Peterson's 12 Rules For Life, have you heard of this?

[bennyboy]

Recall my having mentioned that the latest round of white supremacist normalization made it's rounds on popular skeptic channels?

Here are people who are against religion. And now they're against your view. There are two ways to look at it:

1) They are against one kind of dogmatic bullshit, but are anyway racist, just because.
2) They are against dogmatic bullshit in general, and see your attempts to use rhetoric and to avoid fact to promote your views as dogmatic bullshit.

Obviously, you are going to put Harris, and anyone else who attempts to use fact in any discussion of race in column (1). Obviously, I'm going to put them in column (2) unless they demonstrate that they have malicious intent.

See, that's the difference. When people seek facts, you see that AS malicious intent already. I don't.

---

Its defining for the alt right, sure.   I was honestly hoping for something a little less lunacy confirming out of that one.  In light of the fact that the author directly addressed this notion, does it really make sense to think that the article confirms some nutball conspiracy against free speech?  Or, as unkind as it will inevitably seem to you, might it make more sense to assume that you will interpret any information you come acrossed in this way?  

No, I think the writer of that article is basically sincere. He's not hysterically raving about Harris' white, or about his white supremacist script carrying. He wants to frame things in a certain way, and that's fine.

Beyond that, I think that you might be swallowing the koolaid here, as well..because this conversation isn't actually occurring at high levels of academia.  At that level, the issue has been settled definitively and not in favor of scientific racism.  It's occurring at the pulp level of popular consumption where it's maintenance is politically useful and it's inaccuracy completely irrelevant.  

Bullshit.

Now here's a question for you.  Who told you that was anything I would think or say, or that it bore even a passing resemblance to any position of mine?  I'll give you three guesses and a hint.  Starts with alt, ends in right.

The PC left was identified as an annoying bunch of gits long before the alt-right ever existed. If you choose to call them, alt-right, then rock and roll. But I'd say very many among the moderate right AND the moderate left don't like the meme-spouting, fact-avoiding bullshit. When the "alt-right" consist of normal people who don't like forced demographic division as a political ideology are called "alt-right," then you are using words wrongly.