This video from Some More News really highlights all of Jordans bullshit. It's long as fuck but I enjoyed every minute of it

https://youtu.be/hSNWkRw53Jo?si=WIrG2o3Qa5iqJwEP

The article was a fun read, but for readers who don't have time, I believe Orwell's essay "Politics and the English Language" describes the same problem with marginally fewer words. My favorite excerpt, though, really nails exactly the BS your article mentioned:

Now that I have made this catalogue of swindles and perversions, let me give another example of the kind of writing that they lead to. This time it must of its nature be an imaginary one. I am going to translate a passage of good English into modern English of the worst sort. Here is a well-known verse from Ecclesiastes:

I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

Here it is in modern English:

Objective consideration of contemporary phenomena compels the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account.

This is a parody, but not a very gross one.

Peterson's writings are worse than Orwell's own parodies.

I was going to just call him a wanker.

It's a good article. I'll admit that Jordan Peterson is a good psychologist and knows many words and stories, he can make many people feel smart or dumb through his incantations of nonsense. But that's it, all the rest of it is bunk.

His essays read like an anthology of writings someone made to finish a book report due tomorrow, after not sleeping for 3 days yet somehow feeling wide awake from the crazed panic.

Also see this screenshot on Firefox Mobile (Est. reading time 63 - 81min). Readers will be well-advised to skim over the copious amount of Jordan Peterson excerpts. Lol.

Good article?

The comments that formed the basis of the complaints against Dr. Peterson included comments on a podcast in which he commented on air pollution and child deaths by saying “it’s just poor children…”

This quote is the most disgusting out of context character assassination I've seen in a long time.

I got suspicious because while Jordan does say things that women and/or trans people often find deplorable. I know that he's a strong supporter of the poor (at least in rhetoric) and as a family man I assume of children as well.

The full context can be found on Spotify. Episode #1769 of "The Joe Rogan Experience" start from about 15:30. He's the one that brings up how 7 million poor children die from indoor particulate pollution. Joe doesn't believe him and gets a fact check, which eventually leads to Jordan sarcastically saying "Well, it's just poor children, and the world has too many people on it anyway..."

It's such an insane mischaracterization of what he said, you can't take the article seriously. Probably would have to write off the entire website that article is from, honestly.

Off duty, but still fully willing to be introduced as a clinical psychologist at the start of the podcast, and to consistently refer to himself as a practicing clinical psychologist in these interviews.

He wants to have it both ways clearly

Meanwhile a psychologist who isn’t independently wealthy can’t express controversial opinions without risking his livelihood

Oh fuck off with that. The opinion he expressed was, and I quote, (about child deaths) "it's just poor children, and the world has too many people on it anyways". A licensed medical professional should never say something like that, period, even in jest.

And again people don't grok what "freedom of speech" entails.

You can speak all you like. If what you say pisses people off, they can avoid you all they like, up to and including MOTHERFUCKING EMPLOYMENT.

Freeze Peach idiots need to grow the Hell up!

He isn't free to leave the profession because part of his con is that he is using his professional status when he writes something or says something as a psychologist.

His worth as a propagandist is that he can attach that professional status to his messages, if it's "disgraced" psychologist, or "struck off" psychologist then it has less impact because he has been found to have broken his professional conduct to the point where he lost the title.