[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 262 KB, 1200x1684, 9E54A1EC-0FC3-4CED-B38D-1AA419F3CA29.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14618610 No.14618610 [Reply] [Original]

Thoughts on this guy?

>> No.14618634

>>14618610
I think a thread died for this

>> No.14618642

homosexual in denial

>> No.14618696

>>14618610
Brilliant guy, but confused. He doesn't even know how to answer if he believes in the existence of God. I learned a lot from him by reading his books and watching his lectures, but it has become obvious that his reluctance to ground his "belief" is the cause of his instability in thought.

Do you believe in God?
>Well, that depends on what you mean by God and believe.

>> No.14618704

The big gay.

>> No.14618735

Sophist, lunatic, thought you could understand Marxism by reading Communist manifesto

>> No.14619869

>>14618735
He has also been given two years to address the Holodomor question, yet has failed to do so.

>> No.14620093

>>14618696
>it has become obvious that his reluctance to ground his "belief" is the cause of his instability in thought.
nothing to do with benzos?

>> No.14620333

>>14618735
>t. Chapodrone

Not that you're wrong, but still

>> No.14620342

lobsters
seems legit

>> No.14620357

Poor guy, I feel bad for him

>> No.14620456

>>14620093
In thought, not in emotion.

>> No.14620461

>>14618696
He's only a cultural christian or whatever.

>> No.14620480

>>14618610
jungian pervert. his bible lecture series is a fucking travesty. he takes something sacred and pushes it through his cheese-headed sieve and completely neuters it and removes any nuance or context. he's the kind of guy who would say Jesus was just another bodhisattva. he's a hack who very frequently talks outside of his depth. he should *only* be listened to when he's talking about clinical psychology issues. nothing else. also he's a pussy who cries a lot.

>> No.14620498

>>14618610
"I can't do it."

>> No.14620508

>>14618610
His views are possibly much more radical than he lets on. He's a university professor with a family who has a constant media target on his back. When he nearly got fired simply for taking a basic conservative stance on pronouns, there's no way he'd dare put forward his more contrarian ideas. He's both smart enough and has motivation not to, plus he's very careful and guarded with his words (See any question regarding his belief in God). So when he talks about his "classical liberalism" and refers to modern liberalism in exclusively positive terms, I'm highly skeptical that reflects his actual beliefs. One of Peterson's biggest influences is Mircea Eliade, who, for those unaware, ran in the same circles as Schmitt and De Benoist, and himself influenced by Spengler and Evola. There's also this quote from his earlier book (which I have yet to read fully, but it is one of many similar I assume)“Prior to the time of Descartes, Bacon and Newton, man lived in an animated, spiritual world, saturated with meaning, imbued with moral purpose. The nature of this purpose was revealed in the stories people told each other—stories about the structure of the cosmos, and the place of man. But now we think empirically (at least we think we think empirically), and the spirits that once inhabited the universe have vanished."So when Peterson sounds like Steven Pinker droning on and on about the glories of the enlightenment, he is at least aware and sympathetic to the other side of the equation.


On another tangent, he's interesting because what the media reports him as, and what his fanbase follows him as, are 2 different things. From what I've seen, his fans seem to be more into the self-help 12 rules stuff than the political aspect, and thats probably where he is most influential. As far as that side of him goes, the best I can say about it is that he is promoting the best kind of individualism. Be courageous, take responsibility for yourself and others, pursue what is meaningful, etc. On the flip side, he preaches a weird mix of stoicism and existentialism that can help you get through everyday life, but is wholly inadequate for when life truly comes crashing down, and from my Christian viewpoint, is utterly powerless to redeem your fallen soul. Overall I think he's a good influence on most of his fans though

>> No.14620598

I think Peterson is either a hypocrite or a coward, he seems way more socially conservative than he explicitly admits but he never actually says it, he likes to weasel out of arguments. The alt-lite does that all the time, they hide their more traditionalist views by paying lip service to liberal values.

>> No.14620699

>>14619869
What has to be adressed from the holodomor? A famine made up by the soviets to kill ukrainians. Is there some things you want him to add or to explain?

>> No.14620712

>>14620508
I have read your lines. And I agree with you young man.

>> No.14620738

Don't believe the lies of the crypto-stoic.

>> No.14621468

>>14620699
He refuses to acknowledge how it was administered by Soviet Jewry, and the evil hypocrisy of Jews bemoaning the Holocaust while ignoring the Holocaust they perpetrated.

>> No.14621480

*sweet dreams are made of these*

>> No.14621498

pseud

>> No.14621500

>>14620480
You Christards should be grateful that you have even one half assed "intellectual" whose even trying to defend your ideology.
If it wasnt for JP the New Atheists would have taken over by now

>> No.14621504

>>14620333
Hardly Chapo drone. If you're an academic i expect higher discourse from someone arguing against an idea than reading the basic formulation of it if that. Especially when you're representing yourself as some kind of expert

>> No.14621507

>>14618735
Why do Communists hate the Communist Manifesto so much?

>> No.14621555

>>14620508
>there's no way he'd dare put forward his more contrarian ideas.
Is it possible to know what ideas?

>> No.14621571

>>14618610
He's a lazy ideologue. Show's up for Zizek
"debate" having not even read or done any
prep. How can a guy be anti Marxist and
never read Marx? And his understanding of
post modernism is informed by one self published book of pure hackery. Peterson's
15 minutes is finally up.

>> No.14621579

>>14621571
But he's still more influential on the majority than any Academic Philosopher alive at the moment.
Really says a lot about the Society we live in

>> No.14621590

>>14621507
Because unlike The Capital, it clearly lays out their goals without any obfuscation. And it is grim.

>> No.14621600

>>14618610
I liked him when he was popular 2 years ago. He hasn't really done or said anything new since then so I've kind of forgotten about him until I see the daily thread about him on /lit/. He has a lot of useful things to say, but I can't help feeling that there is something missing about most of the points he makes. It's like they're half truths, like he's on the right track but doesn't quite get there.

I think others are right when they say his brand of stoicism is unsustainable. It's useful for getting yourself psyched up about trying to get ur shit together but there is a human element missing. Again, it's like a half truth. I get that life is hard and we all suffer but shouldn't there be more than suffering? Maybe a reprieve? IDK, all I know is that his brand of stoicism isn't for me, I need more from life, or else why not just kill myself with drugs and alcohol? There needs to be something like God's mercy or whatever. IDK, DFW seems to be more my kind of stoicism (depressed and withdrawn), shame how that whole thing turned out for him.

I liked when he debated Sam Harris about God because it demonstrated that both of them don't really know shit about God other than the usual talking points; it made me feel better about myself, lol. His personality lectures are what hooked me, the bible analysis is what turned me off. It's like he appreciates the bible but has never been to church. His interpretation is way too reductionist and he seems to miss one side of the story because he's so transfixed on making his point and making sure you see his interpretation. I do like how he weasels out of the 'do you believe in God' question by replying 'I believe that you should act as if God is real'. I almost feel like if he straight up said that he does believe then he would be in a much better place to turn half truths into more complete truths. But he would also lose like 70-90% of his followers, so there's that.

All around, he's a pretty good guy who seems to actually care for people, I just wish he would say something new.

>> No.14621602

>>14621579
Peterson is not a philosopher. he's one tier above The Secret.

>> No.14621607

>>14618610
he embarrasses himself whenever it comes to the jq

>> No.14621618
File: 1007 KB, 1064x1513, 1580215748342.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14621618

>>14618610
Refuted by the based monkeyman.

>> No.14621636
File: 56 KB, 509x339, 1579061242025.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14621636

>>14620480
>he should *only* be listened to when he's talking about clinical psychology issues.
And even then clinical psychology has been retroactively refuted by Guenon (pbuh), so Peterson becomes (as in 'becoming' which was also refuted by Guenon (pbuh)) completely irrelevant.

>> No.14621657

>>14621618
you know i've never been able to determine what puts me off about these guys but now i see, it's the /sentimentality/ coupled with rational thought.

>> No.14621660

>>14621657
Or the fact that they are all Jews? Except Peterson who still has a Jewish wife

>> No.14621661

>>14621657
>i've never been able to determine what puts me off about these guys but now i see
Based. Guenon enligthened me on this question too. It's like he was literally looking at this picture while writing that passage.

>> No.14621801
File: 112 KB, 992x1235, 1576593752228.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14621801

>>14618610
Unironically based. He genuinely doesn't deserve the hate he gets, although the criticism that he veers off into territory he shouldn't be with regards to his dismissal of "postmodern neomarxism" and 20th century continental philosophy is reasonable.

I don't get the neocon fascination with Peterson. They wouldn't be enamored with him if he wasn't engaged in BTFOing feminists / queer theorists on occasion and they actually engaged with his work. He actively espouses personal responsibility and dismissal of equity but if his shallow conservativism guzzling fanbase would pull their head out of their ass they'd realize that's about the only points they converge on.

Maps of Meaning is dense and terse but interesting. It really doesn't require much background knowledge beyond the hero's journey and maybe some Jungian concepts, though I'd definitely recommend listening to his lectures beforehand. His personality lectures are especially relevant (and arguably easier to digest because he's extremely enthusiastic about his work)

12 Rules for Life is better dismissed for anyone seeking a more intellectually heavy work, however. You can gleam everything in 12R from MoM.

>> No.14621997

>>14621801
Maps of meaning is a joke. Genuinely what a 14 year old who read Nietzsche and Jung twice.

Word salad designed to be obscure so that people who want to defer to an authority will follow along and no real ideas can be pinned down.

You fell for it my dude. Sad.

>> No.14622001

>>14621801
>Maps of Meaning
Explain its main 'message'/'meaning' in your own words in a couple of paragraphs. I'll wait...

>> No.14622046

>>14618610
is really good when it comes to jungian psychology/mythology. i think there is a lot to be learned from him, and despite him being (somewhat understandably) labeled as the 'epic postmodernist libs OWNED' guy, i think he has great ideas on the forming of values in humans as well as the banality of nihilism

>> No.14622068

>>14622046
Name one thing to be learned from him that isn't a very straightforward truism that can be found in a plethora of self-help/pop philosophy books.

>> No.14622134

>>14622001
I got you.

The phenomenological world is constructed in a narrative fashion, with you as the actor moving toward a goal. Affect toward events/objects is regulated with regards to how they affect your progression or perceived progression towaed the goal in question. This matches the structure of the "hero" myth theme that's persistent across cultures.

Religious traditions are developed in a pseudo evolutionary manner and are "unarticulated" expressions of the way your unconscious perceives the world. Furthermore they elaborate on what consitiutes, generally speaking, functional behavior.

Succinctly, the way we perceive the world is fundamentally motivated and is isomorphic to the hero myth. Peterson posits that we've deviated from this mode of though - and rightly so, as semantic articulation and the scientific method vastly outdo the religious modes of thinking in immediate efficiency of getting us toward desired goals - but that we shouldn't entirely disregard it because it describes how we construct functional societies and regulate ourselves psychologically.

I won't go into the nitty gritty of the diagrams on the structure of myths since that's not too-too relevant to my summary, but they are comprehencible within the theory if you're willing to read the context.

>> No.14622152

>>14622134
A worldview a somewhat inquisitive 14 year old could come up with after reading Joseph Campbell.

Along with honestly shocking psuedo deep aphorisms like

'the future is the place for all potential monsters' in it.

>> No.14622176
File: 435 KB, 488x433, 1580217700835.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14622176

>>14622134
>Religious traditions are developed in a pseudo evolutionary manner and are "unarticulated" expressions of the way your unconscious perceives the world.
So Peterson is a pseud. This notion was retroactively refuted by Guenon.

>> No.14622186

>>14622152
It's a metaphor you redditspacing pseud fuck

>> No.14622190
File: 31 KB, 580x627, bde.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14622190

>>14622152
>'the future is the place for all potential monsters' in it.

>> No.14622196

>>14622134
>the way we perceive the world is fundamentally motivated and is isomorphic to the hero myth
Prove it.

>> No.14622215

>>14622186
No it's not. It's a statement. Other than the colouring of 'bad people' into 'monsters' it's just a statement

The future is the place for all potential anything. Just fyi.

Honestly sad.

>> No.14622217

>>14622152
I haven't seen any 14 year old make a book like that yet. I still hold it's an interesting idea worth looking into if anyone's interested in Jung and comparative mythology. But to be fair the book can be condensed into an essay so it's probably best served as a catalyst for someone with more insight to pick up the Jungian tradition. I think Camille Paglia was onto something similar, but her work is more oriented toward conservative feminism.

>> No.14622284

>>14622134
>Religious traditions are developed in a pseudo evolutionary manner and are "unarticulated" expressions of the way your unconscious perceives the world. Furthermore they elaborate on what consitiutes, generally speaking, functional behavior.
What a cringe modernistic bugman-tier understanding of religion and tradition.

>> No.14622292

>>14622217
>I haven't seen any 14 year old make a book like that yet.
Because even 14 year olds would have enough sense to just repost it onto their myspace and forget about it, instead of writing a whole pseudointellectual "book".
>interested in Jung and comparative mythology
Why would anyone be interested in subjects wholly devoid of all meaning and value?
>Jungian tradition
Contradiction in terms.

>> No.14622305

>>14622215
Monsters is obviously being used in a much broader sense than 'bad people', you are genuinely an idiot and should not be criticizing anybody.

>> No.14622310
File: 152 KB, 316x317, 1436285050435.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14622310

>>14622217
>woman
>oriented toward conservative feminism
>was onto something

>> No.14622322

>>14622305
This! Fuck those theist monsters who want to establish traditional morality!

>> No.14622333

>>14622292
>Why would anyone be interested in subjects wholly devoid of all meaning and value?
Elaborate

>> No.14622343

>>14621507
they don't, it's just that it's a tiny pamphlet that pseuds skim read to pretend to understand Marx

>> No.14622360

>>14622343
They hate it because it directly contradicts their lies about Marx just describing capitalism. It shows that it was obviously a morally weighted issue for him.

>> No.14622366

>>14622333
>Jung
Jung is a pseudointellectual who was retroactively refuted by Guénon. Read his book "East and West" where he dismantles and obliterates rationalism and sentimentalism, showing them to be in fact the same thing. See >>14621618 for a quote from it. Haven't read his book on theosophy and other pseudo-religions yet, but I'm sure he BTFOs Jung in that too.
>comparative mythology
Comparative mythology operates 'from the outside' and takes a reductionist and modernistic viewpoint on mythology, thus robbing the subject of literally all deeper meaning and significance.

>> No.14622374

>>14622284
If you'd bother to think for more than a nanosecond you'd take this as evidence for a religious tradition that's not merely material. Coincidence between tradition and psychology could be read as more than just an evolutionary principle. The question remains, if the coincidence has merit, why there would be such a structure to begin with. This runs back to the question of why there's something rather than nothing, etc.

>> No.14622379

>>14622305
>'it's actually even less specific than bad'

Be precise with your speech indeed, Jordan.

getting sadder.

I'll leave you there my guy

>> No.14622387

>>14622366
That comparative mythology is even a field of study is indicative of a perennial tradition. It robs it from spiritual value 'within the field', so to speak, but cannot say anything for what experiential value those findings have.

>> No.14622396

>>14622379
If you're too dumb to translate the concept of a monster from mythology to mean 'horrifying obstacle to be dealt with/avoided' then you should in fact leave me here until you advance beyond 5th grade reading comprehension.

>> No.14622429

>>14621555
He's probably more traditionalist when it comes to gender roles and I'd bet that he admonishes casual sex a lot more than he leads on.

>> No.14623317

Boring. The Satanic Bible contains the same information, is funnier, just as stupid, has less Christian agenda, and after I read it I got to hit on hot metal/goth chicks. After Peterson, the only people you get to hit on are bitter, paranoid incel guys and school shooter nazis, and I’m not a fag.

>> No.14623325

>>14622360
> t. Retardposter

>> No.14623742

>>14618704
4 you

>> No.14624107

>>14623317
>dude sex
ok

>> No.14624123

He's based
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8-cjd5cdIU

>> No.14624448

he talks like he always needs to clear his throat

>> No.14626024

>>14618610
Some people read way too much into specific things he says, to extrapolate some "definitive" wrong hes made, and pretend they've utterly destroyed everything hes discussed and believes, to prove their limp dick intellectual might

Others, not enough, and half ass any defense they might have, or will simply straw man because they think they know better

Some, having taken a single philosophy class before they dropped out of college, name check a franco fuck turned sand nigger, that unironically used islamic faith to "critique" philosophers of the past and of his time

None have the track record he has because anybody with that kind of history, is helping people instead of jerking themselves off on the internet

Was kind of interesting, but after his wife developed cancer, it definitely showed in his work and this might be the death of his career. And now people are using the fact that despite the fact he had to take medication just to function, as some sort of magic bullet, despite the fact that he's still a practising clinical psychologist that has recommended people take medicine, if they truly need it

pol niggers loathe him because he hates Marxism in all its forms, and yet never name checks the jews

Faux intellectuals loathe him because he hates Marxism in all its forms, and they are so beyond taking it up the ass, they suck off their politics and excuses for being life long failures, from a long since dead, genocidal hypocrite, which ironically is the same for the pol niggers

People who want to like him, and what he stands for, have ample reason to like him

People who dont have ample "reason" to dislike him

The fact that people are more open to his kind of long form, meaningful conversations, though, has been one of the best things to happen in a long time

Definitely has not had the roght kind of conversations in a long time, though, which is definitely a consequence of going mainstream, and perpetually having the same conversation with everybody he meets, because society has regressed to the point where they dont even have the foundation for a discussion any deeper

>> No.14626232

Has intelligent things to say about psychology. existentialism, pessimism
Soon as he starts talking politics or religion he is out of his element, inauthentic and pandering

>> No.14627626

He seems like he would post here.

>> No.14628198

>>14618696
Hes already made it clear precisely why he has trouble claiming belief in God. Belief manifests in action, therefore to belief in God one must act out their belief in full. He does not believe in publicly declaring his belief for this reason. Hes also made it clear that the question is private anyway and the only people who want him to are just ignorant and want an answer to satisfy them.

>> No.14628209

>>14618610
yet another tyrant of one of our many new microecologies in which braindead rapists rape each other producing yet more braindead rapists and when they need someone other than their cokehead rapist father to inspire them they look to this fucking idiot

>> No.14628210

>>14620480
Make an example or stop ruining the quality of this board with non-discussible bullshit

>> No.14628317

>>14621600
Peterson isnt a stoic and doesnt promote stoicism. I've heard him give advice about time management and when describing a schedule he said something like "a schedule is a friend and not your tyrant, you use it to plan a day youd like to have or one that would be good for you rather than to lay out unrealistic task-completion expectations". He teaches people how to maximize their productivity in a manner that's adapted to their temperament. He also says things like "when you do things you know you shouldn't be doing, you're acting out a lie", which should get you off your ass if you take it seriously unless it doesnt bother you, but if thsts the case his message of responsibility wouldnt resonate with you anyway.

The idea of the meaning of life being directly proportionate to the amount of responsibility one chooses to adopt isnt even a stoic message. First of all it's a fact but secondly, one could adopt maximum responsibility and never live up to it completely and they'd still receive the same level of meaning, just some of that meaning would manifest as shame. Adopting maximum responsibility has nothing to do with living like a stoic, it's about having enough humility to recognize the distance between you and God.

>> No.14628373

>>14628210
Don't cry... like your replacement dad.

>> No.14628388

>>14622379
Monsters are threats that lurk in unknown spaces. That's actually more specific than bad. The difference is that "bad" only has meaning relative to whatever state the "bad thing" negatively affects, so people can disagree on what constitutes as "bad", unlike "threat", which is an objective term that corresponds to the world more consistently as it does not depend on antibodies interests.

>> No.14628413

>>14628373
Actually my replacement dad was a psychopathic narcissist who beat the shit out of me every day for 12 years so I've learned to stop crying thanks. I bet you'd fold faster than receipt paper in the wind you ignorant fuck.

>> No.14628550

>>14626232
Hes been talking about religion and politics for about 20 years now so its kind of hard to accept a take like that. Do you have examples of him speaking in a manner that indicates hes out of his territory?

>> No.14628653

>>14622176
Then why dont you summarize what he said and contribute to the conversation instead of calling people pseuds

>> No.14628668

>>14618696
It is pretty much impossible for anyone to accept truth who has married and bred with a jew. He's smart enough to see it, but his poor life choices make it hard to swallow. He knows about Solzhenitsyn's work "200 years together" and the proof that the Jews orchestrated communist, the world wars, etc. But he has to cope with having a jew wife and jew kids.

>> No.14628688

>>14628668
It's not impossible at all. In fact I'd say people are more prone to disowning their own spouse than to contradicting the orthodoxy on things like the jq. Accepting Solzhenitsyn's line about jews is in any case not all that radical. Much more "culture of critique' than 'mein kampf'.

>> No.14628708

>>14628413
he sounds based desu, too bad his kid's a faggot

>> No.14628710

>>14618610
A shallow thinker. Read one good book in your life.

>> No.14628750

charlatan

>> No.14628771

>>14628688
> I'd say people are more prone to disowning their own spouse than to contradicting the orthodoxy on things like the jq

Maybe, but this has nothing to do with JBP. The way that intelligent people deal with the world and the way normies deal with it is completely different. JBP has a high IQ, he knows how to detect liars, deconstruct arguments, question evidence, etc. No one like this can sustain a belief in the holohoax after having seen the evidence. Some midwit with a 115 IQ might not be able to sort through all the facts and just stick with what they are taught as a child, but Peterson doesn't have that luxury.

You can't start trying to analyze his life choices based on normative behavior when he falls on one end of the bell curve. It's no more useful or honest than trying to attribute deep philosophical motivations to a mentally retarded person.

>> No.14628814

>>14628771
It constantly surprises me that people think like you.

>> No.14628909

>>14628771
High IQ people are no less prone to believing bullshit, they might honestly be more so. And you overstate the case about the Holocaust. Whatever the particulars the Nazis still wanted the Jews out of the country, so the basic conflict is still right there, regardless of which sources of information you trust about death counts and intent. Everybody agrees that the Nazis sent the Jews to the camps at least, I think that further discussion of whether they were killed is practically besides the point. Genocide and exile are rather geopolitically similar.

>> No.14628911

>>14620508
>One of Peterson's biggest influences is Mircea Eliade, who, for those unaware, ran in the same circles as Schmitt and De Benoist, and himself influenced by Spengler and Evola. There's also this quote from his earlier book (which I have yet to read fully, but it is one of many similar I assume)“Prior to the time of Descartes, Bacon and Newton, man lived in an animated, spiritual world, saturated with meaning, imbued with moral purpose. The nature of this purpose was revealed in the stories people told each other—stories about the structure of the cosmos, and the place of man. But now we think empirically (at least we think we think empirically), and the spirits that once inhabited the universe have vanished
So he compares the literate Platonic West with the older Mycenaean-Homeric world?
McLuhan is more critical:
>Before writing was invented, man lived in acoustic space: boundless, directionless, horizon less, in the dark of the mind, in the world of emotion.

>> No.14628998

>>14618696
>>14620461
>>14628198
it's a weak form/a poor interpretation of pascal's wager in which the said subject follows a very shallow and pathetic form of Imitatio Christi combined with narcissism. peterson is playing a game of fear and weak will, he's trying to follow a certain line of 'le rationality first'. too afraid to step below the line into 'complete evil' because God might exist and punish him, too weak to go above the line into 'complete goodness' because it would require to give up his neuroticism (which he unconsciously loves), narcissism, love for his whore daughter, family and such.

>> No.14629011

>>14628909
>High IQ people are no less prone to believing bullshit

This is complete nonsense. There is a window on the bell curve where you get more bullshit, the "over-educated" idiot phenomena, around 110-125 IQ or so. That's true, but Peterson is substantially smarter than this. Your average university professor? Their brain is overburdened with bullshit, I'll grant you that. Several decades of Marxist policy has pushed many geniuses out of the academy and replaced them with the midwits undoubtedly. None of this applies to the tail of the bell curve where JBP is however.

>And you overstate the case about the Holocaust.

Nah, you just believe a bunch of nonsense that isn't true. The Jews instigated both world wars. If anything, their treatment by the Nazis was excessively generous, better than the Japs got it in America even. At the end of the war a lot of them got sick and died and starved, but the same is true of everyone in Germany, not just in the camps. The holocaust is a total, complete fabrication.

>> No.14629095

>>14629011
Marxism is good tho

>> No.14629103

>>14629011
You are legitimately crazy aren't you?

>> No.14629115

>>14629095
>>14629011
Ah I kept reading your post and it turns out my assumption that you are probably retarded was correct.

>> No.14629122

>>14629011
I tend to agree that Marxism is full of bullshit, although it's not entirely so. The point is that Marx and many Marxists clearly had genius level IQs so by your own standards this is contradicting your theory.(and if you're Marxist you have to admit that say Libertarians like Mises were genius level IQ as well)

As for the Holocaust you seem to have missed my point. The details of the camps literally don't matter, they change nothing about the fundamental conflict between Jews and gentiles.

>> No.14629229

>>14629122
There are some very smart "Marxists" but they are not true believers. Marx and Engels for instance were given refuge in London and the support of New York financiers because their program was designed to undermine the economy in continental Europe. The financial sea powers felt threatened by both Russia and Germany. So the "smart Marxist" can be understood in the sense, that is, someone pretending to be a Marxist but actually an ideological subversive running a limited hangout. As far as intelligent true believers? No, I don't think so. I've never met one.

>The details of the camps literally don't matter, they change nothing about the fundamental conflict between Jews and gentiles.

I'd say, for example, the details of the camps shift substantially the perception of moral behavior in the conflict. It isn't true that the details don't matter here for a variety of such reasons.

>> No.14629504

>>14628998
this

>> No.14629766

>>14626024
Based