[Music]
brilliant minds even mediocre minds
operate better under stimulus Canadian
history is the Canadian and you can't
take away someone's and Barack Obama has
systematically rebuilt the trust of the
world in our willingness to work through
the Security Council and other three you
must not talk to anybody in the world
any of our allies whatever you want to
call this system a mafia state a feudal
empire it's a disaster for ordinary
Russians
[Music]
brilliant minds even with the ochre
minds
operate better under stimulus Canadian
is a Canadian Barack Obama has
systematically rebuilt the trust of the
world in our willingness to work through
the Security Council and other three you
must not talk to anybody in the world
any of our allies it whatever you want
to call this system a mafia state a
feudal empire it's a disaster for
ordinary Russians I think that's the
kind of hypocritical argument that if I
were Chinese that annoying but
historically Chinese foreign policy can
be described it's by Berrien management
science and religion are not
incompatible religion forces nice people
to do unkind things our men obsolete a
my conclusion to this question is no I
won't let you be you show me the oil
pretext I quoted them saying show me a
free program how you can keep screaming
out and it doesn't change the point we
do not want sympathy we do not want pity
we want opportunities it's an appalling
slander to me to the Muslim religion I
never said the word Muslim in my
fulminating it was a Muslim free form a
nation it is that that kind of restraint
it is that kind of sober-minded sensible
intelligent foreign policy that Obama
represents so I guess what I'm telling
you is he's sort of a closeted Canadian
vote for him for God's sake
[Applause]
ladies and gentlemen welcome my name is
Roger Griffith since my privilege to
have the opportunity to moderate
tonight's debates and to act as your
organizer I want to start by welcoming
the North American wide television
audience tuning in right now across
canada on CPAC Canada's Public Affairs
Channel c-span across the continental
United States and on CBC radio ideas a
warm hello also to our online audience
watching this debate over 6,000 streams
active at this moment on Facebook live
in Bloomberg comm and Munk debates calm
it's great to have you as virtual
participants in tonight's proceedings
and hello to you the over 3,000 people
who filled Roy Thompson Hall for yet
another monk debate thank you for your
support for more and better debate on
the big issues of the day this debate
marks the start of our tenth season and
we begin this season missing someone who
was vital to this debate series in every
aspect it was his passion for ideas his
love for debate that inspired our
creation in 2008 and it was his energy
his generosity and his drive that was so
important in allowing us to really win
international acclaim as one of the
world's great debating series his
philanthropy its legacy wow it's
incredible last fall we all remember
that hundred million dollar donation to
cardiac health here in Toronto
transforming the lives of tens of
thousands of millions of Canadians to
come
we are all big fans and supporters of a
terrific school for global affairs on
the UFT campus represented here tonight
by many students who are in its master's
program congratulations to you and also
a generous endowment last spring to this
series that will allow us to organize
many evenings like this for many more
years to come
now knowing our benefactor as we do the
last thing he'd want is for us to mark
his absence with a moment of silence
that wasn't his style so let's instead
celebrate a great Canadian a great life
and a great legacy of the late Peter
Munk Bravo Peter
where to go Peter
I I know he would have enjoyed that and
I want to just thank Melanie
Anthony Cheney for being here tonight to
be part of Peters continuing positive
impact on public debate in Canada thank
you guys for being here tonight
now knowing Peter as I did the first
thing on his mind at this point in the
debate would be right here stop talking
get this debate underway get our
debaters out here come on got to show on
the road so we're gonna do that right
now because we have a terrific debate
lined up for you this evening so let's
introduce first our pro team arguing for
tonight's motion be it resolved what you
call political correctness I call
progress please welcome to the stage
he's an award-winning writer scholar
broadcaster on NPR and sports networks
across America Michael Eric Dyson
Michael come on out
Michael's debating partner is also
award-winning author she's calmest at
the New York Times and someone who is
going to bring a very distinct and
powerful perspective tonight
Michelle Goldberg Michelle come on out
[Music]
so one great team of debaters deserves
another and arguing against our
resolution be it resolved what you call
political correctness I call progress is
the Emmy award-winning actor
screenwriter author playwright
journalist poet and tonight's debater
Stephen Fry
Thank You City
Stephens teammates is a professor of
psychology at the University of Toronto
a youtube sensation and the author of
the big new international bestseller 12
rules for life ladies and gentlemen
Toronto's Jordan Peterson
okay we're gonna get our debate underway
momentarily but first a quick checklist
to go through we've got a hashtag
tonight hash at monk debate those of you
in the hall and those of you watching
online please weigh in let's get your
opinions going also for those of you
watching online right now we have an
running poll
ww monk debates comm Ford / votes
reflect input react to this debate as it
unfolds over the next hour and a half
my favorite part aspect of this show
that was Peter's brilliance and creation
we have our countdown clock what this
does is it keeps our debaters on their
toes and our debate on time so when you
see these clocks on the screen go down
to zero
I wanted you to join me in a warm round
of applause and we'll have a debate that
ends when it's supposed to end now let's
see we had our resolution tonight on the
way in we had this audience of roughly
3,000 people here in downtown Toronto
vote on be it resolved what you call
political correctness I call progress
let's see the agree disagree on that
number
36% agree 64% disagree so a room in play
now we asked you how many of you were
open to changing your vote over the
course of debate are you fixed agree
disagree or could you potentially be
convinced by one or other of these two
teams to move your vote over the next
hour and a half let's see those numbers
now Wow
okay a pretty open-minded crowd this
debate is very much in play and as per
the agreed-upon order of speakers I'm
going to call on Michelle Goldberg first
Michelle would you like I said but water
you can have a sip of water before you
start calling Michelle Goldberg first
for her six minutes of opening remarks
Michelle okay thank you for having me as
record knows I initially balked a little
bit at the resolution that we're
debating because there are a lot of
things that fall under the rubric of
political correctness that I don't call
progress
I don't like nope
forming or Twitter or trigger warnings
you know like a lot of middle-aged
liberals there are many aspects of
student social justice culture that I
find off-putting although I'm not sure
that that particular generation gap is
anything is anything new on the record
about the toxicity of social media
call-out culture and I think it's good
to debate people whose ideas I don't
like which is why I'm here so if there
are social justice warriors in the
audience I feel like I should apologize
to you because I'm probably not you're
probably gonna feel like I'm not
adequately defending your ideas but the
reason I'm on this side of the stage is
that political correctness isn't just a
term for left-wing excesses on college
campuses or people being terrible on
Twitter especially is deployed by mr.
Peterson I think it can be a way to
delay jitter mize any attempt for women
and racial and sexual minorities to
overcome discrimination or even to argue
that such discrimination is real in the
New York Times today mr. Peterson says
quote the people who hold that all that
our culture is an oppressive patriarchy
they don't want to admit that the
current hierarchy might be predicated on
competence that sounds particularly
insane to me because I'm an American and
our president is Donald Trump but
but it's an assumption that I think
underlies a worldview in which any
challenges to the current hierarchy are
written off as political correctness I
also think we should be clear that this
isn't really a debate about free speech
mr. Peterson once referred to what he
called quote the evil Trinity of equity
diversity and inclusivity and said those
three words if you hear people mouth
those three words equity diversity and
inclusivity you know who you're dealing
with and you should step away from that
because it is not acceptable he argues
that the movie frozen is politically
correct propaganda and at one point he
floated the idea of creating a database
of university course content so students
could avoid postmodern critical theory
so in the criticism of political
correctness I sometimes hear an urge or
an attempt to purge our thought of
certain analytical categories that
mirrors I think the worst caricatures of
the social justice left that want to get
rid of anything that smacks of
colonialism or patriarchy or white
supremacy I also don't really think
we're debating the value of the
Enlightenment at least not in the way
that somebody like mr. Frey who I think
is a champion of enlightenment values
brings it the efforts to expand rights
and privileges once granted just to land
owning white heterosexual men is the
Enlightenment or is very much in keeping
with the Enlightenment to quote a dead
white man John Stuart Mill the despotism
of custom is everywhere the standing
hindrance to human advancement I think
that some of our opponents by contrast
frame challenges to the despotism of
customs as politically correct attacks
on a transcendent natural order to quote
mr. Peterson again each gender each sex
has its own unfairness to deal with but
to think of it as a consequence of the
social of the social structure it's like
come on really what about nature itself
but there's an exception to this because
he does believe in social interventions
to remedy some kinds of unfairness which
is why in the new york times it calls
for quote enforced monogamy to remedy
the woes of men who don't get
their equal distribution of sex when it
comes to the political correctness
debate we've been exactly here before
the Alan bloom the author of the closing
of the American mind compared the
tyranny of feminism in academia to the
Khmer Rouge and he was writing at a time
when women accounted for 10 percent of
all college tenured faculty it's worth
looking back at what was considered
annoyingly outrageously politically
correct in the 1980s last time we had
this debate you know having to call or
not being able to call indigenous people
quote Indians or having to use
hyphenated terms at least in the United
States have terms like African Americans
you know adding women or people of color
to the Western Civ curriculum not making
gay jokes or using as an epithet
and I kind of get it right new concepts
new words sort of stick in your throat
the way we're used to talking and
thinking seem natural and normal you
know by definition and then the new
terms and new concepts that have social
utility stick and those that don't fall
away so if you go back to the 1970s myth
you know ms as an alternative to miss or
mrs. stuck around and women with a Y
didn't and I think that someday or I
hope that someday we'll look back and
marvel at the idea that gender-neutral
pronouns ever seemed like an existential
threat to anyone but I also don't think
it's clear that you know that might not
happen because if you look around the
world right now there are plenty of
places that have indeed dialed back
cosmopolitanism and reinstated
patriarchy and the name of staving off
chaos and they have seemed like terrible
places to live you know I come to you
from the United States which is
currently undergoing a monumental
attempt to rollback social progress in
the name of overcoming political
correctness and as someone who lives
there I assure you it feels nothing like
progress thank you
great start to the debate Michelle thank
you I'm now going to ask Jordan Peterson
to speak for the con team hello
so we should first decide what we're
talking about we're not talking about my
views of political correctness despite
what you might have inferred from the
last speakers comments this is how it
looks to me we essentially need
something approximating a low resolution
grand narrative to unite us and and we
need a narrative to unite us because
otherwise we don't have peace what's
playing out in the Universities and in
broader society right now is a debate
between two fundamental low resolution
narratives neither of which can be
completely accurate because they can't
encompass all the details obviously
human beings have an individual element
and a collective element a group element
let's say the question is what story
should be paramount and this is how it
looks to me in the West we have
reasonably functional reasonably free
remarkably productive stable hierarchies
that are open to consideration of the
dispossessed that hierarchies generally
create our societies are freer and
functioning more effectively than any
societies anywhere else in the world and
that and then any societies ever have
and as far as I'm concerned and I think
there's good reason to assume this it's
because the fundamental low resolution
grand narrative that we've oriented
ourselves around in the West is one of
the sovereignty of the individual and
it's predicated on the idea that all
things considered the best way for me to
interact with someone else is individual
to individual and to react to that
person as if they're both part of the
process because that's the right way of
thinking about it the psychological
process by which things we don't
understand can yet be explored and by
things that aren't properly organized in
our society can be yet set right the
reason we're valuable as individuals
both with regards to our rights and
responsibilities is because that's our
essential purpose and that's our
nobility and that's our function what's
happening as far as I'm concerned in the
universities in particular and spreading
very rapidly out into the broader world
including the corporate world much to
its
to what should be its chagrin is a
collectivist narrative and of course
there's some utility in a collectivist
narrative because we're all part of
groups in different ways but the
collectivist narrative that I regard as
politically correct is a pastiche of a
strange pastiche of post-modernism in
neo Marxism and it's fundamental claim
is that no you're not essentially an
individual you're essentially a member
of a group and that group might be your
ethnicity and it might be your sex and
it might be a race and it might be any
of the endless numbers of other
potential groups that you belong to
because you belong to many of them and
that you should be essentially
categorized along with those who are
like you on that dimension in that group
that's proposition number one
proposition number two is that the
proper way to view the world is as a
battleground between groups of different
power so you define the group's first
and then you assume that you you you
view the individual from the group
context you view the battle between
groups from the group context and you
view history itself as a consequence of
nothing but the power maneuvers between
different groups that eliminates any
consideration of the individual and at a
very fundamental level and also any idea
for example of free speech because if
you're collectivist at heart in this
manner there is no such thing as free
speech it isn't that it's debated by
those on the radical left and let's say
the rest of us so to speak it's that in
that formulation there's no such thing
as free speech because for an
individualist free speech is how you
make sense of the world in reorganize
Society in a proper manner but for the
radical left type collectivist that's
associated with this viewpoint of
political correctness when you speak all
you're doing is playing a power game on
behalf of your group and there's nothing
else that you can do because that's all
there is and not only is that all there
is in terms of who you are as an
individual now and how society should be
viewed it's also the fundamental
narrative of history for example it's
it's widely assumed in our universities
now that the best way to conceptualize
Western civilization is as an oppressive
male-dominated patriarchy and that the
best way to construe relationships
between men and women across the
centuries is one of oppression of women
by men
that's like well look no hierarchy is
without its tyranny that's a that's an
axiomatic truth people have recognized
that literally for thousands of years
and hierarchies do tend towards tyranny
and they tend towards the usurpation by
people with power but that only happens
when they become corrupt we have
mechanisms in our society to stop
hierarchies from becoming intolerably
corrupt and they actually work pretty
well and so and so I would also I would
also I would also point this out you
know don't be thinking that this is a
debate about whether empathy is useful
or not or that the people on the con
side of the argument are not empathetic
I know perfectly well as I'm sure mr.
Frey does that hierarchies tend to
produce situations where people stack up
at the bottom and that the dispossessed
in hierarchies need a political voice
which is the proper voice of the left by
the way the necessary voice of the left
but that is not the same as proclaiming
that the right level of analysis for our
grand unifying narrative is that all of
us are fundamentally to be identified by
the groups that we belong to and to
construe the entire world as the
battleground between different forms of
tyranny in consequence of that group
affiliation and to the degree that we
play out that narrative that won't be
progress believe me and we certainly
haven't seen that progress in the
universities we've seen situations like
what happened in Wilfred Laurier
University instead we won't see progress
what we'll return to is exactly the same
kind of tribalism that characterized the
lamp
Thank You Jordan Michael Eric Dyson your
6 minutes starts now thank you very
kindly wonderful opportunity to be here
in Canada thank you so much I'm gonna
stand here at the podium I'm a preacher
and I will ask for an offering at the
end of my presentation this is the
swimsuit competition of the intellectual
beauty pageant so let me show you the
curves of my thought oh my god was that
a politically incorrect statement I just
made how did we get to the point where
the hijacking of the discourse on
political correctness has become a kind
of Manichean distinction between us in
them the abortive fantasy just presented
is remarkable for both its clarity and
yet the muddiness of the context from
which it has emerged what's interesting
to me is that when we look at the
radical left I'm saying what he had I
want to join them named running up and
I'm from a country where a man stands up
every day to tweet the moral mendacity
of his viciousness into a nation he has
turned into his psychic commode
y'all get Justin we got Donnell
so what's interesting then is that
political correctness has transmogrified
into a caricature of the left the left
came up with the term political
correctness shall I remind you we were
tired of our excuses and our excesses in
our exaggerations we were willing to be
so critical in a way that I fear my
confreres my compatriots are not don't
take yourself too seriously smile take
yourself not seriously at all but what
you do with deadly seriousness now it is
transmogrified into an attempt to
characterize the radical left the
radical left is a metaphor as a symbol
as an articulation they don't exist
their numbers are too small I'm on
college campuses I don't see much of
them coming when I hear about identity
politics it amazes me the collectivist
identity politics last time I checked I
forgive in a trace that was an invention
from a dominant culture that wanted
groups to at their behest the invention
of race was driven by the demand of a
dominant culture to subordinate others
patreon
hey patriarchy patriarchy was the demand
of men to have their exclusive vision
presented the beauty of feminism is it's
not gonna resolve differences between
men and women it just says me I don't
automatically get the last word of
course of my career he never did and so
identity politics has been generated as
a bit Noir of the right and yet the
right doesn't understand the degree to
which identity has been foisted upon
black people and brown people and people
of color from the very beginning on
women and trans people you think that I
want to be part of a group that is
constantly imported by people at
Starbucks I imagine my own black
business
walking down the street I have group
identity thrust upon me they don't say
ah-ha-ha there goes a negro
highly intelligent articulate verbose
capable of rhetorical fury at the drop
of a hat
we should not interrogate him as to the
bona fides of his legal status no they
treat me as part of a group and the
problem is that our friends don't want
to acknowledge is that the hegemony that
dominance of that group has been so
vicious that it has denied us the
opportunity to exist as individuals
individualism is the characteristic
moment in modernity mr. Peterson is
right the development of the individual
however is predicated upon notions of
intelligence Immanuel content David Hume
and others philosophically karte
Descartes comes along
introducing knowledge into the to the to
the to the fray saying that knowledge is
based upon a kind of reference to the
golden intelligence the reflective glass
that one possesses and yet he got rooted
in the very ground of our existence so
now it has fleshly basis and what I'm
saying to you the knowledge that I bring
as a person of color makes a difference
in my body cuz I know what people think
of me
and I know how they respond to me and
that ain't no Theory am I you might mad
at trigger warnings the only trigger
warning I want is from a cop are you
about to shoot me not funny in America
where young black people die repeatedly
unarmed without provocation and so for
me identity politics is something very
serious and what's interesting about
safe spaces I hear about the University
I teach there look if you in a safe
space in your body you don't need a safe
space some of that is overblown some of
it is ridiculous I understand I believe
that the classroom was a robust place
for serious learning I believe in the
interrogation of knowledge based upon
our understanding usually of the
edifying proposition of enlightenment at
the same time some people ain't as equal
as others so we have to understand the
conditions under which they have emerged
and in which they have been knighted and
attacked by their own culture
and I ain't seen nobody be a bigger
snowflake than white man who can play
mommy mommy they won't let us play and
have everything we used to have under
the old regime where we were right
racist and supremacist and dominant and
patriarchs and hated gays and lesbians
and transsexuals that yeah you got a
share
this ain't your world this about his
world and let me have my saying this
yoram that story from David Foster
Wallace Fisher going down to Fisher
going and the older fish comes in the
opposite direction
he said hello boys how's the water they
swim on they turn each other what the
hell is water because when you're in it
you don't know it when you're dominant
you don't know it nothing Keyser söze he
said is more interesting but the devil
did and to make people believe he didn't
exist
[Music]
thank you Michael Steven you're up we're
gonna put six minutes on the clock and
please start because if I miss that
plane to London I went half here the end
of it from the bridegroom's mother now
in agreeing to participate in this
debate and stand on this side of the
argument I'm fully aware that many
people who choose incorrectly in my view
too to see this issue in terms of left
and right devalued and exploded terms as
I think they are will believe that I am
betraying myself in such causes and
values that I've espoused over the years
I've been given a huge grief already
simply because I'm standing here next to
Professor Peterson which is the very
reason that I am standing here in the
first place I'm standing next to someone
with whom I have no differences shall we
say in terms of politics and all kinds
of other things
precisely because I think all this has
got to stop this rage resentment
hostility hostility intolerance above
all this some with us or against us
certainty a grand canyon has opened up
in our world the fist year the crack
grows wider every day neither on each
side can hear a word that the other
shrieks and nor do they want to while
these armies and propagandists in the
culture wars clash down below in the
enormous space between the two sides the
people of the world try to get on with
their lives alternately baffled bored
and betrayed by the horrible noises and
explosions that I can all around I think
it's time for this toxic binary zero-sum
madness to stop before we destroy
ourselves
I'd better nail my colors to the master
before I get it further than this it's
only polite to give you a sense of where
I come from I all my adult life I have
been what you might call a left ear a
soft lefty a liberal of the most hand
ringing milksop milquetoast variety not
a burning man the barricades socialist
not even really a progressive worth the
name I've been on marches but I've never
quite dead waved placards banners am i a
loathed member of that band the an sjw a
a social justice warrior I don't think
highly of social injustice I have to say
but I character myself mostly as a
social justice warrior my intellectual
heroes growing up were Bertrand Russell
and G more liberal thinkers people like
that writers like iam Forster I believed
and I think I still do believe in the
sanctity of human relations of the
primacy of the heart and friendship and
love and common interest these are more
personal interior beliefs than they are
political exterior convictions more a
humanistic version of a religious
impulse I suppose I trust in humanity I
believe in humanity I think I do despite
all that has happened in the 40 years of
my adulthood I am soft and I can easily
be swept away by harder hearts and
harder intellects I'm sometimes
surprised to be described as an activist
but over time I have energetically
involved myself with what you might call
causes I grew up knowing that I was gay
well in fact from the very first I knew
I was gay I remember when I was born
looking up and saying that's the last
time I'm going out one of those I'm
I'm I'm Jewish I'm Jewish so I have a
natural I was horror of racism I
naturally I want racism misogyny
homophobia transphobia xenophobia
bullying bigotry intolerance of all
human kinds to end that's surely a given
amongst all of us the question is how
such a golden aim is to be achieved
my ultimate objection to political
correctness is not that it combines so
much of what I have spent a lifetime
loathing and opposing preaching us with
great respect piety self-righteousness
heresy hunting denunciation shaming
assertion without evidence accusation
Inquisition censoring that's not why I'm
incurring the wrath of my fellow
liberals by standing on this side of the
house my real objection is that I don't
think political correctness works I want
to achieve I want to get to the golden
Hill but I don't think that's the way to
get there
I believe one of the greatest human
failings is to prefer to be right than
to be effective and political
correctness is always obsessed with how
right it is without thinking of how
effective it it might be
I wouldn't class myself as a classical
libertarian but I do
relish transgression and I deeply and
instinctively distrust conformity and
orthodoxy progress is not achieved by
preachers and guardians of morality but
to paraphrase a organism yatin by madmen
Hermits heretics dreamers rebels and
skeptics I
I may be wrong I hope to learn this
evening I really do think I may be wrong
but I am prepared to entertain the
possibility that political correctness
will bring us more tolerance and a
better world but I'm not sure and I
would like this quotation from my hero
Bertrand Russell to hover over the
evening one of the painful things about
our time is that those who feel
certainty are stupid and those with any
imagination and understanding are filled
with doubt and indecision let doubt
prevail
[Music]
so great set of opening statements to
set the scene we're now going to go into
a round of rebuttals to allow each of
our presenters three minutes to reflect
on what they've heard and to make some
additional points we're gonna do that in
the same order that we had the opening
statement so Michelle you're up first
we'll put 3 minutes on the clock for you
so first I would say that I think that
the attempt to draw as I cottony between
individual rights and group rights is a
little bit misleading traditionally
there have been large groups of people
who have not been able to exercise their
individual rights and I think that a lot
of the claims that are being made on
behalf of what we politically cracked
types call marginalized groups are
claims that people who you know have
identities that have not traditionally
been at the center of our culture or
been at the top of our hierarchies have
as much right to exercise their
individual talents and realize their
individual ambitions right when we say
that we want more women in power or more
people of colors voices in the Canon or
in the curriculum or you know Pete
directing movies all of these things are
not because at least on my part I'm
interested in some sort of very crude
equity but because there are a lot of
people who have not traditionally been
able to realize themselves as
individuals that's what the women's
movement was that's what the civil
rights movement was that's what the gay
rights movement was that's in some ways
what the trans rights movement was I
mean far from a collectivist movement
this is kind of liberalism classical
liberalism push to its extreme right
these are people saying I have the right
to define my identity against the one
that was collectively assigned to me
finally I would say you know a lot of
the things that Stephen Fry said you
know in particularly his temperament
were probably in agreement
but this Inquisition this sensoria sness
on the one hand I'm sort of I see where
he's coming from
but I think it's a little bit virtual
right I mean nope who's who's really
censoring you I understand what it feels
like to feel censored I understand what
it feels like to be on the wrong side of
a Twitter mob or get a lot of nasty
comments but and that's a bad feeling
you know and it's a counterproductive
tactic but that's not censorship you
know and again it's it's especially
strange coming from a country where you
know the President of the United States
is trying to levy additional postal
rates on the owner of the Washington
Post you know in revenge for its
reporting and people who have kneeled to
protest police brutality at football
games have seen their careers explode
you know or people who have you know
women who have challenged mr. Peterson
has been hounded by threats and trolls
and misogynist invective
Jordan we're gonna have three minutes up
on the screen there please respond to
what you've heard well I guess I would
like to set out a challenge and somewhat
the same format is mr. Frey did to
people on the moderate left
I mean I've studied totalitarianism for
a very long time both on the left and on
the right in various forms and I think
we've done a pretty decent job of
determining when right-wing beliefs
become dangerous I think that they
become dangerous when they the people
who stand on the right evoke notions of
racial superior superior tea or ethnic
superiority something like that it's
fairly easy to draw a box around them
and place them to one side and necessary
and I think we've done a pretty good job
of that what I fail to see happening on
the left and this is with regards to the
sensible left because such a thing
exists is for the same thing to happen
with regards to the radical leftists
okay so here's an open question if it's
not diversity inclusivity and equity as
a triumvirate that mark out the to
excessive left and with equity defined
by the way not as equality of
opportunity which is an absolutely
laudable goal but as equality of outcome
which is how it's defined then exactly
how do we do mark eight the two extreme
left what do we do we say well there's
no such thing as the two extreme left
well that's certainly something that
characterized much of intellectual
thinking for the 20th century as our
high order intellectuals especially in
place like places like France did
everything they could to bend over
backwards to ignore absolutely
everything that was happening in the
catastrophic left world in the Soviet
Union and in Mao is China not least
we've done a terrible job of determining
how to demarcate what's useful from the
left from what's pathological and so
it's perfectly okay for someone to
criticize my attempts to identify
something like a boundary we could say
diversity inclusivity and equity
especially equity which is in fact
equality of outcome which is an
absolutely abhorrent notion if you know
anything about history you know that and
I'm perfectly willing to hear some
reasonable alternatives but what I hear
continually from people on the left
first of all as my opponents did to
construe every argument that is possibly
able to be construed on the axis of
group identification and it failed two
different to fail to help the rest of us
differentiate the reasonable left which
stands for the oppressed necessarily
from the pathological left that's
capable of unbelievable destruction and
what I see happening in the university
campus is in particular where the left
is absolutely predominate and that's
certainly not my imagination that's
that's well documented by perfectly
reasonable people like Jonathan height
is an absolute failure to make precisely
that distinction and I see the same
thing echoed tonight thank you
Michael give us your rebuttal
I feel freer already
I don't know what mythological
collective mr. Peterson refers to I'm
part of the left they're cantankerous
when they have a firing squad is usually
in a semi-circle part of the skepticism
of rationality was predicated upon the
Enlightenment project which says we're
no longer going to be subordinate to
skepticism to superstition we're gonna
think and we're gonna think well Thomas
Jefferson was one of the great arbiters
of rationality but he was also a man who
was a slave owner how do you reconcile
that that's the complication I'm
speaking about that's not either-or
that's not a collective identity Thomas
Jefferson believed in a collective
identity that is during the day at night
he gets in luther vandross songs went
out to the slave quarter and engaged in
sexual relations and had many children
with Sally Hemings his loins trumped his
logic and when he hit talks about
post-modernism I don't know who he's
talking about I teach post-modernism
it's kind of fun Jacques Derrida just to
say his name is beautiful Michel
Foucault Michele Foucault talked about
the insurrection of subjugated analogous
people who had been marginalized now
beginning to speak the subaltern this
Gayatri Spivak talks about it in
post-colonial theory the reason these
people grew up and grew into existence
and had a voice is because they were
denied as Miss Goldberg said our group
identity was forced upon us we were not
seen as individuals
Babe Ruth when he broke the home rule a
home run record he didn't bat against
all best ballplayers he bent it against
the best white ballplayers when it's
been rigged in your favor from the very
beginning it's hard for you to
understand how much you've been rigged
you're born on third base think you hit
a triple at the Toronto Blue Jays game
and here we are deriving our sense of
identity from the very culture that we
ignore look at the indigenous names and
the first nation names Toronto
Saskatchewan Winnipeg Tim Hortons
but I'll tell you there's an envy of the
kind of freedom and liberty that people
of color and other minorities bring
because we bring the depth of knowledge
in our body there's a kind of jealousy
event as the greatest living Canadian
philosopher Aubrey Drake Graham says
jealousy is just love and hate at the
same time and so for me I think it's
necessary I agree with mr. fry we
shouldn't be nasty and combative and yet
I don't see nastiness and
competitiveness from people I see them
making a desire to have their individual
identities respected when I get shot
down for no other reason that I'm black
when I get categorized for no other
reason than my color I am living in a
culture that refuses to see me as a
great individual
now it's it's interesting to hear that
there doesn't seem to be a problem
button yet I think we all instinctively
know that there is some kind of problem
there isn't censorship of course not in
the way that there is in Russia I've
been to Russia I have faced off with a
deeply homophobic and unpleasant man and
there's political correctness in Russia
it's just political correctness on the
right and that's what I grew up with
political correctness which meant that
you couldn't say certain things on
television couldn't say for example
on television because it was incorrect
to do so and as always the same reason
was that someone would appear and say
I'm not shocked of course no I'm not
shocked I'm not offended I'm offended on
behalf of others young impressionable
plastic minds the vulnerable and and
that's not good enough it's it's so
often people are saying see I don't mind
being called a or a or
everyway or mad person because I've got
mental health issues I don't mind people
insulting me and people say well that's
alright for you Steven because you know
you're strong well I I don't feel
particularly strong and I don't know
that I like being called a in a
kite particularly but I don't believe
that the advances in my culture that
have allowed me to marry as I have now
been for three years to someone of my
gender I don't believe they are a result
of political correctness and maybe
political correctness is actually just
some sort of live trout that the harder
we squeeze it the further it goes away
and and you will be saying I'm not
talking about this redness you're
talking about social justice with which
I agree with whether you want to call it
identity politics or the history of your
people the history my people my people
were slaves as well but the British were
slaves and Romans and the Jews were
slaves of the Egyptians all human beings
have been slaves at some point and we
all in that sense share that knowledge
of how important it is to speak up but
Russell Means who was a friend of mine
towards the end who founded the American
Indian Movement he said I forgot say
come in Indian or a Lakota Sioux or
Russell I don't care what you call me
it's how we treated that matters and so
I'm really addressing a
popular idea also actually in barrel
asker and the new PR said call me an
Eskimo it's obviously easier for you
because you keep mispronouncing in
nuclear it you know words do matter the
just then with a quick story
gay rights came in battling them because
we slowly and persistently knocked on
the door of people in power we didn't
shout we didn't scream people like Ian
McKellen eventually got to see the Prime
Minister and when the Queen signed in
the Royal Assent she has to for the bill
allowing equality of marriage she said
Lord you know I couldn't imagine this in
1953 really is extraordinary isn't it
just wonderful and handing it over now
it's a nice story and I hope it's true
but it's nothing to do with political
correctness it's to do with human
decency it's that simple
[Music]
so some some great rebuttals there
strong opening statements let's move now
into the the moderated cross-examination
portion of this debate and get both
sides engaging on some of the key issues
here and I think what we've heard here
is a bit of a attention let's draw it
out a bit more between the rights of
groups to feel included to have in your
words Michelle the opportunity for
individuality and a belief on the other
side that there's something at threat
here when these groups are overly
privileged through affirmative action or
other outcome oriented processes so
Michael to start with you why why isn't
there just harm that's done to groups by
privileges their group identity whether
it be a group identity of race or gender
and not immediately treating them as
individuals in the way that Jordan and
Steven would like to see you see them
first well a couple of things first of
all there was no arbitrary and random
distinction that people of color and
other minority groups made when I talked
about the invention of race the
invention of gender the invention of
group think that was not done at the by
those groups that have been so named as
Miss Goldberg said so first of all
you've got to acknowledge the historical
evolution of that reality and the
concept of group identity did not begin
with them it began with a group that
didn't have to announce its identity
when you are in control you don't have
to announce who you are so that many
white brothers and sisters don't see
themselves as one among many other
ethnicities or groups what they see
themselves as I'm just American I'm
Canadian can't you be like us can't you
transcend those narrow group
identifications and yet those group
identifications have been imprinted upon
them by the very people who now because
they're their group power has been
challenged let's make no mistake about
it there's a challenge I agree with mr.
Frey in a kind of nether land of how
sweet it would be to have a kingly and
queenly metaphor about how he got
resolved that ain't the real deal homie
and in the real world
and in the real world their stuff at
stake what's at stake our bodies what's
at stake or people's lives what's at
stake people are still being lynched
killed what's at stake people because of
their sexuality and their racial
identity are still being harmed so I'm
suggesting to you it's not that we are
against being treated as individuals
that's what we're crying for please
don't see me as a member of a group that
you think is a thug a
Annihilus the pathological person see me
as an individual who embodies the
realities were but I'll end by saying
this what Michelle said is extremely
important the people who have individual
rights didn't have to fight for them in
the same manner that people of color and
others have had to when mr. fried talked
about enslavement he named them read
Orlando Patterson's comparative history
of race and slavery over 28
civilizations the Greeks did not have
the same kind of slavery that Americans
said it was chattel slavery in Greece
you could buy back your freedom you
could teach the children of the people
who enslaved you and because of your
display of prodigious intellect you
could secure your freedom that was not
the case you were punished and killed
for literacy in America so my point
simply is this is that I am all for the
celebration of broader identities and I
think that often those who are
minorities and others are not celebrated
for the degree that we are in by saying
this in America we have the Confederate
flag I don't know if y'all are familiar
with that we have a confederate flag
we have white guys mostly in the south
but others as well flanked most
Confederate flags that are part of the
South that refused to cede its
legitimate conquests at the hands of the
north there has been a politics of
resentment every you talk my politics of
identity wearing that flag not the
American flag they are not American they
are celebrating a secession a move away
from America and a man named Colin
Kaepernick who is a football player
saying I want to bring beauty to that
flag has been denied opportunity so we
have to really set the terms of debate
in order before we proceed
good point
shorten let's have you jump in on this
idea of what you see is the pernicious
danger of groupthink when it comes to
ethnicity when it comes to gender why do
you think that's that's one of the
primal sins in your view of quote
political correctness well I think it's
one of the primal sins of identity
politics players on the left and the
right just to be clear about that
personally since this has got personal
at times I'm no fan of the identitarian
right I think that anybody who plays a
game a conceptual game where group
identity comes first and foremost risks
and exacerbation of tribalism it doesn't
matter whether it's on the left or the
right
with regards to the idea of group rights
well there's a fundamental and this is
something we've fallen into terribly in
Canada not least because we had to
contend with the threat of Quebec
separatism but the idea of group rights
is extraordinarily problematic because
the the the obverse of the coin of
individual rights is individual
responsibilities then you can hold an
individual responsible and an individual
can be responsible and so that's partly
why individuals have rights but groups
how do you hold a group responsible I
mean the whole idea is not it's not a
good idea to hold a group responsible if
first of all it flies in the face of the
idea of the sort of justice systems that
we've laid out in the West that are
essentially predicated first on the
assumption of individual innocence but
also on the possibility of individual
guilt not group guilt we saw what
happened in the twentieth century many
many times when the idea of group guilt
was it was it it was enabled to get a
foothold let's say in the polity and in
the justice system it was absolutely
catastrophic and so ok fine group rights
well what are you gonna how are you
gonna contend with the alternative to
that the opposite of that that where's
the group responsibility how are you
gonna keep how are you gonna hold your
groups responsible well we don't have to
talk about that because we're too
concerned with rectifying hypothetical
rectifying historical injustice is
hypothetical and otherwise and that's
certainly not to say that there weren't
any shortage of absolutely catastrophic
historical injustice that's not the
point the point is
how you view the situation at the most
fundamental level and group rights are
an absolute catastrophe in my opinion
but let's Michelle come in on that point
this is something you've written about
the idea that you know in identity
politics the identity the group is is
absolutely a valid part of the discourse
and individuals could and should be seen
and participating groups as they enter
into the Civic space I'm not sure that
we necessarily have to analogize from
individual you know the opposite of
individual rights is individual
responsibility I'm not sure that that
analogy necessarily holds for the groups
I mean in in the United States and one
of the things that I think it's
complicated about this discussion is
that we're talking about three very
different cultural contexts three
different histories three different kind
of legal regimes but in the United
States a great a huge part of our
politics has been groups struggling for
rights for their individual members
right I mean so women in the United
States you know seeking the right to
reproductive control of their body you
know african-americans in the United
States seeking redress from police
brutality or discrimination or simply
the kind of tendency in America of white
people to call the police whenever they
see an african-american in a place where
they don't think that they're supposed
to be and you simply I don't see how you
can contend with any of those social
problems if you see society as just an
ocean of atomized individuals you know
and I just again I I don't think there's
anything pernicious about people banding
together on the basis of their common
identity to seek redress for
discrimination and exclusion I mean I
think that that is everything that's
best about our democracy that is the
definition of progress and so again I
just I keep stumbling with the idea that
this is
how tyrannical or that way lies
Stalinism and you know a lot of times
people who are opposed to political
correctness talk about the concept of
category creep or say no no
yeah category creep which is a concept
that was originated by I believe in
Australian academic and it's basically
kind of a failure to draw distinctions
right so that you kind of can't see the
difference between say a KKK Grand
Wizard and a conservative like say ben
shapiro
or you know that you kind of see
everybody to your right as you know
fascist sexist to tala terry and
intolerable and i think that that is a
real thing that happens in part because
you know undergraduates often thinking
broad and slightly overwrought
categories I know I did when I was when
I was a kid yeah maybe still do but but
I hear a lot of category creep in again
the argument against political
correctness or against seeking group
redress the idea that kind of that way
lies dehumanization or you know that
you're kind of one minute you're acid
Steven come in on this part of your
opening remarks you're a category creep
Stephen respond to that
it's nice I'm still very lost about why
we aren't talking about political
correctness we're talking about politics
and that's fine and I share you know I
share exactly what you think about it
I'm not an enemy of identity politics
per se I could obviously see where it
goes wrong and where it's annoying let's
be empirical about this how well is it
working for you in America at the moment
not well at all really easy I you can
ask me in a moment the reason the reason
the Trump and brexit in Britain and all
kinds of nativists all over Europe is
succeeding is not the triumph of the
right it's the catastrophic failure of
the left it's our fault
we absolutely my point is not that I've
turned to the right or anything like
that or that I'm nice and fluffy I want
everybody to be decent I'm saying
political correctness resist fight if
you have a point of view fight it in the
proper manner using democracy's it
should be not channels of Education not
language you know it's so silly there's
a chess rule you know in chess the best
move to playing chess is not the best
chess move it's the move your opponent
least wants you to play at the moment
you're being recruiting sergeants for
the right but by knowing and upsetting
and instead of fighting either fighting
or persuading but political correctness
is a middle course that simply doesn't
work well first of all points you said
the empirical and the empirical as far
as I know the word means that which can
be verified to falsify through the
senses exactly so if we look at it in an
objective way the the reality is that
people don't have equal access to the
means to articulate in a very moment
you're talking I'm talking about the
empirical results of this political
attitude I understand that but my point
is simply this I'm suggesting to you
that people use the weapons at hand now
it was a brahim Joshua Heschel of the
rabbi who said everybody's not guilty
but everybody's responsible right that's
a distinction there everybody clearly is
not guilty but what's interesting look
at the flipside if you have benefited
from 300 years of holding people in
servitude thinking that you did it all
on your own why can't these people work
harder let me see for 300 years you
ain't had no job so the reality is for
300 years you hold people in the bands
you hold them in subordination you
refuse to give them rights then all of a
sudden you free them and say you're now
individuals not having the skills not
not having skills
reach up to about America first of all
I'm some of the American society first
of all I'm so about the northern
hemisphere I'm come on every society
where enslavement has existed but I'm
speaking specifically of the repudiation
of individual rights among people of
color in America who were denied the
opportunity to be individuals so I see I
obviously an ideal and I think Michelle
Goldberg does too
agree with the emphasis on individuals
what we're saying to you is that we have
not been permitted to be individuals we
have not been permitted to exercise our
individual autonomy and authority and
the refusal to do so to recognize me as
an individual means when you roll up on
me and I'm a 12 year old boy in a park
and you shoot first in ways you do the
black hands that you don't do the white
kids you are not treating that person as
an individual if we're living in a
society where women are subject to
aberrant forms of horrid patriarchal
sexist and misogynist behavior you're
not acknowledging the centrality of the
individuality of women you are treating
them according to a group dynamic and if
we if we get beyond the ability of
people on the right to understand the
degree to which they have operated from
the basis of benefit from group identity
without having said I am by saying this
the great American philosopher Beyonce
knows saying that it has been said that
racism is so American that if you
challenge racism you look like you're
challenging America we are challenging
inequality we are challenging the
refusal to see me as an individual when
we overcome that have at it we're all
money goes for a moment that I've
benefited from my white privilege okay
so let's assume now that's fine yeah
well that's what you would say so so
let's say here let's get precisely this
okay was that in a very individual of
you let's get precise about this okay
it's good precise what degree is my
present present level of attainment or
achievement a consequence of my white
privilege and I don't mean sort've I
mean do you mean 5% do you mean 15% do
you mean 25% do you mean 75% and what do
you propose I do about it how about a
tax how about a tax that's like
specialized for me so that I can account
for my damn privilege you saw that great
don't write about it
now let's get precise about one other
thing okay we'll get precise about one
other thing concise yeah
precise yes and so if if we can agree
and we haven't that the left can go too
far which it clearly can't then how
would my worthy opponents precisely
define when the left that they stand for
has gone too far you didn't like equity
equality of outcome I think that's a
great marker but if you have a better
suggestion and won't sidestep the
question so let's figure out how I can
dispense with my white privilege and so
that you can tell me when the left is
gone too far since they clearly can and
that's what this debate is about about
political correctness it's about the
left going too far and I think it's gone
too far in many ways and I'd like to
figure out exactly how and win so the
reasonable left could make its
descendants again and we could quit all
this nonsense
do you mind if I answer see what I will
answer you but I just want to answer
Stephen Fry first because you talked
about you know this is how we got Trump
unless this is the failure of the left
and so I am you know I'm a journalist I
went to a ton of Trump rallies during
the campaign in different parts of the
country and you're right everywhere I
went I heard complaints about political
correctness you know far more than I
heard complaints about say NAFTA but
when you asked people what they meant by
political correctness you know they
called a woman they worked with girl and
she got mad at then and you know they
could you know you couldn't in public
wonder aloud whether the President of
the United States was really a Muslim
you know they didn't like that they
couldn't make gay jokes anymore and so
on the one hand you're right and I've
written about this I think that when you
try to support you know that when people
have these prejudices and you try to
suppress them it can create a kind of
dangerous counter reaction but I also
think that you know what they were
reacting to again to go to go back to
the title this debate what they called
political correctness you know the fact
that they had to have this or bein black
president who they felt talked down to
them which is really what they meant I
don't see a way around that because that
is like I said that's progress
so to go to the clip to the question of
why the Left goes too far I mean to me
it's pretty easy violence and censorship
right I'm against violence and I'm
against censorship but I also looking
around the world right now when the idea
that there is this I understand again
there is like a problem of kind of
left-wing
annoyance right there's a lot of things
that kind of people random people on the
internet in particular are able to swarm
individuals and turn kind of stray
remarks into social media campaigns and
this is often you know completed with
political correctness and it's a bad
phenomenon I wish there was a way to put
an end to it I don't think there there
is no way to put an end to it simply by
having kind
reasonable liberals or reasonable
socialists denounce it because it's just
a kind of awful phenomenon of modern
life and if you want to have a debate
about whether social media is terrible
for democracy I will be on the gay side
but right now where I really disagree
well a couple of there's a couple places
I really disagree but the idea that the
radical left poses a greater threat than
the radical right when you see fat like
actual fascism ascendant all over the
world strikes me as something that you
can literally only believe if you spend
your life on college campuses so Mike I
want to come to you on those Gregg
Michele on Jordans point about how does
he in a sense get an equal voice in this
debate back if it is implied that his
participation brings with it this
baggage of white privilege that doesn't
allow him to see clearly the issues that
are before us but that is to be
complicit in the very problem itself
terminologically your beginning at a
point there's already productive and
controversial you're saying how can he
get his equality back who are you
talking about
Jordan Peterson trending number one on
Twitter
Jordan Peterson internationals in an
international bestseller I want him to
tweet something out about me in my book
Jordan Peterson right this is what I'm
saying to you why the rage bruh you're
doing well but you're a mean man white
man and you're gonna get us right
I have never seen so much wine and
snowflake King there's enough whining
here to start a vineyard and what I'm
saying to you
empirically and precisely when you ask
the question about white privilege the
fact that you ask it in the way you did
dismissive pseudo-scientific
non-empirical and without justification
a the truth is that white privilege
doesn't act according to quantifiable
segments it's about the degree to which
we are willing as a society to grapple
with the ideals of freedom justice and
equality upon which is base number two
was interesting to me you're talking
about not having a collective identity
what do you call a nation are you
Canadian are you Canadian by yourself
are you an individual are you part of a
group when America formed its union it
did so in opposition to another group so
the reality is is that those who are
part of group identities and politics
denied the legitimacy and validity of
those groups in the fact that they have
been created thusly and then have
resentment against others all I'm asking
for is the opportunity that this
quotation you talk about the difference
between equality of outcome and equality
of opportunity that's a state and
retried argument hackneyed phrase
derived from the halcyon days of the
debate over affirmative action are you
looking for outcomes that can be
determined equally or are you looking
for opportunity if you free a person
after a whole long time of oppression
and say now you are free to survive if
you have no skills if you have no
quantifiable means of existence what you
have done is liberated them into
oppression and all I'm suggesting to you
Lyndon Baines Johnson one of our great
president said if you start a man in a
race a hundred years behind it is
awfully difficult to catch up so I don't
think Jordan Peterson is suffering from
anything except an exaggerated sense of
entitlement and resentment and his own
privilege is invisible to him and it's
manifest with lethal intensity and
ferocity right here on stage
responded
well what I derived from that series of
rebuttals let's say it's twofold the
first is that saying that the radical
left goes too far when they engage in
violence is not a sufficient response by
any stretch of the imagination because
there are sets of ideas in radical
leftist thinking that led to the
catastrophes of the 20th century and
that was at the level of idea not at the
level of violent action it's a very
straightforward thing to say you're
against violence it's like being against
poverty it's like you know generally
speaking decent people are against
poverty and violence doesn't address the
issue in the least and with regards to
my privilege or lack thereof
I mean I'm not making the case that I
haven't had advantages in my life and
disadvantages in my life like most
people you don't know anything about my
background or where I came from it
doesn't matter to you because
fundamentally I'm a mean white man
that's a hell of a thing to say in a
debate
say Derrick berry brings I want to move
on to men and women the mean man white
comment was not predicated upon my
historical excavation of your past it's
based upon the evidence it really speak
and the denial of a sense of equanimity
among combatants in an argument
so I'm saying again you're a mean mad
white man and the viciousness is
evidence okay
where's that change the decks here let's
talk about another big factor of the
so-called politically correct movement
right now which is the me2 movement and
the extent to which we've seen this
resurgence this awakening around would
have been a horrible series of systemic
abuses and injustice towards women some
people though Michelle would say that
we're in a cultural panic now that the
pendulum has swung too far and that
there is a dangerous overreaction going
on where people's rights reputations due
process has been thrown to the wind how
do you respond to that well first people
started saying that within like two
weeks of the first Harvey Weinstein's
story is breaking right the minute
Harvey Weinstein stand and people action
men act started actually losing their
jobs over this right which was something
quite new that men with histories of
really serious predatory behavior were
suddenly losing their jobs you know
everybody had known about it for a long
time and there had been a sort of
implicit impunity and suddenly that was
taken away and it created this cultural
earthquake and as soon as it did it
created a lot of anxiety like what if
this goes too far you know I mean the
me2 movement was only a couple of months
old when my newspaper started running
columns from people saying why can't I
criticize me to which they were doing in
my newspaper so on the one hand gift of
course is due process important
obviously I think that when you look at
who has actually lost their jobs who's
actually lost their livelihoods I mean
look around it's people it's not people
in general on a you know McCarthy
estroux Moritz people who took their
dicks out at work it's people who you
know there
it's people who there was you know ten
tens of millions of dollars of
settlements and they lost their job for
four months and now they're staging
comebacks you know Bill O'Reilly is
about to get a TV show on a new network
so the idea that again this idea that
kind of like men everywhere feel like
they can't talk anymore and everybody's
walking on eggshells and I don't know
maybe that's true in in your offices
it's it's not true where where I live
you know and the me to movement has been
particularly active in in media you know
there was this this thing I don't know
how many of you guys read about the
shitty media Mentalist a woman wrote
about she started this sort of open
source document where women could lift
men and media that everybody knew about
but nobody had ever done anything about
and it very quickly went public and
there was something sort of disturbing
in it right you don't like these
anonymous accusations floating around
most feminists I know including myself
or kind of you know freaked out by it
and thought it was unfair to have
people's reputations held up like this
but if you look at what happened to the
men on the list nothing you know they
still have their jobs I know men on that
list I work with men on that list the
people who actually people have only by
and as far as I can think in media the
people who have lost their jobs and lost
their careers it's been four extremely
serious misbehavior documented by
multiple women who had corroborating
witnesses and so again I understand this
anxiety that relations between men and
women are changing of course that causes
a lot of cultural anxiety but I don't
know that it's rooted in anything real
they get his view on this are we
intercultural panic is the response
Michelle says commensurate with the
moment I'm very confused by this of
course I you know I recognize the best
reality of Weinstein and the monstrosity
of his behavior and it was shocking to
me I actually worked from script
doctoring because it's called and I
never had the bathroom toe
but for pretty obvious reasons but it's
you know grotesque and I can't imagine
how vile it must be for such a powerful
man and he was I used to play a game at
the Cannes Film Festival where these
years of power we're walking from one
hotel at them at the end there all the
way up to the Palais des festival you
would get 10 points every time you heard
the word Harvey and you'd usually a
10-minute walk you'd have a 300 points
because it was ER Harvey's got the
script Harvey's got it yep I've got a
meeting with Harvey at the Majestic in
the afternoon he was immensely powerful
and I think that's obvious that someone
in that position abusing and threatening
and hindering the livelihood of women is
is grotesque and in the extreme but I
have to tell you there is genuine
feeling amongst many people I know that
that we can't speak our minds we can't
actually speak to the true nuance the
true depth of sexual romantic feeling
between men and women it's not a subject
I'm absolutely expert on but it counts
between men and men as well though I
know when it's men and men you might say
well that's different because they're
women have had a different experience in
history and I don't want to enter that
particular feel but I would say that
there is real fear in my business which
is where this all started
show business acting and so on yeah
people are rather afraid to speak about
a piece of you know publicity that's
come out or a statement that's been made
you just go yep absolutely and wait for
the people that leave the room before
you can speak honestly with your friends
and that's I've never experienced that
in my entire 60 years on this planet
this this feeling that and I'm not
characterizing feminists as as in East
German but it's like that the Stars
you're listening you better be careful
they're listening and that's a genuine
feeling I'm saying that my hand of my
heart I'm not saying it to make a point
other than the fact that it's true and
it's worrying but the sexual
misadventures and horror experience is
worrying - so the two worries
they're not solved let's bring out
Jordan on this because you've written
and commented about a lot well I think
I'm going to point out two things again
the first is that my question about when
the right when the left goes too far
still hasn't been answered and then the
second thing I'm going to point out is
that you know it's conceivable that I am
a mean man you know I mean maybe I'm
meaner than some people and not as mean
as others I think that's probably more
the case but I would say the fact that
race got dragged into that particular
comment is a better exemplar of what the
hell I think is wrong with the
politically correct left and anything
else that could have possibly happened
[Applause]
imagine the hurt the anxiety the insult
that you might genuinely fill according
to what I felt was an appropriate
comment of description at the moment of
its expression but imagine now those
hurt feelings and went okay you feel
great you feel great about it's really
different I'm not a victim I'm not hurt
your pause okay you wouldn't be a victim
so what's interesting is that whatever
non-traditional feelings of empathy you
endure at this particular point the
point is imagine then the horrors that
so many other others have had to put up
with for so long when they are refused
to acknowledge their humanity now I take
your point seriously so you're let me
let me finish let me finish so let me
spend to me let me finish so you're not
my Inquisition er okay what I'm saying
to you is that when you said you were
upset that I added the element of race
there right when I said mean mad white
man well what's interesting is that you
may have felt that you were being
ascribed a group identity to which you
do not subscribe you may have felt that
you were being unfairly judged according
to your particular race you may have
felt that your individual identity was
being besmirched by my rather careless
characterization of you all of which
qualifies for a legitimate you know
response to me but also the point we've
been trying to make about the refusal to
see our individual existence as women as
people of color as first Asian people in
the light my point simply has been the
reason I talked about race in that
particular characterization because
there's a particular way in which I have
come to a city I don't know if there are
a lot of black people out here not sure
but I constantly come to places and
spaces that are not my natural habit
and other than intellectual engagement
and the love and the fury of rhetorical
engagement yes but I often go into
hostile spaces where people will not
vote in favor from my particular
viewpoint because I'm interested as an
individual of breaking down barriers so
that people can understand just how
complicated it is so what I'm saying to
you is that I would invite you in terms
of the surrender of your privilege to
give you a specific specific response
come with me to a black Baptist Church
come with me to a historically black
college come to me to an to an
indigenous or First Nations community
where we're able to engage in some of
the it lovely conversation but also to
listen and hear and when I added race to
that I was talking about the historical
events in ability to acknowledge others
pains equally to the one that they are
presently enduring so human being well
I've seen the sorts of things that
you're talking about I happen to be an
honorary member of an indigenous family
so don't tell me about what I should go
see with regards to oppression you don't
know anything about me you ask my
question I gave you a smile yeah you
gave me a generic response in generic
raises taste or sports Jordan Peterson I
would like for you to come with me
Michael Eric Dyson to a black Baptist
Church you've been otherwise I would be
happy to do that okay all right I'm
gonna hook you up I'm gonna hook you up
and make sure that happen one more quick
round then we're gonna go to closing
statements and assume for I want to get
your response to why you know a
generation from now looking back on this
debate we're not going to see this quote
so-called politically correct movement
in the same way let's say that we now
understand the positive contributions of
the civil rights movement that that was
a movement that advanced a series of
ideas about human dignity people who
previously didn't have that dignity
we're now having another debate another
social Veda about different groups and
communities that are we're trying to
convey a sense of new dignity to them
why why won't this be in a sense looked
back upon as something positive a
generation from now I think people will
look back on this debate and and wonder
why political correctness wasn't
discussed
[Music]
I said it I said it slippery I mean
interesting to hear talk about raising
about gender and about because he and
it's something that I've thought about a
lot and I can learn a great deal about
but that's not why I came to this debate
I was interested in what I've always
been interested in the suppression of
language and thought the closing down
the rationalist idea that seems
beguiling that if you limit people's
language it may somehow teach them a
different way of thinking something that
would have delighted the inventors of
George Orwell's new speak for example
and it seems to me it's just implausible
it doesn't it doesn't work and that's
what I mean by empirical it doesn't
stand an empirical test it isn't
experientially validated as we see from
the political landscape now and I worry
that we may in the future so I I'm so
disappointed that the subject has just
revolved around academia which was
predictable because that's the sort of
crucible in which these elements are
mixed but even more disappointed that
really I haven't heard from Michelle or
or from Professor Dyson as to what they
think political correctness is because
what they've talked about is basically
saying progress in our view is progress
well I agree that's you know yeah so it
is - and good on progress but how is it
you're saying political that what we
call it is the greatness you call
progress that's what you're supposed to
be arguing I want to know what you mean
by political correctness well you know
the reason a few months ago right you
contacted me asked if I wanted to do a
debate about identity politics and then
you presented me with this resolution
and I said well there's like a lot of
things that people call political
correctness that I'm not going to defend
but then I realized who I was debating
and and and saw that there was a lot of
things that you Jordan Peterson called
political correctness that I call
progress and and to some extent you to
Stephen Fry you know when you talk about
it being
outrageous to tear that we're not
outrageous I won't forward to your mouth
but that we shouldn't be tearing down
statues of kind of notorious racists
that we should just instead be throwing
eggs at them you know so those sorts of
things if you call them political
correctness I call them progress now
this feeling of being silenced which I
understand although it seems very vague
right you kind of are not quite putting
your finger on who is silencing you
except for a vague fear that if you say
something untoward you're going to be
the subject of I'm not sure
shaming but by what by the advancing
that's the point here what I'm saying is
that it's it's a feeling it's a feeling
that is this sort of intangible result
of on right now you've all seen the sort
of show trial thing where the person
then apologizes I have so much to learn
about sexual politics I am really sorry
that signed a lawyer crossed out the
name of the person it's it's real
mistake of our left is that we
underestimate the right the right isn't
as stupid as we'd like them to be if
only they were if only there weren't so
cunning so sly so smart so aware of our
shortcomings and and I just fear that
political correctness is a weapon that
they value that the more were the more
we tell the world how people should be
treated how language should be treated
what words are acceptable what attitudes
are acceptable what HR meeting is going
to tell you in a long pull appointed
list about how you look at people all of
this is is meat and drink to bad people
to malefactors to bad actors I'm not
coming myself as one of those bad actors
in that sense I mean bad actors in the
other sense
so there are like I said there are a lot
of ways in which I agree with you
although I kind of I would like to hear
I need to turn it back on you I would
like to hear you say you know what are
the words that have fallen into
disrepute that we think that you think
we should be resurrecting right um you
to me this is this area of like hotly
contested social change right now where
a lot of people have gone into disuse
it's very often phrases jargon istic
slogans heteronormative cisgendered
those kind of things that they're just
an insult you know imagine you're a
young student arriving University and
someone's bombarding you with this
preposterous hermeneutical nonsense from
from from misread textbook so misread
Foucault and they say duh
and so on because yeah yeah I you know I
was at Cambridge England doing it we had
a French phase and there's value with
that it's an interesting game and it is
it's a place to I think I should just
really say that the ghost hovering over
for me is it's a letter Oscar Wilde
wrote and he said to Bozize love you
said the fact that you didn't get the
degrees is nothing but you never
acquired what is sometimes called the
Oxford manor and I'll say for that the
university manner he said Oscar said I
take that to mean the ability to play
gracefully with ideas I think that's
disappearing from our culture I think
it's
[Music]
it's hard to be the self-deprecating
English Menace
no idea
but no no I got a pretty good idea here
today but what's interesting I don't
recall in all of you all of us have
studied history
I don't recall these debates about
political correctness happening when
people who were in power in absolute
power unquestioned power political
career is Right political correctness
becomes an issue and what I mean by that
is people who used to have power
who still have power but think they
don't who get challenged on just a
little bit of what they have and don't
want to share toys in the sandlot of
life so all of a sudden it becomes a
kind of exaggerated grievance now the
things you names the bullet points and
the cisgender and the heteronormativity
and the hetero patriarchy and the
capitalist resurgence and the
insurrection of subjugated knowledge is
to give Foucault some more love or the
der ideon deconstruction all that stuff
the French phase is still going on with
the French frys in America what's
interesting is that I didn't hear many
complaints of political correctness at
the height of the dominance of one group
or another but when Martin Luther King
jr. who argued for group identity as a
black person to provide an opportunity
for individual black people to come to
the fore they began to make that claim
oh not any color political correctness
you're siding with those who are against
free speech you're siding with those who
don't want me as a white person to be
recognized in my humanity and what I
mean by political correctness is the
kind of politics of resultant modes that
are articulated by various holders of
power at certain levels at various
levels that one of the beautiful things
about Foucault that I take as opposed to
Max Weber is that Foucault said power
breaks out everywhere I would think a
person who's critical of political
correctness like you would appreciate
this as opposed to Max Weber who said
power is over there in a hierarchical
structure where subordination is the
demand Foucault said no power breaks out
even among people who are in
disempowered so you can hurt somebody in
your own
mmunity what's more politically
incorrect than a black Baptist preacher
identifying with the first century
Palestinian Jew and still loving atheist
what's more politically incorrect than a
black intellectual going on Bill Maher
and defending his ability to continue to
have this show despite using the n-word
i sir
believe in a politically incorrect
version when I go as a black Baptist
preacher to chastise my fellow believers
about their homophobia that goes over
like a brick cloud when I come into it
arenas like this I understand that my
back is up against the wall but I think
come sit over here let's say I want to
sit on your lap but what I say don't get
excited but what I'm saying
I see how you've been looking at this so
what was it
what's interesting is that when we look
at the way in which we have societies in
a free Canadian Society of the free
American society when I look at what is
seen as political correctness it to me
has been a mass of jumble that has been
carved together out of the politics of
resentment that powers once held no
longer are held freedoms once exercised
absolutely must now be shared so I I am
in agreeance with both of my gentleman
to my right who believe that political
correctness has been a scourge but not
necessarily the way you think so
I think it's been a scourge because
those who have been the deployers of
power and the beneficiaries of privilege
have failed to recognize their
particular way and at the end of the day
I think that those of us who are free
citizens of this country and of America
should figure out ways to respect the
humanity of the other to respect the
individual existence of the other but
also respect the fact that there have
been barriers placed upon particular
groups that have prevented them from
flourishing that's all I mean well said
I gotta get before we got a closing
statement some final words on this topic
to Michelle and then you Jordan part of
the frustration here is that I think
that both of you have radically
different ideas of what we're talking
about when we talk about political
correctness it seems to me that you're
talking about politically correctness
you mean this kind of feeling of anxiety
that a lot of people feel because we all
live now in this terrible crowdsource
panopticon when you worry that any stray
phrase that you use will be if any stray
phrase you utter might be used to defame
you right and I think that a lot of
people feel that anxiety I disagree that
that is something that is being solely
kind of perpetrated against you know
institution kind of Oscar Wilde and
figures by I sensorial you know some
stories left-wing horde because it's
coming from all directions right this
phenomenon which sucks is all over the
place I mean I get it when I write
something critical of the way
that the IDF behaved in Gaza
you know if it's coming at everyone and
I think that there is there's a way in
which when it comes at a certain sort of
figure and there's a certain set of
complaints and you feel unjustly
criticized and you feel silenced which
again I think is really different than
being silenced you call it political
correctness and I would like the culture
also to be more you know freewheeling I
think one solution you know you're not
going to kind of get the left to I don't
know they can't kind of put an end to
this because it is much more of a mob
social media phenomenon than it is kind
of some dicta coming up from on high and
so one really the only way to break
through it is to say what you are what
you say that you're afraid to say right
I mean that's the only way to sort of
pop this bubble or kind of end this and
this anxiety or at least defuse it a
little bit whereas again what I hear mr.
Peterson talking about as political
correctness is something much more broad
and much more kind of funded much much
more fundamental to social change and
you're talking about
you know you want me to define or one of
us to talk about when the Left goes too
far and if I'm you know I certainly
don't want to be a woman putting words
in your mouth but if if I hear you
correctly what you're saying is that you
want me to kind of renounce Marxist
categories or to do I want you to define
with the left goes too far you can do it
any way you want I like I said I think
that the left goes too far into when it
is violent or censorious when it tries
to shut people down or no platform them
or when it acts violently I I'm not sure
what you expect some behind that
something deeper how how I'd like you to
contend with the set of left-wing ideas
that produced all the left-wing
pathologies of the 20th century and to
define how you think
standard left-wing thinking which has a
value value I can place where goes too
far since it obviously does have the
right gone too far
of course the right hospital tell us how
well how about Auschwitz I mean that's
right what else more recently what is
gone wrong with the right I'm I don't
like identity politics players at all I
don't care whether they're on the left
of the right I've been lecturing about
right-wing extremism for 30 years I'm no
fan of the right despite the fact that
the left would like to paint me that way
because it's more convenient for a bomb
so far recently well where it's
threatening to go too far and
identitarian Europe that's for sure it's
gone too far in Charlottesville it went
too far in Norway like hollow the list
do you want and why am i required to
produce that to show you that I don't
like so your assumption your assumption
is somehow that I must be on the side of
the right it's like look the right
hasn't occupied the humanities and the
Social Sciences it's as simple as that
for me if they had I'd be objecting to
them say that again that in any event
the right has not occupied the social
sciences and the humanities and the left
clearly has the statistical evidence for
that is overwhelming sir what about IQ
testing in terms of genetic inheritance
I'm sorry we're here to talk about
political correctness and we've done a
damage on example
redeem ourselves with our closing
statements I'm going to put three
minutes on the clock we're gonna go in
the reverse order of the opening so
Stephen Europe first there we are hide
behind the lexan in that case well I've
been fascinated by this conversation
there's been an enormous clash of
cultures in in the conversation we've
had you know classic if I can call it
Huck stirring snake-oil pulpit talk
which is it's a it's a mode of discourse
it's a rhetorical style that I find
endlessly refreshing and vivifying but
I'm I'm not sure that we actually
focused on on the point in question and
my objection has always been towards
orthodoxies I'm I'm a heterodox and and
contrary and then I can't help myself
and I think there's been an
underestimation of the fact that
language does affect people it does make
the young in particular as they're
starting out on their educational or
their work careers it makes them it
makes them very anxious it makes them
very angry very upset very alienated to
feel that they don't know anymore how to
operate in the world how to engage in
relationships how to think honestly so
they they treat more and more to their
own mini groups and I think that's
dangerous and unhappy for society I
think it's reflected in in the paucity
of cinema and literature and art and the
culture generally is that there's a fear
that's pervading it and while people can
talk to academia and say you should come
see our lessons our lectures are open
and free and ideas are exchanged I'm
sure that's true I'm sure it's true but
I don't think we should underestimate
how much this feeling is prevalent in
the culture of this strange paradox that
the Liberals are a liberal in their
demand for liberality they are exclusive
in their demand for inclusivity they are
homogenous in their demand for
heterogeneity they are somehow unda
verse in there
call for diversity you can be diverse
but not diverse in your opinions and in
your language and in your behavior and
that's a terrible pity so I say that I'm
sorry that it got a bit heated in in
places because I was hoping it wouldn't
I was hoping would be a shining example
of how peoples of all different kinds of
political outlooks can speak with humor
and wit and a lightness of touch as GK
Chesterton said angels can fly because
they take themselves lightly and I think
it's very important for us who are
privileged to all four of us privileged
to be here to be asked to be here to
take ourselves a little bit more likely
not to be too earnest too pompous too
serious and not to be too certain it's
it's a time I think for really engaging
emotionally fulfilling passionate and
positive doubt that's what I would urge
[Music]
Michael I'm going to put three minutes
on the clock for you please your closing
I'm used to not exclusively white men
who see black intelligence articulated
at a certain level feeling a kind of
condescension if I came up here mister I
was saying of the day but but a kind of
verbal facility automatically assumed to
be a kind of hucksterism and snake oil
salesmen I've seen that I get it I get
hate letters every day from white
brothers and sisters who are mad I'm
teaching their children you're just
trying to co-opt our children you're
trying to corrupt them yes I'm trying to
corrupt them so they will be uncorrupted
by the corrupt ability that they have
inherited from a society that refuses to
see all people as human beings the death
threats I have received constantly for
simply trying to speak my mind it's not
about a politically correct society that
is open minded and that has some
consternation about my ability to speak
I'm getting real live you want empirical
death threats that talk about killing me
setting up to hurt me and harm me simply
because I choose to speak my mind I
agree with my Contreras and my
compatriots that we should argue against
the vicious limitation and recursions
against speech I believe that everybody
has the right to be able to articulate
themselves and the enormous privilege we
have to come to a spot in the space like
this means that we have that privilege
and we should be responsible for it
no matter where we go from here me and
brother Peterson will go to a black
Baptist Church imma hold him to that he
said it on national TV was on go to a
black Baptist Church and have an
enlightening conversation about the need
for us to engage in not only reciprocal
and mutual edification but criticism
even hard and tough criticism but in a
way that speaks to the needs and
interests of those who don't usually get
on TV whose voices are not usually
amplified whose ideas are not usually
taken seriously and when they get to the
upper echelons of the ability of a
society to express themselves they are
equally subject to vicious recrimination
and
hurtful resistance his old story about
the pig and the pig and the chicken
going down the street and said let's
have breakfast the chicken just has to
give up an egg the pig has to give up
his ass
in order to make breakfast we have often
been the pigs giving up our asses to
make breakfast let's start sharing them
asses with everybody else
[Applause]
so I'm not here to claim that there's no
such thing as oppression unfairness
brutality discrimination unfair use of
power all of those anyone with any sense
knows that hierarchical structures tilt
towards tyranny and that we have to be
constantly wait 'fl to ensure that all
they are isn't power in tyranny it's
interesting just here Foucault referred
to it's unfortunate but it's interesting
you know because Foucault like his
French intellectual conference
essentially believed that the only basis
upon which hierarchies were established
is power and that's part of this
pernicious politically correct doctrine
that I've been speaking about
when a hierarchy becomes corrupt and the
only way to ascend it is to exercise
power that's essentially the definition
of a tyranny but that doesn't mean that
the imperfect hierarchies that we have
constructed in our relatively free
countries which at least tilt someone
towards competence and ability as
evidenced by the staggering achievements
of civilization that we've managed to
produce it doesn't mean that the
appropriate way of diagnosing them is to
assume without reservation unit
dimensionally that they're all about
power and as a consequence everyone who
occupies any position within them is a
tyrant or a tyrant in the making and
that is certainly the fundamental claim
of someone like Foucault and it's part
and parcel of this what would you call
it this ideological catastrophe that's
political correctness I'm not here to
argue against progress I'm not here to
argue against equality of opportunity
anyone with any sense understands that
even if you're selfish you're best
served by allowing yourself access to
the multiplicities talents of everyone
and to discriminate against them for
arbitrary reasons unrelated to their
competences it's abhorrent that has
nothing to do with the issue at hand
it's it isn't that good things haven't
happened in the past and should continue
to happen that's not the point the point
is the point my compatriot Frye
which is what we can agree on the
catastrophe and we can agree on the
historic inequity but there's no way I'm
going to agree but political correctness
is the way to address any of that and
there's plenty of evidence to the
contrary some of which I would say was
displayed quite clearly tonight
so I think one of the irresolvable
issues that we're all coming up against
is the role of feelings right Stephen
Fry has kind of asked us to recognize
and empathize with this feeling of being
silenced of being threatened and I do
and I get it you know I feel it
sometimes too and my columns I hate it
when I write something that then you
know gets a kind of irate Twitter mob
after me but if say I stood up here and
said you know recognize how threatened
so many women feel when for example
that's the kind of you know one of the
best-selling and most prominent
intellectuals in the world right now
says in an interview that maybe the me
to movement has shown that this whole
experiment of men and women working
together is just not working or you know
maybe if women don't want to be don't
want the workplace to be sexualized they
shouldn't be allowed to wear makeup
right so you though well Google
interview Google it yeah well so so
right it's on say like you know I feel
threatened right then I'm being kind of
politically correct and hysterical so
much of the debate about political
correctness but there's one group that
really does think it's feelings should
be accommodated and that is what we keep
coming up against is that you know
there's a group of people and it to some
extent I'm part of it that feels
uniquely that our feelings of being
silenced marginalized censored that
those feelings need to take primacy that
we can kind of you know sneer when these
other groups asked for us to take
seriously their feelings of being
threatened or their feelings of being
marginalized then we caught we call that
we called those demands political
correctness and I would finally say that
I think there's a fair amount
research that people become more
close-minded more tribal when they feel
threatened when they feel that their
group identity is at stake and so as
much as you know you want to blame the
left for the rise of the right I think
that when you kind of get the rise of
the right the rise of people who are
questioning the fundamental ideals of
pluralistic liberal democracy the more
those views are mainstreamed the more
people I think are going to shut down in
response because people are really
scared
well first of all I think on behalf of
all the debaters I think we want to
thank the audience you were engaged
we're mostly civil and not so civil in
ways I think that we enjoy it so I think
on behalf of the debaters everybody
thank you audience this was a
challenging topic you did a great job a
big thank you to our debaters you know
it's one thing all of these four give
regular speeches but it's a very
different thing to come on infront to
stage in front of a live audience a
large television audience and have your
ideas contested in real time and again
to all four of you thank you for
accepting our invitation to come here
[Music]
so a few final notes first thank you to
the OREA foundation the Munk family for
once again convening us here at Roy
Thompson Hall we're gonna do it all
again this coming autumn all of you have
a ballot here in the hall you can vote
on your way out we'll have those results
for you just probably after 9:15 and
let's just quickly review where your
opinions stood at the beginning of
tonight's contest on the motion be it
resolved what I call political
correctness what you call political
correctness I call progress 36% agree
64% disagree and again we saw a large
percentage of you willing to change your
mind
87 percent so let's see how tonight's
cut and thrust affected your voting here
you've got your ballots and again to
those of you who are watching online we
are going to have all these results for
you on our social media feeds around
9:15
so enjoy the long weekend happy
Victorian to everyone thanks for coming
out to the month today's
[Music]
and Stephen Fry right now to get their
reactions to tonight's debate some hotly
contested moments here so it would be
curious to see what happens with the
audience vote over the course of the
next few minutes and also for those of
you watching online we have that hour
running pull that poll again was w w
month debates calm forward slash votes
so go there check out see how each of
these debaters did in terms of their
opening statements that are rebuttals
the moderated section and the closing
statements if we see any changes there
so again we're gonna go right now to
Stephen Fry Jordan Peterson get their
thoughts on how the evening played out
gentlemen thank you thank you discussion
with the online audience watching right
now just to get your reactions to the
debate and maybe just start with you
Jordan there were some heated moments
here did that that surprised you that
exchanges that you had with Michael Eric
Dyson well I wouldn't say it surprised
me well I suppose it probably did it
just seemed didn't seem like a very good
tactical move you know and I stand by
what I said I don't see any reason at
all that my racial identity needed to be
dragged into the discussion independent
of my personality proclivity I would say
what I just said to mr. Frye here is
that it was a pleasure sharing the stage
with him I've rarely heard anyone ever
deliver their convictions with such a
remarkable sense of passion and wit and
forbearance and erudition it was it was
really something yeah it's Steven geing
debate because in a sense we're trying
to mesh to different views here to
different worldviews one very focused
more on identity politics group identity
you in a sense having an argument really
more about the larger culture itself and
tenor and tone of the conversation was
being a little kind of scattergun really
and that bets got the gun and two
specific that I just taken very
literally the popular idea of
correctness is being a kind of control
of language and a shutting down certain
phrases or
introduction of others and and and the
the kind of day-to-day as I say human
resource departments of corporations and
that that sort of thing and so I was
slightly disappointed that it just
became a debate about race and about
gender and so on but that was I guess
natural and I still think that the fact
is I I I'm still a lefty but a soft one
I just don't have what I flap II squashy
in every sense
and and I realized that's not a
political point of view it is a personal
right and the the gap between the
personal and the political which is a
space you obviously very interested in
as a psychologist is one that is rarely
explored people are either so personal
that it has no application in the
outside world and the organization of
human affairs or they're so political
and so much to do with structure and
distinguish between hierarchies and
networks and so on that they forget the
individual and that's the space in which
the impassioned liberal lives and it's
not easy to do it because you often do
sound rather way thank you for coming me
just finally before I for you to both to
a well-earned drink anything left unsaid
Jordan any any point that you wanted to
make that you didn't feel you had the
time or the opportunity no great same
question to you see I know I think I got
across I mean there's so much you can
talk in that field and I I just wanted
to leave with the point that I do want
like everybody it's it's it's a no
brainer we want the world to be fairer
just a sweeter kinder but it's how you
get there and I felt I wasn't really
addressed okay well gentlemen thank you
both very much from our online audience
a big thank you also I know
- Jordan Peterson and Stephen Fry for
participating in yeah a debate with some
steaks on the table for sure thank you
gentlemen
see you never separate yeah but yeah
again online viewers we've now have
Michael Eric Dyson coming into the
camera range here with Michelle Goldberg
to get their reactions to the debate so
guys thank you for being part of this
you know with
it's a complicated subject it's got a
lot of different moving pieces and
elements I think we address some of the
constituent parts maybe start with you
Michelle was there something on stage
that you wanted to say that maybe we
didn't have the time or you didn't have
the opportunity you know now's your
chance you know I guess I if the only
thing I can think of is that maybe I
wish that we could have drilled down a
little bit more into the gender piece of
this and again to you know what we're
really arguing about particularly with
mr. Peterson and the kind of range of
progress or the range of feminist
progress that he considers political
correctness I think part of the
frustration is that him and Stephen Fry
are talking about and defending I think
a fairly discrete set of ideas with some
overlap you know and one of the
difficult things about political
correctness is it's a slippery term
that's deployed to talk about a whole
range of phenomenon yeah and closed-down
conversation and open up conversation
yeah how did you feel
Michael there are some points there some
you know points of sharp exchange we
appreciate that at the Munk debates I
mean this is not a place for for you
know shrinking wallflowers but any
unsaid thoughts any anything that you
want to put a point on now I think you
have to hold people intellectually
accountable and to deny some of the
things to Michelle that he said and to
present himself mr. Peterson in a
certain way without seeing some of the
abhorrent things he said about women and
other minorities I think demands an
engaged response to him and I think that
the idea itself as Michelle stated
repeatedly and and mr. Frey talked about
his frustration he said we talk about
everything but political correctness
well the reality is political
correctness resides
I mean rests upon some serious political
work in this culture in the Canada and
in America that needs to be done and
what I tried to in terms of giving a
brief genealogy we didn't have political
correctness as long as white straight
men were in charge there was no argument
about let's get this right but when
people who exercise power know
longer exercise absolute power still
predominant power then there's an
argument and I think Michelle's point
about gender about the workplace about
race about sexuality and the like I just
think that it was a necessarily vigorous
and sometimes sharply worded a debate
between so Michelle final word to you
well if you are curious about the quote
that I mentioned about you know maybe
this experiment with women and men
working together maybe it's not working
I mean please do google it it's an
interview advice again I know me and
Stephen me and Stephen Fry probably
could have sat on the same side of
another debate but again I feel like the
phrase political correctness has
expanded to cover a whole range of
challenges to I thought it was really
interesting how much people were talking
about their feelings because when when
women talk about their feelings right
that is politically correct excess and
right when one men talk about this
feeling that they can't empirically
define we should all I guess I don't
know change change and deference to that
okay guys great thoughts let's go get a
drink in the reception okay thanks
thanks again hey online viewers thank
you for being part of this Monk debate
as I mentioned these debates are
semiannual we'll have another one this
fall we've got a whole archive of past
debates on our website on a whole range
of topics going back over a decade now
and you can access those free by simply
becoming a member at ww monke debates
calm go to the basic membership it's
free and we have a rock-solid privacy
policy there we respect your privacy so
finally check us out on on Facebook a
thank you for the 26,000 new follows in
the last ten days we appreciate it
this debate will be archived on our web
site for the next while again for free
so share it with friends and family I'm
Roger Griffiths from downtown Toronto
Canada at the Munk debate on political
rectus see you again in the autumn take
care good night
you