I looked over Jordan, what did I see?

A suitable air gap exists now between the much-hyped appearance of Jordan B. Peterson on Australia’s “QandA” TV panel show for us to review it without being trampled in the rush.

Our woke friends at the Sydney Morning Herald were exceptionally quick off the mark, publishing this review so soon after the show that a cynic might wonder whether the body of the article was already written so that a couple of specific details just needed to be added.

Certainly, the almost predictable template was adhered to; Peterson is an arrogant quack offering clichés as advice using pseudo-science as evidence, none of which I will try to refute.

Plus ça change.

Before I start my review, full disclosure; I don’t normally watch the programme. Actually, because it’s all such utter drivel, I don’t normally watch Australian terrestrial TV and was pleasantly surprised that our TV could be tuned to receive content that wasn’t over the ChromeCast dongle (this is only a slight exaggeration). 

My reasons for not normally watching QandA are as follows;
1. The format is shit. Too many people on a panel, too little time to answer a question beyond throwing in a pithy soundbite.
2. The host, Tony Jones, is an arrogant, self-aggrandising, biased fool. His body language alone (head and body leaning to one side, elbow out, hand on hip) speaks volumes.
3. The audience seems to be consistently of the opinion that, whatever the problem, the government must do something to solve it. To be fair to the ABC, I’m not accusing the channel of bias, they don’t need to manufacture this opinion; it’s pervasive in Australia.
So, 90 minutes of my life that I will never get back this week;
The already flawed format was worsened by the enforcement of a 1 minute per answer rule. Yet the questions posed were of the “is there a God?” type (seriously, that was asked!). 
The overall impression one gets is that Australians are quite star-struck by Americans (yes, I know he’s a Canuck, but that’s just another name for a quieter American). The panel were not only star-struck but also somewhat fearful of Peterson, the two politicians in particular, in the way people who make a living from obfuscating often are when confronted by those with less of a filter on expressing their opinions.
From left to right of the TV screen, here’s my summary of each person’s performance;
Tranny pensioner – agreed with much of what Peterson said, there’s never much to disagree with though, unless you’ve decided that penises can be female and zhe didn’t try that line. However, zhe mainly just rambled on as if zhey were some kind of national treasure like Australia’s version of Joanna Lumley.
Jordan B. Peterson – tried to smile a lot more than usual, got justifiably grumpy at an angry fat girl in the audience and the left wing politician (unironically) sat to his left and was interrupted with “time’s up, Mr. Peterson” every time he was about to start his second sentence. It seemed pointless him being there, frankly.
Left wing politician – presented well and was clearly scared by Peterson. Steered away from throwing too many local political rocks, which was commendable at least. She’s swallowed the equity=equality kool aid, though.
Tony Jones – he probably thinks he’s an objective journalist. Dunning and Kruger wrote a report about his problem.
Right wing politician – prepared for the performance by standing in a forest presumably, judging by his wooden demeanor. Kept talking about things we can’t talk about, which was confusing. 
Fat angry twitter woman – was fat, angry and unable to let anyone else speak more than 5 words before interrupting with sarcasm. If she isn’t single and surrounded by smelly cats, something is seriously wrong in the world.
Guest appearance – Milo Yiannopolis on a pre-recorded question.
Somebody should have cracked the old favourite:
Knock knock.
Who’s there?
Milo.
Milo who?
That’s showbusiness!
Bill’s Opinion
If you wanted to waste 90 minutes of your life for no reason and without seeing a result, consider watching a soccer match instead.
The terrestrial TV function of our TV is in little danger of being used again this year.

11 Replies to “I looked over Jordan, what did I see?”

  1. I’ve yet to dive in to the analysis on that QnA, but I liked this take as well:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ5aZlLg8rM

    It’s simply incredible that people are arguing against personal responsibility. We can, and do, argue all day long about proper government policy, ideological principles, the effect humans have on the environment etc, but I took for granted that everyone (well, every adult) understood that you have to own your own shit. Those are largely separate discussions, no?

    This is the result of the statists in the studio being unable to articulate their true argument due to either ignorance or duplicity. What they mean to say regarding climate change is, “We wish to use government force in order to fight climate change at the expense of individual autonomy and liberty, and we view JP’s agenda as a threat to that effort.” Instead the euphemism “collective action” is used liberally, as if it means something other than government diktat.

    I wish JP would have pointed out (though maybe he did at another point) something I consider obvious: there is no such thing as “collective” anything outside of theoretical models. Collectives are merely groups of individuals. Every antifa thug, eco-warrior, and even hashtag activist understand that THEY PERSONALLY must contribute to the change they desire. How can people become SO invested in collectivism that they lose sight of this very basic fact?

    There they were, just hours ago, reeling from the steamy kale crap they took. Did they think, “I bet Jordan Peterson would insist I have to wipe my own ass, the monster!”?

    1. The people who seem to have the greatest problem with the “look at your own self before sorting out the world” message always look, on the surface, to need that message most, don’t they?

      This one, for example, is a solid 15-20kg overweight. That’s not the fault of climate change, is it? She looks quite young, so one could surmise that, at that current rate of obesity, heart disease, not the climate, will be the biggest existential threat she will face in her lifetime.

  2. JP & Malcolm, sorry, Cate McGregor were the only two on that show worth listening to. Yep, I thought McGregor was a bit carried away with itself.

    Alex Hawk is supposed to be one of the LNP’s backroom heavy-hitters. There was no sign of that during the program, he was a complete fizzer.

    Vanessa Badham wasn’t quite herself, I suppose obnoxiousness can be toned down, though she couldn’t do anything about the stupid.

    Terri Butler may well have been mindful of her first Q&A appearance, on which careless comments by her resulted in her being sued for defamation. (She was a defamation lawyer prior to being in parliament, haha)
    If her public conduct at the time was any indication, it was a harrowing experience for her, and a very expensive one.
    The newspapers of the day opined that her settlement paid was north of $50,000 – a significant sum for a backbencher.

    1. The information about Butler’s first appearance passed me by for the reasons previously mentioned; I don’t pay any attention.
      Which is the funny thing when the SMH idiots report an “owning” slap down of the token non-leftie each week… nobody who needed to be convinced saw it!

      1. Her first appearance (I think last week was her 3rd or 4th) was a hoot.
        It became painfully obvious that she’s nowhere near as bright as she thinks she is.
        When she casually made a statement that may or may not have been slander, she brushed it off.

        It was obvious she didn’t realise she was on a nationally broadcast TV show, rather than at an ALP dinner party.

        The strained look on her face over the following days, when it became clear what she’d done, & that she couldn’t back out of it, man… that was gold.

        She didn’t need defamation explained to her, & she’d have taken enough poor bastards to the cleaners, without any conscience over it, when she was practising, that she’d have known the scale of the strife she’d put herself in.

        Man oh man, that was rolled-gold visual entertainment (her facial expression)

        You missed it? Wow, perhaps it wasn’t as widely or as salaciously reported as it would certainly have been had it been said by Bob Katter, Barnaby Joyce, Tony Abbott, or [insert names of other hate-figures]
        Just how about that?

        1. Googled it.

          Yes, that is a face that resembles a bulldog licking piss off a thistle, isn’t it.

          Surely the correct lawyerly response to any question to the panel on the ongoing legal case would be “no comment until after the case is resolved”?

          1. Her husband after a very rubbishy effort with my firm which we converted was in a rush on a Saturday morning to leave their union office following signing off our EBA. He explained that he was catching a flight later that day with our then Foreign Minister Bob Carr as they were both going to Washington to demonstrate to the US union leaders how we do it in Australia. Yep, that is what he was off to do and did. Jade Ingham would have been a far better ambassador for this kind of stuff.

            By the way Terri is my local federal member, now that Krudd is gone.

          2. Negotiations are way when you know the other party has a looming compelling event.

            If only someone would explain this to Theresa May.

  3. Terri Butler, man could I tell you some stories of my dealings with her hubby, Troy Spence, but I had better not.

      1. No like piss weak negotiation for an EBA betwen the AWU and my firm.

        Not like Jade Ingham of the CMFEU, now he if the real thing I can vouch for that. Not to be taken to lightly that lad.

        “You’ve said your piece, now f— off,” union official Jade Ingham barked at Stephen Riches, a construction manager at a Brisbane Army barracks for the John Holland group.

        We have seen in the last two weeks former CFMEU official Jade Ingham appointed to the lofty office of the Building and Construction Commission—another job for their CFMEU mates. We have seen him appointed there. We have also seen him negotiating the salaries in the EBA for the Queen’s Wharf development. An average carpenter will start off at $203,000 a year. If they work past three o’clock in the afternoon their salary goes to $288,000 a year. The only reason that EB has been negotiated is because the CFMEU said to the construction industry, ‘You give us this in the EB and we will not have industrial action against your company.’ It is blackmail. It is a rort. It is verging on criminal activity.

        https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/hansard/2018/2018_08_23_WEEKLY.pdf

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published.