GUEST BLOG: Hadley Grace Robinson-Lewis – 5 tactics to stop the alt-right from spreading hate and dividing the people

By   /   January 7, 2019  /   29 Comments

TDB recommends Voyager - Unlimited internet @home as fast as you can get

Jordan Peterson is coming to NZ in 2019. Instead of reacting in anger to his out of date views, let’s start a healthy debate.

Jordan Peterson is coming to NZ in 2019. Instead of reacting in anger to his out of date views, let’s start a healthy debate.

 

1. Never give them an excuse to cry “pc gone mad”

Don’t let them wind you up- it’s what they want.

 

2. Role-model inclusiveness not exclusiveness

The left is known for being inclusive. We need to be a safe and welcoming group for people from all walks of life.

 

3. Don’t become the persecutors

Persecuting people for their beliefs is what the left stand against.

 

4. Know your rights

When we know our power we don’t need to scream “racist” or “bigot” at right wing conservatives, even though it’s most probably true. The left have far better arguments supported by academic research and laws surrounding hate speech, let’s use them in the public arena. We are powerful beyond measure and need to use what’s around us.

 

5. Be kind

See the human being behind every individual on each end of the political spectrum.

Let’s persuade, convince and help people shed their hate instead of persecuting them and driving them further away from a safe and progressive society.

 

Finally, it’s super difficult to bite your tongue. I’ve had plenty of moments where I have verbally lashed out at people who say to me “Jacinda Ardern can’t be a PM and a mother”, “trans-women aren’t real women” or “Te Reo shouldn’t be taught in schools” (even though lashing out is 100% called for). I was demonised for being “too pc” and called “delusional”, these comments are the best the right can come up with. I’ve learned to never give people an excuse to discredit your beliefs through name calling. Instead of having a knee-jerk reaction we should argue in a calm manner and show them who we really are. 

It’s understandably hard to speak about issues that are close to our heart but it needs to be done. It’s a conversation we need to have.

We have a lot of work to do to create a safer society for everyone.

 

ABOUT HADLEY GRACE ROBINSON-LEWIS: I’m based in Ōtepoti and my iwi is Ngāi Tahu. I’m an RN, social activist and vice chair for NZNO/TR in the southern region. I’m passionate about psychotherapy, philosophy, charity, social activism and Māori health. My greatest achievement was raising $25,000 for a women’s refuge in Auckland with Habitat for Humanity.

***
Want to support this work? Donate today
***
Follow us on Twitter & Facebook
***

29 Comments

  1. e-clectic says:

    For all Peterson’s professed intellectual rigour and insistence that he tells the truth, he’s a climate change denier.
    He’s very welcome here but his standing as a scientist is suspect.

  2. Zack Brando says:

    I’ve listened to Jordan Peterson lectures and found them somewhat insightful. I’ve definitely learned a few things from Mr Peterson.

    Concerning economics and modern money mechanics, he probably doesn’t have much to contribute – but I’m sure he’d be the first to admit that.

    What’s your prob with the Peterson? Put up or shut up .. yeah!?

    • Sam Sam says:

      I’ll take this one. The fact is Lenin was a right wing deviation of the socialist movement. That Jordan Peterson missed this in his critique of Marxism. Peterson has, we have forgotten who mainstream Marxists where because they lost. We only remeber the guys that won, but if you go back to the period when mainstream Marxists was a thing you’ll find people like Anton Kannekoek who was head of education for the Marxist movement and one who Lenin later denounced as an infinite leftist. But Anton was one of the leading intellectuals of the actual Marxist movement. Rosa Luxembourg was another mainstream Marxist who was very critical of Leninism because of this opportunistic vanguard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonie_Pannekoek

      Jordan Peterson’s claim that radical leftists are going to exploit popular movements to seize state power and then use that state power to whip the population into a society that they choose, is wrong. That’s inconsistent as understood by mainstream lefties.

      From this point of view Peterson is a right wing deviation and Professor Michael Erik Dyson made rise point debating Peterson. Now when Peterson came back from the debate he took quite a different line in his work. He stopped apologising for the amount of male worshippers and embraced it. Peterson shifted character in May 2018 and now he’s become kind of libertarian. So now Jordan Peterson is very much acting in the mainstream. But liberalism has this kind of range that goes over anarchism. And now Jordan Peterson speaks of the need for workers and workers organisation. In my opinion Jordan Peterson is closer to the ethics of what socialism should be, rather than the greatest critic of radical leftists.

      • Zack Brando says:

        SAM, anyone reading your comment who is unfamiliar with Jordan Peterson would think he’s primarily concerned with topics such as Marxism and “radical leftists”.

        This is so far from reality, that in-my-opinion you should hang your head is shame. You deserve to be called out SAM and I’m calling you out.

        Sometimes The Daily Blog is great, other times the thinkophobic rhetoric is on par with NewsHub.

        • Sam Sam says:

          I’m hanging my head high. The only reason Micheal Erik Dyson lost that debate is because he wasn’t willing to go low. I’m not going to make that mistake. Because I like New Zealand just the way it is, cockie, out of the box. We are a melting pot. As long as no one kills no one in the name on some deity then there’s no problem. People from all walks of life can come to New Zealand and sit down over a nice meal and be nice every day. Why complicate that with philosophical politics.

          I’m happy to have Peterson, in fact I know he means well, but you’ve got to understand that he is the SOLE leader of an authoritarian movement with apostles everywhere who are not worthy of there dear leader.

        • Sam Sam says:

          @nick. The Soviet Union stole socialism then reconstructed bizarre systems of control and oppression. From that point on there was nothing like socialism, in the Soviet Union

          The real revolution according to Marxist doctrine is supposed to take place in the most advanced sector of modern industrial capitalism. Obviously that wasn’t the Soviet Union so there couldn’t be socialism in the Soviet Union, it was just justification for eliminating socialist institutions.

          After that comes the view that all of this is supposed to be socialism and why should communist parties take that view? The reason is I think communist parties want to exploit the morale force of socialism which is real in China today. It’s just regarded as a progressive morale force by associating there on morale destruction with the Ora of socialism and now Xi Jinping hopes to gain credit as Anne Marie Brady tweeted earlier today that Xi is using Mao style of signature which was previously punishable with jail, and former Chinese Prime Minster did go to jail according to her tweet.

          Now the west also wants to associate socialism with the brutality of the Russian state so to undermine socialism. So what we have now is to great world propaganda with Jordan Peterson being a recent user of, and for there own quite different reasons, and now claiming socialism, that the destruction of (insert pet peeve here, lost job, lost wife ect) that this destruction is socialism.

          Now it’s very difficult to brake out of the hold of major world propaganda industries when they agree, they agree for different reasons and then became doctrine and dogma. The answer is communism has nothing to do with mainstream Marx or left libertarianism because it didn’t, it’s just the destruction of organised social institutions. All this maybe true or it maybe false, but if true I don’t think you would have any difficulty expressing the fact that destruction in your own life and community is an ongoing struggle. I don’t think we should be deterred by fascists either just because they happen to condemn the Soviet Union.

          Now we should also recognise that Michael Erik Dyson isn’t a socialist Marxist revolutionary, he’s actually running counter to revolution. He is against placing power in the hands of a highly authoritarian in Jordan Peterson. Granted he is highly anti social, Michael dismisses popular revolutionaries and wants to bring power back into the ghettos of America. There’s nothing wrong with that, his arguments need work but there’s nothing wrong with it. Since then there isn’t a shred of evidence that there’s socialism in Americas ghettos but of course every one will call universal health and education socialism. But they also call it democracy, Yknow.

          The west of course deny they’re the biggest propaganda machine in the world and of course they’re all laughing at democracy. They love doing that because it’s away of defaming socialism. So if you think that the fall of the Berlin Wall is a hit to socialism then you also think democracy is falling too. It’s only when it gets filtered through commercial media then it’s a hit on socialism and not democracy.

          There’s absolutely no reason to play these games whether it’s Jordan Peterson or what ever, expose it for the fraud it is.

      • Nick J says:

        Two things Sam.

        If you listen carefully to Peterson critique of Marx you will recognize that it is not about who was or was not a Leftist or Rightist. The issue was the Creed of Marx, the need for the group to transcend the individual, by force if necessary. It’s very obvious in his dialectic, think dictatorship of the proletariat. It’s redolent of repressive violence justified as liberation. Peterson would in my opinion rightly lump you in with others who would claim that “if I did it then all would be sweetness and light”. Yeah right. Of course capitalism is the mirror image in which too few end up with too much and use power to maintain their position, the individual trumping the group. I’m yet to challenge Peterson on that pathology.

        On the subject of Eric Dyson I watched his approach to Peterson, it was at best bigoted inverse racism that like Marx worked on the basis of retributive justice for past wrongs, applied shotgun at the nearest white male. He was targeting me and every other white man because in his mind we all did it. As a preacher he might have remembered the injunction Christ gave upon visiting the sins of the father on the son.

    • Mjolnir says:

      Why don’t you tell us what you find “insightful” and what you “learned” from Jordan Peterson, Zack? Share those nuggets if wisdom with us, eh?

      As for Mr Peterson himself, would it be too much for the Left to simply ignore him? Huh?

      • Sam Sam says:

        Peterson is more of a radical leftist than he’d like to admit.

      • Zack Brando says:

        Sure MJOLNIR, but first answer my question .. what’s the prob here with Mr Peterson.

        I find this whole article very discriminatory. The Daily Blog has targeted Mr Peterson and for NO good reason. Using thinkophobic labels like “alt right” is truly disgusting and serves to unduly gaslight the weak minded and foment hate.

        Shameful.

      • Gosman says:

        The left should be attempting to learn something from Jordan Peterson rather than ignoring him. For example how defending free speech can be incredibly popular.

        • Mjolnir says:

          “For example how defending free speech can be incredibly popular.”

          Ah, the old fall-back position for the Right, eh Gosman? When you Righties can’t defend something you’ve said you simply trumpet “FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!” As if that explains everything.

          Bullshite.

          It’s not his free speech we’re discussing it’s what he’s saying with it.

          Now, can you and Zack tell us what things he espouses that you agree with?

          It’s a relatively simple fucking question.

      • Nick J says:

        Hadley Grace, I’m pleased by your tactics, by which I mean to have courage to express your better arguments rather than attempting deplatforming.

        I’m also saddened for you that your passion for psychotherapy and philosophy is going to miss out on Peterson’s views, even if you disagree. It would place you in a much better position to judge their merits and offer your own contradiction or agreement. Psychotherapy is after all about listening and examining.

        • Mjolnir says:

          “Psychotherapy is after all about listening and examining.”

          Uncritically?

        • Hadley Robinson-Lewis says:

          I admire JP for some of his views on psychology and philosophy, he is very knowledgeable. But in no means is he a psychotherapist- He may claim to be but has not qualified as one… he’s not even close- It takes atleast 5-6 years of training and years of therapy on the self to gain self-actualisation. It takes so much more than simply listening and understanding. Being a psychotherapist is so different to being a psychologist. If anything I’d say he is being a fraud for claiming to be trained in psychotherapy.

        • Hadley says:

          However I do admire his views on psychotherapy regarding listening and not telling someone how to feel.

  3. Gosman says:

    It seems you are equating Jordan Peterson with some people who might support him that have views in other areas that are unsavory. Who are you going to engage – the supporters of Jordan Peterson who are proponents of free speech and anti-shutting down debate or those that might see him as someone who backs their unpleasant views? If it is the second one then you will have Peterson himself agreeing with you. However if it is the first one you are on a hiding to nothing.

    • Hadley says:

      I’d like to encourage debates. I don’t believe we should shut people down by making juvenile comments like ‘racist’ or ‘bigot’. JP had many good points but I simply don’t agree with everything he says.

  4. francesca says:

    Gulp. I’m rather with Germaine Greer and Camille Paglia(who herself identifies as trans) on the transgender thing
    And also Georgina Beyer who I admire hugely

    “I think they, and the world, need to realise that there is indeed a third , just gender in this world and transgender is it”

    Yep there’s a spectrum , and some identify as women(whatever they believe that to be), but biological , dna, chromosomal women have issues that cosmetic surgeried, hormone pilled trans women just dont.
    Like abortion, childbirth, postnatal depression, for a start.
    Transwomen have their issues too, and that needs to be respected, but do we have to be so binary about it all?.You’re either a man or a woman?

    • Sam Sam says:

      Personally I’d assumed that trans meant that they’ve had corrective surgery but only like 1% actually go all the way. So I’d say yeah, being binary is still really important.

      There’s also the practicalities of being miss gendered. I mean for the most part, trans males still hit like a man so there’s practical issues with poking some constantly for wearing a dress, and a guy wearing a dress will through up questions. The questioning of the gender identity because of the way they act is reinforcing the binary. But still considers herself a woman, that is destroying the gender binary.

      And then there’s the problem of people deliberately remaining in WTF mode just so the can fein ignorance, piss off a trans so they have something to post on social media for shits and giggles. Which is just shitty.

      • francesca says:

        no it doesnt mean that Sam
        You can keep your penis and testicles and just self identify as a woman and that means you are a woman apparently
        Its kind of the Emperor and no clothes syndrome to my mind

        • Sam Sam says:

          Look for meaning in language you’ll quickly discover that close enough is good enough. As long as there’s consensus, is the only real universal.

          It’s a matter of informed consent. Personally I believe it’s important to inform sexual partners of the truth/facts even if it’s just a one night stand. If it’s part of an on going relationship, then hell yes because a healthy relationship can’t be built on secrets.

          It’s not a complicated issue, and it’s one easily resolved by mature adults who are able to use their judgement.

          I understand that there are a lot of areas where trans can’t go or shouldn’t go. For instance males who’ve received gender reassignment should go to female prisons, and males who haven’t had surgery should go to male prisons. Same goes with public toilets and gyms. But honesty is the best policy and no one should be penalised for being honest. Douche nozzles should be penalised. Yknow, everything just needs to be properly explained and properly executed.

    • Mjolnir says:

      “abortion, childbirth, postnatal depression, for a start.”

      That would be fine, except, well, Francesca, there are a significant number of cis women who CAN’T have children and therefor “abortion, childbirth, postnatal depression” are not a thing to contend with.

      Does that make the un-women, by your narrow definition?

      • Sam Sam says:

        That’s unfair. Desires of having children would be an important fact of forming any relationship.

      • francesca says:

        Well Gosh, Mjolnir,
        I always thought I was a woman because of the vagina and periods and hormones and stuff, but you tell me
        Maybe I’ve been wrong all these years

  5. Andrew says:

    “The left is known for being inclusive.”

    Unless of course you’re an white male, or a TERF or a Jew, or a cop at a gay parade or a psychologist who wants men to act like adults.

    Correction: The left used to be known for being inclusive

    • Hadley says:

      The point of my article is to give advice to the left. I’m well aware that the left are not very tolerant when it comes to people who lean towards conservatism or the right. Hence the list of tips encouraging the ‘woke’ left to stop ruining everything for legitimate progressives.

  6. Aristarchus says:

    Sigh, another hit piece and very shallow, uninformed & polemical comments, for the most part. JP is saving lives, literally. I suggest we all remove the planks from our own eyes so that we may See to remove the splinter from our brothers (of course if that gender reference triggers you then disregard.)

    • Sam Sam says:

      That’s the opposite of what’s going on here.

      Hadley- “Instead of reacting in anger to his out of date views, let’s start a healthy debate.”

      Welcome to the thunder doom. If you’re equiped to show examples I’d like to rebut them.