Honestly, either is what you are saying and he is less smart then people give him credit or he is receiving money to "de-radicalize".
Since he has returned to the public eye, I had a feeling that his medical bills are huge and he may strike such a deal.
Peterson has the smell of Tavistock on him. He and Timothy Leary both created a small cult following at Harvard. Leary prevented the radical left from being a threat to the regime, and Peterson has been similarly screwing with the K-lines of the right.
High profile to you isn't high profile to everyone. Let's have a little reality check, very few people outside of our little community ever hear about regular people getting canceled and are only vaguely aware of people like Dankula, Peterson included.
Even if they are, people like Tim Pool and Peterson believe that you should have to face getting canceled rather than be anonymous because, again, they survived it so you should be able to too. They can't seem to understand that they are flukes, outliers with more talent than the average normie.
It's a bad take, but they didn't come to it because they're dumb and we're smart, we're just more realistic than they are.
Eh, I agree there, even if there are greater consequences for regular people. I won't work a job that I don't feel ethical doing and I say what I like.
The problem with online discourse is that anyone can take anything you say, strip the context, and make it mean whatever they like. That's not even mentioning a case where you find yourself wrong about something and change your mind later. And employers often care more about internet drama than hiring qualified workers (not to mention government "hate" laws).
If we want to have true discourse, we should be annonymous, so that we can explore uncomfortable ideas without them being held against us. I wish we were civilized enough that people understood this but I doubt we ever will be.
The only reason you need to see who you are discussing something with is if you intend to use your clout against them irl.
Honestly, either is what you are saying and he is less smart then people give him credit or he is receiving money to "de-radicalize". Since he has returned to the public eye, I had a feeling that his medical bills are huge and he may strike such a deal.
Peterson has the smell of Tavistock on him. He and Timothy Leary both created a small cult following at Harvard. Leary prevented the radical left from being a threat to the regime, and Peterson has been similarly screwing with the K-lines of the right.
Holy shit I thought the very same thing about Timothy Leary/Peterson. Peterson rides a different kind of magic bus, just in his head.
I like JP though and I'm glad he's still around to contribute; what a long strange trip he's been.
Being smart doesn't make it any easier to look at a situation from the, pretty much literal, opposite point of view.
High profile to you isn't high profile to everyone. Let's have a little reality check, very few people outside of our little community ever hear about regular people getting canceled and are only vaguely aware of people like Dankula, Peterson included.
Even if they are, people like Tim Pool and Peterson believe that you should have to face getting canceled rather than be anonymous because, again, they survived it so you should be able to too. They can't seem to understand that they are flukes, outliers with more talent than the average normie.
It's a bad take, but they didn't come to it because they're dumb and we're smart, we're just more realistic than they are.
Eh, I agree there, even if there are greater consequences for regular people. I won't work a job that I don't feel ethical doing and I say what I like.
The problem with online discourse is that anyone can take anything you say, strip the context, and make it mean whatever they like. That's not even mentioning a case where you find yourself wrong about something and change your mind later. And employers often care more about internet drama than hiring qualified workers (not to mention government "hate" laws).
If we want to have true discourse, we should be annonymous, so that we can explore uncomfortable ideas without them being held against us. I wish we were civilized enough that people understood this but I doubt we ever will be.
The only reason you need to see who you are discussing something with is if you intend to use your clout against them irl.