On Jordan Peterson’s Current Situation and Buterin’s Commentary on the Bestseller “Network Nation”

“Professor Lobster” Jordan Peterson was recently banned from Twitter for publicly criticizing transgender Elliot Page (formerly Ellen Page).

He released a video that seemed to “declare war”, which caused dissatisfaction and complaints from leftist netizens. 00

My online teacher, David Fuller, wrote an article commenting on the matter, expressing the changes he has observed in professors over the years.

Fuller said Professor Peterson has two types of fans: those who like his analysis of religious myths, cultural thinking and psychological theories, and those who see him as a political fighter in the culture wars and support him. The former value Peterson’s academic contributions and the positive change his books have brought to people, while the latter are dominated by keyboard warriors on social media who love to see public intellectuals mobilizing culture on their behalf war.

Linking Jung’s insights to leading edge neuroscience, evolutionary psychology, and biology, Peterson willingly embarks on the path of being the archetype of young fathers in a culture suffering from “father-hungry” Young people who have lost their way in life point the way. Peterson’s Twelve Laws of Life 1&2 philosophy seeks to reshape life’s daily struggles into a “hero’s journey,” giving bewildered young people practical and reliable dogma to help them improve their lives and encourage them to see themselves in the world meaning and purpose.

But as Peterson has become more and more popular, his changes over the past few years represent the quandary the web is known to be in in the current media environment. In order to attract users, social media platforms always resort to extreme reports and enticing remarks, and many public intellectuals have become increasingly extreme under the guidance of such algorithms. For Peterson, that meant he was increasingly gravitating toward the role of “the leader of the right in the culture wars” that the media and fans had dubbed him, gradually losing his understanding and judgment of the other side.

Back in 2017, Teacher Fuller identified Peterson as a thinker who was unfairly treated by the media, a man who brought great value to human culture in analyzing mythological and religious stories. But in the past two years, he has found that Peterson’s knowledge and actions are inconsistent. He believes that the most obvious change in Peterson is his serious lack of personal responsibility.

Peterson’s Twitter behavior has become increasingly erratic. He has personally attacked plus-size swimsuit models, promised to leave or reduce his Twitter time but never followed through, and has said he will be wary of his “bitterness and anger.” , but is now furious at being banned from Twitter. Peterson’s previous videos were generally recorded with low-definition webcams, making him look like a weakling; the latest video is shot with multi-directional high-definition footage, and the overall effect looks like a regal.

Fuller found that Peterson was no longer willing to listen to the opinions of others, but was trapped in his own map, repeating his views over and over again, and even trying to impose his views on others. In particular, tormented by conservative illnesses for the past two years, Peterson has been in an increasingly painful isolation, and his frequent commercial tours have bound him into a repetitive pattern. A recent Copenhagen fan posted on Medium describing how Peterson’s speech was so bland that everyone was so bored they started playing with their phones.

Writer Helen Lewis said of Professor Peterson:

“Is Peterson really a smart move to agree to do those brutal interviews, drag himself into endless business shows, and send internet-blasting tweets? He’s like a rock star in a burnout, as famous as he is. Devour. Maybe he doesn’t want to let people down, maybe he likes the feeling of being needed, maybe he likes having a cyber army supporting him. In our frenetic media culture, whether a hero can come back victorious and get his life back to normal, or is it always accepted The temptation of adventure to embark on an endless dragon slaying process?

He stared into the abyss of the culture wars, and the abyss was staring at him. He’s every one of us — unable to resist pointless debates on social media, smothered in pointless online compliments, applauding the defeat of the opposing side. This unhealthy behavior and angry bashing of others is a very modern form of self-harm. But Peterson blamed a series of his actions on the anti-anxiety medication his doctor prescribed him.”

This lack of personal responsibility has become characteristic of Peterson. Maybe he suffered from illness and family changes, but after he recovered, it was not good to always use external factors to defend himself.

If we look back at the video interview that made Peterson popular, we can see that he remained calm in the face of extreme provocation from British journalist Kathy Newman, and managed to laugh at himself, defuse her hostile questions, and Maintained a magnanimous attitude throughout. This version of Jordan Peterson, who hasn’t been around for years, now seems determined to defend his image as a grumpy and angry conservative commentator, deeply embroiled in the conflict of the culture wars and standing firm.

Peterson’s colleagues lamented his “degeneration” and said that Peterson should not waste his talent getting involved in political struggles, but should focus on what he does best at dissecting myths and religions and deeply analyzing Jungian psychology. Peterson spoke to his friend Jonathan Pargo about how valuable fan support is, but Pargo pointed out that fans are not your friends and hinted that he thinks Peterson needs the support of his peers, not the network fans on . The unconditional devotion of fans is addictive and leaves us craving for more, even creating a sense of loneliness that cannot be pierced.

A central tenet of Peterson’s philosophy is the attempt to “save the father from fire and water,” an emphasis that now seems more like a hint of his fate. Can Peterson come back from the ashes and complete his heroic journey?

Vitalik Buterin, the founder of Ethereum, published a review of “The Network State” today. V God is really fast in reading books. There are so many references and external links in this book, and the concepts are complex, and it is really difficult to chew. The author Balaji said that this is just the V1 version of the book, and a “Director’s Cut” will be released in the future… There is a feeling of buying a book and watching it for a lifetime. Without further ado, here is a brief summary of V God’s views:

– A cyber nation can be seen as a community of people with a specific vision organized around how to build and manage society, initially based on online communities, but over time, when the organization grows to a certain point Land can be crowdfunded offline, seeking political autonomy or even diplomatic recognition.

– The cyber state can be seen as a broader political narrative that came with the birth of cryptocurrencies. Blockchain technology should not be limited to the Internet world, disconnected from the wider world, but can be used as a core technology for reorganizing human society.

– Balaji argues that religious colonies in early America were more successful than their for-profit colonies because the former had a shared purpose. Instead of forcing people to buy a product (which is an economical and individualistic pitch), you invite them to join a community (culturally and collectivistic). Unlike most liberals, Balaji greatly emphasizes the importance of social norms for cohesion. He argues that most current liberal attempts at microstates are like “Zionism without Judaism” as a key reason for their failure.

– Balaji argues that the new form of state is bound not only by economic interests but also by moral forces, but we do not need to adhere to the political ideologies of the past because we see the flaws in these political collectives that have been practiced. Balaji’s seven- step plan tells us how to do it:

– Buterin condensed Balaji’s plan into two key directions: immersive lifestyles and supporting technological regulatory innovation . For example, we can come up with the concept of a “sugar-free society” and then gather all the people who support this idea online, like a start-up. At this time, the “meat-eating community” and the “raw diet community” can also join the healthy competition in the same broad field. If successful, such a society could iterate on health topics, setting cultural defaults for fitness and exercise. We need a physical area to enforce the unique rules in cyber states offline. Guaranteed to meet the standards set online anywhere on the land.

– Buterin believes that Balaji has transformed the current political landscape into three core models: NYT, CCP, and BTC. The New York Times team basically manages public opinion in America, and its inept management means America is in decline. The BTC team (referring to actual bitcoin supremacists and the American right in general) has some positive values, but their outright hostility to collective action and order means they are incapable of building anything. The CCP team is capable of building, but they are building a utopian surveillance state that most of the world would not want to live in. And all three teams are too nationalistic: always looking at things from their own country’s point of view, ignoring or exploiting others around the world. Even though these teams are theoretically international, the specific ways in which they interpret their values ​​make them unpopular outside their own countries and teams. Balaji touts the cyber state as a “decentralized center”: combining the BTC team’s love of freedom, the New York Times team’s ethics, and the CCP’s ability to centralize.

– Buterin thinks that Balaji’s idea of ​​the Internet country is very good, but this book is mixed with a lot of Balaji’s unavoidable personal political stance, especially his view of the United States and optimistic about India is affected by his own identity limited. Buterin believes that Balaji did not use abstract theory and data modeling to justify the cyber state, but instead used cyber state as an argument to respond to the specific political situation in the current world. Balaji’s values ​​of building community loyalty, creating a good physical environment structure to encourage personal discipline and promoting hard work are very right-wing, ignoring those who are not wealthy and unfamiliar with technology.

– Buterin believes that blockchain technology is the best infrastructure for resolving disputes at the non-state level, and can also become an ideal infrastructure for cyber states. Although Buterin disagrees with many of Balaji’s political views, he has the following three suggestions for building a network country: 1. Not only encourage founders to build start-up cities, but also need the participation of the community. 2. Cyber ​​states should be governed by some non-monetary-driven governance. 3. Cyber ​​states should make themselves more friendly by engaging external representatives in governance.

All in all, Buterin wants to see the rise of “start-up cities and cyber nations” and experiments with immersive lifestyles around health. He also wants to see more crazy experiments in social governance. He thinks blockchain-based tokens, identity and reputation systems, and DAOs could be a good option. At the same time, he worries that the vision of an online state in its current form may only cater to the elite and not the lower classes of society.