Jordan Peterson on the stage with Slavoj Zizek: Which one is the "clown" and which the "madman"?

I normally try to watch videos before I post them. I'm making an exception because this one involvles Jordan Peterson, who I can only endure in short doses. So I haven't seen it all yet. Slavoj Zizek vs Jordan Peterson debate: Slavoj Zizek vs Jordan Peterson debate 04/20/2019, on the topic “Happiness: Capitalism v. Marxism”:

The first few minutes I've watched, with Peterson's opening presentation dealing with The Communist Manifesto, provides the sort of pedantic puffery that Peterson so reliably provides. He starts by saying he's basing his analysis of Marx on the Manifesto, though he veers off to talk about kulaks in Russia and the "dictatorhip of the proletariat" - which was used by Marx but doesn't appear in the Manifesto. It's Jordan Peterson, do don't expect any deep (or even meaningful) analysis on that concept.

Sam Miller and Harrison Fluss report on the debate in The Fool and the Madman Jacobin 04/20/2019. They write, "Žižek surely isn’t as odious as Peterson. But the debate revealed just how far the leftist intellectual [Žižek] has fallen."

And as we might expect (or fear) from Zizek, who often seems to be deliberately playing the clown, or being provocative more for entertainment value than for provoking reflection:

While Peterson assumed that he was entering a debate with a classical Marxist, and that much of that debate would be centered around Marxism, Žižek came with a different agenda. In his thirty-minute introduction, Žižek did not focus on Marx at all, but began the talk lamenting how marginalized he and Peterson are from “politically correct” academia:

Peterson and I…are both marginalized by the official academic community and supposed to defend here the Left liberal line against neoconservatives. Really? Most of the attacks on me are precisely from Left liberals. Just remember the outcry against my critique of LGBT ideology.

In case you're wondering about the title, Zizek is the "fool," Peterson the "madman." (Can you be a pedantic madman? I gess so.)

Stephen Marche gives us this take, The 'debate of the century': what happened when Jordan Peterson debated Slavoj Žižek Guardian 04/20/2019:

Peterson’s opening remarks were disappointing even for his fans in the audience. They were a vague and not particularly informed (by his own admission) reading of The Communist Manifesto. His comments on one of the greatest feats of human rhetoric were full of expressions like “You have to give the devil his due” and “This is a weird one” and “Almost all ideas are wrong”. ...

Žižek didn’t really address the matter at hand, either, preferring to relish his enmities. “Most of the attacks on me are from left-liberals,” he began, hoping that “they would be turning in their graves even if they were still alive”. His remarks were just as rambling as Peterson’s, veering from Trump and Sanders to Dostoevsky to the refugee crisis to the aesthetics of Nazism. If Peterson was an ill-prepared prof, Žižek was a columnist stitching together a bunch of 1,000-worders. He too finished his remarks with a critique of political correctness, which he described as the world of impotence that masks pure defeat.