3 ms·
You act as if some great injustice has been done because this article doesn't present an empirical analysis of Peterson's following, but it never claimed to. It
by pluto9 8y ago
You act as if some great injustice has been done because this article doesn't present an empirical analysis of Peterson's following, but it never claimed to. It's obviously just an opinion piece. What you call "lies" are simply anecdotes and imagery that the author had the audacity to not back up with statistics and pie charts.
I wonder if you read every think piece so uncharitably, or just the ones that have the absolute gall to disagree with your worldview.
- sp332 8y agoThe claims that the left is vulnerable are entirety founded on this imagery. The article asks me to be afraid of a lot of things without bothering to explain why they are bad, so my reaction is not exactly disagreement but declining to be convinced.
- pluto9 8y agoThere are three claims: - The more people eschew identity politics, the more uncertain is the future of any political party (left or right) that builds its platform on it. That seems self evident. - There is a significant, and possibly growing, number of people who eschew identity politics. No statistics are presented to support this, but considering the left's "It's Her Turn!" rhetoric failed to hold enough water to put "Her" in office, and actively turned some people against her, I don't think it's such an outrageous notion. - Peterson is one of the driving forces behind the possible growth of the anti-identity-politics crowd. If you want numbers, just look at the statistics on Peterson's YouTube channel. Agree with him or not, his popularity is undeniable. Pick apart those points if you wish. But calling the author a liar by pointing out that an image of a person folding laundry doesn't refer to a specific, literal person (you don't say?) is pure sophistry.
- sp332 8y agoI don't see the first claim anywhere in the article. It's pretty explicitly about the left, not identity politics apart from the left. Is identity politics supposed to be about voting for people based on their demographics? Because that's not what the Wikipedia article says, so if you could point me to a definition of what we're discussing I think it would help.
- dragonwriter 8y ago> It's pretty explicitly about the left, not identity politics apart from the left. It explicitly addresses right-wing identity politics briefly, but mostly to note that one particular repulsive group practicing of those politics rejected Peterson as a kind of validation of Peterson through combination of guilt by association and affirming the consequent, and secondarily to further discredit left-wing identity politics by simple guilt by association.
- sp332 8y agoOk, thanks. I misread that as the alt-right group's endorsement of Peterson.
- pluto9 8y ago> I don't see the first claim anywhere in the article. Seriously? From the article: > All across the country, there are people as repelled by the current White House as they are by the countless and increasingly baroque expressions of identity politics that dominate so much of the culture. These are people who aren’t looking for an ideology; they are looking for ideas. And many of them are getting much better at discerning the good from the bad. The Democratic Party reviles them at its peril; the Republican Party takes them for granted in folly. Were you expecting the article to use my exact wording? I won't bother defining identity politics for you because you clearly know what it is and how it relates to voting blocs. It's obvious that you're only interested in derailing the discussion with endless pedantry, so have a nice day.