We're in agreement. I don't believe in the far-rights idea of an organised conspiracy of "cultural marxism", either, and I'm not sure what you're disputing
-
There's no disputing that a good portion of academia are self-styled revoltionaries, and that they have a good hand in shaping young minds. As close as this might seem to the far-right conception of cultural marxism, there is such a thing as nuance
Similar enough to conflate the two? The "retarded" part of my post was presumably conflating Gramscians and "Cultural Marxists," which you might have picked up as an ironic and deliberate error, since PeterNorway (and yourself) don'thesitate to conflate conservatives and nazis
-
-
I absolutely never said, nor would ever suggest that
-
Tweet unavailable
-
Perhaps I should have put "far-right" in quote-marks, to make it absolutely clear that I was using the term with some irony. The quoted tweet suggests that Peterson is the new "far-right" and that his use of "cultural marxism" is linked to Breivik's use of the term
-
If you think that others will take it at face value, and that it might act as some kind of dog-whistle, I will take it down. As for being a miserable little sophist, I make no claim, have no responsibility, and take no payment to be otherwise
-
Tweet unavailable
-
I'm not really a fan of Peterson, but I don't think he has seriously considered enforced monogomy, and his conception of nature is a fairly conservative hallmark, not a far-right one. The democrats are probably "far-left" as far as social politics goes
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.