[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Alright, well we're basically analyzing a piece of garbage journalism at this point, but fine, I'll bite.

Originally Posted by rubecube

Okay, which quotes of Peterson's did you find to be inaccurate or taken out of context?

So, first, any time you see someone write their own sentence and stick small chunks of someone else's words into it with quotation marks around them, you should basically ignore the quotation marks. Here is an example:

A dumb joke, maybe. But an edifying one. (Jokes, as Freud knew, are frequently revealing; "an envelope for thoughts of the greatest substance.") Jordan Peterson is the intellectual as guru-mystic, and the guru-mystic as shameless huckster. He maintains that he abhors "right-wing identitarians" while simultaneously baiting them, materially profiting off their interest, and bequeathing their misguided movement the illusion of intellectual heft. He has also spoken giddily about his ability to "monetize social justice warriors," by converting outrage against him into more online donations. He is an intellectual snake oil salesman, exploiting a genuine need (pointed among the young men who shore the ranks of Peterson disciples) for meaning and order. His aim is little more than the pursuit of his own vanity and the P.T. Barnum-ish padding of his own pockets. He is a prophet, for profit.

There are no actual quotes from Jordan Peterson in that paragraph. There may be a couple of words he has said at some point or another, but that is a very different thing. Frankly, you could construct a paragraph out of words or phrases used at some point by anyone and come up with a full justification for the holocaust.

EDIT: Incidentally, I find it hilariously ironic that the author tries to justify a charge of hucksterism by quoting Freud.

So leaving those bits aside, of which there are many, there are only two quotes in the article that I can see. Here they are.

Fitting, then, that in 12 Rules for Life he finds a hero in Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, whose epic history of Soviet forced labour, The Gulag Archipelago is praised by Peterson as, "a forceful, terrible book, written with the overwhelming moral force of unvarnished truth."

That is a book review. I've never read the Gulag Archipelago, so I can't say what Peterson's praise of it says about him, but I'm not sure that there's any book besides Mein Kampf that would justify suspicion of a person for liking it. Well... maybe Atlas Shrugged.

Then, Bill C-16, an amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act to enshrine legal protections on the basis of gender identity, turned Peterson into a glowering cause célèbre. "I will never use words I hate," Peterson wrote, "like the trendy and artificially constructed words 'zhe' and 'zher.' These words are at the vanguard of a post-modern, radical leftist ideology that I detest, and which is, in my professional opinion, frighteningly similar to the Marxist doctrines that killed at least 100 million people in the 20th century."

That's basically the source of all of Peterson's controversy from a year or so ago. Lots of people disagree with his views on this, including, apparently, the author. Fair enough.

Now look at the rest of the article and the charges levelled at Peterson, basically non-stop. Are those two quotes the basis for them? They sure don't appear adequate to render the incessant smears and vilification defensible... unless you already agree with the author, or are inclined to not think too hard and simply take the word of columnists about who's an evil misogynist alt-righter.