Adam Piggott

Gentleman adventurer

Jordan Peterson as approved opposition.

For readers unfamiliar with the Australian television landscape, Q&A is a live panel discussion program on the government broadcaster ABC. It is so notoriously weighted to the left side of politics, as is the entire ABC for that matter, that it is somewhat of a running joke. Q&A is the most leftist progressive show on a network which is leftist and progressive from top to bottom.

The format of the show goes something like this:

  1. Invite 4 progressive guests.
  2. Invite one guest nominally from the right but who is very much approved opposition.
  3. The audience when lining up to get in are anonymously asked who they normally vote for in an election. This is then displayed at some point on the screen with no sense of irony whatsoever. I mean, if you have the entire audience screaming blood at the very mild approved opposition guest but supposedly 40% of them voted for the conservative party, then you have an audience with a very serious case of collective Tourettes.

And next Monday one of the guests on the show is our old pal, Jordan Peterson.

Q&A, we have a problem.

The ABC’s main panel show doesn’t like to think of itself as biased, but look at what happened when Jordan Peterson was announced as a guest.

The news went off, online, like it’s going to be a showdown.

Why should that be?

If Q&A isn’t biased, then he’s just another guest, isn’t he? Therefore, it should be no big deal to have him on.

And yet, for many people, on Facebook, Twitter, on this paper’s website, it’s like a miracle, and they’ll be tuning in for the first time in years.

I don’t know what’s sadder; the fact that Peterson is so obviously approved opposition or the fact that so many people on the right just cannot see it. But he is their new Messiah and they will celebrate him. Look, you don’t get an invite to this show without being part of the show. As soon as I heard that they had invited Peterson I thought that this would finally signal for so many people on the right what people like myself and Vox Day have been saying for a while now.

I mean, for God’s sake, Peterson himself has declared on multiple occasions both that he is not on the right and that he is on the left and yet the most liked comment on that article, and there are hundreds, is the following:

Q&A has confirmed three other panelists. Quoted from the website,

Terri Butler, Queensland Labor MP
Catherine McGregor, Freelance writer, broadcaster and author –
Van Badham, Writer and commentator

That’s a far Left Labor figure, a trans person, and an extreme Left feminist. It’s still a mismatch in favour of Peterson but the show is notorious for nobbling its conservative guests.

I mean, forget about Peterson, this guys stills believes that the nominal right side of politics guests on the show are actual conservatives. Look people, except for Senator Fraser Anning the entire Australian parliament are progressives.

Peterson being invited onto Q&A should be a wake up call as to his true nature for those on the right. Except it’s not. Unfortunately that says much more about the right then it does about Peterson.

Previous

An Australian Apartheid.

Next

Child Sacrifice.

9 Comments

  1. Peter

    The guy is most definitely LEFT wing. He says it numerous times.

    The thing I dislike most about him is his discouraging Whites to think of themselves as a group. Brock Lesnar at his Prime wouldn’t stand a chance alone against an Antifa mob. As Stalin said “Quantity has a quality all of it’s own” and proved this point by throwing vast numbers of inferior troops with inferior weapons against Germany who ran out of ammo before the Red Army ran out of men.

    United we stand, individually we’ll fall

    • Nick Dean

      Yes, it’s so trivially about White not Right that you could have posted other comments to the OP and been equally correct.

  2. “I don’t know what’s sadder; the fact that Peterson is so obviously approved opposition or the fact that so many people on the right just cannot see it.”

    Definitely the latter.

  3. I learned this from Jordan B. Peterson,

    Law and order conservative tyrants are preferred to the chaos and anarchy of progressive demagogues.. The Truth is not politically chiral.

  4. I don’t see an edit function. That is why Adolf Shikelgruber was elected, the better alternative to his opposition.

  5. Odysseus

    Adam, reader across the Pacific here. You know your tv shows better than I do, of course.
    That said, isn’t it possible they are booking Peterson to get ratings, above all? He does draw those, and the shrikes/harridans booked will encourage their howler monkey fans to attend. Whatever happens, this is not about politics, far as I can tell.

    • The ABC is a government broadcaster. They get their money regardless of ratings which they care nothing for. Everything is about politics.

  6. “If Q&A isn’t biased, then he’s just another guest, isn’t he?”

    Money quote.

    Keep in mind, however, that he does espouse views that are non-prog and so by that definition he fits the definition of “conservative”. The problem here is not Peterson’s views but the media led definition of conservative. Anyone who strays from the orthodoxy gets their two minutes hate, including JP for pushing back against the hard line.

  7. “Keep in mind, however, that he does espouse views that are non-prog and so by that definition he fits the definition of “conservative”.”

    Non-prog? I learned this from Jordan B. Peterson, the United Nations keeps demon-possessed madmen on its payroll. He is neither an ally to us nor a threat to Progs.

Comments are closed.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

%d bloggers like this: