Jordan Peterson Confronts Australian Politician on Gender Politics and Quotas | Q&A
Video Statistics and Information
No captions available for this video.
Channel: abcqanda
Views: 3,959,209
Rating: 4.9132438 out of 5
Keywords: Q&A, QandA, auspol, australian politics, Tony Jones, politics, abc, abc news, Jordan Peterson, Terri Butler
Id: tOHUwwP6LLs
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 4min 14sec (254 seconds)
Published: Mon Feb 25 2019
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.
Man, she really doesn't get it does she? Tries to laugh off the idea of equality for female bricklayers - but that just proves his point that it's all about one thing: Power.
I see that even here some people are not quite grasping the core point. Yes it’s about power, that is the endgame of identity politics but that is not what’s wrong with it: that’s the endgame of all politics, power, and some have argued that all life is about the pursuit of it’s attainment. What’s actually wrong with her thinking is that she believes that in a representative government she should be represented by a woman. Why not a man? If I believed that a qualified woman wouldn’t be able to represent my interest, I’d be just as bigoted and wrong as she is when she thinks only a woman can represent women in the realm of politics.
It’s like saying I can learn nothing from the Diary of Anne Frank because I’m a grown man (was a boy when I first read it) and the books’s protagonist is a girl or Madame Bovary because it’s about a woman. What did Flaubert mean when he said Madame Bovary c’est moi. This woman probably thinks she has little to learn from Moby Dick because all the characters are men, or classic literature in general because, alas, it was all written by that loathsome crew dead white men.
Arguing that a woman should represent women in democracy is destroying singlehandedly all the victories won by the women emancipators who toiled to win equal rights for women, to be seen as no different than men in their rights and political standing. The woman in the clip clearly sees women as different and also inferior since they need a special case plea and quotas in order to compete with men. Any proponent of true equality of women will find this insultingly dumb and destructive.
More to the point, her viewpoint completely impractical. One, it’s is unpatriotic as she puts her belonging to womanhood as a group before her belonging in a community which can be represented equally well by Joe or Jane: therefore she’s a woman first and foremost, more than a member of her community, Australian, Queenslander etc. and a political agent for them. Secondly, where does this fragmentation end? Say women have a woman representing them but it’s an old woman: young women could, and with more justification than insistance on same gender, demand a young woman to represent them because the old woman doesn’t know what it’s like to be a young woman in this day and age etc. The woman is from a certain social class, has this education or that and is therefore in their eyes supposedly incapable of understanding them and representing them. You can go down the line and fragmeng the groups to smaller and smaller bits until everyone is a group of their own, the individual - which is the correct approach - which is our system right now. We’re already across the finish line.
Fundamentally it’s the lack of faith in human empathy, the underlying lack of faith in our humanity, the ability to feel the others plight and to show solidarity, to see the superficial differences between us not as divisions but completely immaterial: people are people, everywhere. Identity politics is poison to solidarity, ecumene, comradeship: this lack of faith in our better nature is what’s wrong with it at it’s core.
Damn, JP looks a little shaky and strung out in this clip. Makes me worried. He's barely making eye contact. I certainly act that way when my blood sugar tanks or I've had too much coffee that morning. Who knows what his situation was. The difference between us is that he remains civil and intelligent, keeping a firm grasp on the reigns, something I can only wish to do in my own life when stressful circumstances come up.
Ownership.
How would she react if her female representative was a conservative evangelical Christian who opposed abortion, birth control, and women's advancement in the workplace?
Am I missing something? Does Australia have some sort of mechanism in place that prevents women from running political campaigns and earning enough votes to beat their opponents? The panelist wants more women in Parliament. Great. Maybe more women should be running on platforms Australians want support. Seems like a simple solution, really.