Five reasons why I do not like Jordon Peterson
Dr. Jordon Peterson, former Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto has substantial followers online as well as offline and most of his followers are from across the globe and although I have not done a detailed analysis of their gender mix, the number of males would certainly outnumber women. What I admire about him is his originality of perspective and specificity of what he speaks. His message for men for them to be intuitive, hard working, with a sense of being the providers of long term and durable relationships is taken well by his followers although some elements of this message may sound somewhat conservative. Although he mentioned in one of his earlier interviews that he is a classic liberal, he sounds more like a Conservative republican in his recent dispositions. I do admire him for his storytelling skills and I believe that as a Psychologist, his interventions with his clients were phenomenal and they could see visible results in a considerably lesser amount of time. But this article is about disagreements and I have clubbed them into five broader areas of where I do not necessarily admire him. Just for simple codification, I have abbreviated his name to JP. Here are my five disagreements;
- JP is anti Gun Control: In one of the discourses available online, Jordon was asked his comments on a school shooting and using his complex vocabulary which he uses with bit of an ease and also espousing some of Christian beliefs, he made a point that Gun violence is more about mental ailments rather than a Gun (in not so much nutshell as I am writing here). Case in point that Homicides reduced when New Zealand and other countries changed their gun laws and made it strict for people to procure firearms easily. Gun laws in the US were meant to be useful for the era where democracy was ushered in because it was an unstable country at that point of time. Funnily, the US Constitution states in its’ second amendment, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”. In the 21st century, one can’t imagine the idea of a well regulated militia.
2. JP denies the existence of Patriarchy: His arguments are that no group of people decided to create Patriarchy and that it does not exist. Surely, people did not decide together that women or other disadvantaged group would not be given empowerment. It happened during the passage of time. Whether you call the perception of a large number of Men who feel superior to women, Patriarchy or not, there is definitely a big problem where a large number of women are not allowed to work by the males in the families, whether they are Fathers, Husbands or Brothers. In Afghanistan, for example, a pregnant lady cannot see her doctor without her husband.
3. JP feels that Trump is creative and entrepreneurial: JP is a proxy Trump supporter as he has never directly said so. He imagines Trump to be a politician who understands the problems of the masses and because of his business experience, he (Trump) is enterprising and creative. JP forgets that Trump’s deals always had malicious agenda and he inherited a great deal of business from his father. Secondly, he cannot connect with anyone emotionally. The Ghost writer of his famous book, “The Art of the deal” recently mentioned in his Oxford Union talk that whenever Trump used to call his home, he never asked how he was doing or any questions about the writer’s wife or kids. Many people have reported the same. Trump also miserably failed in Covid controls. When Justin Trudeau introduced tough covid measures for American Truckers, JP protested about the same. JP has praised the UAE-Israel deal as the pathbreaking deal and was surprised as to why other Islamic countries are not taking up such kinds of deals. Also, Trump is a quintessential narcissist who likes “yes men”. There are many Republicans who are much wise and articulate but JP’s bets on Trump are pretty high.
4. JP is anti-Multiculturalism: In a sense JP does not like migrants coming in his country and making college campuses multicultural. He feels that subject like Women Studies need not be taught at schools and universities as they do not mean anything at all. He feels that there is a need to revive western culture (smells of white supremacism in its infancy). He has complicated views on Diversity and Inclusion (when it comes to LGBTQ+ communities)
5. JP is gung-ho on Abrahamic religions, especially Christianity: He had never clearly articulated if he was religious or not but said few times that he leads his life imagining that there would be a God. In one of his talks, he mentioned in his characteristic explanatory jargonistic vocabulary that he would at least need 40 hours to clarify his opinion on God. It is fine to be admiring one’s religion but he makes his point across many a times that his views are not so simple enough.
These are few things which I do not like, but what I like is that he seems to be an authentic person in his personal life and does not shy away from meeting atheists/rationalists like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris or Stephen Fry and his work is out in the open. I personally loved JP’s book, “12 rules for life” and felt that at least 70% of it could be relevant to many of us.
