ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, November 16, 2018

A reckoning cometh

From the Introduction to Jordanetics: A Journey Into the Mind of Humanity's Greatest Thinker, which is now complete and will be published on Amazon on Monday. It also features a Foreword by Milo Yiannopoulos that is a real barnburner. The final draft has been turned in, it's the #1 New Release in Political Philosophy three days prior to publication, and you can still preorder it.

I also discussed the forthcoming book during my recent appearance with Alex Jones.

---
Introduction: The Meandering Fog of Meaning

Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate.
—Sun Tzu

I decided to begin looking more deeply into this popular professor who was being so widely hailed as a formidable thinker, a thoughtful philosopher, a courageous defender of free speech, and a champion of young men. But almost immediately, I discovered that his reputation was at variance with his actions, as in the case of his deeply ironic decision to ban investigative journalist Faith Goldy from participating in an August 2017 event at Ryerson University called The Stifling of Free Speech on University Campuses. The event was cancelled, and with Peterson’s approval, Goldy was barred from participating in the rescheduled event.

When he was subsequently asked about his decision in public, Peterson responded with what I eventually came to recognize was his characteristic bafflegarble, the word-smog he habitually utilizes to conceal his actual meaning.
QUESTION: I understand that Faith Goldy was removed from the original August panel because of her podcast with the controversial Daily Stormer after Charlottesville…. This strategy appears to parallel the SJWs, who wish to deny platforms to conservative speakers. I want to understand why Faithy Goldy was removed from the event simply for associating with identitarians, and if each of the panelists agree with that decision.

JORDAN PETERSON: That’s an excellent question. So, the first thing I should say is that it’s not like we’re unaware of the irony. Number one. Ryerson cancelled a panel about the cancellation of panels about free speech. That’s irony number one. And then irony number two was the panelists removed a speaker for arguably engaging in the act of free speech. Okay, we got that, believe me.

All right, so why did we come to this decision? I sat down personally—the other people can say what they have to say—I sat down with my son and we went through Faith’s interview. I know Faith, I don’t believe that she is a reprehensible person. I think that Charlottesville was very shocking to her and I think that she put herself in a very difficult position. And I think some of that was brave, that she went down there to cover it.

However, I listened very carefully to her podcast, the one that got her in trouble. And my sense was that she wasn’t, she didn’t, she was associating with people whose views she should have questioned. It was her journalistic, um, responsibility to question them. She had to ask at least one hard question. At least one. Three would have been better. You know, and I understand she had to toe a careful line. She was on the podcast, they had invited her on, it’s much more difficult than you might think when you’re facing people, even when you don’t believe them, to be rude enough to challenge them, right? That’s not so easy, especially if you’re an agreeable person and she is a rather agreeable person.

But I believe she, she failed in her journalistic responsibility. And as a consequence of that, she became too hot a property for us. And not just for us. And, well, that was, that was the reason for the decision. That was, that was my reasoning.
Now, this was manifestly not the correct behavior of a highly principled man or even a reasonably honest one. Jordan Peterson did something he clearly knew to be wrong, he did something he clearly knew to be hypocritical, but instead of simply owning up to his obvious failure when called on it in public, he attempted to concoct a ridiculous ex post facto excuse to justify it. Again.

He had to know that he was going to have to face the question sooner or later. He even appears to have prepared for it, and yet this response was the best that he could manage. If you watch the video, you can even see that Jordan Peterson has, he has, a reliable tell that warns the viewer when he’s about to say something that he knows is not true. He also betrays another tell that indicates when he is going to very carefully attempt to conceal the weakness of one of his assertions or conclusions.

Just watch for the repetitions and the adverbs. Once you learn to recognize them, you can identify when Jordan Peterson is trying to pull a fast one on his audience even when you don’t know what he’s talking about.

And the obvious question Peterson’s response raises is this: according to what theory of human rights or journalism does one’s own right to free speech rely upon one’s correct performance of nonexistent journalistic responsibilities?

There is no such theory. It’s a nonsensical assertion. It’s classic Petersonian bafflegarble. But it requires a high level of mental focus to penetrate the fog of Peterson’s word-salad and see what he is literally saying.

After twice seeing Peterson’s shameless dishonesty in action, I decided that it was time to delve deeper into the man’s actual work. Being a writer myself, I was aware that men express themselves differently in different media. Many eloquent speakers reveal themselves to be superficial thinkers in writing, and no few writers—myself included—are unable to express their genuinely profound thoughts in a facile manner in front of a microphone or a camera. Perhaps Peterson was much better in print than he was on video or on the Internet; after all, he was the bestselling author on the planet at the time.

So, I read his bestseller, 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos. I read his would-be magnum opus, Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief. I even read his contribution to the UN Secretary General’s High Level Panel on Sustainable Development of which he was a member, Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A future worth choosing.

And this book is the result of what I learned from reading the three published works of Jordan Peterson.

UPDATE: Now the #1 New Release in Spiritual Self-Help too!

Labels: ,

26 Comments:

Blogger Uncle John's Band November 16, 2018 6:36 AM  

Places ball on tee...

Blogger Silent Draco November 16, 2018 6:45 AM  

That was very odd. I read the Peterson non-explanstion and closed my eyes for a moment, to think it through. Instead, I had a vision of him being flanked and attacked by three wolves. Perhaps it was another canine.

Either his bafflegarble is damaging to high functioning minds, or I just need more caffeine this early. Time to test hypothesis with the good coffee.

Blogger Xellos November 16, 2018 6:49 AM  

If you hanged this "man" upside down, it would be hard to notice considering the shit that comes out of his mouth.

Blogger Ron November 16, 2018 6:51 AM  

I believe yesterday's interview with Alex and Vox's Darkstream last night were some of the best video presentations Vox has done. Alex had his eyes opened a little more as did many Darkstream viewers whose numbers nearly reached 500. Slowly and steadily, the message is spreading.

Blogger Dirk Manly November 16, 2018 7:18 AM  

He certainly borders on stuttering when he's trying to sink the shiv.

Blogger Jamie-R November 16, 2018 7:27 AM  

"Hey f Q, f Q man, that shit was putting up disrespect about me, man, Q is horseshit, right Vox?"

"Um, Trump's a negotiator"

Nice dance around of your own word fog yo. What I was saying tonight to Sarah is that if Bin Salman was his Vice President, Q would be more than words. But since Trump is a talker on the HEATED actions, then we just get the info, which is nice, exposing plots & high level criminality is nice. But Trump seemingly can't take the heat of the doing part. Doing on some of these things takes the sort of brass balls only my guy Bin Salman would do.

I mean really, VP MBP, sounds like a doer.

Blogger Curlytop November 16, 2018 7:28 AM  

So basically, this book could have an aside on the cover that reads, "I read his tripe, so you don't have to."

Thanks, Vox. You're a prince because I couldn't get through even one of Peterson's lectures without my eyes falling out of their sockets from eye rolling. Peterson's smug persona doesn't help either. Punchable.

Blogger VD November 16, 2018 7:38 AM  

Nice dance around of your own word fog yo.

That is a nonsensical assertion. At most, it's a dance around Alex Jones's words.

Blogger pyrrhus November 16, 2018 8:38 AM  

Only a stoic and determined man could read all that rubbish and make sense of it...Hail Vox!

Blogger Barberquer November 16, 2018 11:19 AM  

"And the obvious question Peterson’s response raises is this: according to what theory of human rights or journalism does one’s own right to free speech rely upon one’s correct performance of nonexistent journalistic responsibilities?"

Vox is right, there is no such journalistic responsibility. However it needs to be pointed out that there is no "Free Speech" right that comes into play here either, at least in the U.S. The first amendment protects us from government restrictions on free speech. However, Vox, for example, or any other private entity is well within their right to prohibit your speech on their own platforms or in their own private places.

This is a pet peeve of mine. People complaining that their "free speech" rights are violated when someone doesn't let them use their platform to preach. No such right exists.

Blogger Lance E November 16, 2018 11:23 AM  

Interesting. The repetition tic stands out, but not the "carefully" qualifier. Hadn't noticed the latter at all, I'll have to watch out for it the next time someone tries to get me to watch one of his monologues.

Blogger Lance E November 16, 2018 11:26 AM  

Barberquer wrote:The first amendment protects us from government restrictions on free speech. However, Vox, for example, or any other private entity is well within their right to prohibit your speech on their own platforms or in their own private places.

Way, way too short for this ride. Whatever Media Matters is paying you, they're being ripped off.

Blogger Barberquer November 16, 2018 11:38 AM  

"Way, way too short for this ride. Whatever Media Matters is paying you, they're being ripped off."

This from someone who clearly doesn't understand what he is speaking about. Forgive me, but I'll have to make a mental note to disregard any think you have to say in the future.

Blogger Wanderer November 16, 2018 11:52 AM  

The problem wasn't that Faith Goldy's free speech right was violated (it wasn't), but that it was hypocritical and idiotic to ban someone from a pro free speech lecture for her speech.

Of course none of that really matters because the event was in Canada iirc, and Canada has no first amendment free speech rights. Canada has European-style hate speech laws and Faith ought to be lucky she wasn't arrested.

Blogger Unknown November 16, 2018 12:02 PM  

@10

Yes, said platforms can decide what speech they allow.

However...

When those who run said platform allow one person to say something, but not another, that platform is now curating speech, and no longer enjoys the liability shield granted them by the law.

As it stands now, Facebook and Twitter could both easilybe held criminally and civilly liable for things posted on their service.

--Unknownsailor--

Blogger Colin Flaherty's baby momma November 16, 2018 12:34 PM  

I wondered why upstart Peterson was being heavily praised and promoted in "right wing" circles, for merely stating men are in fact distinct from women and govt mandated trans-friendly speech codes are bad. Recommendations on social media filled with Peterson and Shapiro type content while growing competitors were cast into shadows if not outright banned.

Vox Day, Supreme Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil and various other Minions, has taken on the gruesome task of intellectually eviscerating the Pro Bono Profiteer in meticulous detail, to spare us the pain of subjecting ourselves to countless hours of sesquipedalian infantilism and self-destructive ideology, while also giving a guide on JBP's fanatic parrots.

Vox Day has spoken. Listen and learn.

God's Will be done.


Blogger Yordan Yordanov November 16, 2018 1:26 PM  

Looking back on it, I think the warning sign - when it comes to being "right-wing" - should have been his rise to fame. The dude started to freak out over mandatory transgenderism inclusive language. The issue wasn't even transgenderism, but the language.

THAT was when he started to freak out? Everything before that was fine?

Blogger Wuzzums Fuzzums November 16, 2018 4:19 PM  

Barberquer wrote:However, Vox, for example, or any other private entity is well within their right to prohibit your speech on their own platforms or in their own private places.

This is a pet peeve of mine. People complaining that their "free speech" rights are violated when someone doesn't let them use their platform to preach. No such right exists.


You are unaware of the actual events that transpired and therefore incorrect. Here they are in chronological order:

>during Jordan's initial rise he rode the coat tails of people like Milo and Rebel Media, specifically Lauren Southern and Faith Goldy
>Faith attended the Unite The Right march as a correspondent for Rebel Media
>Faith was literally meters away from from where that car went into the crowd
>Faith was the first reporter on the scene, she was livestreaming everything
>Faith was then interviewed by some Alt-Right podcast in relation to the event
>Ezra was slowly outed as being a maniac and fraud independently from these events
>Most famous Rebel Media staff quit, which includes Lauren Southern and Faith Goldy
>due to NDA's the official story is that they "got fired"
>"The Stifling of Free Speech" event was promoted as also having Faith Goldy in it, i.e. she was INVITED
>the event got cancelled and rescheduled because of leftists mobs
>the rescheduled event had no more Faith Goldy
>during the Q&A Jordan revealed that not only did he not want Faith there but he was the leading voice in taking her off the panel of speakers -- look at how he phrases it, and also take into consideration the fact that no other speaker put forth any justification of why they did not want Faith there
>Peterson then went on Joe Rogan and pushed his "she didn't meet my journalistic standards" motive which is an absolute lie because you can't interview people when they're the ones who are interviewing you

So she was allowed to speak, she was stopped to speak by Peterson, and Peterson didn't organize the event. Thus by your own standards her free-speech was indeed violated.

Blogger Lovekraft November 16, 2018 4:50 PM  

Peterson, in non-personing Goldy, did much more than simply preventing another from speaking.

He piled on the growing trend of dehumanizing white identitarians, similar to past patterns where this action opens the door for evil.

Peterson showed his hand, which for us may be a gift.

Blogger Al K. Annossow November 16, 2018 5:06 PM  

Word salad. Word salad. Where have I read that before? Oh. It was in the Infogalactic entry about schizophrenia:

"Individuals with schizophrenia may experience hallucinations (most reported are hearing voices), delusions (often bizarre or persecutory in nature), and disorganized thinking and speech. The last may range from loss of train of thought, to sentences only loosely connected in meaning, to speech that is not understandable known as word salad."

Take your meds.

I've read most of 'Maps of Meaning.' It's bad. It might actually reflect schizophrenic tendencies. Or it could be the above mentioned bafflegarble using mixes of academic psychology, personal dreams, mythology interpretations(popular among famous academic intellectuals), and seeming interpretations of his kids growing up. I can say that the Greek mythology was highly distorted. Despite the one statue he found, Artemis was NOT a 15 breasted, nurturing, motherly goddess. She was a huntress usually portrayed with a slain deer. The Biblical parts were just plain false - God did not slay Leviathan as part of creating the world!

I have three hypotheses: 1) He told people he was working on a book so eventually he had to produce one. 2) Before going into public life he had to have a book that could cross many subjects so he could say "I wrote the book on that." His use of quotes and references make it look like he was mostly word-salading others' ideas. But maybe he thinks he carved out a slice of originality.

I'm looking forward to Vox's book to compare notes. I tackled 'Maps of Meaning' mostly just to try my hand at critical analysis while reading rather than to just stop reading junk when I find it. Ugh.

Blogger Al K. Annossow November 16, 2018 5:18 PM  

It should be a requirement that anyone who talks or writes in word salads must be fluent in Russian, Italian, French, and Ranch.

Blogger R Webfoot November 16, 2018 10:44 PM  

"I wondered why upstart Peterson was being heavily praised and promoted in "right wing" circles, for merely stating men are in fact distinct from women and govt mandated trans-friendly speech codes are bad."

Audience size, I think. The appeal was something like "finally, these ideas are breaking mainstream! He talks about men and women having differences and women's emotionality is connected to childrearing, and he is splashed all over the internet!"

Blogger Dirk Manly November 16, 2018 11:22 PM  

The bigger thing was, in that same interview, he totally put Cathy Newman in her place for citing the "women only earn 72% that men do" myth, and for totally confounding her with "well, if I can't exercise free speech because it might make you feel bad, have you ever considered that many of the things you have said tonight might make ME or other men feel bad?" and Newman, dumb cow that she is, was not only speechless for close to 10 seconds, she locked up like a statue.

Blogger Dirk Manly November 16, 2018 11:25 PM  

My first awareness of Peterson was when I was working a midnight shift, and a nationally syndicated, somewhat trucking-industry oriented, conservative overnight radio show played a couple minutes of that interview.

In that one isolated instance, he seemed sane.

I have yet to see/hear anything else from him that comes anywhere close.

So, I'm thinking even that BBC interview was something of a setup.... but Newman wasn't in on the set-up.

Blogger Lance E November 17, 2018 1:49 AM  

Dirk Manly wrote:So, I'm thinking even that BBC interview was something of a setup.... but Newman wasn't in on the set-up.

I'm not as certain as you are about Newman not being in on it. I - sadly - have had to spend a lot of time around dyed-in-the-wool feminists, and most would not fall for such a pathetic rhetorical maneuver as "well, we should limit your speech too because it might make men feel bad". They have standard well-rehearsed responses to this, having to do with disadvantaged groups, institutional sexism, patriarchy, etc., all of which justify the double standard. None of them are afraid to admit that there is such a double standard; they're proud of it and call it Progress.

While I freely admit to being fooled at the time, in hindsight Peterson vs. Newman looks a lot like Hulk Hogan vs. the Iron Sheik.

Blogger Paul M November 17, 2018 8:12 AM  

If Peterson is a real, actual academic professor with a doctorate, then he has a doctoral thesis tucked away somewhere. It might be a fun read.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts