Quote:
Originally Posted by jwb
it's not just out of spite. I would rather have the content out there and decide for myself how to engage with it. Im not a saying you can't run into figures that are going to be problematic but I prefer that over the mob and platform just deciding for us which ideas or arguments are ok to explore which ends up being rather arbitrary. Joel Osteen is probably just as big if not a bigger grifter than Tate and he will never be cancelled for bilking his congregation out of their hard earned money based on a literal lie that they will be going to heaven to be with Jesus and their families. If Tate is a scam artist that feels completely incidental to the fact that he got banned.
|
Of course it's whack-a-mole but if the moles are convincing people to shoot up pizza restaurants and gay bars then it's insane not to whack them. Should something more be done? Does Tucker Carlson make banning Alex Jones from social media ineffective? Is there an entire media ecosystem that is too big and entrenched to be cancellable?
Yes. Obviously.
That doesn't make it pointless to step on a cockroach when you see it. That just means it's pointless if it isn't just a start.
And just like Joel Osteen and Amway are bigger, more influential, and more insidious than Andrew Tate that doesn't mean you should let them all run rampant, that means they all deserve attention. The libs who are only now starting to notice the scope of the problem just need to catch up and stop living in the 90s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwb
That's a cop out that is pretty emblematic of what I mean. If instead of getting into Jordan Peterson and self help let's say I just decided to sit around and vote for Bernie and hope eventually someday people will have free healthcare. That feels like a completely powerless and hopeless message to give. On an individual level even relatively bland advice like clean your room is infinitely more useful than believing in all the correct policies.
|
Jordan Peterson telling you to pull your pants up is a hopeless message. The problems of men in the modern age are bigger than individual responsibility can handle and that **** is a bandaid.
Why are so many men so socially isolated? Well part of the reason might be car culture turning cities into places that aren't safe for children to roam and where there's no place to roam in the first place so they just stay inside and play video games. The left might suggest urban planning to create walkable cities.
Why are so many men feeling emasculated? Well part of the reason might be the alienating nature of the modern workplace where you're a faceless cog in a machine fantasizing about earlier, manlier work where you feel more fulfilled and in control of your labor. The left might suggest labor organizing both to gain power in the workplace and the sense of fulfillment from connection with your fellow workers in a cooperative project.
Why are so many men feeling their traditional place in the world being threatened by changing gender dynamics? Well part of the reason might be that they viewed their place on top as a privilege that is being taken away. The left might suggest that this privilege was always harmful to all parties and that it would be liberating for men to shed the burden a rigid stereotype of what men are supposed to be.
And on and on and on cause men's issues are as complex and deeply entrenched as any other problem faced by society, and deciding that not sitting up straight and not working hard enough are the real problem is a coping mechanism to bring everything that can be so hard to conceptualize down to a simpler conceptual level that is easier to wrap your head around. Listening to Jordan Peterson might actually help you personally, but it isn't going to do anything to change the conditions that put men in the position they are in. The left isn't perfect by any means but they are actually trying to grapple with those conditions that Peterson and Tate ignore.