It is boring, but not surprising, to see you misrepresent and distort his views in this manner.
Someone has a job that only need 1/4 of their brain. The article doesn’t reflect the content of the interview. It was an odd interview with a man obviously recovering from turmoil and still struggling to deal with that and a publisher trying to get him out there before his next book comes out. It was a sick man talking with his daughter trying to cover. The article, on the other hand, was looking to fit toxic masculinity into a phrase and found a chance a couple of times.
Really strange diet, weird medical story. It could be true but who knows?
Oh, sorry, you’re right. He didn’t say the word genocidal in that tweet. It was murderous. My bad.
Actually not my bad though, because we know he was insinuating feminism leads to Communism leads to genocide.
we all can, can’t we?
General observation, or criticism of my analysis of JP’s politics?
Thanks, but that’s still ~3h worth of transcript. Would anyone like to post the highlights?
A general observation (I did add myself), although one notes a rather cherry-picked list on your part right before the cherry picking comment (so, also a critique).
Anyways, JP has made it clear on more than one occasion that he considers himself a liberal. If that doesn’t jive with your interpretation of what you know of his opinions, I could go on but it is boring.
Do you think I am conservative? What’s your take on Sam Harris?
I don’t intend to get drawn into another interminable yyy debate about the meaning of “is”, but as TT pointed out JP does describe himself as a liberal and in various places tries to spell out why (in simple sentences for the dedicated critic).
If you’re accusing him of being an extreme rightwinger, then you’re basically saying he’s either completely deluded (ie., doesn’t know his own mind) or a liar. The former seems unlikely since he spends a lot of time on introspection, and the latter seems unlikely because one of his “rules for life” is “don’t tell lies”. He could be a hypocrite, I suppose, and I must say that the real-life tragedies that he’s had to deal with have unmoored him from his Rules.
Correct. However if you’re determined to boil everybody’s politics down to a one-dimensional line, you’re going to come unstuck.
Still reading it! First part seemed innocuous.
Some talk about politics starting at 1:07:43.
I did not say that.
I did not say that either. (I did say he’s crazy, and another time I said he’s “a bit” crazy.)
You missed the interview where he said “everyone lies” and later “I’m certainly more careful about it now than I used to be”?
He gave his followers a Sisyphean task with the Sixth Commandment (oops sorry, Rule). It’s the ultimate I can disqualify your criticism and discredit you personally at the same time no matter what card because no-one’s house will ever be in truly perfect order, and there will always be something about the world worth criticizing. Yet when he gets called out on the hypocrisy of it – not just the theoretical hypocrisy but the spectacular mess his own house is in – he effectively says yeah I know, deal with it.
After that, any other JP Rules JP violates are just details.
I hope you don’t think when I call you Comrade Finsky I’m saying you’re one-dimensional. You’re definitely nuanced, like me… and even like JP.
But when it comes to politics, at the end of the day either you vote for someone, or you don’t vote, and if you encourage others, you either encourage them to vote for someone or encourage them not to vote. It gets boiled down to (some-) one dimension on the ballot, whether we like it or not. Do you honestly think the net effect of JP’s sermons and tracts is a boost for the left?
I got a notification that I was @'ed in another thread.
Again (and again), I did not say that. I called Stefan Molyneux “basically a walking example of alt-rightness” and pointed out that JP hangs out with him. I’m not aware of JP ever saying “oh btw Stefan do you realize when you say blacks are poor because they’re genetically inferior (dressed up in intellectualisms) and other things like that you sound like you’re endorsing a murderous (right-wing) ideology?”, but I confess I haven’t spent enough time looking into it to see if perhaps I missed that.
My point in pointing out their relationship was that JP knee-jerks to the genocide thing when a generally-perceived-as-lefty-but-actually-pretty-centrist guy (JT) mentions “equality”, yet he keeps giving the time of day to a generally-perceived-as-extreme-right guy. That doesn’t make JP extreme right, but he’s not stupid (just crazy) – he at least sort of knows what he’s doing, and it’s not leftism or centrism.
He can consider himself the Messiah if he likes. Live & let live.
I don’t think it would be boring for me to hear your take.
Sam who? Rings a bell but dunno…
I could ask Discobot, but it’s more fun to hear it from you.
My sources say no
I think it’s worth pointing out that his “house” was in pretty good order at one point. Then life threw him a couple of curveballs and it all went to ratshit. It doesn’t necessarily mean everything he ever said is nonsensical. It just means he’s human.
I agree that, as ideals, some of his “rules” are very high ideals. But so what? Does “thou shalt not steal” mean that, if you steal a turnip when you’re starving, you’re an irremediable sinner and might as well just carry on stealing? Does “thou shalt not kill” mean you cannot defend yourself in wartime? If one looks in the mirror and does not like what one sees, should one say “oh, it’s hopeless, I might as well just resign myself to being a loser for my entire life”?
JPs rules are not Commandments (I refer you to his “be precise in your speech” rule) nor are they generally impossible to follow. They’re just suggestions that will self-evidently make your life better. Or at least will not make it worse.
I entirely disagree. I haven’t voted for as long as I can remember because there is no “none of the above” box.
You might want to read up on the way humans actually make decisions like this, where there is no right answer. There’s a comprehensive body of research on it. In any case, your “politics” is intertwined with the way you live your life. IMO, JP despises the left (and indeed the extreme right) because the core tenet of Marxism/communism/socialism and fascism is this:
“everything that is wrong with the world and with my own existence is somebody else’s fault, and if only we could coerce those faulty humans into doing what I believe is right, the world would have no further problems”.
Socialism and fascism differ only in pointing fingers at different people-who-are-at-fault. JP asserts this:
“everything that is wrong with the world and with your own existence is at least partly your own fault. Sort yourself out and you’ll make the world a slightly nicer place”.
It is rather mundane, and not unlike this injunction:
“How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”
But all of that strikes at the root of what the Left believes, so of course they hate him as much as he hates them.
What is the deal with Stefan Molyneux? Does JP actually “hang out” with him? I can’t find anything specific on the internet apart from a conversation between them on YouTube.
Socialism: Everything that is wrong with the world and my own existence is the result of class struggle and economic oppression caused by an inhuman ruling class of industry captains that control the means of production and exploit my labor for their personal profit.
Fascism: Everything wrong with MY world comes from resentful shitty inferior poor people whose worthless lives and interests mean nothing because they don’t make me richer personally, so fuck em’ let em die.
Dude, everyone gets curveballs.
If a teenager with a messy room used the exact same argument, would JP (and you) not dismiss it as a selfish attempt to blame the world for the kid’s problems?
And for the record if you go back far enough you can see me defending him against the accusation of nonsense. I think he’s interesting when he talks about stuff he actually sort of understands, but he’s overrated because he thinks he understands the world, and he has millions of enablers who help to keep that fantasy alive. Like a pop star who has some good songs, or an athlete who’s won a bunch of high profile competitions, but doesn’t really get politics…
Wrong. Very wrong, in fact.
A rule is called a rule precisely because it’s not a suggestion. If you want to place it between suggestion and commandment, it’s definitely closer to the latter. Think of the sayings: rules are rules. Break the rules, suffer the consequences. When it comes to advice (suggestions), it’s often glossed as free because you can take it or leave it. In general parlance you can “bend” a rule, but only so far before it breaks. There’s no question of how far you can bend of a suggestion, because it’s a vague thing, a blob. It has no teeth, presents no threat.
JP is a smart, educated guy. He knows the etymology of rule – it’s something to obey, lest you suffer the wrath of the ruler (rex, raja, etc.). And he knows the lack of religion in modern life leaves a gap – it’s something for what you call his “not Commandments” to fill.
Besides, you’re ignoring the key word in Rule #6, the part that makes it impossible: perfect.
And once again we’re going in circles, as the explanation of why that carefully chosen, precise word matters is spelled out earlier in this thread.
There is in Thailand!
(There theoretically is in Ontario as well, but it doesn’t actually appear on the ballot. It’s an invisible box, if you will.)
You know what’s even more annoying than people who always blame others for their problems? People who always blame others for blaming others for their problems.
Btw, I wholeheartedly accept my proportional share of responsibility for the universe being the way it is.
I also wholeheartedly accept my proportional share of responsibility for the outcome of every election in which I’m eligible to vote. I suppose some people who don’t vote feel they’ve already absolved themselves by way of intertia. Must be nice…
Anyway, reductio ad absurdum is kind of pointless, but (and this is important) not entirely. Keep vilifying politics in general, and what you’re effectively doing is encouraging people to lose their will to act, and thus you’re encouraging them to shirk their responsibility to act. Don’t even try to get the house in order. It’s hopeless! Just stay in your own room.
(Btw the wall joke predates Trump’s wall talk by ~7 years.)
It’s a convenient way out, but it’s also a lazy way out, and it doesn’t contribute to the improvement of the real world (unless the inertia causes the “right” party to win).
There were four conversations between them in the link I posted. You know the saying:
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it’s enemy action.
When a person who achieves fame by scolding other people’s beliefs and telling them how to live turns out to be a screwed up drug addict, people tend to point that out.
Didn’t all this JP stuff originate around him saying he shouldn’t be forced to conform to other peoples belief system?