The exposure of the real Jordan Peterson.

My piece on Jordan Peterson got linked to by the great man himself. Let’s see how he examined my arguments and firmly rebutted them. After all, I am in the business of putting out ideas, a good part of which is to see whether or not I am on the right track; people’s reactions are a big part of my own learning curve.

Based on that I can now safely declare that I am right over the target.

Peterson responded with a stream of ad hominem slurs, the same slurs which are routinely used by SJWs and the prog left in general. In other words, he used the same tactics which supposedly he battles against on a regular basis. Let’s take apart his little tweet bit by bit.

He starts off with some Loony Tunes era nonsense which he misquotes. Don’t be fooled; this is a deliberate tactic. He is letting the rabbits know that he is on their side.

Next up he accuses me of being a misogynist. This is a very big red flag. Wasn’t Peterson supposed to be on the side of men? Isn’t that what most of the comments on my piece in support of Peterson were saying? And yet the minute he gets a bit of push-back he immediately labels me as a misogynist. Listen up people; he is signalling here. He is signaling his worthiness to all women everywhere. He is really on their side.

All of you who think that Peterson is on the side of men need this wake up call. Peterson doesn’t want you to be good at being men, he wants you to be good men. Good provider men for women everywhere. Good men who will do as they are told. Peterson is telling men to clean up their room? Give me a break. Our grandmothers were saying that. He’s not saying anything new, he’s just repackaged it in a brown cardigan.

Next he accused me of being antisemitic. This is genuinely news to me. I mean, I even posted a thread on the JQ stating my position on the subject as regards to the comments policy on this blog. But I suppose that merely linking to Vox Day is now considered to be antisemitic. How else can this accusation of hating the Jews be otherwise interpreted?

Peterson is making me guilty by association.

Oh golly gee whiz, Mary Sue – I thought that Peterson was against all that sort of stuff. I mean, that’s what he says, right?

Never listen to what they say, just watch what they do.

Finally he accused me of being right wing. So for all of you on the right side of politics, let alone the alt-right, is that clear enough for you now? Peterson considers that applying the label of right-winger to be an insult. How much clearer do you need it to be?

Does Peterson state some truths? Of course he does, but so what? He is not on our side. The cucks on the right are always so very desperate to ingratiate themselves with whatever enemy comes along who even glances in their direction. If they seem to share the values of the right then they are immediately embraced as the great savior. It happens time and time again. The last two speakers to tour Australia who got a huge reception from the right have been a Jewish homosexual who married a black man and this left wing Canadian psychology professor who wants men to be better providers. It’s pathetic.

Jordan Peterson is only angry at the left because he thinks that they have gone too far, not that they are wrong. He desires a return to the left of the early 1970s when apparently they believed in free speech. He’s not against using whatever ridiculous transsexual pronouns his students demand today; he’s just against being forced to do so by law. As Vox Day states in the comments in this post:

A classic Canadian liberal is a Leftist. Peterson is not disillusioned with liberalism, he is afraid of the SJW extremists. He is a metaphorical Menshevik and the fact that he opposes the modern Bolsheviks does not mean that he is our side. He is not. He regards us as the enemy and he supports our enemies. He is to the Left of the cucks that most of you Peterson fans rightly despise. He gets virtually nothing right and he does not oppose the two biggest dangers to the West, immigration and feminism.

Do not worship false prophets.

Peterson made a grave mistake with his tweet that attempted to mock me. He should have never responded to my article. By doing so in the way that he did he gave it immense credibility. It was a really stupid mistake, and a really dumb one at that. He has drawn back the curtain on his own lies and hypocrisy. Do not be disheartened if you really believed that he was the real deal. Be content that he has been exposed so easily and that you needn’t have wasted any more time.

 

 

19 thoughts on “The exposure of the real Jordan Peterson.

  1. David

    Kudos Adam; that tweet is revealing in so many ways. I always thought Peterson remained a leftist but I also thought I could count on some kind of a rational argument from him. I can’t believe he responded to you….i guess he needed some kind of trigger warning….

    Like

  2. J_sh

    I can recognise something of myself in JBP in the sense over being over-reliant on the analytical side of my brain which in terms of volume is at the 99th percentile and brain size correlates with IQ which measures analytical capacity which for me is about 135 or so.

    Unfortunately like Adam my mother was thoroughly toxic in that she was unable to handle the emotions generated from her failed marriage to our father and I suspect that came about from a diminished brain component responsible for managing emotional responses which she passed on to four of us six siblings and then her psycho-sexual emotional abuse of us further undermined what we did get by way of brain structure to support EQ.

    So unlike Adam I am at the opposite end of the distribution in regards to that part of the brain. I function quite well unstressed but when stressed (e.g. from having my Asperger’s sister in law invited into house and home which she then dominated) an overly emotional reaction manifests (which meant nothing to said sister in law, being Aspergers).

    I cannot help feeling JBP also over-relies on his tremendous IQ but the post by Adam triggered an emotional melt-down sufficient to cause an irrational response as the emotional side of his brain to kick in bypassing his intellectual side.

    My reading of it would be that it is not about his being deceitful but rather the two words Adam used to describe his courtship process, combined with a bit of checking up on Adam and finding his references to pulling chicks

    It has to be something that stronglly triggering of an emotional reaction rather than an intellectual one.

    Like

  3. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 04.30.18 : The Other McCain

  4. David F.

    Do you think Rollo will reply to your email now? Well done sir. I always liked Peterson for the same reasons you did. But never did I think he was “red pilled” Thank you for pulling back the curtain. He showed a clearly emotional response to a rational and logical argument. Maybe he has enough success and fame and acolytes that he can’t be criticized anymore…..

    Like

  5. I thoroughly enjoyed this. Something about him always struck me as a bit off. I didn’t quite imagine he would expose himself so readily. Isn’t he supposed to be some sort of psychologist? With such a thin skin it’s hard to credit.

    He strikes me as just another grifter on the make. He never really believed in men taking back their roles in society, he saw it as a way to make some money on book sales and used his credentials to sell it. That really didn’t take long.

    Like

  6. Dave

    You deconstructed his embarrassing virtue signalling most deftly.

    I try not to put much faith in these figures for exactly the reasons you outlined.

    The only public author and commentator I genuinely respect is Mark Steyn. This goes way back, but aside from sharing his longing for the Empire of old, and his immense knowledge and hilariously brilliant writing aside, he is indeed a man of integrity and is fighting the good fight at great personal and financial cost. He has skin in the game.

    As a lurker on the Catallaxy Files your comments always stood out as no BS. No talking around subjects but directly addressing them. Its refreshing. Although there are many clever people on that site, few of them really address the issues and offer solutions so frankly as yourself. This was particularly evident during the same sex marriage debate, as I saw such piss weak objections to your statements of hard, cold facts on the depraved nature of homosexuality.

    So I followed you across to here, and I am heartened to see your courage in taking on figures like Peterson. You clearly want to be part of a solution to a great many problems. I hope this helps put you in the game and that subsequently your thoughts get exposure to the wider public.You want skin in the game, and our nation and western civilisation will be all the better for it if you do.

    Keep up the good work.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Gabriel M

    “Does Peterson state some truths? Of course he does, but so what? He is not on our side.”

    I genuinely don’t get this. If you are running an army, or a political party, or a business, or any kind of organisation with adversaries then it’s important to have people on your side. If you are running a blog and are part of a movement that consists only of other bloggers then it’s not. What are you actually trying to achieve by declaring everyone not as right wing as you to be a enemy? Jordan Peterson is an intellectual with interesting things to say. If you are interested in understanding the world better you can learn from him. People who are to the Right of you understand this: https://spandrell.com/2017/01/jordan-peterson/

    More to the point, you made fun of him for marrying his childhood sweetheart and he responded in turn. He probably loves his wife enough not to pose weekly pics of whores on his blog. Maybe you don’t understand.

    Like

    1. More to the point, you made fun of him for marrying his childhood sweetheart and he responded in turn.

      You’re deliberately misrepresenting both my argument and his response. This is what is known as lying.

      Like

      1. Sjonnar

        Also note the disapproving tone towards the weekly hawt chick posts and his characterization of them as whores. Pussy pedestalization (how dare you objectify the wimmenz!) plus spiteful contempt for chicks in general (girls who pose, generally fully-clothed and smiling, for a picture are “whores”) equals thirty-year-old gamma virgin every time.

        Like

      2. The disapproving tone to the hawt chicks was beneath contempt. Your description of him turned out to be completely accurate by his own admission. Gammas will always rally around to publicly protect another gamma.

        Like

      3. Gabriel M

        He married a woman that he first met when he was 7 years old and whom he “instantly fell in love with” and whom he then pussy worshipped until she finally married him.

        If you expected him to respond to your arguments after that then you need a course in psychology. Who knows, maybe listening to some Peterson lectures could help you.

        In response to Sjonnar. You got my age right, but married with two children, though I was, of course, a virgin on the wedding night. I wouldn’t let my wife pose for pictures ‘full clothed’ so other men could look at her, but then it doesn’t come up because she’s not a whore. One day maybe you’ll discover what actual patriarchy is.

        Like

      4. Gabriel M

        Your description of him turned out to be completely accurate by his own admission. Gammas will always rally around to publicly protect another gamma.

        That’s an extraordinarily bizarre thing to say unless you equate being married with children to being a ‘gamma virgin’, which makes you a damn sight less a man of the the Right than Jordan Peterson. What is your game plan anyway here anyway? All men should be alphas? Alphas should exterminate betas? Alphas should tell betas they are not wanted in the Right so that the Right can never win anything? Alphas should get together and form a homeland called Alpharael?

        Like

    2. J_sh

      Very spot on Gabriel about JBP loves his wife and not just ‘probably’. Your picking up on this as being behind the response rather than the discussion about the merits or otherwise of the bulk of the post is what I had suggested above. Adam below gives a very brief comment in his own style but a closer reading of Adam’s paragraph and his link to JBP’s video wearing his heart on his sleeve did not, to me, represent Adam making fun of JBP but making a rational point in his case the way an alpha would, that JBP is not an alpha. JBP has never claimed to be alpha so is not responding, as he would concur with Adam on this.

      Possibly JBP may have felt that Adam was making fun of him, or of his wife but that is a different thing from Adam’s approach is what I would say.

      Where JBP’s response is ‘in kind’ is this: just as Adam made his point as an alpha might so too JBP’s response was consistent with not being alpha, I.e. most likely he was hurt by Adam’s approach of using his video and references to the woman he loves and loves him and so responded from emotion to express that.

      In a kind of a way JBP had been elevated to some sort of guru status by the crowd looking for a saviour and even Adam caught some of that fever. Jung, and JBP, would say it is very hard to resist being swept up by the crowd.

      So as JBP predicted he would be dumped by the crowd he is being. But it is more an issue of people waking up to their own delusion than about JBP. Adam presents a lot of himself too in a public forum and these posts are about that process as much as about JBP is my reading of it.

      Could be wrong but he has a number of posts about this sort of learning from mistakes in life rather than from theories in books as being the best teacher.

      Like

  8. TechieDude

    I don’t get the whole Peterson phenomenon.

    He has some interesting video. So I bought his book, which quite frankly, I find a bit chewy.

    Most of his 12 points are common sense and would have had a better blog post than a book. It’s as if Adam took the 28 traits of the common man and stretched 20 or so pages per trait.

    “What are you actually trying to achieve by declaring everyone not as right wing as you to be a enemy?” Gabriel, I think Adams point is the guy isn’t right wing whatsoever. Merely a classic Canadian liberal who has a dose of common sense. He’s not on “our side”, whatever that is, and should be treated as such by those on the right.

    He “is an intellectual with interesting things to say”. That’s about it. period.

    Like

  9. J_sh

    This thread is a great illustration of how Homo Sapiens manifests its evolutionary biology exhibiting features of its Pan cousins: Chimps and Bonobos.

    In the former fit concepts like Alpha and Beta with males determining who mates with who and in the latter it is females who make the reproductive selection decisions and males put them on the pedestal and engage in what from the Chimp perspective is pussy worship, if I have read the terminology right, to maximise their reproductive chances. In Chimpland males maximise their reproductive chances by fighting to become Alpha Chimp.

    By and large without a majority measure of Bonobo influence most countries are the shitholes Trump referred to so it has made humanity be civilised.

    In Bonoboland putting woman on a pedestal but then depicting them for admiration and worship is the definition of porn, a form of idolatry. However this blog being Adam’s and thus coming at things from the Chimp angle where women are not given diva status on means the hawt chicks posts don’t have that connotation. I see them as Adam tipping the hat to the feminine but not bowing down to it.

    Unfortunately while Bonoland has been where civilization has emerged females have abandoned their reproductive responsibilities while still clinging to their pedestals as they move into masculine roles emasculating the males and Bonoland is facing demographic decline. Males trying even harder in this environment to impress the females as worthy providers, and so deserving of selection as a sexual partner, falls on deaf ears and is no longer a strategy to ensure population survival of Bonoland.

    Like

  10. Vedran

    Wow, he really did get to you, didn’t he? He summed you up in a tweet, while it took you two essays and you still missed the point.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s