Understanding the Radicalization of American Politics w/ Jordan Peterson

• Source

The Enemy

---

I still watch a bit of Jordan Peterson from time to time. I enjoy his forceful take on individualism and individual responsibility, and I try to absorb his stance on a principled life as much as I can. I try to inform my perspectives based on rationale and proof as well, and I much prefer his wide considerations over any emotional tides. People should be pillars, not waves, and their stance shouldn’t be swept up by trendy hashtags and what kids in the cafe buzz on about.

Lately, Peterson has come to comment much more on the nature of various social phenomena, and one that really caught my ears was a response to a question during the past Aspen Ideas Festival. Have a watch -

• Begins at 10:05 mark. Source

Peterson underscores a question that I don’t think I’ve ever hear mentioned amongst my left-leaning friends - When can the Left go too far?

We know the inverse, when the Right goes too far: ethnic-based hierarchy, oppression-reliant economic structures, and any scenario where “people are put in their place.” Neo-nazis, white supremacists, the KKK - these people have little respect and little pull in society.

• Source

But what about the other side? Do we know when the Left goes too far? I would be hard pressed to find a liberal or Democrat be able to answer that inquiry without stumbling or becoming overly defensive. If it’s reasonable to pinpoint extreme conservatism, shouldn’t we be able to at least attempt to understand when leftism gets out of control?

A Tale of Two Parties

---

Before hopping into how I define both the “radical left” and the underlying issue with radicalization on the left, it’s important to outline Peterson’s distinction between the two parties.

The Conservative right’s position can be boiled down to one word - hierarchy. Any social structure where hierarchy is not established is either pure chaos or socially engineered egalitarianism, which is opposed to individual freedoms. Whether it’s concerning sports, guns, free speech, corporate ladders, or social esteem, conservatives are generally in favor of meritocracy and supporting “winners.”

But of course, any hierarchy can be abused. Absurdly wealthy CEOs could distort the hiring process, streets could be flooded by gun-wielding vigilantes, and a majority ethnicity could reinvigorate the racial hierarchy we experienced in centuries prior. Structure naturally disenfranchises the less capable, the less powerful.

This is where the Left comes in, negotiating with and challenging that hierarchy so that the fallout is minimized. Policies like social housing, minimum wage, and affirmative action are historically liberal moves to ensure the empowerment of the disenfranchised. Much of this has revolved around race, gender, and sexuality, but the ethos is to basically carve out space for the marginalized.

Again, for many reasons, the extremities of the Right are fully recognizable and society has by and large laid out its judgement of these far-out examples. They don’t hold much sway over media, don’t hold public or institutional positions, and are pretty much confined to marginalized conclaves around the country. They are not major players.

But we have almost an impossible time identifying the extremism on the Left, and as such, it is very difficult to parse out consequences of that extremism and much of it is normalized in everyday education, politics, and social circles. I think it is paramount to be able to highlight when an attitude or stance is far Left, since at least in America, progressive ideology pervades through every high institutional structure despite the claims of many who occupy this side.

• Source

Before we hop into why I believe the left has such a hard time singling out its extremes, let’s make some basic claims for what is “extreme” on either side. Since conservatism is concerned with upholding structure, extremeness happens when that structure strips power away from a certain population or group for the gain of the ‘superior’ circle. In the case of leftism, whose primary concern is to maintain openings in the structure for the disenfranchise, extremeness is using that disenfranchisement to completely undermine the structure itself. Both sides must always maintain in productive dialogue and debate, not snuff out the opposing end.

Tomorrow, I’ll go more into why the Left can almost never understand when it has gone too far.

Steem on!