It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Slavoj Zizek vs Jordan Peterson debate. Marxism vs Capitalism.

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 08:38 PM
link   
This debate happened a few days ago in Toronto. Tried to get my hands on some of tickets, but sold out by time I heard.

Anyways. Here is the debate, Zizek brings some interesting ideas to the table and sort of talks about what I thought about political ideologies from the twentieth century in today's world.

And Peterson basically loses within' the first 15 minutes. Enjoy!





posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

I don't have the time to watch quite yet but thanks for bringing it to our attention. I love actual debates. I'll be back to chime in.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

A 2 1/2 video.

At least do the cliffs notes.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

What are the 3 main highlights in your opinion ? 😃



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp

And Peterson basically loses within' the first 15 minutes. Enjoy!



How do you figure? I jumped in at 15:00 and listened for 5 minutes or so. I didn't hear losing.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

Peterson cant debate politics and economics in one. The end.

Debates are supposed to be like watching a sporting event. I'm just presenting it for those interested.
edit on 24-4-2019 by strongfp because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

Ooohhhhhh I love debates and this should be a very good watch! Thanks for sharing and I will watch here in a bit. IMO no need for time stamps as it seems you are just sharing this for those interested in debate and not the topic. No need for stamps as you are not arguing for or against either side.
Thank ya much dude.




posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

If Peterson cannot debate politics and economics, then what was the point of inviting him to do so unless the organizers were desperate for him to fail and so put him in an arena where he was sure to do so?

Truthfully, I don't have 2 1/2 hours to listen to this things, but I imagine Peterson stuck to what he knows as a psychologist and debated based on human nature and psychology and there are very sound reasons there why Marxism doesn't work.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Because he can, even though the Zizek fanboy claims he can't....The End



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp
I disagree with your opinion that Peterson lost in the first 15 minutes. He was still talking. You didn't even get to hear what Zizek said yet.
From what I have watched so far, Peterson is winning.

Although a brilliant man, Zizek speaks of happiness as a burden as well as freedom.
The only burden with happiness and freedom is attaining it.
Economically Jordan pointed out that with free market capitalism more people have risen above poverty
compared to any other economic system in the world, which isn't saying that it doesn't have problems.

Zizek is losing so far. And has anyone else noticed how many times he tugs at his shirt and rubs his nose?
edit on 24-4-2019 by highvein because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Zizek is trash, and Peterson is trash, Peterson had no idea what he was talking about and admitted he just read the book before the debate

and Zizek has always been trash, nothing changed with him

the notion that Capitalism has more people risen above poverty is laughable at best



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: XAnarchistX




Zizek is trash, and Peterson is trash, Peterson had no idea what he was talking about and admitted he just read the book before the debate


So you missed the part where he said he read it 40 years ago at age 18.




the notion that Capitalism has more people risen above poverty is laughable at best


Any evidence or are you just trashing two people that know more about this topic than you do?
If you knew more you would be up there debating them.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: highvein

why do you assume perceived intelligence is a hierarchal power?

If you put up Capitalism against other Economic systems than you could argue that it was based on the fact that is the only economic system that has been continued based on power

and for the record (like I always state everywhere) I do not support communism or socialism

Capitalism does keep those rich and in power... rich and in power, Capitalism has destroyed any small sense of "middle class" created corporatism and monopolies around the world

also, Capitalism is responsible for the poor and homeless, those that starve, can't afford health care, etc and also numerous deaths

and for the record, I don't debate, it is a pointless endeavor at self-satisfaction,



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:16 PM
link   
I'm left wing so I think Zizek won.

I'm right wing so I think Peterson won.

I think they both suck so my opinion doesn't matter to the left and right wingers. It looks like a graceful diversion or cop out. You gave away your true colors by saying "the notion that Capitalism.. is laughable". To the right wingers, you're a left winger trying to fit in like "I'm cool too guys, don't view me as a liberal".

Who received stars so far other than the op? People chiming in to defend Peterson or say he was winning. Why? Because to them Marxism is wrong, misguided, evil. Wouldn't take a very convincing argument in a debate to sway them into the Capitalists favor.

And vice versa 100%. If someone said Capitalist beat Marxist in debate on a left-leaning or mostly left winger forum, a few would take your bait and disagree with you. Most people, like me, who might have favorable opinions for either side but are not into words that dont make moves.

Politicians debating that are up for election trump this. Trump making any statement trumps this. I'd have to be very partial to Marxism or Capitalism to want to watch it and spend 15 minutes of free time to do so. I like to use that time to write a post.

Had I watched it and wrote my opinion in an analysis, it'd be 30-45 minutes total for a net gain of absolutely nothing, for someone to chime in and disagree or agree. Gee, thanks, we agree or disagree. I'm glad we wasted so much time to establish that. See you at work tomorrow.
edit on 4/24/2019 by r0xor because: must be filled out: I thought the video was 15:00 not 150:00



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: highvein

why do you assume perceived intelligence is a hierarchal power?

If you put up Capitalism against other Economic systems than you could argue that it was based on the fact that is the only economic system that has been continued based on power

and for the record (like I always state everywhere) I do not support communism or socialism

Capitalism does keep those rich and in power... rich and in power, Capitalism has destroyed any small sense of "middle class" created corporatism and monopolies around the world

also, Capitalism is responsible for the poor and homeless, those that starve, can't afford health care, etc and also numerous deaths

and for the record, I don't debate, it is a pointless endeavor at self-satisfaction,


Capitalism is the only socioeconomic model that makes a middle class.

Communism or socialism certainly doesn't.

So what socioeconomic model do you propose? Anarchy?

I can understand why you don't debate.

/facepalm
edit on 24-4-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:30 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

SoOo...

You post an OP that has no actual content besides a 2.5 hour video of a debate and your opinion is that debater "A" lost in the first 15 minutes... the subject being Capitalism vs Marxism.

Now, I have to ask since you didn't really post any actual content in the OP but the video....

Do I waste 2.5 hours of my life watching the debate so I can reply to you or...

Do I just go with the last 150 years or so of history to point out that Marxism doesn't actually work because of human nature, experimenting with it so far in history has resulted in 100's of millions of deaths, horrible suffering and economic chaos and may I remind you has never worked once you take the idea off of paper.

I'm not going to watch the video because the debate doesn't matter.

If marxism as a concept works for you, move to Venezuela and check back with us in a few years, mkay?




posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:49 PM
link   
I used to be a debater like you, then I took an arrow to the brain with happiness and productivity inscribed on it. It had glowing letters in Sumerian cuneiform script. It might have been a type of ancient Hebrew, but there was an english translation under it in parenthesis.

After a few years as a hobby among others, it stopped being fun. Having real life stressors come into play like working hard to be able to pay bills on a clock in, clock out hour based shift, family members and pets passing away, realizing my time was more enjoyed doing other things played a part.

You have however many hours after working, cooking, laundry, grooming, errands, using the bathroom, usually only a few unless you have a day off and.. over time (people going into middle age or beyond would agree), you notice what actually rubs you the right way mentally. What's satisfying, enjoyable, you feel good doing it and if it's something you could possibly make money utilizing skills from, all the better.

You might get a rush or initially good feelings that end up getting dragged through the mud. You leave from the experience, debating, feeling edgy, irritated, like you know you're right or else you wouldn't have gone all in on the debate like a chess game.

Ask yourself who you are convincing because it definitely isn't your opponent "if you win" or the audience because, let's face it, no one tunes in for debates who are undecided about the topic. No one is out there window shopping for ideaology following your debate because it's so enjoyable.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

Did the Marxist guy bring up the amount of deaths its caused?

^_^

No?

lulz.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:53 PM
link   
and I don't need to watch a 2hr debate to know

Communism is the highest form of Bull#.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: XAnarchistX




why do you assume perceived intelligence is a hierarchal power?


I never assumed that. You just assumed that I did.




If you put up Capitalism against other Economic systems than you could argue that it was based on the fact that is the only economic system that has been continued based on power


All economic systems are based on power of the government. I don't know what you are saying.




Capitalism does keep those rich and in power... rich and in power, Capitalism has destroyed any small sense of "middle class" created corporatism and monopolies around the world


Not with the creation of jobs. That creates more middle class. And all economic structures keep the rich in power.




also, Capitalism is responsible for the poor and homeless, those that starve, can't afford health care, etc and also numerous deaths


To some degree, but it raises more out of poverty than any other economic system so far.




and for the record, I don't debate, it is a pointless endeavor at self-satisfaction,


Then you should never do it, if it makes you feel like that.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join