If conservatives and other non-leftists hope to finally win the culture war and make sustained gains, they need to leave the ghetto or somehow transform it.
Someone like jordan Peterson is much harder for the left to tackle than a Jerry Falwell or Newt Gingrich, because he is not working in a traditional political paradigm.
Everybody has seen the bestselling author arguing on the news about transgender pronouns, but he’s more professor than politico.
The Atlantic’s Caitlin Flanagan says Jordan Peterson shows the left that ‘currently seems ascendant in our houses of culture and art, has in fact entered its decadent late phase, and it is deeply vulnerable.’
Let us give Steven Pinker and Sam Harris their hearing. Let us follow them into the broad, sunlit uplands of their utopian moral landscape and see what we might find there.
An online petition has been started with the intent of blocking Internet sensation Jordan Peterson from speaking at an event in downtown San Antonio.
Ben Domenech interviews New York Times’ writer and editor Bari Weiss about media, Trump in Helsinki, Jordan Peterson, and other cultural phenomenons.
Two amazing things happened in these six minutes: A leftist defended free speech, and a public intellectual admitted he might be wrong.
A close read of the popular psychologist’s must-read book proves the silliness of claims his message is harmful to women and minorities. But it might threaten your soul.
Peterson’s message is one focused on finding meaning, not fueling hate. Although it’s not a saving message, it’s one we’ll be hearing for a long time.
What makes Jordan Peterson’s message importantly different and provocative is not the content of his advice and rules, but rather the manner and strength of his rationale.
A New York Times Magazine hit piece says more about the mainstream media than it says about Jordan Peterson.
People who listen to ‘alternative media’ and those who run it often continue to implicitly cow to the mainstream’s pretense of being mainstream, even though the numbers show that’s not really the case.
There is no higher ethical standard in using violence than to subdue an enemy without killing him. This requires the highest competence.
- Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test Proves She Was LyingActing as if the results of the senator's DNA test are continue reading >
- 10 Key Questions About The Khashoggi Affair To Answer Before Buying The Press NarrativeThe discipline shown in the messaging campaign against continue reading >
- Liberal Asian Elites Tell Less-Advantaged Asians To Shut Up And Accept College DiscriminationWhen privileged Asian-Americans argue race-based discricontinue reading >