Urges Social Media To Insist On Real Names: I have always said this. If you don't use your real name, you're not a legitimate "voice," you're just a spiteful coward
His main point is: In a classical world, if you insult somebody, you stand physically present and ready to take a punch. Else you are a coward. Never insulted people from the comfort of an anonymous name. I agree.
True. Synchronous and present communication facilitates more socially acceptable terms of engagement. But the digital is not going away, and advocating the end of online privacy, by forcing everyone on attention networks to reveal themselves, is exactly what anti-humanists and total surveillance tyrants like Klaus Schwab and Yuval Harari would want. The solution to trolls has always been simple and effective: "There is no greater insult you can pay someone than to ignore them." — Nietzsche
Yes--or call them out as a troll. They typically don’t like their ruse being uncovered. Once they’re identified as a troll, they have lost what minuscule power they ever had.
trolls--not worth responding to- a lot of what they do is intentional diversion away from the topic- the ones that are real people have to leave groups they are in when people finally figure out they are bullies intent only on their own platform- tedious/non-productive
That is how we got into this mess world wide-we ignored the insults too long and they never stopped with the evil intent behind it. You take a stand and say no more by making another accountable and responsible for their intentional acts of violence that are representing death, not life in the culture. There has to be a parting of the ways here going forward to how we interact with each other. It starts with each person pointing the finger in their own face does it not?
As is usually the case with these people, he highlights a real issue. The problem is with the solution he proposes - banning anonymity. This is utopian thinking which is always results in a Luciferian inversion of good and evil.
Liberty has a price. But it is cheaper than the cost of the alternatives. So we should willingly accept that price.
Thanks, so many actors... they say some/ most of what we want to hear. Test, gather and use our posts and comments to craft messaging to... There are no heroes.
Everything that changes, changes inside first. The whole universe is inside.
Teresa, since I have never been under any kind of Peterson 'spell,' just occasionally learn from him, I don't perceive this as an urgent problem or something affecting my soul. But shall I rethink that? This family has saved many lives by being out of the closet carnivores. Biggest truth-threat to Pharma maybe ever. Meat cures depression. As it cured Jordan's and also cured his daughter's near deadly rheumatoid arthritis. I watched half of the amazing polly video but find her sarcasm almost unbearable. I keep trying to "get it," but it all feels very lazy to me. I must get through the second half, some time soon as that video really convinced thousands of people JP is an evil globalist snake. Even though nothing he ever says promotes any globalist obsessions. I think Milo is a treacherous snake figure but did I not trust you to lend him time and ear and heart without begging you to reconsider and see through him? I admire Jordan Peterson for his teachings, and interviews. His family values, and how he has helped my son and countless people's sons. amazing polly leaves me with a feeling of something not quite right but I can't put my finger on it. A little bit dark, perhaps.
JP is the human version of a TV network. He has so much audience that anything he palys people will see.
Something similar happens to other stars like Rogan.
They have production and minders. Don't say that, say this.
This happens because years ago the young people stopped watching tv. It's a thing for old people. They watched self-produced livestreams. Then the powers that be decided to take over the indie world.
Astroturfing, as always.
And just like in old TV, you will hear good things, sometimes. But everything is scripted.
I seek independent people. The more broke they are, the more I like them, hahaha!
I just watched the entire video. Everyone needs to see that. It also confirmed my suspicion about a site called UnHerd. That's globalist BS as well. ARC and UnHerd...run by the same elitist snob, Sir Paul Marshall... got his start with Soros money.
Your revelation makes the recent unheard interview of RFK Jr make more sense. Vaccines were raised as a point against RFK Jr, but not to be addressed then during the discussion, for example. You just had to take it as given that criticizing vaccines is unpopular and discuss it no further.
Thanks for exposing this. I've never trusted Jordan and I'm glad my reservations have been validated so thoroughly. People need to constantly point out this fraud he's perpetrating in every Tweet thread he starts.
It pertains to a few concepts. Good cop bad cop. Limited Hangout. Streissand Effecct. Stockholm Syndrome. Millgram Experiment. and on. all aspects of Counter Intel.
considering what Peterson has come up against in past 5 years, it probably is a worthy goal. considering who he's owned and operated by it's obviously exploitation of us all via a naive guy. curious how much Peterson is open to considering sources like Polly St George (Amazing Polly) or Celia Farber for that matter. At least we know RFK jr paid attention to Celia. Didn't she get cited throughout "The Real Fauci?" I doubt RFK jr is as naive as Peterson may be.
One problem is that Peterson makes some good points some times, and he interviews some interesting people that don't get much airtime, but extremist people, for whom everything is black or white, cannot get the nuance that guilt by association is not the way to go.
The moment they see one problem, everything is wrong. It's a great mind control technique, because we do it to ourselves.
And we all do it all the time. Splained something similar to another Amurican today. Amuricans have no clue that
Prince Andrew committed no crime by EU standards. That girl he stood accused by was past age of consent in more EU countries.
France just made age of consent 15 in last couple years. Before that it was zero. They had no age of consent.
Should not be surprising in a country where the prime minister's wife is 25 years older than him and dated him while he was in school where she taught him.
By the same token, ignoring associations is naive too. Everyone knew Epstein was guilty of far worse that what he pled to. And yet look who put in so much time and money with him. And gave him and Maxwell so much access.
Has anyone looked at Corbett Report documentary on King Charles the Great resetter? Scads of notebooks of Savile providing lengthy involved profound advice for the family on how to handle the public over Lockerby air crash and other issues.
I disagree. Positive legislation creates more problems.
Natural law is better. There is no need for age of consent laws. Only the obvious stuff: violence has to be punished.
The subtle problem in this is that people lose power because of legislation. Now the State has to take care of the problem, not the people. It happens with every issue.
Removing power from people is what allows evil to grow, and evil actions to become more frequent.
Notice the switcheroo in this topic, they always do things like that: they create a scandal, real or not, they introduce the idea in people's thoughts that superior public authority has to take care of the problem and new "enabling acts" are necessary. That is programming people to yield their power, and become helpless.
Slowly, all European countries are repeating all the errors of the USofA.
Puritanism is like a skin ulcer that won't close.
We need less legislation and more personal responsibility.
By the way, I don't consider that genital mutilation passing as a stealth medical treatment of surgery is a good thing, and the opposition to it is not puritanical in principle (obviousness is not a practice of the puritans) but my warning is that they will use the puritanical programming to pass more positive legislation and hurt more people doing it, while many people who don't want that will approve. Bait and switch 24/7
Do you understand my thinking? To sum it up: the real problem is invisible, the apparent problem is the decoy. Sexual violence against young people or children is real, but it is used as a decoy, and people fall for it.
The real problem is the systematic destruction of the individual.
Individuals do not wait for permission of the authorities to protect their children from predators.
I find him either naive or virtue signaling. We are not in a classical world. And it may well be that he can say whatever he wants with no fear of negative consequences. I agree that it is not nice when people insult others. But there is another aspect that he seems to overlook. There is so much sharing of vital information on social media, and this could not be done if those who share the info had to reveal their identity.
I used to always use my real name and felt the same way. It wasn't until the DS weaponized all their spying tools on Americans I became concerned, and with all of the psychos like you're talking about who will gladly Dox you with help from social justice groups tied to the DS. Not that I'm that important or anything, but used to be more active and vocal before caring for my mother the past 10 years. I just don't trust them, but sure they can gather info on anyone from their home devices, it's the other crazies they rile up that are the scariest.
Overalll, I agree. In many years of commenting in the UK media columns when they were still at least pretending to do their job I often refused to engage with these "curtain twitchers". All too often the protest was that they would be persecuted because of their jobs if they stood behind their words. My feel then and remains that if they were so worried they should either bide quiet or they should apply to the column title for an anonymised account. And that would I suggested get shot of 99% of them. Not a popular idea! The twitchers are a dismal long-term feature of our lives, I fear.
Except that social media is not the "classical world", and we should not confuse the two. Social media is not real life - let's not pretend it is by applying the rules of healthy, real life personal contact to social media. If you want healthy interactions with uncowardly people, don't look to social media to give it to you. That is for the real face to face interactions you have with people in your life.
Besides, having to prove who you are online is a form of digital ID. Is that the authoritarian direction you really want to go because you want more humane interactions on social media? Is that a good trade off?
It's not that social media can't provide support and friendships. The substacks and the comment sections really meant a lot to me through the first year of being vaccine free and isolated. It was a lifesaver. The kind words and connections meant a lot to me, and I didn't need to have human beings "validated online" in order to feel that way.
You are the second person I’ve read in a Substack comment to mention Mike Adamas as maybe a less than reputable, or honorable person when speaking things to him that he does not agree with. And who is David Knight? Is he on Substack? Curious about Mr. Adams. There was always something about Mike Adams and his Health Ranger podcasts that I eventually came to not want to listen to any longer. He gives these big teasers, then doesn’t even talk about the headline he uses as the ‘tease’ until the very end, and very little about it at that. He seemed to me to be a person who enjoys the sound of his own voice and what ‘he’ has to say.
And no I’m not a troll...I’m an older ‘person’ who lives down on the Border of The U.S. and Mexico, thus my ‘handle’ Frontera Lupita. The U.S./Mexico border is considered La Frontera (The Frontier) to people in Mexico.
Adams has alarmist tone... Mercola always negative health info. Both speak truth though I did stop reading both save an occasional check in. Both had great searchable databases when US internet was more free and supposedly neutral. Many truthers are also alarmist. They were decades ahead. To know the truth, speak and conduct business with integrity And a high vibration of the frequency of the world we'd like to live in... that's what I tune into now in others and most importantly through my own divine energy/ information channel.
what i liked about them both in addition to speaking truth and not giving a hoot what others thought, is they both had labs to verify things first hand.
And as I just deleted a Kirsch Substack without even reading it for the fifty billionth time…I was just thinking the same thing about him and his lame ass thinking. He just skims the surface about he speaks about and never goes into the ‘deep weeds’ about anything to to with The Administrative State or the GPS (as Sage Hana calls them)!
Yes! It’s “his high blood-pressure-causing, continual super-alarmist tone” that I find annoying. Then he rarely gets to the things he’s all ‘hot’ about until the end, and then it’s really nothing!
Can I look up David Knight somewhere? Thanks T! 🙏🏻💓
i know what it's like to be called all kinds of names including troll. i have an interesting list. your story reminds me of what could have happened to my doctor in commifornia. (but didn't because he was careful) - he could have lost his license for speaking out against the jab. he's no hero, but he's a good doctor, we need him. he's no loud hero with a megaphone, he didn't get on a soap box, he just gave good advice and good help when we got sick - he would be called a coward by jordan peterson and celia farber, for not getting up on the soapbox and destroying his career and leaving his patients with nowhere to turn.
The storyteller is not a judge. The audience is the judge.
It's always good to remember to listen to both sides of the story before passing judgement. So the audience needs at least two good storytellers, to have more information.
In this particular story, some of the anonymous slanderers are not anonymous and they price themselves of not being anonymous, and yet they have not taken up to the challenge of this post. They are still in other stacks, slandering people unjustly. They have not come here, to this comment section, to repeat their accusations and tell their tale.
I'm actually waiting for that to happen to tell my little part in all this.
good hello 23. pretty obvious to me that she is promoting peterson's push for social media to clamp down on fake names. Are these not her words when she writes, "I have always said this. If you don't use your real name, you're not a legitimate "voice," you're just a spiteful coward" do you agree with that?
Excellent points and that is why anonymity online does not automatically = being a troll or a coward. This is a dangerous black and white slippery slope argument to make. There are doxxing laws online for A REASON!
forcing the real id agenda for social media is throwing out the baby with the bath water. I think maybe Celia was just caught up in the emotion of being intentionally irritated by some of these folks.
Maybe the people who told her about the false claims were the false claimers themselves, and did it to get her goat.
The Romans had an "album" in the town center, and in the entrance. It was a large board or a wall painted in white. Everyone could place notes there. Albo means white.
Some Romans would write offensive jokes and witty poems, criticizing the Gov. and religious things.
Also notes on love, and insults between lovers. It was quite an entertainment.
The officials would get angry at the "incorrect" use of the public album, an repress that behavior.
Then the citizens would keep writing notes on other places for everyone to notice.
Then the owners affected by the defacement would complain that the album was created precisely to avoid defacement of their property.
Then the officials would "allow" once again for people to vent their frustration and comedy in the public album, anonymously.
We've been living the same cycle of stupidity for at least 23 centuries, but now is global and more intense.
In defense of the cowards, I will say that the authorities say and do the most outrageous things, and the fear of punishment is real. Avoiding injustice is not morally wrong.
Haha. What a clown world take by JP. He's usually pretty on, but not on this. He couldn't be more wrong. Anonymity and privacy are linked. Most people haven't sold 20 million copies of a book and don't get six figures each week from YouTube to have the luxury to NOT be anonymous and avoid the financial and social consequences from having ordinary opinions online. And those consequences are now DIRE. Look at the President of Thomas Jefferson University (irony is dead) who is getting raked for simply liking innocuous tweets by Alex Berenson. If TJ were alive today he'd probably make this same point. Other people's right to privacy cannot be infringed for the fragility and feelings of those who take offense to what "trolls" say online. It goes for free speech as well. One's choice to be offended is merely a choice. The best course of action is to ignore and move on. Dwelling on what some isolated anon shit poster does online is playing their game. Ignore. Move on. Nobody's feelings should ever negate the right to online anonymity (in a total surveillance society with dire consequences) for those of us non trolls who cannot afford to not have it. "It" being privacy.
I agree on your reasoning. I feel the same way about J.P.
And when I first heard him speak of this issue I wondered to myself if he thought this thru.
I know how he championed against the Canadian bill C-16, I believe it was.
I would also like to point out that since we now know what our government is capable of, including murder, that they would easily have fake accounts set up that us serfs wouldn't have the luxury to obtain.
The only way I would agree to i.d. for access, possibly, is if you were to prove that you are real through the i.d. process yet can still remain unanimous when posting comments if that makes sense.
live and let live would be good... but dead among those who want to control the dialogue some being very aggressive and violent in doing that.... then we see how the J6 patriots which have been treated and accused and convicted of violating laws they never did... clear openess could lead to anyone being accused of some sort of sedition or treason and put in jail for decades...
Privacy and anonymity have a place among sane and responsible people who do sane and responsible things. Unfortunately, society's parasitical predators rely on privacy and anonymity the way robbers, Klansmen, Antifa, and BLM relies on masks, robes, and hoodies to preserve the privacy they need to facilitate their predation. Be grateful for your unfamiliarity with the clown world that Dr. Peterson describes. It's real. https://youtu.be/sz_8B3vCjGk?t=3669
who defines what's sane or insane? I would say that injecting 5 billion people with a toxic experimental substance is completely insane. Yet they did it. Out in the open. People willingly lined up for it based on what insane "experts" told them. The biggest parasites and predators, the greatest psychopaths humanity has ever known are in society are not hiding anywhere. They meet in Davos every January to dictate INSANE polices that people believe and go along with. The robbers, Klansmen, Antifa, BLM, are not your enemies. They're confused, clueless foot soldiers and ideologues of a global technocrat parasite class that uses them to keep you distracted and demoralized while they get away with their crimes. Dr. Peterson is just now getting acquainted with the global technocratic order (Davos crowd as he calls them), so he's been about half a decade behind the curve and he's dead wrong on eliminating online privacy as well.
Sane people recognize sanity when they see it. Familiarity with our intelligence agencies, politics, propaganda, Marxism, and social experiments (Milgram, Asch, Stanford) helps the intellectually curious to better understand human behaviors and pathologies. Frankel and Solzhenitsyn have something to say on this as well. You attack Dr. Peterson like an abused dog who bites his rescuer because, in your current place, you fear compassionate hands. His books and lectures may help you - if and when help is something you seek.
I understand the sentiment. But without anonymity there would've been no Thomas Paine writing under a pseudonym to pen "Common Sense" and other writers anonymously adding to the discourse in the colonies to secure our independence and freedom from a tyrannical regime.
No doubt our overseers already know who is behind any online contributor, doxxing is often coordinated and facilitated by government insiders leaking to nominally independent sources to destroy a threat they identify. The anonymity of a name, like "Freedom Fox" at least makes them work for it and raises the bar for non-state actors. Which at least allows many low-threat assessment targets to share our voices as we do.
It's a 'pick your poison proposition.' Those like you who put it all out there take poison arrows that many of us adding to the conversation and expansion of human understanding know the King will try to silence, too. And suffer the indignities you suffer. Which makes you and those who suffer the indignities the true heroes in our search for truth and accountability.
Our eternal gratitude to those who put it all out there is small solace for what you and they endure. A forever grateful nation will remember those who did, long after the wounds to character and reputation become scars that remind us of what it took to re-secure our blessings of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness our forefathers once secured for us, before we lost them due to our neglect.
What I hear is that he is saying they should segregate those who comment using their NAME and those who wants to throw stones anonymously. Seems fair to me.
Paid government trolls or agents of disinformation will always be able to use fake names and everyone else will be forced to identify themselves. We will be deemed “dangerous” to the rest of society (for spreading misinformation about a virus). Your online behavior will affect your “social credit score” and this is what Jordan Peterson is actually pushing. This is just a half step towards the eradication of privacy and personal freedoms.
Why don't you trust individuals to discern or learn to discern for themselves? Isn't this what the internet should be teaching us? To onboard our own authority and quit outsourcing it to dubiously conflicted institutions? Shouldn't we learn to judge a statement and/or its author on the shear merits of the content written, rather than some ad hominem reliance on reputation and the status of the person writing?
Jordan’s covert goal is to destroy “the right” ... be very wary of this man. Remember, he worked for the UN, he supports SDGs. He has his own vision of the WEF and it’s called ARC - look at who is involved in that. Furthermore, he believes in world/global governance
Sometimes anonymous names are necessary when others regard controversial viewpoints as toxic and they will dox a person if the views do not cohere with their way of thinking. To avoid cancel culture, and ruining one's life, sometimes anonymous names are required. For example, Libs of TikTok was doxed in a bad way. I know others who have been doxed. It's not fun.
For those of us living with government censorship and control - not necessarily the best idea. Sure, if they really want to find you, they will. But don't make it that easy for them - at least not unless you want a prison sentence.
While I agree with Peterson that we should all have the courage to publicly say what we believe, I believe there should be a wide latitude for people to express themselves anonymously.
Not every conversation should be attached to real-life social status games.
I actually strongly disagree with Peterson’s stance on this. The right to privacy is one of our sacred bulwarks against totalitarianism, and having the ability to share information anonymously is a necessary component of freedom. Whether one is a whistleblower or a meme-maker, forcing that person to disclose their identity puts them at risk for reprisal from the corrupt as well as the menticided public.
I covered this to some extent in the objections I posed to Jonathan Haidt’s recent proposal for combating the threat of AI to the information landscape:
"Safeguarding social media." You're preaching from your moral high horse, the exact same thing the Zuckerbergs and Robert Malone and all the rest of them are demanding. Top down control of speech. Did you know that's one of the issues that Malone is fighting for? Control of the internet?
Would we be at all surprised to learn that our government and/or NGOs lined to the Soros cabal, fosters, encourages and even funds these anonymous trolls, with the blessing and assistance of big tech companies and big intel organizations, and that this backing is one key reason why online platforms resist making us identify ourselves? I certainly would not be at all surprised to learn that this is precisely the reason these trolls exist.
His main point is: In a classical world, if you insult somebody, you stand physically present and ready to take a punch. Else you are a coward. Never insulted people from the comfort of an anonymous name. I agree.
True. Synchronous and present communication facilitates more socially acceptable terms of engagement. But the digital is not going away, and advocating the end of online privacy, by forcing everyone on attention networks to reveal themselves, is exactly what anti-humanists and total surveillance tyrants like Klaus Schwab and Yuval Harari would want. The solution to trolls has always been simple and effective: "There is no greater insult you can pay someone than to ignore them." — Nietzsche
Yes--or call them out as a troll. They typically don’t like their ruse being uncovered. Once they’re identified as a troll, they have lost what minuscule power they ever had.
Trolls are very needy and hungry. Don't feed the trolls. js
trolls--not worth responding to- a lot of what they do is intentional diversion away from the topic- the ones that are real people have to leave groups they are in when people finally figure out they are bullies intent only on their own platform- tedious/non-productive
In the comments below someone posted this expose' on Jordan's ARC confab. He's just another globalist vampire.
https://rumble.com/v2dwmjq-surprise-jordan-petersons-arc-was-built-for-and-by-billionaires.html
That is how we got into this mess world wide-we ignored the insults too long and they never stopped with the evil intent behind it. You take a stand and say no more by making another accountable and responsible for their intentional acts of violence that are representing death, not life in the culture. There has to be a parting of the ways here going forward to how we interact with each other. It starts with each person pointing the finger in their own face does it not?
As is usually the case with these people, he highlights a real issue. The problem is with the solution he proposes - banning anonymity. This is utopian thinking which is always results in a Luciferian inversion of good and evil.
Liberty has a price. But it is cheaper than the cost of the alternatives. So we should willingly accept that price.
Well then an undercover service for a random punch in the face 😂
He is not who you think he is.
And it is hard to imagine how he could not know this.
https://rumble.com/v2dwmjq-surprise-jordan-petersons-arc-was-built-for-and-by-billionaires.html
wow this is creepy. jordan peterson always did give me the creeps and now i know why. thanks. sickening.
Indeed. Without a doubt Peterson is an out and out globalist.
You know what else is demonic? Hollywood and CAA
(https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/contact/)
Tours / Speaking Engagements
CAA (Creative Arts Agency)
For international permissions and rights: mollie.glick@caa.com
Thanks, so many actors... they say some/ most of what we want to hear. Test, gather and use our posts and comments to craft messaging to... There are no heroes.
Everything that changes, changes inside first. The whole universe is inside.
Teresa, since I have never been under any kind of Peterson 'spell,' just occasionally learn from him, I don't perceive this as an urgent problem or something affecting my soul. But shall I rethink that? This family has saved many lives by being out of the closet carnivores. Biggest truth-threat to Pharma maybe ever. Meat cures depression. As it cured Jordan's and also cured his daughter's near deadly rheumatoid arthritis. I watched half of the amazing polly video but find her sarcasm almost unbearable. I keep trying to "get it," but it all feels very lazy to me. I must get through the second half, some time soon as that video really convinced thousands of people JP is an evil globalist snake. Even though nothing he ever says promotes any globalist obsessions. I think Milo is a treacherous snake figure but did I not trust you to lend him time and ear and heart without begging you to reconsider and see through him? I admire Jordan Peterson for his teachings, and interviews. His family values, and how he has helped my son and countless people's sons. amazing polly leaves me with a feeling of something not quite right but I can't put my finger on it. A little bit dark, perhaps.
Celia, didn't you do a piece about rethinking your view of Peterson? I've been looking for it but can't find it.
JP is the human version of a TV network. He has so much audience that anything he palys people will see.
Something similar happens to other stars like Rogan.
They have production and minders. Don't say that, say this.
This happens because years ago the young people stopped watching tv. It's a thing for old people. They watched self-produced livestreams. Then the powers that be decided to take over the indie world.
Astroturfing, as always.
And just like in old TV, you will hear good things, sometimes. But everything is scripted.
I seek independent people. The more broke they are, the more I like them, hahaha!
I think this is why Peterson had his breakdown. His handlers truly broke him that time.
JP needs Jesus in his heart.
The intellect is often an obstacle.
I just watched the entire video. Everyone needs to see that. It also confirmed my suspicion about a site called UnHerd. That's globalist BS as well. ARC and UnHerd...run by the same elitist snob, Sir Paul Marshall... got his start with Soros money.
Your revelation makes the recent unheard interview of RFK Jr make more sense. Vaccines were raised as a point against RFK Jr, but not to be addressed then during the discussion, for example. You just had to take it as given that criticizing vaccines is unpopular and discuss it no further.
Thanks for exposing this. I've never trusted Jordan and I'm glad my reservations have been validated so thoroughly. People need to constantly point out this fraud he's perpetrating in every Tweet thread he starts.
Have you noticed that every person who gains some notoriety and audience gets slandered and insulted systematically?
This happens regardless of the person saying truth or nonsense, or the person being a plant or a real person.
There is always the smear. Always. It makes things more credible to some, it makes things more incredible to others.
It pertains to a few concepts. Good cop bad cop. Limited Hangout. Streissand Effecct. Stockholm Syndrome. Millgram Experiment. and on. all aspects of Counter Intel.
I started suspecting this when he did his 180' on religion and when he started kissing the Royal's feet.
considering what Peterson has come up against in past 5 years, it probably is a worthy goal. considering who he's owned and operated by it's obviously exploitation of us all via a naive guy. curious how much Peterson is open to considering sources like Polly St George (Amazing Polly) or Celia Farber for that matter. At least we know RFK jr paid attention to Celia. Didn't she get cited throughout "The Real Fauci?" I doubt RFK jr is as naive as Peterson may be.
One problem is that Peterson makes some good points some times, and he interviews some interesting people that don't get much airtime, but extremist people, for whom everything is black or white, cannot get the nuance that guilt by association is not the way to go.
The moment they see one problem, everything is wrong. It's a great mind control technique, because we do it to ourselves.
And we all do it all the time. Splained something similar to another Amurican today. Amuricans have no clue that
Prince Andrew committed no crime by EU standards. That girl he stood accused by was past age of consent in more EU countries.
France just made age of consent 15 in last couple years. Before that it was zero. They had no age of consent.
Should not be surprising in a country where the prime minister's wife is 25 years older than him and dated him while he was in school where she taught him.
By the same token, ignoring associations is naive too. Everyone knew Epstein was guilty of far worse that what he pled to. And yet look who put in so much time and money with him. And gave him and Maxwell so much access.
Has anyone looked at Corbett Report documentary on King Charles the Great resetter? Scads of notebooks of Savile providing lengthy involved profound advice for the family on how to handle the public over Lockerby air crash and other issues.
And on
I disagree. Positive legislation creates more problems.
Natural law is better. There is no need for age of consent laws. Only the obvious stuff: violence has to be punished.
The subtle problem in this is that people lose power because of legislation. Now the State has to take care of the problem, not the people. It happens with every issue.
Removing power from people is what allows evil to grow, and evil actions to become more frequent.
Notice the switcheroo in this topic, they always do things like that: they create a scandal, real or not, they introduce the idea in people's thoughts that superior public authority has to take care of the problem and new "enabling acts" are necessary. That is programming people to yield their power, and become helpless.
Slowly, all European countries are repeating all the errors of the USofA.
Puritanism is like a skin ulcer that won't close.
We need less legislation and more personal responsibility.
By the way, I don't consider that genital mutilation passing as a stealth medical treatment of surgery is a good thing, and the opposition to it is not puritanical in principle (obviousness is not a practice of the puritans) but my warning is that they will use the puritanical programming to pass more positive legislation and hurt more people doing it, while many people who don't want that will approve. Bait and switch 24/7
Do you understand my thinking? To sum it up: the real problem is invisible, the apparent problem is the decoy. Sexual violence against young people or children is real, but it is used as a decoy, and people fall for it.
The real problem is the systematic destruction of the individual.
Individuals do not wait for permission of the authorities to protect their children from predators.
Legal positivism is only one method.
and the next article I look at is this:
https://palexander.substack.com/p/arjun-walia-is-over-the-target-boom
Many artists and thinkers throughout history used pseudonyms to remain anonymous, not because they were weak but because they did not seek fame.
Privacy is important. So is freedom.
thats great, ive taken a few punches in my time, meh.
the issue is governments and their laws, before you know it youre going to jail for some crap you said as a kid thats now a crime
I find him either naive or virtue signaling. We are not in a classical world. And it may well be that he can say whatever he wants with no fear of negative consequences. I agree that it is not nice when people insult others. But there is another aspect that he seems to overlook. There is so much sharing of vital information on social media, and this could not be done if those who share the info had to reveal their identity.
I used to always use my real name and felt the same way. It wasn't until the DS weaponized all their spying tools on Americans I became concerned, and with all of the psychos like you're talking about who will gladly Dox you with help from social justice groups tied to the DS. Not that I'm that important or anything, but used to be more active and vocal before caring for my mother the past 10 years. I just don't trust them, but sure they can gather info on anyone from their home devices, it's the other crazies they rile up that are the scariest.
Overalll, I agree. In many years of commenting in the UK media columns when they were still at least pretending to do their job I often refused to engage with these "curtain twitchers". All too often the protest was that they would be persecuted because of their jobs if they stood behind their words. My feel then and remains that if they were so worried they should either bide quiet or they should apply to the column title for an anonymised account. And that would I suggested get shot of 99% of them. Not a popular idea! The twitchers are a dismal long-term feature of our lives, I fear.
Except that social media is not the "classical world", and we should not confuse the two. Social media is not real life - let's not pretend it is by applying the rules of healthy, real life personal contact to social media. If you want healthy interactions with uncowardly people, don't look to social media to give it to you. That is for the real face to face interactions you have with people in your life.
Besides, having to prove who you are online is a form of digital ID. Is that the authoritarian direction you really want to go because you want more humane interactions on social media? Is that a good trade off?
It's not that social media can't provide support and friendships. The substacks and the comment sections really meant a lot to me through the first year of being vaccine free and isolated. It was a lifesaver. The kind words and connections meant a lot to me, and I didn't need to have human beings "validated online" in order to feel that way.
You are the second person I’ve read in a Substack comment to mention Mike Adamas as maybe a less than reputable, or honorable person when speaking things to him that he does not agree with. And who is David Knight? Is he on Substack? Curious about Mr. Adams. There was always something about Mike Adams and his Health Ranger podcasts that I eventually came to not want to listen to any longer. He gives these big teasers, then doesn’t even talk about the headline he uses as the ‘tease’ until the very end, and very little about it at that. He seemed to me to be a person who enjoys the sound of his own voice and what ‘he’ has to say.
And no I’m not a troll...I’m an older ‘person’ who lives down on the Border of The U.S. and Mexico, thus my ‘handle’ Frontera Lupita. The U.S./Mexico border is considered La Frontera (The Frontier) to people in Mexico.
Adams has alarmist tone... Mercola always negative health info. Both speak truth though I did stop reading both save an occasional check in. Both had great searchable databases when US internet was more free and supposedly neutral. Many truthers are also alarmist. They were decades ahead. To know the truth, speak and conduct business with integrity And a high vibration of the frequency of the world we'd like to live in... that's what I tune into now in others and most importantly through my own divine energy/ information channel.
what i liked about them both in addition to speaking truth and not giving a hoot what others thought, is they both had labs to verify things first hand.
And yes Mr. Adams has quite The Marketing Operation’.
I like you and your POV! 🤦♀️😂
And as I just deleted a Kirsch Substack without even reading it for the fifty billionth time…I was just thinking the same thing about him and his lame ass thinking. He just skims the surface about he speaks about and never goes into the ‘deep weeds’ about anything to to with The Administrative State or the GPS (as Sage Hana calls them)!
Yes I don’t like to download apps either…will see if I can listen to audible…I don’t use it at all.
Thanks T!
Yes! It’s “his high blood-pressure-causing, continual super-alarmist tone” that I find annoying. Then he rarely gets to the things he’s all ‘hot’ about until the end, and then it’s really nothing!
Can I look up David Knight somewhere? Thanks T! 🙏🏻💓
i can relate to your experience. thanks. well said.
i know what it's like to be called all kinds of names including troll. i have an interesting list. your story reminds me of what could have happened to my doctor in commifornia. (but didn't because he was careful) - he could have lost his license for speaking out against the jab. he's no hero, but he's a good doctor, we need him. he's no loud hero with a megaphone, he didn't get on a soap box, he just gave good advice and good help when we got sick - he would be called a coward by jordan peterson and celia farber, for not getting up on the soapbox and destroying his career and leaving his patients with nowhere to turn.
Hello again, margie.
I think you misunderstand Celia.
She is a writer, and a journalist, a real one.
She goes for the story. The personal side.
The storyteller is not a judge. The audience is the judge.
It's always good to remember to listen to both sides of the story before passing judgement. So the audience needs at least two good storytellers, to have more information.
In this particular story, some of the anonymous slanderers are not anonymous and they price themselves of not being anonymous, and yet they have not taken up to the challenge of this post. They are still in other stacks, slandering people unjustly. They have not come here, to this comment section, to repeat their accusations and tell their tale.
I'm actually waiting for that to happen to tell my little part in all this.
Now you have some more information.
good hello 23. pretty obvious to me that she is promoting peterson's push for social media to clamp down on fake names. Are these not her words when she writes, "I have always said this. If you don't use your real name, you're not a legitimate "voice," you're just a spiteful coward" do you agree with that?
Excellent points and that is why anonymity online does not automatically = being a troll or a coward. This is a dangerous black and white slippery slope argument to make. There are doxxing laws online for A REASON!
forcing the real id agenda for social media is throwing out the baby with the bath water. I think maybe Celia was just caught up in the emotion of being intentionally irritated by some of these folks.
Maybe the people who told her about the false claims were the false claimers themselves, and did it to get her goat.
Anything is possible.
The Romans had an "album" in the town center, and in the entrance. It was a large board or a wall painted in white. Everyone could place notes there. Albo means white.
Some Romans would write offensive jokes and witty poems, criticizing the Gov. and religious things.
Also notes on love, and insults between lovers. It was quite an entertainment.
The officials would get angry at the "incorrect" use of the public album, an repress that behavior.
Then the citizens would keep writing notes on other places for everyone to notice.
Then the owners affected by the defacement would complain that the album was created precisely to avoid defacement of their property.
Then the officials would "allow" once again for people to vent their frustration and comedy in the public album, anonymously.
We've been living the same cycle of stupidity for at least 23 centuries, but now is global and more intense.
In defense of the cowards, I will say that the authorities say and do the most outrageous things, and the fear of punishment is real. Avoiding injustice is not morally wrong.
Before social media usenet existed.
Haha. What a clown world take by JP. He's usually pretty on, but not on this. He couldn't be more wrong. Anonymity and privacy are linked. Most people haven't sold 20 million copies of a book and don't get six figures each week from YouTube to have the luxury to NOT be anonymous and avoid the financial and social consequences from having ordinary opinions online. And those consequences are now DIRE. Look at the President of Thomas Jefferson University (irony is dead) who is getting raked for simply liking innocuous tweets by Alex Berenson. If TJ were alive today he'd probably make this same point. Other people's right to privacy cannot be infringed for the fragility and feelings of those who take offense to what "trolls" say online. It goes for free speech as well. One's choice to be offended is merely a choice. The best course of action is to ignore and move on. Dwelling on what some isolated anon shit poster does online is playing their game. Ignore. Move on. Nobody's feelings should ever negate the right to online anonymity (in a total surveillance society with dire consequences) for those of us non trolls who cannot afford to not have it. "It" being privacy.
I agree on your reasoning. I feel the same way about J.P.
And when I first heard him speak of this issue I wondered to myself if he thought this thru.
I know how he championed against the Canadian bill C-16, I believe it was.
I would also like to point out that since we now know what our government is capable of, including murder, that they would easily have fake accounts set up that us serfs wouldn't have the luxury to obtain.
The only way I would agree to i.d. for access, possibly, is if you were to prove that you are real through the i.d. process yet can still remain unanimous when posting comments if that makes sense.
Well said!
live and let live would be good... but dead among those who want to control the dialogue some being very aggressive and violent in doing that.... then we see how the J6 patriots which have been treated and accused and convicted of violating laws they never did... clear openess could lead to anyone being accused of some sort of sedition or treason and put in jail for decades...
Privacy and anonymity have a place among sane and responsible people who do sane and responsible things. Unfortunately, society's parasitical predators rely on privacy and anonymity the way robbers, Klansmen, Antifa, and BLM relies on masks, robes, and hoodies to preserve the privacy they need to facilitate their predation. Be grateful for your unfamiliarity with the clown world that Dr. Peterson describes. It's real. https://youtu.be/sz_8B3vCjGk?t=3669
who defines what's sane or insane? I would say that injecting 5 billion people with a toxic experimental substance is completely insane. Yet they did it. Out in the open. People willingly lined up for it based on what insane "experts" told them. The biggest parasites and predators, the greatest psychopaths humanity has ever known are in society are not hiding anywhere. They meet in Davos every January to dictate INSANE polices that people believe and go along with. The robbers, Klansmen, Antifa, BLM, are not your enemies. They're confused, clueless foot soldiers and ideologues of a global technocrat parasite class that uses them to keep you distracted and demoralized while they get away with their crimes. Dr. Peterson is just now getting acquainted with the global technocratic order (Davos crowd as he calls them), so he's been about half a decade behind the curve and he's dead wrong on eliminating online privacy as well.
Sane people recognize sanity when they see it. Familiarity with our intelligence agencies, politics, propaganda, Marxism, and social experiments (Milgram, Asch, Stanford) helps the intellectually curious to better understand human behaviors and pathologies. Frankel and Solzhenitsyn have something to say on this as well. You attack Dr. Peterson like an abused dog who bites his rescuer because, in your current place, you fear compassionate hands. His books and lectures may help you - if and when help is something you seek.
I understand the sentiment. But without anonymity there would've been no Thomas Paine writing under a pseudonym to pen "Common Sense" and other writers anonymously adding to the discourse in the colonies to secure our independence and freedom from a tyrannical regime.
No doubt our overseers already know who is behind any online contributor, doxxing is often coordinated and facilitated by government insiders leaking to nominally independent sources to destroy a threat they identify. The anonymity of a name, like "Freedom Fox" at least makes them work for it and raises the bar for non-state actors. Which at least allows many low-threat assessment targets to share our voices as we do.
It's a 'pick your poison proposition.' Those like you who put it all out there take poison arrows that many of us adding to the conversation and expansion of human understanding know the King will try to silence, too. And suffer the indignities you suffer. Which makes you and those who suffer the indignities the true heroes in our search for truth and accountability.
Our eternal gratitude to those who put it all out there is small solace for what you and they endure. A forever grateful nation will remember those who did, long after the wounds to character and reputation become scars that remind us of what it took to re-secure our blessings of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness our forefathers once secured for us, before we lost them due to our neglect.
Yes.
I resemble these remarks.
This is just propaganda for those who want more top down censorship and surveillance of “dangerous speech”.
What I hear is that he is saying they should segregate those who comment using their NAME and those who wants to throw stones anonymously. Seems fair to me.
Paid government trolls or agents of disinformation will always be able to use fake names and everyone else will be forced to identify themselves. We will be deemed “dangerous” to the rest of society (for spreading misinformation about a virus). Your online behavior will affect your “social credit score” and this is what Jordan Peterson is actually pushing. This is just a half step towards the eradication of privacy and personal freedoms.
digital gulags, what's not to love...?
;)
Why don't you trust individuals to discern or learn to discern for themselves? Isn't this what the internet should be teaching us? To onboard our own authority and quit outsourcing it to dubiously conflicted institutions? Shouldn't we learn to judge a statement and/or its author on the shear merits of the content written, rather than some ad hominem reliance on reputation and the status of the person writing?
Those who will continue to live in cooperative “human” society and those who will bc avatars ultimately. Both are “about to fuck around and find out”.
Hmm... I get why you're upset but there are other reasons than trolling for people to not use their full or real names online.
wrong so very wrong
this sort of thing leads to government laws you wont like
watch Rabbit hole
If the RESTRICT law passes (probably will) then all of that is covered, though not exactly in such terms.
Jordan’s covert goal is to destroy “the right” ... be very wary of this man. Remember, he worked for the UN, he supports SDGs. He has his own vision of the WEF and it’s called ARC - look at who is involved in that. Furthermore, he believes in world/global governance
Sometimes anonymous names are necessary when others regard controversial viewpoints as toxic and they will dox a person if the views do not cohere with their way of thinking. To avoid cancel culture, and ruining one's life, sometimes anonymous names are required. For example, Libs of TikTok was doxed in a bad way. I know others who have been doxed. It's not fun.
The guy who said get the damned shot during the push for jabs said this.
He said this specific thing after a softball bullshit interview with bibi.
People called him out on it and he cried, coming up with this crap.
Sorry JP, what you want is authoritarian.
For those of us living with government censorship and control - not necessarily the best idea. Sure, if they really want to find you, they will. But don't make it that easy for them - at least not unless you want a prison sentence.
Celia, are you falling for this ad hominem posing as logic? Can you justify forcing someone like A Midwestern Doctor to shut up or expose himself?
While I agree with Peterson that we should all have the courage to publicly say what we believe, I believe there should be a wide latitude for people to express themselves anonymously.
Not every conversation should be attached to real-life social status games.
https://libresolutionsnetwork.substack.com/p/anonymous
Nope. Anonymity on line should be protected. You don’t like what someone says, block them. Nowadays getting doxed can be dangerous.
I actually strongly disagree with Peterson’s stance on this. The right to privacy is one of our sacred bulwarks against totalitarianism, and having the ability to share information anonymously is a necessary component of freedom. Whether one is a whistleblower or a meme-maker, forcing that person to disclose their identity puts them at risk for reprisal from the corrupt as well as the menticided public.
I covered this to some extent in the objections I posed to Jonathan Haidt’s recent proposal for combating the threat of AI to the information landscape:
• https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/ai-will-make-social-media-worse/comment/15647505
Gabriel of Libre Solutions has a good post on this topic:
• https://libresolutionsnetwork.substack.com/p/anonymous
Great comment MAA.
Thanks for the links.
"Safeguarding social media." You're preaching from your moral high horse, the exact same thing the Zuckerbergs and Robert Malone and all the rest of them are demanding. Top down control of speech. Did you know that's one of the issues that Malone is fighting for? Control of the internet?
https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/anti-who-graphics-to-share
Would we be at all surprised to learn that our government and/or NGOs lined to the Soros cabal, fosters, encourages and even funds these anonymous trolls, with the blessing and assistance of big tech companies and big intel organizations, and that this backing is one key reason why online platforms resist making us identify ourselves? I certainly would not be at all surprised to learn that this is precisely the reason these trolls exist.