Copy & Paste aus dem Aufwachen!-Forum:
Zitat von @Utan (28.01.2018):
(ab Start des Videos)
Jordan Peterson: "I don't think that you can understand the current situation properly without considering the role that postmodernism plays in this, because postmodernism, in many ways, especially as it's played out politically, is the new skin that the old marxism now inhabits.
So you could think that there's a postmodern philosophy, which we'll talk about a bit, that really came into its vogue in the 1970s after classic marxism, especially of the economic type, had been so thoroughly discredited that no one but an absloute reprobate could uh... support it publicly anymore. Even the french intellectuals had to admit that communism was a bad deal by the end of the 1960s. And what happened was that there... they played a slight-of-hand game in some sense and rebranded themselves under the postmodern guise. And that's where identity politics came from. And so... and now it spread like wildfire from France, especially into the US, through Yale University, through the English department there, and then everywhere, and so...
What happened was... You know there is this idea that the marxists had put forth, that the natural landscape of... economic landscape is a battle, and it's a battle between the proletariat, the working class, and the Burgeois and that the economic systems where doomed to continue to enslave people and to keep them poor and downtrodden, unless there is a radical economic transformation that was predicated on something more like equity policy.
And that was put in place in many, many places, as you no doubt know, throughout the twentieth century, with absloutely murderous results. It was the most destructive economic an political doctrine, I think, that has ever been invented by Mankind. And that includes national-socialism because the absolute magnitude of the havoc wreaked by the communist systems exceeded that wreaked by Hitler, and that's... I mean, Hitler didn't have quite as long a time to pull his stunts off quite as effectively, but it was a catastrophic system and one of the things that's quite interesting is that the full breadth of that catastrophe is not something that students are well taught in our current educational system, which has always made me very suspicious.
For example, the students I teach usually know nothing about what happened in the soviet union under Stalin between, say, Stalin and Lenin between 1919 and 1959. They have no idea that millions, tens of millions of people where killed and far more tortured and brutalized by that particular regime, to say nothing of Mao.
[...]"
(weiter ab 03:03)
"Even the french intellectuals, like Sartre, Jean Paul Sartre, the famous Philosopher, had to admit by the end of the 1960s that the stalinist, communist maoist experiment and all of its variants, not just those particular dictators but all of its variants, was an absolute catastrophic failure.
And then what happened was the postmodernists came onto the scene and they were all marxists. But they couldn't be marxists anymore because you couldn't be a marxist and claim that you were a human being by the end of the 1960s and so they started to play a slight-of-hand and instead of pitting the proletariat, the working class, against the burgeoisie they started to pit the opressor... the opressed against the opressor, and that opened up the avenue to identify any number of groups as opressed and opressor and to continue the same narrative under a different name. It was no longer specifically about economics. It was about power. And everything to the postmodernists is about power. And that's actually why they're so dangerous, because if you're engaged in a discussion with somenone who believes in nothing but power, all they are motivated to do is to accrue all the power to them, because what else is there?
There's no logic, there's no investigation, there's no negotiation, there's no dialogue, there's no discussion, there's no meeting of minds and consensus - There's power.
And so, since the 1970s, under the guise of postmodernism, we've seen the rapid expansion of identity politics throughout the universities. It's come to dominate all of the humanities, which are dead as far as I can tell and a huge proportion of the social scientists... sciences, and we've been publicly funding extremely radical postmodern leftist thinkers, who are hell-bent on demolishing the fundamental substructure of western civilization. And that's no... that's no paranoid delusion. That's...that's their self-admitted goal."
Peterson ist, bei aller inhaltlichen Kritik, sicher kein Dummkopf, denn er versteht sich sehr gut darauf, quasi aus dem Stehgreif eine recht komplexe, und aus seiner Sicht absolut wasserdichte Argumentationskette aufzubauen.
Und natürlich schwingt dabei auch ein Körnchen Wahrheit mit, wenn er zum Beispiel die Dominanz der Poststrukturalisten in den Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften seit den 70er Jahren, oder die perspektivische Verengung seiner Student/inn/en auf identity politics als Ausdruck einer "linken" Emanzipation beklagt.
Aber sowohl sein grundsätzliches (Miß-)Verständnis marxistischer Ideologie, als auch die Schlüsse die er daraus zieht, halte ich, gelinde gesagt, für wenig originell, und es wundert mich nicht, dass er damit im konservativen und rechten Lager (von Alt-Right bis einfach nur republican right) so viel Zustimmung erfährt.
Ich fasse mal zusammen, was ich aus meiner eigenen, keineswegs neutralen(!) Perspektive für seine Kernaussagen in diesem kurzen Ausschnitt halte:
- Marxismus ist die gefährlichste und mörderischste Ideologie, welche die Menschheit in ihrer gesamten Geschichte jemals erfunden hat, und sie war sogar noch schlimmer als der Nationalsozialismus. ("...the most destructive economic an political doctrine, I think, that has ever been invented by Mankind. And that includes national-socialism")
- Postmodernismus, und speziell der französische akademische Poststrukturalismus, ist ein Taschenspielertrick ("slight-of-hand"), also eine falsche Gestalt, oder Verkleidung ("guise"), hinter der sich die Marxisten verstecken (müssen), seitdem der klassiche, ökonomische Marxismus mit seiner Verwirklichung ("...that was put in place...") durch die Verbrechen kommunistischer/marxistischer Regime unter Stalin und Mao, et al. weltweit derart in Verruf geriet und diskreditiert wurde, dass nur noch absolut verwerfliche Menschen ("reprobates") sich offen damit identifizieren können.
- Peterson unterscheidet dabei insofern zwischen der ursprünglich von Kommunisten und Marxisten formulierten Idee des Klassenkampfes zwischen dem Proletariat und der Burgeoisie (Arbeiterklasse vs. kapitalistisches Bürgertum) und der postmodernen Variante des "verkleideten" Marxismus, als er Letzterer attestiert, sie habe den, mittlerweile allgemein als verbrecherisch erkannten und diskreditierten, ökonomischen Verteilungskampf der traditionellen Marxisten auf die kuturelle Ebene transferiert und sich vor allem unter Sozial- und Geisteswissenschaftler/innen eine Anhängerschaft herangezogen, für die alle gesellschaftlichen Konflikte sich nur noch um Macht und Ohnmacht, um einen Kampf zwischen "Unterdrückten" und "Unterdrückern" drehe, und die nun alles daran setze, die behauptete Macht für sich selbst zu beanspruchen ("...to accrue all the power to them.")
- Die postmodernen, linksextremen Initiatoren dieses Machtkampfes sehen es als ihre "selbsterklärte" Aufgabe ("...their self-admitted goal."), mit "höllischer" Vehemenz ("...who are hell-bent...") die fundamentalen Strukturen für den Fortbestand der westlichen Zivilisation systematisch zu zerstören.
ZITAT ENDE
[Edit: (ab 1:44:48)
/Edit]