You know Peterson is a good faith and legitimate philosopher because most of his arguments involve simply calling the people he is criticizing names.
Einstein said the best thing for the future of humanity was vegetarianism. I think there is sense in the idea that we don’t need 40 acres to feed to a few cows to feed one person but I suppose another way to solve the problems of climate catastrophe is simply deny they are real and get paid to push corporate friendly b.s. by the Daily Wire. So let’s sink our teeth into the meat here.
Capitalism has provided luxury in the short term by in its methods at the expense of sustainability and the death of the natural environment. Seeking a better balance is intelligent and is the way to PREVENT famine and help mitigate the climate crisis which will make us all have much lower quality of life.
The pressing issue besides choice of whether land is used for farming or raising beef or returned by someone like Bill Gates apparently to non-farming for sustainability purposes is – what about the acres that are heading into drought because we have clear cut so many trees? If the behavior we exhibit is killing the environment soon leading to a collapse where no one will have meat… maybe a freely chosen cut back and sensible plan to be more in harmony with our world is the intelligent way to simply not die. This is the concept of sustainability. It means you make changes to ensure the way you are living now doesn’t destroy you and and the world in the future. If you cut down the entire rain forest for beef, then everyone dies, cows, mcdonald’s workers, eVERY-ONE. Trees are our planet’s lungs – it’s like we are a chain smoker saiyng ‘I don’t need to quit!’ well.. maybe cut back?
This is my issue with Jordan Peterson’s arguments in this video. He is addressing real problems but then saying the cause is some people who perhaps are doing something to help? I don’t know much about Bill Gates but tell me how Peterson’s arguing here is not based in some conspiracy and appealing to gut dislike of the wealthy – while promoting elite views of his own to help wealthy people who have no public interest in helping? This to me is a smoke screen for some fat cat trying to get people to drink gasoline because they don’t want people to worry they’re about to run out of water? Peterson is doing a bad deal here.
Peterson mentions Mao vs farming, in an offhand on basically misinformative manner hoping people get his drift because communism is bad so ideas aren’t necessary to put forth in any relation other than, of course what I say is right because it’s not communism. For background on Capitalism vs Farmers – I recommend the documentary ‘Down and Out in America’ (1986) which showed the policies of Reagonomics and the government scheme to steal land from family farmers under dubious legal methods to consolidate personal farms into giant corporate factory farm land?