If the “Intellectual Dark Web” is being silenced, why must w

Post Reply New Topic

A 16 minute chat from Bret on the distinct problems that sociopathy presents to culture as well as those who have the condition and pegging its place in human evolution:

I'm a libertarian leftist and that's why I can't stand Jordan Peterson, who glorifies corporal punishment of children (there's a passage where he fantasizes about physically throwing a two-year-old across a playground for hurting his toddler on the monkey bars), supports rigid conservative Christian sexual and gender roles ("enforced monogamy" etc) and uses dog-whistle anti-Semitic rhetoric. The idea of academia being "corrupted" by "postmodern neo-Marxists", who happen to all be Jewish and/or gay philosophers and must be "uprooted" mirrors 1930s fascist rhetoric about "cultural Bolshevism" that lead to the expulsion of the Frankfurt School (and Albert Einstein, who was a Jewish socialist) from Europe.

I don't bring that up as a character insult, btw - I hate it when people trivialize the horror of fascism by using it as a petty pejorative. But in a very literal sense, his rhetoric sounds fascist - he used "the trains leaving the station on time" as an example of noble cosmological order, which mirrors the adage that "at least Mussolini made the trains run on time". He also takes influence from the far-right 1930s German philosopher Martin Heidegger, while despising left-wing Jewish philosophers influenced by Heidegger such as Jacques Derrida.

btw, I have to say that a huge part of why I have the political views I do is because that's the side of the political spectrum which seems most pro-neurodiversity. Even tho the type of "feminism" on Twitter and Tumblr is very toxic, petty, annoying and hostile, elsewhere I've seen intersectional feminists speak up for autism acceptance in a way I've never seen from the "IDW". Here is a feminist article which speaks out against the vilification of neurodivergent and disabled men and says that men shouldn't be mocked for their appearance, conversational habits or living scenario: https://everydayfeminism.com/2016/02/neckbeard-cartoon/

Meanwhile the right-wing, in my experience, is very hostile to autistic people. I often see right-wingers in internet comments use "autistic" as an insult along with insults like "sperging out", "autistic screeching" etc. I went to a philosophy meetup once that had a lot of anarcho-capitalists and "intellectual dark web" types and it was one of the most ableist social settings I've ever encountered - I was yelled at, grabbed without permission by a stranger, and compared to a baby and a school shooter. In my experience, socialist and feminist spaces tend to be very affirming and accommodating and right-wing social spaces (including "libertarian" rightist spaces) tend to be the most hostile.

I won't say much in response to that aside from clarify that you just suggested there's salient evidence somewhere to comfortably call him an anti-Semite and I won't dive off into the ironies that I see in that aside from to say that I see them. Past that I'll leave you to your feelings, it's not the kind of thing where I feel its fruitful to attempt any sort of point-by-point refutation on.

Maybe the only other thing I'll offer - that's a cloud you can get yourself out from under with your own research, and very little I can say here will serve as any exchange of like value for your own efforts.

I'm not saying he consciously hates Jewish people, I'm saying he's internalized a far-right narrative and promotes ideas that play to people's unconscious bigotry. When I say "fascism" I mean an ideology that promotes hierarchy and nationalism, opposes diversity and views authoritarian instincts as natural, unavoidable and good. I'm aware that he doesn't literally want a dictatorship, but the narrative he's promoting helps to normalize the same rhetoric used by fascists. That was my point.

And this isn't about "feelings", I want to keep it to facts and ideology. Calling one's opponent hysterical is a nice way to avoid having to make a counter-argument. btw, if you think I'm consumed with ressentiment over this or something you've read it wrong - I've been doing really well lately. I didn't share my experience of ableism from the right-wing because I want pity, but to warn other autistic people not to waste their time sucking up to an ideology which hates them.

Can you give specifics of what you mean by this?


I can't go with this argument though. I don't know where he's promoting nationalism, if he has I haven't heard the speech. If it's hierarchies he's saying that the best we can hope for is to make them as benevolent as possible but that their literally insolvable, and what I think he means is they're a reflexive aspect of conscious social interaction where the moment you have two people interacting and realizing they have different strengths and weaknesses certain hierarchies have already formed between the two people, and when that becomes towns, cities, states, etc. the town, city or state that's run by someone picked at random rather than the most competent tended to languish or be conquered throughout history.

I'm also curious on what you mean about him being anti-diversity? Is there anything he's said that explicitly makes that case?


I have to do this is again, do you mean right-wing as in people who want small government? Do you mean libertarians? Anarco-Capitalists? Minarchists? Do you mean bible-thumpers? Globalist neocons? Are you specifically meaning national socialists, white identitarians, or the self-labeled alt-right? I've seen this mean 'anyone anywhere to the right of me who says things I disagree with' and I have to clarify that you mean something specific by this because you haven't really zoned what the term right-wing means to you.


The reason I was dismissive in the post before this is that I saw nothing but vague allegations and no specifics. The closest thing I saw to that was the first thing you said about the two year old, and I remember that particular interview or chat where he was making a point in context about something else. The rest of what you launched off into, particularly the neo-Marxist = dog-whistle for Jewish or gay, that's typically a pattern people employ, ie. shower a person or thing with adjectives or long-guesses, when they're heavy on feelings about someone or something but don't have any good arguments or specifics to nail down what they mean logically. It doesn't even mean someone's wrong, it just tends to suggest that they haven't done enough digging to do more than say 'from the sidewalk this is how it vibes up to me'. That could mean that if they look into further they could find substantive points to back that claim, or they could find that a lot of beliefs or attitudes they imputed to that person weren't there at all and then they have to go back and ask themselves what personal beliefs that particular individual challenged in them which got them riled up enough to see them that way on reflex.

Something that might be of help to you - Dave Rubin had Bret and Eric Weinstein on the Rubin Report a while back and both Bret and Eric were talking about Jordan and what their initial thoughts were on him and what they've come to think of him over time. Bret's probably my favorite of the IDW for his clarity and precision on a lot of issues at the nexus of biology and sociology, and his chat with Travis Pangburn really showcased that well. Aside from that it's useful to hear a couple progressives talk about him and give their weigh-in.

The throwing kids comment is in this excerpt from 12 Rules For Life:
http://nationalpost.com/news/excerpt-fr ... her-people

The excerpt deals with bad and permissive parenting, children becoming tyrants or nearly lawless in their behavior, and his comment underscored how parents feel when they watch their child being bullied.

I also need to add - I've heard Jordan Peterson repeatedly, in many lectures and interviews, state that a highly functional left is needed and that the left fills a very important role - being a voice for the less fortunate and speaking truth to power on their behalf. He's often stated that the dark side of hierarchies is that they tend to cause a lot of people to 'stack up at 0' and if too many people stack up at 0 the whole society falls apart either by revolution or even just destruction of market.

Eric was on fire here, in a really good way.