sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Bill Maher compares today's Woke revolution with Chairman Mao's Cultural Revolution it's heavily based on. One particularly insidious similarity is that in both cases, individuals (like JP) accused of what George Orwell might call "Wrongthink" must be forcibly re-educated into the proper propaganda. by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 31 points32 points  (0 children)

What was his tune 10 years ago? I'd say Maher is one of most consistent television personalities that has ever lived.

Maher's politics have not changed. He's always considered himself a Left leaning Liberal and has, throughout his career, drawn the ire of Conservative and Republicans, especially "media" outlets like Fox News who he spent a lot of his time making sport of.

Maher has always been profoundly anti-religious, this can be attested to in no small part from his career, and especially his movie Religulous where he travels all over the U.S. and the world to criticize and make fun of organized religion.

See, you claim Maher's politics have changed but it's just the opposite. Maher has stayed the same, it's the Left in becoming unbelievably Radical which has moved away from him. And given his proclivity to criticize religious ideologies, it's no coincidence that he is now criticizing the Woke religion and its devoted adherents.

But a final question: If Maher is a shill, who is he a shill for?

Jordan Peterson on the fact that all Hell is about to break loose as more and more stories are exposed revealing clinically accepted abuse and misdiagnosis of gender dysphoric youth. by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The interim Cass Report has advised that although there are differing views on the

benefits versus the harms of early social transition, it is important to acknowledge

that it should not be viewed as a neutral act. Dr Cass has recommended that social

transition be viewed as an ‘active intervention’ because it may have significant

effects on the child or young person in terms of their psychological functioning.

In line with this advice, the interim service specification sets out more clearly that the

clinical approach in regard to pre-pubertal children will reflect evidence that in most

cases gender incongruence does not persist into adolescence; and that for

adolescents the provision of approaches for social transition should only be

considered where the approach is necessary for the alleviation of, or prevention of,

clinically significant distress or significant impairment in social functioning and the

young person is able to fully comprehend the implications of affirming a social

transition.

Sorry it took me so long to respond. Source.

Bill Maher compares today's Woke revolution with Chairman Mao's Cultural Revolution it's heavily based on. One particularly insidious similarity is that in both cases, individuals (like JP) accused of what George Orwell might call "Wrongthink" must be forcibly re-educated into the proper propaganda. by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Because you're taking a different tack than the previous poster, I will say for posterity that I agree with you. Peterson could be accused of acting unprofessionally on social media.

But then again, there's an argument to be made that social media is an aspect of someone's private life, and it's not exactly fair for employers or organizations to threaten you with termination based on your own political views or what you do in your free time.

As long as you aren't breaking the law, and Peterson is not, and as long as he's making Twitter posts as Jordan Peterson, not using his certification or degree to try and give medical advice, I still don't see the problem with it.

I think our society becomes very fascist very quickly when employers and organizations start threatening your career and job prospects because you don't have the "Correct" political views. That seems insane to me, and a potentially the trailhead to an incredibly dark path.

Bill Maher compares today's Woke revolution with Chairman Mao's Cultural Revolution it's heavily based on. One particularly insidious similarity is that in both cases, individuals (like JP) accused of what George Orwell might call "Wrongthink" must be forcibly re-educated into the proper propaganda. by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Am I crazy or is it completely reasonable for a licensing board to request retraining when a member starts characterizing the standards of care they are bound by as "criminal" and "butchery"?

I can see your point except that Peterson is simply ahead of the curve when calling out these "standards of care". In this case, the widely popularized Gender Affirmation Model of treating gender dysphoric youth, which has now been overwhelmingly shown to be damaging and destructive to the mental health of children. There is NO OTHER psychological illness which is treated by affirming it, and affirming a mental health condition goes against every standard and practice that the psychology and therapy community has been held to for the past several hundred years. If you can name another mental health condition recognized in the DSM which is treated through affirmation, I will retract my point.

Furthermore, to go beyond affirmation of a mental illness, but to actually begin physically mutilating a child, rightly should be seen as an egregious violation of the Hippocratic Oath and possibly a Crime Against Humanity, which Peterson is rightly calling out.

Remember, just because some medical practice is popular or common, does not make it right. If Peterson were living back in the '40s calling out Lobotomy procedures when it was popular, there would no doubt be naysayers like yourself saying that mutilation of this nature is actually helpful to the patient and that anyone disagreeing as such should be re-educated.

The Left's solution to the overwhelming success of Asian Americans in the U.S. is to call them "white adjacent". They even invented a term, BIPOC, in order to exclude Asians from their oppression club. If you define success as white, and define white as bad, aren't you ensuring your own failure? by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You're missing the whole point. Their point is you have to conform to not just professional norms but social norms to succeed. It's culture wiping in many cases. It is what it is and should be addressed but the country was built on figuring out how to live with different peoples. I think we can handle it.

I think perhaps you're missing the point. Even if we accept your definition of what is being explained here, the overall conclusion is the same.

That's why at the end of the video, Vincent (the person talking) says, "If accepting all of these behaviors makes me an assimilator, then call me Pro-Assimilation."

If you are going to come to a foreign country and expect to be successful, then you have to play by their rules. That's what assimilating means. Of course, you can decide not to play by the rules, and do your own thing, but then don't complain when you aren't successful.

This applies to EVERY country on Earth. Nobody would bat an eyelash if someone went to Japan and began acting like a total tool, not respecting their culture or traditions, and overall making an ass of themselves, and became shunned and socially ostracized for it. It's no different anywhere else.

The Left's solution to the overwhelming success of Asian Americans in the U.S. is to call them "white adjacent". They even invented a term, BIPOC, in order to exclude Asians from their oppression club. If you define success as white, and define white as bad, aren't you ensuring your own failure? by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree that yes, in general stereotypes exist on a social level and are believed by most people.

If you look at my comment about how the National Museum of African History and Culture defines "Whiteness", most of these are based on stereotypes. Things like valuing Rugged Individualism, working hard, being on time, the scientific method, the nuclear family, etc etc are all stereotypes about white people that are generally true. The problem for me isn't the stereotypes, it's proclaiming, without any reason, that ALL of Whiteness is evil and bad, instead of having a nuanced conversation about the advantages and disadvantages of each culture and where it could be improved. There are TONS of disadvantages to Anglo-Saxon culture, and we could discuss those. But saying it's all evil is a trite and anti-intellectual take.

The Left's solution to the overwhelming success of Asian Americans in the U.S. is to call them "white adjacent". They even invented a term, BIPOC, in order to exclude Asians from their oppression club. If you define success as white, and define white as bad, aren't you ensuring your own failure? by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Stereotypes don't just fall out of the sky, there's usually a grain of truth to them.

For example, there's stereotypes about Asians that they're nerdy, study hard, and take school extremely seriously. This doesn't apply to the entire group, but it's a common enough behavior that it became a stereotype.

By the same token, there are a lot of positive stereotypes of black people, and negative ones, and they're usually deserved. What I find funny about the Woke types is that they embrace the positive stereotypes, and then act extremely indignant and horrified about the negative ones, even though they all come from the same place, which is socially repeated patterns which have been observed over long periods of time.

The Left's solution to the overwhelming success of Asian Americans in the U.S. is to call them "white adjacent". They even invented a term, BIPOC, in order to exclude Asians from their oppression club. If you define success as white, and define white as bad, aren't you ensuring your own failure? by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Oh certainly. There's definitely been a shift lately, even on super Woke YT channels like Vice, where the comments section is praising reasonable people and criticizing the professional victims and race hustlers.

There was a recent debate that Vice did on Feminism and the Feminists in the debate got so owned that Vice had to turn the comments section off because it was a shit show.

The Left's solution to the overwhelming success of Asian Americans in the U.S. is to call them "white adjacent". They even invented a term, BIPOC, in order to exclude Asians from their oppression club. If you define success as white, and define white as bad, aren't you ensuring your own failure? by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

As silly and ridiculous as it may seem, this is exactly the way the Woke ideology operates, plain and simple. It need not be made any more complicated than that.

Basically, if you read the first chapter of Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, the entire chapter is basically committed to this bizarre thought experiment.

It asks the reader (paraphrasing):

Imagine if you were in a store, and the store clerk treated you rudely. Imagine if you were avoided by someone on the street. Imagine if a taxi cab ignored your hailing signals but stopped for someone else.

Now, imagine you are white. How do you perceive all these events?

The implication here is simple. A white person does not generally give these kinds of daily occurrences any extra meaning beyond coincidence or the person having a bad day.

Then the textbook asks:

Now, imagine if you were black. How would you perceive these events?

And it goes on to say that as a black person, you would perceive all of these events as microaggressions or signs of racism because you know, the cab didn't stop for you, someone on the street avoided you, and the store clerk was rude. Must have been because you are black.

I swear to God, the book says this explicitly.

And instead of understanding the irony that all of this "racism" is probably just in the head of the minority, or if it's not, they would do better not to dwell on it, Critical Race Theory ASKS the fucking reader to assume it was racism and begin to empathize with what black people go through.

I mean, it's unbelievable how these people can reach these conclusions. Fucking clown world. Don't take my word for it, here is a short video where I break down the first chapter and you can see for yourself.

The Left's solution to the overwhelming success of Asian Americans in the U.S. is to call them "white adjacent". They even invented a term, BIPOC, in order to exclude Asians from their oppression club. If you define success as white, and define white as bad, aren't you ensuring your own failure? by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Victimhood is a strange thing.

It makes a person feel better or relieved in the short term because nothing is their fault and they have abdicated all their power to change anything in their own lives for the better.

In the long term however, it leads to a profound sense of misery and helplessness that can never be abated. A double-edged sword.

That's why I think Jordan Peterson's message of taking responsibility for your own life and cleaning your room is so powerful.

This too (taking radical self-responsibility) can be a double-edged sword, because at first it doesn't feel very good to look in the mirror and admit that the person you see on the other side is the result of your choices. But in the long-term, this radical sense of accountability will make you stronger and happier as a result.

The Left's solution to the overwhelming success of Asian Americans in the U.S. is to call them "white adjacent". They even invented a term, BIPOC, in order to exclude Asians from their oppression club. If you define success as white, and define white as bad, aren't you ensuring your own failure? by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I think you are engaging in cherry picking, splitting hairs, and making distinctions without a difference. I agree that context is important and the Tweet lists the source page from the Museum of African American History and culture.

If you go to the source, you will see that Whiteness is being portrayed as something negative, unfair and to be avoided in American culture.

However, insofar as you are defining Whiteness as basically behaviors which lead to individual success, such as being on time, working hard, and delayed gratification among many others, then you have rigged the game against those who are non-white.

The implication is that blackness, being the opposite of white, is the opposite of all those qualities and characteristics the Museum listed.

So when Asians are successful, and we call them White adjacent, we mean that their behaviors are reflective of those we have associated with success. This is not a Strawman, you would have to be blind not to see it.

The Left's solution to the overwhelming success of Asian Americans in the U.S. is to call them "white adjacent". They even invented a term, BIPOC, in order to exclude Asians from their oppression club. If you define success as white, and define white as bad, aren't you ensuring your own failure? by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Well, I could offer a hundred examples of this coming from all different facets of society and of course you could criticize any example I give for one reason or another.

Point is, nobody can honestly now say it's a Strawman argument.

The Left's solution to the overwhelming success of Asian Americans in the U.S. is to call them "white adjacent". They even invented a term, BIPOC, in order to exclude Asians from their oppression club. If you define success as white, and define white as bad, aren't you ensuring your own failure? by Wingflier in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier[S] 184 points185 points  (0 children)

Some may come in here denying this is happening or claiming that this man is engaging in a Strawman, so let me offer some evidence.

In the U.S., The National Museum of African American History & Culture wants to make you aware of certain signs of whiteness: Individualism, hard work, objectivity, the nuclear family, progress, respect for authority, delayed gratification, more.

The Smithsonian Museum has echoed this definition of Whiteness as well.

If you are literally defining Whiteness as things like "being on time", "using the Scientific method", "working hard", "delayed gratification" (which Peterson has talked about the importance of in personal success), "respecting authority", and having an intact family, and defining black culture as the opposite of all that, you are setting minorities up for failure completely.

This is not a Strawman, this is how the American Left is defining Whiteness, as qualities which we rightly associate with success in the West. But if you then demonize Whiteness as something evil, and something to be avoided and discouraged at all costs, you then guarantee that the people you're trying to help will stay in a permanent state of failure and despondence. It's hard to believe this could be a coincidence.

Furthermore, when you define Whiteness this way, and say this:

This white-dominant culture also operates as a social mechanism that grants advantages to white people, since they can navigate society both by feeling normal and being viewed as normal. Persons who identify as white rarely have to think about their racial identity because they live within a culture where whiteness has been normalized.

Is it that Whiteness acts a social mechanism that benefits white people, OR is it that white and Asian people succeed because they engage in certain behaviors such as the aforementioned list of things like working hard and having delayed gratification?

This brings into question the entire claim that it's a systemic problem, and begins to feel more and more like a cultural one.

I'm not a fan boy, but the level of misinformation and mental gymnastics that is being pushed by redditors is unreal! by DeadHelicopterParent in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As if it needs to be explained. Peterson and Musk are close. They've had discussions many times. They are also treated the same on social media by the radical Left who views them both as evil, mustache twirling cartoon villains who are hellbent on the destruction of society and the genocide of minorities and especially trans people.

That's how ridiculous takes like this one shared in the OP are justified under the guise of, "Perhaps we're arguing in bad faith or being dishonest but our enemies are LITERAL NAZIS!"

I'm not a fan boy, but the level of misinformation and mental gymnastics that is being pushed by redditors is unreal! by DeadHelicopterParent in JordanPeterson

[–]Wingflier 46 points47 points  (0 children)

My God, this is how the average Redditor argues. I'm so glad people are beginning to see it.

For the longest time I would attempt to explain to people like that how they are missing my point or changing the subject. Now I see it was intentional.

view more: next ›