The new Jordan Peterson just dropped.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 сен 2024
- Jonathan Pageau's original vid, but again I must urge you not to bother this man:
• Montero and WandaVisio...
Support me on Patreon:
/ thoughtslime
Follow me on Twitch:
/ thoughtslime
One time tips on Ko-Fi:
ko-fi.com/Thou...
Want more Thought Slime videos? Check out Scaredy Cats! Horror content, every Tuesday at 12 pm EST :
/ scaredycatstv
CGI-Sewer Background courtesy of Andrea Jörgensen:
/ andijorgensen
What is Black Anarchism | Saint Andrew
• What is Black Anarchism?
Class Time: the 90s Marxist TV Show That Never Was.... Until Now!! [e01: CIRCULATE] | Non-Compete
• Class Time: the 90s Ma...
Happy Bee Surf & Daily Beetle by Kevin MacLeod are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. creativecommon... incompetech.com...
Artist: incompetech.com/
Eyeball Zone solicitations can be sent to thoughtslimeeditor@gmail.com, please include your pronouns and use the word "eyeballs" somewhere in the subject line. I do not accept sponsorships, so please do not e-mail me about it.
The Eyeball Zone Masterlist:
docs.google.co...
Two quick corrections:
- Icon carving is apparently an Orthodox thing, so whoops my B there could have done a little bit more of my due dilligence there.
- Pageau is apparently pronouncing Napolean's name in the Italian way, so technically correct.
I just gotta say of all the things you could critic Napoleon for Lil Nas X's video choices sure is the stangest one i've heard yet.
You should look at John Doyle she's starting to get a lot more traction on the right.
But why, though? It's not like the majority of his audience is Italian.
Icons aren’t carved, the Orthodox Church only allows painted images as they believe carved images violate the second commandment’s ban on graven images. Orthodox icon makers refer to the painting process as writing an icon.
Can I add a needlessly nitpicky correction and state that Napoleon was Emperor of *the French*, not of *France*. France is the land that was owned by the royals for centuries, Napoleon was intentionally distancing himself from the kings by not claiming lordship over the land that the French people lived on and worked, but instead claiming to represent them directly. It was pretty important to him. He was a weird and not very nice fellow.
"the stripper pole is a symbol for the stripper pole"
well done john paieigheige
Woah, that is like deep man.
🤯
Ah yes, the floor is a symbol for the floor.
Sometimes a stripper pole is just a stripper pole-Freud, probably.
aah yes, the pole is made of pole
My conservative grandma says everything good that is progressive in the world is bad and a "sign of the times"
This resulted in "sign of the times every time that we speak" being my favorite line in Montero
Lol I choked. Thats awesome
I didn't even really think of how good that line is, damn
@@homestuckhauntsme same. So many layers to art.
I hope your grandma gets indiscriminate access to healthcare. And can afford the care and housing she may require as she ages.
I know. I know, how could I allow the evil, communist idealogy to cloud my vision of what's good and right? If only I found jesus, then maybe I wouldn't want to help the poor and downtrodden so much ....wait, that doesn't seem right?
@@inefffable how dare you want to stop people from suffering. /s
"the spear is of course a-" me: a phalic symbol, literally rising up for Lil Nas to ride on. "an inversion of the Spear of Michael" WHAT?! THE WHAT?!
Lil Nas X symbolism is drawn from the Southern US religious culture that he was brought up in, and is still surrounded with. That's one of the reasons that Right-wing Christian groups reacted so strongly. He was calling them out in their own language. Plus, you know, being an openly gay Black man who dared to have a Country music hit.
They felt personally attacked.
I kind of loved that Lil' Nas X video, I thought it was just _scandalous._
@@grmpEqweer I always hear *scandalous* in the voice of the Ashley's.
@@Purpleturtlehurtler and so do I now. Thank you.
Have you or anyone who liked this comment listened to the song as it doesn't "call them out in their language" the video is meant to be provocative, but the song isn't meant to call people out. Unless you think the line
"Call me when you want, call me when you need" is some southern message...
Conservatives used the some as something they could use to add to the culture war, but it backfired, I mean Lil Nas X kills satan, isn't that good, they obviously didn't watch the video.
"almost all people"
Thank you for recognizing that there are indeed people like me who can use their magick powers to bring back their dead robot husbands.
I have no idea what this means. I'll come back when I finish the video
I want a robot husband
@@johnwrath3612 We all do
@@johnwrath3612 I believe that's either tier 3 or tier 4 of Maslow's hierarchy
"The Strange, The Impure, The Exceptional, The Fluid, The Rejected, The Sick, and The Unknown" is my new prefix for filling out legal paperwork, and the only way I'll accept being introduced at social gatherings and other zoom meetings.
I came across The Strange, The Impure, The Exceptional, The Fluid, The Rejected, The Sick, and The Unknown D S in a RUclips comment section, and I got really jealous, because people just introduce me as "this dude here".
exactly the population Yeshua commanded his contemporary followers to help
@@watcherwlc53 that's the joke.
You fill out legal paper work?
Actually, all Little Nas X did is what a lot of us do when people say to go to Hell. We go there. We go with pride. Fuck it. I'm sliding on that pole - Not with the grace of that boy, damn, he slides on the pole like a god - but i will slide.
If i went down to hell on a pole i propably just slide down like a kid and scream "weeeeeee!"
@@sayanApprentice095 OMG, same~~~
Agreed, he only convinced me to become a witch and damn the heteronorms of this world as I dance upon the moonlit moors.
I would burn my hands halfway down fall of and facepalm onto hell .
Still prefera le to conservative heaven.
@Forrest Taylor not everyone believes in hell, not everyone believes that hell is bad, not everyone cares about going to hell, and it’s not like it’s your responsibility to police what everyone else’s relationship to hell is. 👁
Why is it that Conservative Christianity overtly ignores the things that Jesus was the most transparent about, i.e. compassion for the poor and down-trodden?
Because acknowledging the verse in Matthew's (I think?) gospel in which Jesus recognizes the existence of intersex, transgender and non-binary people (probably?) is the first step on the road to CoMmUnIsM
Yeah i think it’s in Matthew’s gospel with the parable of the sheep and goats, where people who claim to be followers but don’t help the less fortunate (the goats) are separated and discarded from the sheep, those who follow the word and act on it. Even in the Book of Acts it mentions how the Christian communities lived together and it would upset a lot of conservatives today (a couple selling their property, withholding their money from the apostles so it doesn’t get distributed to the poor and then mysteriously popping their clogs)
I do think a lot of Christians haven’t read the Bible properly or fully.
It's inconvenient.
@@digitaldeathsquid3448 what verse? I'm not doubting you, just curious
Conervative Christians are the group that donates the most to charity, whereas liberals who claim to care about the poor actually donate the least
Love that when he pulls up a picture of the "Malleus Maleficarum" book... it's very clearly labelled a "Fiasco Playset" (i.e. a supplement for a tabletop role-playing game). He probably just searched online and grabbed the first thing that looked like a book cover without reading it
He absolutely does that stuff on purpose
Jonathan Pageau sounds like he argues that he doesn't know any hetero women who enjoy sex, and thinks that supports his side.
Maybe doesn't know any who enjoy sex with him...
@@PeaceLoveAndGuns Do you disagreeing with a specific point or are you trying to be edgy
@@PeaceLoveAndGuns Do you disagreeing?
All edge with no point
who? ben shapiro?
a musician talk about gay sex with no euphemism, they see it as figurative, when he talks figurativelly they take it literally, faithful people like to take things in bad faith
Call me skeptical about this.
These guys only worship money,
Not the words of Jesus.
I hear the CSI Miami intro whenever I read that last part
I don't disagree that there's a lot of bad faith analysis going on but I also think they could spare themselves a lot of confusion and long-winded analysis if they punched some of Nas X's lyrics into urban dictionary
@@charliekowittmusic Or they worship a vision of Jesus that happens to agree with and approve of their tribalistic world view. And that allows for the existence of an antagonist figure that all ills - real or imagined - can be pinned onto, including their own faults.
@@Bluecho4 Ahh yes. White, Capitalist Jesus!
The best kind!
I love the idea of trans healthcare being witchcraft, every single trans person i know would find that DOPE AS FUCK.
A difference between this guy and Peterson is he doesn’t have a funny Kermit the fog voice I can close my eye and laugh at
Still find it bizarre that people r bothering to talk aboot a Canadian lol so unCanadian lol
Nooooo mr. Peterson! Don't go into the fog! Tihi
The fog lmaooo
Frog voice without Peterson+rants+muscles- Greg ducette
10:50: Thats not Inclusion,
thats the wrong sort of Normalization, duh.
New thought slime is like going to a new ecosystem: leave only footprints, take only pictures.
and also lots and lots of likes and comments for grumble tum
"Ontological reality of pole dancing..." im gonna hit this dude
If I had to guess who said this phrase totally out of context I would guess Zizek
An eye-opening look at what a Dan Brown protagonist would actually be like IRL. lol
This is satisfyingly true and accurate
Hahahahhah
Who's Dan Brown?
@@Gloomdrake
Author of Angels and Demoms. His books are ok.
@@Gloomdrake he solved DaVinci’s code
Oh god, these word salad grifters keep on coming.
Peterson was at least kinda stimulating. Like a stream of consciousness singer from the 90s
I constantly feel stupid for not understanding wtf people are saying when they talk like that. Like @10:07 im just scratching my head trying to make sense of it.
@@MetalicComplex I studied law and was in courts discussing human decency and even I got confused.
@@michimatsch5862 thank you for that ❤
@@MetalicComplex to be fair, that’s exactly how the grift works, you’re more likely to be roped in if you think you lack understanding
this dude just learned the word solipsism and is SUPER excited about it
This isn't how Roundworld works, this is how Discworld works. WE DON'T HAVE NARRATIVIUM, PAGEAU!
Ya know,considering how tone-deaf his media analyses and political takes are, I wouldn`t be surprised if Pageau was a Flat Earther at all!It would certainly feed into his "Medieval people were smarter than the Moderns" so they must have been right about Christianity,Jews,witches,The Devil and whatnot,boy howdy!" fetishistic revisionism.
This man just said "ontological reality of pole dancing" Jesus Mary and Joseph
I honestly had to double check that ontology still meant what I thought it meant after I heard that bit.
@@nickhamilton-brain7167 I mean, he's saying that the substance of a stripper pole comes with immaterial essences attached to it. There's a narrative with different modes of being (ontology) attached to it. You can do this with anything. He's asking the question "what do strippers do?" It's a phenomenological approach.
@@bradspitt3896 The "stripper pole" is also shaped similarly to an obelisk. These ancient shapes are representational in both structure and arrangement to be phallic in nature. They are also erected to commemorate an individual or to honor God.
Or, just maybe, It's just a fucking stripper dancing on a pole and people like the way it looks.... YOU like the way it looks.
@@kendrajones9708 I'm not really sure what you're saying, it's a little abstract. Even if you deny the significance of the shape of it (which I think isn't necessary), there are certain modes of being people embody on a stripper pole. It's not a prescriptive statement, it's just the way it is. There is an essence to an stripper pole, like there's an essence to anything. A stripper, is objectifying herself. That's descriptive, she's not interested in the people, and they know they can't touch her. You can't point to a marginal love story between a stripper and a client and say it's representative of the entire bell curve. In that sense, they are like a succubus. They embody the same essences.
@@bradspitt3896 I was being obtuse and abstract on purpose. The fact that you... you know what, nevermind. You have to live the rest of your life as yourself and that's punishment enough. Have a good day 😊
Fun fact: Napoleon coming from Corsica, his original last name is actually "Buonaparte" and pronounced more or less like in Italian.
The thing is, he "frenchised" it afterwards to "Bonaparte" and from then on it was pronounced like you pronounce it.
So Pagou is dead naming a dead emperor. Very much like a poor man's Jordan Peterson.
@@amroth14105 LMAO. To add to this, after he became emperor, the last name was dropped entirely because he because of his royal status. So he's being double dead named here.
"...random women, and occasionally a man, for flavor."
A bisexual experience
Lol.
*cisheteromasculine
Tasty
@@MarcillaSmith qhatdo you mean i am confued please explain?
@@BasementTermites I'm saying that it's typical behavior for people who are cisheteromasculine (men assigned male at birth who present in a typically masculine way) to pursue random women as well as the occasional man
"Jonathan Pageau want's very much to be the next Jordan Peterson"-Cries in Stefan Molyneux
So the first time i herd about Stefan Molyneux I was really sad because I though the who made Fable was crazy right wing. I was later corrected
@@worthasandwich It's an easy mistake to make seeing how both of them have a questionable relationship with the truth
@@worthasandwich I'm not sure Peter is much better, but I wouldn't be able to tell you for sure because I can't mentally process the reality Peter's brain originates from. The man is a weirdo, and that's a lot coming from someone in this community.
When this guy said "I guess I should tip my fedora to Lil Nas X" two minutes into the video I knew this was gonna be a doozy
I don't see what's wrong with saying that... People say a lot of different things, talk in very different ways.
Matt: “to quote my namesake...”
Me: * is surprised when slime doesn’t start spilling out of his mouth, like I forgot Thought Slime isn’t his legal given name *
Matt: "to quote my namesake..."
*starts cheering in a crowd of Miis*
Must be his middle name
A reading from the book of Slime
Mr. SO CALLED "thought slime"
I think Matthew is also 25 years old (he's actually 35-40)
"Semiotics of Demonology" is what I'm gonna name my new analog synth Judas Priest tribute project.
That's a lot of JPs in the mix now
when he starts talking about “sacrificing the exception for cohesion” the mask really came off
And what mask is that?
@@06rtm he’s racist lol
well thats postmodernism for ya. well very academic postmodernism. i personally love it...i think it can liberate us
@@robinhastings7609 He lived in Africa for a decade
@@06rtm is that supposed to prove something?
It's really insidious how these people can hide behind "analysis of symbolism" and mystical nonsense to conceal some of the most vile opinions imaginable.
It's basically reality fanfiction
@@garryjones1776 Could it be that many people in general... just look pretty similar? I'm neither balding yet (though 85% of men are balding by the age of 50) nor would I consider my hair that unusual in this pic, lots of guys have longer hair, but these things are rather subjective. Roughly 42% of men wear glasses so statistically I wouldn't consider that very notable. I may be overweight now, as are 64% of the people in the UK, but I wasn't when this photo was taken as it happens. And anything from 42-64% of men have beards, so I'm hardly bucking the trend there either. I'm glad you're not threatened by my eyes though, that would be very weird if you were. Not sure I've ever met anyone with threatening eyes (apart from Lord Occulon of course).
@@garryjones1776 "do you consider yourself a representation of modern man"
I really really really couldn't care less
@@garryjones1776 hi, I disagree with those men.
@@garryjones1776 personally I think Gabriel’s eyes in their profile pic suggest friendliness, kindness and humor.
he talks like hes trying to reach the word count on a college essay
I’ve always called guys like this “intellectual street magicians”. It is really impressive until you know how it’s done. All of a sudden, they stop looking like a wizard and turn into a guy walking around with a playing card stuck to his elbow with theater glue.
@@Animekirk Actually, I stand by my contention. What guys like Shapiro and Peterson and (insert clone here) do is as technical and as rehearsed as any street magician. It's as much smoke and mirrors and sleight of hand as pulling a quarter out of a chicken egg. Once you understand basic rhetorical techniques, you begin to see how these guys build convincing arguments like a patchwork quilt. A dash of circumlocution here, a straw man argument there, a definitional bait and switch slapped in the middle...it's carny art, man. It requires talent and skill in the same way it takes talent and skill to do a cold read, or to sell a used car at 34% to someone who can barely afford the down payment. When confirmation bias meets charisma, you can amass a very large following. Do you think Deepak Chopra and Tony Robbins are making bulletproof arguments? Those Megachurch pastors flying around in luxury jets they bought with their congregation's pension checks aren't "offering the better argument". Ben Shapiro et al are simply selling convincing arguments to people who want to be convinced.
@@Animekirk I don't think 90% of humans are idiots, I think 100% of them are human. And one of the oldest grifts is convincing people that they are less impressionable than they are. Almost every grift plays to a person's ego or their their insecurities; and the very best play to both.
Let me give you an example. A speaker stands up and says "your failures are not your fault; people who fear your brilliance have conspired to keep you down. I will now tell you all of the ways you have been cheated out of the life you deserve."
I don't know if you're a betting man, but would you wager that some, if not most, people will gravitate to what he says, and that he would gain popularity with a large enough platform? Especially if he presents his argument with a sheen of intellectualism, logic, and rationality. But here's the thing; to the people he convinces, any inconsistencies will be overlooked in favor of his overall message. And any criticism of his message will be perceived as attempts to protect the status quo. Because that man has made the argument personally beneficial to the people he convinces, the threshold to make them see otherwise has left the realm of rationality, and entered the realm of emotion. Emotion dulls critical thinking and encourages fortification around ideals. This is psych 101. When your goal is education and data testing, you welcome contrary information. When your goal is popularity, you welcome conflict. The distinction is paramount.
@@BionicLatino I welcome conflict because conflict breeds growth. Intellectual conflict furthers intellectual growth. "Contrary information" can be synonymous with conflict. So your last 2 sentences are confusing. I completely agree with the rest of what you said though. But none of it applies to Peterson at all. You could argue that shapiro might be giving a "you're being cheated and I'm here to help" message, but he's a political pundit. He advocates for one party and against another. It's a given those in his position would do that. I'm not a fan of the political divide myself so I wont defend shapiro on that front. But peterson never claims he will save you from some unfairness that cheated you. He mainly talks about obvious things that he himself readily admits is obvious. He has on numerous occasions expressed disbelief in how popular he's become, as all he is doing is speaking what to him is common sense. And people just seem to gravitate to it.
I hope nothing I said in this topic has come across too aggressive or incendiary. RUclips comments tend to bring out the worst in people. You seem like a thoughtful person and though I disagree with you, I respect your decorum.
@@Animekirk The difference between contrary information and conflict is the difference between a disagreement and a fight. That isn’t to say that there isn’t a productive role of each; I was just highlighting the difference when looking at the end goal of people looking to advance knowledge versus people trying to advance their agenda.
@@BionicLatino what if advancing knowledge IS your agenda. What then?. Lol. Sorry. It's a serious question but I know it might come across as snarky.
All these pseudo-intellectuals are really weird incomprehensible bastardizations of the eccentric art history professors you get in some colleges.
Meanwhile, you, the true intellectual...
You nailed it. It's sort of what Hollywood taught the public to think intellectuals look like. In most movies/shows historians, philosophers, etc always have to look stuck up and eccentric, even though it's far from the reality in most cases.
I have personally only met one professor like this, and even most professors at my uni seemed to avoid him.
Granted, I studied computer-science so most of my profs use to come wearing shorts and a t-shirt in summer.
@@Animekirk Peterson just makes shit up and dresses it up in fancy words you think sound intelligent. He says nothing, means less, and only pushes Christian conservatism when he *does* finally take any kind of stand.
@@Animekirk You're not very bright, are you? Rhetorical question.
@@Animekirk from what I've read he never argued to be "a true intellectual", bro chill
The way he talks about witches threatening "masculine-feminine relationships" or whatever the fuck sounds like textbook homophobia, like "the Satanists are gonna turn your kids gay" kinda stuff. I guess he figures that if you're still watching the video that far in, he doesn't need to keep up the plausible homophobia deniability anymore.
He’s an old school orthodox Christian so he’s catering to a completely different audience than this video
Kid: I want Jorden Peterson
Mom: We have Jorden Peterson at home.
The Jorden Peterson at home:
Why tf would you want Jordan Peterson at your home?
@@niranjanj8601 Pain
I’m sorry but if JBP did BDSM he’d obviously b the sub
@@niranjanj8601 I think he could be fun to hang out maybe.
He sounds like a person who has just found out what solipsism is but still doesn't understand it.
Pfft. Your comment is so solipsistic.
A true solipsist would question the existence of Lil Nas X, especially since I've never seen him in person.
Yes! LUL
i kept wanting to mark his paper with red pen. i have never graded a paper
There is a word in german that describes the use of academic language in a dishonest way like that: "Bildungsjargon".
He's not being dishonest. You just need to read more.
We have that in english too, we say: bullshit
@@anothercat1300 This post is so vague and empty.
If JP has been called “the stupid man’s smart man,” does this mean this guy is the poor man’s stupid man’s smart man, or is he the poor, stupid man’s smart man? I don’t know how to factor this out
He's the coke zero of "The stupid man's smart man"
“We don’t want him either.”
-Sincerely, a poor man.
He's the Jordan Peterson your mom says we have at home.
THOUGHT LEADER!....when I saw your post, that's just what came to my mind, and then yelled it out. I am somewhat intoxicated. Ignore me.
This is a lot like something George Carlin would have said. Well done!
the dude literally said we should sacrifice scapegoats to preserve "coherence" like…is that hate speech? does that legally qualify as hate speech and calls to genocide? please?
It is. He tries to hide it in academic jargon, but Pageau might as well have just said "in order for 'normal' people to exist, we need to kill anyone who isn't normal."
I wouldn't assume he wants to literally sacrifice us, but rather that our rights/ability to function in the world we live in should be sacrificed to keep from confusing people into having to think and interact with more nuance than his worldview. :D
@@Tokahfang
Well, the scapegoat was given the tribes' sins (I think they tied on a scroll) and driven out into the desert, presumably to die.
Anyway...
Scapegoated people can just be made into representatives of the dominant group's unconscious, rejected traits. Or they can really kill them.
Look at black trans women who do sex work. High body count there.😭
@@grmpEqweer Also notable: The scapegoat in the Hebrew ritual was, in fact, a goat. Two goats would be chosen by lot - one goat would be sacrificed, to honor G-d, and another sent away bearing the people's sins. This is also the origin of the name mythical 'Azazel', meaning 'that which is removed'.
The Greeks had a similar ritual, pharmakoi, in which a criminal was chosen at random and sacrificed to avert bad fortune. This was a reference to myths in which a king would sacrifice himself to end a calamity... of course real kings were not so much into this idea.
"Genocide, after all, is an exercise in community building" -Philip Gouverich from the book. We Wish to Inform you that tomorrow we will be killed with our families
“200 years ago I might have been mocked…”
I think his “solipsistic” word salad is fuel for that now.
10:50: Thats not Inclusion,
thats the wrong sort of Normalization, duh.
We need less Sex-Sells and such in Songs, not more inclusionary Sex-Sells-in-Songs, duh.
"Self-crowning" is somehow the grossest term I've heard this week.
yeah napoleon was a gross little man
It makes me think of birthing a baby but the baby is myself and it looks exactly like old adult me but smaller and with weird baby proportions. Definitely a full beard though. Anyway I don't like it.
I self crown before bed erry night.
Giving birth to yourself? That's a hard one to think about.
@@kq1039 doesn't frida kahlo have a painting thats basically that (except for the beard)?
Funfact: i've read malleus malefocarum in its entirety for a presentation about magic in Faust, and it was kind of fun because it really reads like an medieval incel book
"all witchcraft stems from carnal lust, which is in women, insatiable."
Pretty sure it basically was. The church even denounced it (before Kramer(?-the incel) because it didn’t even line up with official demonology or the church’s stance on witches but the book for super popular anyway and then I think one of the author’s supporters gained church power. Something like that.
Well, it was written by monks.
@@wvu05 yeah, but the weird unchill kind of monks
@@yetthesunstillshines True, but I was respinding to the idea that it was written by incels, since they were celibate, and it was not uncommon for families to make that decision on a child's behalf.
He completely ignores the entire history of sexual innuendo in popular music going back to the blues.
It absolutely astounds me when conservatives act like sex in music is a new thing and not something that has been around forever.
@@glitchedoom You're right - so many of the words in old blues and rock'n'roll songs are sexual. But most white people wouldnt' have known the language well enough. The phrase "Rock'n'roll" itself.
It goes waaaay further back, like, as long as humans have been singing, we've been singing about sex
I'm dating a stripper and she's an angel.
My angel is a centrefold (god I'm dating myself with that reference)
I have to say, I never would have predicted the market for “Joseph Campbell, but repackaged for right wing reactionaries”.
At least Campbell inspired Star Wars.
This guy on the other hand...
I mean... That's kind of just Joseph Campbell
@@reaganbartels9993 I can't agree with this. A lot of Campbell's writing is outdated and problematic, but ultimately he saw myths and narratives as metaphors about ourselves, not sets of instructions which tell us how to live. The seeds of the Petersonian fusion of self-help psychology and conservative traditionalism are certainly there, but to arrive at his interpretation, Peterson has to misunderstand myths as truths about the world, rather than symbols of our internal lives.
@@macmcskullface1004 The point I'm trying to make isn't that Campbell is good and right, but rather that there is a specific and important difference between Campbell and Peterson (and this other guy). To Campbell, myths are symbols of the self that can be reflected upon as aides in your personal journey of becoming your best self. To Peterson, myths are cultural roadmaps that tell us what society should be, and help us find our place in the social hierarchy. With Campbell, it's a subjective, personal journey, that ends when you feel like you're the person you should be. Peterson rejects this subjectivity, and replaces it with an objectively correct place within an ancestrally ordained hierarchy. This alteration from subjective, internally determined, to objective, externally determined, is a key element of Peterson's (and this other guy's) fascism.
I love how the word "buckwild" has now permeated the entire left-leaning youtube sphere
It's better than "bucko".. !😂🤣
We all owe a collective thank you to longmont potion castle for that gem
sometimes with a "-fucking-" infix
"Once the narrative is established, reality itself bends to accommodate it."
This is actually a plot point in Terry Pratchett's Discworld with the witches. But, unlike us, they literally live in story books and are genre savvy.
Kind of wild, huh? By sheer coincidence, I just started rereading Witches Abroad the other day, so that whole element was fresh in my mind, too.
@@BasiliskKingOfSerpents RIGHT?! It was just weird like seeing your friend at work when you don't expect them.
I was literally thinking "but this isn't Discworld" at that bit.
fiction represent hyper reality.
everything plays itself out
Icon carving is actually a very old practice, especially in countries that have an Orthodox Christian population, like Russia or Greece. Icons, to be reductive, are pieces of art used as objects of religious devotion. This guy is probably just the first few results in English. Just a nitpick.
As for Pageau himself, he's largely the same as Peterson. Casual bigotry mixed with a warped understanding of religion and philosophy.
The majority of icons are "written" in a traditional form of painting. There's a slight third dimension given by many layers of thick paint over time, but 3d art isn't typical with icons. There are loads of iconographers, as they are known, even in the english speaking world. Not sure where he revived carving them from, but it isn't at all the norm.
Maybe they have similarities but he is very different than Peterson.Pageau uses a knowledge of historical images and symbolic analysis and Christian mysticism. Peterson manipulates disparate scientific conclusions and a very shallow straw man reading of various philosophers to make his pseudo intellectual conclusions. Peterson is agnostic or atheist and pageau is a devout Christian orthodox openly admits hIs thoughts rest on a faith based cosmological foundation. I doubt pageau would ever even refer to himself as an intellectual. In that way Pageau is less of a sophist- he’s open about his Faith based foundations and not trying to make rational arguments or factual conclusions like Peterson.
You'd refer to yourself as an author or writer.
@@Tokahfang Yeah icons are painted (my priest jokes they aren't "graven" because they aren't carved). "Written" is an old mistranslation that some people still think is the better English word idk.
@@juliaboon9741 there are carved icons too. Painted ones are just more common
So, um, you know that book graphic that shows on-screen at ~22:25, when he's talking about the Malleus Maleficarum? That is not a picture of a genuine medieval text. That is the cover of a scenario for Fiasco, a tabletop roleplaying game, that happens to be named after the (real, albeit stupid) book.
This is literally the equivalent of a dude ranting about how "women are parasites who metaphorically suck men dry, just like the succubus of ancient demonology!" and then pointing to a page in the Dungeons & Dragons Monster Manual as evidence.
Oh my god what a catch!
I hope you are saying this while understanding it was an intentional joke?
One of his points was maleficarum was a protestant early modern text not an medieval one. He idolizes medieval catholicisreductionist which actually had few witch hunts rather than protestantism which he characterizes as modern and reductionistic.
"dude thats not even a demon, sucubi are untethered from the demon/devil/yugoloth dynamic of most fiends! "
“It gives us a riddle of our own Sphinx and it is by this very Sphinx that we run the danger of getting devoured”
Good sentence bro.
The ability of these men to be utterly oblivious to implied metaphor and obvious symbolism is simply..... Staggering and only makes the irony of his self appointed title even sweeter
"New Jordan Peterson just dropped... fyi he gets weirdly transphobic at some points"
Sounds about right
Jordan Peterson is not transphobic, though. Unless you have a very loose definition of transphobia. He neither hates nor fears them.
You know what the funniest part of this all is? Academically speaking, there is a school of thought that appreciates and encourages an asincronic reading of symbols (that is, to impose a symbolic reading on a text divorced from what the author meant or did explicitly depicted). It's what allows queer readings on texts that existed way before queer theory came to be, and therefore couldn't have been written with queer theory in mind.
That school of thought is called postmodernism.
that's what I was thinking haha. how ironic
This!! I was literally just thinking this, but you expressed it better than I could have. Cheers!
This comment needs more likes, people!
First thing to understand is that reality is built on patterns, I hope that we can agree that the world is not arbitrary. Second thing to understand is that symbolic interpretation is not about imposing a narrative on an old text. Post-modernism strives to break down meaning which symbolic thinking does not. Rather it is the manner in which you can see how a story plays out a specific pattern. This is exactly why we even consume stories in the first place, as they reinforce patterns of being that then play out in our lives. Hope this explanation from my amatuer understanding helps!
@@spaak3465 No, I don't think you understand what you're talking about at all, and your comment did nothing to help anything whatsoever.
This whole thing reminds me of growing up in the uberconservative Christian house hold of a right wing talk show host. Their media analysis skills are so silly
"This man claims to be an expert on symbolism..." Trouble is, he wants all the Christian imagery to be literally true. All other imagery then has to be bent to fit that Christian narrative. Which is, well, wrong.
you definitely don't know what it is to think symbolically, semiotically, or archetypically. Imagery being 'literally true' is gibberish - images aren't words, sentences or propositions, they exist unto themselves
@@helvete_ingres4717 Yeah you're right, fictional is a better way to describe art of angels and shiet. You could have cut out the pretentious fluff though.
@@pone5953 haha nope, what I meant is that it's a category error - look that up, you might learn something. Also the prosaic mind is satisfied with the equation: 'fictional' = false
@@helvete_ingres4717 Events that have not happened but are drawn are works of fiction, and no I'm not saying art itself or symbols are fiction, get your nose out of your own ass.
It doesn't need to be bent. it fits into it pretty nicely.
Unfortunately that's lost not only to Western Christians but to all those they've failed like yourself.
The Christian narrative is quite literally universal. All myth and theology can fit inside it.
So weird to call Lil Nas X a satanist even though he literally killed satan in the clip.
the people claiming he's a satanist didn't get to the end of the video, they hopped around in circles going "ewww! icky! yucky! ewwy!" and turned it off before they could see. but really they don't actually give a fuck, they will do whatever they can to shit on a gay black man
Maybe they think Satan works like Siths.
@@autosadist tbh I watched it for the 1st time yesterday (mostly bc I was busy.... but still)
Yeah, but then he becum satan
@@Neimi_Lelnuie did u enjoy it? i enjoyed it ^_^
As an academic who tries very hard to be able to explain things clearly to laypeople, this obfuscatory air Pageau puts on really gets my goat.
PS: If you're interested, his name is pronounced /paʒo/ or "pa-zho".
based IPA user
Seriously he may as well be the "ethics" teacher I had in my online Christian homeschool. That part about self love being disgusting, contemptible pride from the devil is exactly what I was though throughout k-12. That the only ethical way to have self worth was from knowledge that you are unworthy of self love, and that your only worth is through your relationship to Christianity. Very rough to unlearn
Is he like Davis Aurini but less obviously crazy?
Like if Davis Aurini was a Medieval Art History professor
And less cripplingly insecure
I'm still not convinced all these far-right pundits aren't Davis Aurini in latex masks. Stephan M, Peterson, this guy, Davis, SargAk. All the same. Same speech patterns, and droning, monotone voices.
Vc? Aqui? No ninho dos commie?
The Amazing Aurini is a completely different entity from the rest of the big brain boys. He's more closeted pirate magician (as a wise man once said) than pseudo philosophical figure, no matter how hard he tries.
"Everyone who disagree with me is a solipsistic narcissist", says solipsistic narcissist in an attempt at obfuscating own solipsistic narcissism envy.
Also, I think the music video is more about the tickling of the sphincter than any riddle of some sphinx.
The tickling in itself a noble goal.
Also solipsism isn't satanic. Which makes this even more of an projection.
This is what happens when you think all of your ideological preconceptions are metaphysical universal symbolic truth
Very much agree with that, he needs to examine his metaphysical axioms and assumptions, then all his symbolic fantasies would crumble into dust.
God imagine being a watered down version of someone that was already a hack. It would be like a band being a watered down version of Nickelback...
He’s the Collective Soul of conservative hacks.
😂😂😂
So... He's an intellectual Puddle of Mudd?
Theory of a Deadman?
Jonathan Pagaeu has eyes therefore he practices Occulism. (all hail)
He seems like a character Jon Lovitz would be playing if he was still on SNL
He really does!
Oh my god
Blood for the blood god (and sneakers), skulls for the skull throne, carrots for the Sterling!
Milk for the Khorne Flakes!
Nah, broseph. The Emperor protects.
Forget Jesus or Satan, I'm going to worship the most fair of Gods: Khorne. He cares not from where the blood flows and is all about equal opportunity bloodshed.
@@samringwald Orkz iz da best!
Wouldn't it be Boglins for the Sterling?
Cornflakes for the Homunculus
Matt, do you think god stays in heaven because he lives in fear of what he's created?
Somebody Ring the Dinkster
You mean Palutena? Ehh, on her holidays at least.
- spy kids 2
He's not a loon
In god perspective, humanity is that pot full of cooked beans you forgot to throw out weeks ago, but you dont want to throw it now because youre afraid of how awful is going smell the second you open it.
And I think you missed a dogwhistle in there: The constant references to "inversion". "Inversion" is also an archaic term for homosexuality. So when he uses that term in context of "inverting" Christian values, or "inverting" social norms or society etc, he's associating homosexuality as the pivotal cause.
To be entirely fair: if one uses the term "inverse" it generally means: "the inverse of [topic]". You need more clarification to be entirely certain of the full argument.
If I say: "To choose the inverse of Judeo-Christian values...might suggest that one wishes to move beyond the realm of Moral Absolutism and into the realm of Moral Relativism. If you invert the entirety of a system though, you may be wasting your time. You need to subdivide a system into 'quanta' of some kind. You need to evaluate ideas discretely, then understand ways in which those factors interact within a complex system".
There is no historical significance regarding that previous statement. It is simply my choice of how I might utilize language. And some random words I felt like saying. Because why not.
Saying what you think he's saying without actually listening to what he's saying is a bit odd.
No
@@anothercat1300 You could've said that exact same thing about Jonathan.
"if dudes blow you, it's a force of entropy" love it
So does that mean that every closed system trends over time to a guy blowing you?
For many years lil Naz X was roommates with himself, and when he was apart from himself he wrote long letters of longing. They were, perhaps... the best of friends.
(For some reason he reminded me of how historians talk about wlw relationships)
Me: How can you sound intelligent and idiotic at the same, while saying nothing at all?
Pageau: Hold my Thesaurus!
This man sounds like he's trying to bullshit his art history final thesis paper that he started to write three hours before the deadline while running on no sleep, Wikipedia, and a Red Bull spiked with bottom of the pot diner coffee.
Exactly.
He speaks with the cadence and coherency of a man who doesn’t even fully understand the words he’s mashing together.
As someone who's just finished writing an essay on Image Theory, three hours after the deadline while running on no sleep and a lot of sugar in my system (not actually energy drinks), I feel personally called out.
Although I agree. It's kind of uncanny how similar it feels to the way my Image Theory teacher talks in class, although in terms of actual content it's leagues apart.
Anyone's who's tried it knows graveyard coffee (coffee brewed with the bottom of the pot coffee from a truck stop) is the closest real-world thing to a magic potion.
You people are insufferable. His speech is perfectly intelligible once you extend an ounce of charity.
Take a shot any time that guy says "solipsism" (probably in a wrong context) and you'll get alcohol poisoning
Guy talks in a song about their inner world -> Solipsism.
Wanker saying he is in possesion of absolute truth, and therefore everyone else is evil and wicked -> Logic and reason, top level objectivity.
I'm being ironic, of course.
@@Batsmiley “solipsism is when you have your own worldview. The more you think the more of a solipsist you are” - this guy probably
@@huckthatdish And if you think a lot it's Narcissim.
I absolutely CANNOT believe someone actually cited the Malleus Maleficarum...
Omfg..😳😳😳🤯🤯🤯
He's drawing a parallel between the symbolism of the witch he actually has more respect for medieval catholicism and orthodoxy which had hardly any witch hunting then protestantism.
In short Pageau is exactly the type of person Lil Nas X´s middle finger is shown to.
Ironically, "Montero" has a beautiful Satanist interpretation, where a young man enslaved by Christian concepts is slowly empowered with knowledge and eventually conquers their belief in Hell and Satan to become self-fulfilled. (Exercise for readers: Show that "WandaVision" has a similar Wiccan interpretation!)
Love how right wingers feel irresistibly compelled to launch into gibberish tirades about mystical bullshit, instead of just straightforwardly arguing that the mainstream pop culture they dislike is propaganda legitimizing self-indulgent bourgeois narcissism (which has the benefit of being both true and easy for normal people to understand). They can't do it because they'd have to admit that the capitalist system they support actively encourages this stuff to be produced.
@@avispartan4795 i like how you use normal people to mean group of people you are a part of
I'm a Pagan who isn't a Wiccan, but WandaVision is closer to a Crowleyan statement that Gardner ripped off for Wiccan rituals. Anyone who looks at Wicca for more than two minutes sees "An it harm none, do what ye will." That's the Wiccan Rede. However, it reads in full by its original writer, "An it harm none, do what ye Will. Love is the Law; Love under Will." In this phrasing, "harm none" is kind of obvious. But the will Crowley refers to is your overarching pathway and calling in life. You could re-phrase it as "do what you want to achieve your goals, but don't fuck over anyone else in the process when you don't have to." That second sentence continues noting that harm to others is a violation of Love. Also, you can't use your heart's passion as an excuse to be a dick.
Using that yardstick, or even its shortened version, Wanda really blows it. She did as she willed, but it was not her true Will. It also violated "harm none" a few hundred times a minute. And since she's a solo practitioner instead of a member of a coven, she never learned the Rede. Of all people, Agatha made that clear to her. But Agatha is a fully trained witch. The whole reason she's there fighting Wanda is an allegory for the push and pull between eclecticism and hardline Gardnerian Wicca. It's also somewhat akin to the philosophy that you need to learn the rules in an artistic medium before you can break them to gain a better end. Eclectics who never deal with a coven can call themselves Wiccan as it pleases them. But if they want to do ritual with the side of Wicca that has rules and rituals and oath-bound knowledge, they need to stop and learn first.
So at the end, Wanda's stopped harming an entire town and picked up a few books to read. This says in Wiccan terms that she realizes violating the Rede is a very bad idea. She also got to see how other witches do their thing, and she's using that to better understand and make use of her powers. Wicca isn't deep into the redemption arc as a storyline. But it does have a deep soft spot for respect and due caution. Wanda starts using it, so she's aligned with Wiccan philosophy instead of acting against it.
@@lysanamcmillan7972 With a minute-long read you made a critique of Pageau that Matt couldn't fit into 30 minutes. And most who watch might not even read it. Talk about inversion!
I thought the poor man's Jordan Peterson was just Jordan Peterson. I don't know how much more intellectually shabby a fraud can be than that.
JP is already the poor man's Jung
And he’s tenured, which makes this intellectual fraud even more bewildering.
@Kurapika Giovanna he's a bad student of Jung's. He draws from the same discipline and sites Jung often. I'm not a fan of Jung, but I agree with you that Peterson is a pale imitation, but he's following Jung in his school of psycho analysis.
Well for starters his "lectures" are held in five minute increments at various open mic nights.
@@ShinichiKanna you say that like professors aren't intellectually dishonest literally all the time
I swear, there's just a factory somewhere churning these people out...
It's called the 'RUclips algorithm'.
Reactionary attempts to talk about symbolism mostly all make the same basic mistake: they take it for granted that any specific symbol (or sign or signifier) has a single transcendent meaning that everyone who uses that symbol is deliberately invoking. Meanwhile, the people who actually take a systematic or academic study of how systems of symbols work have all been pointing out for the last century that that's not how symbols, meaning, or symbolism work, at all, and that no, everyone in the world isn't operating under conservative Christian symbolism and metaphysics.
In other words, "reality bends to fit my narrative." That really is what the conservative religious "symbolism expert" crowd thinks: their favorite interpretation of their favorite symbolism is the only thing that's Really Real, and reality itself is just bad fanfiction of their theology.
...and now some of the anti-mask BS just clicked for me: they don't think that masks could possibly be necessary to reduce the spread of a virus, because their symbolism says that masks mean [whatever it is they insists masks always mean], which is bad, so masks cannot be good. Their symbolic language is the only real reality, so mere actual reality must conform.
The sign as a malleable phenomenon is high on the list of fundamental phobias of the religious and the right wing. This is why postmodernism has become the target of people like Peterson. At least he gets relatively close to admitting what he's actually doing. Most of the people fighting against these ideas have no fucking clue how to articulate what they're even fighting. Not to give JP too much credit- he's still a giant hypocritical hack that deserves every laugh aimed at him, but he's at least first place in a race of confused imbeciles.
@@alistairmaleficent8776 It's like...can they even process the concept of different languages using different symbols (e.g. words) to refer to things? (Let alone the idea that concepts and connotation might not translate exactly!)
@@M_M_ODonnell Exactly. Therein lies a fundamental root of xenophobia. The fear that our interpretation of reality might not be universal finds its first expression in the very words that different people use to describe that reality. Wittgenstein says the limits of my language are the limits of my world, and this is interpreted in a very primal and literal way by people who don't know who the hell Wittgenstein is haha.
This guy has one thing over Jordan Peterson. I don’t feel less intelligent and outraged from listening to him spout smart stupidity. I only feel incredulity at how he can be so wrong while using many big words
10:50: Thats not Inclusion,
thats the wrong sort of Normalization, duh.
The fool often forgets who the fool is
I never noticed how much Ben Shapiro looks like the goosebumps dummy until today.
Ben Slappy-ro.
Slappy's Revenge, indeed!
Pageau says that the "self-named lover" is about pride when the whole point of the phrase, the song, and the book "Call Me By Your Name" is about how true love empowers us by reflecting who we truly are back at us. It's about the beauty of perfect intimacy and the paradox of how, in giving up one's individual identity by entering into relationships with the right people, we actually become more of who we are. It is the opposite of self-centered. This is probably the most Christian view of love that I've ever seen expressed anywhere aside from the literally Jesus.
It's amazing how conservative Christians like Pageau can literally just make the argument that things are actually opposite of what they are and therefore, good things are bad, actually and people are just like yeah, okay that seems right we must protect civilization from Marvel shows and trans children.
So... love that makes two people more than what they are ? That's nice I guess.
I like Jons video tbh but I like your take too
@@NIHIL_EGO not only this, but love that helps you to understand who you yourself are as a person.
That was beautiful 🥲
"Most people can't use magic powers to revive their robot husbands."
*stares out window pensively* if only
Side note: I used to say there was no bad art criticism. That last fashy take proved me wrong.
10:50: Thats not Inclusion,
thats the wrong sort of Normalization, duh.
We need less Sex-Sells and such in Songs, not more inclusionary Sex-Sells-in-Songs, duh.
jp's image of faux-"intellectualism" is more impressive when you remember how ridiculous his voice is.
If you listen to JP with your eyes closed, it's almost impossible to imagine anything other than a South Park Canadian. The only other possible thing to imagine is a Muppet.
I cower at the sound of intellectual Kermit.
Michael Brooks once commented on how weird it is that all the masculinity-obsessed trad bros have turned to a weeping hysteric as their guide and I can't stop thinking about it
I for the life of me can't understand why people go there. Nobody can help how their voice sounds. Why not lambast the man based on one of the literally tens of thousands of fucked up things he chooses to say, instead of an innate physical trait that's fucked up to shame someone about?
@@commbir5148 Because JP is the kind of person to judge masculinity based off those same traits.
It's a criticism of his hypocrisy.
i might be too high but i can’t be the only one who literally cannot understand a single word of what jonathan is saying, right? it just sounds like joe biden trying to tell that story about corn pop
dudes saying a whole lotta words to say a whole lotta nothing
I can grasp the individual words, but the whole is just a bunch of ten-dollar words that somehow total up to half a penny.
He’s got this dull sort of cadence that makes it sound like he just isn’t fully comprehending the things he’s saying. I’d be charitable and call him a poor public speaker who isn’t good at reading his own cue cards, but even the basic material he’s working with occasionally veers into word salad.
It’s annoying to listen to. I feel like I have to do most of the comprehension work myself.
fun fact if u ever encounter someone like this ask them to explain it in simple terms and watch them implode. the density is the point and the key of charlatan obfuscation.
@@dasuberedward People ask Jonathan that all the time and he happily complies.
This guy talks exactly like Charlie Kelly did on the episode of It’s Always Sunny when he thought the science bitches made him more smarter
"Stupid science bitches can't even make I more smarter!"
That's exactly the right comparison and what Peterson sounds like as well. Ben Shapiro and Tim Pool too sometimes.
oh also, as a french speaker: no, he did not pronounce Bonaparte correctly.
it's the solipsistic pronunciation actually
Napoleon's family was Italian, and he was born Napoleone di Buonaparte in Corsica, so maybe he's using the Italian pronunciation. Still, he's being pointlessly obscure.
shouldn't Pageau be pronounced pa-jo
Pageau is French Canadian... different accent?
Yeah, this is so weird. Like, he describes himself as a French-Canadian, he has a pretty distinctive French Canadian name (though I don't detect that much of a French-Canadian accent in his English), and the first thing he sells on his site is a carving of Saint-Jean Baptiste (patron saint of French-Canadians), yet he gets Bonaparte wrong (no French-Canadian pronounces it like that) and he says "Arche" rather than Arc de Triomphe.
So either he is only a French-Canadian by lineage and isn't actually a native French Speaker, or he is way less educated than he oretends to be.
As a recovering addict I find it offensive that Peterson put himself in a Coma to not deal withdraw after his whole gig being preaching self-consequence. He should work the twelve steps instead of writing his own
I have been saying this exact thing since he went into the coma... gigantic hypocrisy, so blatant that it requires one to laugh uproariously just to stomach it.
I completely agree. It is so incredibly pathetic.
Can the rest of us have access to that coma protocol or do we have to be D-list celebrities for that?
Exactly! And he almost d/ed trying, too, because the withdrawal off benzos can k/ll, but so can the "induced coma" method (which is why he couldn't get it in North America). It's incredibly dangerous _and_ it's not actually proven to work as a cure! Least of all for that specific class of med he was on (benzodiazepines - they're a really tricky one).
Incidentally, they're not antidepressants, as many people are mistakenly saying; they're prescribed for severe anxiety, and seems they're still fairly common. Valium, Klonopin, lorazepam, etc. (Less often, they're used as an acute anti-seizure med.) They're all extremely addictive, and again, the withdrawal can k/ll. I'm saying their names in case anyone reading this happens to recognise any - maybe they, or someone they know, is taking them - because I hope that they will take the innocuous little p//ls seriously. And maybe even talk to a doctor about making sure you're aware of their power...and the signs of any problems, should they arise. Please take care. It's never too late.
...Hugs & love to you, whoever is reading this. ♡
Huge respect to all those trying to overcome mental/physical health problems, drug addiction included. But I cant really judge JP for going with the coma. He went to rehab, so he is probably somewhat familiar with the 12 steps and decided they didnt work for him, they dont work for a lot of people. Maybe in the future with more research medically induced comas could help people improve people's lives, and we don't need any macho bullshit about it being the cowardly way out. Just to be clear though... I friggin hate JP just as much as the rest of you guys for the shit he says, but not his personal medical decisions.
My first introduction to this certain kind of person would probably be Ben Shapiro:
Someone who is so removed from legitimate criticism and critique that they just believe whatever they say/think at that moment.
Because they, and they alone! believe Real True Things™️, so whatever they think must automatically be true!
10:50: Thats not Inclusion,
thats the wrong sort of Normalization, duh.
We need less Sex-Sells and such in Songs, not more inclusionary Sex-Sells-in-Songs, duh.
i fucked up my brain and now my inner monologue pronounces shapiro as "shabeebo" whenever i read it
IOW: so-called "rationalists" who treat the phrase "facts and logic" like a magic incantation that instantly makes whatever you say correct
"So it’s kinda funny, right? How many of these folks self-identify as “rationalists?” I mean, typical rational thinking would say: If I am presented with the truth, I will believe it, and, once I believe it, I will defend it in argument. This? This is not that! This is a different idea of “rationality” that views it not as a practice but as an innate quality one either possesses or lacks, like being blond or left-handed: If I’m arguing it, I must believe it, because I’m a rational person, and, if I believe it, because I’m a rational person, it must be true. You speak assuming you’re right, and, should you take a new position, this telescopes out into a whole new set of beliefs with barely a thought. Stay focused on the argument, and you won’t even notice it’s happening."
-InnuendoStudios, "The Alt-Right Playbook: The Card Says Moops"
I’m not saying this guy is closeted, but I was just like him, and I turned out to be super-queer
I'd just like to take the time to congratulate you on transcending the closet.
Congratulations! 🥳
I don't like when people say "that guy's acting so homophobic because he's secretly really into guys and is just deep in the closet" but ...I mean, he sure did find an excuse to watch lil Nas X a lot. Hm yes I just need to "study" this evil music video so I can decode the symbolism
If he is, I hope he realizes that, and what that means, as quickly as you did.
ThoughtSlime, queer? Matt uses he/they pronouns, i thought.
@@anarchisttechsupport6644 Pretty sure OP means Pageau
This is the same as The Vigilant Christian. He would make click bait videos about whatever was trending on social media and how it was secretly satanic.
This guy spending ages over-analyzing "Montero" reminds me of millions of people trying to figure out what, "I am the Walrus", a song about nothing made to troll people, meant.
Isn't that what glass onion was for? And the reason Rian Johnson used that name for his movie?
Thanks so much for the oculation!! I got like 1k views within this vid going up. May such massive balls of eyes flourish with us all! ♥️🖤👁👁👁👀👀👀
I remember this Sunday School lesson well: Jesus taking the bread and fish and then beating the poors and the sicks to death with them lest there be an inversion of the dominance hierarchy.
How about the one where he received an anointing even though Judas suggested selling the perfume and giving it to the poor? What a fascist, that Jesus guy.
@@shotinthedark90 the canonized gospels send *mixed* messages, to say the least, but i appreciate any follower of his who takes the good parts and not the bad parts
@@forgottentree3716 yeah... or, stick with me, there's something you might not understand about it. I mean I know that's a long shot, since you of course understand everything.
@@shotinthedark90 lol what do you mean (the judas being a liar thing? you referring to that? bc i was talking mainly about other mixed messages)
@@forgottentree3716 Even if Judas is lying, why wouldn't Jesus say, "you know you're right I'm being selfish?" The person using the perfume on him was herself poor. She doesn't care about the money as much as the meaning. Because meaning matters more than money, even to--especially to--the poor.
When Canadians are sending in their pundits, they aren’t sending their best.
But some, I think, are good people.
Jonathan is great. The video was pretty unfair to him.
As a Canadian, some are decent, but it's a way more racist country than people think
@@IrishCaesar Yeah man the French Canadians are racist af. Haha
@@anothercat1300 Dude he literally just said the interests of minorities should be sacrificed for conformity. There's no way you can read what he says that makes it any better than that, and some ways you could read it that make it far worse.
Like legitimately fuck Pageau. I have no question in my mind that he's a bigot.
my favorite part is when they claim "faith and truth". Truth..... truth.... everytime a hear a a theist utter "truth" as if they have it by osmosis I literally feel my blood pressure
I feel like Pagou’s refusal to see Wanda’s family as being like, real people in the world of Wandavision, even though every sign shows that these people, despite being robots and products of magic, are real people who have feelings, says something about him.
A lot people will not view robots, ai etc in fiction as proper sapient life, even when that was the extremely obvious implicit/explicit intention of the writer.
It's a good "get out of jail free card" to restrict person hood to a strict definition humans - or even only *some* humans. Gives a permanent open goal to morally enslave something down the line.
@@mattjk5299 morally or literally: Exodus 21 is a _barrel_ of laughs.
Though, it is interesting that the show also kind of does this, like if those were real human kids it would not have ended like that
@@Josh-oj9mm hell I once saw someone who wasn't able to conceptualize aliens in media as being people, his chosen example of only humans being in any way valuable was AVATAR, you know the movie avatar? The one that uses aliens as a metaphor for native americans? Yeah he used THAT movie to say that the aliens SHOULD have been genocided! most unhinged youtube video ive ever seen and I wish I saved the link to it
I really hope that someday one of my fellow French Canadians becomes a famous influencer for something else than bigotry and/or grooming.
Il y en a plusieurs, mais tu dois savoir parler français. You can translate subtitles in english btw. Please don't be a Quebec basher.
"The song is about a sexual relationship between Nas X and an unnamed guy"
No, the guy has a name. His name is Monterro. Which is Nas X's name. It's not actually about another guy. It's about Nas X. It's an exploration of his past selves, his internalized homophobia, and the negative habits he developed in his time coming to grips with it. It's a song about self love, and forgiving his past selves.
It doesn't have any of the church and devil stuff of course, the video takes the basic themes of the song in a different direction, but the themes are still there in the song.
Lil Nas said in interviews that Montero is about a dl ex of his.
actually the theme of "call me by your name" comes from a movie of the same name which depicts a relationship in which the partners use their own names for each other. he likely is calling his partner his own name, Montero, in the song.
Are you asserting that he's fucking his past self into submission? 😅
songs can have multiple meanings, it can be both about himself and about an ex.
@@noviatoria2436 sure but there is only one person who can speak to the Consciously intended meaning(s) - and that’s the author/artist. The rest is speculative interpretations and none are right or wrong -just internal coherence.
Somehow the most discomforting part about this video was how he pronounced Bonaparte, and I'm trans.
His wrecking "Malleus Maleficarum" got to me more. I'm also trans and non-binary. So yeah.
Someone needs to send Jonathan Pageau a link to Ram Ranch.
I’m an educated person. I really try to grasp lofty concepts. That said, Pageau has to be a character you came up with on edibles. I genuinely don’t understand from what philosophical school(s) he is basing his thesis on the media he’s covering. He’s a straw man you made up, right?
His philosophy is smart boy word salad, and by god is he churning up some piss poor vinegarete to cover it.
Go have a look at his comments (after you enable whatever you personally use to prevent his channel from benefitting from the "engagement" of course), they're absolutely chock full of little internet versions of him. People misattributing various "smart and deep" quotes, religious waffling on the evils of media, all sorts of other wacky shit. It's like, they all want to feel educated and as if they're involved in important scholarship, but they absolutely refuse to have the type of open mind and intellectual curiosity without judgment that that requires. So what's left for them is to find someone who can make them feel that way while only telling them things that confirm their pre-existing bigotries. It's at once sad, hilarious, and disturbing.
He's based in christian orthodox tradition, not a philosophical branch. His entire channel is devoted to showing that tradition using more secular terms. I recommend his channel if you are intrested in that sort of thing.
@@spaak3465 I don’t think any of us are that starved for meaning that we’d turn to an obvious charlatan and idiot for it, but thanks.
@@spaak3465 Christian Orthodoxy does have a philosophical basis. It’s a Christ-centric one, but coherent and linear. My criticism centers on his nonsense use of much of the terminology he employed. Admittedly, this could be due to an unfavorable edit by Thought Slime. What I heard of his argument was what appeared to be a purposeful misinterpretation of the media he covered interspersed with unintelligible tangents where technical terms seemed to be used the way one might use a mirror to reflect light into someone’s eyes. I was being very tongue in cheek with my comment, but I do genuinely appreciate you engaging me in good faith anyway with an alternative POV. I certainly didn’t facilitate an honest discussion about Pageau’s rhetoric with my initial comment.