Cloud Hosting

This article was published online on March 2, 2021.

One day in early 2020, Jordan B. Peterson rose from the dead. The Canadian academic, then 57, had been placed in a nine-day coma by doctors in a Russian clinic, after becoming addicted to benzodiazepines, a class of drug that includes Xanax and Valium. The coma kept him unconscious as his body went through the terrible effects of withdrawal; he awoke strapped to the bed, having tried to rip out the catheters in his arms and leave the intensive-care unit.

When the story of his detox became public, in February 2020, it provided an answer to a mystery: Whatever happened to Jordan Peterson? In the three years before he disappeared from view in the summer of 2019, this formerly obscure psychology professors name had been a constant presence in op-ed columns, internet forums, and culture-war arguments. His book 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos, published in 2018, sold millions of copies, and he had conducted a 160-city speaking tour, drawing crowds of up to 3,000 a night; premium tickets included the chance to be photographed with him. For $90, his website offered an online course to better understand your unique personality. An official merchandise store sold Peterson paraphernalia: mugs, stickers, posters, phone cases, tote bags. He had created an entirely new model of the public intellectual, halfway between Marcus Aurelius and Martha Stewart.

The price of these rewards was living in a maelstrom of other peoples opinions. Peterson was, depending on whom you believed, either a stern but kindly shepherd to a generation of lost young men, or a reactionary loudmouth whose ideas fueled the alt-right and a backlash to feminism. He was revered as a guru, condemned as a dangerous charlatan, adored and reviled by millions. Peterson has now returned to the public sphere, and the psyche-splitting ordeal of modern celebrity, with a new book, Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Lifean intriguing title, in light of his recent experiences. The mystery deepens: What really happened to Jordan Peterson, and why has he come back for more?

Growing up in Fairview, Alberta, Peterson was small for his age, which fostered both a quick wit and a fascination with the power and violence of traditional masculinity. He once recounted in a Facebook post how hed overheard a neighbor named Tammy Roberts joking with another girl that she wanted to keep her surname, so she would have to marry some wimp. Then she turned around and proposed to the teenage Jordan. He spent a youthful summer working on a railroad in Saskatchewan, with an all-male group that nicknamed him Howdy Doody, after the freckle-faced puppet. As a student, he visited a maximum-security prison, where he was particularly struck by a convict with a vicious scar right down his chest, which he surmised might have come from surgery or an ax wound: The injury would have killed a lesser man, anywaysomeone like me.

How to be a greater man was very much on Petersons mind. Raised in a mildly Christian household, he decided as a teenager that religion was for the ignorant, weak and superstitious. He yearned for a left-wing revolution, an urge that lasted until he met some left-wing activists in college. Then, rejecting all ideology, he decided that the threat of the Cold War made it vital to understand the human impulse toward destruction. He began to study psychology.

Alongside pursuing his doctorate, teaching at Harvard and then the University of Toronto, and raising a familyhe married Tammy in 1989, and yes, she took his surnamePeterson started work on his first book, a survey of the origins of belief. Its ambition was nothing less than to explain, well, everythingin essence, how the story of humanity has been shaped by humanitys love of stories. Maps of Meaning, published in 1999, built on the work of academics like Joseph Campbell, the literature and religion scholar who argued that all mythic narratives are variations of a single archetypal quest. (Campbells monomyth inspired the arc of Star Wars.) On this heros journey, a young man sets out from his humdrum life, confronts monsters, resists temptation, stares into the abyss, and claims a great victory. Returning home with what Campbell calls the power to bestow boons on his fellow men, the hero can also claim the freedom to live at peace with himself.

In the fall of 2016, Peterson seized the chance to embark on his own quest. A Canadian Parliament bill called C-16 proposed adding gender identity or expression to the list of protected characteristics in the countrys Human Rights Act, alongside sex, race, religion, and so on. For Peterson, the bill was proof that the cultural left had captured public-policy making and was imposing its fashionable diktats by law. In a YouTube video titled Professor Against Political Correctness, he claimed that he could be brought before a government tribunal if he refused to use recently coined pronouns such as zhe. In the first of several appearances on Joe Rogans blockbuster podcast, he made clear that he was prepared to become a martyr for his principles, if necessary. His intensity won over Rogana former mixed-martial-arts commentator with a huge young male fan base and eclectic political views (a frequent critic of the left, he endorsed Bernie Sanders in 2020). You are one of the very few academics, Rogan told Peterson, who have fought against some of these ideas that are not just being promoted but are being enforced.

The fight over C-16, which became law in 2017, was a paradigmatic culture-war battle. Each side overstated the other sides argument to bolster its own: Either you hated transgender people, or you hated free speech. In Petersons view, the bill exposed the larger agenda of postmodernism, which he portrayed as an ideology that, in denying the existence of objective truth, leaves its practitioners without an ethic. (This is not how theorists of postmodernism define it, and if you have a few hours to spare, do ask one of them to explain.) He was on the side of science and rationality, he proclaimed, and against identity politics. Feminists were wrong to argue that traditional gender roles were limiting and outdated, because centuries of evolution had turned men into strong, able providers and women into warm, emotionally sensitive nurturers. The people who hold that our culture is an oppressive patriarchy, they dont want to admit that the current hierarchy might be predicated on competence is how he later phrased it. (This was during Donald Trumps presidency.) The founding stories of the worlds great religions backed him up, as did the heros journey: It is men who fight monsters, while women are temptresses or helpmates.

The mainstream media began to pay attention. Peterson had posted some advice on the Q&A site Quora, which he turned into his second book, 12 Rules for Life, a mashup of folksy wisdom, evolutionary biology, and digressions on the evils of Soviet Communism. (His daughter, Mikhaila, is named after Mikhail Gorbachev.) It stresses the conservative principles of self-reliance and responsibility, encouraging readers to tidy their bedrooms and smarten themselves up to compete for female attentiona message reinforced by a questionable analogy involving lobsters, which fight by squirting urine from their faces to establish their place in the mating hierarchy. Parents, universities and the elders of society have utterly failed to give many young men realistic and demanding practical wisdom on how to live, David Brooks wrote in a New York Times column. Peterson has filled the gap. He offered self-help for a demographic that wouldnt dream of reading Goop.

Yet the relentless demands of modern celebritymore content, more access, more authenticitywere already tearing the psychologists public persona in two. One Peterson was the father figure beloved by the normie readers of 12 Rules, who stood in long lines to hear him speak and left touching messages on internet forums, testifying that he had turned their lives around. The other Peterson was a fearsome debater, the gladiator who crowed Gotcha! at the British television interviewer Cathy Newman after a series of testy exchanges about the gender pay gap and the freedom to give offense. His debates were clipped and remixed, then posted on YouTube with titles announcing that he had DESTROYED his interlocutors.

I know this because one of them was me: Our interview for British GQ, which has garnered more than 23 million views, is easily the most viral moment Ive ever had. While dozens of acquaintances emailed and texted me to praise my performance and compare Petersons stern affect to Hannibal Lecter with a Ph.D., mean comments piled up like a snowdrift below the video itself. I was biased and utterly intellectually bankrupt, dishonest and malicious, and like a petulant child who walked into an adult conversation. What kind of man, several wondered, would marry a dumb, whiny, shrill feminist like this? (Quite a nice one, thanks for asking.)

Peterson lived in this split-screen reality all the time. Even as he basked in adoration, a thousand internet piranhas ripped through his every utterance, looking for evidence against him. One week, Bari Weiss anointed him a leading culture warrior, including him in a New York Times feature as a member of the Intellectual Dark Web. Ten days later, the newspaper published a mocking profile of him, reporting that his house was decorated with Soviet propaganda and quoting him speculating about the benefits of enforced monogamy in controlling young mens animal instincts. After he was accused of pining after Margaret Atwoods Gilead, he quickly posted a note on his website arguing that he meant only the social enforcement of monogamy.

The negative publicity affected him deeply, and it was endless. After the Indian essayist Pankaj Mishra charged him with peddling fascist mysticism, Peterson tweeted that Mishra was an arrogant, racist son of a bitch and a sanctimonious prick. He added: If you were in my room at the moment, Id slap you happily. Even sleep brought no relief. Peterson is a believer in dream analysis, and after one particularly ill-tempered interview in October 2018, he blogged about a nightmare that followed. In his dream, he met a man who simply would not shut up. The man reminded him, he wrote, of an acquaintance at university in Canada he calls Sam, who drove around in a Mercedes with swastikas on the doors, saying the worst things he could, unable to resist inviting attacks. I cant help myself, Sam had told Peterson. I have a target drawn on my back. Eventually, at a party, Sam overstepped the line; he was about to be assaulted by a mob until another acquaintance felled him with a single punch. Peterson never saw Sam again. In his dream, the Sam-like man talked and talked and finally pushed me beyond my limit of tolerance I bent his wrists to force his knuckles into his mouth. His arms bent like rubber and, even though I managed the task, he did not stop babbling. I woke up.

It is hard to resist reading the subtext like this: Peterson had spent months being casually described as a Nazi and associated with the alt-right, labels he always rejected. He had metaphorical swastikas on his car door. He couldnt resist putting a target on his own back, and he, too, couldnt stop talking. Indeed, in May 2019, after railing against left-wing censoriousnessnow widely called cancel culturehe met with Viktor Orbn, the proudly illiberal prime minister of Hungary, whose government has closed gender-studies programs, waged a campaign to evict Central European University from the country, and harassed independent journalists. Orbns state-backed version of cancel cultureor, to use the correct word, authoritarianismapparently didnt come up in their meeting. Peterson had previously told an interviewer to describe politicians like Orbn not as strongmen, but as dictator wannabes. Nonetheless, the visitand the posed photograph of the men in conversation, released to friendly media outletsgave intellectual cover to Orbns repressive government.

All that time, the two Petersons were pulling away from each other. As the arguments over his message raged across YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, and traditional media, he became an avatar of our polarized media climate. People were consuming completely different Petersons, depending on their news sources. When I saw him on his speaking tour at a theater on Long Island, the first question he was asked was not about pronouns or the decline of Western civilization; it was When was the last time you got drunk? The second was a heartfelt plea that will be familiar to any new parent: How can I get my baby to sleep?

The past two years have clearly been hell for Peterson. In a June 2020 video interview with his daughter, he looked gaunt and restless as he described his struggle with drug dependency, a torment that he revisits in the Overture to Beyond Order, his new book. As he describes it, an allergic reaction during the 2016 Christmas holiday manifested as intense anxiety, leading his family doctor to prescribe benzodiazepines. He also started following what Mikhaila calls the lion diet, consuming only meat, salt, and water. In 2019, the tumultuous reality of [being] a public figure was exacerbated by a series of family health crises culminating in his wifes diagnosis, in April, of what was thought to be terminal cancer. (She has since recovered.) Petersonwho notes that he had been plagued for years by a tendency toward depressionhad his tranquilizer dosage upped, only to experience rising anxiety, followed by the ravages of attempted withdrawal. He was at the edge of the abyssanxiety far beyond what I had ever experienced, an uncontrollable restlessness and need to move overwhelming thoughts of self-destruction, and the complete absence of any happiness whatsoever.

Throughout this turbulent time, Peterson was working on Beyond Order. He makes no claims that his suffering provided a teachable moment (particularly, he notes, when a pandemic has upended lives everywhere). He also declines the opportunity to place his addiction in the context of the prescription-drug-abuse crisis. Peterson seems to have softened his disdain for religion, and as for Tammy, passing so near to death motivated my wife to attend to some issues regarding her own spiritual and creative development. Notably, Peterson is not ready to give up on the heros journey, despite the terror he has endured. All of that misfortune is only the bitter half of the tale of existence, he writes, without taking note of the heroic element of redemption or the nobility of the human spirit requiring a certain responsibility to shoulder.

This book is humbler than its predecessor, and more balanced between liberalism and conservatismbut it offers a similar blend of the highbrow and the banal. Readers get a few glimpses of the fiery online polemicist, but the Peterson of Beyond Order tends instead to two other modes. The first is a grounded clinician, describing his clients troubles and the tough-love counsel he gives them. The other is a stoned college freshman telling you that the Golden Snitch is, like, a metaphor for round chaos the initial container of the primordial element. Some sentences beg to be prefaced with Dude, like these: If Queen Elizabeth II suddenly turned into a giant fire-breathing lizard in the midst of one of her endless galas, a certain amount of consternation would be both appropriate and expected But if it happens within the context of a story, then we accept it. Reading Peterson the clinician can be illuminating; reading his mystic twin is like slogging through wet sand. His fans love the former; his critics mock the latter.

The prose swirls like mist, and his great insight appears to be little more than the unthreatening observation that life is complicated. (If the first book hadnt been written like this too, youd guess that he was trying to escape the butterfly pins of his harshest detractors.) After nearly 400 pages, we learn that married people should have sex at least once a week, that heat and pressure turn coal into diamonds, that having a social life is good for your mental health, and that, for a man in his 50s, Peterson knows a surprising amount about Quidditch. The chapter inviting readers to make one room in your home as beautiful as possible is typically discursive, but unusually enjoyable: Peterson knows his Wordsworth. (It is not free from weirdness, however. At one point, he claims to have looked at 1.2 million paintings on eBay while selecting his living-room decor.) His prose also lights up when he describes the wonder of watching his granddaughter encounter the world.

On the rare occasion that Beyond Order strays overtly into politics, Peterson still cant resist fighting straw men. What Peterson sees as healthy ambition needs to be encouraged in every possible manner, he writes.

But who is reflexively identifying all male ambition as innately harmful? If any mainstream feminist writers are in fact arguing that the West is a patriarchal tyrannyas opposed to simply a patriarchy or male-dominated societyhe should do the reader the favor of citing them. Is he arguing with Gloria Steinem or princess_sparklehorse99 on Tumblr? A tenured professor should embrace academic rigor.

Peterson writes an entire chapter against ideologiesfeminism, anti-capitalism, environmentalism, basically anything ending in ismdeclaring that life is too complex to be described by such intellectual frameworks. Funny story: Theres an academic movement devoted to skepticism of grand historical narratives. Its called postmodernism. That chapter concludes by advising readers to put their own lives in order before trying to change the world. This is not only a rehash of one of the previous 12 rulesClean up your bedroom, he writes, because fans love it when you play the hitsbut also ferocious chutzpah coming from a man who was on a lecture tour well after he should have gone to rehab.

The Peterson of Beyond Order, that preacher of personal responsibility, dances around the question of whether his own behavior might have contributed to his breakdown. Was it really wise to agree to all those brutal interviews, drag himself to all those international speaking events, send all those tweets that set the internet on fire? Like a rock star spiraling into burnout, he was consumed by the pyramid scheme of fame, parceling himself out, faster and faster, to everyone who wanted a piece. Perhaps he didnt want to let people down, and he loved to feel needed. Perhaps he enjoyed having an online army glorying in his triumphs and pursuing his enemies. In our frenzied media culture, can a hero ever return home victorious and resume his normal life, or does the lure of another adventure, another dragon to slay, another lib to own always call out to him?

Either way, he gazed into the culture-war abyss, and the abyss stared right back at him. He is every one of us who couldnt resist that pointless Facebook argument, who felt the sugar rush of the self-righteous Twitter dunk, who exulted in the defeat of an opposing political tribe, or even an adjacent portion of our own. That kind of unhealthy behavior, furiously lashing out while knowing that counterattacks will follow, is a very modern form of self-harm. And yet in Beyond Order, the blame is placed solely on the hypothetically safe but truly dangerous benzodiazepine anti-anxiety medication he was prescribed by his family doctor. The book leaves you wishing that Peterson the tough therapist would ask hard questions of Peterson the public intellectual.

To imagine that Peterson is popular in spite of his contradictions and human frailtiesthe things that drive his critics madis a mistake: He is popular because of them. For a generation that has lost its faith in religion and politics, he is one of notably few prominent figures willing to confront the most fundamental questions of existence: Whats the point of being alive? What kind of personal journey endows our existence with meaning? He is, in many ways, countercultural. He doesnt offer get-rich-quick schemes, or pickup techniques. He is not libertine or libertarian. He promises that life is a struggle, but that it is ultimately worthwhile.

Yet Petersons elevation to guru status has come at great personal cost, a cascade of suffering you wouldnt wish on anybody. It has made him rich and famous, but not happy. We compete for attention, personally, socially, and economically, he writes in Beyond Order. No currency has a value that exceeds it. But attention is a perilous drug: The more we receive, the more we desire. It is the culture wars greatest reward, yet it started Jordan Peterson on a journey that turned a respected but unknown professor into the man strapped into the Russian hospital bed, ripping the tubes from his arms, desperate for another fix.

See the original post:
Review: Beyond Order, by Jordan B. Peterson - The Atlantic

The Unbroken Thread: Discovering the Wisdomof Tradition in an Age of Chaosby Sohrab Ahmari, Hodder & Stoughton, 2021, 294 pages

Sohrab Ahmaris new book, The Unbroken Thread, follows his acclaimed spiritual memoir, From Fire by Water, in which the Iranian-American journalist had charted the story of his conversion to Catholicism.

This book is less personal and more ambitious, laying out an argument that we need to rediscover the traditions which have been swept away by the enhanced focus on individual autonomy and social liberation which has become so prevalent in recent times.

In diagnosing what he feels is our civilisations main malady, Ahmari, opinion editor of the New York Post, speaks from experience.

As readers of his previous work will know, Ahmari did not convert to Christianity from Islam. Having been raised in a highly Westernised family which fled the Ayatollahs Iran, the young immigrant embraced a hedonistic lifestyle with a passion, and felt appalled that others around the world were denied such freedom.

Years on, Ahmari has scaled the heights of journalism on both sides of the Atlantic and now enjoys a comfortable life in Manhattan. He is, by any definition, an example of a successful immigrant to the West.

But as a Catholic and a father of a young son, he is disturbed by what he sees around him and fearful about the world which his little boy will inherit. He writes:

I have come to believe that the very modes of life and thinking that strike most people in the West as antiquated or limiting can liberate us, while the Western dream of autonomy and choice without limits is, in fact, a prison; that the quest to define ourselves on our own is a kind of El Dorado, driving to madness the many who seek after it; that for our best, highest selves to soar, other parts of us must be tied down, enclosed, limited, bound.

Self-sacrifice and freedom

His son Maximilian looms large in this book, as does Saint Maximilian Kolbe, who died a martyr in Auschwitz.

Ahmari writes that Kolbes act of self-sacrifice in volunteering to die in the place of a stranger represents the climbing of the very summit of human freedom, and argues that we have abandoned Kolbes brand of freedom freedom rooted in self-surrender, sustained by the authority of tradition and religion in favour of one that glories in the individual will.

Surveying the landscape of contemporary society, the author fears that his son will discard the permanent ideals of the past in favour of a culture which prefers the new to the old, and which suggests that there is no purpose to life other than self-fulfilment.

This book the final chapter of which is a touching letter addressed from father to son is an attempt to explain the unbroken thread which connects us to the past.

Is God reasonable?

Ahmaris structural approach is reminiscent of Jordan Petersons. He divides the book into twelve sections, each of which is based on answering a particular question: Is God Reasonable? Can You Be Spiritual without Being Religious? What Is Freedom For?

Like Peterson, Ahmari is a gifted storyteller and is refreshingly broad-minded when it comes to the examples he explores from a range of religious and cultural traditions.

In one chapter, he describes how C.S. Lewis came to abandon the shallow and materialistic worldview which he and others had developed in the early 20th century, and how this renewed respect for the old helped Lewis not just to explore this world, but to reconsider the Christian faith he had abandoned.

When explaining the relationship between faith and reason, Ahmari describes how Plato and Aristotle had, through the use of reason and without revelation, concluded that God must exist.

Elsewhere, in discussing the value of the Sabbatical rest and the costs which society has borne as a result of our collective decision to dispense with it, he highlights the work of the rabbi Abraham Heschel, who believed that by honouring the Sabbath, people were not only reminded of their basic religious duties, but also helped to understand their task to restore the world to the kingship of the Lord.

Secularisation, individualism and conservatism

Many prominent books about modern American life have touched upon what is surely the most consequential change to occur there in recent times: the rapid secularisation of the population.

This usually involves a movement away from traditional religion towards an individual-centric form of vague spirituality, and Ahmari argues persuasively that the baleful effects of this shift can be seen throughout society, including the rise of identity politics and the ever-greater social division which it is causing.

Politics is not the central theme here, thankfully, although it is touched upon.

It is worth noting that the author has recently undergone more than a religious conversion. In addition to this, he has become an increasingly vocal critic of the traditional fusionist approach of right-of-centre Americans, which saw social conservatives work together with libertarian-leaning economic conservatives to advance their goals within the framework of the American political system.

In 2019, Ahmari launched a blistering attack on this approach in the pages of First Things, and he has since become associated with the quixotic integralist position, which favours a more aggressive approach in culture war issues, and which seeks to do the impossible in marrying Church and State at a time of accelerating secularisation.

It would take another (very long) book to chart a path towards the society he and the other integralists seem to be aspiring towards, but few conservative-minded readers would disagree with his basic contention that the existing American order enshrines very few substantive ideals I would want to transit to my son.

Those substantive ideals are there, surely, and in this book, Sohrab Ahmari has done an excellent job of explaining to his son and anyone else who cares to listen why the thread which binds us to the past must always be preserved with reverence.

View post:
'Preserve the thread of tradition, my son' MercatorNet - MercatorNet