| transactions | | 0. | | ref_block_num | 32,824 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 1,870,396,117 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:36 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | mathworksheets |
|---|
| author | omrusman |
|---|
| permlink | quote-of-the-day-2-try-to-be-a-rainbow |
|---|
| weight | 2,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 204313e25fa7178ae8c041d2f89cee6f3e88353c2ee5c8d3804db0f8dda101d155657d0ce782ce5780833eea61c77304b338f185e3283a420ce41cc60f28d3b6d4 |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | d665e43e90bdd4112d5b742e98f34aa36644ee11 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 0 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 1. | | ref_block_num | 32,824 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 1,870,396,117 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:36 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | abcdoctor |
|---|
| author | lennartbedrage |
|---|
| permlink | is-litecoin-ltc-under-evaluated-or-under-performing |
|---|
| weight | 10,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 2067cc707f2ba4f715db2f547a601b42d08cf8f45d752e811528bc81a239e99729435b951199ca0aff8fd7086b0472cc10f8bac3a820c21fcba06626d04a0bd537 |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 289873143f2ff7535e336d09725d7415c4f03dc0 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 1 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 2. | | ref_block_num | 32,824 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 1,870,396,117 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:36 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | custom_json |
|---|
| 1. | | required_auths | [] |
|---|
| required_posting_auths | |
|---|
| id | follow |
|---|
| json | ["follow",{"follower":"grinboy","following":"praneel","what":["blog"]}] |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 1f4b01cc351128fefeb3207d27ae2400d7f4aa7acfbec8455ac07d2a6033e420af6dff13258c0cddcdd33fc9d76fc2a238cf257d7057771fc7dd1eef7eb0a1a74d |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 071f66610ce5f191eccddae24a3aa995b864e2a1 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 2 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 3. | | ref_block_num | 32,825 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 2,124,781,205 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:54 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | limit_order_create |
|---|
| 1. | | owner | teamsmooth-mm |
|---|
| orderid | 2,000 |
|---|
| amount_to_sell | 159.417 HIVE |
|---|
| min_to_receive | 90.000 HBD |
|---|
| fill_or_kill | false |
|---|
| expiration | 2035-10-29 06:32:22 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 207aab5d0ce22eb942f2e69e153c684f475cda0fa0476d54db04a92afbd526ce3e21cd4a3a79e319d1921d2ec98f4fce9a58caf09d88f1c2a241529efc1725c82d |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | dd1b1cdece9a062d68c864c3ac4a6b4392d77a9b |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 3 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 4. | | ref_block_num | 32,824 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 1,870,396,117 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:51 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | mckenziegary |
|---|
| author | signalnoise |
|---|
| permlink | new-york-city-on-black-and-white-film |
|---|
| weight | 10,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 2064d06e605dccf72590c9e1dd336c21a3ac1cb2fbb22792d422ae802e3786b29f32fd2d8a9d745ddbd91cf63ee88a1e0072e40fdc4ea42393b0fe01ee8c95fbb4 |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 692087a6a6391a7f11b5d73ab1630f51a222e0e0 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 4 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 5. | | ref_block_num | 32,824 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 1,870,396,117 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:54 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | irawandedy |
|---|
| author | signalnoise |
|---|
| permlink | new-york-city-on-black-and-white-film |
|---|
| weight | 10,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 1f6d03583a41981dd60f92a0fa8c3896f4f29c0c272d47ff2cdf1cec66fea4e96f465ccffd15702e72de3bd632d692fe0ad0cf0a1bc97d1baedc9a2f07b72dd1af |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | a5762007551da6d2f068c7ea9dc83c8dd60ebe1a |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 5 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 6. | | ref_block_num | 32,824 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 1,870,396,117 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:36 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | jeanelleybee |
|---|
| author | jeanelleybee |
|---|
| permlink | re-cryptodan-re-jeanelleybee-my-introduction-a-bit-of-everything-in-jeannie-s-eyes-20170522t162703922z |
|---|
| weight | 10,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 1f3604ea8e34f3ebb83c7c426fead0963ebf6425861560cd61a869ab5b923550857b193bbac00093d941c8f3ae506f72ae198f5c0d3ea3339b2dce15dd7a70f070 |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 24ef852c6d48516e88dffb880fedc3c1729facc5 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 6 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 7. | | ref_block_num | 32,824 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 1,870,396,117 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:06:23 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | daniel.pan |
|---|
| author | signalnoise |
|---|
| permlink | new-york-city-on-black-and-white-film |
|---|
| weight | 10,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 2069f30166f9c505901bfa228007b856acd5eda59384e1a83f007c0d5956d455891bff47452dba12d77f15db83bb9ad3f8f4c092d36fe0f09727433082f873e66c |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 02096772c89c376280324630f7d50f8cc582ea18 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 7 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 8. | | ref_block_num | 32,825 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 2,124,781,205 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:39 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | custom_json |
|---|
| 1. | | required_auths | [] |
|---|
| required_posting_auths | |
|---|
| id | follow |
|---|
| json | ["follow",{"follower":"thermo","following":"theshadowbrokers","what":["blog"]}] |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 1f3872335e294ee291a1c1c3209f322aea11101cbadb6da3a4be3c71c77bf143045822cdd9f434ba4b881550c4ca21c24fe2d9c91921cd2010a37894b234d967d0 |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 40159b0dd4d1e982588146f538f13cd3e97d7a81 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 8 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 9. | | ref_block_num | 32,821 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 1,181,859,985 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:43 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | juliosalas |
|---|
| author | everittdmickey |
|---|
| permlink | how-i-became-a-truck-driver |
|---|
| weight | 6,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 20653f92ab854bea91f1a89f61c2806f1e92bcc5221e1c38b28e8278198d3df6344ee12cf9606582e9bd7c3f243c4ab3be9f363e0b0fd2949bb7bbb95876097b5d |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 3857fab8839ee498620cabbcc8a5cc3fbc7c67a9 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 9 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 10. | | ref_block_num | 32,825 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 2,124,781,205 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:54 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | develcuy |
|---|
| author | signalnoise |
|---|
| permlink | new-york-city-on-black-and-white-film |
|---|
| weight | 10,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 206456b415a9dc409bca34b9d7ebe22b7a7f16ec359c1b3a1016d93c3e12285aca7bfed5777cb9733200cee35c1cc8a03d96732c1c6e857ba937cbd78aa7ebb326 |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | a19d3908432238d825419700907b3257cce17d3f |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 10 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 11. | | ref_block_num | 32,825 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 2,124,781,205 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:39 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | custom_json |
|---|
| 1. | | required_auths | [] |
|---|
| required_posting_auths | |
|---|
| id | follow |
|---|
| json | ["follow",{"follower":"grinboy","following":"prasadj","what":["blog"]}] |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 1f26c463ec3bb95144944d146f138d6ff1700c3e455e420fa85e0906de844e2f8d080da9811bf4846884517cbb7b97d5307e38939c658336f4a9df8f222e7ec176 |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 83e4dfffc24120e1c839d444d4e6a58b1d70637c |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 11 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 12. | | ref_block_num | 32,825 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 2,124,781,205 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:06:25 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | bunny |
|---|
| author | signalnoise |
|---|
| permlink | new-york-city-on-black-and-white-film |
|---|
| weight | 10,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 1f39276dbee5de62d99d38a59fc856c233c1960a5e1cd1d4ddeafe4269773f20661e5fefe166a4aecca7c91b9c643a45d105407dc04d281d230c1f143d9886992a |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 8c30adbd1f2b3e9c7f4f33d55bf5b627a6c20116 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 12 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 13. | | ref_block_num | 32,825 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 2,124,781,205 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:55 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | cgame |
|---|
| author | signalnoise |
|---|
| permlink | new-york-city-on-black-and-white-film |
|---|
| weight | 10,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 201fa6e1d2b84d3ecc6bb595379cafea86f555ecd0fccd6c33541673721240495c10372e5651ce2a7e64620540d128adbc4fa397a67d49530965e808bdcf81a1ea |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 1798139c7c80f2fe21a0c608335ff125b756a615 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 13 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 14. | | ref_block_num | 32,825 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 2,124,781,205 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:39 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | comment |
|---|
| 1. | | parent_author | "" |
|---|
| parent_permlink | news |
|---|
| author | andrarchy |
|---|
| permlink | jordan-peterson-v-the-canadian-government |
|---|
| title | "Jordan Peterson v. The Canadian Government on Free Speech" |
|---|
| body | "<h1>The Case of Gender Pronouns</h1>
<h1>http://i.imgur.com/09iQGG2.jpg</h1>
*The views expressed in this post should not be interpreted as representing the views of Steemit Inc. or of any members of the Steemit Team. These are my personal opinions. But to be absolutely clear, I am 100% in favor of equal rights for all people, as well as their right to identify as whatever they wish. I believe people should be *as free as possible* which is precisely why it is a moral obligation to oppose what is 1. clear governmental and bureaucratic overreach, 2. aimed specifically at limiting people's right to choose the words they say when they do not cause direct and provable harm to others.*
In the video below we can see a perfect illustration of precisely why what Jordan Peterson (clinical psychologist and professor of psychology at the University of Toronto) is doing with respect to his stated refusal to "use made up words" is so important, as well as the true face of the opposition to him.
https://youtu.be/KnIAAkSNtqo?t=39m20s
The Canadian Senator says, "So I'm trying to square what you, as a party of one, are saying with published documents of the Canadian Psychological Association, The American Psychological Association, The Canadian Medical Association, The American Psychiatric Association, The Canadian Psychiatric Association, and The United Human Rights Experts. So these are all not parties of one, they are associated, they are all I imagine, lots of psychologists, members of The Canadian Psychology Association and The Canadian Psychiatry. So how are we to square what you're saying, which is your opinion, which you are absolutely entitled to, with what everyone is saying, plus the feelings and testimonies of the people who have suffered over 30 years with being taking issues to court, these are people who we've listened to. So how are we to square this?"
<h1>Fallacious Reasoning</h1>
There are so many problems with this statement (aside from overuse of the word "so") that it's hard to know where to start. The first thing I want to highlight is that in this conversation it is clearly *Peterson* who is being more lawyerly than the Senator (the person in charge of making laws). In case you're wondering, I have the authority to weigh in on this as a trained attorney who was licensed to practice in both New York and New Jersey.
Peterson is basically saying, "Look, you don't know what you've done. You're passing a law that *if applied faithfully* compels people to say certain made up words; that again, if applied *faithfully* will deliver penalties onto people NOT for the words they *say* (like ALL of the restrictions on free speech prior to this bill) but for what they *choose *not* to say*; that this is an overreach far beyond the government's previous *bans* on speech (it is compulsory speech); that there is no evidence that the groups the bill claims to help *as a whole* are in favor of it; that there is no scientific evidence *even presented* that the bill will actually help the people it claims to protect, *and in fact* there are scientifically valid reasons for considering it a *strong possibility* that it will *hurt* the very people it claims to want to help due to the fact that people with non-standard sexual identities frequently rely on biological arguments to defend their identities."
The Senator's arguments are typical of those that are lobbed at Peterson. Mainly they ignore his argument and attack him as a person, either directly (calling him some kind of bigot) or indirectly as the Senator does. She doesn't take issue with a single one of the logical and *legal* arguments that Peterson makes, an interesting choice for a politician. Instead she demonstrates that she has fallen prey to a psychological "perfect storm" of pathological thought. There are so many biases and logical fallacies being demonstrated, it's really no wonder that the conclusions she comes to are entirely nonsensical.
The biases and logical/rhetorical fallacies I see (and I suspect this list is not exhaustive):
1. Appeal to Authority
2. Attacking the Person
3. The Straw-man Fallacy
4. The Red Herring Fallacy
5. False Consensus Effect
6. Group Attribution Error
There are even some in there that I've never really seen demonstrated before. For example, she seems to put a lot of weight on the fact that the groups she references are "Associations" and not "lone individuals." The assumption being that this makes their arguments more valid than those made by an individual. Now there is an argument to be made for that claim, but Peterson reveals there are even deeper flaws with her argument when he asks, "What exactly are all of those people who aren't thinking the same way as me saying? You said that there's a bunch of them and a bunch of groups, but you never said *what they're saying precisely*."
This is where you can see Cognitive Dissonance start to set in on the Senator as she realizes she's dealing with someone on another level. She says, "Well I ... I think our Chair would rule me out of order if I proceeded to read out [The Chair says, "No you're fine."] what they're all saying, but in general they say they oppose discrimination and harassment because of gender identity and gender expression and then there's ... three pages, which I can share with you." Three pages I say! I can share them with you! The force of the argument is overwhelming! Three pages!
There's clearly a reason why she didn't include that quote (which she did have ready) in her original statement: because it doesn't disagree with anything Peterson actually said. Peterson has never defended discrimination or harassment! She just wants to believe that's what he's saying despite his almost fanatical insistence on sticking to legal arguments. His claim has only ever been that the laws are poorly constructed, that they are based on zero scientific evidence, *that they are internally inconsistent*, and that if *applied faithfully will lead to the material harm of innocent people.*
<h1>Peterson Opposes Discrimination (Obviously)</h1>
Here's how Peterson responded, "I oppose discrimination against gender expression and gender identity. That's not the point. The point is the specifics of the legislation that surrounds it and the insistence that people will have to use compelled speech. That's what I'm objecting to. I've dealt with all sorts of people in my life. People who don't fit in in all sorts of ways. I'm not a discriminatory person. There's 500 hours of my teaching to my classrooms on ... YouTube and no one's found a smoking pistol. I'm not a discriminatory individual. But I think this legislation is reprehensible and I do not believe *for a moment* that it will do what it intends to do. I also don't think that my opinion deviates substantially from the bodies that you're describing because you haven't provided any evidence that they say anything other than ***discrimination is a bad thing!*** ... *But I don't think you've demonstrated in the least that the opinions that I'm putting forward exist in opposition to the standard practices say of my particular discipline*."
<h1>QUICK, Change the Subject</h1>
Her response to this argument was to demonstrate yet another rhetorical fallacy: Changing the Subject, a/k/a The Red Herring Fallacy. Instead of acknowledging that her entire argument had just been entirely dismantled (because she didn't actually make an argument), she changes the subject by asking Peterson to re-state an argument he'd already made perfectly clear. One Senator claimed the Ontario Human Rights committee stated that you didn't *have* to use the pronouns someone demanded of you, you could refer to them by their name or other "acceptable" pronouns. Since there were options, there was no compulsion.
It is fairly absurd to say that "compulsory options" are equal to "freedom" but Peterson leaves this potentially obfuscating argument alone and, once again, stuck to the legal argument pointing out that while that was true, there were other places in the *same laws* where the regulations specifically stated that to not use a preferred pronoun was *highly likely to constitute harassment* in-and-of itself. Again, Peterson's argument was that the laws are poorly designed, unsupported by the evidence, *and internally inconsistent* not that "discrimination and harassment are awesome."
<h1>Avoid Traps By Sticking to Your Argument</h1>
Instead of falling for the Senator's bait he simply states, "Well, I think it's been made clear in the presentation so far in that it depends on what part of the Ontario Human Rights Commission policies you read. And that's a big problem. One of the reasons I criticized this *to begin with* was because when I went through the policies I could see they're absolutely incoherent." Given the nature of this particular Senator's statements, that the results of her and her colleagues' work could be incoherent is not only not a surprise, but expected.
<h2>The Red Herring</h2>
Here Peterson demonstrates an impressive *mastery* of the art of rhetoric. People engage in Red Herrings because they often work. They exploit the audience member's Confirmation Bias by giving them something else to focus on instead of having to realize that *if they agreed with the argument that was just defeated, then they were wrong.* People prefer to hear arguments that confirm they're right, rather than consider that they might be wrong. In this circumstance (when you make a bad argument that is clearly wrong) I suppose an intentional Red Herring is arguably the way to go.
Peterson demonstrates his rhetorical skill by 1. not trying to force the Senator to acknowledge that she was wrong and changing the subject because that could be seen as combative and a demonstration of poor character, 2. clearly and concisely responding to the Senator's question, and 3. using the changed subject to advance his argument even farther. She is hoping (desperately I would say) to get him to acknowledge that one part of the law indicates that you have options and so the law*S* (plural) don't compel speech. She just lost the "all of the experts agree you're wrong argument" so this is akin to a Hail Mary since he'd already dismantled the argument earlier in the proceedings. But Peterson doesn't just use the opportunity to reiterate his point, which doesn't do much for him that hasn't already been accomplished. He uses the very argument against her by continuing:
"So I'll give you another example, there's an insistence in the Ontario Human Rights Commission that sexual preference is an immutable phenomena which indicates at least in principle that it's biologically grounded, but by the same token, in the very same policies they presume that sexual identity, gender identity, and gender expression are entirely independent. Sorry guys you can't have both of those because one's "A" and one's "not A" and you can't put those together. There's *endless numbers* of places in the policies surrounding Bill C16 that are characterized by that kind of logical incoherency. And what's it going to do to people who are transgender who are making the claim that they were, say, born that way at birth? Which is a strong claim! That's a biological claim! It indicates that there is a direct causal connection between some biological phenomena and the expression of a particular identity. It's actually the strongest defense that people who have, let's call them non-standard sexual identities, or gender identities *have to defend their claims!*"
<h1>Sweating the Small Stuff?</h1>
Now this might seem like obsessing over details, but if that’s the case then a big part of law school is wasted attempting to educate us on how to “obsess over details” and the potential harmful consequences of failing to do so. Lawyers are, in fact, the programmers of the legal system. They write and interpret the code that governs the behaviors of the users in the system, and if the code is inconsistent *many bad things can happen*. In the existing legal systems (as opposed to the legal systems of the future which will be tested programmatically for inconsistencies and conflicts) the potential problems often have far graver consequences than poorly designed code which are only exacerbated by the introduction of biased, irrational, and flawed human participants.
<h1>Rhetoric is a Tool Not an End</h1>
This isn't about who argues better. Clearly that's Peterson. In fact, I would say (again from a lawyer's perspective) that Peterson outperformed the lawyer who testified alongside him. But part of what makes Peterson's arguments "better" is that they're *right*. That they're grounded in reality as opposed to fantasy. That they are backed by science instead of opposed to it. That they are *internally consistent* instead of *internally contradictory.*
Any lawyer will tell you that there are always unforeseeable repercussions for even *well* designed laws. That these politicians are so resistant to acknowledging the flaws in this bill and eager to demonize a well-respected, successful, and clearly brilliant researcher and clinician who is willing to engage in a legal argument (where the lawmakers *should* have an upper hand), I believe demonstrates that their intentions are political and ideological, and not rational or legally defensible.
<h1>The End of the World?</h1>
Many people are frightened by such events. They fear that this is the beginning of the slippery slope descent into government control over everything. By my analysis, however, this commits one of the same errors that the lawmakers themselves are making: overestimating their ability to control their population. Before this law nobody knew who Jordan Peterson was. Now his YouTube channel has over 200,000 subscribers and it is growing at a *fantastic* pace. On Patreon Peterson is receiveing $36,000 *a month*! Bad laws weaken a government, they don't strengthen it. The video of Peterson’s testimony on his YouTube channel already has over 277,000 views *and it was only posted 3 days ago*. It will likely become the most viewed Senate hearing in Canadian history and the reviews are almost entirely *positive*. The lawmakers' incompetence is quickly making Peterson one of the most influential and powerful people in Canada!
Bad governance strengthens those who oppose it not those who attempt to hoist it on an overworked and under-compensated population. Refusing to acknowledge this is *always* the hubris that destroys ruling elites. The more they limit what people can say, or force them to say things which they do not wish to say, the more demand they will create for sites like steemit.com and protocols like STEEM which are *intentionally engineered* to guarantee people a space to discuss ideas without fear of reprisal or compulsion and, in fact, get rewarded for doing so.
<h2>So I guess ... We need to BAN Jordan Peterson! ;)</h2>
Thanks for reading!
http://i.imgur.com/rYG5A84.jpg" |
|---|
| json_metadata | {"tags":["news","op-ed"],"image":["http://i.imgur.com/09iQGG2.jpg","https://img.youtube.com/vi/KnIAAkSNtqo/0.jpg","http://i.imgur.com/rYG5A84.jpg"],"links":["https://youtu.be/KnIAAkSNtqo?t=39m20s"],"app":"steemit/0.1","format":"markdown"} |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 203ca575328218e9b7802ce39585e336e6cccf738f92771d6650089ee54738d097719f9a3ed68ba1cec161c72b967c1f6adf8c18a2585ac7d52cd344c65d41ad87 |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | 08e949e5a20b99f156a6089168c0dfa21fd6dd82 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 14 |
|---|
|
|---|
| 15. | | ref_block_num | 32,825 |
|---|
| ref_block_prefix | 2,124,781,205 |
|---|
| expiration | 2017-05-22 17:05:39 |
|---|
| operations | | 0. | | 0. | vote |
|---|
| 1. | | voter | vadbars |
|---|
| author | signalnoise |
|---|
| permlink | new-york-city-on-black-and-white-film |
|---|
| weight | 5,000 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
| extensions | [] |
|---|
| signatures | | 0. | 207e0cc7e6eca3f455f725b081a854d0fb3f743176b45b9f60a3fd1bda3fea4c971bbed70fd57fe053f56d9e4046ad0159d3ed3654e36c1437020e67d3920b9f01 |
|---|
|
|---|
| transaction_id | c2ead4449253f4a1f73d2dd489496804eaa79dd8 |
|---|
| block_num | 12,156,986 |
|---|
| transaction_num | 15 |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
hiveblocks