Seven Answers to Jordan Peterson’s seven questions on the Darkstream. 1. What if it was nothing but our self-deceit, our cowardice, hatred and fear, that pollutes our experience and turns the world into hell?
Then the problem could be solved by sweet reason and a dedication to facing the truth about ourselves. But it isn’t so it can’t. And it isn’t our self-deceit, cowardice, hatred, and fear, but our greed, our pride, our lusts, and our will to power. Beyond that is the problem of supernatural evil, which is totally unaffected by our internal emotions. Moreover, this concept of evil contradicts Peterson’s own stated belief that it is group identification that lies at the bottom of the human motivation for evil
2. This is a hypothesis, at least—as good as any other, admirable and capable of generating hope. Why can’t we make the experiment, and find out if it is true?
Because it will turn out like every other utopian experiment; in large quantities of bloodshed. Especially since Peterson is determined to try the experiment on a global level.
3. Does survival itself depend upon a solution to the problem of war?
No. Because war is not the problem as far as human survival is concerned. Neither is religion. Science, and more importantly, technology, are what pose a potential danger to the species. That being said, inasmuch as this is a problem of survival, the problem is likely to cure itself, as the infrastructure required to maintain this level of destructive technology is more fragile than either the Earth or the species.
4. Is Tammy Peterson’s dream that it was five minutes to midnight back in 2016 prophetic or significant in any way?
No. It was a bad dream and nothing more. Her dream is considerably less significant than Jordan Peterson’s dreams about dog-headed aliens butchering his beautiful cousin and offering the meat to him.
5. Is history itself a unitary phenomenon?
No. History is neither a force nor an inevitability. It is merely a very incomplete record of the past. Peterson is no more correct in his bizarre take on history than Marx or Fukuyama were.
6. Is Western culture the only one to possess a history based on objective events?
No. There are ancient Egyptian records of the height of the annual Nile flooding dating back to 3050 BC. The formal rules of sumo date back to 726 BC. The tax records of the Qin Dynasty date back to 221 BC.
7. Have I have discovered something that no one else has any idea about?
No, you’re just a very frightened and mentally disturbed individual who was literally driven crazy due to your fear of death.
Jordan Peterson’s grand solution to war is the elimination of competing group identities. One world, one race, one identity. Evil will be vanquished and paradise on Earth will result.
From the transcript of last night’s live Darkstream. I’m still figuring out the system; for some reason the charts I prepared in the edit screen were not available once I went live. Also, thanks to Hooper, we were able to determine that the donation system is working but you have to use the Streamlabs system and not the YouTube one, since my channel has been deemed ineligible for both monetisation and SuperChats by YouTube.
What happened is that comics went from being a fairly broadly distributed product to one that was completely dominated by a single distributor. Now, what usually happens in the case of a single distributor. You can probably guess. They’ve got a monopoly position and so they have a tendency to significantly increase their prices at the expense of everyone else. Remember, the distribution is part of the pie and distribution cannot, by definition, increase the pie, and so it’s always going to have to take something from somebody else.
Now if we’re going to take it, are you gonna take it from Marvel? No, you can’t. Marvel has about 40{434e4795edb8718426f2262f16bc350bda72304c69f2c22d1de5754882bdf177} of the market. Are you gonna take it from DC? No you can’t. because DC is already very closely tied to Diamond. So who do they take it from? Well, when a distributor can’t take it from the suppliers, they take it from the retailers, and that’s exactly what’s happened.
You know I knew what this situation was going to be even before I knew what the numbers were because I have worked in a distribution retail channel before. My father owned a large supplier in a particular industry and so my first job out of college was actually managing part of the distribution channel, so what that means is that if you look at a normal distributor, the kind of distributor that Arkhaven is working with, the kind of distributor that Castalia is working with, they usually do a 20{434e4795edb8718426f2262f16bc350bda72304c69f2c22d1de5754882bdf177} markup at most.
Diamond’s markup is 38 percent. And so what that means is that if you run the numbers and you work out the details, then what you see is that instead of taking 11.9 percent of the total retail price of a comic, that would be what a normal distributor takes, Diamond is actually taking 22 percent of the total retail price of a comic. so where does that additional 10 percent come from? Well, it’s not coming from Marvel and it’s not coming from DC, it’s coming from the comic stores. I worked it out, and the comic stores are losing, on average, each of them, $31,885 apiece because Diamond is a monopoly. So that’s what’s killing them, that’s why we’re seeing so many retailers going out of business, and this is not going to improve because the market is declining so everybody is trying to take bigger and bigger pieces out of a smaller and smaller pie.
I calculate that it’s going to go down from 74 million [correction: 79 million] last year which is well down from you know the previous figure of 86 million, and I believe it’s gonna drop down to 67 million or less by the end of the year.
The decline from 100.32 million units in 1997 to 67 million in 2001 is known as the Comics Crash. However, the current decline from the 2015-2016 peak of 89 million appears to be gaining momentum, due to rising prices, failing stores, and declining quality. The average price of comics has risen from $2.62 in 1997 to $4.14 in April 2018, Top 300 unit sales are already down 7 percent for the year, and the much-ballyhooed move of SJW Marvel writer Brian Bendis to DC is proving more disastrous than even the skeptics had expected.
I have been tipped off by DC editorial sources that the numbers that DC Comics received were a lot lower than expected. A lot lower. Less than you might expect for a new Superman title relaunching the character with A-List talent and spinning out of Action Comics #1001 and DC Nation #0 and more like – well, a newly launching Brian Bendis title at Marvel, without the tiered variants. And out of the top ten as a result.
Also note that at -10 percent, total unit sales are down even more than Top 300 unit sales. Put these factors together and it looks as if the comics industry will hit a new 21st century low in annual unit sales by 2019 at the latest, and quite possibly, by the end of this year.
In case you ever found it hard to understand what was meant by the 2-SD IQ gap that prevents effective communication, this comment on a recent Darkstream should help illuminate the concept for you.
I am trying my best to get to know you and figure you out.I am trying to be fair and listen to both sides. But for the life of me I am not getting it. Because what and when you are saying it is nonsense it is just a fruit salad. It just sounds like psycho babble to me to same way whatever Peterson is saying sounds like psycho babble to you. I am thinking this is one of those times it might be best I just close my eyes and ears before they are too polluted with your nonsense. From where I sit I am hearing Peterson is selling out all over the country and filling up venues with people that obviously understand and need his nonsense and will pay for it. And it is obvious to me that he might be doing something ok and right because people are trying to bring him down and stain him and ruin him for whatever nefarious reason they have. Whether it ruins or interferes with their narrative like the catholic church did back in the day when they destroyed everything that wasn’t in their book of ideas. So whether your cause is noble or not is yet to be scene and I can hear nor sense any real motive for me to be on your side to disparage the man. It just sounds like you are making things up as you go along the same way you are accusing him for doing… that’s what I am getting out of this…
It’s a good poing. After all, how can Hitler possibly have been bad? He filled up venues all over Germany and a lot of people around the world went well out of their way to try to bring him down for whatever nefarious reason.
I sometimes wonder what it would be like to legitimately be that stupid. Just the process of getting up, eating breakfast, and making the morning commute must feel like an awe-striking series of wondrous mysteries. It’s as if the guy can see the tree and see the acorn, but has no idea that they might be related somehow. And as for the crazy notion that squirrels eat trees and live in them, well, that’s clearly just psycho babble.
Jordan Peterson’s philosophy doesn’t sound like word salad to me because it is so intellectually advanced, it sounds like word salad because it is word salad.
From the recent transcript of my second successful attempt at livestreaming a Darkstream. If you want alerts for when I go live with them, subscribe to the voxdaychannel, which is distinct from the Voxiversity channel.
Here’s the thing: If Jordan Peterson is a genuine free speech advocate, then what is he doing on Patreon? Why is he supporting an SJW-converged organization that is actively and aggressively opposed to free speech? Has anyone asked him that?
You know, the thing that you have to understand is that in the same way that Ben Shapiro is a fake American conservative, Jordan Peterson is a fake free speech advocate. Now, I’m not saying that the free speech is the most vital thing in the world – I’m not a free speech advocate myself – but if you’re going to sell yourself as a free speech advocate, if you’re going to claim to be a free speech champion, if you’re going to run around the country, run around the world, lecturing people on how they they have to be individuals and they have to speak their own truth, then there is absolutely no way that you should be working with a company like Patreon. There’s absolutely no way that you should be supporting any business that is as ruthlessly prone to speech policing as Patreon!
This led to an informative exchange in the comments when one commenter quite reasonably requested a clarification concerning my claim not to be a free speech advocate. For the record, I am not, nor have I ever claimed to be, a follower or admirer of Voltaire. I will absolutely not defend anyone’s absolute right to blaspheme or even be impolite, much less to the death. To the contrary, I have even pointed out how very wrong he was. JustAintThatWay:“… I’m not a free speech advocate …” Say what? Clarification requested. From any WesternCiv, let alone a book publisher. “I may not agree w/ what you say, but will defend to the death, your right to say it”-style. VD: Read more about the history of free speech. It’s nothing more than a philosophical attack on Western Civilization in general and Christianity in particular. JB Bury, a strong advocate, has written a very informative history that makes it clear that it was always about getting rid of the West’s blasphemy laws. Joshua Coleman: I’d recommend you read the Supreme Court rulings in Reynolds vs United States, Commonwealth Vs Nesbit, and Lindenmuller Vs The People. They reaffirm that the First Amendment, and in particular the Religion clause, was not a free license to say anything you like. Specifically, anything that was considered “Subversive of good order” and “overt acts against peace” were not protected, and among those things was advocation of immorality. The Libertarian / Conservative / Liberal interpretation of ‘you can say anything’ is ahistorical. The First Amendment was to protect your right to express your Christianity without State interference, not to subvert Christian order and morality. You could be prosecuted for doing or advocating immorality such as bigamy, polygamy, parricide, infanticide, etc.
After six failed attempts, I finally got the Darkstream going live via YouTube, which considerably improves both the video and audio. If you want alerts for them, subscribe to the voxday channel, which you should note is NOT the Voxiversity channel. There were still a few minor bugs, which is why I deleted the video, but I should be able to get it rolling again tonight. Far more people are watching these on YouTube than on Periscope, and I’d rather not use a Twitter-owned service due to my being banned there anyhow.
Also, if you’re ELoE on Idka, check it out later today for more communications news.
These revelations about the man are entirely consistent with his philosophy. His philosophy is openly evil; His philosophy is not, contra most of his fans’ assumptions, respectful of the Bible and respectful of Christianity in any way. You know, the fact that you talk about them as myth and you talk about the importance of myth and all this sort of thing is it’s more polite than calling them fairy stories, but in some ways it’s actually more damaging because if you’re a frothing-at-the-mouth New Atheist who is just complaining about fairy tales and no evidence and that sort of thing, you’re very easily dismissed. It’s very very easy to demonstrate that what those people are saying is objectively false.
On the other hand, when you are talking about myth, and you’re talking about tradition, and you’re babbling away in this huge fog of barely penetrable citations and these meandering streams of references that resemble a Joycean novel more than anything else, more than anything coherent, it’s it’s difficult to disprove that because it’s just nonsense. I mean, how how do you factually disprove ambiguous nonsense? You know, it’s very, very difficult because there’s nothing there. When somebody tells you 2+2 is 37, it’s relatively easy to to prove that that’s not the case, but when the person is going on and babbling about the snake in the tree is because the Garden of the Eden, and children in the trees, and vision over the horizons, and this relates to the shame one feels, and is not worthy of taking one’s pills… I mean how do you disprove that?
There’s nothing there to disprove, it’s just this streaming salad of words. It’s like being presented with a fruit salad and someone says “well critique that, critique that argument!” Yeah, you’re looking at it and, I mean forget, Stefan Molyneux’s “that’s not an argument”, I mean, it’s a fruit salad! There’s nothing to it, there’s nothing to argue about it, and so, you know, it’s it’s very difficult for me to deal with Peterson’s defenders because what they do is they inform you that he really means X when he says Y, and so how do you argue with that?
All you can say is well, no, he said what he said. They say, no, but that’s because he would get in trouble in Canada, you know, he has to be careful of what he says, and he has to speak this nonsense but what he really means is… you know, then they come up with something. Sometimes they come up with something sensible, more often they don’t, but it’s all nonsense. And so there’s a reason why Peterson tells his fans not to read Maps of Meaning because when you read Maps of Meaning, if you are able to not be overly impressed by this stream of barely relevant citations and references, even if you don’t understand the references well enough to understand that he doesn’t always know what he’s talking about, you still have to understand that the connection of these things isn’t there.
It’s because he’s drawing such bizarre connections that if I were to simply prove that his syllogism doesn’t hold up, the average person’s response to me is going to be “well what does that have to do with it?” To which my response is EXACTLY! It’s both wrong and unrelated at which point the sufficiently intelligent or the sufficiently open-minded individual realizes Jordan Peterson is crazy. But the Peterson defender just does the “I can’t hear you, I don’t want to hear it, you know he’s doing so much good!” But what Peterson is functionally doing in terms of the “good” that he is doing is that he is helping young men jump from the fire into the frying pan. Now you might say oh that’s good, you know, that’s progress, but it’s really not, because whether you’re in the fire or whether you’re in the frying pan you’re still going to get cooked. There is no natural progression from the fire to the frying pan to getting out of the kitchen.
The revelations to which I referred in the video are these, which is the news that in 2009, Jordan Peterson attempted to dismiss as conspiracy theory the accusations of a police officer concerning a high-level coverup of a pedophile ring in Canada. It’s hard not to recall that similar accusations of coverups by the authorities were similarly dismissed in the well-known cases Jimmy Savile, Rotherham, and Telford scandals, to name but a few, before being subsequently confirmed.
Commissioner G. Normand Glaude concluded Tuesday that children were sexually abused by people in positions of authority and that public institutions failed victims by mishandling complaints dating back to the 1960s.
But many were looking to him to lay to rest a more sinister explanation for those events, that it was the work of a pedophile ring and a cover-up that reached all the way to the Attorney General’s office was at play.
He did not, saying in his 1600-page report that he would not make an unequivocal statement about the theory either way.
For some, it may not have mattered.
An explanation that to some appears to debunk a conspiracy theory just further confirms others’ suspicions, said University of Toronto psychology professor Jordan B. Peterson.
“It’s very difficult to disprove a conspiracy theory, because every bit of disproving evidence can be just written off as additional evidence that these conspirators are particularly intelligent and sneaky,” he said.
Conspiracy theories are usually started by people who are very untrusting and it gathers steam among others who are somewhat untrusting, Peterson said.
They’re psychologically compelling because they neatly tie together troubling facts or assertions, he said. When things go badly there are often many explanations, and an orchestrated conspiracy “should be pretty low on your list of plausible hypotheses,” Peterson said.
“A good rule of thumb is: Don’t presume malevolence where stupidity is sufficient explanation,” he said.
“Organizations can act badly and things can fall apart without any group of people driving that.”
While Glaude made no definitive statements about a ring, he declared there was not a conspiracy by several institutions to cover up the existence of any such operation, rather that agency bungling left that impression.
I recall to your attention my reliable heuristic for detecting evil: does it justify, rationalize, excuse, defend, encourage, advocate, or require sex with children in any way, openly or covertly, directly or indirectly? Then it is evil, topped by an evil sauce, with a side of evil.
And given that we already know Jordan Peterson’s philosophy is evil, given that we already know that the man himself is seriously disturbed, we can’t pretend to be too surprised to discover that its true depths may be considerably deeper than anyone imagined.
The importance of the revelations concerning the Deep State’s involvement in directly manipulating US democracy for the last 38 years is going to have global repercussions, even if absolutely nothing comes of it in the USA itself. I addressed these recent revelations about Stefan Harper’s interference in the presidential elections in a Darkstream.
I’ve always been very cynical about US politics, but the thing that is amazing is that I wasn’t anywhere nearly cynical enough. It was it was just astonishing to me to read these revelations of what Stefan Harper has been doing since the 1980 elections. I mean this is absolutely and utterly remarkable, and you know, a lot of people are pessimistic that anything’s going to happen. A lot of people are saying “oh well what difference does it make now that we know, what is anyone going to do about this?” but the reality is that it is bringing the end of the neo-liberal world order closer.
The neo-liberal world order has already failed. Even people who were part of constructing it, and people who are true believers in it, people like Henry Kissinger, they know this. I mean, when you’ve got people like Francis Fukuyama, who was a firm and strong believer in the neo-liberal world order and he famously pronounced “the End of History”. Not fifteen years later, he’s been desperately trying to walk back his words and claim that that he meant something other than than his actual meaning and so forth because it is so readily apparent to everyone that the neo-liberal world order is failing.
But what we’re seeing here is that in addition to it failing, people are increasingly unable to even believe in the false front that it presents, and so it’s really, really remarkable to see how much this has changed, how much people’s perceptions have changed, not just in the United States, but around the world. Think about what this is doing in Russia, think about what this is doing in China, even more importantly, think about what this is doing in all the countries like Indonesia, in countries like Korea, in countries that are currently making decisions about which way they are going to go.
Jordan Peterson is an absolutely shameless and filthy liar, but he is now tweeting about how angry and upset he is, and how pathetic Ari Feldman is, because Feldman is doing the same thing to Peterson that Peterson is doing to the Right. I didn’t like Peterson before. I thought that he was wrong and I thought that his philosophy was evil. I picked that up relatively quickly, but I didn’t really have anything against the guy personally. You know, I felt pity for him because he’s somebody who has clearly known a lot of suffering and tragedy in his life, but you know what, after I read those tweets where he was saying that you have no right to be proud of your culture, you have no right to be proud of your race, you have no right to be proud of your nation, you have no right to be proud of your tribe, you have no right to be proud of your people… you know what? Fuck him!
Anyone who is going tell me that I should not take pride in the tradition that my grandfather established for me, for my brothers, and for my children, can go to Hell. I have nothing but utter contempt for that attitude. You know, Petersen goes around saying “oh you should you should create your own standards and define your own truth and do your own thing” and all this kind of crap, that is not something that is going to preserve Western civilization, that is not something that is going to preserve the West’s traditions, and I’ll tell you something else. Jordan Peterson absolutely lies, because he says the goal of the far right is “to unjustly bathe in the glories of the past.”
That is totally false. What we on the right want to do is we want to be worthy of the glories of the past. When we look at the story of Leonidas and the 300 Spartans we want to be inspired by that, we want to be worthy of that. You do not develop courage on your own, you develop courage by seeing the example in others, and especially in others like you, especially in your family members.
Jordan Peterson is a man without honor. Jordan Peterson is a man without courage, and while I don’t think it’s true that Jordan Peterson is an anti-semite, I don’t think that it is true that Jordan Peterson is a dog-whistler, I think Jordan Peterson is scum. I think Jordan Peterson is a man without balls and I think Jordan Peterson is one of the very last people on Earth that anyone should be listening to. He is not going to teach young men to become men, he is not going to teach men, to become heroes. His path is the path of the rabbit.
“Ever to excel, to do better than others, and to bring glory to your forebears, who indeed were very great … This is my ancestry; this is the blood I am proud to inherit.”
– Homer, The Iliad
UPDATE: The new Darkstream which cites the newly exposed evidence that Jordan Peterson is a globalist snake in the grass is up.
I’ll be going on it to discuss Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson at 2:30 Eastern today. Discuss amongst yourselves….
It was definitely a high-energy interview. My favorite part was this:
Alex Jones: “WE DON’T NEED JORDAN PETERSON TELLING US HOW TO WIPE OUR ASSES!”
I didn’t misrepresent Jordan Peterson at all. I can conclusively support my case, which is constructed entirely upon his own words. The cargo cultist reaction is about what one would expect.
And this guest is the worst. Totally misrepresented Jordan Peterson entirely. From basic stuff like “Rule two: Take your pills” to big stuff like calling him fundamentally unbalanced, when Jordan answers questions like “do you believe in God” with “I act as if God exists, now you can interpret if you think i believe in God”. These are not the ramblings of an unbalanced person, like this guest appears to think, but the well thought out and articulated answers to fundamental questions Peterson addresses constantly.
You guys are really throwing the baby out with the bathwater on this one and losing credibility FAST.
The funny thing is that it is always Peterson’s fans who misrepresent him. Usually because they a) haven’t actually read his books or b) don’t understand what he is saying.
The great forces of empiricism and rationality and the great technique of the experiment have killed myth, and it cannot be resurrected—or so it seems. We still act out the precepts of our forebears, nonetheless, although we can no longer justify our actions. Our behavior is shaped (at least in the ideal) by the same mythic rules—thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not covet—that guided our ancestors for the thousands of years they lived without benefit of formal empirical thought. This means that those rules are so powerful—so necessary, at least—that they maintain their existence (and expand their domain) even in the presence of explicit theories that undermine their validity. That is a mystery. And here is another:
How is it that complex and admirable ancient civilizations could have developed and flourished, initially, if they were predicated upon nonsense? (If a culture survives, and grows, does that not indicate in some profound way that the ideas it is based upon are valid? If myths are mere superstitious proto-theories, why did they work? Why were they remembered? Our great rationalist ideologies, after all—fascist, say, or communist— demonstrated their essential uselessness within the space of mere generations, despite their intellectually compelling nature. Traditional societies, predicated on religious notions, have survived—essentially unchanged, in some cases, for tens of thousands of years. How can this longevity be understood?) Is it actually sensible to argue that persistently successful traditions are based on ideas that are simply wrong, regardless of their utility?
Is it not more likely that we just do not know how it could be that traditional notions are right, given their appearance of extreme irrationality?
Is it not likely that this indicates modern philosophical ignorance, rather than ancestral philosophical error?
Peterson’s initial error is that he still accepts the false assumptions of the rationalists and claiming myth is dead. I’ll explain the consequences of that error in the Darkstream.
So, I finished the book and took a reasonable amount of notes, although considerably fewer than I would have anticipated. This is not my review, which I’ll probably post on Monday, merely a list of things I noted directly from the book rather than from interviews, videos, or statements by his fans or detractors.
12 Things I learned from reading 12 Rules for Life: A Darkstream
Jordan Peterson is doing philosophy and religion, not psychology or science.
Jordan Peterson is a gamma male and a physical coward
Jordan Peterson is a man who is psychologically scarred by tragedy. This is probably why he believes both life and evil are primarily defined by suffering. He has really suffered and he genuinely merits an amount of pity.
Jordan Peterson is not a man of the Right
Jordan Peterson is not a Christian
Jordan Peterson does not understand evil
Jordan Peterson doesn’t entirely believe in individual responsibility.
Jordan Peterson does not know what chaos is.
Jordan Peterson does not follow his own advice.
Jordan Peterson does not have a good grasp of either science or history.
Jordan Peterson’s perspective is shaped by Holocaustianity.
Jordan Peterson is a moderate who worships balance.
