What specifics? You haven’t made any points that I can see.
The article has. I get you guys love JP and we’ve had this conversation for over a year now. I’m not going to get into it again. I just added the address as it was new.
Right, so what you’re saying is having an opinion based on ideology is censorship?
Or just one you disagree with?
I’m not answering an article you link to without providing any of your own input. How can I even know which “specifics” you want me to answer? It would be pointless anyway if you aren’t “going to get into it again”.
I certainly do not love JP.
Lol. I use evidence to back up my claims. Sorry about that. I forgot using an article to back up statements is looked down on here.
JP is a bigotted transphobe. Some evidence to back it up is posted above.
The article is somehow linked to statements you have made elsewhere and you expect me to figure out where these statements are.
Yes, the title. It’s pretty self explanatory.
I’ve put it in my own words for you though:
I don’t agree that he’s a bigoted tranphobe. And I do appreciate him, he has helped me personally on improving my life and moving me in the right direction.
2 Likes
It’s not particularly specific, but thanks anyway.
1 Like
A load of bigots at the Guardian call someone a bigot.
People at a publishing company cry when someone they perceive as some monster or whatever term they use today is. Meanwhile Hitler’s book is no problem for them. He did burn books though…
i’ve never been good with irony, but:
lol. no. what you said i said was not what i was saying.
i don’t think you have a clear understanding of what i disagree with. to be clear, i think that suppression of books because of disagreement with the politics of their content is pretty much the definition of censorship. it would also be censorship for the publisher to fire any employees with a dissenting view.
i just don’t think the employees have much of a case here, in terms of grounding their complaint or expecting their employer to act to their satisfaction. and i don’t agree with your characterization of their behaviour as simply expressing concern (this was probably my main point, originally).
also, for the record, i wouldn’t consider myself a fan of JP in general. but i disagree with what i see as illogical, negative, and unproductive knee jerk reactions based on loose associations.
let us try to be clearer with what we are saying, and assume a little more good faith on the part of our interlocutor. i think JP would agree, i hope that doesn’t prevent you from doing so as well!
1 Like
And I didn’t call JP far-right.
Are you mistaking me with another poster?
Help me out here.
E posts an article critical of JP. You respond with JP is not far-right. I suggest that comment is a strawman (which to me makes it funny, coming right after someone else said the criticism of JP was a strawman).
The article didn’t call him far-right. I didn’t call him far-right. No-one in this entire thread has called him far-right, if our own internal search engine is correct.
Andrew mentioned ~650 posts ago that JP has been smeared as far-right, which he probably has been at some point by someone somewhere, though not here. The only other instances of the phrase in this 700+ post thread are a passage I quoted ~150 posts ago from an article about Cultural Marxism, and now E asking if you want to address the specifics of the far-right question… which you brought up, though it’s not clear why.
(ETA: or does “conservative” qualify as far-right these days?)
What, Random House?
I wonder which publication would come up if one were to google “Is Jordan Peterson far right?”
I think you are stretching it a bit to pull me up over my use of the phrase far right. Nothing I posted was in relation to you, you chose to make it about you.
It seems to be a trend. As was pointed out above though, they have the right. The publishers seemed willing to hear them out. I agree crying over it and other exaggerated concerns (“JP radicalized my dad!”) are silly, but it probably wasn’t all like that, if I had to guess. The publisher seems to have done the right thing in continuing to publish the book, given the claims here are trivial or even poorly founded as has been pointed out in a couple of cases, and JP isn’t some kind of evil bigot (not to say I agree with him about anything in particular or love him either). Spotify had this recently as well, so maybe companies are realizing complaints such as this aren’t something that absolutely have to bend to. I guess we’ll see if people leave their jobs, business suffers, etc. I wouldn’t have bought one of their books in the future if they canned JP just to appease their employees.
4 Likes
You got that from
After all, he has suggested that gay marriage might be a plot by cultural Marxists
and nothing else. The linked twitter thread does go further, saying he outright opposes GM, but the original article merely calls it a suggestion.
And if you want to split hairs about what JP says in the video (fourth one in the thread), here it is:
A reasonable reading of that is, he doesn’t follow Australian politics but finds the characterization perfectly credible and acceptable and has no reason to disagree with the stance, because he associates gay marriage with CM and specifically the “assault on traditional modes of being”. He doesn’t say it outright, but he doesn’t need to in order to – as the Guardian article put it – suggest that gay marriage is a CM plot.
Also, if you think about it, the way you summed up his view on the issue
boils down to X is good, unless my least best friend also thinks it’s good, 'cause then it must be bad. How childish is that?
If @BiggusDickus says “far right my arse” for whatever reason, and @eCanada answers by saying “Care to address any of the specifics?”, he at least doesn’t seem to be taking issue with this characterization.
1 Like
I can understand why people would be upset if it was like a neo nazi ideological book. But it’s a freakin self help book probably telling people things like clean your room and take responsibility like his last book.
1 Like