Separately, Žižek stated in The Independent that "his crazy conspiracy theory about LGBT+ rights and #MeToo as the final offshoots of the Marxist project to destroy the West is, of course, ridiculous.
"[1] The term "cultural Marxism" became mainstream in 2016, when Peterson was objecting to a Canadian bill that would prohibit discrimination based on gender identity, which he argued would force people to use someone's preferred pronouns.
[8][9] The debate was divided into two thirty-minute introductions from each participant, followed by shorter ten-minute responses and time at the end for additional comments and answers to questions posed by the moderator, Stephen J.
[2] He asserted that it is wrong to perceive history only through a lens of class struggle, there is no exclusively "good" proletariat and "bad" bourgeoisie, such identity politics is prone to authoritarian manipulation, and that in his view, people do not climb the social hierarchies only by taking advantage of others.
[2][12] The monologue itself was less focused as it touched many topics and things like cultural liberalism, Nazism, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Fyodor Dostoevsky, and xenophobia, among others;[2][11] and against the expectation of the debate format, it did not defend Marxism.
[11] Later in the debate, Žižek agreed with Peterson's opening analysis and called for regulation and limitation of the market for capitalism to reduce the risk of natural and social disasters.
[15] Harrison Fluss and Sam Miller of Jacobin reported that Peterson made many factual errors, such as misunderstanding the labour theory of value, incorrectly associating Marx broadly with identity politics, and denying the existence of a Marxist philosophy of nature.
[18] Der Spiegel concluded that Žižek won the debate clearly, describing Peterson as "vain enough to show up to an artillery charge with a pocket knife".
[5] Writing for Current Affairs, Benjamin Studebaker criticized both Peterson and Žižek, calling the debate "one of the most pathetic displays in the history of intellectuals arguing with each other in public".