/lit/ - Literature

What I dislike the most about Peterson is that he is a boring defender of the convenient idea that if you are unhappy, it can only be your own fault.
Ten years ago, this man would have absolutely nothing to say on a macro level about the subprime crisis and the subsequent global recession that decreased the standard of living of most people in the West, and there is a big chance he will stop being relevant once the next global economic crisis will strike us, because while cleaning your room might have a positive effect on your psyche, it won't change the prices at the grocery store.

At least /pol/tards are conscious to a degree that things outside of their influence have a direct effect on their well-being. Blaming the shit coming to them on the figure of the Jew is very misguided IMO, but at least they have a drive to change things, and they support policies with a global effect like protectionism and restricting immigration. They are conscious that baby-boomers had an easier life than them, and that something went wrong along the way.
Peterson, on the other hand, promote Solzhenitsyn to ingrain the idea that striving to change society is bad. He uses Nietzsche to tell us that the death of God was bad and that we ought to come back to the good old days when people believed in Jesus, something which is ironically quite antithetical to Nietzsche.

He is only an out-of-touch boomer with an above-average vocabulary, and not much else. He has absolutely no idea of what it is like to grow up as a millennial in a dysfunctional economy, and never will.