Jordan Peterson anyone? Now, before anybody who likes Peterson objects to this (I personally enjoy many of Peterson's lectures and Biblical analyses), this isn't about whether or not you feel the man has helped you with your personal life.
I'm pointing out something implicit and explicit. Implicitly, I'm pointing to a history of the use of public intellectuals, typically a few heavy handed 'stars' of academia every generation. You might look at Foucault or Chomsky as a couple examples - typically people housed beneath the umbrella of academe while positioning themselves as 'rebels' that are trying to check or rebuff their own system.
Explicitly, Jordan came to prominence virtually overnight. For context, the things he is saying in his lectures are not new. Jung, Campbell and the mythopoetic movement of the 70s have been saying these things for many years. They are not even new to Peterson's career. He published Maps of Meaning something like 22 years ago, which he spent 13 years writing. It got very little attention - about as much as you'd expect from an obscure academic: a few reviews from colleagues at his own school. Before 2016, Jordan had been doing his style of mythical analysis and posting all of his lectures to Youtube for around a decade.
Suddenly, in 2016 he jumps on a bench with a megaphone to do a monologue about compelled speech on campus in Canada, and he becomes a sensation overnight. I wonder, would he have possibly sacrificed his academic status for this stunt had he not known something better was coming?
I'll ignore the intelligence community's ties to universities in that part of the world, including UofT and others in upstate New York. But we can't ignore Jordan's work with the United Nations.
Someone could explain the whole thing away. "His thought is groundbreaking, but that doesn't mean it will instantly be recognized. He needed the publicity of his protest at a politically charged time in history to get him the notoriety to promote his other work."
Fine. Perfectly possible. I personally find the entire story arc far too peculiar, especially once you start looking into how crucial the podcast circuit was for him, namely Rogan and the IDW, and the history of institutes like Esalen using intellectuals for social engineering.
Now add in the fact he married a Jewess, has a commissioned mural of Lenin as a literal wall of his home's living space, and his sudden disappearance to Russia for detox treatment coming off a benzo addiction.
he seemed suspicious
also elon musk and the black science guy
I can't speak to Elon's true role in some of the early companies that brought him wealth. Whether he is a skilled programmer, or whatever, I don't know.
I know that today he is an absolute prop. He is an icon being used publicly for social engineering, to introduce concepts (really, to plant psychological seeds) for the technocracy. These tactics have been used for decades and decades, all the way back to the 'World of Tomorrow' tv segments.
To me, this was evident for several reasons. First, his appearance on Rogan. There are some gullible folk who will come to believe he is merely eccentric, mildly autistic, etc., and this accounts for his strange punctuated way of speaking about his company's projects. In reality, he simply couldn't articulate a single thing about the concepts themselves, because they are all prop concepts. Rogan pressed him for some explanation about the so-called underground tunnel system beneath L.A. Elon couldn't put together a coherent description that would suffice for a high-schooler. "Uh, you uh, just dig a pit."
The most autistic person on the planet could have said something more substantial about the idea. No, Elon, you don't, uh, just dig a pit.
Second, Elon is often used to promote the Neuralink idea (basically, that mankind is on the precipice of plugging our brains into computers and achieving a sort of hive mind capability). It's absolute fucking nonsense, based on fiction. How do I know he has absolutely no concept about the mind? I saw him in a panel discussion with several prominent philosophers of mind and a few physicists. Elon contributed literally nothing - it became very clear he was a publicity object to attract attention to the meeting.
Again, bang on analysis. That is precisely how I read that interview as well.
and... did you miss the part where space is fake & gay??
if you needed Elon to showup on Rogan before you realized that he is a total sellout shill then evidently your brain is also that which is fake and gay.
Why would the Jews choose a guy defying the state's prescribed doubleplusgood Newspeak (flagrantly and successfully, remember) as a method of catapulting a dude into the public consciousness so he can...say the exact same shit he's been saying for decades, like, "Everybody should read The Gulag Archipelago"?
Do you think it's possible for a voice to gain popularity organically? What does that look like and what characteristics can we use to recognize such phenomena?
I acknowledged it was possible in the comment you replied to.
But don't forget Jews play both sides of the aisle with the ultimate goal being to move groups as a whole to the containment of the pasture.
As long as you are pointing out Jordan's defiance of the newspeak, we can also note his refusal to deal with the topic of the Jew (including that embarrassing moment on stage when he was confronted about 200 Years Together and could not even muster an answer to the question), his total admonishment of group identity where it concerns whites, and his not subtle encouragement of every man to enter the current establishment and rise through its hierarchy. At no point does he acknowledge what it means when that hierarchy is turned upside down or when it tracks values anathema to the host society, all the while speaking about the horrors of white group identity while shirking the Jewish identity.
Again, if you believe that Jordan has done something personally beneficial for you, great. I'm not claiming his writings won't do that, but I also specified that I was looking at the bigger picture.
To answer your final question, there is nobody who reaches that level in popular culture today without endorsement. People that are truly outsiders and represent a threat to the existing order are crushed. We've just witnessed high-level politicians, including members of congress, get existing publishing contracts cancelled. Jordan never had a publishing contract cancelled. He was at one point in talks to host a recurring segment on Dr. Oz. Not only wasn't he cancelled, he was very quickly slated for appearances on a publicity circuit around the world. News stations across the developed world picked him up, and threw softballs at him like Cathy Newman. It wasn't simply a matter of him gaining organic popularity by bootstrapping, the establishment picked him up and put him everywhere. Now consider some of the other voices historically who were truly exposing the establishment narrative: crushed. The second Fischer came out and began speaking about the Jews, they made him a pariah. David Irving also comes to mind.
I also think about an author like E. Michael Jones. The man has written highly anticipated books through his own independent publishing company because he had to. He was fired from a professorship at Notre Dame (did Jordan ever lose his job with UofT?), and was blacklisted from publishing. Amazon removed his most controversial titles. Despite his fandom, Jones has been relegated to taking interviews with obscure personalities on Youtube, getting perhaps his biggest audience through Owen fucking Benjamin. Meanwhile, Rogan is parading Jordan around with, what, 4 episodes in two years?
Not only do jews play all sides, they don't co-ordinate as a single unitary block.
Partially it is part of the jewish religious and cultural teachings (they actually believe they can outsmart their god by interpreting their bible in autistic ways) but also it is just part and parcel of their genetic predisposition to high levels of autism. They don't see the world the way normal people do. They see the world the way an autistic mathematician does, as a set of cold hard mechanical processes that can be exploited to their own benefit.
This is why every conversation with a jew, as described by Hitler in his book is pointless. You are having a meaningful conversation with them while they view the conversation as a set of abstract procedures that can be arranged / re-arranged to their benefit.
This is why people on our side keep on talking about the jewish conspiracy. While there are all sorts of jewish groups getting together and organizing, there is no overall global single conspiracy. What our people can sense is that there is something wrong with these people, and what is wrong is that they are always looking to exploit every loophole and every kind word of our people.
They are a kind of parasite species.
Terrific post. It's great to see that we can look at our enemies work and pull out useful things and throw out the rest.
Your analysis is correct and everyone on the far right has turned on Peterson a while back when we smelled that his job was to get in the way of the "radicalisation" of young white men.
I don't think it worked to the extent that he claims based on emails he receives. What was really interesting is that he pulled out the Gullag Archipelago at the end but stopped at naming the jew. Which was telling as it looked like he could have gone either way from there.
Is his wife a Jew? She is ugly enough to really make me suspect.
Wasn't aware of this, interesting points.
Game's been rigged from the beginning. Tape your friends name to the bottom of the fishbowl and have your sister-in-law from out of town do the drawing; after that, the people in town will defend the fairness of the drawing if someone protests.
Excellent analysis, articulate and pointed.
Where can I find documentation on upstate NY institutions being compromised by intelligence?
Kyron the Icon
I have seen the references in many places. I apologize I don't have them on hand. But Toronto was a hot spot, and you should be able to do some searches on MKUltra and find plenty of mentions of both University of Toronto and McGill. The US and English researchers crossed the border between NY and Canada. I believe you'll find some information for Dr. Don Cameron and his involvement in MKUltra.
Thank you for the reply. I know what you are saying is true, but I was hoping you could point me in the right direction on "official documentation"
Kyron the Icon
(post is archived)