ok, depends what you mean by controlled opposition. For me, that was always a conscious thing.
Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War
- Thread starter Laura
- Start date
ok, depends what you mean by controlled opposition. For me, that was always a conscious thing.
Yeah, for me that's the best evidence for his naivety. People like Shapiro saw the usefulness of him and took his good intentions, manipulated him, and diverted and distorted his intentions for Shapiro's own cause, which is ultimately "Israel first". In fact, there were several other people who zoned in on Peterson and exploited him and his talents for their own benefit. Meanwhile, Peterson remains largely clueless about it all, at least for now.
bianca etezete
Dagobah Resident
bianca etezete
Dagobah Resident
that is strange...i wanna delete something that mysteriously doubled, and i cannot without posting something else, what I do just now
On a personal note, the whole Peterson thing - and countless other automatons on social media - has had me wondering where I would have been in terms of my understanding of the world and human nature without the group.
Do we all lose appreciation for just how much we actually understand about ourselves and this reality compared to everyone else?
How many of us would be able to see through so many of the lies and media narratives if we’d gone this way instead of that way and never stumbled upon the pentagon strike, or found one of Laura’s books, or an article on sott?
It’s really brought my attention and focus on humans back to the Gurdjieffian interpretation, that everyone is asleep, almost the entirety of human beings are simply machines. And that no one is actually really any good at anything. Like when Ouspenski asked G. what he thought of Tertium Organum and G. said that if Ouspenski actually understood anything he’d written in it, that he’d bow down before him and call him master. That ultimately, wherever anyone finds themselves before entering into the actual Work - becoming actually affiliated with a genuine esoteric school - that anything and everything they have learned or achieved is all simply accidental.
That’s how I’m looking at Peterson, now. He is a walking accident, like pretty much everyone else on the planet.
Do we all lose appreciation for just how much we actually understand about ourselves and this reality compared to everyone else?
How many of us would be able to see through so many of the lies and media narratives if we’d gone this way instead of that way and never stumbled upon the pentagon strike, or found one of Laura’s books, or an article on sott?
It’s really brought my attention and focus on humans back to the Gurdjieffian interpretation, that everyone is asleep, almost the entirety of human beings are simply machines. And that no one is actually really any good at anything. Like when Ouspenski asked G. what he thought of Tertium Organum and G. said that if Ouspenski actually understood anything he’d written in it, that he’d bow down before him and call him master. That ultimately, wherever anyone finds themselves before entering into the actual Work - becoming actually affiliated with a genuine esoteric school - that anything and everything they have learned or achieved is all simply accidental.
That’s how I’m looking at Peterson, now. He is a walking accident, like pretty much everyone else on the planet.
I've been souring on Peterson for awhile. As others mentioned already, he's become very repetitive but at the same time more militant about his views. His emotions got the best of him.
On the other hand, in reviewing his work, I keep finding that his entire philosophy was always only skin deep.
When you scratch the surface, you find that he very neatly falls into the typical self-improvement, entrepreneurial, work-harder-than-everyone-else, redpill, even Tateian niche.
All that he espouses is purely materialistic in the "final analysis". He merely uses certain spiritual or religious ideas to further a reductionist point of view.
This approach is great for people who are at the stage in life where they don't know what they're doing or they're living in their grandma's basement. Following his precepts would surely improve your life in this case, but it can only get you so far. And if you're the type of person who is seeking the Truth in this life, it is, in fact, a quick path to the dark side, which he clearly proves with his own descent into some type of hell.
I think he admires the Jewish tradition so much because it gives him a clear set of moral guidelines on which to build his life and this is something that people absolutely need, but as we all know, it needs to become something that springs forth from within us as we gather knowledge. He and his ilk, on the other hand, are satisfied with what the Judeo-Christian tradition has to offer and therefore they grow stagnant and ultimately start to whither away as circumstances change and the framework starts to fall apart.
When Peterson was supposed to lay back and recover from his ordeal with benzos, she was one of the main forces that got him back into the game so quickly. Couldn't just leave all that money on the table.
It also looks like she played a big part in getting him signed with Shapiro since she's his manager.
One thing I'm seeing more and more in him, even when watching his old material, is that he loves the sound of his own voice (maybe not literally, because who wants to sound like Kermit the forg, eh?).
I think he's full of it. It's all just a game for him, a vehicle for his ego to show off in front of the world. Maybe he had and still has the potential to break free from that narcissistic tendency, but is becoming less and less likely the more famous he becomes.
And this hubris and narcissism becimes even more apparent when he speaks with the aura of great authority about things of which he knows nothing about. He also becomes an easy target for people like Bibi and Shapiro who have no issues with massaging his ego to get what they want out of him.
I'm sure that just getting to talk to someone like Bibi made a huge impression on poorbold Peterson and Shapiro got a lot of credit with him for making it happen.
I couldn't bring myself to watch that entire interview, but from what I did see, Peterson always seemed like he was in the presence of greatness and was sucking up to the murderous psychopath.
And he's got only half the deck because he refuses to look at the other half due to his inherent, or acquired materialism.
On the other hand, in reviewing his work, I keep finding that his entire philosophy was always only skin deep.
When you scratch the surface, you find that he very neatly falls into the typical self-improvement, entrepreneurial, work-harder-than-everyone-else, redpill, even Tateian niche.
All that he espouses is purely materialistic in the "final analysis". He merely uses certain spiritual or religious ideas to further a reductionist point of view.
This approach is great for people who are at the stage in life where they don't know what they're doing or they're living in their grandma's basement. Following his precepts would surely improve your life in this case, but it can only get you so far. And if you're the type of person who is seeking the Truth in this life, it is, in fact, a quick path to the dark side, which he clearly proves with his own descent into some type of hell.
I think he admires the Jewish tradition so much because it gives him a clear set of moral guidelines on which to build his life and this is something that people absolutely need, but as we all know, it needs to become something that springs forth from within us as we gather knowledge. He and his ilk, on the other hand, are satisfied with what the Judeo-Christian tradition has to offer and therefore they grow stagnant and ultimately start to whither away as circumstances change and the framework starts to fall apart.
One of them being his daugther who's stated goal is to become a billionaire, presumably to get all the botox and plastic surgery she could ever want.
When Peterson was supposed to lay back and recover from his ordeal with benzos, she was one of the main forces that got him back into the game so quickly. Couldn't just leave all that money on the table.
It also looks like she played a big part in getting him signed with Shapiro since she's his manager.
Definitely agree here with Luc. I would just add that this unwillingness seems to come from hubris.
One thing I'm seeing more and more in him, even when watching his old material, is that he loves the sound of his own voice (maybe not literally, because who wants to sound like Kermit the forg, eh?).
I think he's full of it. It's all just a game for him, a vehicle for his ego to show off in front of the world. Maybe he had and still has the potential to break free from that narcissistic tendency, but is becoming less and less likely the more famous he becomes.
And this hubris and narcissism becimes even more apparent when he speaks with the aura of great authority about things of which he knows nothing about. He also becomes an easy target for people like Bibi and Shapiro who have no issues with massaging his ego to get what they want out of him.
I'm sure that just getting to talk to someone like Bibi made a huge impression on poorbold Peterson and Shapiro got a lot of credit with him for making it happen.
I couldn't bring myself to watch that entire interview, but from what I did see, Peterson always seemed like he was in the presence of greatness and was sucking up to the murderous psychopath.
Completely agree. He doesn't actually know what he's talking about. I feel like he's attempting to wrestle with these perennial questions of the utmost importance, but is playing with only half a deck of cards (sorry to mix metaphors).
And he's got only half the deck because he refuses to look at the other half due to his inherent, or acquired materialism.
Well said, but I would also point out that Peterson, too, has seen the 9/11 attacks happen. He must have also, at the very least, heard about the idea that it was a false flag, but he CHOSE, like most of the rest of humanity, to ignore it because even entertaining the thought that the US gov or, God forbid, Israel, was capable of doing such a thing would have upended his entire worldview.
This place is certainly a blessing to us all and God knows where we would be without it, but never forget that you, your soul chose to look for the Truth and it brought you here. He could have done the same, but he didn't.
And there are many many people who are not here and don't know about this place but still have a better handle on things than he does.
I think it's a choice. A choice on a Soul level.
And he chose bloody Satan himself this time around.
The only thing that can save him now is if he lost all his money and fame and wad forced to take stock and take his own advice for once.
DianaRose
Jedi Master
I think JP is enamoured with the concept of intellect and people whom he perceives as intellectually superior combined with bias against Arabs and Muslims, whom, he perceives as backward/ uncultured/ kinda tyrannical due to religion. In the conservative circle, I've often noticed this assumption that Jews are intellectually gifted/ superior. And in JP's mind, the fact that he sees Jews as intellectually superior and the Palestinian as inferior justifies the crimes committed. It's cruel, but I've noticed that quite a few on the intellectual right can display gregarious lack of empathy in certain situations if they don't align with their worldview.
JP chose to work for/ with a Zionist (Ben Shapiro), and knowing the type of person he is, if he felt his freedom was hindered, he would've long severed the relationship. The reality is that he has a big blind spot and a rather high level of fame which allows him to fully display his ignorance. I assume that because of his stratospheric rise plus JP's own stubbornness, his inner circle and PR unfortunately allow him to say whatever/ don't challenge him sufficiently. Additionally, he has no knowledge of geopolitics and he also no knowledge and interest in history.
Also, imo, the high intellect crowd often has some sort of black and white thinking going on and don't seem to want to acknowledge that the world and situations are complex, and especially these days, I notice that in order to win an argument, they use the most outlandish examples and don't want to grapple with history and how the past impacts the present and with the fact that not everyone has the same life experiences. This means that although they may have good points, their analyses and conclusions, imo, can be incomplete, sometimes downright obtuse or a bit slimy. There's also something to be said about how the personal impact politics, and how personal beliefs, biases, and sometimes petty feelings impact thinking, but that's not something that people really want to admit.
In this particular case, yes, Islam and Arabs have their faults and Palestinians aren't perfect, but that still doesn't give Israel the right to terrorise them. But it seems like JP is unwilling and unable to acknowledge that. It's not just about having a network, it's about acknowledging that you have bias and being willing to challenge those bias or assumptions. But the reality is that the vast majority of people, including intelligent people, don't want to do that. In fact, the issue with high intellect people is that they just find new ways to justifies their thinking as can be seen in the interview. The problem is that this justifications is essentially meaningless waffling which becomes very embarrassing and cringe-worthy, which is what happened in the interview.
It'll be interesting to see how JP and his family moves on from what is essentially a PR fiasco. His popularity took a hit, and if you look at the comments section, the majority of fans were extremely disappointed by his comments. Perhaps he will do some soul searching. Perhaps not.
JP became famous for being something of an intellectual. His brand was about selling a form of intellectualism and self-help that is approachable for the mass. But I think ultimately, his brand is suffering because he's become stagnant. He hasn't grown as an intellectual, but his team and himself seems to not have noticed. At the same time, he's too earnest, too arrogant and too sure of his intellectual abilities to become a sort of influencer for a certain crowd like his daughter or Shapiro although really right now that's closer to what his brand is.
JP chose to work for/ with a Zionist (Ben Shapiro), and knowing the type of person he is, if he felt his freedom was hindered, he would've long severed the relationship. The reality is that he has a big blind spot and a rather high level of fame which allows him to fully display his ignorance. I assume that because of his stratospheric rise plus JP's own stubbornness, his inner circle and PR unfortunately allow him to say whatever/ don't challenge him sufficiently. Additionally, he has no knowledge of geopolitics and he also no knowledge and interest in history.
Also, imo, the high intellect crowd often has some sort of black and white thinking going on and don't seem to want to acknowledge that the world and situations are complex, and especially these days, I notice that in order to win an argument, they use the most outlandish examples and don't want to grapple with history and how the past impacts the present and with the fact that not everyone has the same life experiences. This means that although they may have good points, their analyses and conclusions, imo, can be incomplete, sometimes downright obtuse or a bit slimy. There's also something to be said about how the personal impact politics, and how personal beliefs, biases, and sometimes petty feelings impact thinking, but that's not something that people really want to admit.
In this particular case, yes, Islam and Arabs have their faults and Palestinians aren't perfect, but that still doesn't give Israel the right to terrorise them. But it seems like JP is unwilling and unable to acknowledge that. It's not just about having a network, it's about acknowledging that you have bias and being willing to challenge those bias or assumptions. But the reality is that the vast majority of people, including intelligent people, don't want to do that. In fact, the issue with high intellect people is that they just find new ways to justifies their thinking as can be seen in the interview. The problem is that this justifications is essentially meaningless waffling which becomes very embarrassing and cringe-worthy, which is what happened in the interview.
It'll be interesting to see how JP and his family moves on from what is essentially a PR fiasco. His popularity took a hit, and if you look at the comments section, the majority of fans were extremely disappointed by his comments. Perhaps he will do some soul searching. Perhaps not.
JP became famous for being something of an intellectual. His brand was about selling a form of intellectualism and self-help that is approachable for the mass. But I think ultimately, his brand is suffering because he's become stagnant. He hasn't grown as an intellectual, but his team and himself seems to not have noticed. At the same time, he's too earnest, too arrogant and too sure of his intellectual abilities to become a sort of influencer for a certain crowd like his daughter or Shapiro although really right now that's closer to what his brand is.
DianaRose
Jedi Master
I think there's an element of personal responsibility. Shapiro may have manipulated him to a certain extent, but I think JP was willing and open to this. And perhaps, there might not have been any manipulation at all, and it's all JP's sense of rightness. In life, I've noticed that to a certain extent we often choose the hill we die on and the bed we lie in.
JP isn't a bad person at all but it seems to me that he has an ego, likes the sound of his own voice, and likes to be with what he perceives as the big players. Someone said that at some point he was considering going into politics. His relation with Shapiro is getting him close to that political sphere and he gets to talk and talk.
I have to say that after getting a better hang of reading scientific articles through starting my dissertation some years ago I’ve started to wonder exactly what you’re saying. After getting a basic understanding of the scientific discourse and how evidence should be presented and argued from many perspectives, I do see in retrospect that as JBP:s argumenting and his certainty of things is often based on just one or two studies, it is not nearly enough. He apparently reads one study and the. ‘runs with the idea’. This was actually pointed out to me by a colleague at work many years ago when JBP:s publicity was at its peak. But I didn’t listen since I was so taken in by him at the time.
Another thing I’ve never quite understood are his ‘Bible lectures’. I’m not too familiar with them but my impression is that he’s ‘fine combing’ the stories in the Bible to find their ‘true meaning’ and the ‘archetypal’ and allegorical lessons in them. True, there are great teachings in the Bible but from what I’ve seen, he takes them a bit too seriously.
Still, I have to admit that I’ve learned many great things from JBP. At his very best moments some years ago, I do think that he was brilliant.
This in itself, if he eventually pays attention (no guarantees), should sends a message to self, concerning self and what he has gotten himself mixed up in.
On his back clearly stated, is one of his patron with a +, and people are indeed watching.
This Arc stuff, as Joe mentioned a few pages ago, seems intriquitly tied in with Legatum-perhaps at the helm (Economic Openness) with others, and they sometimes mention likes, such as Mark Carney, who 'may' run to replace Trudeau in 2025 - undecided.
Polly does a round table of figureheads, from Paul Marshall at Prosperity UK to Arc. And, that is Sir Paul Marshall with hedge fund partner(s), where with Ian Wace they were financed originally by Soros (noted with ex chairman Goldman Sachs boy - and so was Carney ("Carney spent 13 years at Goldman Sachs...and was involved in Goldman's work with the 1998 Russian financial crisis") - one can only imagine.
Yes, many strings, and this is the new Arc world he has joined (making it look as if he is a founder). A world tied in to powerful players - new bosses, like old bosses with different masks and corporate registered titles and philanthropic aims. This is a world of big money, big risks, big danger.
Note: Carny and Marshall (with a Sir) will be speaking at the same event (Global Financial Leaders’ Investment Summit Living with Complexity - or living with Chaos, one might say) in a few days time. It is the who's who of banking and investing, of which Arc is somewhere under Marshall's wing, and Jordan looks on the surface to be somewhere under that, where he may find himself being lead a merry dance.
Me thinks Mr. Peterson is out of his lane and should go back and hit some books he seems to have missed.
Ketone Cop
Jedi Council Member
I saw a link to Amazing Polly earlier in this thread, and after watching her three videos on him from earlier this year, I thought it important enough to share a near-transcript of at least her first video. The ones following this one are even more "interesting", so if people are interested after reading this let me know and I'll transcribe those soon. The more I watch Polly the more I see she's a first-rate researcher. The video below has so much information I could not capture it all. BTW I couldn't find JP's 17-minute video that Polly shows a lot of clips from, but she shows enough of it in her video that you can get the gist of it.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Amazing Polly on Jordan Peterson
rumble.com
- Start: JP sets up an international consortium that would be an alternative to the WEF, based in London
- Video on his website (Feb. 3rd this year) about what he wanted to accomplish (link dead)
- 1:10 - JP addressing "problems" - 6 key questions: The energy problem; the poverty problem; create new form of governance; family and reproduction problem (population deficit); new story of how the future will look. (Only five, not six things.)
- 2:22 Klaus Schwab wrote book, "The Great Narrative", admitted they need a "new vision for the future."
- JP steps in to do the same thing
- 2:44 June 2019, WEF and UN signed a strategic partnership framework for the purpose of accelerating the 2030 agenda for "sustainable development."
- 3:03 Polly argues that plan has failed (Goes through goals of WEF, Harari on loss of free will, "you will own nothing and be happy).
- 4:30 Their messaging isn't working; no one is going for it - "internet of bodies"; digital ID; dietary changes; social credit scores; end of private property; "climate change"; world government led by corporations; cybernetics.
- 5:20 The UN has looked at that partnership framework and said "you suck!"
- 5:35 Here comes JP! Picks up contract to market sustainable development goals.
- 5:45 What does the WEF do? It "brings together decision-makers from across society to work on projects and initiatives that make a real difference."
- 5:56 What does JB say? "We're going to bring about 2000 people together. That's an invited list. We want to bring in people who are cultural figures and political figures, business figures...we want to put forth a vision of the world that's enticing." Sounds similar?
- 6:20 What if this consortium does do some good? They do seem opposed to some of the craziest WEF dictates.
- 7:00 JP re-tweeted the General Mills stupid health-food list (Tufts University, which lists sugary cereals above all real good foods). It's obviously crazy, JP agrees.
- 7:55 JP re-tweeted about "social credit score" that got Laura Southern's parents "canceled" for being related to her, to show how bad it is - which is a good thing...but it's low-hanging fruit.
- 8:34 Opposes getting rid of gas cars; seems to grok the "climate change" agenda (more on that later).
- BUT: JP worked for the UN 20 years ago writing about sustainability agenda.
- 9:22 He's still into "climate change" but wants another angle on it. Still involves "the system" doing projections for wind farms etc.
- 9:40 Polly plays clip from JP's 17-minute video where he talks about energy.
- 9:50 JP starts asking "six key questions" (mentioned above). (I'm paraphrasing here, not direct quotes) How do we get energy and resources at the lowest possible cost as fast as possible to as many people as possible? Develop alt energy sources? No problem! Top-down people are collaborating to set future guidelines on energy for everyone - zero-growth model. We'd need five planets to sustain the energy used in the West so the best path is to deny loans to developing countries so they can't develop energy sources so they'll just burn wood and coal...
- 10:42 Polly: "The energy crisis can't be solved unless the world bank will give loans to developing countries for their energy sector." Not much different from what's already being proposed. The World Bank? Red Flag!
- 11:06 The poverty problem. JP talks about redistributing resources.
- 11:20 JP clip: "how do we get energy and resources at the lowest possible cost as rapidly as possible to the largest number of people around the world?" Make the poor rich! Alleviate absolute poverty!
- 11:30 Polly - redistribute resources to developing nations? JP so far has advocated for world bank loans and bought into two of the UN's sustainable development goals - "no poverty" and "reduced inequality."
- 12:06 Next question: problems about family and reproduction. Underpopulation argument; Elon Musk tweets about collapse due to low birth rates being bigger risk to civilization than global warming. Population collapse bigger deal. JP echoes Musk. Tweets about depopulation time bomb facing the West.
- 12:45 Polly says it's important because for Musk, it allows him an excuse to bring in more robot workers without looking like he's throwing a lot of people out of work. for JP, he wants new policies about reproduction and the family through his consortium.
- 13:30 JP clip - "The fourth question is "what do we put forward as a vision on the family policy front to facilitate the encouragement and maintenance of long-term monogamous couples who are child-centered and to make increasing the birth rate part of that policy?" Policies to champion long-term two-parent families because in the West the purpose of marriage is the happiness of the couple itself and that's not the purpose of marriage at all. The purpose is long-term facilitation of their psychological and spiritual development and the establishment of an environment that's beneficial to children. That's a responsible way of thinking about it and we need to have a serious conversation about it and what that means..." (end clip)
- 14:24 Polly: Any time anybody talks about 'making policies' that encourage marriages and certain kinds of marriages - long term committed monogamous heterosexual relationships to create an environment fit for raising children. Think about "eugenics." JP is an evolutionary psychologist - SCIENTIFIC EVOLUTION. He frames all of this in terms of Christian values. His terms appeal to Christian morality in a eugenical way. Control who marries and who doesn't and the ways they do it and how they raise children, it's kind of creepy. The family and reproduction "policies" have an echo in the past. China one-child policy; Soviet/Bolshevik Stalinist era and family policy.
- 16:00 "The view of the Soviet family as the basic social unit in society evolved from revolutionary to conservative; the government of the Soviet Union first attempted to weaken the family and then to strengthen it."
- 16:15 This scenario set-up - women had a bunch of babies with different men and had alimony and there were seven million orphans at one point, a disaster. VERY liberal policies and Stalin came in and "reformed" them. "According to the 1968 law "Principles of Legislation on Marriage and the Family of the USSR and the Union Republics", parents are "to raise their children in the spirit of the Moral Code of the Builder Communism, to attend to their physical development and their instruction in and preparation for socially useful activity."
- 17:00 What did JP basically say? "The family unit is meant to be conducive to the proper raising of children in the spirit that JP would like to see them raised in. It's creepily familiar."
- 17:20 "Moral Code of the Builder of Communism" was a set of 12 codified moral rules in the Soviet Union which every member of the Communist Party of the USSR and every Komsomol member were supposed to follow. The 12 rules were compared to the Ten Commandments. JP wrote a book, "The 12 Rules For Life, an antidote to Chaos".
- 17:45 Table of contents of JP's book compared to Soviet rules, they look completely different at first. JP's rules are sort of like them, but with a whacky professor spin. More friendly and non-Communist!
- 18:30 JP Russian ties - has a Soviet art collection. One with Lenin. He has 400 Soviet paintings covering his house he got from E-Bay. Why? Because of the irony (capitalist E-Bay selling communist art after the fall of the Soviet Union. He also had a network of 15 people in Ukraine who scoured the country for him for Soviet art.
- 19:30 Bigger question: his real intentions. Back to when he was a drug addict. Jan. 31, 2021, JP was suicidal, addicted to benzos. Quotes from a British newspaper: "I don't remember anything. From Dec. 16 of 2019 to Feb. 5, 2020, "the self-help author said of period he was sent Russia for treatment. "I don't remember anything at all," Peterson told the British Newspaper. He penned the international bestseller, "12 Rules for Life" in 2018 but was struggling with an addiction to benzos prescribed after a violent reaction to a strict meat and greens diet.
- 20:26 Polly: "What? This is the story. A reaction to a meat and greens diet. Sounds weird and not honest to her.
- 20:4 9 JP's daughter Mikhaila and her Russian husband and JP started the diet in 2016 but all three had a violent "sodium metabisulphate response". "It was really awful - but hit him the hardest," Mikhaila told the Times. "He couldn't stand up without blacking out, he had this (snippet ends). JP: "it wasn't that [the evidence from Moscow] was compelling. It was that we were out of other options." He felt he was going to die without going to Russia for treatment. "In Russia, Peterson was intubated for undiagnosed pneumonia and administered Propofol so that he could be induced into a coma for more than a week while medics cleared his system of drugs. When he emerged from the treatment, Peterson had lost the ability to walk, along with large parts of his memory, according to the report."
- 22:00 JP flown to Florida in Feb 2020 where his pain and suicidal thoughts returned. Mikhaila then flew JP to a private hospital in Belgrade, Serbia where he was diagnosed with akathisia - a restlessness condition linked with withdrawals of benzos.
- 22:28 Polly: that story seems whacky and dishonest. Concern similar to one Kanye West brought up: was JP a threat, and did they take and institutionalize him, send him to zombieland (Harley Pasternak/Kanye's keeper threatened to do to Kanye for coming out about the Jews owning everything). Did JP get Pasternak'd?
- 22:55 JP is now wearing stupid suits (shows pictures) he never did before. Has he been "reformed?"
- 23:13 JP's proposal to solve the family and reproduction problem. How Russia handles that right now. 1. Russia against gay adoption. JP says that isn't a viable solution to family and reproduction program. Adoption takes too many resources. He's framing things in Biblical themes. Why can't he just say it's immoral and against Christian values? He doesn't. It takes too many resources to adopt. Is he against heteros adopting too? Polly: JP seems to be being dishonest; the "framing" is technocratic. Cybernetics. Control. Energy input.
- 25:15 JP's insistence on long-term committed monogamous heterosexual marriages and insistence on policies, how will that be handled? Like in Soviet Russia? Polly links to old article on USSR: lower-party organs summoned a comrade to defend his behavior about his marriage. He repeatedly ignored advice of fellow communists to get his family life in order. As a result the comrade was expelled/reprimanded from the party for "unworthy conduct in family life."
- 26:10 Implementing a policy that has to do with formation of family and an environment conducive to raising children - that policy has to be POLICED. JP wants to return to tradition, and that IS appealing. But it's creepy with the policing policy. There's a eugenics element to it.
- 27:00 https://eugenicsarchive.ca/discover/tree/5233c3ac5c2ec50000000086 "Historically, positive eugenic measures have included promoting the idea that healthy, high-achieving people should have children, or have larger families; introducing institutions and policies that encourage marriage and family life for such people; and establishing sperm banks where eugenically desirable traits, such as intelligence, are criterial either for donors or are listed as present in the donor for users to consider in their choices. Negative eugenic measures have included immigration restriction based on putatively eugenically undesirable traits, including race, nationality, and ethnicity; discouragement or prohibition of marriage and family life for those with eugenically undesirable traits; and sexual segregation, sterilization, and euthanasia of those with such traits." JP advocating for that.
- 27:33 (Further quote from eugenics archive) "Marriage counseling, replete with advice about proper mating practices, was common among eugenicists and eugenically oriented psychologists in the 20th century. More recently, some on-line dating services, which seemingly are driven by individual choice and self-preservation, have incorporated kinds of psychometric instruments to assess personality and compatibility developed by eugenicist early in the 20th century. - Alexandra Minna Stern" JP when he first gained fame had an on-line personality assessment kit. Polly wrote him and asked for a paper copy of it to do and send back and have it assessed. He/his company never answered. An in-depth questionnaire on-line. In her opinion it was a data harvesting operation. 2016. What did he do with all that info?
- 28:57 Polly has concerns about JP wanting to create policy on marriage and the family. That is positive eugenics.
- 29:20 Many red flags in JP's alternative to the WEF. He wants to create a new form of governance. Not top-down or fascist. It sounds good! JP goes off on Moses and his theories of governance.
- 30:13 JP clip: And that's called subsidiary. You have to produce a hierarchy of distributed responsibility as an antithesis to tyranny and that's the model for good governance. Part of the model we are trying to put forward in his group he's describing is based on this principle of subsidiarity and the idea that we want to encourage everyone to take as much responsibility as possible at the most local level possible. Take responsibility for yourself until you can take responsibility for a wife and then kids then serve your local community then maybe serve the state then serve your nation if you're good enough.
- 31:00 Polly - that's still a hierarchy, like what we live with right now.
- 31:15 Clip from JP video where he talks about he doesn't want it in the spirit of power dynamics; he wants it in the spirit of voluntary play.
- 31:30 JP clip: The other question is it's pretty clear we have to live within a story and one story is power rules everything. That's not a very good story. I believe the spirit of voluntary play governs everything, not the spirit of power.
- 31:45 Subsidiarity as a model. Puts a Biblical spin on it. Goes back to Aristotle and concept of Natural Law. It's also a concept within cybernetics.
- 32:21 Catholic spin, which has no reference to Moses at all. It's from Papal encyclicals. They arose at the time of the Industrial Revolution. What happened? All the wealth got syphoned to the top and all the workers got exploited. The Catholic church encouraged trade unions. From Wikipedia: "Political decisions should be taken at a local level if possible, rather than by a central authority. The Oxford English Dictionary defines subsidiarity as the idea that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level." That is what JP describes.
- 33:18 Modern literature on subsidiarity always always quotes Pope Pious the Eleventh. It was before him. Goes back to Saint Thomas Aquinas, a Dominican Friar. They were the ones to bring the church into the "Scientific Age." They didn't have to oppose one another. There was "Natural Law" and "Eternal Law". Eternal Law was the church's and Natural Law built onto man and nature - human made. Aquinas building on work of Aristotle, before Christ, so this is not Christian at all.
- 34:25 How church was slowly changed from God centered to how it is today, Aquinas was a chief culprit. The Subsidiarity Principle was used in formulation of the European Union. It is probably the most famous of the principles of the social doctrine of the Church. This is so for several reasons, among which is its adoption by the EU as a general clause of the important Maastricht treaty (1992). When it came time to design the relationship among other member countries and the government of the EU, the subsidiarity principle was considered a means to regulate the division of competences between each member and the Union.
- 35:30 It didn't work out that way because that lovely sounding framework the principle of subsidiarity and yet the higher power just battles against the lower authority constantly by using vague terminology through the courts and through updating the policy documents. Example: "We won't interfere in the lower authority as long as they can adequately address the issues at hand." What does adequately mean? Who gets to decide?
- 36:07 Link to seven-page document showing all the regulatory changes and updates to workings since the EU came into being. The cybernetic approach.
- 36:30 Link to paper: "Cyber-Subsidiarity: Toward a Global Sustainable Information Society" (31 March 2017). "At the age of the global information society, the necessary management of global issues (environment, geopolitics, inequality, etc.) requires both proper levelism and information management from the peoples to communities, to national authorities, and to international institutions." (All stuff JP's consortium wants to address.) "Stafford Beer's Viable System Model provides a suitable approach to deploy subsidiarity with the backbone of an information and communication infrastructure based on the acquisition, circulation, and processing of relevant information to enable decentralized, democratic decision-making."
- 37:22 The tech to be used for a decentralized form of governance based on subsidiarity is very block-chainy. JP wants things to be decentralized. Centralization is the root of tyranny. Yet he's putting together this consortium to ask questions on how to solve the world's problems.
- 38:05 Polly's issue with JP is she doesn't think he's fully in control. He has a will to power. His ego controls him. When he talks as an evolutionary biologist, a guy into data and charts, figuring out what different groups think about things, he is a technocrat. He seeks to blend religion and science. Today that science focuses on high-tech powered AI and cybernetics. He has to by definition be supporting that. And now he want to take an outsized role in piloting the ship of humanity to pose the big questions in an international consortium of specially-selected cultural business and political figures.
- 39:14 JP quotes Solzhenitsyn a lot. What would he think of this one? "To do evil a human being must first of all believe that what he's doing is good, or else that it's a well-considered act in conformity with natural law." (Gulag Archipelago)
- 39:33 Polly isn't saying JP has bad intentions. She's questioning if we can trust him. What are his ultimate goals? Are they in line with the UN sustainable development goals? A LOT of red flags.
- 39:55 JP says that it's clear to him people need to live within a story.
- 40:03 JP clip - another question, we're trying to make these into questions rather than "we have the answer" - the other question is, "well, it's pretty clear that we have to live inside a story, and one story is 'power rules everything'. But that's not a very good story."
- 40:21 We need a new story, not the one the WEF promotes. JP is reframing some of the same themes advanced by the UN. Sustainable development goals by borrowing Biblical stories. The WEF admitted in 2021 that it was going to need a new narrative.
- 40:47 Interesting analyses in her research that relate to populist science and the art of story-telling as opposed to using factual arguments to convince people.
- 41:03 Article - "JP's Muddled World View" (Benjamin Cain) "...Peterson contends that religion is an evolutionary strategy, so religious myths can be read as containing life lessons. Those lessons, in turn, reduce to something like the hero's journey: life is an adventure in which we're supposed to proceed from a state of maximum order (childhood), encounter dangers and disorder in the wider world, heroically overcome them, and return to our starting point in old age, matured by our engagement with that which is other than us. Just as you can cherry-pick from religious myths, you can tell unfalsifiable, just-so stories to provide an evolutionary explanation of any psychological or social phenomenon you like. In that respect, comparative mythology is tailor-made for an evolutionary psychologist. It's no surprise, then, that Peterson finds a way to set religious myths and our evolutionary functions on a common stage. But that doesn't mean his account makes sense."
- 42:07 Another article: "The Dangerous Populist Science of Yuval Noah Harari" - they mention that JP is another populist scientist just like Harari. Harari has been the story teller for the WEF and for the UN sustainable goals. His message is terrifying. Even in Harari's book, "Renaissance Military Memoirs: War, History and Identity, 1450-1600", the professor who helped him write it admitted that Harari didn't have any fact-checking process, and that goes for all his books. What Harari does is leapfrog expert critique "by saying, 'Let's ask questions so large that no one can say, We think this bit's wrong and that bit's wrong.'...Nobody's an expert on the meaning of everything, or the history of everybody, over a long period."
- 43:15 Polly: "THAT is exactly what JP does." If you listen to him you think he's a living encyclopedia. He talks very confidently on so many topics all at once. And when he interviews guests he seems to almost like to show them how much he knows and maybe that he knows more than they do about everything. There's just no way that he or anyone can have that good a grasp on such a wide variety of topics, and that's the same with Harari. They tell good stories.
- 44:00 It's possible the WEF lost it's UN strategic partnership. The partnership was going to ID six areas of focus: financing the 2030 Agenda, climate change, health, digital cooperation, gender equality and empowerment of women, education and skills - to strengthen and broaden their combined impact by building on existing and new collaborations. What does JP say?
- 44:28 JP clip: "like, an alternative vision of the future, say an alternative to that kind of apocalyptic narrative that's being put forward at least implicitly by organizations like the WEF. And it's more like something like we want to ask people six key questions."
- 44:45 And what are JP's six questions? Linking to article: "The consortium identifies 6 key questions: how to solve the energy problem, how best to eliminate absolute poverty, what would a new form of governance look like, what policies can be developed to deal with the family and reproduction problem and what new story can we live by to achieve our goals?" (Polly points out similarities to WEF questions and JP's)
- 45:25 Not exactly the same but isn't that a weird echo of the six key areas the six key goals just like the twelve moral codes of communism and the twelve rules for life of JP. Is he a copycat, are these coincidences, or is there more to it? Polly doesn't know. She just doesn't want people to idolize JP because he seems so smart without peeling back some of the layers and asking what's underneath them. Who is actually behind this guy? There's enough similarities even though his approach is completely different - if the areas of focus are the same, then this is just a new sales pitch. As Polly listens to JP, he says a lot of sensible things. She's putting this question out to us. She hates to see total fan-girling and fan-boying like she sees in the comments section of his video. People need to stop and think.
- 46:50 How does the JP consortium work? "They're going to have a conference in London. We're going to bring about 2000 people together. That's an invited list. We want to bring in people who are cultural figures and political figures, business figures..." (in November this year) Sounds like what the WEF does. Who would these people be? Stay tuned for my next video - there's some interesting stuff! Is JP even capable of doing what needs to be done? Is he too much of a mess? I'll look at his associations, his drug problem that he seems to be lying about, his daughter and her connections (Andrew Tate anyone?), Edge.org vs. the Intellectual Dark Web, Elon Musk and Peter Thiel.
- 48:03 Final graphic. Did they fire the WEF and Harari and replace it with phony religious guy JP, a technocrat who is still going after the same UN sustainability goals. Is he putting a more palatable spin on it for people on the right of the political spectrum?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
So I guess the question is, is JP "WEF-lite?" The Good Cop vs. the Bad Cop? The next two videos show some interesting connections JP has with some murky swamp creatures...
rumble.com
rumble.com
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Amazing Polly on Jordan Peterson
Jordan Peterson's WEF Dreams
JBP is creating an "alternative to the World Economic Forum" which will offer a New Narrative for the Future. RED FLAGS abound! My website is here: https://www.amazingpolly.net/contact-support.php **T
rumble.com
- Start: JP sets up an international consortium that would be an alternative to the WEF, based in London
- Video on his website (Feb. 3rd this year) about what he wanted to accomplish (link dead)
- 1:10 - JP addressing "problems" - 6 key questions: The energy problem; the poverty problem; create new form of governance; family and reproduction problem (population deficit); new story of how the future will look. (Only five, not six things.)
- 2:22 Klaus Schwab wrote book, "The Great Narrative", admitted they need a "new vision for the future."
- JP steps in to do the same thing
- 2:44 June 2019, WEF and UN signed a strategic partnership framework for the purpose of accelerating the 2030 agenda for "sustainable development."
- 3:03 Polly argues that plan has failed (Goes through goals of WEF, Harari on loss of free will, "you will own nothing and be happy).
- 4:30 Their messaging isn't working; no one is going for it - "internet of bodies"; digital ID; dietary changes; social credit scores; end of private property; "climate change"; world government led by corporations; cybernetics.
- 5:20 The UN has looked at that partnership framework and said "you suck!"
- 5:35 Here comes JP! Picks up contract to market sustainable development goals.
- 5:45 What does the WEF do? It "brings together decision-makers from across society to work on projects and initiatives that make a real difference."
- 5:56 What does JB say? "We're going to bring about 2000 people together. That's an invited list. We want to bring in people who are cultural figures and political figures, business figures...we want to put forth a vision of the world that's enticing." Sounds similar?
- 6:20 What if this consortium does do some good? They do seem opposed to some of the craziest WEF dictates.
- 7:00 JP re-tweeted the General Mills stupid health-food list (Tufts University, which lists sugary cereals above all real good foods). It's obviously crazy, JP agrees.
- 7:55 JP re-tweeted about "social credit score" that got Laura Southern's parents "canceled" for being related to her, to show how bad it is - which is a good thing...but it's low-hanging fruit.
- 8:34 Opposes getting rid of gas cars; seems to grok the "climate change" agenda (more on that later).
- BUT: JP worked for the UN 20 years ago writing about sustainability agenda.
- 9:22 He's still into "climate change" but wants another angle on it. Still involves "the system" doing projections for wind farms etc.
- 9:40 Polly plays clip from JP's 17-minute video where he talks about energy.
- 9:50 JP starts asking "six key questions" (mentioned above). (I'm paraphrasing here, not direct quotes) How do we get energy and resources at the lowest possible cost as fast as possible to as many people as possible? Develop alt energy sources? No problem! Top-down people are collaborating to set future guidelines on energy for everyone - zero-growth model. We'd need five planets to sustain the energy used in the West so the best path is to deny loans to developing countries so they can't develop energy sources so they'll just burn wood and coal...
- 10:42 Polly: "The energy crisis can't be solved unless the world bank will give loans to developing countries for their energy sector." Not much different from what's already being proposed. The World Bank? Red Flag!
- 11:06 The poverty problem. JP talks about redistributing resources.
- 11:20 JP clip: "how do we get energy and resources at the lowest possible cost as rapidly as possible to the largest number of people around the world?" Make the poor rich! Alleviate absolute poverty!
- 11:30 Polly - redistribute resources to developing nations? JP so far has advocated for world bank loans and bought into two of the UN's sustainable development goals - "no poverty" and "reduced inequality."
- 12:06 Next question: problems about family and reproduction. Underpopulation argument; Elon Musk tweets about collapse due to low birth rates being bigger risk to civilization than global warming. Population collapse bigger deal. JP echoes Musk. Tweets about depopulation time bomb facing the West.
- 12:45 Polly says it's important because for Musk, it allows him an excuse to bring in more robot workers without looking like he's throwing a lot of people out of work. for JP, he wants new policies about reproduction and the family through his consortium.
- 13:30 JP clip - "The fourth question is "what do we put forward as a vision on the family policy front to facilitate the encouragement and maintenance of long-term monogamous couples who are child-centered and to make increasing the birth rate part of that policy?" Policies to champion long-term two-parent families because in the West the purpose of marriage is the happiness of the couple itself and that's not the purpose of marriage at all. The purpose is long-term facilitation of their psychological and spiritual development and the establishment of an environment that's beneficial to children. That's a responsible way of thinking about it and we need to have a serious conversation about it and what that means..." (end clip)
- 14:24 Polly: Any time anybody talks about 'making policies' that encourage marriages and certain kinds of marriages - long term committed monogamous heterosexual relationships to create an environment fit for raising children. Think about "eugenics." JP is an evolutionary psychologist - SCIENTIFIC EVOLUTION. He frames all of this in terms of Christian values. His terms appeal to Christian morality in a eugenical way. Control who marries and who doesn't and the ways they do it and how they raise children, it's kind of creepy. The family and reproduction "policies" have an echo in the past. China one-child policy; Soviet/Bolshevik Stalinist era and family policy.
- 16:00 "The view of the Soviet family as the basic social unit in society evolved from revolutionary to conservative; the government of the Soviet Union first attempted to weaken the family and then to strengthen it."
- 16:15 This scenario set-up - women had a bunch of babies with different men and had alimony and there were seven million orphans at one point, a disaster. VERY liberal policies and Stalin came in and "reformed" them. "According to the 1968 law "Principles of Legislation on Marriage and the Family of the USSR and the Union Republics", parents are "to raise their children in the spirit of the Moral Code of the Builder Communism, to attend to their physical development and their instruction in and preparation for socially useful activity."
- 17:00 What did JP basically say? "The family unit is meant to be conducive to the proper raising of children in the spirit that JP would like to see them raised in. It's creepily familiar."
- 17:20 "Moral Code of the Builder of Communism" was a set of 12 codified moral rules in the Soviet Union which every member of the Communist Party of the USSR and every Komsomol member were supposed to follow. The 12 rules were compared to the Ten Commandments. JP wrote a book, "The 12 Rules For Life, an antidote to Chaos".
- 17:45 Table of contents of JP's book compared to Soviet rules, they look completely different at first. JP's rules are sort of like them, but with a whacky professor spin. More friendly and non-Communist!
- 18:30 JP Russian ties - has a Soviet art collection. One with Lenin. He has 400 Soviet paintings covering his house he got from E-Bay. Why? Because of the irony (capitalist E-Bay selling communist art after the fall of the Soviet Union. He also had a network of 15 people in Ukraine who scoured the country for him for Soviet art.
- 19:30 Bigger question: his real intentions. Back to when he was a drug addict. Jan. 31, 2021, JP was suicidal, addicted to benzos. Quotes from a British newspaper: "I don't remember anything. From Dec. 16 of 2019 to Feb. 5, 2020, "the self-help author said of period he was sent Russia for treatment. "I don't remember anything at all," Peterson told the British Newspaper. He penned the international bestseller, "12 Rules for Life" in 2018 but was struggling with an addiction to benzos prescribed after a violent reaction to a strict meat and greens diet.
- 20:26 Polly: "What? This is the story. A reaction to a meat and greens diet. Sounds weird and not honest to her.
- 20:4 9 JP's daughter Mikhaila and her Russian husband and JP started the diet in 2016 but all three had a violent "sodium metabisulphate response". "It was really awful - but hit him the hardest," Mikhaila told the Times. "He couldn't stand up without blacking out, he had this (snippet ends). JP: "it wasn't that [the evidence from Moscow] was compelling. It was that we were out of other options." He felt he was going to die without going to Russia for treatment. "In Russia, Peterson was intubated for undiagnosed pneumonia and administered Propofol so that he could be induced into a coma for more than a week while medics cleared his system of drugs. When he emerged from the treatment, Peterson had lost the ability to walk, along with large parts of his memory, according to the report."
- 22:00 JP flown to Florida in Feb 2020 where his pain and suicidal thoughts returned. Mikhaila then flew JP to a private hospital in Belgrade, Serbia where he was diagnosed with akathisia - a restlessness condition linked with withdrawals of benzos.
- 22:28 Polly: that story seems whacky and dishonest. Concern similar to one Kanye West brought up: was JP a threat, and did they take and institutionalize him, send him to zombieland (Harley Pasternak/Kanye's keeper threatened to do to Kanye for coming out about the Jews owning everything). Did JP get Pasternak'd?
- 22:55 JP is now wearing stupid suits (shows pictures) he never did before. Has he been "reformed?"
- 23:13 JP's proposal to solve the family and reproduction problem. How Russia handles that right now. 1. Russia against gay adoption. JP says that isn't a viable solution to family and reproduction program. Adoption takes too many resources. He's framing things in Biblical themes. Why can't he just say it's immoral and against Christian values? He doesn't. It takes too many resources to adopt. Is he against heteros adopting too? Polly: JP seems to be being dishonest; the "framing" is technocratic. Cybernetics. Control. Energy input.
- 25:15 JP's insistence on long-term committed monogamous heterosexual marriages and insistence on policies, how will that be handled? Like in Soviet Russia? Polly links to old article on USSR: lower-party organs summoned a comrade to defend his behavior about his marriage. He repeatedly ignored advice of fellow communists to get his family life in order. As a result the comrade was expelled/reprimanded from the party for "unworthy conduct in family life."
- 26:10 Implementing a policy that has to do with formation of family and an environment conducive to raising children - that policy has to be POLICED. JP wants to return to tradition, and that IS appealing. But it's creepy with the policing policy. There's a eugenics element to it.
- 27:00 https://eugenicsarchive.ca/discover/tree/5233c3ac5c2ec50000000086 "Historically, positive eugenic measures have included promoting the idea that healthy, high-achieving people should have children, or have larger families; introducing institutions and policies that encourage marriage and family life for such people; and establishing sperm banks where eugenically desirable traits, such as intelligence, are criterial either for donors or are listed as present in the donor for users to consider in their choices. Negative eugenic measures have included immigration restriction based on putatively eugenically undesirable traits, including race, nationality, and ethnicity; discouragement or prohibition of marriage and family life for those with eugenically undesirable traits; and sexual segregation, sterilization, and euthanasia of those with such traits." JP advocating for that.
- 27:33 (Further quote from eugenics archive) "Marriage counseling, replete with advice about proper mating practices, was common among eugenicists and eugenically oriented psychologists in the 20th century. More recently, some on-line dating services, which seemingly are driven by individual choice and self-preservation, have incorporated kinds of psychometric instruments to assess personality and compatibility developed by eugenicist early in the 20th century. - Alexandra Minna Stern" JP when he first gained fame had an on-line personality assessment kit. Polly wrote him and asked for a paper copy of it to do and send back and have it assessed. He/his company never answered. An in-depth questionnaire on-line. In her opinion it was a data harvesting operation. 2016. What did he do with all that info?
- 28:57 Polly has concerns about JP wanting to create policy on marriage and the family. That is positive eugenics.
- 29:20 Many red flags in JP's alternative to the WEF. He wants to create a new form of governance. Not top-down or fascist. It sounds good! JP goes off on Moses and his theories of governance.
- 30:13 JP clip: And that's called subsidiary. You have to produce a hierarchy of distributed responsibility as an antithesis to tyranny and that's the model for good governance. Part of the model we are trying to put forward in his group he's describing is based on this principle of subsidiarity and the idea that we want to encourage everyone to take as much responsibility as possible at the most local level possible. Take responsibility for yourself until you can take responsibility for a wife and then kids then serve your local community then maybe serve the state then serve your nation if you're good enough.
- 31:00 Polly - that's still a hierarchy, like what we live with right now.
- 31:15 Clip from JP video where he talks about he doesn't want it in the spirit of power dynamics; he wants it in the spirit of voluntary play.
- 31:30 JP clip: The other question is it's pretty clear we have to live within a story and one story is power rules everything. That's not a very good story. I believe the spirit of voluntary play governs everything, not the spirit of power.
- 31:45 Subsidiarity as a model. Puts a Biblical spin on it. Goes back to Aristotle and concept of Natural Law. It's also a concept within cybernetics.
- 32:21 Catholic spin, which has no reference to Moses at all. It's from Papal encyclicals. They arose at the time of the Industrial Revolution. What happened? All the wealth got syphoned to the top and all the workers got exploited. The Catholic church encouraged trade unions. From Wikipedia: "Political decisions should be taken at a local level if possible, rather than by a central authority. The Oxford English Dictionary defines subsidiarity as the idea that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level." That is what JP describes.
- 33:18 Modern literature on subsidiarity always always quotes Pope Pious the Eleventh. It was before him. Goes back to Saint Thomas Aquinas, a Dominican Friar. They were the ones to bring the church into the "Scientific Age." They didn't have to oppose one another. There was "Natural Law" and "Eternal Law". Eternal Law was the church's and Natural Law built onto man and nature - human made. Aquinas building on work of Aristotle, before Christ, so this is not Christian at all.
- 34:25 How church was slowly changed from God centered to how it is today, Aquinas was a chief culprit. The Subsidiarity Principle was used in formulation of the European Union. It is probably the most famous of the principles of the social doctrine of the Church. This is so for several reasons, among which is its adoption by the EU as a general clause of the important Maastricht treaty (1992). When it came time to design the relationship among other member countries and the government of the EU, the subsidiarity principle was considered a means to regulate the division of competences between each member and the Union.
- 35:30 It didn't work out that way because that lovely sounding framework the principle of subsidiarity and yet the higher power just battles against the lower authority constantly by using vague terminology through the courts and through updating the policy documents. Example: "We won't interfere in the lower authority as long as they can adequately address the issues at hand." What does adequately mean? Who gets to decide?
- 36:07 Link to seven-page document showing all the regulatory changes and updates to workings since the EU came into being. The cybernetic approach.
- 36:30 Link to paper: "Cyber-Subsidiarity: Toward a Global Sustainable Information Society" (31 March 2017). "At the age of the global information society, the necessary management of global issues (environment, geopolitics, inequality, etc.) requires both proper levelism and information management from the peoples to communities, to national authorities, and to international institutions." (All stuff JP's consortium wants to address.) "Stafford Beer's Viable System Model provides a suitable approach to deploy subsidiarity with the backbone of an information and communication infrastructure based on the acquisition, circulation, and processing of relevant information to enable decentralized, democratic decision-making."
- 37:22 The tech to be used for a decentralized form of governance based on subsidiarity is very block-chainy. JP wants things to be decentralized. Centralization is the root of tyranny. Yet he's putting together this consortium to ask questions on how to solve the world's problems.
- 38:05 Polly's issue with JP is she doesn't think he's fully in control. He has a will to power. His ego controls him. When he talks as an evolutionary biologist, a guy into data and charts, figuring out what different groups think about things, he is a technocrat. He seeks to blend religion and science. Today that science focuses on high-tech powered AI and cybernetics. He has to by definition be supporting that. And now he want to take an outsized role in piloting the ship of humanity to pose the big questions in an international consortium of specially-selected cultural business and political figures.
- 39:14 JP quotes Solzhenitsyn a lot. What would he think of this one? "To do evil a human being must first of all believe that what he's doing is good, or else that it's a well-considered act in conformity with natural law." (Gulag Archipelago)
- 39:33 Polly isn't saying JP has bad intentions. She's questioning if we can trust him. What are his ultimate goals? Are they in line with the UN sustainable development goals? A LOT of red flags.
- 39:55 JP says that it's clear to him people need to live within a story.
- 40:03 JP clip - another question, we're trying to make these into questions rather than "we have the answer" - the other question is, "well, it's pretty clear that we have to live inside a story, and one story is 'power rules everything'. But that's not a very good story."
- 40:21 We need a new story, not the one the WEF promotes. JP is reframing some of the same themes advanced by the UN. Sustainable development goals by borrowing Biblical stories. The WEF admitted in 2021 that it was going to need a new narrative.
- 40:47 Interesting analyses in her research that relate to populist science and the art of story-telling as opposed to using factual arguments to convince people.
- 41:03 Article - "JP's Muddled World View" (Benjamin Cain) "...Peterson contends that religion is an evolutionary strategy, so religious myths can be read as containing life lessons. Those lessons, in turn, reduce to something like the hero's journey: life is an adventure in which we're supposed to proceed from a state of maximum order (childhood), encounter dangers and disorder in the wider world, heroically overcome them, and return to our starting point in old age, matured by our engagement with that which is other than us. Just as you can cherry-pick from religious myths, you can tell unfalsifiable, just-so stories to provide an evolutionary explanation of any psychological or social phenomenon you like. In that respect, comparative mythology is tailor-made for an evolutionary psychologist. It's no surprise, then, that Peterson finds a way to set religious myths and our evolutionary functions on a common stage. But that doesn't mean his account makes sense."
- 42:07 Another article: "The Dangerous Populist Science of Yuval Noah Harari" - they mention that JP is another populist scientist just like Harari. Harari has been the story teller for the WEF and for the UN sustainable goals. His message is terrifying. Even in Harari's book, "Renaissance Military Memoirs: War, History and Identity, 1450-1600", the professor who helped him write it admitted that Harari didn't have any fact-checking process, and that goes for all his books. What Harari does is leapfrog expert critique "by saying, 'Let's ask questions so large that no one can say, We think this bit's wrong and that bit's wrong.'...Nobody's an expert on the meaning of everything, or the history of everybody, over a long period."
- 43:15 Polly: "THAT is exactly what JP does." If you listen to him you think he's a living encyclopedia. He talks very confidently on so many topics all at once. And when he interviews guests he seems to almost like to show them how much he knows and maybe that he knows more than they do about everything. There's just no way that he or anyone can have that good a grasp on such a wide variety of topics, and that's the same with Harari. They tell good stories.
- 44:00 It's possible the WEF lost it's UN strategic partnership. The partnership was going to ID six areas of focus: financing the 2030 Agenda, climate change, health, digital cooperation, gender equality and empowerment of women, education and skills - to strengthen and broaden their combined impact by building on existing and new collaborations. What does JP say?
- 44:28 JP clip: "like, an alternative vision of the future, say an alternative to that kind of apocalyptic narrative that's being put forward at least implicitly by organizations like the WEF. And it's more like something like we want to ask people six key questions."
- 44:45 And what are JP's six questions? Linking to article: "The consortium identifies 6 key questions: how to solve the energy problem, how best to eliminate absolute poverty, what would a new form of governance look like, what policies can be developed to deal with the family and reproduction problem and what new story can we live by to achieve our goals?" (Polly points out similarities to WEF questions and JP's)
- 45:25 Not exactly the same but isn't that a weird echo of the six key areas the six key goals just like the twelve moral codes of communism and the twelve rules for life of JP. Is he a copycat, are these coincidences, or is there more to it? Polly doesn't know. She just doesn't want people to idolize JP because he seems so smart without peeling back some of the layers and asking what's underneath them. Who is actually behind this guy? There's enough similarities even though his approach is completely different - if the areas of focus are the same, then this is just a new sales pitch. As Polly listens to JP, he says a lot of sensible things. She's putting this question out to us. She hates to see total fan-girling and fan-boying like she sees in the comments section of his video. People need to stop and think.
- 46:50 How does the JP consortium work? "They're going to have a conference in London. We're going to bring about 2000 people together. That's an invited list. We want to bring in people who are cultural figures and political figures, business figures..." (in November this year) Sounds like what the WEF does. Who would these people be? Stay tuned for my next video - there's some interesting stuff! Is JP even capable of doing what needs to be done? Is he too much of a mess? I'll look at his associations, his drug problem that he seems to be lying about, his daughter and her connections (Andrew Tate anyone?), Edge.org vs. the Intellectual Dark Web, Elon Musk and Peter Thiel.
- 48:03 Final graphic. Did they fire the WEF and Harari and replace it with phony religious guy JP, a technocrat who is still going after the same UN sustainability goals. Is he putting a more palatable spin on it for people on the right of the political spectrum?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
So I guess the question is, is JP "WEF-lite?" The Good Cop vs. the Bad Cop? The next two videos show some interesting connections JP has with some murky swamp creatures...
Listen Bucko, Peterson is Controlled Op - Answer Comments & Going in to More Detail
Polly’s Web site: https://amazingpolly.net/contact-support.php I answer viewer comments and go into some more information about Jordan Peterson and his background. Like, Share, Subscribe and comment!
rumble.com
Surprise! Jordan Peterson's "ARC" was Built for (and by) Billionaires
There is a new Global Council fronted by Jordan Peterson that promises to save us all from the Woke Dystopian Future. But who is behind it? Can you support this work? To do so, visit: https://amazingp
rumble.com
Last edited:
I felt the same way, and I hadn't been following him for a few years, and definitely not on Twitter, I just recently made one reply.
He neatly packaged some reasonable not-very-original material, communicated it well, and spoke against compelled speech (hate speech laws) with all its gender fluidity / pronoun nonsense as well as the insanity of postmodernism. If he only had stuck to his narrow and specific area of expertise.
Time will tell if he will experience metanoia / penance and realize the error of his ways.
I remember writing ca a year ago, when I first heard JBP mention about his plan of creating this consortium, that without awareness and knolwedge on psyhopathology and ponerogenic processes this kind of group is doomed to fail. Not patting myself on the back here, but what Polly is seeing forming with this group is maybe at least in part because of this blindness.
I'll have to read your transcript more carefully to form a more solid opinion, but from reading it once through I'd say, yes, Polly is on to something but perhaps making a bit too many assumptions/deductions?
Maya
Jedi Master
Thank you T.C. for saying this.
It's not that I'm defending JP, he fucked up badly but really if someone is missing this part of informations
that we have thanks to Laura & Cass it is almost impossible to go all the way and understand the nature of evil
and see the true colours of it's agents here.
Especially with his super sensitivene emotional attachment on things and XXL ego latelly.
But ! Didn't he saw Gabor Mate's comment for instance ? That's a good one for start.
So sad Jordan....so sad.
