Here's a summary that seems pretty valid after reading a bit about this discussion (not really debate).............
Peterson: “communist manifesto makes several mistakes and if we look at the data, capitalist economies actually help both the poor and the rich more than communist economies help either group.”
Zizek: “This is true, however we need to be able to acknowledge that there are still problems with a capitalist economy which will lead to doom if not solved, for example: ecological externalities. I am also concerned that happiness is a poor definition of the end goal for actions as this only motivates personal gains which is not necessarily good for society as a whole.”
Peterson: “I agree happiness is a poor measure for success and believe that following Judeo- Christian values – namely the idea that everyone should be treated as an individual and take individual responsibility - is a better model for a successful life. So in what way are you a Marxist? My definition of Marxism is someone who follows the communist manifesto as a better economic strategy for society than capitalism.”
Zizek: “I would say I’m Marxist because I share Marx’s concerns about the very real flaws in free market capitalism. I use the term Marxism in part to provoke a conversation. But if we were to use your definition of Marxism, I would not be one. Now my question: When you complain about post-modern Neo-Marxists you appear to be referring to the members of the liberal left that engage in identity politics, why do you describe that as Marxist?”
Peterson: “Because when Postmodernism was really gaining momentum in the 60s and then the atrocities of communism became apparent the post-modern philosophers appeared to pivot from a Rich vs Poor narrative to other forms of oppressor vs oppressed, but essentially the ideology is the same.”
Then they have questions.
Summary: they appear to have glossed over their main difference of opinion which appears to be as follows:
Zizek seems to think the biggest threat to society currently is the external bi products of unchecked capitalism.
Peterson seems to think the biggest threat to society at the moment is people losing faith in capitalism and attacking free thought through a narrative of oppressor vs oppressed.
Comments
(Old Spike)
Bad audio plus accent & lisp makes this unbearable to listen to.
(Old Spike)
Got a few good lolz from this snarky summary: https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/bj9znv/what-i-learned-at-the-debate-between-jordan-peterson-and-slavoj-zizek
(Old Spike)
Here's a summary that seems pretty valid after reading a bit about this discussion (not really debate).............
Peterson: “communist manifesto makes several mistakes and if we look at the data, capitalist economies actually help both the poor and the rich more than communist economies help either group.”
Zizek: “This is true, however we need to be able to acknowledge that there are still problems with a capitalist economy which will lead to doom if not solved, for example: ecological externalities. I am also concerned that happiness is a poor definition of the end goal for actions as this only motivates personal gains which is not necessarily good for society as a whole.”
Peterson: “I agree happiness is a poor measure for success and believe that following Judeo- Christian values – namely the idea that everyone should be treated as an individual and take individual responsibility - is a better model for a successful life. So in what way are you a Marxist? My definition of Marxism is someone who follows the communist manifesto as a better economic strategy for society than capitalism.”
Zizek: “I would say I’m Marxist because I share Marx’s concerns about the very real flaws in free market capitalism. I use the term Marxism in part to provoke a conversation. But if we were to use your definition of Marxism, I would not be one. Now my question: When you complain about post-modern Neo-Marxists you appear to be referring to the members of the liberal left that engage in identity politics, why do you describe that as Marxist?”
Peterson: “Because when Postmodernism was really gaining momentum in the 60s and then the atrocities of communism became apparent the post-modern philosophers appeared to pivot from a Rich vs Poor narrative to other forms of oppressor vs oppressed, but essentially the ideology is the same.”
Then they have questions.
Summary: they appear to have glossed over their main difference of opinion which appears to be as follows:
Zizek seems to think the biggest threat to society currently is the external bi products of unchecked capitalism.
Peterson seems to think the biggest threat to society at the moment is people losing faith in capitalism and attacking free thought through a narrative of oppressor vs oppressed.