The criticism of Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Zizek, of their debate, is unfounded.

I find the criticism of both Jordan B Peterson and Slavoj Zizek to be unwarranted.

They had a good and enlightening discussion that benefitted everyone. I suspect the alleged former fans didn't know much of either before losing their appreciation of either figure.

Peterson has deep and systematic understanding of communism.

Communism is also not limited to the communist manifesto, which he had read before, and read again in detail before debating Zizek.

Marx wrote a lot more than it, and most of what he wrote, Peterson has a good grasp of.

Zizek prefers works of Marx other than the communist manifesto. Even when I studied him in University, he was not a true communist. He likes some of Marx, and those parts he discusses are actually parts Jordan Peterson has a grasp of, while disagreeing.

I am very impressed with Jordan Peterson's performance in the debate with Slavoj Zizek, and think those who are now attacking him or Zizek over the debate need to re-evaluate their thinking and their fickleness. Displaying fickleness isn't attractive as a trait.

Like those who recently felt the need to disown Stefan Molyneux and claimed his positions had changed (untrue), the rush of new former Jordan B Peterson fans leave me with the impression they had never read a word he has written, nor watched his lectures at all. Virtue signalling.