this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2025
357 points (96.4% liked)

Political Memes

9453 readers
2895 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Timothy Lott:

Quick question: are you a Christian?

Jordan Peterson:

I suppose the most straightforward answer to that is ‘Yes.’ But it’s… let’s leave it at ‘Yes.'

Interview from 2017


You:

But that positioning one as totally different as an atheist compared to the christian is wild

When discussing ethics, morals, virtues, empathy and compassion, they are deeply entwined to religious ideology.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

The whole jubilee video got re-themed because he was invited as a christian but his position was that un-christian. And that is not a 8yo interview snippet that already indicates that it isn't a simple yes for him.

And yes religious belief is important for the topic, which is why I think it is wild to paint him as a christian. His position is not really Christian.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm not going to pretend I'm a mind reader. If someone says they're a Christian, I'm not going to waste time telling them they aren't.

We don't know why he claims to be a Christian but refuses to spell out why. Perhaps he had an experience he can't explain and knows it's irrational.

Or maybe it's cosmic fear of the abyss.

Or maybe it's fear of God's wrath.

Whatever the case, I agree, he's not really a Christian. Nor is the overwhelming majority of Americans who identify as such.

Which is why I made the distinction: Christian Traditionalist.

The semantics of what those words mean independently is besides the point; it's like arguing the Nazi's (National Socialists) are not really Socialist.

Like, yeah, sure. They're not socialists, but they are literal Nazi's lol.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I misunderstood your position then because I didn't understand it as "christian traditionalist" but "christian" "traditionalist". I had that impression because you contrasted it to "atheist" "materialist". Being a "atheist" is not in conflict with being a "christian traditionalist", neither does being a "materialist".

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

An atheist materialist is someone who does not believe in the existence of any gods and also holds the view that only physical matter exists. (No metaphysical realms, spirits or karma)

This is Sam Harris to a point.


A Christian traditionalist is someone who emphasises the importance of historical beliefs, practice's, and customs within Christianity, often adhering to teachings and rituals that predate modern changes in the faith.

I call Peterson a traditionalist because he's self identifies as a traditionalist.


Being a "atheist" is not in conflict with being a ["theist"]

I think you'll find that they're polar opposites.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

I don't care for Harris. So sure, he might is. And I know what it means.


I agree with your definition of christian traditionalist.

as you correctly described,

Being a christian traditionalist doesn't require the person to actually believe in a god.


Being a "atheist" is not in conflict with being a ["theist"] I think you'll find that they're polar opposites.

Is therefore a wrong conclusion.

Being an "atheist" is not in conflict with being someone who emphasises the importance of historical beliefs, practice's, and customs within Christianity, often adhering to teachings and rituals that predate modern changes in the faith.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Being a christian traditionalist doesn't require the person to actually believe in a god.

Peterson does though, explicitly (with an annoying amount of nuance)

Peterson is a self ascribed Christian and Christian Traditionalist.

That position is opposite.

I'm really not interested in arguing semantics until we reach the point where I say "when I said Peterson was a Christian traditionalist I meant both"

This conversation is splitting hairs over what?

Is there a point to be made here beyond "Peterson isn't what he claims to be"?

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

After hearing him speak about his belief, I wouldn't dare to make any claim about his religious beliefs beyond that he is very careful with saying absolutely nothing about it.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

OK. Well I wouldn't dare contradict how someone chooses to identify.

Are we done here? Because my original point had not a single thing to do with Jordan Peterson and I would really like for him to be irrelevant where possible.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

You contrasted Harris to peterson based on their religious beliefs. I find that questionable. I don't know what you are doing.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

I contrasted them because someone else brought Peterson into the conversation and said they're comparable, as far as to say Harris could potentially 'go fascist'.

My point was so say they couldn't be more different in terms of ideology.

I'm guessing Peterson is pro-Trump? (I dont know I dont give a shit about Peterson lol)

Meanwhile, Sam spends half his podcasts shrugging off claims of "Trump Derangement Syndrome", while making it abundantly clear that Trump is the epitome of everything that is wrong with the world.

Sam could never be a fascist, and I think the assertion that he 'could be' is laughable.

Full disclosure: I'm a fan of Sam (though I don't agree on everything he says)

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

You might be right but I think your chosen contrast is bad.

I could easily be a christian traditionalist, materialist and atheist. (I am not! But I could)

Whatever reason there is to oppose the claim that Harris is like peterson, whatever reason there is why Harris could never be a fascist, you aren't highlighting it with that contrast.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I'm using Christian Traditionalist as shorthand for Christian + Christian Traditionalist.

There are many ways to contrast them, but perhaps the most salient is in their reputations.

Harris has been labeled as one of the new horsemen of atheism or some dumb shit.

Peterson is some kind of postmodern Christian lobster or some shit. Whatever it is, its defined by judaeo-christian values and cleaning up your bedroom.

(I joke about the lobsters and cleaning up bedrooms but for as much shit Peterson gets, these two memes are commonly misunderstood as goofs)