The opposite of capitalism (money worship) is not communism; it’s sales tax. Your usefulness to the future of the whole team should be of real value. Money determines price. Most people with extreme wealth have gotten there by making everyone else into cheap seats at the game and by devaluing money and labor (forcing competition through overpopulation). The stock market is not the economy, and axholery is not individualism.

I’ll add to Peterson’s rules:

Evil: an action taken based on unquestioned belief.

He’s right but the people who choose group identity and work as a group are chewing the rest of us operating as individuals up. The individual is losing.

That’s why I’m a White Nationalist. It has nothing to do with wanting to march around on uniforms or be superior or any of that. It’s just survival. The individualist are dying off and are the losers.

Individualism is great for humankind but is noncompetitive for those that are in the West acting under the precepts of Western Civilization. Sad but that’s the way it is.

Dr. Jordan and I both think that rewards should be “proportional,” but he and I mean different things by that word.

Dr. Jordan says that the rich are rich because they have great talent, and their rewards are proportional to their talent and effort.

I say that a society that concentrates the wealth too far will collapse, and that rewards should be proportional to population to prevent society from collapsing — or else that rewards should be proportional to value added, which is more difficult to arrange. But if you think you can concentrate the wealth indefinitely and society will continue to function, go right ahead and try that out. I’ll write a postmortem after your society collapses.

“Who will be the decider of what is fair?”

Dr. Jordan apparently believes that he can decide what is fair and he can explain his notions of fairness at great length. Again, he is welcome to preach his doctrines, and I’ll write up my postmortem after his society collapses.

We have a name for”the external struggle for economic fairness.” That name is communism, which delivers only poverty and death in the name of equality and fairness.

If Peterson resents the mass murders done in the name of Communism, I and many others will join him in that resentment. However, I don’t think Peterson has any answer for economic inequality. I am very leery of holding him up as a role model; he strikes me as very similar to various wealthy Christian megachurch pastors. These preachers – whether they preach Jesus or psychology – teach poor people to focus inward and to neglect the external struggle for economic fairness.

Peterson frequently defends rich people who earn vast monetary rewards because he claims that they have competed for their rewards. That’s true, but it does not mean that their rewards are proportional to the value that they add. Peterson boasts that he has taught negotiation to brilliant female lawyers. He does not address the question of whether lawyers are too rich, too powerful, and too lionized in Western society.

He seems to be a rare and great intellect. His mind is energetic, educated, and expressive. I see nothing in his history or his conduct to justify the claim that he is spiritually superior to anyone else.

His new online test at http://www.understandingmyself.com is a great deal and professionally constructively and empathetically delivered.