No they really aren't. I can ignore Peterson being a centrist because it's not really what his work is about. Hes about psychology of archetypes Sargon is just a fat guy who vlogs. I learn nothing from him.
reminder to report, filter and ignore tinderposters
Almost as bad as dating siteposting tbh
He's a based British comedian just like you or me lad smh
He's a better sophist than Sargon but they promote the same ideals.
"MUH INDIVIDUALISM" Oh so you're an ancap? "NO UH ANCAPS ARE RETARDED SINCE THEY FOLLOW THEIR PRINCIPLES TO THEIR LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS, EVEN THOUGH I ARGUE FROM A PRINCIPLED PERSPECTIVE. BOW TO MY COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND PRAISE ME FOR BIBLE REFERENCES!"
They're both dumb guys that preach individualism to the extent that they personally like it. They will argue "but that's not individualist" you can't argue "X goes against Y principle so it's bad" when your own ideology goes against that principle. They're low brow charlatans gas lighting their white male audiences. Useful idiots keeping what already is, alive.
* Starts his own Collective *
How can one be better at promoting fecklessness than another.
"better" is a pretty vague term. "More convincingly argues the same garbage" would have been clearer.
Because he draws more people in and convinces them of his bollocks better.
I guess my point is more that I really enjoyed Peterson's psych lectures and his use of historical archetypes to show understanding of how humans operate. I don't care that he's wrong about individualism because I can see hes wrong and i can focus on his good stuff. I learn a lot of other stuff from him.
Sargon is of no value at all.
actually, my 1 hour video dissecting Jordan Petersons Sky interview will prove that I am the more intelligent individualist :^)
It'd be a trainwreck either way Just a different kind of trainwreck
It would be worse.
Sometimes I wonder if the whole "anti-collectivist" rhetoric is just them making a point about how "collectivism has been forbidden for white people". Because it has been, but not by them.
It's been forbidden by people by people who say one moment, "Your pro-white policies would be allowed, if you could get people to vote for them". Meanwhlile, these anti-whites turn round two-facedly and say nothing when pro-whites are fired from their jobs for off-the-job politically incorrect speech : who say nothing when pro-whites are beaten up in the street by anti-white thugs : who stand back quietly when pro-whites are ejected from social media despite not breaking any rules except for using polite but still politically incorrect language (these two-faced types will say in such a case that "it's a company's right to choose who can and cannot use its services").
So, at least these anti-collectivist types will come out and say that whites are not allowed to collectivise. While the real evil comes from the ones who say that whites are allowed to, but then turn round and do everything to make sure that it doesn't happen.
I agree that white people still need people to stand up for whites, but these anti-collectivist types are making a reasonable point about how whites are in practice held to a different standard.
I don't get it either. I've seen twitter pages of ethno nationalists and their entire timeline is filled with shit flinging at Dickie, Woes and Allsup. It's a lot like looking at a lefty twitter page but those guys are their Trump. It's autism.