thirst of desperate and suffering living beings.
 

Debra

Jedi Master
Mikhaila Peterson just got a smack from Youtube and she is not impressed!
Here is her post from Facebook:

"@youtube demonetized lil’ ol’ me with zero warnings! ⁣

Hmmm. ⁣

Was it the fact I talk about trying a pure meat #liondiet for health issues that mainstream medicine can’t help? ⁣

Or was it the fact my dad is @jordan.b.peterson? ⁣

Or was it the fact I got covid and was okay? ⁣

Or was it because I just interviewed a republican @dancrenshawtx? ⁣

Or was it from talking frankly about hallucinogens and other drugs? ⁣

I guess that list does add up... ⁣

If anyone is interested in podcast sponsorship let me know! But no buy-this-59$-food-to-help-you-fast businesses or juice cleanses or gummy bears for vitamins or skinny teas please. ⁣

Maybe they’d remonetize if I dressed like this (more) and put up makeup videos instead? ⁣

Maybe I should sell t-shirts? I’m open to ideas, what do you think? Is anyone still into pogs?⁣

Maybe I’ll pull a @louderwithcrowder and sell mugs
😂
.
1598716258422.png
 

Debra

Jedi Master
Babylon Bee has posted a brilliant and Satirical article.
A bit of Humor and Truth for us to enjoy.
It's a short article, so I am posting it complete, plus the link.


With Professional Sports Canceled, Jordan Peterson To Host First Televised Lobster Fights
August 29th, 2020
1598810063690.png
TORONTO—With fans across the country mourning the loss of their baseball, basketball, and football games, Jordan Peterson has stepped up to feed our sports cravings with the world's first televised lobster fights.


The LFL, or Lobster Fight League, will be available on pay-per-view and feature the world's most formidable lobster specimens as they compete for dominance by slowly pawing at each other in an MMA ring.

"This will be a perfect opportunity for our distant ancestors to display their competence," said Peterson in an interview. "I trust this will be a bloody phenomenal event where we will get to witness these non-empathic and non-social creatures compete for dominance for our viewing pleasure. Viewers will likely get a nice shot of serotonin from watching it, just as the lobsters do from winning!"

Each match is expected to take about 6 hours, but sports fans say they will gladly take it over anything going on in the NBA and NFL right now. Fans will even be given the opportunity to fill out their hierarchy brackets and place bets ahead of time.

The first event already has millions of pre-sales, with fans excited to watch a show where the contestants "just play the game" and don't take a knee during the national anthem.

 

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
From JBP Weekly
August 31, 2020 | DR. JORDAN B. PETERSON

This story was told on SOTT’s MindMatters back in December 2019, which is worth a listen if not done so:

MindMatters: Ordinary Men: What Makes Normal People Do Monstrous Things -- Sott.net

Here is JBP’s look:

Hell, One Step at a Time

The following is from a previous draft of
Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life
(Estimated Read: 18 Minutes)

In 1991, the American historian Christopher Browning wrote a book called Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland about the Ordnungspolizei (Order Police) Reserve Unit 101. The book detailed in a very psychologically plausible manner the terrible transformation of conventional and essentially well-socialized working men—most with families—into killers capable of taking naked pregnant women into the Polish countryside and executing them with a pistol shot to the back of the head. Such a book is best read with caution—and, more importantly (with that caution firmly in mind), read as a potential perpetrator, rather than as a hypothetical victim or, worse, hero.

The men of Police Battalion 101 were tasked with mopping up after the Nazis had marched through and subdued Poland. Their commander, Major Wilhelm Trapp, was by all accounts a decent man, considering the times. Furthermore, the men in the battalion were all middle-aged citizens of Hamburg with no military experience, drafted but found ineligible for regular duty, who had matured prior to the intense propagandizing of young people typifying the Hitler Youth. They were not abnormally cruel, nor were they were in the main ardent anti-Semites. No simple explanations (sadism; prejudice) were going to suffice as Browning attempted to account for their behavior.
Within the unit were a few professionally trained SS men, cruel and psychopathic, who tended to regard their commander Trapp as weak, unmilitary, and prone to interfere inappropriately in the duties of his officers. A few others were reservists, rather than career policemen. The majority, however, were working-class men of the less professionalized sort, warehouse and construction workers, machine operators, waiters, and seamen, among others. They averaged almost forty years in age—too old for general conscription. They weren’t even particularly likely to be Nazi party members (about 25% percent). As Browning points out, “these men would not seem to have been a very promising group from which to recruit mass murderers on behalf of the Nazi vision of a racial utopia free of Jews.” Some of them, after being informed to a certain degree of the intensity of what they might be required to do in a now-subdued country, asked to be released from their work and placed elsewhere—and the option to leave appears to have been offered to them by their commander. Indeed, Browning even recounts the story of a police officer who requested and was granted his release, and who obtained a promotion on his return to Germany. Nonetheless, only 12 men in the 500-man strong battalion would choose to withdraw as they learned the true nature of the jobs. Furthermore, by all accounts, the majority of them would suffer terribly as they transformed themselves into the monsters they would soon become.

Ordinary Men is horrifying not least because of its graphic accounts of the actions undertaken by the now-policemen, once transported to Poland. But what makes it truly terrible is its aforementioned psychological plausibility. These men were indeed “ordinary.” They weren’t following orders under threat of punishment. With this firmly in mind, Browning confronts and articulates the moral conundrums associated with the study of history. It is all-too-tempting (and also something that provides a certain degree of naïve psychological security) to read the past and to cast the villains as all-villainous and the heroes as all-virtuous. But that’s propaganda, not history. Even in the literary world, the work of quality presents the ever-present moral battle not as raging between purely evil states and good, or purely evil people and good, but as a consequence of the complex and paradoxical forces of good and evil working themselves out in terrible conflict within each soul, between individuals, and in the battle between states. This is not to say that darker forces do not sometimes dominate at one or more of these levels. I’m not equating the Axis powers with the Allies, or the Soviet or Maoist communists with the free West. But the temptation toward deceit, arrogance, resentment, ideological possession, and the projection of all evil onto something conveniently other than a combination of self, compatriot, family, and state is dangerously alluring. At the very least, it interferes with the kind of introspection that might produce genuine moral progress—which is something still required, no matter how good the current state—on the part of individual and society alike.

The Order Police were placed under the auspices of four special mobile units of the SS known as Einsatzgruppen, described by Browning as “the thin cutting edge of German units that became involved in political and racial mass murder in time a population of about 1800 Jews. Globocnik or someone close to him informed Trapp that these people were to be rounded up, as usual, but that only the males capable of working were to be transported. The elderly, women, and children were to be executed on the spot.

One Lieutenant Heinz Buchmann refused, forthrightly, stating that “he would in no case participate in such an action, in which defenseless women and children are shot.” Lieutenant Hagen, Trapp’s representative, agreed to reposition Buchmann and placed him in charge of the male Jews selected for work. This is a very telling episode, in my estimation. Buchmann made his move under very dire and dangerous personal circumstances, and was not punished for it: He was merely reassigned. Although there were undoubtedly times when moral objection to an unacceptable order (the massacre of unarmed women and children certainly topping the bill) would have resulted in extreme personal danger, and perhaps even danger to family members, we don’t know how common such retaliatory threats actually were, nor how often such malevolent orders could have been successfully refused.

It may be, after all, that under such circumstances the resistor has such a clear upper hand, morally speaking, that it is difficult to effectively criticize or to discipline him. In any case, the next morning, when the truck convoy arrived in Józefów, Trapp made another extraordinary offer: “any of the older men who did not feel up to the task that lay before them could step out.” A dozen men abandoned the operation, after facing some abuse from Hoffmann. Is it too much to point out that a decision of that sort, even when accompanied by accusations of betrayal and cowardice, appears far preferable to outright participation in mass murder of the most conscience-betraying sort? And to note also how tiny the minority of men was who stepped voluntarily aside, and how few followed in their footsteps, even after the example of resistance had been made?

The remaining men were ordered to surround the village, shoot any escapees, escort the Jews to the marketplace, and shoot all too resistant, sick, or frail to comply (as well as infants incapable of the journey). This meant the massacre of the weakest and least able to defend themselves. Something less in keeping with any sense of military honor could hardly be imagined. Trapp himself did not witness the executions: “Oh, God, why did I have to be given these orders,” he said, in a clearly heartfelt manner. His tears flowed copiously. He asked a subordinate if he felt that what was happening was in any manner justified. “No, Herr Major!” he replied. Most telling, perhaps, are the words he stated later to his driver, “If this Jewish business is ever avenged on Earth, then have mercy on us Germans.” There is every bit of evidence that Trapp—and not only Trapp—suffered dreadfully because he betrayed his conscience, despite undertaking his duty, showing full well that obedience to God, so to speak, transcends the duty placed even on conventionally disciplined men by their superiors (just as the later Nuremberg trials insisted).

Culture itself can become corrupt. Obeying its dictates under such circumstances is merely to participate in the corruption, as well as a genuine and serious dereliction of duty (even with regard to the culture itself, regardless of its collective opinion), given that the true duty of the patriot and citizen is revivification of the dead past, lost in chaos, and restoration of its vision. Under such circumstances, there are no zero-risk options: we can choose expedience and its illusory safety, or the great dangers of a long-running pathological game that degenerates into hell.

The evidence regarding the actual shooting of infants is mixed. Some claimed that there were bodies of very young children among the elderly and sick left lying in the doorways, houses, and streets. Others claimed that “almost tacitly everyone refrained from shooting infants and small children.” Nonetheless, once the Jewish inhabitants of Józefów were marched to the train tracks, the slaughter began in earnest. Workers were separated from their families, weeping as realization dawned among them. The Battalion men were instructed to place their bayonets on the backbone above the shoulder blades, and to fire, in unison on order. Excepting a short break, the shootings proceeded until nightfall. It is worthy of note that several additional men (but, again, not too many, refused to take part in this process, after its details had been outlined. These men were merely assigned to alternative duties). Others shot past their victims or hid in a local Catholic priest’s garden until they became afraid they might be noticed. Some spent undue time searching houses.

The executions were a bloody and horrific affair. Using fixed bayonets as aiming guides was of little use: “Through the point blank shot that was thus required, the bullet struck the head of the victim at such a trajectory that often the entire skull or at least the entire rear skullcap was torn off, and blood, bone splinters and brains sprayed everywhere and besmirched the shooters.” Many additional men, including Lieutenant Hergert, an officer overseeing the operation, simply had to—and were allowed to—stop, “I myself took part in some ten shootings, in which I had to shoot men and women. I simply could not shoot at people anymore, which became apparent to my sergeant, Hergert, because at the end I repeatedly shot past… Other comrades were also relieved sooner or later, because they simply could no longer continue.” Those who did refuse to partake in the process were showered with epithets but, as one non-participant indicated, “It was in no way the case that those who did not want to or could not carry out the shootings of human beings with their own hands could NOT keep themselves out of the task. No strict control was being carried out here.”

And here is an account of the response of several people who did follow orders, at least to some degree: One soldier, Franz Kastenbaum, had shot four victims: “The shooting of the men was so repugnant to me that I missed the fourth man. It was simply no longer possible for me to aim accurately. I suddenly felt nauseous and ran away from the shooting site…. I then ran into the woods, vomited, and sat down against a tree…. Today I can say that my nerves were total finished.” Could there be any clearer indication of violation of some inner sense of right and wrong? He then returned to the wood’s edge and rode an empty truck back to the marketplace, suffering no consequences for his actions. Perhaps 20-30% of men engaged in such covert avoidance—although the terrible corollary of that is that 70 to 80% complied. Browning states, “When the men arrived at the barracks in Bilgoraj, they were depressed, angered, embittered, and shaken.” They ate little, drank copiously, and listened as Trapp attempted to place the responsibility on those higher in the chain of command. But the horror remained, and the nightmares began, and the men agreed silently not to discuss what had taken place.

When the policemen were later interrogated about their participation in the events, many denied that they’d had any choice. A smaller fraction attributed their participation to outright cowardice or an unwillingness to lose face. Others rationalized their actions: “I made the effort, and it was possible for me, to only shoot children. It so happened that the mothers led the children by the hand. My neighbour then shot the mother and I shot the child that belonged to her, because I reasoned with myself that after all without its mother the children could not live any longer. It was supposed to be, so to speak, soothing to my conscience to release children unable to live without their mothers.” Browning also notes a remarkable dearth of any discussion whatsoever of anti-Semitism as a motivating factor. Furthermore, “politically and ethically motivated opposition, explicitly identified by the policemen in question, was relatively rare.” It was a matter of personal repugnance, by all appearances, motivated by conscience, often overridden, much to the detriment of not only the victims (with whom our fundamental sympathy should obviously lie) but the perpetrators themselves.

As the work undertaken by Police Battalion 101 continued, those in charge became more psychologically canny. They removed the men from the worst of the work, returning them to the rounding up of the Jews in question and assigning the actual killing to the POW Trawnikis. No doubt, by comparison, this was a great relief, allowing at least one step to be placed between the direct action and the inevitable consequences. The next time the Battalion men were called upon to act as executioners, the Trawniki did the dirtiest of work, drunkenly massacring women and men alike in shallow graves full of water, often after torturing and humiliating their victims, while the Battalion men were “overjoyed” that they “were not required to shoot this time.” Even the small proportion of policemen who were required to shoot did so firing-squad style, and did not have to directly face their victims. Over time, they became increasingly accustomed to the role they were playing in the Nazi actions between Polish lines as agents of massacre.

After such training, conducted at the very expense of the souls and the consciences of the men involved, the mere requirement to round up Jews for the death camps seemed very tame indeed, and this took place at towns such as Radzyń, Łuków, Parczew and Międzyrzecz. By this time, the training (and the self-deceit and self-betrayal) had proceeded to the point where many of the men retained as their cardinal memory the fact that they had to stand at Parczew in a swampy meadow and suffer wet feet. A newly recruited officer, one Captain Wohlauf, even brought his new bride, four months pregnant, to witness the events (specifically at Międzyrzecz), much to the shame and chagrin of the more seasoned men. Frau Wohlauf, now devoid of the military coat she had been wearing, evident to everyone in her dress, watched the events closely—and the military police were now in the thick of it, packing the transport railcars, using whips and guns when necessary and, once the loading had finished, nailing the doors shut. The ratio of deportees to deaths at Międzyrzecz was 10 to 1, compared to the much more well-known deportations at the Warsaw ghetto of 50 to 1.

As Browning reports, the Jews of Międzyrzecz did not march like “‘lambs to the slaughter.’ They were driven with an almost unimaginable ferocity and brutality that left a singular imprint on the memories of even the increasingly numbed and calloused participants of Reserve Police Battalion 101. This was no case of ‘out of sight, out of mind.’” And the situation only worsened from there. At Serokomla, in the northern Lublin district, under the command of Captain Wohlauf, the 200 to 300 Jews who had been gathered and cordoned were ordered, suddenly, to be shot. Each policeman directly faced the individual he was to execute. “Following each round, the next group of Jews was brought to the same spot and thus had to look down at the growing pile of corpses of their family and friends before they were shot in turn. Only after a number of rounds did the shooters change sites.” It is exactly that additional staggeringly callous cruelty that is the true sign that corruption has attained its ultimate victory.

By this time, the once compassionate Trapp appeared to have had little compunction about carrying out his duties. There is no reason to be triumphant about this, or to feel comparatively morally superior: it is an indication that even those who are not temperamentally or, shall we say, philosophically or theologically inclined to delight in mayhem can certainly train themselves to participate in it. This should be an object lesson to us all, given that it is far from obvious that the typical person would have been as merciful as Trapp was to begin with. To me, what the story of Trapp produces is excess and deeper horror, providing evidence as it does for the hell that can await anyone willing to move forward, despite themselves, one terrible step at a time.

Heinz Buchmann, however, continued with his refusal and, although he was not returned to Germany, he was given jobs that kept him isolated from the carnage , and was, indeed, promoted with some regularity during the remainder of his military career. Some made their disapproval of his actions known through curses and insults, but others followed his example. Was it the desire to cling to some sense of propriety, however residual and rationalized it may have been, that allowed Trapp to tolerate and to protect those unwilling to participate in the ordered destruction?
It was not long after this that the gangland style of murdering women and children, kneeling or lying face down, became standard practice, often after the victims had been stripped to their underclothes in the cold autumn weather. This was following the orders of one officer, of whom a later witness testified, “To my regret, I must say that First Lieutenant Gnade gave me the impression that the entire business afforded him a great deal of pleasure.”

It might be apropos to close this section with some of the most chilling words that Browning penned. In the course of all this—let’s call it training—“many had become numbed, indifferent, and some eager killers; others limited their participation in the killing process, refraining when they could do so without great cost or inconvenience. Only a minority of nonconformists managed to preserve a beleaguered sense of moral autonomy that emboldened them to employ patterns of behavior and stratagems of evasion that kept them from becoming killers at all.” Indeed, as the slaughter progressed, and when volunteers were called to carry out the necessary actions, there quickly came a time when there were more available than needed, so that many were turned away.

How does hell emerge on Earth? First, because people act in spite of their conscience, even to their own detriment, even when they know it; second because hell arrives step by step, one action of betrayal after another. And it should be remembered that it is very rare for people to stand up against what they know to be wrong even when the consequences are comparatively very slight. And this is something to deeply consider, if you are concerned with leading a moral and careful life: if you don’t object when the transgressions against your conscience are (comparatively) minor, why would you possibly presume that you will not participate when asked to when things truly get out of hand? This is not to say (as we have noted) that everyone capitulates, and thank God for that: Consider the testimony of one Adolf Bittner, police battalion member: “I must emphasize that from the first days I left no doubt among my comrades that I disapproved of these measures and never volunteered for them. Thus, on one of the first searches for Jews, one of my comrades clubbed a Jewish woman in my presence, and I hit him in the face. A report was made, and in that way my attitude became known to my superiors. I was never officially punished. But anyone who knows how the system works knows that outside official punishment there is the possibility for chicanery that more than makes up for punishment. Thus I was assigned Sunday duties and special watches.” But, as Browning points out, no one assigned Bittner to a firing squad for his insubordination.

Tyranny grows slowly, and asks us to retreat in comparatively tiny steps at a time. But each retreat increases the possibility of the next retreat. Each betrayal of conscience, each act of silence (despite the felt resentment), and each rationalization weakens resistance and increases the probability of the next tyrannical move forward. This is particularly the case when a certain percentage of those pushing forward truly delight in the irresponsible power they have now been granted—and such people are always to be found. Better to stand forward, awake, when the costs are relatively low—and, perhaps, when the potential rewards have not yet vanished. Better to stand forward before the ability to do so has been irretrievably compromised. This is the terrible lesson of the Holocaust and, I would say, of all the twentieth-century tyrannies.

How are men who were by all means ordinary and decent citizens of their type (or at least no worse than others, and somewhat randomly selected) transformed into the heartless wolves of destruction who obeyed the terrible orders they were delivered? The answer is not pretty. It’s far too personal, for those who think clearly and realistically while they read and reflect. It’s far too indicative of the terrible dangers of mere order, and the loss of soul and spirit that is the price for sacrificing conscience to the state. It’s far too frightening to consider the terrible places at which it is possible to arrive following one careless and willfully blind step at a time. But it’s necessary to contemplate, if we are to stop, once and for all, the catastrophe of the unconscionable social conformity that accompanies the sacrifice of the still small voice.

There are consequences for following the rules, as this sequence of stories clearly relates. There are consequences to adhering to the order established by social consensus when the social consensus and, therefore, the order, has become pathological. The consequences in this case involved the persecution and torture and death of thousands of people as well as the perversion of the souls of those who were involved in carrying out their unconscionable acts.

If you decide to stand up and refuse an order; if you do something that others disapprove of but you firmly believe to be correct, you must be in a position to trust yourself. This means that you must have attempted to live an honest, meaningful, productive life (of precisely the sort that might characterize someone else you would be inclined to trust). If you haven’t done that, you may not be able to trust yourself when push comes to shove. But if you have acted in an honorable manner, so that you are a trustworthy person, it will be your decision to refuse or to act in a manner contrary to public expectation that will help society itself maintain its footing. By doing so you can be part of the force of truth that stops order itself from becoming corrupt and tyrannical. It has always been so. The sovereign individual, awake and attending to his or her conscience, is the force that prevents the group, as the necessary structure guiding normative social relations, from becoming blind and deadly.
 

Mikkael

Jedi Master
FOTCM Member
Nonetheless, only 12 men in the 500-man strong battalion would choose to withdraw as they learned the true nature of the jobs.
This depressing ratio shows clearly how scarce are people with developed moral convictions, that majority of humankind despite reaching their middle age are totally fragmented and immature. Who knows how they've been primed to succumb to such mind control and horrors. But then taking the point of JBP, what matters is what do I do when facing growing evil around? Thanks @Voyageur for food for thought.
 

Debra

Jedi Master
A "New" interview and discussion with JP has been posted recently. The interview is from June, 2019, so a little over a year ago.
Apparently, bits of this interview are included in a documentary done in Holland.
This is the complete interview, as explained in the write up underneath the video.
I haven't watched the complete video, but you can see in JP's facial features and his general body posture that he was showing signs of fatigue and generally not in very good place, health wise.


"This interview was not conducted to be a stand-alone interview, it was conducted for a Dutch documentary about male/female-dynamics in Canada.
Within this documentary, we explored how an event like the Toronto van attack could happen in Canada and how Canadians are trying to heal from it.
More broadly, we looked at misogyny and violence against women within Canada, and what it is about contemporary feminism that makes some men angry or lost.

We also paid attention to men suffering from violence that their female partners had inflicted upon them. As prominent Canadian voices, we included both Margaret Atwood and Jordan Peterson.

Psychology professor Jordan Peterson has become a controversial figure ever since speaking out against Bill C-16 (2016), a law which adds gender expression and gender identity to the Canadian Human Rights Act.
He has received both praise and criticism after the publication of his self-help book 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos (2018).

His fans are thankful for the advice he’s given them to take responsibility for their lives, his critics argue that his emphasis on the danger posed by ‘postmodern neo-marxists’ is dangerous in itself. He has been accused of being anti-feminist and feeding into the alt-right.

While he gained support among people who do identify with the alt-right, he himself does not. Peterson has become an important inspiration for various men’s groups, an influential voice.

Therefore, we wanted to get clear where he stands on contemporary feminism and how he interprets the van attack, which took place in the city he lives in.

Since the documentary episode only allowed for brief passages from the interview, while Peterson’s answers are extensive, we decided to provide the entire interview.

We talked to Peterson on the 4th of June 2019, in Toronto, Ontario.

Since there were some breaks (for adjusting the camera and for having coffee) during the interview, it consists of multiple takes. Apart from leaving out the breaks themselves and making the transition between breaks more fluent, no further editing has been done.
 

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
A "New" interview and discussion with JP has been posted recently. The interview is from June, 2019, so a little over a year ago.
Apparently, bits of this interview are included in a documentary done in Holland.
This is the complete interview, as explained in the write up underneath the video.
I haven't watched the complete video, but you can see in JP's facial features and his general body posture that he was showing signs of fatigue and generally not in very good place, health wise.

Thanks for this, Debra. Started in on the interview and will have to finish later. Given the time/circumstances when he did this (as seen so far), Jordan is fired up.

Jumped on to also post JBP Weekly:

September 14th, 2020 - DR. JORDAN B. PETERSON

On 'Authentic Speech'

1600321096763.png
I received a letter from a PhD student out of the University of Houston who asked me the following question:

"Could you please point to good literature about authentic speech? I have heard you speak about its importance. But I am not really sure how to achieve that, how to tell when I am being authentic. This issue has puzzled me a lot for the last 5 years, but I still do not have a clearer understanding of it. What can you recommend?"

First, a book: A Way of Being by Carl Rogers, 1980
-
With regards to telling if you are speaking authentically:

Listen to yourself talk, as if a stranger was talking. Try not to identify too much with what you are saying. Then, observe. See if what you are saying makes you feel stronger, physically, or weaker. If it makes you feel weaker, stop saying it. Try to reformulate your speech until you can feel the ground under your feet solidifying. Then practice only saying things that make you strong.

Stop trying to use your speech to get what you want. You don’t necessarily know what you want. Instead, try to articulate what you believe to be true as carefully as possible. Then, accept the outcome. Assume that your truth, as lived and spoken, will produce the best possible outcome. It’s an act of faith.

But so is every other way of being.

"If you act in truth, then the order you produce is good regardless of how it appears."


 

bjorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Woke Imperialism:

Joe Biden said he would “curtail foreign assistance to countries” who do not uphold the values of the LGBTQ community, regardless of whether they clash with the traditions and beliefs of the country in question. He was also quoted as saying he would establish an office in the State Department with the job of promoting LGBTQ rights around the world. Biden says he would withhold foreign aid if countries discriminate against LGBTQ people.

 
Last edited:

whitecoast

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Woke Imperialism:

Joe Biden said he would “curtail foreign assistance to countries” who do not uphold the values of the LGBTQ community, regardless of whether they clash with the traditions and beliefs of the country in question. He was also quoted as saying he would establish an office in the State Department with the job of promoting LGBTQ rights around the world. Biden says he would withhold foreign aid if countries discriminate against LGBTQ people.


It’s a good start, but I’d like to see all the foreign aid halted. In my experience it just seems to go to civil society and extractive industries, i.e. to increasing the power of oligarchs or institutions that would be all too eager to sell out their own country and peasants in exchange for being a part of their globalist club.
 

bjorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
In other words, get in line, get woke and accept our ideology as the gospel of truth.

People on Twitter think its former CEO has called for the execution of his political opponents, after Dick Costolo warned that "me-first capitalists" will face firing squads during "the revolution."

 

bjorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
If BLM is designed to cause a race war than it's them against all the other races. Apparently they not only hate America but also Chinese culture. In Calgary's historic Chinatown they have painted over a beautiful mural with something absolutely disgusting and the local residents are not happy about it. The hate group is known for causing havoc and destruction and their ''artistic side'' is no different.

 
Top Bottom