Jordan Peterson has a video up at BigThink outlining what he considers to be the fatal flaw on the left: they have failed to define the edges of their ideology. Peterson holds that the right has defined ‘too far’ as racial superiority: once the right has asserted a racial domination hierarchy with whites at the top, the line has been crossed and the ideology is rejected.
I tend to agree with Peterson’s definition of ‘too far right’, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, any racial hierarchy based on IQ can’t have whites at the top. Ashkenazi Jews are demonstrably the kings of that particular castle, so the hierarchy is just plain wrong. If we construct a racial hierarchy based on, say, academic achievement, then Asians are at the top, and once again, the hierarchy is just plain wrong. There is scant justification for the idea that ‘whites are superior’, and thus any ideology on the right that takes that tack is rejected outright.
What there is ample justification to believe is that Western society is superior, and most of that society has been constructed by whites, but it is not whiteness per se that has resulted in superiority. This is my position – I welcome and hold forth the superiority of anyone who embraces Western culture and values, no matter what their race or creed. Dzhokhar and Tamerlin Tsarnaev, after all, were from the Caucasus – THEY ARE LITERALLY THE DEFINITION OF WHITE – but I despise their actions and ideology and want nothing whatsoever to do with them or their kind.
So I agree with Peterson that any definition of the right that asserts a racial superiority has gone too far, and is unacceptable. I demand a definition of the right that values people based on their actions, principles and concept of morality, justice and ethics. The color of your skin is irrelevant. Western is a state of mind, not a race. I don’t quite know how to think about the fact that most of the people who share Western values are, in fact, both historically and currently, white. I guess I could call my mindset ‘colonial’ in that I believe the whole damn world would be significantly better off if everyone thought the way we do in the West: freedom is the supreme value.
The left has left a huge void in its ideology, because nothing seems to be too far to the left! There does not appear to be an edge to their philosophy or ideology. No matter how many gallons of blood have been spilled in the name of communism, socialism or Marxism, there is a dogged insistence that it just wasn’t done correctly! This time we will get it right! This time will be different! Once more unto the breach, dear, friends, or clog up the walls with our feminist dead! Paraphrasing, obviously.
Consider this charming lady, whom I am pleased to announce hates white men, but is still willing to suck white dick! Oh joy. I’ll bet you white guys are super excited!
She laments that lefties have stopped hijacking airplanes, because hijacking airplanes is apparently not ‘too far’. You can be a vocal leftie, kneel and suck dick for men you purport to hate, call for violence, clog up a suicide hotline as a joke, celebrate the death of a grand old lady like Barbara Bush and still not go ‘too far’.
What on earth would be too far?
Peterson says ‘too far left’ should be a demand for equality of outcome. Equality of opportunity is a laudable, admirable, desirable goal, but equality of outcome leads only to murderous envy and totalitarian death camps. This becomes obvious when you consider negative goals. I can truly understand why people think ‘we need more women on corporate boards and we should just force companies to add more women’ is a reasonable idea. I don’t agree, but I can at least understand. There does not appear to be any immediate harm in such an idea, and there seems to be some advantage, so people embrace the concept. Equality of outcome is easy to accept when the outcomes are ostensibly good. The problem with the concept becomes clear when you consider equality of negative outcomes.
There are not enough male kindergarten teachers, so for the next 20 years, only male kindergarten teachers will be hired.
In order to protect their turf, women will immediately begin asserting sexist, derogatory stereotypes based on gender, – precisely what they claim to despise and are working to dismantle. Male kindergarten teachers will immediately become potential child rapists who can’t adequately nurture small children anyways. And also, men should do more housework and baby care because the idea that nurturing small children is women’s work is sexist and wrong.
Let’s get even more negative:
There are more men in prison than women. Let’s round up several thousand random women and put them in jail to make outcomes equal.
More men commit suicide than women. Let’s round up several thousand random women and kill them to make outcomes equal.
More men than women drop out of school or fail to complete higher education. Let’s round up several thousand women and expel them from school to make the outcomes equal.
Do you see how insane equality of outcome is? These ideas are not sick fantasies. They are precisely the kinds of programs that happened in Maoist China, in Stalin and Lenin’s Soviet Union, in Pol Pot’s Cambodia, in Castro’s Cuba.
They are leftist programs that went too far.
And millions upon millions died.
The left often expresses wonder why the right fears them. I think Peterson has hit the nail on the head – the left doesn’t appear to think anything is too far, and that is what frightens. An ideology without limitation is not an ideology at all: it is a religion, and religious zealots rarely make for a happy world. Salman Rushdie sounded the alarm long ago: fundamentalism isn’t about beliefs. It’s about power. The right values freedom and the left values power and there is nothing fundamentally wrong with either of those things.
Unlimited freedom has problems, and we understand that perfectly well. Unlimited power has more than just problems.
It is annihilation.
It is evil.
Who, or what, can save us?
Lots of love,