@@sadbuttrue1187 No, a wage they don't like (ironically due to Government interference in the labour market) is worse than bloody murder. Murder doesn't faze them, freely contracted work does.

They are naive most likely, which is dangerous. If they where given the chance to act on those feeling's, it would be too late before they realized the tremendous wrong they had done. At that point I suspect they would have to rationalize their wrong doing. A sort of bloody cognitive dissonance.

@@thekalamazookid4481 I think they lack an appreciation for the tremendous achievements of western civilization and capitalism. They can only see the faults in the current system. Problems do exist, of course, but incredible progress has been made. To ignore that, and to ignore the horrific failures of every Marxist government that has ever existed, is to ignore reality. It is very easy for them to act without thought for consequences, because they genuinely believe that the current system is Hell on Earth. Naive isn't strong enough of a term. They are delusional. And therefore dangerous.

I agree to a certain extent. I don't want to paint them all with the same brush, however there is definitely a sect of them that are dangerous for this reason. I was thinking more about the average person in the ranks of the leftist/marxist camp if you will, and how a the effects of mob mentality can lead them to a path of absolute horror contrary to their feeling of righteousness.

@@thekalamazookid4481 : I think your post has more to do with blind zealotry than anything. Only someone who blindly follows what they've been indoctrinated to believe, and then gathers those of like mind to form a mob, would be the kind of characteristic you mention. And before I go on, I agree with you, with what you said. I'm merely pointing out the fact that, psychologically, it is a delusion to simply accept and not question. These kinds of behaviors are most often seen in events that transpire between the police and the citizenry, where when a shooting (intentional or not is irrelevant here) resulting in a death, the mob gets formed because of the emotion running rampant among the individuals of the group. And to spite the truth of the matter later, as was shown by the Michael Brown case, the mob still wanted the head of the cop, Darren Wilson, on a pike -- notwithstanding the evidence that came to light that exonerated him. The same was said of Kyke Rittenhouse, when I've run into people that only know what the media reported, and not the whole story. The biggest issue I find today is, to spite the fact we have access to information, there is a severe problem with emotional cognitive dissonance -- that no matter what the facts and evidence shows, or what the science of a given matter is, there are thousands, maybe millions, of people who disregard what the objective science actually says, and still goes with the idea that what they "feel" or "believe" is more important than what objective reality is, and thus, show their cognitive dissonance for what it is. This problem then manifests in political discourse, when the emotional many do things or want things the rational minority know is wrong, or is outright false. In some cases, this even leads to regression, or worse, such as black people assaulting or even killing Asian people, knowing they wont be prosecuted, because of the fear from government not wanting to uphold the Rule of Law, lest they be called "racist." This is why I've been telling people that unless this crap about one group of people _has to be_ racist, while another group _possibly cannot be_ racist, we will not progress, but instead, regress. In some ways, segregation is acceptable again, and I fear that a reverse kind of Jim Crow will take hold, sooner or later, and in the process, MLK's message of judging people not by color of skin, but by content of character, will be lost -- and in the process, this country will internally implode, and ethnic tribalism will completely take over.

Hail lobster!

Hail lobster

Hail lobster

Marvin the Martian explains why Jeff Bezos is a-okay.

what a bizarre situation he lives!

I agree. Many who embraced communism don't understand is it was flawed and they jailed people who disagreed with the government. I know that in theory, everyone is equal with communism but some people thought they were more equal than others. Strange times we are living in.

Have you seen the full video with Zizek's response? I strongly recommend it, a serious debate between 2 intellectual heavyweights

​@@adamsmith4813can you point me to it?

@@SandOnToast2598 I think it was called capitalism, Marxism and happiness. If you put in Zizek vs Peterston with Sam Harris chairing you should find it. Lengthy but gripping all the way. 2 well composed, calm and thoughtful academics showing how to construct a debate

@@adamsmith4813 Zizek a "heavyweight"? Aw.....I see what you did there.

You can venture into crypto trading… and make money. The good thing is. You just need a broker to help you. I'm in and I'm making good money.

please what do you mean by trade?

Crypto trading is a digital currency investment that can bring you good profits over time. I would recommend Val J Smith to a real estate agent

I think I came across this name Val J Smith on my way to work on the billboards and as to his effectiveness how can he be contacted please?

✅Val J Smith ii

What book was that in, Notes From The Underground, maybe? I remember reading Dostoevsky when he laid out that sentiment and I had to put the book down and revel in the genius of the observation.

The US is as it is today because you have foreign competitors that bought your democrat party and started spouting bullshit to ignite a culture war. It has been effective so far.

@@cornbrains yes it is! That book is one work of art

@@diogocastro7048 I saw an interview with gothix and an older lady who was raised in Maoist China and some of the things she said sadly resembled what we are starting to see. I could be wrong though and I certainly hope I am.

Absolutely, there’s no doubt in my mind that this is why we see many issues in our youth, young men, and populace in general. LACK OF PURPOSE, lack of struggle.

I would pay a staggering amount of $ to be at that talk

Yes that would be epic

I would easily pay $1000 to see that.

Where do I buy tickets! Oh boy I hope it happens

Mmm yum I'd like to see that too. Lots of lube and no rubber

Fuck those murderous bastard

They’ll cheer… and if their “glorious” revolution comes to be, they’ll rape, pillage and murder until, inevitably, it’s decided that they are part of the problem, and it’s them and their family up against the wall.

Don't worry, they have a problem..

Jordan Peterson is trying to wake us up to how awful these attitudes are. Morally these people are no better than a bunch of white supremacists, in my opinion. However, it's worth bearing in mind that it is unlikely that any of the people who cheer have any influence on anyone beyond their own debating circles.

There have always been those in humankind who thirst for violence; it is unfortunately a part of human nature, but a disturbing one nonetheless for those who are not that way inclined. There will always be such people unfortunately. The conundrum of those who oppose them has always been to do so without violence. For to retaliate against violence with violence; makes us the same. Such has been the conundrum of all opposition of evil since the dawn of time…

Some philosophers have suggested we create our own monsters in order to claim success when we destroy them. Marx's warped philosophy seems to agree with his narcissistic attitude. Holy structures saved me.

Same for me. However, I desire very much to teach my daughter differently and I’m really struggling. It’s really difficult for me to stick to a schedule. Working on it - always an ongoing battle.

yeah peterson doesnt have enough structure though. what you need is more stucture. JOIN ME IN THE REVOLUTION. we will have marxo-structurism. we dont even need to do shit as long as its structured. if your interested go to hustlers university for a PHD(pimpin hoes degree)

@@heidyalfonso6556 You can teach her about socialism by offering to pay her $10 to clean the bathroom. When she's done, tell her 9 of those $'s will be distributed to the neighbor kids so that we can all feel good about ourselves & each other.

@@jameseverett9037 when do you teach her about socialism though

This statement is so self evidently true that it's painful how some people think otherwise.

I think red skull said that

That is so true but politicians teach people with less money to hate people with much more, even if they are great people who worked extremely hard to get it. Rich people are judged quite a bit without knowing them. There are good and bad people in every race, gender, class, or wealth bracket. You have to get to know the individual first, especially in the US where it is very diverse.

@@hamidkarim4811 That's because nobody thinks that. Peterson is attacking a strawman of Marxism to "refute" it.

Marx literally doesn't make any moralistic assessments in the Communist Manifesto though. The whole point of the Manifesto is that if classes exist in a society and those classes have contradictory economic incentives, then it inevitably lead to social conflict. Jordan Peterson is providing you with a faulty analysis, as usual.

I BELIEVE THAT YOU MEANT TO SAY... 'PERPENDICULAR' (AS OPPOSED TO PARALLEL).

Damn. That's... Nice comment. That's all I've got.

@@wwrbhq7136 parallel to shore. I had the same riptide experience once.. was very happy I didn’t panic.

freedom, love that story.

Beautiful story. . .beautiful parable. . .thanks for sharing that. . .

What problems you attribute 'communism' to are problems of living in a monetary-market society, and the 'communism' was state capitalism, whereas USA is more United Corporations of America capitalism - just different flavours of oppression and exploitation within the same base system of monetary-market madness. I don't know if you consider yourself a free thinker or critical thinker and want to know the truth, but if you do the you are free to check out: "Peter Joseph - Critique of Jordan B. Peterson (vs Slavoj Zizek: "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism")" Yes, even the great and powerful Peterson can be rightfully criticized when his has flaws and errors in his views. Peterson is from Canada and probably thinks Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is the biggest dictator, but he never criticizes the big private banks, the corporate rich who control much of the property, wealth and influence legislation in this world game of Monopoly. Somehow he misses the forest for the trees.

So true, and it makes me terrified that there are people who still believe in that crap. Some people really need to smarten up.

@@oleksii000 what's your understanding of monetary-market capitalism? Do you think it is sustainable, healthy and just?

​@@coolioso808 no, I think that it has many flaws and is very far from perfect, but is way closer than any communist attempt in general. And any attemps to recreate that horror is no better than saying "oh well, the slavery/colonisation/monarchy(specifically authoritarian/tyranical systems) were also just misunderstood, why don't we give them another try instead???". Which is what I sadly notice from time to time. Communism is terrible in any means, and listening to those that had a decent/some-what decent life in the soviet union (or any other communist experiment) is no better than asking a relative (that is not even aware that their relative is evil) of a serial killer what they think about their relative. Instead, I'd prefer if people were actually listening to those who lived through the horror so that we would not repeat that.

@@oleksii000 Okay, well here's the mind blower: The 'horrors' of the economic models you attributed to communism is under a monetary-market base system. Congrats on explaining why monetary-market economics is unsustainable, unjust and unhealthy. Historical 'attempts' at communism is a good word because if you knew the definition of communism it would be a state-less, class-less and money-less society and nothing like what was 'attempted' in Soviet Russia or China or Cuba, etc. Those were all within the same monetary-market system globally, just doing a form of state capitalism where the state controlled the means of production, instead of somewhere like the USA where the big corporations, working with the government (as has always been the case) control the majority of the means of production. You get slavery, colonisation, monarchy and authoritarianism because of the existence of money and the market which requires profit maximization, infinite growth and competitive self-interest. Those elements make all people slaves of different natures. A very small elite are super rich owners, yet in their own way are slaves to the monetary system because they fear losing power and control. Everybody else, 99% and more are in poverty or living paycheck to paycheck and playing a game that most of them cannot win, only suffering can increase in this near zero sum game of Monopoly. All for what? A fake human-created control scheme: Money. Do you know when money was invented? Thousands of years ago! By force, upon the human society at that time, by priest-kings and they used it as a means of enslavement. Technology changed and developed since then to create surplus and meet all human needs, technically speaking. But the system of money and markets remained the system of resource management. Do you see the problem there? It's like using a computer chip from the 1980s in a 2020s Smart Phone, it's going to be out-dated technology and not going to work well. We need system change. We can do that, if people recognize the root problem and start working on building a better system. Starting locally is the best place to start. One Small Town Contributionism-style and in a few year's time, communities can be living in abundance and prosperity, working less than 15 hours a week, happier, healthier and richer than ever before, yet money wouldn't be needed to maintain their 'wealth.' "Health is wealth" will be the new measuring stick.

P.S. I recently finished the Gulag Archipelago and was pleasantly surprised by your foreword. Solzhenitsyn also mentions a vilification of the police in Russia prior to the revolution which should be ringing alarm bells right now in the west.

You must have misunderstood him, he's clearly a Nazi with nothing intelligent to say at all

@@chzbrgr123 Projecting much?

Thank God....

@@chzbrgr123 Ah yes, the 4 levels of radicalization. Level 1. Jordan Peterson. :p

@@robertnobles8189 That you can boil potatoes to eat it. Yes, that's a good idea.

@@robertnobles8189 I think he means: Every single idea has a high a priori probability of being wrong before it is evaluated.

@@robertnobles8189 Which is what " All ideas are PROBABLY wrong" means (emphasis on the qualifier added).

@@robertnobles8189 Which is what " All ideas are PROBABLY wrong" means (emphasis on the qualifier added).

"all ideas are wrong" would just be postmodernism

There's a difference between having 'everything someone ever wanted handed to them' (this applies no work or effort or challenges in life to achieve something), which has never been the case ever and is so absurd for Peterson to suggest anybody ever advocated for that and ensuring all humans have access to basic needs so they can attempt to self-acutalize. It's more than technically possible to meet all human needs, but not in the current socio-economic system, which mathematically ends up more like the game Monopoly- which anyone who has played that knows it doesn't end well for most people. There's a fair critique you might be interested in: "Peter Joseph - Critique of Jordan B. Peterson (vs Slavoj Zizek: "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism")"

Maybe that's what all the rich kids are doing in their woke protests.

Who said 'everything' should be handed to them? I guess Peterson did, but I haven't heard many people suggest 'EVERYTHING' should be handed to humans for nothing. But let's look at what human needs are, shall we? You know Maslow, right? Not rocket science, but we know human needs food, clean air, water, shelter, love as a basic foundation for survival. Yet, what has become owned by many private corporations or bankers and sold back to the people, if they can pay, for profits? Food, water, shelter, clothing, and even love, in some ways! Our entire basics for life costs money. Yet we have no technical reason for any single human being go without their needs met. The system is structurally inefficient and unsustainable. Money and markets do a terrible job of distributing resources efficiently. 1/4 of all food produced is wasted! Just plain wasted, never touching a human mouth. All the blood, sweat and tears going into that food - GONE. For what? For nothing. You can't tell me humanity cannot create a better social system to distribute resources better. It can be localized, access-oriented, contribution-based, voluntary and widely effective for everybody to live well. One Small Town Contributionism is one of such examples of this starting to work better.

OK boomer.

@@jeffsmith9420 that better be for the other idiots replying to me, sir

Remember that most people take in information the first time and treat it as truth even when validly opposed or critiqued. Marxism is extremely surface-level thinking and has no regard for how human beings ACTUALLY behave and makes countless presuppositions regarding the nature of Meaning and Purpose. Fundamentally it’s a brutal regime founded on the notion that you and everyone you love is a tiny inconsequential cog in the machine of bureaucracy, with a nice red ribbon on top that seems to entice Lesbian Poetry Studied majors into revolting against the idea of being paid somewhat honestly for typing on a keyboard 5 days a week.

Its a cult.

What insane parts are you talking about? The manifesto is vague, and doesn't give answers to everything, Peterson makes assumptions that are wild, instead of just leaving the vagueness of the manifesto to be vague. I'm not defending Marx, but I'm aware of what he wrote and meaning behind it. What do you think is insane in the manifesto that the crowed cheered?

People who cheer for Marx and communism have not experienced it. You cannot know good if you don't experience evil. Coming from a former communist country I am flabbergasted by westerners who say that communism was actually not properly implemented. You cannot properly implement something that assumes the result of it is going to be utopia without any empirical evidence to support it. All the empirical evidence we have available in our history shows that anything which remotely resembles communism is doomed to become hell. And my comment is partly a response to the thing who commented right above too. Human beings are flawed, it is impossible to just force human beings to thrive to an outcome impossible to achieve. It is hell. It is torture. Coming from Romania, where all the dictator wanted was for people to be prosperous, to be strong, to be powerful to be connected in eternal brotherhood. Yeah, at the surface everything is perfect, but as you dig deep in the system you find the political prisoners, the people who rat their own children, parents or brothers, the poverty, the suffering.... Everything masked under a courtin of artifical pink. Romania, the country I was born in, suffers from GENRATIONAL TRAUMA because of Marxism. There is not one single empirical evidence which confirms Marxist theory to be applicable in real life. There are tens and tens of cases which empirically destroys Marxism. Ironically, Marxism has destroyed all the nations where that empirical evidence is coming from.

There's nothing particularly "insane" about the manifesto. You may disagree with it, but to call it "insane" is a bit dramatic. Have you even read it?

and then they cheered at the "bloody revolution part" and we knew he was right.

he said you dont rise to a position of authority by exploiting people... doesnt that happen all the time??

@@LeossJ433 As he observed, some people do it that way, but the position becomes untenable without considerable oppressive force, as in North Korea. I suspect he meant true and legitimate authority, which is always built on a foundation of service, and results in people being appreciative of leadership.

​ @LeossJ433 He didn't said that it doesn't happens. He said it isn't a stable form of sustained power and historically all the oppresive regimes result in a bloody end for the oppressors. That's not a intelligent form of control to growth.

@@LeossJ433 authority that isn't properly earned is tyranny

I'm actually moving out of Canada to live in Japan after the japanese government decides to reopen the border. I can't deal living with these liberals anymore. lol

@@TTTKyouma FWIW, James Lindsay, ostensibly a part member of the Intellectual Darkweb along with JPB and Weinstein, is an actual Liberal fighting Left Woke-ness and neo-Marxism.

@@gg_rider i dont give a crap who's fighting who. i want nothing to do with it.

@@TTTKyouma Good luck.

@@steven5054 You are knowledgeable. Keiji is a great scholar who also learned Zen Buddism, especially philosophy of nothingness. And Daisetsu Suzuki is the one who introduced Zen philosophy to the world. Thank you for mentioning a Japanese philosopher.

In the context of class stratifications, which is the context of The Communist Manifesto, an inherent quality shared among bourgeoisie IS exploitation for wealth, and for power as well. To share wealth generated is antithetical to capitalism. Therefore, extracting more and more labor surplus from the proletariat is naturally the outcome of the very class stratifications in capitalist society. Otherwise known as exploitation. This ties back in in Chapter 1 of the manifesto, where “capital obtaining” mechanisms available to the proletariat go through the bourgeoisie. IE - to buy a car to get to work, capital owners will enrich themselves by capitalizing on your loan, the auto maker will make their profit off of your inelastic demand for transportation, to labor for livelihood. Just for you to arrive at work, to labor for the bourgeoisie who are then entitled to your labor surplus. The sweat off your brow. But sure JP, there is no position of power yielded to those who are capital owners 😂 Elon Musk doesn’t exist.

@@toms6147 "To share wealth generated is antithetical to capitalism" marx has clearly never heard of dividends in his life. And transportation is very elastic people will consider alternative options then owning a car such as trains, bus, walking, biking, taxi'ing. People buy cars regardless because people are willing to spend money to enjoy the CONVENIENCE of owning a automobile. The ability to control the temperature, the destination and the time is why people spend money on automobiles.

@@toms6147 Your premise is wrong and you show a very deep ignorance of how economics work, which is a prominent marxist trait. In a free market economy, transactions are agreed upon by the parts according to offer and demand, and the best possible alternative is chosen by each. When a worker chooses to work for an entrepreneur, he offers his labor, while the capitalist offers his means of production. The profit generated is then SHARED among them according to the proportion of value they contribute. This is clearly shown when either labor or capital become scarce (therefore more valuable) in a certain situations, it then tends to be rewarded more (salaries rise or dividends increase), and the opposite too. It is therefore the nature of capitalism to share, as one needs to reach a compromise when transactions can only be voluntary, as in a free market.

@@Javiervs258 I think that the terms like "capitalism" or "communism" are being too generalized. I mean "US 1960's capitalism" differs from "US 2020's capitalism" by a lot. (According to The Guardian, CEO's salary in 1965 was 15 times the salary of an employee. In 2021 it was 351 times.) From what I understand of the Marxist theories, they started with pointing out a legit issue - grossly skewed distribution of wealth - and then suggested a completely unrealistic solution. The world does not need communism. It needs a mechanism to dial back capitalism. Not a clue what that should be, though.

@@bleurghs The payment of dividends is your answer. ROFLMAO. Next you will tell us that everyone owns Blackrock and Vanguard and that the MIC it owns doesn't determine US foreign policy.

So was I, I guess...

And I look that way too!!

These punks always assume they will be the ones delivering the bloody violence, not receiving it.

@Lohkyn "Gender studies degree" lmao. I cannot believe that's actually a thing. Maybe people really are devolving as time goes on and technology replaces our natural capacities, the indians might have been right.

No better way to prove the inherent goodness of the proletariat than cheering in support of bloody murder. They want to ridicule the man and defend their ideology but in the end their actions only prove his points, and reveal covert malice underlying the marxist theory.

*infinite mic drop*

I think the laugh had nothing to do with what was said. Probably something in the audience was going on that we couldn't see.

It's all in the Bible...even the way things are going for mankind is pure prophecy. It's a good read.

@@sitarnut Amos was a Communist. Change my mind.

It is incredibly scary. People that laugh at the pursuit of truth, seeking power, masked behind a flawed moral agenda and worst of all, influencing more and more ingenuous people around them.

Thank you for reading and using logic, u like some of the morons in these comments. Some of the comments in here are truly scary. You can tell anyone promoting Marx is clearly a university student being fed propaganda, who think they’re smart. Well guess what, everyone has a degree in 2023 you’re not special.

How did you read a set of Lenin's work and yet somehow fail to grasp the concept of revolutionary vanguardism? Did you skim read his works or were you asleep? Also why is it that you were struck by the term "dictatorship of the proletariat" in the communist manifesto when it mentions this phrase a sum total of zero times whereas Lenin expounds upon it extensively in The State and Revolution, one of the seminal works of Lenin which any set of his works would be incomplete without? I think that you're an absolute charlatan and a bald-faced liar.

Your depiction of the notion of the dictatorship of the proletariat is askew. This phrase does not denote a customary autocratic dictatorship, but rather, within the realm of Marxist theory, it signifies the transitory collective governance of the laboring class, wherein capitalist structures are dismantled and a newfangled socialist order is established.

@@LawSavant Right or wrong, I simply discerned that behind every proffered "transitory collective governance" is a rabid mind seeking absolute power (the word “dictatorship” was the Freudian slip, the reveal), that rhetorical phrase just a stepping-stone-notion for a rabid mind. It could be another Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini or anyone else in yet another socialist cult of personality. The first time I saw AOC talking the “green new deal” and calling for that first transitioning step of tearing down capitalism (in the making right now), I saw the word “deplorables” quietly drooling from her lips, and Evita dancing around in her head.

​@@LawSavantBut just as notion of "bloody violence" was cheered at, are we supposed to forget that that is the underlying method of designating the newfound leadership of the proliteriate? I'm confused, the energy of radicals are the voice that is used to portray any sort of radical movement, at least to the general consensus of the cliche "media". Are you saying it's non violent in anyway? I just watched people cheer for bloody violence lmao

That is because it is true...we have savages alright. it is the ignorant buffoons at the top.

Yea.. it works very well in the short run.. untill your use fullness run out.

@@matsv201 usefulness...as one word, it takes on a whole new meaning...!!

@@slicedbacon2861 i want to be judge only by a Pear of use full people

@@jeanetteschulthe1andOnly ignorant buffons do not exist at the top of a hierarchy. Look up the pareto distribution. The upper echelons of power know exactly what they are doing

Of course they did. I suggest, that they have not the heart to admit it. They’re to busy trying to….. save the world. Which essentially means, enrich themselves.

@@jaywilley955 this comment is epic.

Enrich themselves just like a commie.

@@jaywilley955 You meant, "Save THEIR world"... We aren't part of it, so we're just stealing space by existing.

The ovation the good professor got for his comeback to the jeering got the point across. That roast was damning.

9:14 is wrong. Many people behave like that. Only christians deny this

You are challenged to 'think about your thinking' as even Peterson referenced, about Carl Jung, by seeing if you can critically think, viewing different view points and coming to your own conclusions. Here's an example: Watch "Peter Joseph - Critique of Jordan B. Peterson (vs Slavoj Zizek: "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism")" and see how you feel and think at the end. Any questions? Disagreements? Agreements? Change of mind?

You are political, you just don’t know what statements you say are politics.

Well said after the co-founder of BLM was caught buying mansions.

There were a handful of meatsticks in the audience and it was funny to see Dr. Peterson clap back a bit. I was there and I found some of the "socialists" (all of them in the cheap seats) quite rude.

Same people who couldn't contain their glee when Peterson mentioned violent revolution. Those people want all of us dead or in chains, and they're not too subtle about it.

@@NFT2 Always sad when the naysayers ruin it for everyone. If you disagree and you're going to attend anyway at least listen so you know what you're opposing. Being a jerkwad just makes you a jerkwad and your cause/opinions as jerkwadish.

@@martinzarathustra8604 Ooooh, ad hominen nonsense. Come back with specifics.

"Political Prostitutes" also had a nice ring to it.

If they called them idiots (of which I agree) why wouldn’t they call themselves idiots? And why the term “useful”?

@@fellipedasilva99 a "useful idiot" is someone who is convinced to organise for something that is against their interest; i.e revolutionaries who would almost certainly rebel against the communists they brought to power

@@listenherejack ....and when the 'ueeful idiots' succeed in their 'revolution' they're the first to face the firing squad of the new regime for being troublemakers who have outlived their usefulness....but...but..we helped you get here..yes,thank you..BANG!

@@kimobrien. Trotsky ?? Stalin's purging of the generals ?? Once dictators gain power paranoia soon follows,ANY imagined threat to their power is extinguished,THEY plotted their rise to power using any tool available and now the 'tools' have to be disposed of in case,heaven forbid, a rival uses them so, fear is now the controlling factor,IOW,the people in Stalin's inner circle had to be very,VERY careful,a whisper,smile,glance at the wrong time or place could easily make you 'disappear'

Doesn't matter if Marx was a horrible person or he gave ice cream to orphans on Sunday. The only thing that actually matters is he got all his ideas wrong.

@@willnitschke I think we should always consider the source. When the devil writes a book, even a good book, it going to cause hell.

@@SurrealAdventure The problem with your claim is you can now argue animal lovers are fascists because Hitler was an animal lover. See how stupid it is to ignore the arguments and focus on who makes them?

⁠@@willnitschkeWhy is it important that all of Marx’s ideas are wrong?

@@davespanksalot8413 Because millions of delusional religious nut jobs don't care and want to implement his ideas over and over again. Why do you ask?

the perfect reason why socialism doesnt work, they only ever want to redistribute what they have if everyone else is doing it, never making their own sacrifices. they can argue about how fruitless their sacrifice would be in comparison to a billionaire, but it isnt very convincing to just say things and do another thing. Care about the environment? Ride a bike more. Care about educational inequality? put videos about your specialist subject on the internet. many different things that, if done, more people will do, and then you dont even need governmental enforcement since everyone is already doing it

@@booperdee2 I agree; just look at the history of the kibbutz system and its failures. As Jordan Peterson states, socialism has never created wealth. Capitalism has done more to lift people out of poverty than any other system in the history of man. Yes, it’s true, the rich get richer but the poor get richer as well. All boats rise in a high tide.

@HMS Blackprice haha, you communists are funny folks! Nice grammar by the way; clearly you are top shelf. The ad hominem was just the perfect touch to your “logic”! I would counter you but I found arguing with a fool is often useless. “When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”

@@forgetaboutit1069 "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money." - Matthew 6 : 24

@@definitelynotcrazyrei3890 I’m unsure what you’re implying but isn’t there a passage that says “don’t covet anything that belongs to your neighbor”? As if God isn’t taking care of you that you need to worry about your neighbor? As Thomas Sowell once said “I don’t understand why it’s ‘greed’ to keep the money you have earned, but not ‘greed’ to take someone else’s money”

you are been sarcastic isn't it? I don't think west needs someone to attack communist manifesto.. it is dead already in west.

@@baturaltok1922 are you serious? 😳 There are people literally protesting for it every other week, and universities are riddled with communists. Then there are the BLM leaders who are trained Marxists... buying million-dollar homes 😂

@@baturaltok1922 Well, no. That's the problem. We have BLM and Antifa fomenting violent revolution here in the USA, and communists have successfully infiltrated and have effectively captured major institutions such as academia, the press, and even the Democratic Party.

@@baturaltok1922 i bet your hate watching

LOL! You can see/watch them (communists) for all you care here in YT.

They will never triumph. God will deliver justice sooner rather than later. Communism and socialism are the worst thing that has ever existed

I’m also a communist survivor (from Venezuela)

Sometimes it's better to let them expose themselves and just let it sit for a minute

​@boltjet1352 facts. "Never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake"

@@usdepartmentofthetreasury489 considering venezuala isn't run by communists, i think you're either lying entirely or misinformed about your own country

Luckily the Russian people had the good sense to kill their king.

@@Fopenplop The Tsar was removed from power before he was murdered by the communists. The communists overthrew the democratic government inbetween.

It's more like: Understanding the Political Scenario of INDIA,CANADA,JAPAN,CHINA,USA, FRANCE etc - Amit Sengupta channel UKposts won't let me post links, but that's Yuri Bezmenov speaking.

@@Fopenplop you should find an audio book of Machiavelli's "The Prince." The communist revolution really followed his advice to a T. Like kill the current rulers of the land you conquer, so they will never come back power. The more divers and conflicted a group of people are, the easier they are top conquer. Another Machiavelli tip.

@@Fopenplop The Czar did NOT fund the Bolshevik "Revolution". Why would he fund his own demise?!

Mao Zedong should have learned this dictum.

I need this on a t shirt!

Hail lobster.

@@rustyshackleford3487 learn how the aggressors took over your mind communist subversion communist rules of revolution antifa hand book blm brain washing Confucius institutes ❗❗❗

like we all "have" to be vaccinated, so we have all "equal" treatment? Maybe we are all forced by the "scientists" to accept their only method of health care.

But who’s good and who’s bad!? We all will be on the evil side I guess!? Who is it that’ll wave us though? God?

@@GreatBonFire Wut?

What u smoking homes?

True. That’s why Marxists today set the bar so low for calling someone a Nazi or fascist. It means they can put those labels on anyone they disagree with, instantly marking said person as the epitome of evil, and thus an enemy who needs to be destroyed.

Capitalism demands poverty. Monetary-market economics, overall, ensures poverty and class division. This is not a sustainable system. How do you propose we get out of this unsustainable monetary-market system of extreme inequality and exploitation?

@@coolioso808 THX for the question and not the usual hateful commentary. The fact that poverty has existed at various levels for all time is not necessarily a reflection of any economic system. People can make poor choices, that alcohol or drug for the three day high versus doing something constructive to make money for example. Poor choice, your income will be effected in all kinds of bad ways. Unfortunately, Socialism, Communism, Progressivism are all systems that offer even less in addressing any so called income inequality and what the propagandists call "exploitation". J. Petersen understands the Communist Manifesto. The promises are endless with the extreme left, but historically never really delivered. Even those countries Bernie Saunders calls successfully socialist have admitted to moving away from such political leanings as the ruination of their country would have been inevitable. Suggest doing some actually study to catch up. There has been a lot learned about these systems and how they can lure the under informed into a disastrous thought train. Of course books by Mark Levine, an ardent constitutionalist and supporter of the Constitutional Republic we were supposed to be. One of my older favorites was written by a John Stormer and called None Dare Call It Treason. The 1990's version compared what he wrote in the mid sixties to what had happened by the 1990's, more than validates what is actually going on today too. None of it is good for America and if it continues the US of A will exist in name only and all that free stuff will really cost you then.

​@coolioso808 certainly not a by handing all property over a select elite that illicit absolute control and maintain it by governmental force. The most capitalistic thing the government can do end lobbying and break up monopolies. Without governmental power aiding them abusive corporations will fall.

A lot of them are. Most of them have been wrong. Particularly in history. It's a lot like hypotheses in science. We test out ideas over and over until we get onto something that works.

@@CloudWithoutASky indeed, I took a class in symbolic logic and we learned about truth tables. For a statement to be true every element of the logic has to be true and there can be absolutely no contradictions. One mistake is all it takes to invalidate a statement.

The truth is that most ideas are wrong, it takes all kinds and not all are capable of leading groups of people. It does seem clear historically that marxism/communism is the worst idea. The ussr and China prove it. Look at modern China, do you want to live there? Forced “retraining camps”, soldiers sleeping in the beds of men at the camps to make sure they’re following party lines? Forced organ harvesting? All while the left ignores it, why would we as a country do business with anyone putting people in labor camps/organ harvesting? Let alone holding ppe and drugs from us in an emergency. But Biden is apart of the generation that has caused all of this, the 1993 crime bill (mandatory minimums), farming out the United States middle class and sending all their tooling to China for cheaper labor. Look at flint Michigan in the 80’s, then look at its current state. We’re in this position because politicians care more about lining their own pockets then they care about the American people of what we stand for. We need mandatory minimums, at least to squash some of the corruption. Wake up America, your rights are at stake 🇺🇸

@@im9550 So some arguments are more valid than others? I mean which argument is better if two or more arguments are invalid? Perhaps the most advantageous for your purposes.

@Lucas Brito The old rock and the hard place. Peterson said life was naturally harsh and we are built for trouble. What's cool is life has never been better for most people in terms of leisure and convenience. Yet people bitch a lot.

Small business yes. Once you have enough money to hire people smarter than you to run your business, or if you own a monopoly on an industry, then there’s no difference from those robber barons to the feudal lords he was talking about. Third generational wealth is a major component of what’s destroying the economy in the US. Grandfathers smart enough to open a business giving their obscene wealth to grandkids who don’t understand how they got it but have too much to ever lose it.

Amazon workers peeing in bottles: A yes, this is symbiotic

@@goblin6587 go start your own business if it's so fucking easy

@@traveler3137 you took the words out of my mouth, sir. My sister works for Amazon and she says the high turnover is costing the company a ton of money. They're going to have pay much better than $15/hour to get people to power walk marathons everyday for 13 hours.

@@iamthem.a.n.middleagednerd1053 He/she never said it was easy to start a business. Do you actually mean that it's so difficult for Amazon to stay in business that they have to make their employees pee in bottles to make ends meet?

No it doesn't. This speech has been debunked many times if you just care to do the work. It's pure ideology, in the marxist sense of ideology (a set of ideas designed to justify the current order of any society). These arguments can only operate on people who don't read.

Im sorry but ur white mentor is wrong. 9:14 explains why this “psychiatrist” is wrong. He fails to acknowledge the evil in this world and says that people dont rise to positions of power by the exploitation of others. A failure to understand this, is pure dishonest. If jordan is right, then Explain jails and inmates if humans are so good.

No, they’re not

It should be seen with the full video though, have you seen it? With Zizek's response, 2 intellectual heavyweights debating calmly and composed

Peterson makes arguments?

CHEKA

Yup, those people will probably end up on a list somewhere, and will probably deserve it. Cheering bloody revolution....disgusting

We will all become pure evil in response.

The wordless expression Peterson gives in reply. Encompassing tragedy, disappointment, and perhaps a shade of contempt.

Clueless automatons programmed by online blogs

@@cryptoprofit278 Fake account everyone.

Oh some of them understand. You give them too much credit.

@@amyness3452 I'd like to think that he just is super into investing lmao

@historypoliticsbb So counter his points, don't cry "misrepresentation" and expect anyone to care.

@historypoliticsbb if those 8 pages are based on false premises then theres no use to reading the next 1000. if your entire ideology is based on the grass being red, if i disprove grass is red then theres nothing else to talk about.

You know. Its a fantasy game. And Eldar are specifically NOT people.

@@Cyborg_Lenin *Space* Fantasy

​@@Cyborg_Lenin So what? The point still stands.

Only evil people have Plans, good people don't need plans as they are good and never need an exit strategy ~ Lee Camp

@@kobked-x Strategy = exit strategy, wtf are you talking about?

To an extent, but even people with plans of their own can still be used by others.

@@doloreschansey9556 this . You are intelligent my friend .

@@doloreschansey9556 sometimes you have to knowingly let yourself be used to achieve something more important.

It's very sad that you believe in this fiction.

@@sebji9581 wait what

@@sebji9581 The gulag Archipelago isn't fiction like 1984. It's a series of stories and political essays from the perspective of someone who survived the gulags

@@jayhutzler6706 Sure, but his claims are based on rumours told by the prisoners and his own fantasy. There are no sources to prove this.

@@sebji9581 Ok Putin, anything you say comrade

That alone would have freaked me out.

You know you are doing it wrong when speaker stopped speaking at gave you THAT looks.

All those that whooped at bloody revolution haven't listened. They would themselves all be on an oppressor list just for sitting in that lecture and being at that university

@@andrewbayram765 Idiots like that painting walls with their brains is the only possible upside of a communist revolution I can think of.

The same people whooping for a revolution, are the same ones that want the government to take away anything that could achieve that. They're not just ignorant, they are full on, completely useless, walking meat sacks of pure stupidity.

But capitalist business doesn't work

@@ExistentialWill apparently neither does birth control.

@@martinzarathustra8604 implying that great wealth is preferable to ethical treatment

@@ExistentialWill which is funny, because everything that has allowed you to say that is due to capitalist businesses

@@ExistentialWill Capitalism has created the best countries in the world, and communism has created some of the absolute worst. Go figure.

The proletariat does not care for this Xanax addicted bozo

lmfao. no.

This is an example of Schrodinger's Communist - simultaneously lazy and fat off the government, while also ruthlessly exploited by an uncaring totalitarian system. If a worker didn't work hard enough, they could be fired. If they didn't find a new job, they'd be arrested and sent to a labor camp. The saying should be more like "We're required to work whenever and however they want us to, and they pretend to have goods and services for us to buy."

@@BrainSoap Who are you arguing against? The saying came from within the USSR.

In America, you find the party. In Rasha, Party find YOU.

And in the west they pay you, but squeeze all the time and energy out of you, so you don't get the time OR energy to spend all this money.

@@ElenaKomleva Speak for yourself! I take 2 vacations a year, a nice house, and I spend a lot of my money and energy on my children.

Because you have human decency

You know Zizek destroyed him during the debate do you? Poor JP went into a coma afterwards.

@@pyotrbagration2438 It’s a shame! People should be worn about the dangers of communism. It is very human on the surface but leads to totalitarian oppression of people . The rich and powerful will rule . If you think capitalism is unfair try living in China.

@@pyotrbagration2438 you are pathetic. Zizek struggles to put two thoughts together in his own language, let alone English. Makes as much sense as the dude living under the bridge near my house, and drinks as much as him.

@@pyotrbagration2438 stinks.

Hail Lobster

@daredevillive what do you mean who is "them?" They are the Ta Nehisi Coateses of the world and the woke morons who (literally and figuratively) paint Jordan Peterson as a villain in comics, and believe his rhetoric is villain esque in real life.

Hail Lobster! Set your life in order and pet a cat.

@@joesmith701 Hail Lobster! That's my new battle cry.

Authoritarians and their NPC followers are the "them" that hate Jordan Peterson and anyone who loves inalienable rights.

> book says it will analyse the history of class divisions > peterson says they are saying they are analysing only class divisions. he also believes that human nature is to construct hierarchy and proves this by repeating himself. says that they are linking class struggle only to capitalism when they are analyzing the entire history of class struggle, but very specifically capitalism. > peterson says that marx has never spoken on nature. peterson has not read even read the critique of the goetha program. > peterson asserts that marx has made a binary division. he discusses at least 3 classes in the manifesto. he akgnowledges that it is not clear. it is a dialectical analysis so marx looks at the primary class contradiction. in marxs time class division was messy as the mode of production was changing. marx discusses that a lot in his work. > good evil division. marx never asserts that one group is evil or good? he discusses class interests, not magical moral blights which affect portions of the population. > misunderstands the meaning of the dictatorship of the proletarian. also misunderstands the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, and claims that marx says wages must fall, which marx does not say. he also opposes socialism on the grounds that revolution is bad, because of his false prior statement that socialism groups people into a good vs evil binary. > peterson criticizes the manifesto for things not discussed in it. it is a 30 page or so pamphlet. marx and other scholars discuss some of these points in other works. > "your a fool to exploit your workers. . . the assertion that you add nothing as a manager" managers are workers, and exploitation is inherent to capitalist wage labor. managers are not necessarily bourgeois. > peterson seems to think a planned economy couldnt track and address inefficiently run labor? > he just says its impossible to plan an economy??? >peterson doesnt seem to understand marxs theory of alienation from what i can tell > it seems like peterson also thinks socialism claims to end all of societies ails? that isnt a claim the manifesto makes so far as i remember petersons analysis is fucking dumb. in order to challenge his ideas, as he suggests we all do when consuming content in this very video, you have to gain knowledge on socialism. once you do, you see that peterson is vigorously attacking a strawman.

Is that supposed to be brilliant? It's also "absolutely foolish to make the presumption that you can" read someone's mind. So what? It doesn't any more disprove that someone's (let's say, "high") economic standing is the result of being a greedy bastard who could care less about Those people whom he tramples on to gain his massive wealth. If all Peterson is trying to do is play the devil's advocate, then fine. But, if his conjectures are meant to seriously justify Capitalism's stranglehold on The American Worker, he isn't making an enormous amount of headway.

@@Newton14alan You dont hold a candle to this man, hence shut your trap.

@@Newton14alan Peterson's comment works both ways. The rich have neither moral guilt nor moral virtue by dint of their wealth alone.

@@AbaddonTheDestroyer --- I own a lot of candles, and can see him just fine. BTW, have you attended any anger management programs lately...or do you just "rage" on everyone you disagree with?

@@nforne --- Exactly...and that was my point...although I think that you voiced the thought more concisely (and a little less snide) than I did. Thanks.

And then they proved him right by cheering on a bloody revolution.

@@jordanbpeterson5154 Bot or scam.

That's how communist professors stole the minds of university students. No one was around to warn any of them they were entering the birthing room of a horror show.

Do you live in China?

I hope you don't mean watching this is studying marxism? Why not go read Marx or listen to what a Marxist has to say?

More study and analysis can be found here: "Peter Joseph - Critique of Jordan B. Peterson (vs Slavoj Zizek: "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism")"

@@coolioso808 peter joseph? The guy who made the Zeitgeist?

You're edgy

The best part was when he raised his fist and said "Confound you buck'o!".

@@ezabjacorn6208 its a joke, he doesnt think hes comparable to red skull really

@@ezabjacorn6208 woosh

Omg you killed me

Capitalism doesn't demand that all of us are in a competition?

@@mdaniels6311 Nope

Great quote and on the spot about polarisation of society nowadays.

@@mdaniels6311 Individual competition based on personal merit vs class/societal group based competition based solely on occupation of said group are entirely different. Keep thinking, you might get there one day.

@@mdaniels6311 would you really like to live in a world without competition? Competition is the reason for every advancement that has protected us from the brutality of nature. The real world is no place for idealism

The statement is completely incoherent by reasons and misses the point. He's claiming that nothing can produce unless you have a small number of rich people and a great number of sarving ones. This is not the point since inequality is not at all linked with production so to make the apologia of inequality by saying "oh, but we at least produce something" misses the point of who decides what is to be produced and to whom it shall be distributed in exchange of what.

@@novinceinhosic3531 So you're telling me that you mined the Quartzite, Hafnium, Copper, Gold, etc., performed all necessary chemical operations to stabilize materials, used those materials and fabricated wafers, etched the transistors and fully processed beginning to end every single microchip in the device your using? Did you write the code too? Did you even assemble it? Do you not exist in a world surrounded by the comfort of the capital you've gained by working for it? And furthermore, do the people who realistically and actually do all those things not deserve maybe a little more money than you because you can't do it?

@@NewPraetorianBlues How is this even related to the topic? They never deserved to get more money just because "they can do stuff", we conduct a trade from equal position. They exchange their bought materials + their labour in exchange of my money or something of equal price. Neither me, nor Peterson talked about trade of commodities. In fact you don't get rich by merely trading (unless you are a speculator), but by producing value. If they simply shipped me the raw materials without their labour imputs, they could make 0 money, only the transporter would make something because he actually does something useful for my consumption. My x amoung of labour is traded with their y amont of labour, nothing more and nothing less. The differences are made based on labour market competition whethere there is a higher demand for a certain kind of labour, that is exchanges against more of the quantity of other lower prieced labour. This is all on equal grounds and produces little to no inequality despite some may earn more money than me in the same amount of time. On the flipside, this does not apply to those to charge interests for loans or cash-in dividends via employing labour or charging rents. They have little do do with production in itself, they just tax people for their ability to produce and trade the fruits of their labour. This is what causes inequality, not Bill Gates having the ability to code better than other software devs, but his ability to employ propertiless devs to work for him in exchange for wages which are lower than the price with which he sells, post-material cost, their services with which he accumulates more capital without contributing to the production process of the services or programs at all, not even directing the sales or managing anything, since he has paid manages to do that for him anyway. Also you seem to make a confusion between capital and commodities. Commodities have a usage of being consumed or sold against other commodities, capital is something that employs labour against wages. Peterson's point is that production is impossible without this form of "taxing" represented by profit for the banks, landlords or shareholders as in the claim "that inequality is not unique to capitalism" (thing which is partially true) and that capitalism, by the mere virtue of being a "productive system", is exploitative and produces inequality (by this he implies that production necessitates exploitation and inequality, which is not true). Prehistorical forms of production and most of the early antiquity was based on production which did not produce such a levels of social inequality or exploitation and socialist production has produced tons of industrial and agricultural goods without employing exploitation and preserving a certain level of social equality. By his logic Peterson should not have a problem with slavery and feudalism, since they too are productive systems which bring about inequality and severe exploitation.

Trying out summer dresses? :/

@@druncle1977 😂

And here we are... 🙄

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣✌

True

Comments like this remind me of a quote by Leo Aikman: "You can tell more about a man from what he says about others, than from what others say about him."

@dfasht I know right poor jordan peterson is soooooo censored with his 3 million subscribers. Conservatives are soooo oppressed ;( ;( ;(

@@2FadeMusic If they are not, it is not from lack of trying.

@@deepfriedsammich yeah i think conservatives should be censored since conservative ideology is nothing but pure brain rot fueled by hatred and fear

@@thomasatkinson9452 ok

😅 ditto ! And what a paradox eh ?! I'll bet those little trolls frantically adjusting censoring algorithms as fast as they can are tearing their hair out in frustration.

@@annbrown3037 lol oh you know they are.

@@martinzarathustra8604 what is the strawman he is attacking then? I am unable to see it. But you claim to be a master of critical thinking so as a master of critical thinking what is he wrong about?

@@roguegen5536 Way to out yourself as indoctrinated.

@@ExistentialWill it is a genuine question, what is he wrong about?

How are you to understand a megalomaniac nazi or Dr Robotnik whose entire character since his inception has been nothing but pollution, destruction and dictatorship for his own ego?

@@magnusm4, gonna have to declare that to be a whoosh.

Understanding the villains does not mean agreeing with them. Just ask Mr. Incredible. ;)

you do know the red skull is a nazi right?

​@@truantakuma6234 The Red Skull is a character In A Series of Comic Books.

He has described the process before I think he said it was about using all the knowledge he has, but he's still trying to figure stuff out actively with the audience in the moment.

An extremely thoughtful speaker.

Hes trying to put his thoughts into words, I believe. To make sure he explains it well for others to understand. I know people that speak like this when trying to get a point across because if they don't they accidentally talk over peoples heads and it makes them angry

@Praxis Of Logos At what point did OP claim that he conducted himself in such a manner at any other point? Based on the comment, they were just speaking on THIS discussion.

The two deranged death cults that illegitimately dominate the U S , foisted onto the American public a bungling real-estate grifter and game-show host versus Nixon in a pants suit. And yet, you have the nerve to say something like that in public.

Sorry to disagree ... SLIGHTLY ... because EVERY IDEOLOGY has its extremist incarnation and the current situation has two examples: - Amazon is killing off competition from small shops because they do not have the cost of running stores ... but our cities NEED the stores or else they will become wastelands of "boring nothingness". The pandemic just made it more extreme. - "Twitter, FB, YT, Google are private companies and can do what they want" is an expression of radical capitalism ... and one of the reasons why PROPAGANDA is one-sided ... because the quasi-MONOPOLIES are not recognised as such. Capitalism has its flaws ... just like every other ideology and needs to be held in check through common sense. It isnt "fair" that giant corporations can "do shifty stuff" to evade taxes while small companies dont have the spare cash to make hiring tax lawyers/manager do fancy investments to evade it all. Regulations should ALWAYS favor small businesses, since these are the real tax payers!

Thank you.

​@@Muck006 no, Amazon isn't killing anything. It's consumers, by choosing where to spend their money. No-one is putting a gun to your head, telling you that you must shop at Amazon. Do cities need stores? Sure. But they apparently don't need the ones that are going out of business.

@@MolecularArts That's disingenuous. Naturally, given the option of buying the same item at a higher or lower price, people will opt for the cheaper.

I'm not sure why you think I'm being disingenuous, @@flumpyhumpy, because I agree with everything you wrote. Yes, consumers do in general buy cheaper when the opportunity arrises. That is their _choice_. Would you force them to buy more expensive?

Most older ppl who lived during the Soviet Union want it to return.

​@@RextheRebelYes, but they won't be the intellectuals that were killed.

And Cambridge University canceled his visiting fellowship because of political correct mobs.

Sorry. This moment in Peterson's debate with Zizek is really the lowest he ever got in public. He makes good points when he is on his own turf. I appreciate it, and I even more enjoy it when brainless activists fail to frame him as whatever right-wing monster they think he is. But here he only showed off his hubris, possibly motivated by the attacks against him from certain neo-marxist. It begins with him not acknowledging what kind of text this is. Then not knowing what Marx is about. Or thinking marxism is relying on the communist manifesto as a philisophical/political blueprint. Ok, I guess you could assume the last point of a 19th century factory worker, but this is not the level of the debate we would expect from these two people. Really, any student of political science or philosophy approaching this text this way would get kicked out of the class, and rightly so. I prefer Peterson when he talks about subjects he knows something about.

@@fp5126 LMAO so... you are saying you know nothing about Jordan Peterson? IMO you only think it is "Hubris" because you are drinking the kool-aid.

he's mind blowing and a great family man at that, God Bless him and his family always!

@@jeb1691 you are a blind ideologue you know how I know? HE NEVER SINGLED ANYONE OUT THAT IS A LIE PROPAGATED BY FANATICS LIKE YOU.

He didn't even read/understand the one pamphlet he claimed to read on this subject. Clearly it doesn't take much to impress you.

@@canaryimpulse989 wow. That’s your take? Interesting....

@@andrewsperry6450 Yes. I'm putting it midly.

@@canaryimpulse989 Did you thumbs up your own comment?

@@SkeezyBacon No. There are other ppl here who know that JP is lying and frankly, are trying to break through into your echochamber to show you that.

I wasn't aware that many people still don't understand the root problem is far deeper than a misunderstanding of what communism even is, and a much greater ignorance as to the enslavement and instability of a monetary-market system on humanity, from thousands of years ago to today. Perhaps a better analysis would be on YT from searching: "Peter Joseph - Critique of Jordan B. Peterson (vs Slavoj Zizek: "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism")" And a critical thinker might ask after such a video, now what? What can be done? They could turn to watch: "UBUNTU Contributionism Workshop By Michael Tellinger"

@@coolioso808 I assumed communism was completely disregarded similar to flat earth theory. i have always felt Communism is the most evil of all ideologies. They are very crafty at brainwashing young minds. It’s like the pedophile that lures kids into the van with free candy. Thankfully most grow out of this as they age but don’t assume it will always be that way. Reagan’s quote is true, freedom is only one generation away from extinction. Be strong. Embrace your freedom.

Are you my huckleberry?

@@RadiantHealthForAll not unless your name is Johnny Ringo

to be a king lobster our rooms must be clean

I guess I'm the loser playing boring video games while listening to this 🤣

It's about time.

Capitalism works!

I agree. A few others from the US like Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell and Milton Friedman are economists but allow you to create or improve your view on many social, economic and political issues.

You may have the coolest name on 6 continents.

@@garywhitt98 which name?

@@southafricauncensored both, first and last. Melodic and rhythmical. Your parents got it right.

Its convincing because you dont know hes lying.

he clearly hasnt read marx closely. hes become a caricature of himself.

@@flamingo9022 he was underprepared for this portion. Zizek was loaded well, but JP should have read kapitol. I hate Marxism, but it is a lot more than just a pamphlet

Peterson Cultists are needy.

@@flamingo9022 marxism is evil whitewashed balel.

Without a written speech, Obummer says “Uh, um” so many times you want to fall asleep.

@@deLappMedia they are exploiting people to "make it fair"? What are you talking about?

Im sorry but ur white mentor is wrong. Most people behave like that. Explain jails and inmates if humans are so good.

@@chobin7982 I’m sorry but for some reason Race has to be brought into this? What do you gain from this?

@@luigimrlgaming9484 It's the last resort. They don't explain how or why someone is wrong, they just know it, and demand that you not only accept it, but also admit it. They throw in a random, generic notion that usually has nothing to do with the premise and without factual backup, and seal it with allusions to racism, because that's the passpartout, the definitive key that grants them total victory in every debate. At least in their heads. How racist of you to assume they had something to gain from this.

​@@chobin7982 why do you bring race into this? Are you resentful of Peterson? Your comments suggest so.

That's how you do it. 👍 One bitter pill at a time, until they don't taste anymore.

Because they have no rebuttal, only selfish anger and childish hatred.

HAIL HYDRA...I MEAN LOBSTER.

@@MarekUtd dang it!! You beat me to it!! 😄😄👍👍

@@MarekUtd What does that mean?

Yea we don’t like their ideas so Nazi is the only title that’s universally available

"Hating the rich" - sounds pretty based, they don't deserve love even from their mothers

Hmm I don't think you have even read the manifesto :pepethonk:

@@ppstealer4656 it’s not entirely accurate, but the manifesto is definitely more “fuck the rich” than it is “help the poor”

Communist China has done exactly the thing, “F* the rich and poor, but help themselves to get rich.”

Guess who is to blame for poverty, huh?