In case of him, making him a villain, the "face" of the enemy makes him more appealing to people like you who, like many have done with Trump
I originally only knew of Peterson because of him being a Psychologist, not a political or social pundit. At the time I worked at a company that produced a product similar to Self Authoring, but we sold it to probation officers to help them come up with treatment/case plans for passing probation, so I knew of him professionally.
Non-profesionally, I like him for his take on Psychology and Religion, especially as someone who deconverted from the radical left. Fifteen years ago I was a drug using self-hating marxist that laid the sins of the world at the feet of white people, so I don't really see his branding of the left as that as all too inaccurate when I myself have been what he describes. I might watch the video, but if you selectively edit Peterson's lecture, you can make him out as extremely against the far left, or extremely against the far right, when as far as I can tell, he's against both.
It's more than they aren't marxist and such, most of it is end-product of liberalism which he supports. Most of the so called "marxists" are hardly marxist to begin with; as you've noted, their focus is on race, etc, and their role within the system is fundamentally different.
Okay, I can follow your logic here. I just don't follow on the "and their role within the system is fundamentally different." part. Especially as I'm reading through The Gulag Archipeligo, to me they seem hauntingly similar. At the most basic level, it is people with nothing organizing to take everything from those with means. Just as they would decry the Bourgeois, now they have the Patriarchy. It's mutated almost beyond recognition, absolutely, but it's the same kind of resentful hate filled morons who believe or practice either.
The issue with "far-right" is that there isn't even "right-wing" nowadays within western politics
If by "western politics" you mean "what is allowed on the news" I agree. Personally though I've always found people willing to discuss and entertain rather radical ideas. Just curious, what sort of system would you consider yourself a proponent for?
I originally only knew of Peterson because of him being a Psychologist, not a political or social pundit. At the time I worked at a company that produced a product similar to Self Authoring, but we sold it to probation officers to help them come up with treatment/case plans for passing probation, so I knew of him professionally.
Non-profesionally, I like him for his take on Psychology and Religion, especially as someone who deconverted from the radical left. Fifteen years ago I was a drug using self-hating marxist that laid the sins of the world at the feet of white people, so I don't really see his branding of the left as that as all too inaccurate when I myself have been what he describes. I might watch the video, but if you selectively edit Peterson's lecture, you can make him out as extremely against the far left, or extremely against the far right, when as far as I can tell, he's against both.
Okay, I can follow your logic here. I just don't follow on the "and their role within the system is fundamentally different." part. Especially as I'm reading through The Gulag Archipeligo, to me they seem hauntingly similar. At the most basic level, it is people with nothing organizing to take everything from those with means. Just as they would decry the Bourgeois, now they have the Patriarchy. It's mutated almost beyond recognition, absolutely, but it's the same kind of resentful hate filled morons who believe or practice either.
If by "western politics" you mean "what is allowed on the news" I agree. Personally though I've always found people willing to discuss and entertain rather radical ideas. Just curious, what sort of system would you consider yourself a proponent for?