Everyone seems to be discussing the recent Jordan Peterson interview on Channel 4 and I'm starting to get a bit sick of it but I just got finished
watching it and something the interviewer said right at the end really struck me as a critical point relating to why the left and right are drifting
so far apart ideologically. She says "Aren't you just whipping people up into a state of anger?". This question left me flabbergasted, she had just
listened to Peterson explain the logic and reasoning behind his positions and he made it very clear his intentions are to help people and in fact he
has counseled many women to help improve their careers. All he was trying to explain is that women and men when left to make their own choices will
naturally select certain jobs over others and that accounts for a large part of why there are less female CEO's and why women have lower paying jobs
overall. She then immediately takes this as him saying women should just give up and accept their fate, when clearly what he is trying to do is
encourage women to be more assertive and have more confidence, he's trying to empower them and prove they can achieve anything they want to achieve in
life if they have the right mindset.
The single largest flaw in SJW thinking is they assume anyone who opposes them must have beliefs opposite to them, meaning they hate minority groups
and they love inequality. This could not be further from the truth, we simply realize the fact that constantly treating people like oppressed victims
enforces the idea that's what they are. You cannot simply assume a person is a troll because they don't instantly jump onto the social justice train,
Peterson is a well educated philosopher and he has deep, well formulated and well thought out reasons for having the stances he has. After I finished
watching that interview with Peterson I saw another Channel 4 interview with Richard Ayoade in the suggested videos and my god was it hilarious. I
absolutely love and adore Richard Ayoade, if you're not aware he was the black guy in The IT Crowd (best show ever btw). The interviewer begins
prodding Ayoade and asking why he wont enthusiastically support the SJW movement as a black man... "you are young, Cambridge educated, black British,
I mean that's quite rare", and Ayoade simply responds "yes it's a hell of a medical form"... the interviewer asks "but you're not going there?", he
responds "where should I be going?"
The interviewer continues "well no what I mean is you know Lenny Henry and David Harewood and all those people, other black people in the
entertainment industry", the response: "there are others, yeah". Every time the interviewer brings up his "blackness" and tries to frame the
discussion around that you can tell Ayoade is annoyed because he is defined by much more than simply the color of his skin, he is a human being and
I'm sure he'd much prefer to be treated like any other person rather than part of a victim group. He is a very successful man and he did that with
hard work, people around the world love him and they don't care for a single moment what color his skin is. This is what really irks me about so much
of the virtue signaling I see, it's so fake and superficial with no real good will behind it, and they often take it so far that they end up offending
the very people they want to help. It's like if you treat a disabled person as if they were a child when mentally they are an adult, it's
condescending because they just want to be treated like everyone else instead of having some group identity lodged upon them and constantly told they
will never be anything outside of that.
Guru blatantly trying to steer the conversation into a debate about race and inequalities and Mr Ayoade was far too intelligent and morally
superior to court it. Guru ended up looking like a fool.
edit on 23/1/2018 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
idk if you've watched much with ayoade, but he rarely gives a straight/serious answer to anything... and picking out one celebrity who isn't throwing
in with racial justice doesn't prove that you've arrived at a superior understanding of the topic, either.
I didn't "pick out" anyone as an example, I wanted to make a thread about the Peterson video and I just happened to see that video in the suggested
bar and it fit with this discussion very well. Are am well aware of how Ayoade behaves in interviews but that doesn't take away from anything he said,
especially near the end when the interviewer really tried to dig into the issue and put him on the spot. He may always be sarcastic but there is great
wisdom behind his jokes, they say comedy is one of the most powerful forms of political commentary. Also I'm not claiming to have a "superior
understanding", it's not about trying to out-virtue-signal, it's about simply taking a stance which I believe is the most ethical and most human
edit on 23/1/2018 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
On a side note, I was going to mention to how Dave Chappelle takes a similar approach, doesn't define himself by the color of his skin, and doesn't
jump on the SJW bandwagon, and how he got burned hard for saying give Trump a chance. However I knew someone would counter that argument by saying how
he roasted Trump on his recent Netflix special. He explains how everyone harassed him for not being anti-Trump and why his opinion on Trump has
changed and why he now thinks Trump is doing a terrible job. Honestly it was the first time I've felt any degree of cringe while watching his standup,
I think he's probably the best comedian ever but when he started to make fun of Trump it was honestly just bad. And I'm not just saying that because I
support Trump, I've watched a lot of people roast Trump and I enjoy a lot of it, this was just plain bad and it shocked me. However I think a large
part of him roasting Trump was just him trying to recoup a bit of respect from his friends and colleges and reduce the level of anti-Trumper hate
directed at him. But that would be seen as a wild conspiracy theory and so I chose not to include this part of my argument.
edit on 23/1/2018
by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
...and calling those you disagree with, fake. no, i don't get any sense of implied superiority out of that at all.
I'm not saying it's all fake, but a lot of it is and yes maybe in some sense I do believe I'm above those people who use virtue signaling as a tool
for social manipulation... but I mean it is quite a low brow thing to do. Also the fact that almost every person I see doing it is some fake Hollywood
personality or morning talk show host really drives home the point for me. These people don't know what real hardship is... ask yourself why the most
popular people on YouTube are personalities like PewDiePie, H3H3, and iDubbbz, even Peterson is becoming quite famous now, that Channel 4 interview is
still trending. They are crude and often push the limits of what is politically correct, they are real human beings and that's why people are drawn to
them, despite the fact YouTube constantly tries to push fake obnoxious personalities by rigging the trending videos and other methods.
23/1/2018 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
Fair enough point, usually I try to make a point of saying "far left" or "fanatic SJW's" or something that doesn't generalize everyone on the left.
When I use the term SJW I'm not necessarily talking about all of them although I feel it's a vast majority of them, just based on the fact they've
chosen to label themselves as a warrior for social justice. Anyway I have to be off for a while, I'll check back later.
Also before I go here's a new video from Prager University which helps my argument some what. In it a black women explains how historically the
Republicans have been behind a lot of real social change, how democrats have often aligned themselves against the will of minority groups, and
how the first black senators and congressman were all Republican as were the first Asian and first female senators and congressman. Obviously things
have changed since then and she acknowledges that. At the end of the video she explains why Republicans tend to treat blacks and other minorities as
equals instead of giving them special treatment, and how democrats tend to "treat blacks and women as victims who aren't capable of succeeding on
their own, the truth is this is just a new type of contempt".
A democrat sees a black man and says "You poor, oppressed victim! Vote democrat and we will take other people's money and give it to you!"
A republican sees a black man and says, "Good morning! How are you today?"
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.