Jordan Peterson – Poverty causes crime? Wrong! – The Gini coefficient

Jordan Peterson – Poverty causes crime? Wrong! – The Gini coefficient


Yeah, so there’s this interesting phenomena. That is very characteristic of Societies, I believe pretty much everywhere. It’s being studied now You can calculate an index called the gini coefficient, and the gini coefficient is a number that represents How much inequality of income distribution there is in a given? geographical area so you could calculate a gini coefficient for a street or you know an area in the city or a city or a state or a [country] you can do it at all those levels and What you find is you know you always hear this idea that poverty causes crime That’s a classic left-wing idea, but it’s wrong. It’s seriously wrong and [it’s] importantly wrong and it’s Definitively wrong not only that so there’s no argument about this. It’s already been established what causes crime especially aggressive crime is relative poverty and Relative poverty is not the same thing as poverty at all It’s seriously not the same thing poverty is when you don’t have enough [to] eat Relative poverty is when the guy next door has a much better car than you So and there’s lots of relative poverty in the United States and there’s some absolute poverty but even the absolute poverty in the United States Is nothing like the absolute poverty say in places like India or in sub-Saharan Africa where absolute poverty means you have nothing Now what’s really interesting about the gini coefficient? Is that? If you go to places where everyone roughly speaking is Poor say by National standards [right] I think South Dakota was often used as an example or maybe one of the maritime provinces Like Newfoundland where there’s where there’s low average income, but it’s pretty flat distribution there’s almost no crime and if you go to places where the everyone’s rich then there’s almost no crime, but if you go places where there are poor people and moderately well-off people and rich people And the distribution is really steep then the rate of aggressive behavior among young men And it’s usually within their own ethnic group starts to skyrocket Out of control and the reason for that seems to be that if the dominant Hierarchy is too steep then the young men have no Likelihood of climbing to a dominant position while playing the standard social game and so what they do is turn to aggression aggression to To make their mark on the world and it works, [too] That’s the other thing is that make no mistake about it if you’re if you’re looking for status in a place where status is hard to achieve, and you’re the meanest toughest guy around then and You know around a bunch of people [who] like you don’t have much money then you’re going to benefit from that status it works. Yeah Would that be part of the reason why… cause I know I think that the violent crime rate in the U.S. Is higher than it [is] in Canada Would that be part of the reason why… sure Sure, yeah I mean, you can make [a] real conservative argument for making sure that you know the conservatives are very anti income distribution And we figure that’s because of the guys that have this male independence you know they identify [with] this male independence factor They don’t want to be distributing resources to people who are down the dominance hierarchy because they want they want them down in the dominance hierarchy they want there to be a difference between the people on top And the people on the bottom so [that] they can be the people [on] top so that it increases their relative attractiveness Like it’s a perfectly logical game And they presume that while the rules are set up and like Every man can go for it do its best in the winner wins and the loser loses And that’s just how it is and don’t ask me to fix it because I don’t want it You know and besides that it’s I don’t find it I find it distasteful to attempt to fix it more than that right because it’s a moral issue. It’s not just that an intellectual issue so So you can make a case however, you can make a case from the conservative point of view especially with regards to say beliefs in religious traditionalism and the desire to Maintain social stability that you shouldn’t let income distribution become too unequal Like one of the big things your society has to do is to make [sure] that that doesn’t get out of [hand] because it tends To get out of hand it tends towards a few people having everything and almost everyone else having nothing It’s a natural in a sense. It’s a natural consequence of economic progression which is actually something that Marx pointed out although an Italian named Pareto had figured it out at Approximately the same time and I think with a lot more Conceptual clarity but the more unequal you let your society get to higher the probability [of] death Roughly speaking through violent causes and no But but but I’ll tell you why is that you know? Men want to climb the dominant hierarchy and the reason they want to climb the dominant hierarchiy because that’s how they get access to women [societies] actually [have] [earlier] in this [discussion] you talking both familiar and the unfamiliar and the structure So it seems like we all want to live within the structure but we don’t want the rules to apply to ourselves. Well, we have this contradictory problem We want to be protected [by] the structure, but we want to advance our position within it and so that means What that should mean and this is I [think] the definition of civilized behavior is that you’re allowed to advance your position within the structure as long as you don’t disrupt it negatively you know And I think most people do do that in fact I think people in civilized countries do that so effectively that it’s an absolute incomprehensible Miracle I can’t understand how or why I never got established But like a psychopath will he climb the ladder and cut the runs off underneath Fundamentally right, it’s like he doesn’t care. He doesn’t even care if the damn thing maintains itself You know he’s perfectly willing to have it destroyed after he’s exhausted it you know but if everyone acted like that or even if a fairly substantial Percentage of people acted like that the whole thing would come to a halt virtually – like in no time flat so so mean Why? See you might here here’s the reasons likely You know because one of the things we were talking about was masculine violence now the thing about Masculine violence is it only tends to emerge in situations where there doesn’t … there don’t seem to be any other reasonably viable means of Advancing Status so it’s not reasonable to say that men are aggressive. You [can] say that on average men are more aggressive than women and You can also say that if that if you put men in a situation where they have no Where they can see status differences, but they have no means of moving forward That they’re likely to turn to aggression as a way of establishing dominance and then you can say that that’s… the reason for that is [because] it makes them more attractive – the fundamental reason yeah? Oh yeah, bring that on foul? I’d just like to add on: I read this article [once] that talked about how polygamous societies are [more fond of violance]. Yeah, absolutely [just] The reason: If one guy has two wifes, than there is fifty percent of the population that has no wife – that’s right – no access to [them]. Yeah, that’s exactly right the Evolutionary psychology explanation for the Pathology of polygamy is that if once you let it establish itself [then] the men get ultraviolent So would you say that normally there would [always] be a basis for …? Many people have said that [and] yes, I think you can make a strong case for that And I [think] the fundamental reason is the one that you [just] pointed out. You know the idea is well would you rather have one woman or die You know or sorry that’s not quite right would you rather [no]? That’s not quite that’s not quite right would you it’s more like would you be willing to limit yourself to one partner or Have a shot at many partners, but a much higher probability of dying [yeah], right, and you know some guys will take that they’ll take that the high risk approach You know so now it just doesn’t eliminate the difference in Individual differences in determining who’s going to be aggressive because what will happen is that as the gini coefficient pressure rises? The more aggressive men the men who are more aggressive by Nature will get more aggressive First right so you can imagine it’s a threshold phenomena to some sense so [and] what I should tell you as well is the relationship between the gini coefficient and Male-on-male on the side isn’t like 0.2 or 0.3 Which is about the correlation that you get if you were predicting something like that using personality. It’s like point eight or point nine It’s like idiot of all of it. It’s the explanation So it’s a huge effect. You know it’s so it’s so big in effect that you can basically say oh Well we figured that out allthough psychologists never know when they figured anything out and they keep endlessly Retesting it over and over and over because you know we don’t know how to bring our science to a stop but if you don’t accept the gini coefficient aggression data It’s like you might as well throw the rest of social sciences out the window because the effect is unbelievably powerful [hilarious] [it] depends you can do it at any level of analysis you can do it you can do it by County you can do it by City You can do it by state and you can do it by country [and] it works on all of those levels Like it predicts agression [all over…]? You bet yeah, yeah, and [that’s] a great question. [I] mean the method logically sophisticated studies. Have done [exactly] that To ensure [that] [while] to ensure [that] it’s actually this phenomena rather than other factors that might be offered in that particular geographical area so countries with a higher gini coefficient or more violent and Cities within that country [that] have a higher than average gini coefficient for that country are more violent on average. It’s a very very robust robust robust finding so all [right], so We’re going to say for the sake of argument that you’ve got the male dominance hierarchy and it’s represented as Masculine now one of the things you said he thought that women carried an image [of mat] of men in their unconscious And she he thought that the image that Women carried of men in their unconscious was a group of men not an individual man. He called that the [animus] whereas he believed that the image that women Image of women that men carry in their collective unconscious was of a single woman, and he called that the anima

100 thoughts on “Jordan Peterson – Poverty causes crime? Wrong! – The Gini coefficient

  1. Then it's about the narrative "they"(humans, the wealthy, etc) create, what makes you happy etc. For me, it only states that we are lied to each day about "how to live" and "what makes you happy". That should be the sub-topic of this main topic.

  2. Seriously; it sounds like he's saying jealousy is the cause of violence. It can also be stated that to move up the hierarchy ladder, a boy/young man needs a good father figure to be an example to him on how to succeed. Therefore: single mothers are the root cause of their bastard son's violence.

  3. This was instantly evident to me when I moved to America from a less rich country. The poor here live better or equally good as the middle class where I lived, yet they are ignorant of their blessings and still act poor and uncivilized. Poverty is mostly in the mind, not wallet.

  4. what causes crime especially aggressive crime is relative poverty and Relative poverty is not the same thing as poverty

  5. that is the point you don't want to. fuck the poor give me my money. You bitch about SJW, but don't, forget they made you, you were nothing in the global scheme of things till they appear, and when they disappear so will you.

  6. when you get 1, the manager gets 3 and the boss gets 5, and a decent life can be had for under 1,.you feel like the distribution is fair enough and don't really care that they get more.
    when you get 1, the manager gets 5 and the boss 10, and a decent life requires under 1, you dont see the distribution as fair but are willing to overlook it.

    but today you get 1, the manager gets 18 and the boss gets 80, and a decent life requires 3. so you feel cheated out of what should be rightfully yours and crime, especially against those who have more than 3, seems justified.

  7. The destruction of enforced monogamy and rejection of biology seem to account for a large percentage of the current structure and climate of society as a whole. Very interesting.

  8. Ummmm me being poor makes me want to steal from the rich… but I guess that's what your getting at…

  9. I don't hear that poverty causes crime coming from the Left.. that is typically a CONSERVATIVE claim. I hear from Conservatives that it is a lack of "Character and morals " and a general "Laziness" that causes poverty and crime…. You have Uber Rich folks who can be just as criminal if not more so than some of the poorest folks. Poor folks may commit crime due to desperation or apathy of their situation while Rich folks commit crimes due to greed, psychopathy, power and a feeling they can just get away with it or that they are better than others… Generally the Rich DO get off far more than the poor due to money and the ability to buy the legal system….

  10. It is endlessly frustrating when I hear Libertarians blame poverty on the person themselves.. they somehow are not "working hard enough" which is a MAJORLY overly simplistic argument . There are so many factor, not excluding the fact that often the system does work against poor folks. I don't understand why Jeff Bezo's can get away with being one of the most wealthiest persons in the world. yet his workers that created that wealth for him somehow don't deserve living wages or benefits or housing.. or basic dignity. While he is off spending his money on rockets to the moon.. he can't even pay his workers decent wages and is actively looking to automate the entire AMAZON industry (as are other companies such as UBER) .. Money is corrupt.. It isn't everything but then again it is.. sigh..

  11. Im telling you as a person who has been impoverished his whole life poverty causes crime. Very few people escape poverty without charges.

  12. Hollywood has glorified crime as a completely acceptable occupation with honor.
    I don't have time. But, the number of movies made about people who steal because they have wronged.
    It's staggering.
    Or the people who are being robbed are "bad people". So it's OK to rob them.
    This is a dynamic being pushed by Main Stream Media.
    There are people that are bad, (you don't have to know them personally, the media identifies them for the masses.)
    These "Bad people" are successful. Because they are successful, the only way they could have become successful is by wronging people.
    Because according to the media, if you are not from a down trodden background.
    It is not hard work and commitment that gave you success……..
    This thinking is destroying the middle class. Justifying criminal behavior. And the greatest negative produced, or generated by this dynamic.
    We have whole generations of people who don't know how to work, take responsibility for their actions and spend the majority of their waking hours Blaming others for everything that is wrong in the world.
    John 14:6

  13. Now I have an answer to give to old generation's people in my country saying that in their time crime numbers were wayyyy lower than now ,in their time EVERYBODY was POOR .

  14. This video made me relook at race and homicides. Africans and latinos have high rates of homicidal activity in almost all countries with some exceptions. The exceptions are in Africa where everyone is poor, homicide rates are in the low range for a poor country. The exception is South Africa or Jamaica where homicides are very high and this gives credit to what Peterson points out. I use to say blacks have a higher violent temperament but it might be they have a higher violent temperament in a diverse income environment.

  15. This is about the 100th Peterson clip I have watched, and it's the first time I disagree with him. He's really reaching on this one. Crime is mostly caused by culture, and exacerbated by alcohol and drug use.

  16. Income distribution is a red herring. What matters is how well off the people at the bottom are. Do you care if there's a billionaire if you're working a good, good-paying job, and ascending the ladder, yourself?

    When you focus on income distribution and attempt to fix it by authoritarian means (forcible redistribution), the main effect is that the upward mobility of people at the bottom evaporates. "We'll prop you up in relative comfort, but you will never challenge the elites." Take away the redistribution and you find people from the "lower classes" clawing their way up to the top. When you perfect socialism, only the bureaucrats are on top, and they'll do everything they can to hide their prosperity from the people they exploit. Soviet dacha out in the woods.

  17. funny how he defines crime. Crime is only crime when poor ethnics do it, but when rich accountants and bankers commit fraud everyday and police murder people unlawfully, that is not crime. A joke. Interestingly, when I was a student, I worked part-time in a children's home and the kids almost always misbehaved when they were bored and not engaged. Its crazy how people see no link between crime and unemployment , lack of jobs or encouragement to make and achieve goals

  18. You are quite right, Mr Peterso, most very serious crime is committed by the richest people. Vide Epstein and most top politicians.

  19. Wow! This explains why my neighbors keep ripping off my pkgs, once they're delivered at my door. I'm white; they're black, and prob perceive me as having plenty more than they do!! Of course, it's usually the druggies who r taking what doesn't belong to them, as whatever monies they have is spent on drugs, while mine is spent on food, and staples!!

  20. Bs. Crime because those people are criminals. Not raised right. Unless they're starving theirs no excuse.jordan doesn't challenge those that agree with him

  21. So what I got from this is that people being poorer than others around them causes violence. Am I wrong? Please let me know.

  22. I guess that's true, but only for places where the poverty isn't extreme. The slums in Liberia are extreme violent. 70% of women raped, cannibalism, etc. (Could we imply that this violence is reminiscent of the wars there?).

  23. I would actually say that crime is caused when you have a poor socioeconomic class that is victimized. In their minds, they can therefore justify crime because they feel like they deserve something better and they feel like other classes deserve pain and punishment.

  24. Along similar lines….https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/03/03/what-have-we-learned-since-rodney-king

  25. Between laws being different in different places and selective enforcement, you can throw out the idea of comparing crime rates, other than criminal homicide (and even there it's not perfect.)

    In the U.S., this theory for homicide doesn't seem very satisfactory. Blacks and hispanics have been similarly poor relative to other racial/ethnic groups, but blacks have had sky-high murder rates, when hispanics haven't. Are young black males finding it particularly difficult to obtain women? That's not my impression. Most black men seem to prefer and be content chasing black women. And there are lots of available black women for black men, due to: lower male-to-female sex ratios at birth (minor factor); higher mortality rates for young black men than young black women; and then so many young black males are incarcerated for reasons other than homicide, and are thus off the streets in any competition for females.

    I'm not presenting any alternative theory, just that the "seeking women" idea seems doubtful to me here.

  26. that argument, that conservatives oppose to redistribution because they just want to keep lower classes to stay under their social status is very unfair.
    redistribution has so many negative side effects (moral hazard, corruption, wasting with resources etc) that we can simply say it never really helped and made thing even worse. to be honest, there were no better way of getting out of poverty than competitive capitalism in human history

  27. Bottom line, women want stuff, men want women, men with women can focus on making stuff. Thus, the answer to world peace is very simple… anatomically correct female androids.

  28. This is specifically aggressive crime though. What about drugs and that kind of stuff? Thats specifically poverty itself.

  29. Totally disagree with him on this issue. Income disparity in the United States at least, is not a contributing factor to violent behavior.
    Culture is the largest contributing factor. We have Japanese immigrants and other types of immigrants that were poor when they migrated here and adjusted in society without any problems. Why? Because their culture didn't glorify destructive behaviours and promoted behaviors that improved their lives.
    Income mobility in the USA is obtainable. It's not as obtainable as it was 12 years ago (whole different topic) but is still fairly reasonable. And that's why his theory doesn't stand up to criticism.

  30. so what was his point at the end when he talked about animus and anima, that women are sluts and man are loyal?

  31. Would the flow to opposite polarities be the root of this derivative theory of Gordon Peterson. "As day follows night.."; "Disequilibriums seek their equilibrium state" would be the natural course and consequence of these states..

  32. Our school district draws extremely radical lines for each schools boundaries to make sure our high schools have a mix of rich kids and poor kids. They still do not make friends.

  33. Poverty does not generate, or solely causes, but it does contributes, atracts and endorses crime and violence.

  34. How can you tell that the high gini index is the cause for violent communities and not the other way around?

  35. I graduated as an IB student, and one of the requisites are that you write a 2500 math analysis internal assessment. Jordan Peterson inspired me to do it on the Ginni coefficient and the Lorenz curve, I GOT A 7! Thanks for the idea Jordan.

  36. What if being dissatisfied is what satisfies you most? It’s man’s greatest gift and curse, his autonomy. We will do absolutely anything to prove we have freewill. Man needs to learn to provide for himself and in doing so realizes there is more to living than bread and circuses and more to gain than utter destruction. Best way to break a man is to hand him everything he ever needs! As William Blake said, ‘Pity, failure of inspiration, divides and can be capitalized on’.

  37. Poverty just means you won't get off Scott free if you are arrested for a crime. Even if you didn't do it poverty means you'll most likely be pushed into a plea bargain. Rich people commit crimes ALL THE TIME and they get away with it because they can afford an attorney.

  38. Would have loved if he covered red lining, blockbusting, and labeling of red light districts. these shaped minority neighborhood in the US to an extreme and fall into his explanation

  39. 3:25

    Actually it's more like I've worked very hard ever since I was a little kid and it's been a very tough struggle to get to where I am now.

    I had thought it would get easier as I got further up but it's actually very hard for me to wake up and go to work everyday.

    Here in the United States I see that half of my money goes for taxes–literally .

    And I have known people who have for the last three generations now going on the 4th and even 5th generation been collecting collecting and collecting tax money without doing any work or putting anything into this Society.

    From what I can figure I'm paying for about 3 families with my tax money.

    No I have given money to charitable causes donated money in church but there is a difference here.

    The people we see on the Dole assume it is their right and actually develop a sort of arrogance that they are smarter than those like me who are such damned dumb fools as to work and pay for them. It is especially greeting when I have had such people laugh in my face about this.

    So there are other emotions at play than just wanting to be above someone else. in my case it is sense of frustration and anger and resentment at the lack of gratitude. I actually put myself out at work to such a degree end up having a n episode where I left work for. Of time. I have come to the realization that part of my frustration a major part is that lack of gratitude from the people that I put so much effort into to try to make their lives easier.

    I've made it official that I'm going to be a son of a bitch now. that is I will not come to their rescue and make things easier for them I will let them stew in their own juices if they make a mistake. I'm not talking about disciplinary action I'm just talkin about letting them suffer the consequences instead of swooping in to the rescue.

    I've notified my superiors of my course of action and believe it or not they approve of it.

    so do not think it's the idea that I am better than you and so I resent you know that is a more-or-less leftist concept of the view of things.

    honestly Doctor,r I am surprised that you've bought into that one.

    I think if you addressed the biblical concept "he who will not work neither shall he eat"– that would make for an interesting talk.

    but to say that I'm just seeking to see other people ground down below me while I am sitting High– that's nothing of what my motivation has been. I've been all about trying to get myself ahead but also to push other people up the food chain too. as to the droogs who simply want to coast and collect that is not my concern. the wholesale theft of my money for taxes is.

  40. 4:55

    I wanted to climb the dominance hierarchy to get up high enough to be able to working a job I liked receive enough money to pay all my bills and to develop a cushion of security to be able to live comfortably and to be able to do things for other people that I thought would actually benefit by my assistance.
    I have a woman in my life who is mrs. So this thing about seeking the dominance hierarchy solely for access to women I'm going to seems like something it hasn't been thought out much.

    Of course I reject and repudiate Marxist and darwinists thought because both are grossly flawed

  41. 7:40

    In regards to polygamy… it was a very interesting episode of Married With Children in which everybody went out to a cabin in the woods and all of the females had their PMS synchronized at that time….
    Now if you would imagine. A potentate with 17 wives and all of them are synchronized in their PMS and he has to deal with that….

    I mean, that's how very bloody wars get started.

  42. Sooooo random thought here but would the influence of social media essentially causing high status men to have as many woman as they like and the fact that woman are now less interested in monogamy be a cause for the massive increase in mass murders especially done by the incel men?

  43. Dominance? bitch please, it's about having money and the comfort your poor neighbors don't have and girls too and grabbing stuff by force so they don't suffer like the rest of us honest poor people

  44. I sense that this isn't the whole story. While I would agree this gini coefficient is important, what about other factors? Was there big differences in crime in different cultures that had similar gini coefficients or were they similar? What about across time? Does the gini coefficient explain high crime rates of the past as well?

  45. What causes poverty is the bankers. They create the poverty. Look to Germany when Hitler rose too power. He took the Germans off the bankers debt and the Germans flourished, built houses and put pride back into the German people. Poverty causes crime, because it's all by design. You don't need Jordon to tell you, with all his funny words and science, it's straight forward, Money doesn't exist, it's all corporate credit.

  46. I guess you can change most things but you just can't change Human Nature itself…That looks to be a constant since the dawn of mankind. This is why Socialism fails over and over. Yes you can institute laws and systems of control but regardless of that Human Nature reclaims the environment again and again.

  47. Our education system is broken. Jordan Peterson shows this shortcoming on every lesson and every lecture he blesses us with. If we had more professors like Peterson we would have the highest success rate per capita in our societies. History and Human Psyche are a MUST for knowing ourselves and our surroundings. No wonder we have a bunch of amoral sick fucks running things, since they are pushing their standards on us from their Hollywood, Media and Corporate pulpits.

  48. "It's wrong,
    it's seriously wrong,
    and it's importantly wrong,
    and it's definitively wrong…"

    I just love this guy )

  49. what's the difference between "poverty" and "relative poverty"? Is relative poverty not poverty? I don't understand when you say poverty doesn't cause crime but relative poverty does.

  50. Relative poverty is when all @ girls fuck/ marry the top 20% of men and all the other men are left over taxed and underloved.

  51. Its shocking how accurate he is in articulating his points. People who have experienced both type of poverty will tell you, relative poverty is worst. There is no humiliation that goes with absolute poverty. If you grew up in poverty, you wouldn’t even know you’re in poverty; its just the way things have always been for you. Relative poverty, lol, shits embarassing. All the kids in school know you’re poor because you wear payless shoes and not nikes. You wear the same pants for a week lolol hoping nobody notices.

  52. I've been watching JP for years but I'm growing tiring of his pompous, cock-sure generalisations, and this video is so full of hem. One example:

    "Men climb the dominant hierarchy because it helps them get women".
    Jezzus that's general and over simplified. Peterson's own sense of male ego and self importance causes him to "know everything" and to state things too often in unqualified, black and white and absolutism.
    Eg, SOME MEN like to climb the dominant hierarchy to pull women. Some men do it simply for power over other men without any competition for women. Some do it for self ambition, or money, or prestige, or even self betterment or even as a way to better serve society through corporate elevation.

    Too often Peterson forgets to qualify his absolutes, leaving himself (quite rightly) wide open for attack and dismissal.

  53. "Jordan Peterson is in it for the money. He used to have some vague political ideas, some hazy and diffuse sense of spirituality. His conservatism was mostly about people taking responsibility (without adding “if they can”) and cleaning your room. His liberalism was primarily about something something is the road to personal success.

    Sadly he is now paid well over 100K a month by the Koch brothers, right wing ideologues and think tanks, his many speaking engagements, his books and literal donations from gullible, lonely MRA’s, Incels, Alt-Reich script kiddies, MGTOWs and guys who hate feminists and libruls. To placate this drooling, sycophantic following he constantly babbles extremely dualistic, vague, allegorical, inspirational crap. It’s essentially a scam. To mobilize his following he buys in to the same old Red Scare playbook, and constantly hammers some kind of utterly nonexistant strawman composed of parts (what he calls) Cultural Marxists, “SJW” (SeJeWs) and Feminists. He never makes any definitive statements, he only foams at the mouth on this topic and predicts “They” are out to destroy modernity, civilization and the world. Listen to his lectures and make a list of any time he uses political dogwhistles to foment diffuse anger in his listeners.

    As self-help guru he is extremely successful and competent in making “gruff neckbeards who think they are tough guys” listen to reason. This helps these poor kids who would never go to a therapist for any of their many psychological issues. Because they are just as tough as the characters from the many games they play.

    The issues the boys experience ARE real – many boys in this world have it far far more emotionally difficult than boys a generation ago (And some boys are sword-wielding bearded guys in their 40s). The guys can’t get laid, they can’t get meaningful work, get paid a pittance, have to jerk off on hentai, most women are disgusted by them and they are consequently very very angry.

    Jordan Peterson gives these kids good advice to cope with modernity, everyday life and life in general, but mixes it in with total neocon crap. In this regard he is a paragonic student of Strauss. By the letter"

  54. Or maybe conservatives don’t want redistribution because it doesn’t seem to work. The groups who get the most government handouts, at least in the US, tend to do the worst. The growth of our welfare state has resulted in a growth of serious societal problems like illegitimacy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *