Jordan Peterson on Free Speech and College Protests - The Jim Jefferies Show
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 июн 2018
- Jim sits down with Jordan Peterson, a professor who’s become a darling of the alt-right, to discuss his stance on free speech and the protests against him on college campuses.
Subscribe to Comedy Central: / @comedycentral
Watch more Comedy Central: / comedycentral
Follow The Jim Jefferies Show:
Twitter: / jefferiesshow
Facebook: / jefferiesshow
Instagram: / jefferiesshow
Watch full episodes of The Jim Jefferies Show: www.cc.com/shows/the-jim-jeffe...
Follow Comedy Central:
Twitter: / comedycentral
Facebook: / comedycentral
Instagram: / comedycentral
About The Jim Jefferies Show:
The Jim Jefferies Show is here to shake up the humdrum formula of the political late-night show. Jim tackles the news of the day with no-bulls**t candor, piercing insight and a uniquely Aussie viewpoint.
The Jim Jefferies Show airs Tuesdays at 10:30/9:30c on Comedy Central. 
Приколы
I felt Jim may have been too far onto the protester's side until that last bit he did with the airhorn, stopping her from speaking. Nice to see he's pointing out hypocrisy and faulty reasoning no matter who is behind it.
Second this. I dare the viewer not to instantly judge and give it a chance. So... basically just like everywhere in life.
I agree, but I feel like the way this was edited, a bunch of random clips with absolutely no context to anything Peterson said, was very deceptive. He has absolutely no connection to the "alt-right", and unequivocally denounces their ideology every chance he gets. In fact, that's pretty much his whole schtick - ANTI-IDEOLOGY - of the alt-right, far-left, religious zealots, etc..
That editing was the whole point to paint him, that finished with the final statement/showcase of how quick peterson was to admit he might be wrong. How he would listen while others wield their right of freespeech, but would not see their own ignorance while disturbing his right.
EDIT: the whole clip was pretty good setting up the joke and showcasing a decent viewpoint with the horn. I loved it.
Gene Hakman Peterson comes across as someone who is vehemently against fanaticism.
nice to see... i think you mean 'at least'. that is the bare minimum. it doesnt get you kudo points.
"Maybe it's not different. Maybe I was wrong." This is probably the most respectable response anyone could give and it says so much about the person.
He was interviewed by a competent interviewer who called him out on his bullshit. Really inspirational.
As much as I like his honesty there, it also kinda shows that his philosophy and sociopolitical convictions aren‘t as fleshed out and thought through as one might think.
But it also shows Peterson is a faux intellectual if he couldnt even put two and two together until Jim brought it up.
Frito Laid but that happens all of the time in debates. It might be easy for you to see from your lens, but people review their opinions all of the time, even simple ones that supporters of might take for granted.
KFCthanksgiving so your previous comment commends jp for admitting him being wrong, then in this comment of yours you say changing one's mind happens all the time. Way to keep the bar low on what's commendable
"Any comment on the Nazi presence?" "Yeah I don't like Nazis" absolutely solid reply
@jcorb because all the commies Bernie attracts fills the same role of extremist group taking an ideology too far
@jcorb Where did he say that Bernie is a communist, he said that Bernie attracts Communists, and he's right, it's the same with Peterson, his ideas have absolutely nothing to do with the Nazis but since he speaks against the left, he attracts anyone who's not from the left, it happens with libertarians too, they have absolutely nothing to do with Nazis, white supremacists... But still when all these crazy people assaulted the capitol they were waving the Gadsden flag, that means nothing
@jcorb Your comment is actually very funny, because he could have said the same thing from the other side, you got offended because he said that Bernie attracts Communists which is true, but you claim that Peterson attracts Nazis which is also true, actually with your comment you show your extreme left wing position, you thinking that Peterson has something to do with Nazis is one of dumbest shit I've read
@jcorb Honestly if there was 1 socialist democrat who I would trust to safely implement more "socialist" policies it would have to be Bernie. I liked him in 2016 (barely shy of voting age att) and I still find him to be a solidly principled person. But as many others in this thread have mentioned I was merely talking about how has a more socialist leaning person Bernie attracts the farthest left leaning people. That doesn't mean he's some far left communist who wants to destroy all capitalism in a bloody proletariat uprising. Just like how Peterson being a more conservative person advocating personal responsibility, mild religious values, and free speech over PC doesn't make him a Nazi who wants to subjugate all minorities. As an avid gamer I know first hand that all large scale communities attract a certain amount of shitty people. And usually the shitty people either have the loudest voices or the longest lasting mental impact on people
@jcorb your on every comment get a life you fucking commie, your boy Bernie will have died of old age before he gets into office.
"I'm using my free speech to criticize them"
Yes, the airhorn and white noise are quite compelling arguments. 😂
To some, free speech IS white noise.....or black noise haha
White noise is the sound produced by old black/ white tv's that received no signal. Why is it white noise? Because when the tv was turned off, it was black. When there was no signal but the tv was on, it flickering on the screen would be white and the accompanied static noise, hence the name "white noise". Yes, "compelling argument"...
Free speech is not just the mouth uttering words. It's freedom of expression. So the use of a noise maker is free speech.
@@NxDoyle But Christeen didnt like it one bit when used on her. I'm sure no one else using that method would be either. I'm using my free speech to make sure no one hears your free speech. Not sure if sensorship is the correct word but its in the area.
“But they’re flawed” lol
i loved the airhorn bit at the end
I wonder if that got through to her at all.
Probably not. Still it was awesome!
I preferred the moment the illogic of Peterson's defence of prejudicial cake shop owners was gloriously exposed 5:10
Matthew Malpeli
The cake shop owner would not have stopped the gay couple from purchasing a cake from the available stock (which would have been illegal anyway). He refused to make them a cake based on his constitutional right to freedom of religion and it was determined he was within his rights denying them his artistic service. Similarly, you shouldn’t be able to force a Jewish painter to paint a portrait of Jesus or the Nazis for that matter. Jordan appeared to have been caught in a semantic trap that he would have been better off in responding to with reference to why the Civil Rights Movement was necessary. They were in response to unconstitutional Jim Crow laws. This highlights that both the Civil Rights Movement and a religious baker denying service to something he deemed abhorrent as both Constitutionally correct.
caleb salisbury - I could tell that was coming because I saw a reporter in the UK do the same thing to equally annoying disruptors with a whistle. The idea that you can use free speech as a weapon means these people have never heard of slander or defamation of character law suits.
So this is why people are scared of video edits, they can make you seem however they want
KingLeo There was nothing wrong with this video edit...
I mean, it still seems to side with Jordan. It shows that he believes what he does honestly, and is willing to see things from other angles. It puts a lot more hate on the college students.
or we can cut the snipet, all have a laugh, and move on. no reason to explain, right?
John Johnson, the question asked was "How do you summarize why men are in crisis?", to which Jordan responds "I think it is- on a deep level...", then "it's the same thing, and so, and Nietzsche knew what the consequence of that would be". Jordan's talking philosophy and addressing Nietzsche's conceptualization of "the death of god" to answer the question. He goes on to give an explanation that makes perfect sense if you've done the most rudimentary reading in the subject (though I don't buy in myself, this is the part of Peterson I'm least fond of.)
Why would he go straight for philosophy and shit when asked to "summarize" something? A summary for a child is a sentence or two, while a summary for an adult is a few paragraphs that touches on all necessary elements. Peterson isn't aiming for to teach children or the child-minded.
DA REAL Johnny Appleseed its completely taken out of context all the time.
You should post the entire interview.
He never posts full interviews because he doesn’t want to show what he really says
@@shanelynch7757 dude he is a comedian
@@lovelymachinegunOOC he should stick to comedy then
@@lovelymachinegunOOC then it sounds like he shouldn’t be doing highly edited interviews then huh?
He, although very funny, its dishonest, the interviews are cut and split to fit his narrative, and some times the guests didnt meant things they said the way the cut was made, or they were answering something else.
Let's take all of his quotes out of context and make a funny
- comedy central guy
It's basically a Daily show "interview" with an Australian accent.
What context would make his comments ok?
@@drewhead1 Ever listened to him speak in long form? Anything other than clips?
@@ChristopherTucker138 yes, have you?
Im not talking about hearing him. Have you actually listen to what he said?
He contridicrs him self all the time.
@@Tom-vx7xm given that he contradicts himself all the time you should be able to give me some easy examples of it right? Ive listened to him for hours and couldn't call it "all the time". So... Come with the receipts
That girl needs to learn that random loud noises are not considered "speech".
gokufujison also, it’s a form of physical assault on anyone who hears the noise at dangerous decibel levels.
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!1!!
you didn't get the joke then?
Shes an idiot. Everyone has rights but their rights end where another persons rights begin.
Free speech covers more than what you say, its about freedom of expression. Maybe read the definition of free speech before commenting on it
UNEDITED VERSION IMMIDIATELY ! ....please
O U T O F C O N T E X T
This isn't a documentary. It's comedy bit.
If your looking for anything other than a laugh you've missed the fucking point.
Next you snowflakes will be demanding that Bad Lip Reading should have a transcript of what they're really saying
Bravo Kilo A bad lip reading is a great channel for a laugh. Trumps inauguration was a gem.
learn what snowflake means you dipfuck
i bet is completely different
The air horn move at the end with that PC girl was priceless!! 😂 😂 😂
😂😂😂😂😂
I would love to see a Jim Jefferies interview like this with a clock in the background
You Americans really can't laugh at yourselves.
😂😂
The air horn bit was GOLD. her face 😂
Lol great bit. Jim Jefferies managed to offend both sides 😂
@@rafijahangiri4 Pfft Jordans too logical to be offended.
It's pretty telling that she didn't get the argument.
@@chaosjoerg9811 She got it. Jim didn't get it. Disrespect people who deserve it. Don't just disrespect everyone.
@@daemonCaptrix Sorry, I don't get what you're saying. Are you trying to imply anyone could actually mean that? That's a totalitarian position. And in a totalitarian society, dissent is impossible in the first place. Are you arguing for a spiral of argumentative self-invalidation?
Honestly, Peterson was open to the idea that he may be wrong and was willing to hear the opposing argument. The lady wasn't and wouldn't even acknowledge Jim's POV. I think this is mainly shows the issues on tribalism.
jordan is an accomplished phd and showed his lack of thought by giving that knee jerk reply in the first place. its on jordan to think his positions thru. especially one so sharp as this one.
veroman007 should a black baker have the right to not bake a cake for a Klan rally?
Black people are a protected class, as are LGBT people. You can't deny people a service based on things about them they cannot change, for example the color of their skin, or their sexuality, among other things. What you can deny people a service for is political stances, such as being a member of the KKK, or antifa.
There should be no 'protected' class. The entire thing is ridiculous.
Who defines what is and what is not a 'protected class'?
Conservatives didn't eat it up. All reasonable people ate it up
People with a basic understanding of psychology dont like him because he understands nothing. Look up his debate with zizek.
@@jimmybeaton4438 Philosophy you mean. He knows a lot about psychology, to say he doesn’t is ridiculous. The problem is that he delves into so many other complex academic subjects like philosophy and medicine that he occasionally has dumb takes
@@edenbeats I think it's more than occasionally. He is pretty dumb when it comes to philosophy. He doesn't know what marxism or post-modernism are, he reduces Marx to the super thin Communist Manifest (lol)... But I do like his defence of free speech. He's mostly correct, even though it's a tough topic.
@@bru513 He’s mostly right on issues that concern normal ppl. When it comes to economical history, he definitely has more to brush up on
@@jimmybeaton4438 I thought Zizek could've used more and so on and so on.
"Why do you care what they call themselves?"
"I don't care. I care when people tell me what I have to say." Bingo!
So, it should still be ok to use the n word when talking about or to people of color?
@@DaveTheFuckingBrave do you mean morally correct or legally allowed
@@hederal5546 whatever Peterson means
@@DaveTheFuckingBrave why ask a question if you don't understand what you're asking
@@hederal5546 I understand it very well. Peterson‘s logic opens the doors to and form of hate speech and discriminating speech you can imagine. And an imaginary moral code of conduct won’t change a thing
Every single clip was taken out of context... For fucks sake. When will these people learn. Every time they do this, people see right through it.
Only JP cultists perceive "every clip to be taken out of context". How convenient that literally ANY clip that doesn't show Peterson in a positive light is somehow ALWAYS him out of context. Yeah that's not weird at all....
Justin Gutierrez Almost every comment you write is insulting people as "JP cultists" for no reason, don't call people immature while acting like a 4 year old.
I don't agree that literally everything here was taken out of context, but most of it was.
And it's because they heavily edited the videos out of context, not because they didn't show him in a "positive" light, in my opinion you should just let him Talk and make people decide for themselves.
It was all in context. No one was shown in a positive light, and I thought that was the point. Both positions have flaws and don't deserve to be held up on a pedestal.
Think for yourselves, and stop being suckers to sensationalist media that tells you which side of the issue is God and which is Satan.
Because no comedy show ever does this right? They just did it to that SJW woman in this segment and you don't mention that, but it's only when it's done to "Daddy Peterson" that the lobsters lose their shit.
Clearly not everyone is seeing right through it. Of course it's more troublesome when it's some so-called "media organization" doing it than a comedian.
The face when he pulled out the air horn 😂
And the grin on his face when he asked "do you agree with me"?
That was gold. I think right to criticize is fine, i agree there especially with bad groups. But at same time its pointless if you cant have open discussions and interupt people with noise : P
Jeff is mouthpiece for whoever provides milk to his table
just like jordan accepting money from the koch brothers?
Shutting down Peterson's events and then calling yourself a supporter of free speech is hypocrisy at its best.
non violently ,non threateningly protesting an event isn't shutting something down .that's just using your freedom of speech. If he wants to move than that's on him
They're just whole heartily afraid of truth because it doesn't suit their agenda.
@@santinosingh6047 as if you haven't tried shutting him down and violating his freedom of speech countless times, and as if you would allow him to speak freely if it was up to you cowards.
@@ollikoskiniemi6221 are you really trying to debate a khalistani?? They are a terrorist that have called for genocide of their own countrymen because they dont follow their religion, buddy stop trying to talk to such Piece of S.
Whining about hypocrisy and then gushing over Peterson is hypocrisy at its worst.
"maybe I was wrong"
That's a good man. When was the last time any of us had the guts to say that?
Deep questions cannot be answered intermediately, the require deep though, not deep throat!
@@TheVigiIante exactly
But he'll be saying the same shit again 5 minutes later.
@@colinholio well. If he does, that's wrong of him. Or maybe he has decided he was right.
colinholio nail on the head. JP will continue on regardless of this rather revealing moment
Anyone else remember when Jim and Comedy Central deceptively altered Avi Yemini's interview, then Yemini posted the uncut version?
i remembered that and i was searching for that video rn
Yeah that's one of the reasons why I'm so mad right now
Who is abi yamani?
Yup
Anyone else remember when Jim and comedy central made fun of a nazi loving piece of shit called Avi Waks? The same Avi Waks that plead guilty to and was convicted of assaulting his wife. The same Avi Waks who plead guilty and was convicted of harassing his wife. The same Avi Waks that was sued by his brother. Why? Because he accused his brother (who is a victim of child abuse) of harbouring a paedophile Is this the piece of shit your trying to protect?
It's not just "conservatives" that like Jordan Peterson
Yeah… no
But it mostly is.
Even For Jim I thought this was a little sleezy to cut up his arguments and put words in his mouth to paint a picture.
Im sure the conversation was great the editing was foul tho
Gotta respect a man who's able to admit when he thinks he's wrong.
That's what I thought too.
That's something I don't think people get about Dr. Peterson's classes and lectures. He's not *lecturing* us, he's letting us listen to him *think.* If you can't see or more importantly admit when you are wrong, growth becomes much more difficult. :)
One of the things I like about him. He is actually a pretty reasonable person. I have seen many times where he simply admitted his ignorance of something.
Unless a Jewish baker should be forced to make a cake for a Nazi wedding, or a black baker for a KKK rally, he wasn't. Yes, the civil Rights act was good, but free market would have also eventually stopped that garbage as well. The less people you serve, the less money you make and the more you give to someone else
@@Farah0122 Not just his ignorance, but also his sometimes being irrational, acting wrong, being angry. His personal flaws. To be able to not only see that but also admit do it and constatly trying to lessen these negatives is remarkable and not as easy and obvious as some might think
"you're not going to force me to respect you..."
I couldn't agree more
One of my standard answers to when my superiours want me to do something I konw to be wrong: "You can tell me do it, but you cant make me say its a good idea". Basically the same energy. Agreed 100% with mr peterson.
Back in school one kid was really strong and would intimidate everybody. When people made jokes about him, just like they did everybody else, he would sometimes get mad and take them really badly. He would hit them and told them they "need to learn some respect". I told him that respect and fear are not the same thing. He told me either is fine lol
@@tubeyoukonto That's actually a pretty funny response (not that I condone his actions!)
“You’re not going to force me to respect you”
Is the same idea southern whites could say to black people having their land stolen, living in a cycle of debt through tenant farming/share cropping, while being thrown in prisons where they were legally slaves. Sure. Turns out when you say “you’re not going to force me to respect you”, you’re most like the oppressive class.
@@r.i.petika829 or you're aware of the idea that respect is earned through action and not through force.. maybe.. just maybe everything is not about race
@@lafountain40 "maybe.. just maybe everything is not about race" The labor forces, leaders, history, legal space, and rhetoric of America quite literally disagrees with you. The 60s-70s were only 50-60 years ago, that's 2-3 generations. Maybe, just maybe, you're trying your best to ignore America's racial problems.
Jim is woke af
yeah he's pretty cool
Yeah, he's pathetic.
The last part with the air horn was hilarious!!!
this was... a lot less of a shitshow than i thought it would be
Remember, it's edited!
It's a comedy show and he did punch both ways. I honestly didn't expect it to be as good as it was. I was pleasantly surprised
>Was a bullshit hit piece designed to insinuate he's aligned with nazis.
Was it though.
Effect it was cool that he air horned the liberal at the end, like she did to Peterson.
That editing on Peterson was total bullshit tho.
Jim Jeffries, no....Jefferies? Jeffrie, OMFG FFS.
Jim's generally a good egg. He's no Samantha Bee or Trevor Noah.
Nice edits there jimmy. Why dont you release the full interview?
Seized Cheese yeah cause I want my interviews to be chock full of the greatest trope in the greatest genre of TV. Reality TV with a bunch of jump cuts, sound effects and laugh box. Nice
Seized Cheese fucking watching nickelodeon again, shit.
Well, its comedy central. "We're news for dumb people until we get called out"
Careful insulting the incel. Cold steel goes hard.
7783DEATH Yup. Jim has become a complete fucking sellout since going to the US. So gross.
Don't trust anything this Jim guy does, he just edits to get fake answers.
FACTS
@Jay Blabla12 Its called accountability and this is not the first time he has done it, if he doesn't like it, then he should tell the truth, ever heard of the story of the boy who cried wolf
@Jay Blabla12 Just like he "didn't edit" on this video?
ruclips.net/video/odCQhAezB_Q/видео.html
This Jim guy and whole comedy central are scumbags.
I'm not sure Jim really disagrees with Peterson, except allowing people to shop where they want.
I love how you guys think Jim actually edits his own show. He's got better things to do with his time than sit around with an editing program, he's a face for a network television show on Comedy Central, and a stand-up comedian that still tours the world very commonly. Editing is provided by the studio.
The airhorn was the best!!!😂😂
Avi Yemini just exposed you bro lmao
no he didnt did you even watch the video??
@@evannatland5151 yes I did, did you lmao? You must be smoking the same crack jim is
Dylan L. No, warping videos to attack strawmans is just wrong. Their points have been falsely represented through editing, not just a sting. I doubt you’d sit on this view if they did this to someone from the left wing. Sometimes you need to step back and realise what Jim jeffries did was wrong, cowardly and misrepresentative. And plus people do care, look at the dislikes on these videos. And lastly Jordan Peterson does not have poorly thought out points. He’s argued them very well with little live debate refutation. Even now, you’re misrepresenting Jordan Peterson. He is not anti civil rights, how ridiculous to label it that. Also What Jeffries have said about muslims is probably 10x worse than what Avis said as well and even avi admits he went too far.
Are you talking about AVI the confessed and convicted wife beater? Anyway, this is comedy not a fucking TED talk.
@@austinhamilton9040 Again, another dick head who doesn't understand the difference between comedy and a TED talk.
Peterson: maybe i was wrong about that.
This made me like him more. A true sign of a scientific thinking person is the ability to change his mind.
Yeah same here, that was quite the mature response!
Battle of Valmy Are you really so intent on hating people you disagree with that you're not even willing to accept their submission when they admit they were wrong? The guy says something wrong, you call him a homophobe. He admits he was wrong and corrects himself, you STILL call him a homophobe. Well fuck me, homophobes aren't really left with much incentive to change then are they?
The correct answer was his first answers though. someone should not be forced to not bake someone a cake .
Fuck Google+ Can you give me a reason for that claim?
His incapability of applying his way of thinking to different situations and his reoccuring logical inconsitency made me respect him so much. Dumber he gets more I like him.
”I hate this video it's biased!....I love the part at the end with the blowhorn hurdur!”
Hurdur?
This was actually really well done and I loved how he blew that air horn to point out the hypocrisy
well it was selectively edited to paint a different picture about Peterson than what is reality. Jordan Peterson absolutely detests identitarianism. Hes spoken about why extensively. He proposes that it is the center of the Marxist movement and why its such a dangerous ideology.
@@colinmckay5228 I only understood about 20% of what jordan Peterson says because I listen while driving and it's hard to concentrate on two things at once but his points are interesting.
@@colinmckay5228maybe he has no idea what Marxism is.
That airhorn bit...
Julio De la Cruz No, that civil rights act bit. Peterson's entire reactionary worldview smashed into a gazillion pieces by logic. It was glorious
He crushed Peterson on his position about legal refusal of gay wedding cakes, then ridiculed Christeen Elizabeth on her attacks on free speech.
Gotta admit that Peterson's "Tell the truth (=what you think) in order to get challenged and progress" works far better than the SJW tactics.
By logic... lol Did you get your degree from Trump University? There is no logic in forcing people to say something because it aligns with your fantasy worldview. There is also a reason that you tubers now have vastly larger audiences then most of these shows.
Matthew Malpeli logic? The whole interview was edited. I like both Jeffries and Peterson and respect Peterson even more because he admits he was wrong which is something no liberal ever does. I think if you are all for free speech than everyone else has a right to speak their mind whether we like it or not. Thats mainly what Peterson preaches. I’m not a conservative btw, I just respect points of views from both sides.
+TakeoFR
it's not that he "smashed" his opinion. It's that jordan hasn't thought it over for him to have a real opinion on it
You're in big trouble Jim.
The air horn on the girl was comedy gold 😂
And yet she didn't laugh.
Really disappointed with that interview. There's plenty of things you can disagree with on Peterson without misrepresenting him.
What was edited
There are plenty of reasonable criticisms that can be levelled at Peterson. And this video touches on a few of them. But I really don't think he can be accused of flirting with the alt-right. He's spent much of his career lecturing about the dangers of radical far-right ideology. There are videos of him dismantling their core principles in quite some detail.
But he engages with them rather than just insulting them, because he wants to change their minds, and pull them back to a moderate individualism.
Assuming "moderate individualism" is a good thing. Just as long as you're coexisting with far right ideologies, life is good.
the far right is a tiny minority and has very little influence. I bet you're the type of person who smears anyone who wants strong borders as far right wing.
The alt-right is dying, don’t you remember Charlottesville? These people aren’t gaining any power or influence. Richard Spencer is getting sued into oblivion.
He is after money.. Everybody knows that the right wingers will pour money just to listen someone say that they are right.. Besides they never attend colleges. so they will never see lectures or seminars(atleast most of them) and i dont consider anything except degrees related to engineering, chemistry, medical and mathematics to be worthy enough.. Anyways for them a lecturer using fancy words defending many right wing ideologies is a good thing for them i mean atleast it is some thing new to them, a new format different from alex jones, conservative radio shows, shapiro, crowder etc..so he uses SJW, PC, gender identity, christianity etc to lure them and make enough money..
I honestly can't tell if that is sarcasm or you're genuinely stupid.
"it's like stand up, but instead of laughs..."
as laugh tracks back this video 😂
"as laugh tracks back this video"
and your point ocourse is ...?
The air horn part at the end was hilarious 🤣
The airhorn was epic 😎
Havent seen JJ in some time. What a puppet. Shame. Next
Having a different opinion than you do makes him, if anything, NOT a puppet.
StHubbins The world passes you by, doesn't it Sport.
@@michaelc3977 Unfortunately for you, it does not.
5:16 This type of behavior is why young people aren't watching TV anymore. We're tired of producers manipulating interviews in a manner that feels disingenuous and dishonest. What was his next sentence? Was the reply shown lifted from a 3 minute explanation in which Peterson clarified his views?
No thanks, CC.
He admitted he might be wrong. There’s nothing wrong with that. Stop being sensitive.
JakeTheGiant EXACTLY
This isn't a documentary. It's not a debate. It's comedy bit.
If your looking for anything other than a laugh you've missed the fucking point.
Christ, next you snowflakes will be demanding that Bad Lip Reading should have a transcript of what they're really saying. What a bunch of children.
Bravo Kilo It's gone beyond comedy though, there's an agenda being pushed under the guise of 'comedy', and if anyone says anything we get the 'it's just comedy' line, and that's deceptive. Just be upfront. I'm not an advocate of gay marriage, most gay guys are mentally traumatised, that's not my opinion it's a statement told to me by a gay man in the scene, at any rate, people should be able to refuse to work for anyone if they don't want to, ie baking a cake, that's the difference between capitalism and serfdom, so essentially we are serfs, and u call that 'progress'?
a fury you too huh? I myself am a former liberal. not that I am now a conservative or anything like that, I just simply went from a registered democrat to a registered no party preference. I have been wondering how common this is becoming.
If you actually listen to even one of Jordan Peterson's full interviews or lectures you'd realize he's the most reasonable person with a platform. Its a shame people just hear he's phobic or whatever and right him off as far right. The people who do this should be ashamed of themselves
I've listened to a lot of his interviews and what I do understand about him is that a broken clock is right twice a day. I don't know if he's far right, and I don't care. All I know is that from what I've heard from his own mouth, he has badly formed opinions that are subject to a clear political bias that he pretends not to have, and that type of phony behavior annoys the fuck out me. Furthermore, no intellectual worth their salt should be able to have any of their points so easily dismantled like this to the point of agreeing with the interviewer. I don't understand how you Peterson fans don't find this utterly embarrassing. And the sad thing is that this isn't the first time this has happened.
@@Lexyboogie you haven't listened to his interviews. This vid cherry picked 1 paragraph in his book. You haven't specified anything btw. He was a dem
I know right?!? They say that he has "become a darling of the alt-right", but he has always denounced the alt-right!
@@Lexyboogie I wish you would have given clear examples
You're just another bent pawn that can't think for itself smh
@LexBoogie Watch any interview with him thats longer than 6 minutes and 17 seconds and hasnt been edited, to the point where you dont even get to hear more than a sentence or 2 and I promise if youre "worth your salt" as an "intellectual" you'll see how idiotic every word in your comment is. Hes a democrat, not a Republican. Just to be clear, he's not saying he dislikes transgender people. He hates being forced to say anything. Hes okay with being told "you cant say these things." You're a dumbass for someone who claims to be more of an intellectual than a professor at a college that graduated from harvard.
"I'm using my right to criticize them"
What you're doing is not criticism, it's censorship.
The first amendment protects free speech in that it prohibits the government from censoring people. It says nothing about individual person on person censorship or censorship from corporations. She could be charged with a public disturbance or something, but you can't be charged with "suppression of speech"
"Fuher " lol. I would love to see the WHOLE UNEDITED interview
You can, it's available dummy.
will he’s dissing him because of the edited Avi Yemini interview
@@willvr4 are you sure? where? I think this is the version that aired
Jamie Walker The only thing edited during the question in regards to how those two things are different was the camera angle. That's it.
lol, furor not fuher
The air horn piece was priceless. It’s like when a kid plugs his ears and makes noise when a parent is talking.
Exactly, even if the parent is retarded and abusive, it's best to let them speak. Making your own valid counter arguments always trumps censorship.
Wonder how many people here would look if we edited together clips of your life. Especially Jim.
Exactly. I’m sorry but Jim looks a bit weak to me
4:24
"i'm using free speech to criticize them"
Really i did not hear many arguments from the airhorn.
Jim was losing me on this one till the air horn, then I remembered the true nature of satire.
Watch out, you're getting awfully close to dogmatic thought.
You don't have to believe Jordan Peterson is right because the other alternative is wrong.
Use your own free thought and don't believe everything people tell you, including Jordan Peterson and the syndico-anarchists.
Thor Jørgensen syndico-anarchists? Jesus Christ it's like you people make up new shit everyday.
Anarcho-syndicalism has existed since the start of the 20th century, and it's not quite uncommon.
In a nutshell it's extremist-left wingers in the style of communists.
Antifa for example are anarcho-syndicalists, waving their red and black flags. Black representing anarchism, and the red representing syndicalism. Most people known them from media as "autonomists"
When you say "you people" I honestly don't know who you are referring to.
I'm not a Jordan Peterson fan, in fact I think he's very often flawed and makes outrageous pseudoscientific claims.
So tell me. Who are "you people"
This ain't satire, have you listened to this guy lately?
+Thor
It sounds like you're including Jordan Peterson into the syndico-anarchist group: _"..including Jordan Peterson and the syndico-anarchists."_ That might be where the confusion is coming from.
The guy changed his mind or at least stopped to think when confronted with a good argument. I don't know him, but that is a better sigh than college girls that don't want to hear anything that confront them.
Any debate he knows when he is contradictory to his own beliefs and will admit to it. Jim Jeffries had the chance to fully have a discussion with him and they cut it up in to some horrible wanna-be Daily Show routine. I still like Jim, but I don't get how such a shock comic can be so overtly-liberal as well. Comedy Central is shaping him to be like every other CC shill.
brodi81 I'm sorry you feel that way, since I think what most people took away from that is that guy's thinking may be very flawed, but not only should he be allowed to speak, but he seems willing to admit that some aspects of his thinking are flawed. Compare that to the liberal college students who think that free speech is the right to prevent other people from speaking.
Of course, you might be one of those people who thinks that Comedy Central is a cesspool of liberal groupthink that wants to tell their viewers how to look at the world because that's what your favorite right-wing pundits tell you to think. The right wing has never been more cultish, so that's always a possibility.
brodi81 dude spot fucking on! I don’t even know what the point of this piece honestly was.
brodi81 It's a show dude... he's the host but it's going to be 90% scripted, which means a team of writers, except for the bits like the furor/Führer joke which was just him improving. It's also only a half hour show, and this was only a 6 minute segment so they probably shot a 30min-1hr long interview (which I'd love to see) and had to cut it up. You can't really expect them to just air a 30min uncut interview on 23 minutes of air time , especially on a topical show where they have other news and bits to do.
Gunman610 - It's interesting that you call right wingers "cultish" and say they are only repeating what they've been told to say; considering the liberal sheep's newest favorite term is "cult" all of a sudden. I love how idiots on the left forget that one of the most notorious cults ever, the KKK, was formed by democrats. But of course trying to explain that or have an intelligent conversation with someone like yourself is impossible because you've closed your mind to rational info long ago, and everything must be decided based on feelings. The biggest mystery ever is how a liberal's brain has such a high fail-rate with all of the free information and truth that's available. Please do the rest of America a favor and stay in your safe space.
Jim should get a Oscar for editing interviews there's no one better
Emmy. TV shows get Emmy's.
That is who you think is the best ? Get some help boy .
I don’t even care about the out of context edits anymore, 5:30 was just too hilarious
The airhorn at the end was just brilliant hahaha.
Why
@@iconcanada3660 Because of the irony
full Peterson interview?
I found it, enjoy ruclips.net/video/lmoPMiCJ10A/видео.html
Should have been a lobster... But on a serious note. Holy fuck, his fanbase grows increasingly insufferable by the day.
I couldnt agree more, they are always super serious and cant take any jokes
Not to mention they are generally really fucking dumb, hence why they need a university daddy to affirm their beliefs
No Masters and that's why nobody gives a shit what you think. To label over a million people 'dumb' because you don't agree with a professor they watch... Maybe it is you who missed something?
I said generally, not exclusively
He peddles pseudo philosophy and self help to ppl who for the most part haven't engaged with any philosophical material
Anyone who takes a philosophy 101 class would see the flaws in his arguments
An example of his bad arguments is his constant appeals to myth and this entailing an appeal to nature as well (he believes these myths are integral to or nature, he believes these myths are more true than scientific truths)
This is an example of the naturalistic fallacy, he constantly claims that because something is "natural" it is good and or immutable (myths in his case)
A counter example would be men who are genetically predisposed to rape, we would not say therefore it is good for them to rape
Something could still be morally bad and natural, some myths may be bad (he never shows that these myths are indispensable, only that they are possibly omnipresent) for society and yet be natural concepts for us (although even this can be fervently debated, I don't buy the whole meta myth thing)
Is that substantial enough, you mouth breathing sycophant? :)
There are conservative philosophers that are much more consistent than he ever will be (because he is a hack)
but I suspect any pseudo intellectual that will affirm your beliefs will do
Where can you see the whole show?
"why does the noise have to be white"
Jpb: "😐😐😐😐.... Hahaha"
🤣🤣🤣 Same
I hope people don't take this interview as a serious disscussion, way too many quick cut-aways from Petersons talks without proper context.
It looks like many ARE taking it as serious discussion. Lots of people offended that Peterson wasn't portrayed the way they wanted.
+Bravo Kilo They're mad that Peterson wasn't granted the use of his preferred adjectives (non-alt right)
bhsWD96, they're mad because they heard something that was poking fun at Peterson and immediately jumped on the butthurt bandwagon in the comment section without even hearing the conclusion of the clip that was in support of him.
"ahh yes the closed minded ignorance of the left
Quick to label, quick to judge."
Proofread your comments to avoid painfully face-palming irony.
Bravo Kilo that's the point. Taking random statements out of context to make someone appear to be something their not, to portray them in a inaccurate way is fucked up.
I bet, if I looked at you're life. And took a few clips from it I could portray you as a woman hating racist crazy person.
And if you aren't those things, I dare say you might be offended, or even upset by the portrayal. Media does that alot, they have someone who doesn't share their interest and they portray them as a crazy person.
I love how he was faced with a good point, reconsidering his own and changed his opinon. What an adult thing to do
The problem? He’s still arguing the same points today.
He never wrote a book admitting he was wrong. He never corrected the record
@@sibais lol true
@@zapkvr just cause you got baited to answer a question wrong, doesn't mean all of your believes are wrong.
@@pedrovelasquez5121 In English???
LOL, saw that furor/fuhrer joke coming ...
Jordan Peterson admitting 'maybe i was wrong about that' after Jim made a very valid point that Jordan could not just dismiss. I respect that a lot. You gotta take something from this. It shows Jordan is someone that truly wants to move forward in the name of fact and science and is able to stick true to what he believes in. He is not just someone that wants to win the argument or puts his ego before his beliefs.
True, but the logic that Jim provides Jordan should of been obvious from the get-go, Especially to a person like Jordan. A man who claims to have a very high IQ, and then subsequently categorises people based on that quota. It's a joke that someone as "intellectual" as Jordan Peterson failed to intially comprehend his involvement in the same prejudice that African Americans were subjected to in the past.
A comedian educating a "great intellect". That is a joke in itself.
Peterson is a clinical psychologist and his motivations are in sync with clinical training the includes ethical practices( whether to treat or not treat a client if harm can come if it, especially when one's values do not resemble in any way the socio-political views and policy shifts of a movement),psychology, sociology, human development theory, moral development theory, and is well researched in current gender studies that now also include de-transitioners. Free speech is important and bandwagon hop-ons who fail to do their homework are a disappointment!!! I.e some leftist college students
@@timmothyjennings He doesn't claim to have a high IQ he does have a high IQ over 150 that puts in the top world 1%
He is in also the top 50 cited Clinical psychologist of all time on google scholar and has a H index of 56 thats extremely high
A H index of 10 is regarded as successful 20 is outstanding 40 or anything over up there with the best for perspective 62 is the average for noble prize winners
If you dont know the “h-index” is a metric for estimating “the importance, significance and broad impact of a scientist’s cumulative contributions.” It takes into account both the number of an individual’s publications and their impact on peers, as indicated by citation counts.
But hey he is human too.
@@Indonesiansurftravelwell, that didn't stop him from saying in an interview with Theo Von "Alcohol is the ONLY drug that causes aggression". Lol. Let's hope no scholar cites that.
The airhorn part lol
I cannot wait when joe rogan or crowder interviews dr. Peterson on this interview and well hear the real story
Jesse Knox Rogan has already I think.
I wear a hoodie that mightve been the vice interview? Rogan has Peterson on 3 times, the last time was 4 months ago and this video came out 4 days ago unless theirs an interview that was recently done
baddogonline do you have a link? Ive lookes on youtube and the latest one is 4 months ago and it has 3.8 million views. That's the only newest one I'm seeing, but i could be wrong!
baddogonline ok we're on the same page
“I cannot wait until somebody fairly sympathetic (Joe Rogan) or outright worshipful (Steven Crowder) gives a softball interview to a man I love with a passion, instead of taking a critical perspective.”
A comic as a journalist is the funniest thing about this video. 🤣
The last part redeemed the video. Fair enough. Haha.
Thanks Avi Yemeni for showing me what Jim is really like.
Yep Jim is a low level human.
And thanks to the former Mrs Yemeni and the courts for showing what Avi is really like....
@@MiggsMultiple yeh at least Avi copped it on the chin… Jim is just a straight coward
@@brettskizz I'd rather an editing coward than the sort that assault women, let alone their wife.
@@MiggsMultiple fair enough
I can’t stand people who can’t own their wrongs.
Hey Jim, release the 40 min full interview so you can get respect from your fans.
I hope you can make a petition for this shame them into it. I used to be a huge fan of jim I never agreed with him on guns but I can agree to disagree when its comedy. This however is not ok in anyway maybe he needs to work on bringing legit back and stop this if he has to be this one sided fact ignoring bullshit
pretty sure Jim is serious about gun control like the rest of the sane world.
lol how deranged are you looser? Peterson just got made to concede that his point of view was wrong by a low brow Australian comedian lol
Pretty sure they'd never do that, for obvious reasons. I wonder if Peterson might out this on his channel..
Jim Jefferies was picking on both sides equally, yet you want to be a precious snowflake about him picking on Jordan Peterson and owning him in less than 3 sentences. You know, you're just as bad as the PC feminists coming to this page to bitch and moan about their side getting picked on. Jim Jefferies doesn't give a fuck.
The government can be looked at as an overlooking body that maintains peace within a region. To do that fairness is very important. In this modern day and age there are a lot of ideas on right and wrong circulating within regions the government overlooks. The best way to maintain fairness must be to establish common ground and come to an agreement on what to be used to implement laws. So far the scientific and logical basis has worked to create peace as its reasoning is followable and doesn’t have cracks, or at least is the least cracked logical flow that can be followed. So as the government sets rules to be followed there must be concrete reasoning for imposing them.
Using the baker analogy, refusing to give someone service for a specific reason must mean that it’s more costly to provide this service because of that reason. Assuming two exactly similar orders came in from two people who only differ in race, there is the insinuation that one race is less valuable than another if one customer is is denied service. Government intervention is based off of concrete scientific proof that the two people are actually equal, and therefore it would seem sort of fair to force someone to operate according to the logic provided by provable science in order to maintain the peace.
With the exact same scenario with sexuality being the difference now, it seems as though the government’s reasoning is based on the idea that their sexuality doesn’t make them scientifically any less human, any political stance held wouldn’t do so either, so you can’t deny someone service simply bc they’re homosexual or even completely racist. Like a customer could probably walk in with a swastika tattooed on their forehead and you wouldn’t be allowed to deny them service.
When it comes to the type of cake to be made however, the government has established that some ideas can be worth more than others, because it uses ideas it has chosen and therefore must be able to identify which ones are “the best”. Some cakes would be used to push certain ideas or atleast act as though they’re true. To demand a baker bake any cake demanded of them would be to demand they treat all ideas as equal. The government doesn’t believe that itself which is why I think you would be allowed to deny service to a customer requesting you decorate a cake with swastikas and the words “kill all Jews”. So making a cake congratulating a homosexual couple on their wedding probably isn’t a must if requested, or even a straight couple. The government would need proof that heterosexuality and homosexuality are inherent in human beings so that they aren’t considered ideas but rather similar to race. Or proof that there are absolutely no effects on a person’s life to being either so that the two “ideas” are scientifically and logically equal.
With the pronouns issue, the “logic” behind it isn’t concrete. There are clear holes in the logic behind why gender lies on a spectrum and all the info behind why such preferences should be considered this heavily. It’s not following the scientific method, isn’t concrete enough for government implementation and is clearly a pov held by one of the many groups protected by the government. It seems as though the fairness of the government that is very important in order to maintain peace is withering away because of the lack of keenness of those working in government, and speaking out about it should be looked at as an attempt to keep the region together rather than letting it break apart into smaller ones controlled by their own smaller governments, bc that collapse would be a very bloody scene. We need to wait for the science to develop to an extent that these issues can be studied accurately, seeing as though that’s the government’s to for reasoning, before using the government to implement laws that aren’t based on concrete ground, bc otherwise you get a fairly unreasonable government and usually when that’s the case the situation doesn’t tend to be resolved peacefully.
Did they edit this interview as well?
"maybe it's not, maybe I was wrong about that" that moment is stunning. I actually think the cake thing is a bit different, but what is amazing is how he didn't hesitate to admit he may have been wrong. it's so clear that truth and not winning the argument is Peterson's goal.
The dudes on another level. This is actually a prime example of how intelligent Jordan Peterson is.
What’s more amazing is that he didn’t already realize what he was saying. He’s been caught time and time again on issues where it’s clear he hasn’t actually given it ANY thought. He’s a fraud and an opportunist. I don’t know ANY well adjusted people who believe his nonsense.
@@MarmaladeSally I imagine your idea of a well adjusted person might differ from mine.
@@my_cousin_mose9782 You as well-considering you can’t even tell it was edited
@@MarmaladeSally 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 the video was edited or can u not even tell that
How to misrepresent someone in 6 shite minutes.
Lee Davies
Did he misrepresent him tho? 2 minutes in and I don’t necessarily feel that way... yetz
Lee Davies he's a pretty shite person
Lee Davies when he realised it would help him advance higher amongst the Hollywood media
Funny how there are tons of these comments with tons of likes but no actual points brought up how Peterson was misrepresented. Come on, is it about the man or the ideas?
Alex Ferrando Two glaring examples: the way he made fun of Peterson's point about the death of masculinity and the death of God without getting into any further detail about that (a much deeper concept than it first appears on the surface), but more specifically 2:30-2:45 where he says that Peterson is weak on criticizing the alt-right. That is not true at all.
That was really good Jim.
Kinda wish it was actually a full interview
only clicked for Jordan Peterson, back to living my life without comedy central
Larry Lee Same.
"WHAAA, I'LL NEVER WATCH COMEDY CENTRAL AGAIN!" LOL! We found him fellas, the triggered special snowflake....
Damn you just going around calling everyone in the comment section snowflakes. Someone's had a bad day, I presume.
yup, I haven't missed Commie Central in years.
but South Park....
Jim Jeffries the islamophobe.
Behead those who insult Islam! Start with Jim!
Why?
topcatdog Fuck off you all, He’s Atheïst he hates all religions!!
@@kyaxara7321 most athiests dont hate religion they just dont believe in it
@TheTimbalanders He tells those types of jokes all the time, if it hadn't been for the Christchurch shooting I bet they might have put it in there. It's certainly in his stand up comedy, but you don't know that because you were sent here because you watched a VERY racist nazi nuthugger bitch about how 1 hour of footage had to be cut down into a short segment about bigotry (which Avi is, he's a bigot of the highest rank).
Whoa, he got so OWNED because he thoughtfully considered the counterpoint and was willing to admit he was wrong/change his stance? I guess we need some legislation that forcefully changes the definition of owned.
Best part was the air horn bit
"I'm a good liberal" Is easily your best joke Jim.
Right Wing Everything, is a Trick..
Liberals are Liberal w/Liberty.
Conservatives are Conservative w/Liberties.
Conservative Liberties are Liabilities (Tricks)
Democracy = Rule by Society.
Left/Dem = Society.
Progressive = Better.
Like Liberty? ~ Be Liberal.
Want Better? ~ Be Progressive.
I've officially lost all respect for Jim
I'm sure he's crushed. How will he go on?
lol why
Nothing to do with taking Peterson seriously, he was just disingenuous. For example with the alt right thing, Peterson made a joke about inviting them to parties, but has in the past disavowed all identity politics including those of the alt right. He also acknowledges how the actual alt right (not the nebulous bogey man that many people use) hate him
Because he only agreed with half of your belief or half of the other side's?
You're acting like a little whiny bitch if you ask me.
No.. Jim did not call Jordan Peterson alt-right, he just said that JP is popular among the alt-right.
Just like how Fox News isn't racist, but they are the most popular news channel among racists.
So many JJWs here, jordan justice warriors.
I remember when Jim was a great edgy comic.
Key word, WAS
I used to think Jeffries was so intelligent. How could he be so oblivious to Peterson’s message, which isn’t anti liberal, but just correct!
I don’t…
In other words, you remember when you thought Jim was a conservative.
@@rockmyballsplease Jim has never been conservative. Search 'Jim Jefferies Gun Control'.
Lol, as slanted as the edits are, the moment when he air horned that chick made it all worth it *dying*
And a very valid point to make! She must have known it would happen eventually, her reasoning in justification of silencing was flawed.
4:25 but you’re not criticizing. You’re shouting him down.
she is exercising her right to deny the rights of others
@@nathenism bruh, that sum the stupidity of this whole thing up perfectly. XD
Blue Wolf Which is perfectly framed later when he whips out an air horn on her lol.
K and?
@@lucasholguin6109 that is not the proper way to have a conversation. If you need to shout someone you disagree with down instead of debating them, you’re argument probably isn’t that good.
When will you release the unedited video
I liked the air horn bit at the end.
A couple bits of Comedic misrepresentation, a very good challenge on the Cake issue (maybe you need to have a long form chat together) and the Airhorn part was absolutely inspired.
A solid 8/10
MajesticDemonLord you nailed it right on the head. Even I had to think a little bit when he used that cake example. I’m glad he did. The airhorn was genius lol
Bob Johnson he took a position on discrimination that was proved wrong by a comedien in a few seconds and you wanna give him credit for that? Seriously? Is your bar really that low?
ehhhh, i would disagree. He claims it would be wrong to deny the cake to the gay couple, but still should be able to have the freedom.
there is a difference between the color skin you are born with, and what you are sexually attracted to. do i have a right to refuse service to furrys or pedophiles? im curious
Matt Davis homosexuality isn't a sexual fetish nor is it illegal so there's a world of difference there. But as long as the child molester has paid his debt to society and the furry is not engaged in sexual activity sexuality inside the bakery then it might very well be discrimination not to serve them
They should do a segment on how much of a sell out Jim Jefferies is.
U mean 5 part series
Wouldn’t even say he’s a sell out, his true colors were just exposed. Fuck him.
They should do a series on his unedited interviews. And "Dingo and muslim baby: bonus episode".
they should a segment on how much you people whine about your hurt feelings.
@@jasonclarke7557 Hurt feelings and contempt for a lack of integrity are quite different things.
5:30 that’s our old jimmy 😁
Phew! you had me worried about being objective for a moment 😁
The moment JP admitted that his conclusion about not serving gay people was too fast, and that hes was wrong about it (because it was a spontaneous question/answer that needed more thoughts) made me respect him even more.
really?
In other words having the balls to own up to your own inadequacies like a man, ie social responsibility. This really is where conservative values shine through. He's really doing a great thing for society, but he also put a huge target on his back by doing so because of all the people whose entire worldviews will come crashing down the moment they concede that he actually makes some valid points. That's why they go at him so hard. I just wish he doesn't end up physically hurt or worse.
Jack Heathen he didn't get the question.
Except none of his ideology or public raving will change as a result.
allenwright89 I think you are also missing the question.
You know this actually wasn’t super bias towards either side I appreciate his attempted neutrality
But then again in the description he labesl Peterson as "Alt Right" which implies he's racist and hatefull.... This is just false and is an attempt to disinform people.... appart from that yes it was good that he was critical he should be Peterson is not a prophet or something he should be confonted with the flaws of his discourse
tim van der velde you’re completely right I agree
tim van der velde No it doesn't, it says he became a darling of the alt-right. Not the same as saying that he's alt-right.
What that means is that the alt-right loves him. Or at least did at one point. Not that he himself is alt-right or loves the alt-right. In fact, if that is what that description meant to say then it doesn't make sense for Jim to have included clips of Peterson denouncing/disavowing the alt-right/Nazis/hate groups.
I do think there was bias but that fucking air horn at the end was the redemption
Thank you for keeping this heavily edited and deceptive video still up and with the comments open!
This aged like cottage cheese left on a roof in Death Valley in mid July.
Gee wiz what a great segment. Thanks for the laugh track otherwise i wouldnt have known what was funny 🤒🤢😖💀
Michael Silovic:
Exactly.
Tragic.
Jesus christ.. This is so.. taken out of context.
Typical considering the opposition. This is important because if our ideas are correct they can stand even disingenuous criticism.
@Brett No amount of editing can hide the embarrassment of someone completely dismantling your cake argument on national television by using the most obvious analogy on the planet. That isn't the result of clever editing, it's the result of a terribly formed opinion.
@@Lexyboogie So why edit at all then? Why take things out of context if the argument is so bad that it's self evident? The lengths of cognitive dissonance that you L/R partisans will go to in defense of your team is astounding. Your little hot take is on par with "Stealing is ok as long as you steal from the rich - because they can afford to lose it." I don't see how that "logic" is any different from the utter nonsense spewed in defense of Trump. It's just basic bitch whataboutism. If Tucker Carlson edited some unhinged Antifa Commie out of context, would you be as flippant about that? Doubtful...
I see you also completely glossed over the fact that when Jim "embarrased" Jordan, Jordan's response was to admit that he may have been wrong. That's a pretty rare occurence on either side these days. ....but let's just completely gloss over that and get back to reading from the "McAlt Right(TM) Self Help Boogie Man" script.
...and I'm sorry, but the thought of Jim Jefferies dismantling _anyone's_ argument about _anything_ halfway important is hilarious to me. He's like a 15 year old boy who was given a show about politics. He's about as low hanging fruit as it gets. You must have a very low bar if you're giving him that much credit. Faaaaaaaaaaar lower than the Peterson fanboys who think that Jordan is some sort of once in a lifetime intellectual juggernaut. At least they're making an *attempt* at critical thinking and objectivity.
Here's a thought: You can actually maintain your negative opinion about Peterson AND call out dishonest/divisive behavior. Pretty crazy concept, huh? It's called "intellectual honesty". Try it out some time! It's fun! :)
@@lionelnietzsche3917 Well, of course you edit interviews because it's a TV show and TV shows have to stay within a time limit while accommodating commercial breaks. I know people desperately want to believe he was taken out of context on the cake point but anybody with a halfway decently functioning frontal lobe can clearly hear that he wasn't, so why does it even matter that that part was edited for TV? That would have been incredibly embarrassing even if they had played the entire interview, perhaps even more so. The fact that he admitted he was wrong means nothing to me because someone who commands the attention of so many vulnerable people should NOT be getting caught off guard so easily on such a basic analogy. I would have praised him for changing his mind if they had gone back and forth for some time with complex and rational arguments, but that's not what happened here.
This isn't the only time this has happened by the way. Go watch the Rogan interview where he completely face plants from Joe pointing out a simple hypocrisy of his. You're here talking about progressives arguing for stealing from the rich? Okay then, go watch Jordan Peterson on that podcast talk passionately about redistributing sexual opportunity among the population, i.e., stealing (as you put it) sexual opportunities from the sexually rich. It really didn't take that much brainpower for the self-described ape, Joe Rogan, to point out the hypocrisy of being against wealth redistribution, but being in favor of sexual redistribution, which is objectively so much worse.
As to why I can't stand Jordan Peterson, I am of the opinion that if you are in the sort of position that JP is in, you better have all your ducks in a row when you have a fanbase of vulnerable people who are looking for a savior and will gobble up anything you tell them. When your points are frequently getting dismantled by "low hanging fruit", as you put it, that's a massive problem to me that demonstrates a significant lack of care in your thought process and the way you form your opinions, and it provides some evidence of a grift mindset. When he does that nonsense under the phony guise of being a liberal, while simultaneously covering for bigoted words, thoughts and actions, that's where the JP hate becomes totally warranted.
@@Lexyboogie I've worked in the film and music industries for the better part of my entire life. It's the family business. I know all about editing. I've spent thousands and thousands of hours doing it myself.
...and just for the record, I started watching JBP a couple years before he became a political figure and member of the iNtElLeCtUaL dArKwEb. I'm a psychology nerd and dislike both sides of the political spectrum. I'm not only disappointed with where Jordan's gone as a celebrity intellectual (lol), but I also don't think he goes nearly far enough into the root of the geopolitical situation we're faced with. I've called him a "selective fan of Solzhenitsyn" many, many times. I'm definitely not here to drool over his IQ and I don't believe in having idols, period. I think it's absurd to consider Jordan any sort of leader or hero.
I'm here to point out that the Jim Jeffries show, like most of the corporate media, has an agenda. In service of that agenda, they'll use every kind of selective editing and strawman argument possible to avoid actual discussion. The most egregious case of Jim's selective editing was with a right wing activist named Avi Yemeni. I disagree with just about everything Avi stands for. ..and yet I can still see how dishonest Jim was being with his framing and editing. Just because you call out one side doesn't mean you support the other. I'm not defending Avi or Jordan. I'm calling out Jim.
Go read about Peterson's recent interview with the Times. The article and the uncut audio of the interview itself are COMPLETELY different. This is par for the course on both sides of the media. Why do you think Fox News almost exclusively interviews insane liberals? They need their audience to conflate the radical left with the wider left. ..just like left wing media wants you to think that Jordan is McAlt Right(TM). It's all "gotcha journalism", divisive strawmanning, and hit pieces. Jordan Peterson is irrelevant. I'm talking about the landscape of our media and the state of journalism - and you're hung up on whether or not Jordan secretly hates women. We're having two entirely different conversations.
Does the actual interview exist or is this all we get?
wow. u have to watch it until the end! it's worth it!