For the most part I think they assume that everyone will pick themselves up by their bootstraps as soon as they abolish welfare. It's a deluded position, and many of them DO think the way you say, but probably not all.

But I've never heard him deny the Holocaust

When he says that Hitler never tried to win WWII, that's what I'm referring to.

And Marxism and the french revolution influenced almost all political change in the Europe for about a hundred or more years. It had to have some effect on the third Reich just like the French revolution did.

Yes, it was a direct reaction against Marxism. They considered Marxism and Judaism intertwined, which is why socialists were the first people the Nazi regime began to systematically kill off.

Just calling Hitler a monster doesn't help anyone actually understand him and therefore be able to stop others like him

This is precisely what Peterson does when he claims Hitler is the reincarnation of Caine whose only goal was to create chaos, rather than having a worldview that predicated killing Jews for out of bigotry.

https://youtu.be/b8AcmzqFdPM

Well, I grew up in Mississippi so everything that ever happened to me was done by country boys.

Honky Tonk Bonky-Bonk was swingin on the dude with a shit eating grin on his face. He definitely wanted to be there. Im not sure why, I could tell how it was gonna end based on his pisspoor footing. It looks like he's never been in a fight with anyone that wasn't his 14 year old girlfriend.

I live for the challenge.

I'm so glad we have fucking statues to teach us history but MAN is it difficult to wheel a giant fucking statue into every history classroom across the country every day to teach them history! IF ONLY THERE WAS AN EASIER WAY TO TEACH HISTORY! It's almost like monuments were invented for a wholly different purpose!

Put the bubble pic first, remove the cat pic.

Why is it necessary?

... Until later in the series when the dude actually gets laid.

Yeah, a lot of people have only a surface level understanding of political theory or economics.

You tell me.

Killing lions definitely isn't vegan bro. /s

But for real, thanks for the long reply. What has this viewpoint shaped your political ideas into?

The core of Liberalism (which a lot of this idea of individuality stems from) comes from a position where you don't have to worry about what you're going to eat the next day.

I think this is poignant. The most illiberal people I know in the west tend to be the ones who have struggled the most with food insecurity. In a world that produces enough food for 1.5x it's population, this shouldn't be a worry anyone has.

And if you want to complain about the adults who raised you, I'll listen so feel free. It's therapeutic to talk those things out and, at least for me, has helped me to understand why I am the way I am and has stopped me from passing on to my child the issues that were handed down to me.

I became libertarian because, I didn’t want people to give me money, if they didn’t want to.

But you also have the ability to make money on your own, correct? Do you think there should be compulsory support for the elderly or handicapped and if not could your opinion be the same if you were born paralyzed?

The owner of the business would make 15 on his own, then after democratization of the workplace, the owner would make 10, so it’s better to not hire anyone.

I think this is a bad argument because you're assuming, in descending order from the most glaring issue with the argument,

1) the owner can do all the work on their own, or the reduction in workload isn't worth the salary cut [so why would they consider hiring someone to begin with?]

2) the profit margin would remain exactly the same when the number of workers doubles [why wouldn't it double?]

3) the person they chose not to hire [or anyone really] doesn't start a business that cuts into that profit margin and reduces their take home salary anyway.

You got downvoted, but this is at least partially true. It's proven that people become more corrupt/less charitable as they gain more money. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" as they say. I'm not sure about humans being instinctively "loss averse," depending on how you define it. Humans since the dawn of humanity have worked to keep the handicapped alive, so does the loss of that person outweigh the loss of resources it takes to keep them alive?

I think you're right, at least in our society, but I also think that's caused more by nurture than nature.

She has mad Karen energy.

Ah, so it's r/menwritingwomen material

Edit: You can downvote me but I'm right.

I'd like to believe that isn't true for everybody, that there are people who are willing to sacrifice their own good fortune for others' gain.

You good?

Sure. Here.

exposure

Can you explain what you mean by this?

I'm saying that's what bill C-16 was about. Peterson either didn't understand or purposely mischaracterized it.

If you were also a teenage libertarian, did you not also believe that it was in everyone's best interests?