This time, a post-battle review. He nails Ms. Newman of Channel 4 for what she is. She is a Marxist inspired post-modern leftist. To that end, there is no truth, there's merely the assumption of my measure of righteousness, anyone who disagrees must be a stereotype. And it isn't just Ms. Newman. That's the biggest problem. Peterson also calls out the fact that Ms. Newman's tactics are all too common. While not unique to any time or place, her approach is pretty much the go-to approach in our millennial age; the post-Truth age where the point is to be affirmed in your awesomeness and contempt for non-conformers, rather than care a lick about getting to the truth.
As I listened to this, I thought of a glaring mistake I made at Patheos. Early on, I assumed commentators commented in good faith. Not sure why, since I've visited blogs for years. But I did assume this, I suppose because it was my blog and I thought I could direct the spirit of the comments. No. I was wrong. Some did in good faith. Many did not. The best Troll of the bunch incarnated the postmodern leftist millennial age and all its problems that we see with Ms. Newman.
Early on I missed that and tried to engage in the spirit of mature discourse. Which led to endless comments of nothing, strings of pointlessness that ended up chasing readers away (by the end, some told me exactly who it was that they dreaded seeing on a comments thread). The wag would use any tactic imaginable - deflection, inconsistency, arrogance, subtle insult, pointless rabbit chasing, insinuation, you name a method of obfuscation - to do nothing other than win, and feel intellectually superior. Any attempts to correct the situation? More accusations, name calling or insults.
Which is why his approach reminded me of Ms. Newman, and much of the postmodern, millennial approach to debate. There was no attempt to get to the point, discover the truth, find an answer, or discover a solution. There was no real desire to understand my point - something I missed for too long. The point was keeping the individual tripped up as long as possible to feel validated and superior. Truth, and reality were completely irrelevant.
When engaging with the Marxist inspired postmodern millennial Left, it might be worth remembering this sad and ugly fact. We don't engage with people seeking Truth. We engage with people who have one agenda and one agenda only - the eradication of anything that challenges their own superior view of themselves and their latest convenient values.
The fact that mainline outlets are taking notice and making with the slick 'he's obviously evil, he's not liberal' headlines, is all I need to know to understand how dangerously on the edge we are. Dangerous because it's not just people who need validation on blogs, but actual jouranlism and even our very educational institutions that are in on the act. Here, the Chronicle of Higher Education takes on Peterson. It's more subtle than Ms. Newman, but the obvious suggestions and hints are there. Slate, of course, cuts right to the chase and in typical *Yawn* form, labels Peterson an Alt-Right hero. Alt-Right is quickly becoming 'excuse to root for the extermination of those who don't conform', rather than a descriptive label.
All of which reminded me of the Patheos Trolls, Ms. Newman, progressive millennials, and why we must stop fooling ourselves about compromising with a movement of tyranny, oppression, violence and wickedness resting on lies and calumny and rejection of Truth as its primary tactic. It's not just on Patheos or Channel 4. Increasingly, it is the millennial Left in a nutshell.