There is a comedic device: using a non sequitur to redirect the audience's attention in a humerous manner.
Your post, unfortunately, has all of the signs of a non sequitur, but none of the humour that could have been included.
You can, but I am not sure what you intend to gain from saying so.
If you choose to laugh at me, then laugh at me. I don't give a ****.
You choose to advertise that you are laughing at me: seeking approval like this reeks of insecurity.
There is something wonderful about someone crying about criticism and then deciding to censor that criticism in a way that merely innoculates themselves from hearing it.
There is a saying, "none so blind as those who will not see"
On the other hand I was celebrating the idiots of this world...
I'm not sure how you think that move has "outsmarted the lefties" - plenty of people have been suggesting the obnoxious create their own online communities rather than pollute existing ones. Moving to TheDullard.win is simply following that suggestion - and retreating from a large mixed...
Peterson doesnt like certain people (presumably those he doesnt like) defining hate speech.
Therefore he says that the people defining hate speech should not be doing so.
By saying this he is suggesting which people (ie, "not them") should be defining hate speech, presumably people he does like...