Jordan Peterson Thread

paternos said:
It's not the forum, it's me saying this
Click to expand...

Whoah. To assert that Solzhenitsyn is a Western asset is a very bold claim. Is it just your opinion, or do you have some information to back it up? If it's just your opinion, then what's your reasoning. Maybe don't respond here and derail the thread, but create a Solzhenitsyn thread. Such a statement deserves its own thread.
 
Jordan Peterson does offer some good, common sense wisdom on how to get your life together, he stands up against wokeness, feminists, and he can be entertaining in interviews. He has also unintentionally provided some hilarious comedy material when he got banned from Twitter. And of course he stood up for free speech in Canada.

He's also long-winded, verbose, he repeats a lot of the same things, he doesn't have the right view of The Bible, he isn't the serious philosopher that he's made out to be, he sold out to the Daily Wire, and is now a shill for Israel.

Does that sum it up?
 
For me "sold out to the Daily Wire, and is now a shill for Israel" It doesn't sum it up.
It doesn't sum it up at all.
And I don't know that Jordan Peterson IS a good subject for a thread.. I wish he was.

THIS my friends is the storming phase of the new forum that necessarily has to come.. how we handle the storming phase amongst ourselves is up to us.

Here we have some of the best evidence there is around that "controlled opposition" isn't just someone who is misguided, isn't just someone 'having a hard time' here we have someone who proves the assertion that controlled opposition is in fact a long term, planned operation.
Per Christopher Bollyn our intelligence agencies are MOST concerned with the cultural zeitgeist and public figures and controlling public perceptions. Tavistock Institute social psychologists in London are British intelligence, after all.

People like Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones will naturally divide people. In the last week I have heard Devon Stack of all people saying that Alex Jones is "just misguided" (with NO zog connections) and that Q is "probably nothing to do with western intel counter propaganda, he's probably just a misguided person in a room somewhere" - that to me is preposterous but never mind..

In the case of this thread - this is page two - on page one, one page ago the fact that jewish globalists are on record that they cultivated him (from (loooong before he was ever thrust into the public eye) was detailed.

What happened?
Straight away we're back to "he sold out to the Daily Wire" people "write rubbish sometimes when they are omnipresent online"

I said it how many times on the last forum -
"This is what so many on the forum do.. you spend ages writing several paragraphs going through all the evidence that Jordan Peterson was always being managed by jewish handlers and jewish money..
next post they will come in and say - "I think Peterson is just misguided and his latest 'Israel is our master' post is just the pain meds were affecting him recently"
I was exaggerating for effect but the same issue remains..

We are one page one from 2,300 words going into how Jordan Peterson has always been a long term jewish cultivated plan, from 10 years before he became famous, and we are straight back to 2 recurrent things.

1. Completely ignoring all the evidence presented beforehand. Completely ignoring it.
2. Pretending that Peterson obeying master is some very recent development in years.

I've said it so many times - I got a suspensions for posting aggregated reportage/exposes in some threads. Many contacted me saying that they got a lot from the posts. Straight beneath it someone would unfailingly post "who says that David Icke is a freemason? who says that Tommy Robinson is controlled?" - when there is 1500 words or more sitting not two posts above that, answering that very question.

I would ask that - if people are so set on ignoring what other people post in a tread that is not yet even 3 pages long yet - that they do one of two things:

1. They say WHY they are ignoring everything that has been said before.
Where it is typed that Dongier, Leary, Doidge, Szemberg, Balsillie were involved with cultivating their project "Jordan Peterson" long before he was thrust into fame and certainly longe before Shapiro, Prager and Netanyahu were all over him I would like to hear why those facts and those arguments and that text is being refuted.
2. If people don't wish to do that then just say.. "Im not interested in reading what others have typed and I'm just going to ignore it/dismiss it" That, at least, is an honest statement of intent and we can all accept what we are then about to read.

Ive got a few health issues. Typing on here is a massive time sink. If we are going down the route of some conservative-lite take on the world around us with deep dives brushed aside - then let us at least do the necessary storming before we all pretend that we have agreed to that
- and agreed to ignore what is written in between the assertions that Peterson is just more or less 'misguided'.

We need to do some (dignified and constructive) storming on here gentlemen because it is quite something to see the people who wrote in the JQ thread on RVF that jews just 'work hard' 'and display in group preference 'like everybody else' or who wrote that the JQ focus was very new to them and it made them uncomfortable - appear in this very thread ignoring what for me is a salient fact - that Jordan Peterson's entire public career was planned in advance by his Jewish masters.
I wouldn't mind if it hadn't taken a fair amount of research (not necessarily mine) to draw that conclusion.

(@paternos - you and I agree on a lot of things tho maybe not all.. writing what you wrote about Solzhenitsyn opens a whole can of worms that requires nuance and debate. Im not dismissing what you wrote but at the same time broad statements about public figures who haven't had an asterisk beside their name before will draw strong reactions. For me the conversation around Solzhenitsyn is how he was branded and sold in the western media, not so much the man himself, maybe that requires a different thread as it would Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones, say..)
 
BarrontheTigerCat said:
You and I agree on a lot of things tho maybe not all.. writing what you wrote about Solzhenitsyn opens a whole can of worms that requires nuance and debate. Im not dismissing what you wrote but at the same time broad statements about public figures who haven't had an asterisk beside their name before will draw strong reactions. For me the conversation around Solzhenitsyn is how he was branded and sold in the western media, not so much the man himself, maybe that requires a different thread as it would Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones, say..)
Click to expand...
I agree actually, Solzhenitsyn needs nuance, I was writing a start of thread to get the debate going. (agree different league as peterson / tucker)
 
BarrontheTigerCat said:
For me "sold out to the Daily Wire, and is now a shill for Israel" It doesn't sum it up.
It doesn't sum it up at all.
And I don't know that Jordan Peterson IS a good subject for a thread.. I wish he was.

THIS my friends is the storming phase of the new forum that necessarily has to come.. how we handle the storming phase amongst ourselves is up to us.

Here we have some of the best evidence there is around that "controlled opposition" isn't just someone who is misguided, isn't just someone 'having a hard time' here we have someone who proves the assertion that controlled opposition is in fact a long term, planned operation.
Per Christopher Bollyn our intelligence agencies are MOST concerned with the cultural zeitgeist and public figures and controlling public perceptions. Tavistock Institute social psychologists in London are British intelligence, after all.

People like Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones will naturally divide people. In the last week I have heard Devon Stack of all people saying that Alex Jones is "just misguided" (with NO zog connections) and that Q is "probably nothing to do with western intel counter propaganda, he's probably just a misguided person in a room somewhere" - that to me is preposterous but never mind..

In the case of this thread - this is page two - on page one, one page ago the fact that jewish globalists are on record that they cultivated him (from (loooong before he was ever thrust into the public eye) was detailed.

What happened?
Straight away we're back to "he sold out to the Daily Wire" people "write rubbish sometimes when they are omnipresent online"

I said it how many times on the last forum -
"This is what so many on the forum do.. you spend ages writing several paragraphs going through all the evidence that Jordan Peterson was always being managed by jewish handlers and jewish money..
next post they will come in and say - "I think Peterson is just misguided and his latest 'Israel is our master' post is just the pain meds were affecting him recently"
I was exaggerating for effect but the same issue remains..

We are one page one from 2,300 words going into how Jordan Peterson has always been a long term jewish cultivated plan, from 10 years before he became famous, and we are straight back to 2 recurrent things.

1. Completely ignoring all the evidence presented beforehand. Completely ignoring it.
2. Pretending that Peterson obeying master is some very recent development in years.

I've said it so many times - I got a suspensions for posting aggregated reportage/exposes in some threads. Many contacted me saying that they got a lot from the posts. Straight beneath it someone would unfailingly post "who says that David Icke is a freemason? who says that Tommy Robinson is controlled?" - when there is 1500 words or more sitting not two posts above that, answering that very question.

I would ask that - if people are so set on ignoring what other people post in a tread that is not yet even 3 pages long yet - that they do one of two things:

1. They say WHY they are ignoring everything that has been said before.
Where it is typed that Dongier, Leary, Doidge, Szemberg, Balsillie were involved with cultivating their project "Jordan Peterson" long before he was thrust into fame and certainly longe before Shapiro, Prager and Netanyahu were all over him I would like to hear why those facts and those arguments and that text is being refuted.
2. If people don't wish to do that then just say.. "Im not interested in reading what others have typed and I'm just going to ignore it/dismiss it" That, at least, is an honest statement of intent and we can all accept what we are then about to read.

Ive got a few health issues. Typing on here is a massive time sink. If we are going down the route of some conservative-lite take on the world around us with deep dives brushed aside - then let us at least do the necessary storming before we all pretend that we have agreed to that
- and agreed to ignore what is written in between the assertions that Peterson is just more or less 'misguided'.

We need to do some (dignified and constructive) storming on here gentlemen because it is quite something to see the people who wrote in the JQ thread on RVF that jews just 'work hard' 'and display in group preference 'like everybody else' or who wrote that the JQ focus was very new to them and it made them uncomfortable - appear in this very thread ignoring what for me is a salient fact - that Jordan Peterson's entire public career was planned in advance by his Jewish masters.
I wouldn't mind if it hadn't taken a fair amount of research (not necessarily mine) to draw that conclusion.

(@paternos - you and I agree on a lot of things tho maybe not all.. writing what you wrote about Solzhenitsyn opens a whole can of worms that requires nuance and debate. Im not dismissing what you wrote but at the same time broad statements about public figures who haven't had an asterisk beside their name before will draw strong reactions. For me the conversation around Solzhenitsyn is how he was branded and sold in the western media, not so much the man himself, maybe that requires a different thread as it would Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones, say..)
Click to expand...

A few things:

Some people don't have the energy or capacity to read through every post in a thread, no matter how well-written or backed by careful research. This is a forum, not a one-on-one conversation; people read some posts, not all, and they respond to whatever strikes them.

For me long posts are not as accessible as shorter ones. I want to know someone's main point in three paragraphs or less. I wish I had the mental capacity to dig into longer posts. I'm impressed with anyone who has the ability to make sustained arguments and provide so much information.

I don't know much about Jordan Peterson besides what I casually observe, from his books and online, and from what people say about him. I'm open to the idea that Jordan Peterson's rise was carefully orchestrated by people who saw him as an opportunity to implement their nefarious purposes, and that he has been obeying these people for many years. It fits into a narrative that I'm open to hearing, but it's not something I can really speak to.
 
Last edited:
BarrontheTigerCat said:
"Jordan Peterson was always being managed by jewish handlers and jewish money"...

... "Jordan Peterson's entire public career was planned in advance by his Jewish masters."
Click to expand...

@BarrontheTigerCat

First, may God bless you and may your health improve.

Second, I've been reading every word of your long posts for many months now and I have enjoyed them very much (even though I disagree with about 50% of what you say), and I look forward to reading many more in the future.

Third, for me, Jordan Peterson has provided some value to my life (for reasons many have outlined above and on RVF). This is not up for debate. I don't care why he has provided said "perceived" value to me (he's controlled opposition, he's controlled by MK Ultra jew trickery, etc.), for "A rose by any other name still smells as sweet." However, just because he provides some humorous entertainment for me doesn't mean I trust him, or love him, or even like him. He's actually a complete non-issue in my daily life. I find him neither important nor unimportant.

Fourth, I know you've heard this before, but not everything is a conspiracy and when you make such specific, detailed claims about a person you really need to back it up with something strong besides "I know this to be fact." For example, when you state something about Jordan Peterson's past you need to say someting factual and concrete like, "I personally know Jordan Peterson and I was present when the jews approached him and forced him to sell his soul to the devil," or "I know someone who knew Jordan Peterson and they said he completely changed once the jews approached him and asked him to be controlled opposition," or, "I'm ex-CIA and I saw the jewish file on Jordan Peterson with my own two eyes."

Have you ever noticed how hard it is for one human being to keep a secret? What do you think happens when a group of ten or a hundred people are sworn to secrecy (even if their lives are threatened for revealing the secret)? Eventually someone slips up and goes blabbing. "Loose lips sink ships."

In addition, we use to play a game at summer camp when I was an adolescent. We'd sit in a big circle and pass a "secret" phrase around by whispering it in each others ears. One time the original phrase was "The Yankees won the penant," by the time the phrase made its way back around the circle to me it had been switched to "The Yankees lost the revolution." My point is that people say all kinds of things and they often get many details wrong.

I do believe some conspiracies are real (i.e. the macro-system JQ in particular), but when we deem everything a conspiracy and every co-conspirator as "controlled opposition" we diminish the terminology. There is a such thing as "hitting the nail a little too hard on the head."
 
I havent read his books or watched too much of his stuff but I do see some clips of him talking on Instagram,some topics are ok he maybe asks so good questions, I see Johnathan Pageu is always with him and taking him to Orthodox places, recently saw him on a boat on his way to Mt Athos dont know what happened there. I have a friend at church who said Jordon Peterson was a big influence on him becoming Orthodox but I think thats because he watches him through Johnathan Pageas stuff, I hope some day Jordan Peterson becomes Orthodox I think he has been exposed to it quite enough now so he cant be on the fence about it for too long a time will come whether he will accept it or reject it, until then listen to him with caution especially around the topics of religion and Christianity
 
Nobody we talk about on this forum with any regularity - or on Roosh's forum either - is controlled opposition. They're 'allowed opposition' perhaps. Controlled opposition is groups like Al-Qaeda in the 80s, not Jordan Peterson.
 
Teedub said:
Nobody we talk about on this forum with any regularity - or on Roosh's forum either - is controlled opposition. They're 'allowed opposition' perhaps. Controlled opposition is groups like Al-Qaeda in the 80s, not Jordan Peterson.
Click to expand...
Sure, that does not negate the fact that they are "allowed" for the simple reason that they lead people astray.
 
JBP was an important stepping stone for me, but yes, one quickly outgrows his ideas and realises that he uses a lot of words to say very little and is suspiciously slippery about what he actually believes.

I’ll give him credit for helping me come to the realisation, in my late twenties, that I was totally useless and a loser and it was my fault.

It frustrates me that he’s incapable of going down the same pipeline he has ushered many young men down. He’s too wedded to his fame and career, and Mossad snipers probably have his family permanently in their crosshairs with orders to shoot if he goes near a baptismal font
 
I learned about Jordan Peterson through Lew Rockwell and Tom Woods talking about him. This got me curious, so I watched the interview where he discussed pronouns with a female journalist. I felt that he did well in that interview so I watched another one where he was interviewed by an Asian journalist. That was when I had my first ick moment when he removed his shoes and pulled his legs up onto his chair like a girl.

I read 12 Rules but it was so longwinded and convoluted I got nothing from it and barely remember it. Then I started to read Vox Day's threads on JP (but never read Jordanetics). I was severely turned off by his supposed being incapacitated for days and days after eating a piece of food. Feeling a sense of doom (I think that was from his appearance on Joe Rogan). I became increasingly allergic to his style of speaking and wrote him off, avoiding his stuff. The other day I tried to watch an interview he had with Brian Roemmele on ChatGPT and Jordan seemed so interested in hearing himself talk I found myself cringing and skipping every part of the interview where he was speaking. I couldn't finish it. I also don't care for his image, the photos of his determined face, his attempt to look like a grave intellectual. His fancy suits, his flashy style, his backgrounds in the video. I don't care for showmanship at all, he reminds me of the kind of smart but evil villain you'd see from an anime or sci-fi film.
 
Peterson builds syllogisms on sometimes interesting takes on Bible passages, and deftly delivers them with fast talk. Unfortunately, the titillation value of an interpretation does not make it true, and stringing them together, however quickly and articulately, does not lead one to wisdom.

He obviously gets high off his own supply, and his upset about the state not leaving him alone after accepting the experimental mutagen illustrates this amply.
 
PurpleUrkel said:
Fourth, I know you've heard this before, but not everything is a conspiracy and when you make such specific, detailed claims about a person you really need to back it up with something strong besides "I know this to be fact." For example, when you state something about Jordan Peterson's past you need to say someting factual and concrete like, "I personally know Jordan Peterson and I was present when the jews approached him and forced him to sell his soul to the devil," or "I know someone who knew Jordan Peterson and they said he completely changed once the jews approached him and asked him to be controlled opposition," or, "I'm ex-CIA and I saw the jewish file on Jordan Peterson with my own two eyes."

Have you ever noticed how hard it is for one human being to keep a secret? What do you think happens when a group of ten or a hundred people are sworn to secrecy (even if their lives are threatened for revealing the secret)? Eventually someone slips up and goes blabbing. "Loose lips sink ships."

In addition, we use to play a game at summer camp when I was an adolescent. We'd sit in a big circle and pass a "secret" phrase around by whispering it in each others ears. One time the original phrase was "The Yankees won the penant," by the time the phrase made its way back around the circle to me it had been switched to "The Yankees lost the revolution." My point is that people say all kinds of things and they often get many details wrong.
Click to expand...

Here is how you can achieve near total control of narrative and thought without any "secret keeping" being necessary:

I do marketing and communications for private clients across North America. Some of those clients consult for municipalities and/or orgs comprised of multinational energy corps, and finally others are deeply involved in commercial lending and real estate.

So these are important industries and wealthy people who affect the lives of many around them. But also nobodies in the grand scheme of things. And certainly not on the speed dial of Soros or Schwab.

I've either been in meetings or had to archive the meeting minutes when a question of Covid, environment, or women/gay/aboriginal rights came up. Everyone immediately parrots the exact conclusions that were first set down in a McKinsey white paper written for the WEF. If you dare to suggest even a modification of a phrase, let alone a competing idea, they will police you hard.

None of them are in on anything.

It's just considered impolite and autistic to suggest different interpretations from the current mainstream. They also realize how much more successful they are than 90% of the rest of the world, and associate that success in large part to the inertia of the current system. Suggesting that any of the accepted beliefs or slogans are anything less than perfect is like telling them you hope their investment portfolios go down, and their homes lose value, and their certifications/degrees become worthless.

No one has to give them any marching orders or check up on them or ask them to hold any particular piece of delicate insider knowledge.

The incentive structure is entirely such that they will act as unpaid marketing interns for ZOG.

You may also want to look into the concept of "Fifth-Generation Warfare": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth-generation_warfare
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top