Online free K-12 education, online free college, etc., etc.
Just do an end-run on the whole corrupt mess, and get a real education - instead of the indoctrination being sold now.
If Mr. Peterson can get even one person to think, it's worth it.
From Tom C's link to The Atlantic article on Jordan Peterson:
When the top man at The New York Times publishes a sober statement about a meeting he had with the president in which he describes instructing Trump about the problem of his “deeply troubling anti-press rhetoric,” and then three days later the paper announces that it has hired a writer who has tweeted about her hatred of white people, of Republicans, of cops, of the president, of the need to stop certain female writers and journalists from “existing,” and when this new hire will not be a beat reporter, but will sit on the paper’s editorial board—having a hand in shaping the opinions the paper presents to the world—then it is no mystery that a parallel culture of ideas has emerged to replace a corrupted system. When even Barack Obama, the poet laureate of identity politics, is moved to issue a message to the faithful, hinting that that they could be tipping their hand on all of this—saying during a speech he delivered in South Africa that a culture is at a dead end when it decides someone has no “standing to speak” if he is a white man—and when even this mayday is ignored, the doomsday clock ticks ever closer to the end.
And there's more... has The Atlantic been slowly jumping off the leftie Titanic?
Another lift from Tom C's link:
" . . If you think that a backlash to the kind of philosophy that resulted in The Nation’s poetry implosion; the Times’ hire; and Obama’s distress call isn’t at least partly responsible for the election of Donald Trump, you’re dreaming. And if you think the only kind of people who would reject such madness are Republicans, you are similarly deluded . . "
I concur. The author also pointed out that 'the left' frequently dismisses Peterson's work as merely common sense. They reject common sense because . . because what?
My favorite bit of the Atlantic article on why the left has to neutralize Jordan Peterson:
The young men voted for Hillary, they called home in shock when Trump won, they talked about flipping the House, and they followed Peterson to other podcasts—to Sam Harris and Dave Rubin and Joe Rogan. What they were getting from these lectures and discussions, often lengthy and often on arcane subjects, was perhaps the only sustained argument against identity politics they had heard in their lives.
That might seem like a small thing, but it’s not. With identity politics off the table, it was possible to talk about all kinds of things—religion, philosophy, history, myth—in a different way. They could have a direct experience with ideas, not one mediated by ideology. All of these young people, without quite realizing it, were joining a huge group of American college students who were pursuing a parallel curriculum, right under the noses of the people who were delivering their official educations.
Peterson teaches that the thought tradition of what we call "the West" discovered that the remedy to bloody tribalism (now called identity politics) is the elevation of the individual as an agent with ownership of and responsibility for one's own life. It's what a faction of the Left wants to negate.
The author of that article has written several other articles that question some of the left's favorite shibboleths.
One matter she brings up is the left's "unpersoning" of Peterson, the tactic of attacking the individual harshly enough to get the sheep to ignore what he says.
It's their favorite tactic against those who make effective arguments to which they have no rational response. We should be on the watch for that tactic, point it out, and see it for what it is.