psychdelicblues
Full Member
Thanks. That's a lot of n-words.
Lot of old stuff too, it seems. Why didn't it surface before?
It was posted it in this very thread 3 years ago.
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/joe-rogan.319156/page-2#post-23718111
Thanks. That's a lot of n-words.
Lot of old stuff too, it seems. Why didn't it surface before?
The world is fecked.
I mean... yes? And also the comparing black people to apes thing.
Nah, the conspiracies, lies and bias would unravel then. There's a large portion of the world that has no interest in that, sadly.The world really needs to do its own research.
You loved him back in the early racist days though.
I randomly threw on a new Rogan podcast the other week just to see what all the fuss was about, and he had Jordan Peterson as a guest.
My god what a constant stream of verbal garbage. Peterson genuinely seems borderline insane, and Rogan was agreeing with him mostly.
The racist remarks should really end his deal with Spotify. White brain and black body? What the actual feck.
The world is so depressing right now. United both on and off the pitch is a miserable experience to follow, trucker movements, Rogan earning millions spouting dangerous lies supported by corrupt homophobic world leaders. Inflation. Climate change. Etc.
The world is fecked.
Wait, why is he a racist all of a sudden? Because he used the n-word in an episode?
One of the first posts on here.He did ?
the Peterson episode is wild, he clearly isn't mentally well at the moment..
I'm surprised there isn't more talk about his comments on trans people in that episode, it was absolutely bonkers
Peterson has become a parody of himself. Just going off on ever weirder tangents now.
He pivoted ?One of the first posts on here.
He redeems himself further down page one.
His fanboyism appears blunted now.
I think he's overexposed now, and has veered far too much out of his lane.
But then that happens with many so-called intellectuals.
I think he's overexposed now, and has veered far too much out of his lane.
But then that happens with many so-called intellectuals.
Still very popular though. Big huge tour worldwide that will earn him millions.
Still very popular though. Big huge tour worldwide that will earn him millions.
More popular than any actual intellectuals.
Yeah but so what, the demand for him is mostly organic anyway.
It's not as if he's pulling a huge con-trick on the thousands who pay to see him/read his book.
Peterson is just a bluffer on most subjects. Maybe he's a heavyweight in the Psychological field but a, lot of commentators say he wouldn't cut it on a practical level and is somewhat protected by his role as an academic.
If it was Noam Chomsky I doubt there'd be the same issue.
This is what i was saying to someone once. There is no way he can be an expert in all these different fields. Psychology, psychiatry, philosophy, sociology, politics, etc. All them fields then have sub fields.
He is a con artist really. But because he is such a good speaker, or was until he had to be hospitalized, he just sort of became famous.
What issue?
Noam speaks in lecture halls in Trinity in Dublin, Peterson plays the 3 Arena, that's what I said.
I'm not saying that you're one of them, but many people seem to have an issue with the fact that Peterson gets the attention that he does, sells the number of books that he has etc.
Yeah, though Noam's one of those intellectuals who came to public prominence by veering out of his lane.
I encountered him first years ago when someone sent me links to his anti Marx rants and it was weird and drew me in. It was fascinating in the lack of substantive attacks on Marx and sounded as absurd and lacking in actual research to me as that shit show on climate on JRE there a few weeks back. Lots of keywords and half ideas but essentially a void.
I first saw him on that channel four interview with him, where the woman tries her utmost best to catch him out and he just starts laughing at her. "So what you are saying is...."
I dont hate him. I just dont agree with most of what he says.
Anyhow i think he is past his sell by date now.
Narrow audience? He gets dozens of millions of views on Youtube. I think the Cathy Newman interview alone is over 30 million and the GQ interview over 40 million.I find him and his huge appeal to such a narrow audience really fascinating.
Narrow audience? He gets dozens of millions of views on Youtube. I think the Cathy Newman interview alone is over 30 million and the GQ interview over 40 million.
Is more of of the supposed begrudgery?
What do you mean about Chomsky?
His branching out from linguistics?
Noam has a body of impressive work that makes his existence on the fringe for so long quite as bewildering to me as Peterson's appeal.
Noam is the definitive voice on lots of things and is universally accepted as such by his peers. Peterson is a different animal.
Narrow audience? He gets dozens of millions of views on Youtube. I think the Cathy Newman interview alone is over 30 million and the GQ interview over 40 million.
I'd say so yeah. At least partly anyway.
Yeah. In other words had he remained solely in the field of linguistics he wouldn't have become publicly known at all, given that it's a very narrow field of interest.
I like his critique on many things, the media and foreign affairs especially.
His existence on the fringe however doesn't surprise me when it comes to his economic musings.
If it was Noam Chomsky I doubt there'd be the same issue.
Gone from youtube , but he went on Alex jones in the mid-00s. This is also how I remember it: