Jordan Peterson, author and Steph Dryberg,Wellingtonian of the Year

Controversial Canadian psychologist, professor of psychology and author is coming to New Zealand to speak.

NZ Herald:  Canadian psychologist and ’12 Rules of Life’ author Jordan Peterson visiting New Zealand

A Canadian professor who became an internet sensation almost overnight and with a cult-like following is touching down in Auckland to speak about his book, 12 Rules of Life: The Antidote To Chaos.

People say the life lessons in Dr Jordan Peterson’s self-help style book can’t be argued with. They include things like standing up straight with your shoulders back, making friends with those who want the best for you and not bothering children while they are skateboarding.

However, the clinical psychologist’s views on gender politics and his opposition to the recent Canadian law making it illegal not to use preferred pronouns for transgender people have been greeted with a strong backlash.

Backlashes seem to be common these days against people that other people disagree with. Or in the current case, forward lashes.

Activist group Auckland Peace Action has accused Peterson of homophobia and racism.

“In the lead-up to Jordan Peterson’s visit to New Zealand we have a duty to condemn his sexist, queerphobic, racist and deeply reactionary views,” Iris Krzyzosiak, of Auckland Peace Action, said.

Newshub:  Jordan Peterson labels New Zealand activist interview ‘more painful’ than other ridiculed videos

On Wednesday, Auckland Peace Action activist Iris Krzyzosiak was interviewed by Magic Talk’s afternoon host Sean Plunket on a statement the group released criticising his views as threatening “everything of value in society”.

A video of the interview has now gone viral, with many criticising Ms Krzyzosiak for her inability to provide examples to back up claims the group were providing to oppose Prof Peterson’s views ahead of his tour of New Zealand next week.

On several occasions Ms Krzyzosiak didn’t answer Plunket’s questions, and once murmured “oh dear lord” as she tried to respond.

On Friday evening, Prof Peterson tweeted the “catastrophic” interview was “more painful” than other notable debates and interviews by journalists attempting to discuss his views.

“Arguably more painful than either the relatively recent GQ interview with Helen Lewis or the Channel 4 Cathy Newman debacle,” he said.

There will be more interviews and free publicity:

NZH:

Peterson turned the opposition into an opportunity for ticket sales and took to Twitter: “Apparently my ‘presence in New Zealand is worrying as it threatens many of the basic values of our society’.”

One of the basic values of new Zealand society is free speech, but with the advent of social media there are growing moves to shut down speech some people don’t agree with or approve of.

Wellingtonian of the Year

Steph Dryberg describes herself on her Twitter profile as ‘Wellingtonian of the year 2018’.

Stuff:  Wellington employment lawyer Steph Dyhrberg named Wellingtonian of the Year

A woman instrumental in the fight against a culture of sexual harassment within the legal profession has been recognised as the 2018 Wellingtonian of the Year.

Steph Dyhrberg was crowned the supreme winner at the 2018 Dominion Post ‘Welly’ awards held at Te Papa on Thursday night.

Dyhrberg, a leading Wellington employment lawyer, also won the Community Service category.

She has been vocal in condemning law firm culture following sexual misconduct complaints by law students, and hasn’t shied away from criticising the “absent” New Zealand Law Society on the matter.

“This year has really been about standing up for people who have been powerless, young women in particular, but all of the people who have been in my profession and who don’t feel safe at work.

“I dedicate this award to the five young women from Russell McVeagh, and to the people that supported them, because this is for them and about them and everyone like them.

“Their courage is what this is for.”

​Dominion Post editor Eric Janssen said Dyhrberg​ was a standout winner amid a very strong lineup.

“Her voice and actions have already had a huge effect, and will give women and interns the confidence that they will be treated fairly and respectfully at law firms – the way it should have been in the first place.”

Sounds like a deserved award.

On Saturday she tweeted:

She has blocked someone who follows someone she disagrees with. I follow people I sometimes disagree with. And I’m  sure there are people following me who follow people I sometimes disagree with. I don’t check things like that out.

It quickly got complicated.

Her choice who she blocks. Also her choice to publicise the fact that she blocked someone who follows Peterson, it seems to win applause for being some sort of anti-Peterson hero.

Free speech in politics and in an open democratic society is important.

Dhyrberg’s blocking may win a few pats on the back, but it won’t shut Peterson up (it adds to the publicity about his visit).

As of now there have been 309,975 views of this video on Youtube:

A couple of days ago (Feb 12, 2019) a group calling itself the Auckland Peace Action, objecting to my slated arrival in New Zealand in a couple of days (www.jordanbpeterson.com/events/) for my 12 Rules for Life Tour, produced a “press release” claiming that “Jordan Peterson Threatens Everything of Value in Our Society.”

I thought that was a bit of an overstatement and so, apparently, did journalist Sean Plunket of New Zealand’s Magic Talk (http://bit.ly/2SSWHyb), who interviewed the writer/spokesperson for the Auckland Peace Action group, Iris Krzyzosiak . I think it is rather charitable to describe the results as distinctly unhelpful for the Peace Action group.

In this video compilation, I read part of the original press release, then present Sean’s interview with Ms. Kryzosiak, so you can make up your own minds about the opinions of her group, and follow that with an extended interview, with an audience Q and A that I conducted with Sean a day later.

 

Hope to see you in New Zealand: See http://www.jordanbpeterson.com for tickets remaining in the New Zealand venues: Wellington and Auckland, as well as Australia, later: Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.

It is going to be difficult to avoid seeing stuff about Peterson this week – including for Steph Dhyrberg.

Leave a comment

56 Comments

  1. Tipene

     /  18th February 2019

    Isn’t it revealing that the Golritz’s and the Stephs, and the Iris’s and the Valarie’s of this world are happy to criticism Peterson from afar, but none would directly challenge him to a 1:1 debate on the “issues” they apparently hold so dear?

    So Steph Dhyrberg is “Speaking tomorrow night at Otaki Labour Party AGM” to about 30 people.

    Meanwhile, Peterson sells out every venue he speaks at, including the Sydney Opera House, the tickets for his show which sold out just 3 minutes after coming online.

    These bat-shit crazy banshee-women just don’t get it: WE JUST DON’T CARE WHAT THEY THINK – THEY ARE IRRELEVANT TO MAJORITY & MAINSTREAM DISCOURSE.

    Peterson has already won the day with these dimwits – they are just having an ideological “tanty” and have now been sent to their rooms like the naughty little misses they are.

    Reply
    • Griff.

       /  18th February 2019

      Bullshite and rhetoric wins .
      Peterson makes a living out of selling his nonsense he spends his enter life centered around developing it.
      It is extremely difcult for someone who may have a well supported position but has not spent a life time building their sales spiel to win at such a public debate.
      It is the same with actual climate scientist debating climate nutters like the potty lord.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  18th February 2019

        It’s nutters like you who make JP’s life a joy. People who are simply skittles lined up ready for him to bowl over.

        JP has won without opening his mouth.

        Reply
        • Griff.

           /  18th February 2019

          ROFL
          He is a crank on the fringe .
          The only ones convinced by such nonsense are those who like having their prejudice confirmed by a man with letters after his name .
          Meanwhile the world continues to revolve.

          By the way
          I made an argument
          You did not refute it you just gibbered more nonsense.

          JP has won ?
          He makes a good living out of duping suckers thats for sure.

          Reply
          • artcroft

             /  18th February 2019

            No. You made an assertion. An argument needs supporting evidence.

            Reply
            • Griff.

               /  18th February 2019

              What.?
              You are disputing he makes money from his lecture tours?
              Or that it is extremely hard for a total amateur to win against someone who presents such content professionally on a regular basis and has been doing so for years?
              Both points are self evident.
              I dont think either need to be supported by me instead you try constructing an actual argument against them.

        • Blazer

           /  18th February 2019

          in much the same way as you ..lose..when you open…yours.

          Reply
          • Corky

             /  18th February 2019

            Come now, Blazer. Griff doesn’t need you to make his argument worse than it already is.😃

            Reply
      • Duker

         /  18th February 2019

        Actual climate scientists ? Like Prof Tim Ball.
        let me guess , you wanted to know more so you took a course, Climate Science 101

        Reply
        • Griff.

           /  18th February 2019

          Tim Ball
          No I have spent about a decade reading up on climate science with a particular focus on denial.
          That is why when you suggest Tim Ball is a climate scientist I just laugh in your face .

          Tim was a co author in a book called.
          Slaying the Sky Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory,
          It is such a load of nonsense that the so called dragon slayers have been banned from even mentioning their “theory” on just about every fringe climate blog as it brings them into ill repute being linked to such lunacy .
          Your “climate scientist” is a documented gibbering loonytune.

          Reply
          • Duker

             /  18th February 2019

            Juts because he doesnt agree with you doesnt mean he hasnt had a academic career as a climate scientist, indeed long before people like you jumped on the bandwagon
            Your little rant just confirms you were looking for a theology to believe in. Some absolutes to help you sleep at night
            Exactly what has Tim Ball said that is loony- or are just a ‘follower of the pack’
            This is one of his papers in the journal Climatic Change
            The migration of geese as an indicator of climate change in the southern Hudson Bay region between 1715 and 1851

            Just saying that you been reading up on stuff – doesnt mean you had the scientific background to understand beyond the PR claims
            .
            I can once remember a debate about air pollution at blog. It was over the claim that in London air pollution kills people- which is essentially true in the respect of shortening lives.
            I looked up the paper for the actual ‘numbers killed’ and of course the word ‘modelled’ was used scores of times. They had a computer model which came up with the numbers which didnt otherwise exist in a usable form.
            Thats Ok in its self, often the core idea for writing a scientific paper – to introduce new and innovative research techniques , this being the 21st century means a nifty computer program.
            Newspaper headlines will take that ‘made up’ number and use it , when for most readers the difference from shortening your life to being killed isnt useful to them.
            Modern media takes some speculative conclusions about lots of scientific subjects and writes them up – for readers like you- as though they are a 60 minutes TV program -“we can reveal” bringing an absolute truth.

            When I was a student and well remember a scientific topic we were studying at a high level , ie “beyond 101”, and the Associate professor telling us something in the prescribed textbook we were using as being ‘wrong’. I presumed his research in that area came to different conclusions. Cest la vie.

            Reply
            • Griff.

               /  18th February 2019

              He doesn’t agree with well established fuckin physics like the theory of black body radiation , The theory of greenhouse gasses and the laws of thermodynamics.
              ergo
              He is a crank .
              He is also not a climate scientist he was a professor of geography .
              A couple of disputed papers on the history records of an obscure region in Canada does not make you a climate scientist capable of disputing the foundations of radiative physics.

              When I was a student and well remember a scientific topic we were studying at a high level , ie “beyond 101”, and the Associate professor

              non sequitur
              The basics dont change radically over a couple of decades.

              “beyond the PR claims…..”
              If I do read an interesting MSM story I look deeper and read what actual scientists are publishing .
              IE this morning in the guardian I read.
              “Sharp rise in methane levels threatens world climate targets”
              So I looked up the source paper which was unreference in the article rather than rely on a journalists impression.
              Very strong atmospheric methane growth in the four years 2014‐2017: Implications for the Paris Agreement
              E. G. Nisbet Et al.
              https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2018GB006009

              You dont have an idea at all besides the repetition of idiotic talking points like models are broken.
              From a reputable source staffed by actual world leading scientists not some crank ex weather presenter or an unknown account .
              Hansen et al (1981)

              Climate science dates from long before computers were a thing .
              Start here
              and get back to me when you are finished and have a small idea about what you are talking about .

            • Duker

               /  18th February 2019

              Clearly you dont even know what climatology is – but thats because you ARE stupid. The clue is in the w.o.r.d.
              Ah the old ‘wasnt a climate scientist was a professor of geography’ meme. His PhD was in Climatology, just back then geography was where the subject was parked.
              Hansen was a Nasa expert in plantary Physics , nothing to do with earths climate either. maybe that was why he predicted sea level rises that never happened [Funny that this is a common occurrence now its 20 years plus since predictions could be.. you know rigorously tested]
              Michael Mann ? his PhD was in theoretical condensed matter physics, but ended up playing around with tree rings , yet wasnt a dendochronolgy expert either.

              oh dear …your experts are not climate scientists either ..but like Snow white drifted

              Yet you are the one screaming ‘ show us your credentials’ , i did so with a published climate professor, so you have go down the barmy army routine.

            • Duker

               /  18th February 2019

              perhaps we could fill in the gaps for you on what Climate is – its the long term average of weather.
              Maybe thats why people research the long ago records of weather in Hudson Bay. No computers required.
              Hows your Climate science 101 going.. got a few computer programs under your wing yet, no need for any historical stuff on climate change has always happened..indeed has been warmer..or sea levels higher

            • Griff.

               /  18th February 2019

              His PhD was in Climatology.
              Oh dear .
              Ball attained a PhD in and was a professor of geography not climate.
              His lies about the details of his qualification are explored in detail with references and links to his false statements over the years can be found here.
              https://www.desmogblog.com/dr-tim-ball-the-lie-that-just-wont-die

              Hansen is a world renowned expert in Planetary physics.
              In case you did not know earth is a fuckin planet and planetery physics include the study of planetary atmospheres….
              Hansen started by modeling Venus and its CO2 induced surface temperature then developed the same technique to look into earths .
              https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=NhWonoUAAAAJ&hl=en
              Cited by
              All Since 2014
              Citations 60623 18535
              h-index 95 57

              Michel Mann .
              https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=KrRw4RIAAAAJ&hl=en
              Cited by
              All Since 2014
              Citations 31404 11895
              h-index 77 50
              Again a well respected expert in his field.

              Yet here you are backing some conspiracy gibbering crank with a hand full of citations who disputes the basics of physics.
              roflmao

            • Duker

               /  18th February 2019

              I rest my case

              Computer models are battling it out over TC Oma’s possible severe impact on the country at the weekend.

              hmmm 5 days away … lets change lots of things call them climate models and run them for 20 years hence …all because some research project just wanted a rough way of modelling different levels of CO2 ahead of time, of course they produce a scattering of results , so lets tweak some things chose a nice line and pretend its ‘the answer’
              never mind the theology is settled…. there is to be do dissent none at all as the models cant ever be wrong

              https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/110659860/is-tropical-cyclone-oma-heading-for-new-zealand-or-not

            • Griff.

               /  18th February 2019

              You dont have a case .
              Climate is not weather remember .
              Its the range of weather over a thirty year period.
              You just said it now you are confusing the two.

              so lets tweak some things chose a nice line and pretend its ‘the answer’
              never mind the theology is settled…. there is to be do dissent none at all as the models cant ever be wrong

              Straw man argument based on your own ignorance again .
              All models are wrong some are useful.
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_models_are_wrong

              As I suggest stop making an arse of your self in public and read the history of the science
              It would give you an idea how ignorant you are with your idiotic taking points.

            • Duker

               /  18th February 2019

              Climate isn’t weather.. so how the hell do they take weather models( you previously called them same thing) and turn them into future weather ..oops climate.
              As anything bad has to be called climate change when often it’s the usual variable weather. Heateaves, droughts, floods, polar vortexes ( this year it’s all at the same time) as we all know weather porn sells clicks on media sites. There is of course a slight rise in temperature currently as there was a small dip for the previous 500 years. And 12000 years ago it was the end of the ice age…which as pretty up and down as well not being a consistent temp either with warm periods in age ages as well as long interglacials long before that. THATS what I call climate chnge

      • PDB

         /  18th February 2019

        Griff: “Peterson makes a living out of selling his nonsense he spends his enter life centered around developing it.”

        Whilst your nonsense, after years of looking at selective graphs & kidding yourself on how everybody else is wrong, is provided to us free on yournz.org! Lucky ole us…

        Reply
        • Griff.

           /  18th February 2019

          Every one else?
          Oh goody logic fail number twenty nine from PDB.

          In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for “argument to the people”) is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: “If many believe so, it is so.”

          Every one.
          Except every single major scientific body on the planet.
          The UN, The Pentagon, The world bank, The reinsurance industry,The world meteorological organization ,Every viable political party in this country etc etc etc.
          You know I can link to statements from all these and far more .
          We can therefore deduce .
          Every one in your case is limited to a few low info idiots.

          And the selected graphs bit ?
          Well we know evidence is pretty hard to produce for a loon who like most of his ilk relies on feelz and the bullshite he is fed from whacko sources.

          When you come out with such dribble in an attempt to score points it just makes for laughter and makes you look even more of an arse.

          Reply
          • PDB

             /  18th February 2019

            Narcissism 101 – you didn’t read it, you wrote it!

            Reply
            • Griff.

               /  18th February 2019

              Thats your feelz talking.. Because I make you feelz an arse ….
              Here full this out we will get a wambalnce out as soon as we care.

      • Pink David

         /  18th February 2019

        “Peterson makes a living out of selling his nonsense he spends his enter life centered around developing it.”

        He has been in the public eye at most 2 years. How do you work out he spent his whole lifetime ‘developing it’? Is he any different to any other university professor?

        Reply
        • Griff.

           /  18th February 2019

          How do you work out he spent his whole lifetime ‘developing it’? Is he any different to any other university professor?

          Umm the point of being a university professor is to teach and do research on a subject.to teach you must know the subject well .
          He wrote a couple of books .
          That usually takes a number of years .
          He published his claim to fame the you tube vids starting in 2016 .
          He now tours lecturing on the books and videos ideas
          You dont think thats a profession and he knows what he is talking about rather well ?
          Note just knowing shite does not mean you are right
          Especially in psychology ..
          The couple I have known over the years have been nuts anyways .

          Reply
    • Blazer

       /  18th February 2019

      ‘So Peterson initially agreed then declined to debate Douglas Lain, publisher of Zero Books because he apparently wasn’t popular enough, declined to debate Richard Wolff for less than $50,000.’

      Peterson picks his opponents carefully,like a boxer ,always wary of engaging with an opponent that may knock him clean out ..cold.

      Reply
      • admiralvonspee

         /  18th February 2019

        Assume a can opener….bol.

        Reply
      • Gezza

         /  18th February 2019

        Iris Krzyzosiak, of Auckland Peace Action made a complete twat of herself. She hadn’t a bloody clue. That was a very polite and even tame interview with Sean Plunket. Every criticism or allegation she made about Jordan Peterson was wrong & seemed founded on nothing but what she’s heard from weirdos. She floundered helplessly & hopelessly throughout the entire interview & seems to be one of those people whose views are formed by the last bit of gossip she heard at a whinger’s convention.

        Thick as two short planks was how she came across to me. All mouth & no shoes.

        Reply
  2. alloytoo

     /  18th February 2019

    Park your snowflakes and tidy your room, JP is coming. LOL

    Reply
  3. Duker

     /  18th February 2019

    Jordan admits he was wrong
    https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/06/24/jim-jefferies-jordan-peterson-wrong_a_23466788/

    Apparently making people bake cakes for gay people isnt a good thing, but back when they made shop owners serve black people that was a good thing …which leads back to the baking of cakes..

    A more critical view on his outlook, for those who are really really interested in Petersons magic talk

    Reply
      • PartisanZ

         /  18th February 2019

        Cheers Duker. “Yes,” the logic goes, “we know there’s a fire – but we don’t know how the fire started, so we shouldn’t try to put it out” pretty much explains it …

        “Nor is it that some of it is politically disempowering – insisting, as does Rule 6, that you “Set your house in perfect order before you criticise the world” (translation: children have no business questioning the world, which probably would not have played that well with the Parkland survivors and their controversial desire to not be massacred in the classroom by military-grade weapons).

        No, the real problems are that it misuses science for unacknowledged political ends; that it grotesquely misrepresents Peterson’s intellectual opponents; and that it requires absurd philosophical and logical gymnastics to render the supposedly scientific standpoint compatible with his religious convictions …”

        And then there’s Lobster Brain … a kind of 21st Century safe harbour for Aryan Superiority … which I note the article completely demolishes …

        Reply
      • phantom snowflake

         /  18th February 2019

        Similarly; Pankaj Mishra’s review of Peterson’s 12 Rules For Life really nails it:
        https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/03/19/jordan-peterson-and-fascist-mysticism/

        Reply
        • Corky

           /  18th February 2019

          Nails what?

          Reply
        • Pink David

           /  18th February 2019

          You do realise he didn’t review the book at all don’t you? He waltz’s off down a rabbit hole of his own making, and barely pauses to read the title of the book.

          Reply
      • High Flying Duck

         /  18th February 2019

        I really tried to read that, but it was verbal diarrhoea of the worst kind and somewhere after the 468th paragraph I started losing my will to live. And as they hadn’t quite gotten to the point by then so I have no idea of the article’s merits.
        If that article is representative, it is no wonder Vice are going under at a fast rate of knots.

        Reply
    • High Flying Duck

       /  18th February 2019

      Peterson admitting he was wrong was….wrong? Human? a fault we should judge him by?

      Reply
      • PartisanZ

         /  18th February 2019

        Even I defend Jordan Peterson’s right to free speech …

        And then I mock what he says.

        Reply
  4. High Flying Duck

     /  18th February 2019

    It’s the Guardian, but perhaps puts up a more coherent description of the JP phenomena and meaning than most:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/22/what-the-left-gets-wrong-about-jordan-peterson

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  18th February 2019

      we can sum up their assessment of Jordan thus…

      ‘the mass of men,lead lives of quiet…desperation’…D.Thoreau.

      Reply
      • High Flying Duck

         /  18th February 2019

        Succinct and probably correct. They are those whom he has tried to help.

        Reply
        • PartisanZ

           /  18th February 2019

          A million followers on the internet nowadays is certainly not a measure of intellectual or spiritual or political ‘leadership’, let alone veracity …

          It measures ‘popularity’ … a very different thing entirely … Popularity is what makes ‘Twilight’ a bestselling novel* … despite the fact it has no redeeming literary features.

          ” … tried to help” …… Now that’s funny!!!

          * Indeed, even to call the book a “novel” is an enormous stretch in the usage and ‘sense’ of the word … Instead, it’s a ‘narrative popularity phenomenon’ in something approximating prose …

          Reply
          • High Flying Duck

             /  18th February 2019

            35,000 letters of thanks for helping turn around people’s lives is probably representative of something positive.
            You can disagree with his views, but still acknowledge he has helped people.

            Reply
            • PartisanZ

               /  18th February 2019

              Would you say the same of people who are “helped” by converting from Christianity to Islam?

    • PartisanZ

       /  18th February 2019

      “The notion that there is nothing redeemable in Peterson’s message – and the accompanying assumption that any fan of his is beneath contempt – is not only wrong, but represents a rather bleak, zero-sum vision of politics …. The left’s most profound message used to be that all human beings deserve dignity and worth, and those who need help should receive it, regardless of their race or gender or class or other characteristic.

      If that axiom still holds true – these days I’m not always sure – then it applies to many of Peterson’s fans” … and must, of course, also apply to Peterson himself …

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  18th February 2019

        You big soft egalitarian, Parti.

        Reply
      • Pink David

         /  18th February 2019

        “The left’s most profound message used to be that all human beings deserve dignity and worth, and those who need help should receive it, regardless of their race or gender or class or other characteristic.”

        That’s never been something the ‘left’ has stood for. It’s entirely based on drawing lines between race, class, gender and anything else they can weaponise.

        Reply
  5. phantom snowflake

     /  18th February 2019

    This was fun to read; a satirical blend of lighthearted swipes with a few heavy hits from The Spinoff’s much underrated Madeleine Chapman.
    https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/06-12-2018/my-beef-only-week-living-as-jordan-peterson/

    Reply
    • PartisanZ

       /  18th February 2019

      Renowned …

      Reply
    • Pink David

       /  18th February 2019

      “Why indeed? I didn’t know much about Peterson beyond his public stance against a proposed bill in Canadian parliament that would ban discrimination against people based on “gender identity”. ”

      Given the article starts with this lie, why would you rate it?

      Reply
    • Pink David

       /  18th February 2019

      “Peterson considered it a threat to the right of free speech, and that he could be arrested for using the wrong gender pronouns. This was ultimately proved to be untrue, but it didn’t matter. ”

      Also untrue.

      Reply
  6. Mother

     /  18th February 2019

    The “cult like” following of J Peterson is a shame, if this is the case. But I doubt that it is. From what I have seen, he would detest that sort of following. It’s worth keeping in mind though. I think he encourages youth to think for themselves. It wasn’t easy for him to stand firm against the popular voice. He is showing people that they are free to think and speak.

    Reply
  7. Jean Davy

     /  19th February 2019

    The observation, ‘ cult-like’ following, could do with a re think. It would seem to demean an incredible number of people who agree with his views whilst still
    quite able to hold their own. I like to think he would wholeheartedly dislike the concept too. I respect both his IQ and EQ.

    Reply
  1. Jordan Peterson, author and Steph Dryberg,Wellingtonian of the Year — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s