Dr. Jordan Peterson Queens speech interrupted

[slmmdtruck05]

What is happening on college campuses???? I just finished watching the speech Dr. Peterson gave at Queens university. Was expecting the typical brilliance and incredible insight one would expect from Jordan...until about ten minutes in when the 'protesters' broke in and interrupted the event. If you haven't seen this take the time to watch it. Over an hour of these people banging on windows and blowing air horns and chanting like possessed monkeys. They actually broke several of the beautiful stained-glass windows. Is this sort of thing common at many universities? Who here is currently a student? Is speech going to continue to be effective to combat this hatred going forward? Please share your thought on this.

 

[Mjquigley92]

I know here in the states, barricading any door of a public building is a serious felony.  Would I have gone to jail in Canada had I defended the property of the university by restraining the person who broke the window or those barricading the doors?

[Dylan Lawrence Moore]

That's pretty mild compared to the Milo protests.

[Donnadogsoth]

The perils of radical Individualism.  If Peterson could nurture his inner Collectivist he might accrue a dedicated youth movement that would spontaneously relocate the disruptive gentlemen in question and allow him to speak uninterrupted.

[barn]

[excerpt from the description of the video]

[...] "The 900 or so people who attended (who comported themselves admirably and thoughtfully throughout) were subject to a continual 90-minute barrage of noise generated by the protestors, who leaped up on the stained glass windows lining the hall and banged continually on them, breaking one. Inside, we could see shadowy figures dimly outlined through the colored glass. The outside doors were barricaded. One protestor was caught on film saying "Lock them in and burn it down." The din was substantial and ominous, although it is much attenuated in this video, due to the nature of the microphones used, which were designed to pick up speech close at hand. " [...]

" No one who was at this event will forget it.

Not good. Not good at all. " [...]

 

There are these 'flash-like' moments in life (akin to : The Devil's Advocate, Al Pacino, Keanu Reeves - elevator scene) when I have trouble telling my mind that seeing demons is not necessarily an only religious experience.

There's for sure another few thousands, hundreds of thousands people (millions over time, hundreds of millions perhaps) now in the world since then, contemplating in their deepest cellars of their minds, how should these imagery be interpreted as.

No doubt about it, they look like demons, sound like demons... are they demons, really?

[Donnadogsoth]

"Lock them in and burn it down."

 

Isn't self-deception a demonic trait?  So, are they being serious, or are they being aye-ronnick?  Can they even tell the difference?  Do they not know that that is how atrocities start?  Do they care?  Do they relish the prospect?  There must be some commissars among them, herding them, whipping them on.  They appear to be soulless creatures, incommunicado with the phallologoic world, without an inner "I" to restrain them from total irrationality and the violence that that leads to.  What does make them, then?

[barn]

I don't believe for a second that the people outside didn't commit fully to chaos, disarray.

They knew what they were doing to a certain degree and what's worse they were are also fully conscious that it was only... barely 'explainable' (not moral) 'to JUST a certain degree'.

When a critical mass is achieved, it no longer matters how it came about but where does it lead to and how quickly/slowly.

So much has been forgotten, a little bit more remembering could do 'wonders'.

Edited March 20, 2018 by barn
clarifying (a tad bit)

[SnapSlav]

20 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

Isn't self-deception a demonic trait?  So, are they being serious, or are they being aye-ronnick?  Can they even tell the difference?

Poe's Law is all about the satire being indistinguishable from that which it is satirizing. It comments on how ridiculous that which is being satirized is, despite being its legitimate claim. So these people are not being ironic, they are genuinely that ridiculous. Having grown up and been through American public education, both "before" it got bad, and returned to see what the college system had become "after" getting bad, I can say that these kids sincerely believe that EVERYTHING they're doing is just. They just don't realize that they're the violent ones, that they're the intolerant ones, that they're the evil ones. That's a huge reason for why I say that ignorance is the root of all evil, because these people are willfully ignoring ideas that could help them; they had to ignore to become what they are, and it is evil.

Teachers were always insisting how evil the Nazis were, and they always called them Nazis, they only ever said what the nickname stemmed from a couple times, and most students almost immediately forgot it. They gave the students the ammunition, but never taught them how to maintain the rifle (to be briefly metaphoric). I can still remember a particular day in my freshman writing class when I was in high school- now decades ago (:shudders: Tempus Fugit, amirite?) -where the teacher introduced the concept of relativism vs universalism, and the phrase she gave as an example of these terms put into use were "it's all relative". INSTANTLY, whenever students were called on to address a question, and they didn't have a good answer, when the teacher pressed them, they smirked and said "it's all relative", and the class would laugh, and the student would give that wide shit-eating grin of someone who knew they'd gotten away with something bad, yet they were sincere. These kids latched onto the concept of relativism and used it as an escape from critical thinking from that day onward, because they saw an easy out. They didn't realize they were cheating themselves out of greater understanding, or that they were headed down a dark path that leads to much of where we are today, but they saw something that they liked, and they embraced it.

The ones at these protests? They are these kids, years later, having metastasized their ideological cancer to the point that they don't know anymore what's right and what's wrong.... because it's all relative, ha!

I don't think it's mislabeling in the slightest to call them demons.

[SnapSlav]

On 3/12/2018 at 4:53 PM, slmmdtruck05 said:

Please share your thought on this.

Having finished the video now, I can say that it was a great speech (as always). But more importantly was what I took away from the videos of the protests outside afterward.

For one thing, that queer person near the end was interesting. He/she was clearly a "gender-nonconforming" type (visible breasts, deep voice, etc), which you could say put him/her firmly on the same ideological side as the disrupting protestors, but was at the same time disappointed by the protest.

Then there was that guy walking amidst the protestors handing out Pepsi, which just made me laugh out loud. That was genius.

But the biggest takeaway from the end of the video for me was, whenever you heard the cheering and the chanting, there was a noteworthy pitch to their cries. A higher pitch. As I remember the infamous Milo speech where a group of feminists stood up to smear their faces with red paint as they decried "This man preaches hatred", then joined by a group of BLM supporters shouting their chant, only to be drowned out by a bunch of MAGA people chanting "Trump!" back... when you heard "Black lives matter!" in that confrontation, it was higher pitched, and when you heard "Trump! Trump! Trump!" in that same moment, it was distinctly lower pitch.

Put simply, all the crazies were predominantly women, all the people NOT raising some kind of violent fuss were predominantly (non-effeminate) men. Like Stef says whenever he covers race and IQ, that he wishes with all his heart that these were not true, but that these facts are undeniably true, I wish it weren't the case that women seem to be the problem, but it looks undeniably the case that women (certainly in crowds) are the driving force behind all of the cultural problems of recent year. It's not just that they voted in the welfare state decades ago, they keep congregating and forming activist groups that push these far-leftist agendas, including all these disruptive protests and riots.

I feel like what Neil Strauss described in "The Game" when he said that it was harder and harder to not become misogynist when a PUA learned more and more about human psychology and put it to work. Nowadays, when I hear the loud cheers of women, I can't help but think that whatever came before it was actually a bad idea. The recent Oscars certainly didn't help discount that notion.

[Donnadogsoth]

On 3/20/2018 at 1:41 PM, SnapSlav said:

Poe's Law is all about the satire being indistinguishable from that which it is satirizing. It comments on how ridiculous that which is being satirized is, despite being its legitimate claim. So these people are not being ironic, they are genuinely that ridiculous. Having grown up and been through American public education, both "before" it got bad, and returned to see what the college system had become "after" getting bad, I can say that these kids sincerely believe that EVERYTHING they're doing is just. They just don't realize that they're the violent ones, that they're the intolerant ones, that they're the evil ones. That's a huge reason for why I say that ignorance is the root of all evil, because these people are willfully ignoring ideas that could help them; they had to ignore to become what they are, and it is evil.

Teachers were always insisting how evil the Nazis were, and they always called them Nazis, they only ever said what the nickname stemmed from a couple times, and most students almost immediately forgot it. They gave the students the ammunition, but never taught them how to maintain the rifle (to be briefly metaphoric). I can still remember a particular day in my freshman writing class when I was in high school- now decades ago (:shudders: Tempus Fugit, amirite?) -where the teacher introduced the concept of relativism vs universalism, and the phrase she gave as an example of these terms put into use were "it's all relative". INSTANTLY, whenever students were called on to address a question, and they didn't have a good answer, when the teacher pressed them, they smirked and said "it's all relative", and the class would laugh, and the student would give that wide shit-eating grin of someone who knew they'd gotten away with something bad, yet they were sincere. These kids latched onto the concept of relativism and used it as an escape from critical thinking from that day onward, because they saw an easy out. They didn't realize they were cheating themselves out of greater understanding, or that they were headed down a dark path that leads to much of where we are today, but they saw something that they liked, and they embraced it.

The ones at these protests? They are these kids, years later, having metastasized their ideological cancer to the point that they don't know anymore what's right and what's wrong.... because it's all relative, ha!

I don't think it's mislabeling in the slightest to call them demons.

Interesting how these "moral relativists" are simultaneously the biggest moralisers.

[SnapSlav]

6 minutes ago, Donnadogsoth said:

Interesting how these "moral relativists" are simultaneously the biggest moralisers.

Oh, but didn't you get the memo? That's TOTALLY not a contradiction! Like, literally!

/s (Does it even need to be said? XD)