Documentary: A Glitch in the Matrix (David Fuller production) — Jordan Peterson

The interview, between journalist Cathy Newman and Peterson on Channel 4 News in the UK, was viewed by millions online and received tens of thousands of comments, with many feeling Peterson was unfairly represented. Jordan Peterson answers questions what this incident says about the state of mainstream media and culture. David Fuller, a former journalist, believes that their study of psychology has helped him see the blind spots in mainstream media.

This article is also available here.

Topics

1 . Jordan Peterson has been a controversial figure who is often misrepresented and villainized.

1. There has emerged a new ideology seem to only recognize extreme aspects of masculinity and femininity, and it has seemed to drain our cultural vitality.
2. New media platforms like YouTube are challenging traditional television.
3. There has been a cultural shift away from critical thinking and towards scripted narratives.
4. The concept 'first principles' and the dignity of the human soul.
5. There is a problem of polarization, which has been exacerbated by social media.
6. Peterson's work on how biological temperament influences political orientation.

I have been concerned about the lack of open conversations on topics raised by thinkers like Jordan Peterson, who are part of a new breed of intellectuals popularized by the internet, not broadcast media. This group, referred to as the 'intellectual dark web', includes figures like Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro, Brett Weinstein, and Peterson, who engage in important conversations often ignored by mainstream media. It could be argued that these individuals are more influence than traditional cable news pundits. This is evident by their online traction. The ideas that have governed Western culture are breaking down which has been leading to search for new ones.

It is important to understand and respect different temperamental types and political views. Intelligence is not the prime determinant of political belief and each perspective is valid. Free speech and continuous dialogue are important in a democracy to prevent extreme shifts to the right or left. For example, the shock of Trump's election and the analysis of Deep Code suggests a cultural war and the emergence of new forms of communication. Neither 'red' nor 'blue' ideologies alone are sufficient to adapt to reality, and we have a need for a combination of both.

It might be possible to integrate different values and perspectives from 'red' and 'blue'. We need responsibility, commitment, and personal sacrifice, which are seen as 'red' values, to be integrated into 'blue'. Jordan Peterson's philosophy includes the necessity of a balance between order and chaos. Also, Peterson's depth of thought makes it difficult for him to be categorized by the media.

The interview between Cathy Newman and Peterson was a clash of old and new media sources. Newman, who conducts numerous interviews each month, was focused on obtaining sound bites for a short TV segment, rather than engaging in a lengthy online discussion. Peterson found the interview to be strange and confrontational, with Newman seemingly more interested in creating conflict and sensationalism than understanding his perspective.

There has been a shift in media consumption from traditional TV to online platforms like YouTube. It can be argued that this shift is due to the limitations of TV and the institutional political blindness of mainstream media. The polarization in society is driven by the shadow side of liberalism, where supposedly inclusive social justice liberalism becomes exclusive and judgmental. There has been rise of the 'red pill' phenomena and the mainstream media's misunderstanding of it, confusing it with the alt-right. I have been interested in Greek philosophy and Stoicism, and am surprised at finding an overlap between these interests and the 'alt-right'.

The philosophy of stoicism has increased in popularity in recent years. Stoicism teaches individuals to take responsibility for their thoughts and emotions, promoting resilience and strength. Jordan Peterson, who is often associated with the alt-right, doesn't hold views that align with white nationalism, a key characteristic of the alt-right. There is a difference between stoicism and the alt-right, with the former focusing on personal responsibility and the latter seeking power and control externally.

How can we discuss responsibilities alongside rights, as one's rights are another's responsibilities? There is a lack of completeness in this discussion. I observe that young men are particularly receptive to this message, which they find surprising and encouraging. Jordan Peterson identifys as a classic liberal, but he is often labeled as right-wing by the media. There is a tendency to mislabel and misinterpret individuals and their messages. For example, James Damore's Google memo was widely mischaracterized as anti-diversity. Such misinterpretations reveal a dogmatic and reactionary mindset.

The 'Blue Church' has mechanisms to maintain its dominant frame. When there's a break in the frame, the Blue Church instinctively tries to control and convert it to maintain its integrity. It is like a self-healing and policing mechanism. For example, on the topic of intrinsic differences between men and women, the difference are well-documented in scientific literature and has not been seriously debated for decades. Political conflicts on this topic could be due to attempts to integrate the different political temperaments of men and women.

There has been an increasing presence of women in the humanities, universities, and politics, which is a relatively new phenomenon. Historically, women have been responsible for distribution and men for production, and this could be driving the social justice demand for equity and equality. However, there is a conflict between this and the reality of differential productivity. The rise of women to political power could be linked to the social justice phenomena, but we don't yet know what a truly female political philosophy would look like. Without careful examination and conceptual sophistication, it could default to a simplistic demand for equal distribution, which is not feasible.

Jung's studied psychology and explored the concept of the 'shadow', which represents aspects of ourselves we don't want to accept, such as anger, negativity, and unconscious judgements. Integrating these disowned parts is crucial for personal growth. After leaving Channel 4 News, I change my career to be a counsellor, and I started leading personal growth workshops for men. I explore Jung's idea of animus and anima possession, which suggests that everyone has an inner masculine and feminine essence, and discuss the implications when a man is unconsciously possessed by his feminine side. When a man is dominated by his anima, he becomes withdrawn and moody, while a woman dominated by her animus becomes aggressive and dominating. This is illustrated by Cathy Newman.

The dominance hierarchy or patriarchy is a part of the masculine archetype. This idea can be negatively projected onto men by women who are possessed by their animus, treating them as manifestations of a tyrannical patriarchy. I am deeply saddened by how Cathy Newman's actions reflect the collective anger of womanhood. When such feelings are not acknowledged, they are projected indiscriminately. I am disappointed in Newman's perceived agenda and lack of open conversation. The interview's popularity indicates a resonance with viewers who recognize the dynamics of the conversation, particularly the masculine and feminine aspects. I believe that rage needs to be acknowledged and expressed, but also that it's not enough. We need to take responsibility for our actions and manipulations, rather than blaming it on anger or patriarchy. Everyone has to accept that they have a 'shadow' side.

The cultural conversation around toxic masculinity is widely accepted, but discussions about toxic femininity are often considered off-limits. This restriction on dialogue can be dangerous and perpetuates a victim-persecutor dynamic where women make themselves the victims and persecute men. This dynamic can lead to women compromising their femininity and integrity to fit into societal expectations. The solution lies in acknowledging and embracing our natural power and dignity, and trusting that it's good enough to be a woman without having to compromise or play power games.

There has been a societal devaluation of femininity and it had lead many women to develop their masculine side as a defense mechanism. There is also 'anima possession' in men, where they lose confidence in their masculinity and become overwhelmed by their inner feminine side, resulting in passive and withdrawn behavior. It is possible that the anger from feminists is not towards masculinity itself but the way men behave. Men need to develop their masculine strength, presence, courage, confidence, and learn to be protective and strong.

There has been a societal shift towards a negative view of masculinity, and has resulted in men feeling guilty and becoming passive. In the work of Neumann, there is a symbolic representation of masculinity and femininity in consciousness and unconsciousness. Society is currently playing out a dynamic where masculine authority is seen as tyrannical, with no appreciation for the benevolent aspects of both masculinity and femininity. I criticize this imbalance because it is sucking the vitality out of society. There needs to be a balanced representation of both the positive and negative aspects of masculinity and femininity.

I am concerned about the perceived decline of masculinity in Western culture, and I attribute it to anti-male propaganda in public schools and a lack of resistance from 'sane' women against 'crazy' ones. I believe this is symptomatic of the decline of Western culture, like the fall of the Roman Empire. I advise people to free their minds, explore, listen and learn, turn inward, reconnect with nature, and relearn how to use other human beings as allies in order to navigate this new world. Be authentic to yourself, and have in-person conversations to enrich your perspective. Break away from consensus reality and ideology. Embrace uncertainty and learning from chaos as a means to form a collective intelligence.