LWDT V: Completing the Five Thread Plan

[Great Minarchistan]

400-500bn assuming all of it is cut, you won't want China storming through the East Coast.

Current projected deficit is 1100bn, cut 300bn off the military (800bn left), cut medicare and medicaid by 500bn (300bn left) and social security by 300bn (balanced, ta da).

Military, corruption, and corporate welfare are the largest contributors to the deficit.

Military has a 600bn budget, Medicare/Medicaid has a total of 1.5T-2T and Social Security with 1.5-2T either

[Liriena]

Thoughts on Jordan Peterson? I found him pretty annoying on a lot of levels, although it seems left-wingers have a tendency to over-demonize his philosophy, which is mostly the same as YT skepticism, just add lobsters.

I agree with you on the over-demonization part. Even though I have an abysmally low opinion of him, people on our side of the spectrum have constantly failed to really engage him and his ideas, and instead added fuel to the fire that is the anti-SJW circlejerk.

I disagree with your assessment of his philosophy being "mostly the same as YT skepticism". Most YT skeptics are liberals. Peterson is a reactionary. While he does pay lip-service to liberal values (particularly individualism), his worldview as a whole is one of esoteric social conservatism. When you get down to it, there isn't all that much that distinguishes him from William F. Buckley or Dennis Prager other than his education and his penchant for obscure allusions and mysticism.

His understanding of the left, within and outside of academia, is almost entirely wrong. Just wrong.

[Canadensia]

Thoughts on Jordan Peterson? I found him pretty annoying on a lot of levels, although it seems left-wingers have a tendency to over-demonize his philosophy, which is mostly the same as YT skepticism, just add lobsters.

I agree with you on the over-demonization part. Even though I have an abysmally low opinion of him, people on our side of the spectrum have constantly failed to really engage him and his ideas, and instead added fuel to the fire that is the anti-SJW circlejerk.

I disagree with your assessment of his philosophy being "mostly the same as YT skepticism". Most YT skeptics are liberals. Peterson is a reactionary. While he does pay lip-service to liberal values (particularly individualism), his worldview as a whole is one of esoteric social conservatism. When you get down to it, there isn't all that much that distinguishes him from William F. Buckley or Dennis Prager other than his education and his penchant for obscure allusions and mysticism.

His understanding of the left, within and outside of academia, is almost entirely wrong. Just wrong.

I'd say he fits the label of classical liberal to the tee.

Generally speaking, the only people who think he's right-wing (or more ridiculously, far-right) are also those who think that anything short of social democracy belongs on the Right of the political spectrum.

Frankly, most of his criticisms of Socialism and social justice are spot on. The main problem with him isn't that his criticisms are wrong, but rather that his proposed solutions are what began this mess of a system in the first place.

[Liriena]

I agree with you on the over-demonization part. Even though I have an abysmally low opinion of him, people on our side of the spectrum have constantly failed to really engage him and his ideas, and instead added fuel to the fire that is the anti-SJW circlejerk.

I disagree with your assessment of his philosophy being "mostly the same as YT skepticism". Most YT skeptics are liberals. Peterson is a reactionary. While he does pay lip-service to liberal values (particularly individualism), his worldview as a whole is one of esoteric social conservatism. When you get down to it, there isn't all that much that distinguishes him from William F. Buckley or Dennis Prager other than his education and his penchant for obscure allusions and mysticism.

His understanding of the left, within and outside of academia, is almost entirely wrong. Just wrong.

I'd say he fits the label of classical liberal to the tee.

There's nothing "classical liberal" about embracing traditional mores and traditional gender roles as biologically predetermined and inherently good.

Generally speaking, the only people who think he's right-wing (or more ridiculously, far-right) are also those who think that anything short of social democracy belongs on the Right of the political spectrum.

Well... yeah. Duh. Liberalism belonged on the left-side of the spectrum when it was synonymous with challenging the status quo and its philosophical foundations. Liberalism is now the foundation of our modern society and of the current status quo. Hard to place that on the conventional left side of the spectrum.

Frankly, most of his criticisms of Socialism and social justice are spot on.

There's nothing "spot on" about treating post-modernism as a "secret successor" of Marxism, considering the fact that post-modernists and Marxists have been at each others' throats from day one (and both have been at odds with identity politics for just as long), so the very foundations of his criticisms are bullshit.

[Canadensia]

I'd say he fits the label of classical liberal to the tee.

There's nothing "classical liberal" about embracing traditional mores and traditional gender roles as biologically predetermined and inherently good.

You realize Classical Liberalism originates with the Enlightenment and people like John Smith, right?

Classical liberals generally have at least some socially conservative views.

Well... yeah. Duh. Liberalism belonged on the left-side of the spectrum when it was synonymous with challenging the status quo and its philosophical foundations. Liberalism is now the foundation of our modern society and of the current status quo. Hard to place that on the conventional left side of the spectrum.

You... desperately need a reality check.

There's nothing "spot on" about treating post-modernism as a "secret successor" of Marxism, considering the fact that post-modernists and Marxists have been at each others' throats from day one (and both have been at odds with identity politics for just as long), so the very foundations of his criticisms are bullshit.

That's hardly the sum of the man's arguments. Nor the defining feature of them.

[Great Minarchistan]

You realize Classical Liberalism originates with the Enlightenment and people like John Smith, right?

Classical liberals generally have at least some socially conservative views.

They weren't social conservative for their time. By the contrary.

[Torrocca]

You realize Classical Liberalism originates with the Enlightenment and people like John Smith, right?

Classical liberals generally have at least some socially conservative views.

They weren't social conservative for their time. By the contrary.

their time =/= today.

A classical liberal would be socially liberal in their time, and is socially conservative today.

[Great Minarchistan]

They weren't social conservative for their time. By the contrary.

their time =/= today.

A classical liberal would be socially liberal in their time, and is socially conservative today.

Not really, no

[New Emeline]

their time =/= today.

A classical liberal would be socially liberal in their time, and is socially conservative today.

Not really, no

Probably yes. The Overton Window and all that.

[Cekoviu]

Generally speaking, the only people who think he's right-wing (or more ridiculously, far-right) are also those who think that anything short of social democracy belongs on the Right of the political spectrum.

It does, along with the center.

Frankly, most of his criticisms of Socialism and social justice are spot on. The main problem with him isn't that his criticisms are wrong, but rather that his proposed solutions are what began this mess of a system in the first place.

lmfao

[Cekoviu]

Well... yeah. Duh. Liberalism belonged on the left-side of the spectrum when it was synonymous with challenging the status quo and its philosophical foundations. Liberalism is now the foundation of our modern society and of the current status quo. Hard to place that on the conventional left side of the spectrum.

You... desperately need a reality check.

Quality rebuttal, 10/10.

There's nothing "spot on" about treating post-modernism as a "secret successor" of Marxism, considering the fact that post-modernists and Marxists have been at each others' throats from day one (and both have been at odds with identity politics for just as long), so the very foundations of his criticisms are bullshit.

That's hardly the sum of the man's arguments. Nor the defining feature of them.

Sure seems to be what he focuses on the most, even if it's not the core.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Thoughts on Jordan Peterson? I found him pretty annoying on a lot of levels, although it seems left-wingers have a tendency to over-demonize his philosophy, which is mostly the same as YT skepticism, just add lobsters.

I agree with you on the over-demonization part. Even though I have an abysmally low opinion of him, people on our side of the spectrum have constantly failed to really engage him and his ideas, and instead added fuel to the fire that is the anti-SJW circlejerk.

I disagree with your assessment of his philosophy being "mostly the same as YT skepticism". Most YT skeptics are liberals. Peterson is a reactionary. While he does pay lip-service to liberal values (particularly individualism), his worldview as a whole is one of esoteric social conservatism. When you get down to it, there isn't all that much that distinguishes him from William F. Buckley or Dennis Prager other than his education and his penchant for obscure allusions and mysticism.

His understanding of the left, within and outside of academia, is almost entirely wrong. Just wrong.

I mean, it makes sense that he would like mysticism, that's what most of his research focuses on.

[Liriena]

There's nothing "classical liberal" about embracing traditional mores and traditional gender roles as biologically predetermined and inherently good.

You realize Classical Liberalism originates with the Enlightenment and people like John Smith, right?

Classical liberals generally have at least some socially conservative views.

Religious traditionalism, however, is at odds with classical liberalism, and Peterson is a religious traditionalist.

Well... yeah. Duh. Liberalism belonged on the left-side of the spectrum when it was synonymous with challenging the status quo and its philosophical foundations. Liberalism is now the foundation of our modern society and of the current status quo. Hard to place that on the conventional left side of the spectrum.

You... desperately need a reality check.

Not an argument.

There's nothing "spot on" about treating post-modernism as a "secret successor" of Marxism, considering the fact that post-modernists and Marxists have been at each others' throats from day one (and both have been at odds with identity politics for just as long), so the very foundations of his criticisms are bullshit.

That's hardly the sum of the man's arguments. Nor the defining feature of them.

A man who treats identity politics, Marxism and post-modernism as if the three were the same thing has no business pontificating about what's wrong with "the left". Not to mention that a lot of his more specific criticisms are only "spot on" insofar as they are "spot on" responses to his own homemade strawmen.

[Liriena]

their time =/= today.

A classical liberal would be socially liberal in their time, and is socially conservative today.

Not really, no

A lot of classical liberal thinkers supported slavery, or were extremely abstract about their opposition to it. That would hardly be considered socially liberal today.

[Bakery Hill]

Thoughts on Jordan Peterson? I found him pretty annoying on a lot of levels, although it seems left-wingers have a tendency to over-demonize his philosophy, which is mostly the same as YT skepticism, just add lobsters.

I agree with you on the over-demonization part. Even though I have an abysmally low opinion of him, people on our side of the spectrum have constantly failed to really engage him and his ideas, and instead added fuel to the fire that is the anti-SJW circlejerk.

I disagree with your assessment of his philosophy being "mostly the same as YT skepticism". Most YT skeptics are liberals. Peterson is a reactionary. While he does pay lip-service to liberal values (particularly individualism), his worldview as a whole is one of esoteric social conservatism. When you get down to it, there isn't all that much that distinguishes him from William F. Buckley or Dennis Prager other than his education and his penchant for obscure allusions and mysticism.

His understanding of the left, within and outside of academia, is almost entirely wrong. Just wrong.

If you consider establishment media liberals and the radlib idpol crowd our side, then sure he wipes the floor with them. If you mean decent leftists worth their salt, for all his decrying of Marxism he doesn't even attempt to debate them.

[Liriena]

I agree with you on the over-demonization part. Even though I have an abysmally low opinion of him, people on our side of the spectrum have constantly failed to really engage him and his ideas, and instead added fuel to the fire that is the anti-SJW circlejerk.

I disagree with your assessment of his philosophy being "mostly the same as YT skepticism". Most YT skeptics are liberals. Peterson is a reactionary. While he does pay lip-service to liberal values (particularly individualism), his worldview as a whole is one of esoteric social conservatism. When you get down to it, there isn't all that much that distinguishes him from William F. Buckley or Dennis Prager other than his education and his penchant for obscure allusions and mysticism.

His understanding of the left, within and outside of academia, is almost entirely wrong. Just wrong.

If you consider establishment media liberals and the radlib idpol crowd our side, then sure he wipes the floor with them. If you mean decent leftists worth their salt, for all his decrying of Marxism he doesn't even attempt to debate them.

I'd place them somewhere in the center-left, so yeah.

And yes, as far as I can tell he has never actually debated a Marxist.

[Bakery Hill]

If you consider establishment media liberals and the radlib idpol crowd our side, then sure he wipes the floor with them. If you mean decent leftists worth their salt, for all his decrying of Marxism he doesn't even attempt to debate them.

I'd place them somewhere in the center-left, so yeah.

And yes, as far as I can tell he has never actually debated a Marxist.

Well I rarely consider them on my side tbqh. On certain issues sure, but on others not at all.

Marxists like Doug Lane of Zero Books have invited him to debate and made contact with him numerous times. Peterson keeps putting it off (which is understandable given his schedule) but also continuing to tell people that no leftist will debate him.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

A man who treats identity politics, Marxism and post-modernism as if the three were the same thing has no business pontificating about what's wrong with "the left". Not to mention that a lot of his more specific criticisms are only "spot on" insofar as they are "spot on" responses to his own homemade strawmen.

In academia, that combination of perspectives is called new critical theory.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

Thoughts on Jordan Peterson? I found him pretty annoying on a lot of levels, although it seems left-wingers have a tendency to over-demonize his philosophy, which is mostly the same as YT skepticism, just add lobsters.

He makes it harder to takes him seriously as the days go by.

[Jelmatt]

I agree with you on the over-demonization part. Even though I have an abysmally low opinion of him, people on our side of the spectrum have constantly failed to really engage him and his ideas, and instead added fuel to the fire that is the anti-SJW circlejerk.

I disagree with your assessment of his philosophy being "mostly the same as YT skepticism". Most YT skeptics are liberals. Peterson is a reactionary. While he does pay lip-service to liberal values (particularly individualism), his worldview as a whole is one of esoteric social conservatism. When you get down to it, there isn't all that much that distinguishes him from William F. Buckley or Dennis Prager other than his education and his penchant for obscure allusions and mysticism.

His understanding of the left, within and outside of academia, is almost entirely wrong. Just wrong.

I'd say he fits the label of classical liberal to the tee.

Generally speaking, the only people who think he's right-wing (or more ridiculously, far-right) are also those who think that anything short of social democracy belongs on the Right of the political spectrum.

Frankly, most of his criticisms of Socialism and social justice are spot on. The main problem with him isn't that his criticisms are wrong, but rather that his proposed solutions are what began this mess of a system in the first place.

No, he really doesn't. His politics focus far too much on preserving/defending tradition and authority to fall under the classical liberal banner. He really does seem in all respects to be no different from any other everyday conservative.

[Liriena]

Thoughts on Jordan Peterson? I found him pretty annoying on a lot of levels, although it seems left-wingers have a tendency to over-demonize his philosophy, which is mostly the same as YT skepticism, just add lobsters.

He makes it harder to takes him seriously as the days go by.

Even his followers, bless them, sometimes struggle to defend his ideas.

[Liriena]

I'd place them somewhere in the center-left, so yeah.

And yes, as far as I can tell he has never actually debated a Marxist.

Well I rarely consider them on my side tbqh. On certain issues sure, but on others not at all.

Marxists like Doug Lane of Zero Books have invited him to debate and made contact with him numerous times. Peterson keeps putting it off (which is understandable given his schedule) but also continuing to tell people that no leftist will debate him.

Ah, yeah, I've been following the Doug Lane saga for a while. (Also, the Zero Books YT channel is great)

[Oil exporting People]

400-500bn assuming all of it is cut, you won't want China storming through the East Coast.

Current projected deficit is 1100bn, cut 300bn off the military (800bn left), cut medicare and medicaid by 500bn (300bn left) and social security by 300bn (balanced, ta da).

Military, corruption, and corporate welfare are the largest contributors to the deficit.

Nah, Entitlements are.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

I agree with you on the over-demonization part. Even though I have an abysmally low opinion of him, people on our side of the spectrum have constantly failed to really engage him and his ideas, and instead added fuel to the fire that is the anti-SJW circlejerk.

I disagree with your assessment of his philosophy being "mostly the same as YT skepticism". Most YT skeptics are liberals. Peterson is a reactionary. While he does pay lip-service to liberal values (particularly individualism), his worldview as a whole is one of esoteric social conservatism. When you get down to it, there isn't all that much that distinguishes him from William F. Buckley or Dennis Prager other than his education and his penchant for obscure allusions and mysticism.

His understanding of the left, within and outside of academia, is almost entirely wrong. Just wrong.

I'd say he fits the label of classical liberal to the tee.

Generally speaking, the only people who think he's right-wing (or more ridiculously, far-right) are also those who think that anything short of social democracy belongs on the Right of the political spectrum.

Frankly, most of his criticisms of Socialism and social justice are spot on. The main problem with him isn't that his criticisms are wrong, but rather that his proposed solutions are what began this mess of a system in the first place.

Nah, he is quite socially conservative. Not to mention the fact that his strong belief in God pretty much automatically disqualifies him from being a "skeptic."

[Painisia]

Originally The Culture War (Kulturkampf) ended in the 1970s with the women`s liberation movement and introduction of abortion. Now, for some mystical reasons, The Culture War has reemerged in the US and Canada thanks to The Internet and right-wing reactionaries responding to the "libtards"