(01-21-2019 02:24 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  Some of the guys here are confusing RVF with Stormfront. Can't believe I'm seeing people defending Hitler and the old "it's not so black and white" argument.

Stormfront and the 1488 are mostly controlled opposition.

This being said, your attitude about wartime Germany seems tainted by decades of propaganda. Unbiased historians have established that Hitler did not want war with western Europe. He was very lenient, he could have slaughtered hundreds of thousands of mostly British troops stranded in Picardie. The Allies in return showed little mercy for the Germans, killing millions of them after the war in the Morgenthau Plan, where they set up a network of 50 concentration camps in which 9 million German POWs and civilians starved and shriveled to death after 1945.

The Allies exterminated far more prisoners after the war than the nazis did, so yeah, shades of gray.

Canadian historian James Bacque documented this in Other Losses, his career was sidelined and his work relentlessly attacked.

He came up with a documentary version of Other Losses, here is the preview:





And here is the full doc:





A poignant testimony by an American soldier who was a guard in an Allied concentration camp:

In 'Eisenhower's Death Camps': A U.S. Prison Guard Remembers

"...some of our weak and sickly prisoners were marched off by French soldiers to their camp. We were riding on a truck behind this column. Temporarily, it slowed down and dropped back, perhaps because the driver was as shocked as I was. Whenever a German prisoner staggered or dropped back, he was hit on the head with a club and killed. The bodies were rolled to the side of the road to be picked up by another truck. For many, this quick death might have been preferable to slow starvation in our "killing fields."

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v10/v10p161_brech.html

This is what a real concentration camp looks like:



Unlike at Auschwitz, no soccer fields, no swimming pools, no clubhouses, no housing, no toilets, no hospitals, just an open field where underfed men and women with no potable water shriveled away under the elements and died within months, in Henry Morgenthau's talmudic genocidal revenge on Germany. An no brainwashing films or school trips to any of the sites where millions of Christian Germans were exterminated...

This last link above is a sequestered Youtube video that documents the tribal final solution against the German people.

(01-02-2019 06:21 PM)scorpion Wrote:  "Why doesn't this well-known guy who is currently making millions of dollars destroy his career and reputation by coming out hard on the JQ? He's obviously a shill and a disinfo agent!" - Random anonymous person on an internet forum with no money, status or reputation at stake.

You're endorsing cowardice. It might be justified for an academic who wants a quiet life, but JP makes a living telling others how they should live.

And he did come out on the JQ. It was instant credibility death for him.

His argument was equivalent to saying that if 50% of people in Liechtensein smoke, and only 1% of people in China smoke, there are more smokers in Liechtenstein than China. That's how retarded his argument was.

He might still offer valuable life advice for some. But he has almost no intellectual value. There are too many other great men who wrote great books for him to ever compete on that level. Most of his success is due to his use of videos in a post-literate world.

I'm still amazed that men who have found RVF take life advice from a medicated Boomer. But self-improvement is self-improvement.

911, Western Europe wasn't the only theater. Tell the descendants of 27 million dead Russians that "Hitler was very lenient". Were the Einsatzgruppen misunderstood as well? I like you and you're often on point, but this shit is getting out of hand.

Despising Hitler and everything he stood for is not the same as white-bashing, as extremists like SS might have you believe. There's good reason why he's a reviled figure.

(01-22-2019 01:17 PM)Oak Wrote:  

(01-02-2019 06:21 PM)scorpion Wrote:  "Why doesn't this well-known guy who is currently making millions of dollars destroy his career and reputation by coming out hard on the JQ? He's obviously a shill and a disinfo agent!" - Random anonymous person on an internet forum with no money, status or reputation at stake.

You're endorsing cowardice. It might be justified for an academic who wants a quiet life, but JP makes a living telling others how they should live.

And he did come out on the JQ. It was instant credibility death for him.

His argument was equivalent to saying that if 50% of people in Liechtensein smoke, and only 1% of people in China smoke, there are more smokers in Liechtenstein than China. That's how retarded his argument was.

He might still offer valuable life advice for some. But he has almost no intellectual value. There are too many other great men who wrote great books for him to ever compete on that level. Most of his success is due to his use of videos in a post-literate world.

I'm still amazed that men who have found RVF take life advice from a medicated Boomer. But self-improvement is self-improvement.

These anti controlled opposition Jordanetics talking points are starting to sound coordinated themselves.

(01-22-2019 02:02 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 01:17 PM)Oak Wrote:  

(01-02-2019 06:21 PM)scorpion Wrote:  "Why doesn't this well-known guy who is currently making millions of dollars destroy his career and reputation by coming out hard on the JQ? He's obviously a shill and a disinfo agent!" - Random anonymous person on an internet forum with no money, status or reputation at stake.

You're endorsing cowardice. It might be justified for an academic who wants a quiet life, but JP makes a living telling others how they should live.

And he did come out on the JQ. It was instant credibility death for him.

His argument was equivalent to saying that if 50% of people in Liechtensein smoke, and only 1% of people in China smoke, there are more smokers in Liechtenstein than China. That's how retarded his argument was.

He might still offer valuable life advice for some. But he has almost no intellectual value. There are too many other great men who wrote great books for him to ever compete on that level. Most of his success is due to his use of videos in a post-literate world.

I'm still amazed that men who have found RVF take life advice from a medicated Boomer. But self-improvement is self-improvement.

These anti controlled opposition Jordanetics talking points are starting to sound coordinated themselves.

I've never read Jordanetics and I've never called him controlled opposition.

I can't find an argument here.

I'd actually be interested to know what JP's original ideas or arguments are that deserve this much admiration. Because at the moment I think it's just the fact that he mainly uses the medium of youtube rather than books. But I haven;t dedicated much time to the guy.

He seems to be at the level of the likes of Orwell/Nietszche/MarcusAurelius to you guys and I just don't get it.

There's always been something interesting about his ascent, especially given he's well-known among the mainstream.

Never saw this with Farrell, Buss, etc.

His big idea, as near as I can tell, is that the age of mechanized warfare and industrial-scale slaughterhouses like the holocaust, ideological and identitarian differences threaten mankind's very future. With all our technology it's easier to slaughter the "other" than it's ever been before, whether that other is jews in WW2, who he identifies as victims of the right, or dissidents under communism, who he identifies as victims of the left.

The cure he proposes is a kind of radical individualism: Don't join the left. Don't join the right. Don't identify yourself as white or black or part of any other ethnic group. You are you, a unique, sovereign individual, and your first and only responsibility is to yourself.

It's a bit of a shitty idea, but it does have the merit of being original.

(01-22-2019 11:55 AM)911 Wrote:  Henry Morgenthau's talmudic genocidal revenge on Germany

Any idea on how to watch this from within europe ?
It says "not available in your country domain".
My downloader tells me "This video can't be played here, but you can still watch it on YouTube."

(01-22-2019 03:26 PM)Oak Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:02 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 01:17 PM)Oak Wrote:  

(01-02-2019 06:21 PM)scorpion Wrote:  "Why doesn't this well-known guy who is currently making millions of dollars destroy his career and reputation by coming out hard on the JQ? He's obviously a shill and a disinfo agent!" - Random anonymous person on an internet forum with no money, status or reputation at stake.

You're endorsing cowardice. It might be justified for an academic who wants a quiet life, but JP makes a living telling others how they should live.

And he did come out on the JQ. It was instant credibility death for him.

His argument was equivalent to saying that if 50% of people in Liechtensein smoke, and only 1% of people in China smoke, there are more smokers in Liechtenstein than China. That's how retarded his argument was.

He might still offer valuable life advice for some. But he has almost no intellectual value. There are too many other great men who wrote great books for him to ever compete on that level. Most of his success is due to his use of videos in a post-literate world.

I'm still amazed that men who have found RVF take life advice from a medicated Boomer. But self-improvement is self-improvement.

These anti controlled opposition Jordanetics talking points are starting to sound coordinated themselves.

I'd actually be interested to know what JP's original ideas or arguments are that deserve this much admiration.

All you have to do is read this thread. But you knew that. And you aren't going to do it either.

Check bolded text.

That's how I know.

Character smears disguised as rational argument.

It is so boring by now.

That is why I grouped you in that crowd. You are in it.

You do get points for using character assassination and then accusing others of:

"Not an argument."

Have your fun.

People are smarter than you think.

That's it for me.

(Cowardice!)

Delete.

(01-22-2019 03:57 PM)Oberrheiner Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 11:55 AM)911 Wrote:  Henry Morgenthau's talmudic genocidal revenge on Germany

Any idea on how to watch this from within europe ?
It says "not available in your country domain".
My downloader tells me "This video can't be played here, but you can still watch it on YouTube."

Same video here, won't be up too long. It's a 7min overview of the genocidal plans for Germany, some of which were set up before WW2 even started:

(01-22-2019 02:00 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  911, Western Europe wasn't the only theater. Tell the descendants of 27 million dead Russians that "Hitler was very lenient". Were the Einsatzgruppen misunderstood as well? I like you and you're often on point, but this shit is getting out of hand.

Despising Hitler and everything he stood for is not the same as white-bashing, as extremists like SS might have you believe. There's good reason why he's a reviled figure.

The great majority of the Soviets killed died at the front, Stalin was all too happy sending out his masses to the slaughter by the millions because he purged the bulk of his officers, most of whom being nationalists who were not ideologically aligned with the communist regime.

The point I was making is that the Allies exterminated at least as many civilians and POWs as Hitler ever did. It's a valid one, if you're willing to examine history without the propaganda blinders.

(01-22-2019 04:16 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 03:26 PM)Oak Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:02 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 01:17 PM)Oak Wrote:  

(01-02-2019 06:21 PM)scorpion Wrote:  "Why doesn't this well-known guy who is currently making millions of dollars destroy his career and reputation by coming out hard on the JQ? He's obviously a shill and a disinfo agent!" - Random anonymous person on an internet forum with no money, status or reputation at stake.

You're endorsing cowardice. It might be justified for an academic who wants a quiet life, but JP makes a living telling others how they should live.

And he did come out on the JQ. It was instant credibility death for him.

His argument was equivalent to saying that if 50% of people in Liechtensein smoke, and only 1% of people in China smoke, there are more smokers in Liechtenstein than China. That's how retarded his argument was.

He might still offer valuable life advice for some. But he has almost no intellectual value. There are too many other great men who wrote great books for him to ever compete on that level. Most of his success is due to his use of videos in a post-literate world.

I'm still amazed that men who have found RVF take life advice from a medicated Boomer. But self-improvement is self-improvement.

These anti controlled opposition Jordanetics talking points are starting to sound coordinated themselves.

I'd actually be interested to know what JP's original ideas or arguments are that deserve this much admiration.

All you have to do is read this thread. But you knew that. And you aren't going to do it either.

Check bolded text.

That's how I know.

Character smears disguised as rational argument.

It is so boring by now.

That is why I grouped you in that crowd. You are in it.

You do get points for using character assassination and then accusing others of:

"Not an argument."

Have your fun.

People are smarter than you think.

That's it for me.

(Cowardice!)

But he has shown cowardice and is on psychiatric medication. Since he's telling other people how to behave, this seems very relevant to me.

The rest are arguments related to his intellectual value, not his character.

There's a world of extraordinary literature out there written by great men that you could be learning from. Men who went through siberian labour camps, orphaned as children, lived as a tramp in london and paris, traveled the world alone or fought in wars. They came through these experiences and wrote books for other men about what they learned. None of them went on antidepressants, their books are packed with original insights and they were generally redpilled on women.

As far as I am aware, JP has done nothing extraordinary, has shown character defects, is on psychoactive medication and is bluepilled on women. And you are choosing him as a guide in life. Not an average man on the street, but an RVFer.

And as far as I am aware he has no significant original ideas.

I still don't understand the infatuation.

I can only explain this as the power of youtube in an age when people no longer read.

(01-22-2019 01:17 PM)Oak Wrote:  

(01-02-2019 06:21 PM)scorpion Wrote:  "Why doesn't this well-known guy who is currently making millions of dollars destroy his career and reputation by coming out hard on the JQ? He's obviously a shill and a disinfo agent!" - Random anonymous person on an internet forum with no money, status or reputation at stake.

You're endorsing cowardice. It might be justified for an academic who wants a quiet life, but JP makes a living telling others how they should live.

Picking your battles wisely is not cowardice.

Quote:And he did come out on the JQ. It was instant credibility death for him.

In other words, instead of accepting that his position differs and taking up the challenge to counter his arguments, you go straight for the "discredit and disqualify" rhetoric taken right from the SJW playbook. This indicates you are engaged in primarily political gamesmanship not discussion, hence: debeguiled's observation.

Quote:His argument was equivalent to saying that if 50% of people in Liechtensein smoke, and only 1% of people in China smoke, there are more smokers in Liechtenstein than China. That's how retarded his argument was.

No, that is not what he said. Based on this: https://jordanbpeterson.com/psychology/o...-question/, his argument is a simplified version of the bell curve argument. It's the same thing that explains the complete lack of women at high levels in anything and the extreme rarity of some races in some fields or dominance in others. When you hit the extreme ends of the bell curve, population distortions can be very dramatic. For example, Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate long-distance running worldwide, despite being a relatively small population. I do vaguely recall that Alternative Hypothesis also did a counter-argument video about the math, but I don't remember the details.

More importantly, note that Peterson includes a full and decently-written response that brings up a number of points, while Peterson's counter-rebuttal ONLY addresses the mathematical criticism. He includes this opening statement from the critic:

Your argument is essentially that identity politics does matter not. But it does to Jews, who’s religion and ethnic identity are especially important to them. They even base their whole identity around their victimization in the past by gentiles (Romen Empire, Christians, the Holocaust). Yet, you’re trying to tell us those who play into identity politics are losers? That’s the first problem I’m seeing because even Jews don’t believe that.

But then does not even attempt a refutation. He just allows the idea to stand unchallenged. What should we think about that? If he was a nefarious no-credibility Jewish shill, why would he even print that paragraph? That's certainly what any dishonest media publisher would have done.

Because that's really the main issue at the end of the day. All this quibbling over whether there is a conspiracy or (statistically significant) nepotism among Jewish elite is missing the point that the over-representation exists and has risks and consequences that we should be allowed to talk about openly. JBP appears to have no response to the accusation that Jews like play identity politics with their own ethnicity.

(01-22-2019 03:45 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  His big idea, as near as I can tell, is that the age of mechanized warfare and industrial-scale slaughterhouses like the holocaust, ideological and identitarian differences threaten mankind's very future. With all our technology it's easier to slaughter the "other" than it's ever been before, whether that other is jews in WW2, who he identifies as victims of the right, or dissidents under communism, who he identifies as victims of the left.

The cure he proposes is a kind of radical individualism: Don't join the left. Don't join the right. Don't identify yourself as white or black or part of any other ethnic group. You are you, a unique, sovereign individual, and your first and only responsibility is to yourself.

It's a bit of a shitty idea, but it does have the merit of being original.

Does it? There's Randbots that have been saying the same thing for 50 years. Its a stick your neck in the sand philosophy.

Good luck preaching individualism to the new arrivals in the West. They may not have the high IQ that Peterson thinks in the panacea for everything. But they're smart enough to realize there's strength in numbers.

(01-22-2019 09:46 PM)Trumpian Wrote:  Good luck preaching individualism to the new arrivals in the West. They may not have the high IQ that Peterson thinks in the panacea for everything. But they're smart enough to realize there's strength in numbers.

He doesn't seem to preach it to the new arrivals. It seems to be entirely directed at whites.
That might just be because very few minorities are, for whatever reason, interested in talky youtube dudes, so his audience is mostly white. But it's true nonetheless.

(01-22-2019 10:16 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 09:46 PM)Trumpian Wrote:  Good luck preaching individualism to the new arrivals in the West. They may not have the high IQ that Peterson thinks in the panacea for everything. But they're smart enough to realize there's strength in numbers.

He doesn't seem to preach it to the new arrivals. It seems to be entirely directed at whites.
That might just be because very few minorities are, for whatever reason, interested in talky youtube dudes, so his audience is mostly white. But it's true nonetheless.

Right, and the irony is off the charts with that observation.

He preaches individualism to the one segment of the population that will entertain the idea whilst that segment gets out-bred and displaced by tribalist 3rd worlders.

You can't separate a fool from his folly.

There's a reason Peterson's talks veer into religion, because fundamentally his stances are those of the martyr.

Yes, you will be swamped, displaced and perhaps enslaved or butchered, but you will be morally in the right!

If you said to Jesus "dude, all that stuff ain't gonna keep you off the cross" he'd fail to see your point. For him and a lot of people, ending up on the cross is not a bug, it's a feature. Their tune will probably change when the nails start going in, but by then it hardly matters.

And that's why I don't trust Christians.

They welcome defeat and hardships in this life for rewards in another. Christ was the original cuck. The Jews wouldnt have any of his bend the knee nonsense, and that's why they're still a people despite being stateless for 2,000 years. I respect them for that.

(01-23-2019 02:45 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  There's a reason Peterson's talks veer into religion, because fundamentally his stances are those of the martyr.

Yes, you will be swamped, displaced and perhaps enslaved or butchered, but you will be morally in the right!

If you said to Jesus "dude, all that stuff ain't gonna keep you off the cross" he'd fail to see your point. For him and a lot of people, ending up on the cross is not a bug, it's a feature. Their tune will probably change when the nails start going in, but by then it hardly matters.

2017/06/15: 12 principles for a 21st century conservatism

Quote:1. The fundamental assumptions of Western civilization are valid.

2. Peaceful social being is preferable to isolation and to war. In consequence, it justly and rightly demands some sacrifice of individual impulse and idiosyncrasy.

3. Hierarchies of competence are desirable and should be promoted.

4. Borders are reasonable. Likewise, limits on immigration are reasonable. Furthermore, it should not be assumed that citizens of societies that have not evolved functional individual-rights predicated polities will hold values in keeping with such polities.

5. People should be paid so that they are able and willing to perform socially useful and desirable duties.

6. Citizens have the inalienable right to benefit from the result of their own honest labor.

7. It is more noble to teach young people about responsibilities than about rights.

8. It is better to do what everyone has always done, unless you have some extraordinarily valid reason to do otherwise.

9. Radical change should be viewed with suspicion, particularly in a time of radical change.

10. The government, local and distal, should leave people to their own devices as much as possible.

11. Intact heterosexual two-parent families constitute the necessary bedrock for a stable polity.

12. We should judge our political system in comparison to other actual political systems and not to hypothetical utopias.

Is he meant to be giving viable suggestions for dealing with the current situation or is this basically him suggesting that people larp as 1950's Americans?

(01-23-2019 08:19 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Is he meant to be giving viable suggestions for dealing with the current situation or is this basically him suggesting that people larp as 1950's Americans?

Do you know what principles are and how they are intended to be used?

"The fundamental assumptions of western civilization are valid."
"Borders are reasonable."
"Follow tradition, unless you have a good reason not to."
"People should be paid."


Bold stances for a bold mind.

(01-23-2019 10:10 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(01-23-2019 08:19 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Is he meant to be giving viable suggestions for dealing with the current situation or is this basically him suggesting that people larp as 1950's Americans?

Do you know what principles are and how they are intended to be used?

Sure.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Principles. They're not solutions and living by them at this stage of history will result in you being put on the cross with the rest of history's losers (Christ was nowhere near the only person to be crucified).

So I ask again. Is Peterson offering anything that isn't a boomer's guide to ethnic and civilizational martyrdom?

I mean, it's his prerogative and the prerogative of his adherents to martyr themselves, but I'm just saying that if he's presenting some options that don't involve martyrdom I'd sure like to hear them.

Here's an example:

Quote:1. The fundamental assumptions of Western civilization are valid and they must be upheld against competing assumptions by any means necessary.

2. Peaceful social being is preferable to isolation and to war. In consequence, it justly and rightly demands some sacrifice of individual impulse and idiosyncrasy. But inevitable war must be identified, prepared for and fought without remorse.

3. Hierarchies of competence are desirable and should be promoted. Laws which prevent this should be rebelled against and ignored where possible.

4. Borders are reasonable. Likewise, limits on immigration are reasonable. Furthermore, it should not be assumed that citizens of societies that have not evolved functional individual-rights predicated polities will hold values in keeping with such polities. If such people exist in numbers large enough to meaningfully tip democratic outcomes then secession of heritage citizens should be the foremost strategy.

5. People should be paid so that they are able and willing to perform socially useful and desirable duties.Not even bothering with this. Duh

6. Citizens have the inalienable right to benefit from the result of their own honest labor. They therefore have the inalienable right to fight by any means necessary against communism regardless of whether communism is arrived at democratically.
...

You get it? Principles have gotten us from where we were when Peterson was a boy to where we are now, and the people that upheld them are about to become a minority.

What are Peterson's principles other than martyrdom if not premised against repercussions for infringing against them?

In other words, in response to all of those principles he's given above let me ask the one question of real relevance.

"...OR WHAT?"

So, if I just want to talk about things Peterson has done or said that I like, should I take it to the Jordan Peterson Political Thread?