Peterson has started activity on his podcasts/YouTube/etc and while he seems to be doing better, he’s definitely not yet back to his former self. What shouldn’t surprise anyone who has ever listened to his full thoughts, he remains a moderate/left, politically and a liberal, philosophically.
Can take more than a year for peoples brain to rewire normally. Recovery isn’t linear sadly, I’ve seen people feel back to their normal self after a few months and have symptoms of post acute withdrawal symptoms randomly for a few weeks.
You’re talking about present day Canada?
The interesting problem with pin-pointing Peterson’s politics is everything he says can be interpreted in many different ways. I think how people view his politics says more about the person than Peterson. If you want to see fascist it’s there. If you want to see conservative it’s there. If you want to see liberal it’s there.
He describes himself as a liberal and I take him at his word. I’ve kind of given up on him now mainly due to his lack of clarity, which could be deliberate but I think is just his personality.
His style when he talks is like an intellectual Donald Trump.
No, I know very little about politics in Canada, nor do I care to.
47 posts were split to a new topic: How relevant is Canada?
Aitkenhead [the author he was offended by] begins the piece by saying, “I thought this was going to be a normal interview with Jordan Peterson. After speaking with him at length, and with his daughter for even longer, I no longer have any idea what it is. I don’t know if this is a story about drug dependency, or doctors, or Peterson family dynamics — or a parable about toxic masculinity. Whatever else it is, it’s very strange.”
Glad we cleared that up!
@BiggusDickus I get what you’re saying, but philosophy =/= politics. In the present day Canadian context, Mith’s statement doesn’t make sense, because (1) no leftish party in the entire landscape would fit with JP’s views*, (2) some rightish parties more or less would, and (3) the only centrish parties that exist are the Liberal Party (which he despises) and the Libertarian Party (which at 0.05% of the popular vote isn’t really a thing – and it has one of the most radical platforms, e.g. complete abolition of taxation, which makes “moderate” a hard sell).
*Yes, JP voiced support for decriminalization of cannabis a few years ago. The Marijuana Party still technically exists despite getting less than 0.005% of the popular vote in 2019, and its platform now is basically “Why so much 𝖗𝖊𝖕𝖗𝖊𝖘𝖘𝖎𝖔𝖓?”. I doubt JP pays them any attention now, if he ever did.
[click to reveal Canadian joke]
Of course, if the Rhinoceros Party qualifies as centrish-leftish, then okay, ya got me.
Peterson may yet to have been exposed to the concept of simplicity being the key to brilliance.
IOTW, a typical Peterson interview.
Jordan Peterson believes that:
Abortion should be legal with limitations as agreed to by the consensus of the Canadian public
Gay marriage should be legal
Gun restrictions should be stronger
Immigration is a positive, we should have more of it, but we should proceed cautiously
Drugs should be legalized, cautiously
Pro single payer healthcare (that may have changed after the last 2 years)
Religion should be separated from government
These are all moderate to left of center positions in the US.
The only prominent view he holds that could be seen to paint him in a right-wing light would be on climate change…unless criticizing the radical left automatically makes you right-wing.
Some of those points require serious asterisks. Anyway,
Irrelevant. He can’t vote down there.
His “right winger” credentials are based entirely on his telling men to man up, and women to stop behaving like spoiled children. Many people on the left interpret this to mean “women should stay in the kitchen with their babies and men should slap them around a bit to keep them there”, but that really isn’t his point.
On the subject of manning up, though, I’m surprised to hear him denounce his interview as “cruel”. Even if it was, he should have been able to respond to that appropriately.
Yeah, it does. The media labels pretty much everybody “alt-right” or “neo-Nazi” if they’re expressing some unapproved viewpoint.
It is neither irrelevant to my original statement on the matter, how people perceive him, nor his influence on people in the US or other places.
The general perception of left & right in the US is a US thing, not a global thing.
If you want to call him “moderate/left by US standards”, okay. That’s pretty broad though, these days…
No, they’re not.
Why surprised? You never noticed the tendency?
Anyway, it’s behind a paywall, and his proof of the supposed cruelty is a 3 hour recording. Ain’t nobody got time for that.
Are you going to offer some suggestions? Gender issues and personal responsibility are at the root of 60%+ of his opinions.
OK, “surprised” may be the wrong word. Disappointed?
Suggestions for why your claim sounds disingenuous? Sure.
Claim to be pro-equality while being the leader of a non-right party? Then JP will instantly accuse you of being genocidal. Nothing even vaguely rightish about that, no, nothing to see here, move along…
Claim to be pro-equality while supporting the rightest parties you think stand a chance and also basically being a walking example of alt-rightness? Then JP is your buddy! Nothing even vaguely rightish about that either…
I could go on, but it’s boring. You can cherry pick all you like, but the man ain’t no lefty, and he ain’t no middle of the roadie either.