Jordan Peterson book banned and university invite rescinded.

Where did I defend Hitler?

Where did I compare Hitler to either Trump or Clinton?

 

It is a damned good notion, when you cry over the candidates to explain your better solution.

Who should have became president in 2016?

 

The best democracy money can buy.

 

You've spent several posts defending his written work and philosophy from criticism.

 

You could throw a tennis ball into a crowd at a baseball game and it would ricochet off five more suitable candidates than the guy stinking up the Oval Office now.

 

I hardly defended his one book or actually his philosophy.

I am defending the reality and importance of human biodiversity. I think the Germans are a remarkable people and believe that genetics is the root of that fact.

 

Yes, why defend preserving biodiversity in habitats but care nothing about making any effort trying to preserve human biodiversity? double standard

 

At least two of those guys would have voted for Trump, you know.

 

So you shouldn't have any problem with people insulting his intelligence or his written work.

 

I realize there were plots to kill Hitler. FORCE is behind most governments. The USA is not exempt from government FORCE. FDR forced America into war. FDR forced my parents to get ration books. Forced them to wages and prices decided on by FDR. FDR tried to pack the courts. He made moves at first that favored Hitler. He later regretted doing it so decided on a system to get America into war. The plot did not involve Hitler, but did involve Japan.

This is the plan.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCollum_memo

 

I listened to the entire audio book. Can you give me an example of what was bad?

Maybe someone should tell them that they may block any speaker they wish by simply refusing to listen, the same way they refused to read the first amendment.

 

I said that he had some good stuff and some bad stuff, not that the book itself was bad. For example, his "theory of truth" is completely incoherent nonsense. He believes that what's "true" is wait aids in survival, rather than that which correlates to reality. So if you found out your wife was cheating on you and overracted and committed suicide, it wouldn't be true that your wife cheated on you (in Peterson terms). If you were to find out that an asteroid was headed toward earth and was bout to destroy it, then it wouldn't be true that such an asteroid exists. Because apparently something being sad makes it untrue in Petersonese. There's also all of his incoherent talk about God. His work on personality, however, is pretty good.

 

We have had leaders engaged in war who in my view had not clearly thought things through.

Was Hitler intelligent? Frankly I have to this day never seen any testing of the man to know.

Could he be very intelligent and also make war? Of course he could.
Was his book written for Americans or to please Americans? He had no such need. We were not his target audience.

What about his military moves? Hitler proved he is no General or Admiral. Hitler had a ready and willing bunch of fans inside of Germany. But until he waged war, to the world it looked as if he was improving Germany and doing so quickly.

Hitler enjoyed the system used today by Democrats.

Well, except for his wars.

What is one of the mantras of the Democrats?
Build an improved road system. Build a super rail system. Curtail using oil. For crying out loud, that was what Adolf wanted as well. Study his high mileage VW for proof on some of that. Study his autobahn for more proof. Study the works under the direction of Speer for more proof.

Adolf was trying to turn Germany into Shangri La.

 

Fair enough. I am an atheist and not a fan of god talk, so I disagree with much of it. Disagreeing doesn't make it bad.

 

Yes. splendid idea. Based on their understanding of me, I accept they read a few words and haul ass to angrily reply.

 

No, disagreement doesn't make it bad. Incoherence makes it bad. If you ask him if he believes in God, he can't even really answer, and has at least once admitted that he kind of doesn't, but at the same time he claims that anyone who isn't a murdering psychopath is tacitly admitting the existence of God. I'm not even joking.

Like I said, though, so far as I know, his personality work stands out as the most accurate in the field at the moment. And I think some of his self-help stuff is actually pretty well done.

 

It's not about how much you make it's about how well you save..

 

To me, killing or imprisoning people over their beliefs or race reflects one kind of ignorance or another. And, unfortunately, the only people I've seen defend Hitler in the modern age have been self-described right wingers. I don't hold that against all conservatives by any stretch of the imagination. I don't think either side is truly comparable to such a murderous maniac, when you get down to it.

 

Yet Germany did not have the effects of the collapse of capitalism in 1929

 

I don't have a problem with it, I just want to know if they are parroting the conventional wisdom or have a real understanding of the situation.

I don't see how a stupid person could become leader of Germany in th 1930's. I assume there was no lack of intelligent and ambitious men who would step on him given the chance.

 

As I've said, murderous racial authoritarianism reflects one kind of ignorance or another. We can argue about what bucket of ignorance it belongs in, but defending the intelligence of it requires a certain level of acceptance of it.

 

Yes, let us argue about what bucket of ignorance it belongs in. What do you say?

 

Lack of recognition of individual rights. Lack of rational thought. Lack or critical thinking skills. Lack of awareness of the hell hole it would turn his country into. There's four for starters.

 

I am totally brushing off your comment about the tennis ball. It looks as if you totally misunderstand what happens.

WOW, I know to some, my service to the real estate industry as a director of two operations, 1 the local very large real estate board, and 2 the much larger CA state real estate association, was a bunch of horse pucky. I realized we learned much more than the members and my aim was to ensure members were fully informed and educated. This pissed off the Democrats in the association.

When the association paid tens of thousands for me and others to drive to Monterey, Ca and indulge ourselves in vacation surroundings with fine meals at no cost to us, I pissed off some directors by saying to them, we could do this all at our board headquarters and as well. And we would spend evenings at home and not out on a vacation. It pissed off the Democrats. They wanted all the freebies.

We indulged ourselves all over CA to the finest hotels. We ate in luxury. I equated the members to taxpayers. When a Federal operation called government does this, it still pisses me off.

 

Maybe one....and another would have voted for Clinton...The other 3 would probably be smart enough to realize it’s all just the Theater of the Absurd and sat it out.