Great conversation man, really loved this one, hope you get him back on your podcast or you go on his soon.. not sure if he uploads podcasts on his channel, idr and idts. Edit- Did the video end at where it ended or is there a part 2 coming of this Convo? It kinda felt like the ending got cut off 😂
Appreciate it - and yeah thats strange I didn't realize it got cut off there. I think we may have lost 3 or 4 minutes at the end unfortunately. But I expect me and James will talk again at some point in the future!
I couldn’t disagree with both of you more at around the 29:00 mark. Firstly, I want to talk about his analysis of Peterson’s hatred of Communist revolution juxtaposed against the French revolution. Jordan’s issue with Communist revolutions isn’t with the revolutions themselves. It’s the value of the system through which the revolution was demanded. Enlightenment values have overwhelmingly lead to wealthy and thriving nations, modern medicine, agricultural advancements, and technological advancements that have quite literally transformed the world in objectively good ways. Every Communist revolution has resulted in nothing but totalitarian regimes 100% of the time. The aftermath of each type of revolution is so outside of comparison, it’s absurd to consider them as equals. I also take issue with your Constitution reset theory. I would love to know which values in the declaration of independence, or the constitution itself, you feel society has outgrown, and by what metric. We tend to get caught up in the microscoped social media problems, that we forget that the Western world has statistically become progressively less violent and more wealthy (in terms of quality of life) over time. Moreover, I don’t believe there is any substantive evidence that poverty or inequality causes crime. In fact, I believe a more reasonable conclusion would be that crime causes inequality, and poverty. That is a statement that is based on a more measurable standard. Insurance companies are going to have higher premiums in high crime areas, and businesses are going to leave high crime areas. This is business 101. There is no good reason for a business owner to want to operate in an area where their profits are inherently at risk. Further, there are a ton of examples of unequal, or simply minority groups, outperforming the majority groups. You end up with this self-fulfilling prophesy when there is a culture of oppression and weak populist agendas. This doesn’t mean there’s not some level of inequality that needs to be tended to, or that there’s not an issue with corporate power. But I couldn’t disagree more about how those changes need to happen. I think he’s forgetting that Foucault and Derrida aren’t just products of their works. They were both activists. Their actions give us a lot of insight into their philosophy, as well. Another thing he ignores is almost all of these philosophers not only identified with the cultural aspect of Marxist ideals, but the materialist variation, as well.
Great conversation man, really loved this one, hope you get him back on your podcast or you go on his soon.. not sure if he uploads podcasts on his channel, idr and idts.
Edit- Did the video end at where it ended or is there a part 2 coming of this Convo? It kinda felt like the ending got cut off 😂
Appreciate it - and yeah thats strange I didn't realize it got cut off there. I think we may have lost 3 or 4 minutes at the end unfortunately. But I expect me and James will talk again at some point in the future!
Some good ideas percolated here, Id love to see more information exchange and synthesis between you guys.
I had never seen the word "percolate" before. What made you choose that word?
@@jasonsomers8224 uh somthing like, the ideas that bubbled up through the reciprocal nature of conversation.
@@andrewnock2675 Nice word.
Thanks Andrew! Hopefully James and will talk again in the future.
Great conversation, question though why make the full conversation an "unlisted" video?
My mistake - public now
I couldn’t disagree with both of you more at around the 29:00 mark. Firstly, I want to talk about his analysis of Peterson’s hatred of Communist revolution juxtaposed against the French revolution. Jordan’s issue with Communist revolutions isn’t with the revolutions themselves. It’s the value of the system through which the revolution was demanded. Enlightenment values have overwhelmingly lead to wealthy and thriving nations, modern medicine, agricultural advancements, and technological advancements that have quite literally transformed the world in objectively good ways. Every Communist revolution has resulted in nothing but totalitarian regimes 100% of the time. The aftermath of each type of revolution is so outside of comparison, it’s absurd to consider them as equals.
I also take issue with your Constitution reset theory. I would love to know which values in the declaration of independence, or the constitution itself, you feel society has outgrown, and by what metric. We tend to get caught up in the microscoped social media problems, that we forget that the Western world has statistically become progressively less violent and more wealthy (in terms of quality of life) over time.
Moreover, I don’t believe there is any substantive evidence that poverty or inequality causes crime. In fact, I believe a more reasonable conclusion would be that crime causes inequality, and poverty. That is a statement that is based on a more measurable standard. Insurance companies are going to have higher premiums in high crime areas, and businesses are going to leave high crime areas. This is business 101. There is no good reason for a business owner to want to operate in an area where their profits are inherently at risk.
Further, there are a ton of examples of unequal, or simply minority groups, outperforming the majority groups. You end up with this self-fulfilling prophesy when there is a culture of oppression and weak populist agendas.
This doesn’t mean there’s not some level of inequality that needs to be tended to, or that there’s not an issue with corporate power. But I couldn’t disagree more about how those changes need to happen.
I think he’s forgetting that Foucault and Derrida aren’t just products of their works. They were both activists. Their actions give us a lot of insight into their philosophy, as well. Another thing he ignores is almost all of these philosophers not only identified with the cultural aspect of Marxist ideals, but the materialist variation, as well.