The ontological assumption informing Jordan Peterson’s “Twelve Rules for Life” is that we are intelligent beings capable of understanding both ourselves and the world around us. Implicit in this Enlightenment vision of Man is the notion that Objective Truth is to a large extent available to us, Reason being the vehicle to its apprehension. Succumbing to Unreason, to the irrational, self-serving impulses surging within us, not only separates us from the Truth but results in behavior that is counterproductive and often downright pernicious.
Marxism eliminates Reason from the historical dynamic, reducing it to a never ending saga of oppression. Marxism feeds the sense of persecution that has come to dominate the woke Left. I repeat for the thousandth time that there are of course injustices in our Democracies which have not yet been totally eradicated. But grievance has literally become an industry in the West, its practitioners, with the maturity of spoiled six year olds, blaming everyone but themselves for their condition. Uninterested in either objective reality or genuine self-awareness, they are the very antithesis of Peterson’s Enlightened Man. Indeed the Religion of Inclusiveness which has come to define the Left has eliminated both Truth and Integrity from its absurd Identity based ethos….i.e., if you’re Black, you’re a good person; if you’re Female, you’re a good person; if you’re Gay, etc., etc., etc.. I realize this is somewhat of an exaggeration but, sadly, it is not far from the truth and it is ridiculous!
North American culture was shaped predominantly by Western Europeans of a Post Enlightenment, Christian world-view. Its norms logically reflect that heritage. Yet the hoax of Critical Race Theory suggests that those norms are somehow racist, that those of alternative world-views are perfectly justified in feeling persecuted by them. It is a grievance rooted in Postmodern Relativism, the belief that all cultural values are equally worthy of defense. While that notion is itself flagrantly moronic, what is even more so is the complaint of those who have come from other continents that they feel “systemically” oppressed by our norms, the very norms responsible for their advent to the West in the first place. This is comparable to willfully walking into the ocean and then complaining that one got wet! Candace Owens has sardonically said more than once that she would gladly supply air fare for such complainants to return to their native regions. Were a Caucasian to make such a statement, he would of course be denounced as a White Supremacist jerk.
Examples of complaints over words and behavior that pose no threat to anyone are a daily occurrence, their hysterical rhetoric generally saying more about the character of those who lodge them than their intended targets.
Having been attacked on stage by a man wielding a knife that looked like a gun, Dave Chappelle quipped it was “a gun that identified as a knife.” He was assailed on line by transgenders who maintained his use of the word “identified” was a hateful slur directed at them. Oh please!!!
The Ohio Department of Transportation has ordered the Fahey family to remove their Thin Blue Line Flag hoisted in honor of their son David, a cop who died in the line of duty in 2017. To some, apparently, supporting the police means supporting racism, right-wing extremism, etc.. In the small Ohio town of Pataskala, the DiSario family, whose son Steven was shot while on duty, has also been told to remove their flag. Who are the villains in such situations, those whose tributes to fallen police officers are perfectly understandable, or those whose loathing for the cops is rooted in a level of hysteria that is utterly unwarranted by the facts?
Here in southern Ontario, the Confederate Flag of a family in the small town of Binbrook has been causing quite the controversy, the Canadian Anti Hate Network having lodged a formal complaint. The family in question stands by it’s democratic right to display the flag, maintaining it is in no way intended as an endorsement of racism. A resident of Jamaican descent, however, says she feels “fear and confusion” each and every time she drives by it. Is her reaction warranted? Is Binbrook a hotbed of racial intolerance? Ought the feelings of those who claim to be offended by the actions of others which might never have the slightest impact on their lives, to be the arbiters of Freedom of Expression in our Democracies?
I find dumb people to be quite obnoxious. Ought they all to be denied the right to speak? I find a significant portion of what is on T.V. to be an insult to my intelligence. Ought it all to be banished from the airwaves? Are the opinions of any demographic legitimate grounds for censoring the speech of others? Indeed is not the defense of diversity of opinion fundamental to the very definition of Democracy?
To any decent person not debilitated by an irrational need for validation, genuine hate speech is eminently discernible from that which is not. Criticizing the Taliban is not hate speech. Pointing out that George Floyd was a career criminal is not hate speech. Suggesting that Kamala was cynically chosen by Biden to be his running mate simply because she is both Black and Female is not hate speech. Asserting that heterosexuality is Nature’s norm is not hate speech. On and on it goes, a host of “conservative” opinions rooted in Reason denounced by woke individuals who have never really become Individuals, indeed who, given Peterson’s Enlightenment definition of a mature, self-aware adult, are mere children. Absurdly it is they who have come to define the standards, both intellectual and moral, of Western Civilization which ironically deems itself to be “progressive.”