We can never have enough enemies.

I have to say that I have been surprised by the number of people who have commented in support of my position as regards to my little Peterson skirmish; I really expected a lot more push-back. The commenters who have sided with me and who have reappraised their position on Peterson have been eloquent, clear-headed and factual.

However, the Peterson fans who have doubled down on their hero worship have performed some truly incredible feats of intellectual hoop jumping in order to protect their Canadian false prophet from criticism. Some of it has been rather disappointing. This from Matty’s Modern Life is typical:

I think he’s being sarcastic dude, in fact I think he’s mocking the Left with that tweet. He likely knows you aren’t any of those things and is pointing out to Leftists that even people on the right are critical of him.

You should ask him to clarify with a detailed argument and invite him to respond to your article in detail. It would be great to watch and if he is what you say he is it will come out in the article.

Otherwise you can’t take that tweet seriously given his style. He’s prone to sarcasm.

I’ve watched hours and hours of his work and I see him as a classical liberal, certainly not on the Left. He supports western civilisation, free speech, capitalism and all the things that make the West great.

He’s not what you accuse him of as far as I can tell.

Happy to see evidence to proves otherwise but that tweet is not it because I don’t believe it’s serious.

It literally reads like a defensive screed from some leftist attempting to defend someone like Cathy Newman. Cathy wasn’t being serious in that interview, she was just being sarcastic. It all makes sense now, right?

It’s bad enough when the left use the old but I wazn’t serious bro line when they slip up. But here we have someone of the alt right using it to defend one of those same leftists. Matty isn’t happy to see any evidence at all. I mean, how else to explain his easy dismissal of concrete evidence from Peterson himself?

Another comment from someone called Entropy:

Peterson is an effective ally against the bizarre excesses of the left; he’s not a messiah.

You’re right. The personal attacks were uncalled for and he shouldn’t have linked you at all. Simultaneously, congratulations and stop bickering with our allies.

Peterson is not our ally. He is one of them. The only difference is that he cleverly says some stuff that we agree with. I see this all the time with our side. We’re so desperate for approval from the left that we immediately ingratiate ourselves and hero worship anyone, and I mean anyone who says anything vaguely resembling conservative thought. Even better if they’re black, or gay, or some tradthot, or a left wing Canadian professor of a dubious and discredited field of pseudo-science. Ooohh! Validation! See, we’re not so bad after all!

He continues:

I’d prefer Peterson, for example, stopped explaining the ‘wage gap’ in terms of how women are more ‘agreeable’ and started simply pointing out that they work less and in lower-skilled positions, but don’t we have enough enemies?

Listen to me very carefully – we can never have enough enemies. The more enemies that we have the better. Where is your fight? Where is your pluck? Where is your courage? You’re moaning because I upset someone from their side? Yes? And?

May they all come out as enemies once and for all. Let them finally bring the fight to the field of battle. I know that there will not be many standing on our side, but I’ve always made a point of standing with the unpopular crowd, and by God we are unpopular now. We’re unpopular for a very good reason. Because unlike colossal frauds like Peterson, we really stand on the side of truth. And truth is just like poetry, and people fucking hate poetry*.

The more enemies that we have then the more that I know our fight is the right one. I understand the motivations of the vast masses who side with prog liberalism because they just want to pick the political side that will give them the least problems in their personal lives. I get that. But those of our side who are scared of fighting because the numbers are against us? Are you for real? You’re worse than gobshite.

Peterson’s entire schtick is about building better betas. He’s never red-pilled a single man in his entire life. And the reason I know that is from simply observing the behavior of his staunchest defenders.

So sad.

* Lifted from The Big Short.

13 thoughts on “We can never have enough enemies.

  1. Susie P

    “The only difference is that he cleverly says some stuff that we agree with. I see this all the time with our side. We’re so desperate for approval from the left that *we immediately ingratiate ourselves and hero worship anyone,* and I mean anyone who says anything vaguely resembling conservative thought. *Even better if they’re black, or gay, or some tradthot,* or a left wing Canadian professor of a dubious and discredited field of pseudo-science.”

    I agree with this completely. It’s a concern I have about this Candace Owens woman. Not a year or so ago, she was behind something called Social Autopsy, which (correct me if I’m wrong, but this is what I read) was a left wing website that basically wanted to be an aggregate source for outing anonymous pundits (among others) online and opening people up to criticism.

    I know that Blaire White (mostly right wing Youtuber) has a sort of “feud” going with her. Blaire doesn’t trust Candace Owens and I can’t say I entirely disagree with Blaire’s take on the situation.

    I’m all for people changing sides when it’s a legit conversion, but it does seem to have happened very quickly with Candace Owens. I’m not saying she’s a liar, I’m just saying that her past would suggest being cautious about what her goals are.

    Like

  2. “Many enemies, much honor.” – Ezra Pound.

    Jordan Peterson has put out a lot of genuinely useful information—his Bible lectures are fantastic, for one—but he’s succumbing to the fame bug like everyone else who has ended up in his position.

    Roosh’s “Influence Curve” article was eerily prescient when it came to predicting the career trajectories of e-celebs like Peterson. Past a certain point of popularity, any extra notoriety you gain will just harm you because you’ll either have to continuously fend off attacks from your enemies, precluding you from putting out the material that made you famous in the first place, or you’ll end up cucking to said enemies in pursuit of said fame.

    Like

  3. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 05.01.18 : The Other McCain

  4. MarkT

    Please don’t take my silence on this matter as fence sitting, or supportive of your accusations. To me your accusations sound completely deranged, and that’s coming from someone who is only lukewarm about Peterson. When you’re good, you’re really good (as you undoubtedly are on some topics) – but when you’re bad, you’re diabolical. Dismissing him because of the age he married and how he did it (decades ago!), and because he doesn’t buy into conspiracy theories about the Jews? Really?

    In regards to the bankruptcy of playing the ball and not the man (and regarding everyone who doesn’t agree with you on every topic as “enemies”), Ayn Rand said it best below. You’re not exactly what I’d call a “pragmatist”, but there’s still an ugly tribalism that rears it’s head every so often with you, and makes this quote of relevance:

    “As a rule, it is an accident whether the smart young intellectual wheeler-dealers .. turn to the Left or to the Right [as they enter politics]…

    It is not a matter of political principles. What principles? Pragmatism has taught them that there are no such things.

    But the big dilemma for all the pragmatists of the Right, is: what are they to fight and by what means, if principles are inoperative? Politics is a field in which one deals with ideas and it requires the ability to argue, to discuss, to persuade.

    What does one do in politics if one has discarded the whole realm of ideas? One fights men.”

    Like

  5. SPQR

    Even Paul Keating (a man who may not be well regarded in these parts, but one who hold in high esteem) learned from his mentor Jack Lang – “Having enemies worries some people. For me it’s a badge of honour”

    I think there are degrees of “enemy” though. There is far far worse out there than him. As far as someone so popular goes, he ain’t all that bad. In fact, I think it is a good and promising sign that he has become so popular.

    Like

  6. Gabriel M

    Peterson is not our ally. He is one of them. The only difference is that he cleverly says some stuff that we agree with.

    Let’s review. Peterson has constructed a synthesis of pragmatic philosophy, evolutionary psychology and Jungian theory to come up with a novel defense of Christian ethics and culture. Some people think this is the moist exciting intellectual project of the century, other’s think it’s kind of a flop. As a side job, he has helped tens of thousands of people, the vast majority of them men, to stop leading chaotic miserable lives and, at a conservative estimate, has probably prevented a few dozen suicides. In his free time he helps raise understanding of certain malign trends in politics among normies.

    Next step. Like anyone else even vaguely associated with the Dissident Right, Peterson gets endlessly spammed by anti-semites demanding he drop whatever he is doing and name the Jew, to what purpose it is never explained. Peterson finally responds with an article citing mainstream research into Ashkenazi IQ.

    Next step. The alt right gets into a stupid signalling spiral, each one trying to outdo the other in irrelevant and paranoid attacks on Peterson’s character and bizarre Nation of Islam style IQ denialist conspiracy theories. You win the contest with an article full of completely irrelevant drivel (Peterson is not an alpha, well, duh), falsehoods (he lets women off the hook), paranoia (see above quote) and, to clinch victory, a completely pathetic attack on him for being a happily married man with a wife he respects. In recognition of your victory Peterson retweets you.

    Next step. Various morons congratulate you. Sane people point out you have made a prat of yourself. You double down. Enjoy the acclaim of self-marginalizing dysfunctional internet ”alphas” who think it’s cool to look at pictures of floozies on the internet and sad to be devoted to a good woman who you love.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. J_sh

      The ‘sides’ and ‘allies’ which seems puzzling is, to me, another fascinating illustration of how there are two evolutionary reproductive strategies at work in Homo Sapiens: Chimp and Bonopo. They bring two different mindsets to play. So Adam being Chimp where males are Alpha or Beta can only see Bonobo males as Gamma and pussy worshippers as competition to sort out a male pecking order is a Chimp characteristic. Bonobo males don’t know what this competitive ranking game is about but rather co-operate and a hierarchy emerges based on within group competence. Dr Peterson is a Bonobo so was caught flat footed and should not have attempted to respond as he didn’t know the game, Adam’s “Gotchya” moment. Being Bonobo myself (my older brother got the Chimp ‘gene’) I find the blog and podcasts a useful resource for me as I am spending lots of time with my young grandsons and want to balance out what comes naturally. So don’t feel there is a need to judge or justify one way or another as to what is motivating Adam as he is doing his Chimp stuff to disengage his mind from briefly seeing Dr Peterson as being a Chimp and thus ally. Just observe how Desmond Morris was right and take away what is useful with what Adam says and leave the rest, much as other ‘allies’ have said they select what they find useful from JBP but leave the rest. On his Q&A lists a question about why he is impulsive about them and this would now be one he regrets, along with wearing his heart on his sleeve on social media despite many a warning for some years now about how doing so carries risks of being seen as fair game.

      Like

  7. J_sh

    Just listened to the Podcast. Yes in too many cases Dr Peterson pussyfoots around the issue of biology. This is in total contrast with a now deceased Canadian psychologist and Prof who never wavered under attack from leftists in academia and the likes of David Suzuki. Philipe Rushton always remainder calm, cheerful and gracious never letting the thought of tenure dissuade him from presenting the results of his research when attacked as being a being a far right bigot, never taking any of their bait. He stood his ground alone, and kept his tenure to boot.

    Like

  8. J_sh

    Short this time: Just watching JBP’s latest Q&A reminds me of how he stays quite focussed if a very specific question is being addressed in contrast with his more wide ranging canvasses.

    Like

  9. Peterson is deeply invested in the now-obsolete progressivism he was raised in. He’s defending it against the version that supplanted it. His version talked a good line about facts sometimes, not because it really valued them, but because it didn’t yet have enough power. It still had to persuade rather than coerce. Peterson is an Outer Party type who sincerely believed the sales pitch. He’s a useful idiot who didn’t get the memo when the Party line changed. I know a Bernie guy who’s the same way. He’s got the revolutionary spirit, but he hasn’t won the victory over himself.

    Officially, the ideology Peterson is defending never even existed. The past is always changing. “At least he’s an honest man”, you might say, but never forget he’s an honest believer in what brought us here. An honest enemy (or relatively so — he lies to himself, because that’s what progressivism *is*) is an enemy.

    Like

    1. I shouldn’t call him “honest”; he’s faithful to a set of lies. He balks at installing a new belief system in his own head on command. That’s not nothing in a culture where most people comply, which is why he’s famous. But do t make it out to be more than it is.

      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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.