Red Light Racicot

Members
  • Content Count

    1,811
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

967 Esteemed

About Red Light Racicot

  • Rank
    Canucks Rookie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I say if Trump wants to act like Mussolini, then we should treat him like Mussolini:
  2. Because as we all know, no one can get pregnant unless they take a pregnancy test!
  3. This is what happens when Trump is your spell checker
  4. The part I find disturbing is how even though they had quite a bit of room and the crowd could have been spread out to at least try to mitigate the risk, it appears that no attempt to do so was made by the organizers. If anything I imagine they were probably encouraged to stay close together so they could at least create the illusion of a large dense crowd from certain camera angles. And these are the people who love him! He doesn't even give a damn about his own base! I really hope this means he will keep the rallies to a minimum or even better, stop them altogether.
  5. I'm not exactly the best guy to talk to for this but I'm pretty sure those things are related. I figure a good way to bolster the lower and middle classes would be to raise the taxes the of the uber wealthy and private corporations big time. Roosevelt did something akin to this in the 30s and it worked remarkably if not outstandingly well. I think its the main reason he served 3 terms. I figure the least these billionaires can do is pay enough so that wealth inequality is no longer poised to destroy our civilization
  6. Wealth inequality comes not from something someone wrote 2 centuries ago, but in the form of a couple thousand billionaires owning the same amount of wealth as about 4 and a half billion people, or if you prefer 26 people owning half the wealth on the planet. These people are either born into it and/or have the luxury to enrich themselves based purely on the fact they have a massive bulk of wealth. You never need incur any kind of overall risk when you have your tentacles into everything, along with the power to influence the market. Does this sound like a meritocracy? Or... anything close to an ideal situation? Those "Intellectual Dark Web" echo chambers are typically funded by billionaires. If you stick up for the status quo like Peterson does, well... in my opinion it would be more accurate to say you;re actually defending the guys who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
  7. Give me a break. Obviously there is more to it then that, it's like you think people are just going to just take off their belt and not have to worry if their pants will stay in place: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative A worker cooperative is a cooperative that is owned and self-managed by its workers. This control may mean a firm where every worker-owner participates in decision-making in a democratic fashion, or it may refer to one in which management is elected by every worker-owner who each have one vote. In other words a perfectly valid business model where workers are actually involved in a meaningful way rather then having everything relegated to someone who makes decisions for them. We already have these in North America, but they are far more popular in Europe because they are not terrified of Socialism. However, you definitely have a good point. It's certainly possible the system is not realistic,. I'll admit, something like the abolition of the state sounds rather pie in the sky-ish. But rest assured, you don't have worry about a Marxist takeover anyways. Pretty much no one has ever heard of the CPC (Communist Party of Canada) who obviously have no significant power or influence. I don't understand how you guys get so worked up about something that is practically nonexistent. You'd think Peterson would at the very least be able to produce an extensive list of names belonging to influential people who actually identify as Cultural Marxists, along with the kind of evidence that justifies his paranoia as to their apparent mustache twirling agendae, but no of course not that's never going to happen My main problem with people getting pissy about this kind of thing is that it creates a resistance to adopting programs that are hugely beneficial. Did Marx say "Make sure you seize farmlands to ensure tens of millions of people starve to death" "Have the Government seize temporary control over the means of production, but if they don't feel like giving it to the people ever, then that's okay" "By, the way, about 15 years in you can go ahead and abolish labor unions, because it turns out those don't really matter. Ignore what I said about them before" "Make a sure a totalitarian seizes control and creates a cult of personality which creates an environment where no one is allowed to speak in opposition for fear of death or perhaps even worse, decades of brutal slavery" I don't understand why you think you can have it both ways. You seem to admit this is something that can't be done, and you may well be correct, and yet you're like "Oh, and by the way all the terrible things Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot etc did, those are actually Marx' fault." Again, this an absurd post-hoc way of looking at it. These despots were purely selective about how they wanted to proceed and largely filled in the gaps with a blatant disregard for human life. Worst of all, it totally ignores countries that exist today that were and are far more faithful to Marxist principles and enjoy some of the best quality of life on the planet. Imagine the blueprints for a car, lets call it Marxism. It has the potential to run perfectly fine, but must be built methodically. Dudes like Stalin come along and forcefully take the blueprints, then either switch out many of the important parts or remove them altogether. This car is of course nothing like the original plan but it still runs fairly well. Among other things it kills a lot of people because, for example, you've removed many of the safety features.
  8. Both China and "Communist" Russia were/are at best comprised of both capitalist and communist policies, and nothing like what Marx had in mind or what Peterson has led you to believe. This has been common knowledge for decades and It's discouraging to see how willing people are to just take someone's word for it rather then having the curiously to look into the details of something they feel so passionate about, or at least familiarize themselves with an expert like Richard Wolff who has studied Marx for decades. Peterson, on the other hand has never even read Marx save for an outdated 23 page pamphlet. If he is your primary source of information on this topic then I'm sorry, that is a monumental stumbling block. Lenin himself admitted Russia's economy was state capitalism. This means the Government rather then the people had control over the means of production. While Marx explains that this is a necessary step in the transition, it was meant to be temporary. Soviet Russia, from 1917 to 1989, maintained this model the entire time. When Stalin was in charge he abolished labor unions, the literal bedrock of socialism. Peterson blames Marx for the actions of despotic megalomaniacs decades after his death. Actions Marx would never approve of in the first place. Absurd! Ironically, the USA, while clearly not a socialist country, has arguably this entire time been more eager then Russia to adopt the kind of policies and practices that Marx would approve of. Also ironic is how Stalin had no problem announcing to his people and the world that the USSR was communist. It was expedient to him. People should have been taking that claim with a grain of salt. Stalin was not a very honest person after all. By the way, did you JBP guys know that Orwell was actually a life long socialist? I havent met a single JBP fan who hasn't read 1984.
  9. Marx was a humanist who genuinely wished to improve quality of life for everyone, but that's just the kind of thing Peterson loves to twist in order to make it seem like it is something abhorrent. Labor unions, free health care, social programs... stuff we can't imagine living without. Good stuff every country on Earth has adopted to some extent. We are already living in a world that has been heavily influenced and transformed by the ideas Marx promoted. It's frustrating when someone like Peterson, who has no real idea of who Marx was because its obvious he isn't familiar with his work, just goes ahead and conjures a straw man that barely applies. Worse is how he chooses to propagate such misinformation. This penchant for nonsense seems to find its way into any subject Peterson attempts to tackle, as if he has a degree in every single relevant field. It'a a really annoying habit of his. For example, he claimed lobsters and humans are to a large degree behaviorally and socially identical. He also claimed that Nazis were atheists when Germany at the time was 99%+ Christian. He also claimed that atheists are unaware that they are actually Christians, at least the ones who don't go around raping and killing people, like some silly Presuppositionalist. This list goes on for days. I apologize. Didn't know.
  10. Bill C-16 enshrines the rights of transgender or gender-diverse Canadians by including them under human rights and hate-crime laws, which basically means they just get the same treatment as anyone else. For example you can no longer fire someone for being transgendered which seems reasonable enough if you ask me. Jordan Peterson made it out to be like he was going to go prison for misgendering people, when to this day not a single person has served a day in prison for misgendering anyone. Here is a quote that essentially sums up how he felt about C-16: "at the vanguard of a post-modern, radical leftist ideology that I detest, and which is, in my professional opinion, frighteningly similar to the Marxist doctrines that killed at least 100 million people in the 20th century." I'm sorry but this... this is lunacy. The man speaks as if Stalin sent people to the gulags for misgendering people or something. This is hugely misleading and antagonistic. Think about it. if you're a staunch JBP fan is this going to improve your opinion of transgendered people or worsen it? These people already get plenty of flak, just leave them alone please. He misconstrues philosophers like Derida, Foucault and Marx; he rolls feminism, marxism and some other nonsense into what he calls cultural marxism, or Post-modern neo-marxism, or whatever, a phrase that doesn't even make sense since Marxism is incompatible with postmodern views, as Marxism itself is a narrative that sees the world structured in a certain way. More disturbingly, cultural marxism is a direct descendant of what the Nazis called cultural bolshevism. He has done a butt load of damage to the way people think about Marx based on his outrageous, often incoherent and fallaciously contrived statements and attacks. There is nothing good to say about this kind of behavior. If listening to the advice he has is a positive then that's great. I'm not going to hold it against anyone in particular and at the very least I hope very much that the man doesn't inspire anyone to hold and then follow through on such extremist rhetoric, the details and context of which JBP fans may not have even been aware of. Its actually been a couple years since I've kept track of the guy so I suppose its possible that he has amended some of these views which would be fantastic. Edit: Sorry I dont actually like the guy I missed that part
  11. Also: We all criticize how Trump behaves at pressers, but Obama's even worse!
  12. Remember in 2012 when Obama was like: "BUSHGATE! Its been going on for a long time, before I got elected, and its a total discrace." Reporter "What is the crime exactly mister President?" "Uh... umm... You know what the crime is! Honky!"