I have been eating some crow for a week or two.
For years I've argued with the right-wing cohort here on the forum,
saying that no way should Peat be claimed as a friend of The Right--
like The Tea Party Republicans and the Republican-allied Libertarians.
But, after listening to the last Herb Doctors interview,
I have to admit you right wingers may be right about Peat.
Shockingly, it seems pretty likely that that show
was a kind of vague coming-out party for Andrew, Sarah, and Peat--
coming out as supportive, at least in part, of Donald Trump for President of the USA.
Andrew did most of the talking,
and beat around the bush vaguely most of the time,
but he hit some Charlton Heston-esque notes
as he sounded alarms about seemingly imminent threats to our freedom of the press--
threats we should be well-prepared to die for,
possibly quite soon.
Peat seemed to want to associate himself with Andrew's comments, as did Sarah.
Again, not a lot of real clear straight talk from Andrew,
but he did say that he liked some things about Trump, and considered himself a Libertarian.
Peat said something to the effect that Hillary was worse than Trump--just more politically correct.
I wrote about this in the thread about that KMUD interview,
so I won't rehash all of that.
I should stress that I listened to the show at work,
and thus do not have a perfect memory of all the details.
Perhaps I don't want to listen again because it was so depressing.
And maybe we can hold out a sliver of hope that Peat had been hypnotized by Andrew
and that soon Peat will come out and disavow his seeming Trump leanings.
Alas...I doubt it.
So, all that is meant to introduce this topic:
Contemplating Peat as a Possible Right Winger.
I'll put the "possible" in there to imply a faint flicker of hope.
What I mean by "contemplating" Peat from this new (and sad, for me) perspective is,
that there now seem to be, maybe, in retrospect,
different ways of looking at some Peat ideas.
I was mulling them over at work today.
Here are a few off the top of my head.
Feel free to add to the list, disagree, or whatever...
1. Climate Change
I never closely examined Peat's statements,
but I did hear him, in a couple of different interviews,
say we (as Earthlings) need not worry about the planet heating up.
The rather blithe way he mentioned this,
it left a lot of room to believe that Peat might be...not a "climate change denier"--
because he didn't argue that the planet was heating up.
Rather, he said that there will be more CO2 and more heat,
and this will be a good thing for the planet and for, as I take it, its inhabitants.
This idea of Peat's seems to fall into what I think of as Peat's art-meets-science intuitive speculation.
And it seems to rely very strongly upon the ideas of Russian scientist Vladimir Vernadsky
and his ideas about the planet evolving towards higher consciousness.
I won't detail Vernadsky's ideas here.
I find his ideas intriguing, but definitely theoretical (if not mystical).
I personally was disappointed to hear Peat seem to green-light all manner of planet warming.
Maybe he didn't mean to, but he was at least careless in discussing such important ideas,
and I personally considered it irresponsible.
Part of a larger right-wing conspectus, this carefree dismissal of concerns about planet warming?
2. California Cancer Regulations
This is a little thing, but I wanted to put it beside the other environmental point.
In an interview--I can't remember which one--I remember Peat dismissing as silly
some aspect of California's regulations about the public use of substances found to be carcinogenic.
I forget--perhaps something in asphalt or something like that.
Peat made fun of what he saw as the over-regulation, saying something like:
Oh, you know, in California they say everything causes cancer.
I kinda just went along with it at the time--I can understand this point of view.
I just mention because, as I say, now I am, retrospectively, rethinking a lot of what I've heard from Peat.
3. Other Environmental Regulation Talk on Some Other Radio Interview
Sorry to be so vague, but I just wanted to group these environmental bits together.
I'm thinking here of an interview Peat did with...I can't remember her name.
Not Herb Doctors.
Not ELUV.
Not Politics and Science.
It was an interview with a woman host.
This particular woman did seem like a smart cookie,
very direct, clear, and forceful in her speaking manner.
I think there are only a couple of shows with this woman host.
Anyway...
on this show, this woman host kinda took me by surprise when,
toward the end of one show
she started a bit of an anti-government rant about...maybe it was the EPA.
Over-regulation of some sort.
At the time I just felt Peat was just letting it go, not wanting to fight about it.
Now I tend to think the woman brought it up because she knew that Peat sympathized.
More possible retrospectively recognized right-wingerism from Peat?
4. Homosexuality and Environmental Estrogens (or mimics)
Now here I do want to be careful--a tricky subject.
We've had some threads on this subject.
I don't mean to imply that anyone who thinks homosexuality might be caused by environmental estrogens
is some kind of right-wing pervert.
I will just say that there was something a little worrisome
in some of the posts in those kinds of threads.
I mean: the idea that homosexuality is...in effect...a kind of disease.
At the time, I felt a nagging urge to post about this kind of worry.
And I really don't know if Peat thinks of homosexuality as something like a disease,
caused by environmental estrogens.
Like I've said, I'm kinda in the process--after that last HD show--of re-thinking things:
it is a naturally drifty kind of mental process.
But--and this is very vague too I'm afraid--but I do remember wincing a bit
during some radio interview with Peat, on this specific subject,
where Peat seemed to imply that homosexuality could be seen as a kind of disease.
I think it was a HD show.
If anyone knows what I'm thinking of, maybe you can point me toward it.
What with right-wingers in many states hyper-worried about bathrooms
and passing all kinds of laws aimed against LGBTD people,
I think it is reasonable to identify with the right
the idea that homosexuality is some kind of disease...yes?
5. 9/11
This one is pretty scant, but oft-cited in these parts, especially by Mister Landcast.
Apparently Peat said, of 9/11,
something to the effect that
"nothing the government has said makes any sense."
This caused no end of salivation on the conspiracy theory right in these parts,
as it seemed to those folks that this marked Peat out
as a fellow-traveler in all manner of right-wing conspiracy notions.
Obama a Muslim, anyone?
I had previously--before that last sad HD interview--
dismissed this as much ado about one vague Peat comment.
But now...I don't know.
Andrew, in that last show, did seem to darkly imply that his ex-country, England,
had been taken over by outsiders.
Not a damning statement at all, in itself.
But when linked to a support for Trump on Andrew's part.
And then with Dr. Peat seeming, by his silence, to assent...
Obama as secret Muslim now seems thinkable as a possible mindset of the Herb Doctors and Dr. Peat,
quite sorry to say.
6. Noam Chomsky
Quite a lot of ever-so-slightly odd hate for Chomsky from Peat.
Chomsky, a darling of the anti-Vietnam War era left.
Peat would seem to share that political positioning, but...lots of anti-Chomsky bile from Dr. Peat.
A right-wing antipathy?
7. Learned Helplessness
There is a cool way to think about "learned helplessness."
And I always assumed Peat was thinking coolly about it.
But...
Peat brings the idea up often.
And we've had a number of threads about it here on the forum over the years.
Some of them, with some posts, had a slightly off odor about them.
Behind some of them,
I detected the scent of right-wing judgmentalism, sanctimony, and anger.
"Boy, where did you get the idea that anything should be given to you?
Do you think you're entitled to it?
Boy, if you want something, you have to work for it!
You can't just sit on your a** and expect to be given things!
Do you think Big Guvment is gonna come give you everything for free, you lazy slacker!"
That approximate kind of right-wing, anti-government rant
sometimes crept into discussions of Learned Helplessness.
Learned Helplessness became a kind of proxy for Liberal Entitlement.
The hatred for those seen to be "waiting for a hand-out" from Big Government
kinda loomed in the background, sometimes,
in threads about Peat's oft-mentioned notion of Learned Helplessness.
Right-wing anger behind the psychological terminology?
8. Trump and Soviet/Russia Affection
It has been a damn strange campaign season.
And Donald Trump is a damn strange candidate.
What with his main strategist Paul Manafort
having worked for the ex-pro Putin-Ukrainian kleptocratic ruler Viktor Yanukovych...
And with another Trump advisor, Carter Page, having been closely connected with Russian oligarchs...
And with Trump having only glowing praise for Putin...
And with Putin having only glowing praise for Trump...
And with Putin leaking through WikiLeaks damaging stuff about Hillary...
And with Peat having severely dissed Hillary in that last HD's show...
And what with Peat frequently speaking positively about things Russian and Soviet...
There is perhaps a pattern here?
Trump loves Putin.
Peat likes many things Soviet/Russian.
Andrew likes some things about Trump.
Peat silently stands by on the HD show while Andrew asserts such liking.
Does Peat approve of Trump and Trump's fondness for Putin?
I don't know.
These are the kinds of dark thoughts I am doomed to dream about
in the wake of the last Herb Doctors lovefest.
There's a poster on here called something like "billiebobbob" or something like that.
He said, a couple of months ago,
that he thinks there is a good chance Peat was a Soviet agent
back in the Blake College days.
It seems like a silly idea.
But any more silly than Peat being in the tank for Trump?
9. Hillary
In the HD interview, someone mentioned something about Trump calling names.
Peat spoke up energetically,
and said something like:
"Hillary calls names too, but she does it in a politically correct way."
I think that was the gist, but not exact.
Could someone refresh my memory?
No need for retrospective wondering with this one.
Trump clearly is against Hillary.
Well, not my perfect candidate by any means.
But...really really really hard to figure what Peat sees in Trump.
One angle:
like some of my whiny leftist friends on the forum,
we might think Peat just likes Trump
because Trump will blow things up--the juvenile attraction of anarchy.
Because Trump sure won't usher in some era of mature, cooperative, Marxist anarchy.
For years I've argued with the right-wing cohort here on the forum,
saying that no way should Peat be claimed as a friend of The Right--
like The Tea Party Republicans and the Republican-allied Libertarians.
But, after listening to the last Herb Doctors interview,
I have to admit you right wingers may be right about Peat.
Shockingly, it seems pretty likely that that show
was a kind of vague coming-out party for Andrew, Sarah, and Peat--
coming out as supportive, at least in part, of Donald Trump for President of the USA.
Andrew did most of the talking,
and beat around the bush vaguely most of the time,
but he hit some Charlton Heston-esque notes
as he sounded alarms about seemingly imminent threats to our freedom of the press--
threats we should be well-prepared to die for,
possibly quite soon.
Peat seemed to want to associate himself with Andrew's comments, as did Sarah.
Again, not a lot of real clear straight talk from Andrew,
but he did say that he liked some things about Trump, and considered himself a Libertarian.
Peat said something to the effect that Hillary was worse than Trump--just more politically correct.
I wrote about this in the thread about that KMUD interview,
so I won't rehash all of that.
I should stress that I listened to the show at work,
and thus do not have a perfect memory of all the details.
Perhaps I don't want to listen again because it was so depressing.
And maybe we can hold out a sliver of hope that Peat had been hypnotized by Andrew
and that soon Peat will come out and disavow his seeming Trump leanings.
Alas...I doubt it.
So, all that is meant to introduce this topic:
Contemplating Peat as a Possible Right Winger.
I'll put the "possible" in there to imply a faint flicker of hope.
What I mean by "contemplating" Peat from this new (and sad, for me) perspective is,
that there now seem to be, maybe, in retrospect,
different ways of looking at some Peat ideas.
I was mulling them over at work today.
Here are a few off the top of my head.
Feel free to add to the list, disagree, or whatever...
1. Climate Change
I never closely examined Peat's statements,
but I did hear him, in a couple of different interviews,
say we (as Earthlings) need not worry about the planet heating up.
The rather blithe way he mentioned this,
it left a lot of room to believe that Peat might be...not a "climate change denier"--
because he didn't argue that the planet was heating up.
Rather, he said that there will be more CO2 and more heat,
and this will be a good thing for the planet and for, as I take it, its inhabitants.
This idea of Peat's seems to fall into what I think of as Peat's art-meets-science intuitive speculation.
And it seems to rely very strongly upon the ideas of Russian scientist Vladimir Vernadsky
and his ideas about the planet evolving towards higher consciousness.
I won't detail Vernadsky's ideas here.
I find his ideas intriguing, but definitely theoretical (if not mystical).
I personally was disappointed to hear Peat seem to green-light all manner of planet warming.
Maybe he didn't mean to, but he was at least careless in discussing such important ideas,
and I personally considered it irresponsible.
Part of a larger right-wing conspectus, this carefree dismissal of concerns about planet warming?
2. California Cancer Regulations
This is a little thing, but I wanted to put it beside the other environmental point.
In an interview--I can't remember which one--I remember Peat dismissing as silly
some aspect of California's regulations about the public use of substances found to be carcinogenic.
I forget--perhaps something in asphalt or something like that.
Peat made fun of what he saw as the over-regulation, saying something like:
Oh, you know, in California they say everything causes cancer.
I kinda just went along with it at the time--I can understand this point of view.
I just mention because, as I say, now I am, retrospectively, rethinking a lot of what I've heard from Peat.
3. Other Environmental Regulation Talk on Some Other Radio Interview
Sorry to be so vague, but I just wanted to group these environmental bits together.
I'm thinking here of an interview Peat did with...I can't remember her name.
Not Herb Doctors.
Not ELUV.
Not Politics and Science.
It was an interview with a woman host.
This particular woman did seem like a smart cookie,
very direct, clear, and forceful in her speaking manner.
I think there are only a couple of shows with this woman host.
Anyway...
on this show, this woman host kinda took me by surprise when,
toward the end of one show
she started a bit of an anti-government rant about...maybe it was the EPA.
Over-regulation of some sort.
At the time I just felt Peat was just letting it go, not wanting to fight about it.
Now I tend to think the woman brought it up because she knew that Peat sympathized.
More possible retrospectively recognized right-wingerism from Peat?
4. Homosexuality and Environmental Estrogens (or mimics)
Now here I do want to be careful--a tricky subject.
We've had some threads on this subject.
I don't mean to imply that anyone who thinks homosexuality might be caused by environmental estrogens
is some kind of right-wing pervert.
I will just say that there was something a little worrisome
in some of the posts in those kinds of threads.
I mean: the idea that homosexuality is...in effect...a kind of disease.
At the time, I felt a nagging urge to post about this kind of worry.
And I really don't know if Peat thinks of homosexuality as something like a disease,
caused by environmental estrogens.
Like I've said, I'm kinda in the process--after that last HD show--of re-thinking things:
it is a naturally drifty kind of mental process.
But--and this is very vague too I'm afraid--but I do remember wincing a bit
during some radio interview with Peat, on this specific subject,
where Peat seemed to imply that homosexuality could be seen as a kind of disease.
I think it was a HD show.
If anyone knows what I'm thinking of, maybe you can point me toward it.
What with right-wingers in many states hyper-worried about bathrooms
and passing all kinds of laws aimed against LGBTD people,
I think it is reasonable to identify with the right
the idea that homosexuality is some kind of disease...yes?
5. 9/11
This one is pretty scant, but oft-cited in these parts, especially by Mister Landcast.
Apparently Peat said, of 9/11,
something to the effect that
"nothing the government has said makes any sense."
This caused no end of salivation on the conspiracy theory right in these parts,
as it seemed to those folks that this marked Peat out
as a fellow-traveler in all manner of right-wing conspiracy notions.
Obama a Muslim, anyone?
I had previously--before that last sad HD interview--
dismissed this as much ado about one vague Peat comment.
But now...I don't know.
Andrew, in that last show, did seem to darkly imply that his ex-country, England,
had been taken over by outsiders.
Not a damning statement at all, in itself.
But when linked to a support for Trump on Andrew's part.
And then with Dr. Peat seeming, by his silence, to assent...
Obama as secret Muslim now seems thinkable as a possible mindset of the Herb Doctors and Dr. Peat,
quite sorry to say.
6. Noam Chomsky
Quite a lot of ever-so-slightly odd hate for Chomsky from Peat.
Chomsky, a darling of the anti-Vietnam War era left.
Peat would seem to share that political positioning, but...lots of anti-Chomsky bile from Dr. Peat.
A right-wing antipathy?
7. Learned Helplessness
There is a cool way to think about "learned helplessness."
And I always assumed Peat was thinking coolly about it.
But...
Peat brings the idea up often.
And we've had a number of threads about it here on the forum over the years.
Some of them, with some posts, had a slightly off odor about them.
Behind some of them,
I detected the scent of right-wing judgmentalism, sanctimony, and anger.
"Boy, where did you get the idea that anything should be given to you?
Do you think you're entitled to it?
Boy, if you want something, you have to work for it!
You can't just sit on your a** and expect to be given things!
Do you think Big Guvment is gonna come give you everything for free, you lazy slacker!"
That approximate kind of right-wing, anti-government rant
sometimes crept into discussions of Learned Helplessness.
Learned Helplessness became a kind of proxy for Liberal Entitlement.
The hatred for those seen to be "waiting for a hand-out" from Big Government
kinda loomed in the background, sometimes,
in threads about Peat's oft-mentioned notion of Learned Helplessness.
Right-wing anger behind the psychological terminology?
8. Trump and Soviet/Russia Affection
It has been a damn strange campaign season.
And Donald Trump is a damn strange candidate.
What with his main strategist Paul Manafort
having worked for the ex-pro Putin-Ukrainian kleptocratic ruler Viktor Yanukovych...
And with another Trump advisor, Carter Page, having been closely connected with Russian oligarchs...
And with Trump having only glowing praise for Putin...
And with Putin having only glowing praise for Trump...
And with Putin leaking through WikiLeaks damaging stuff about Hillary...
And with Peat having severely dissed Hillary in that last HD's show...
And what with Peat frequently speaking positively about things Russian and Soviet...
There is perhaps a pattern here?
Trump loves Putin.
Peat likes many things Soviet/Russian.
Andrew likes some things about Trump.
Peat silently stands by on the HD show while Andrew asserts such liking.
Does Peat approve of Trump and Trump's fondness for Putin?
I don't know.
These are the kinds of dark thoughts I am doomed to dream about
in the wake of the last Herb Doctors lovefest.
There's a poster on here called something like "billiebobbob" or something like that.
He said, a couple of months ago,
that he thinks there is a good chance Peat was a Soviet agent
back in the Blake College days.
It seems like a silly idea.
But any more silly than Peat being in the tank for Trump?
9. Hillary
In the HD interview, someone mentioned something about Trump calling names.
Peat spoke up energetically,
and said something like:
"Hillary calls names too, but she does it in a politically correct way."
I think that was the gist, but not exact.
Could someone refresh my memory?
No need for retrospective wondering with this one.
Trump clearly is against Hillary.
Well, not my perfect candidate by any means.
But...really really really hard to figure what Peat sees in Trump.
One angle:
like some of my whiny leftist friends on the forum,
we might think Peat just likes Trump
because Trump will blow things up--the juvenile attraction of anarchy.
Because Trump sure won't usher in some era of mature, cooperative, Marxist anarchy.
Last edited:
