Multiversity critique of my *Explaining Postmodernism*

Three smart young people critique my book in this extended YouTube conversation. I enjoyed listening, criticisms and all, as they present both sides of the arguments, intelligently assess their strengths and weaknesses, and state forthrightly their own conclusions.
“Explaining Stephen Hicks: Jordan Peterson and ‘Postmodern Neo-Marxism’?” In a forthcoming Open College podcast, I’ll respond to their critique.

Topics:
2:08 What is postmodernism, and what is modernism?
17:10 Foucault, the fundamental question of the left, and why postmodernists seek to understand the perspectives of the oppressed.
28:30 Why postmodernism is so frustrating to talk about
36:10 Is philosophy fundamentally political? Why there is no sitting on the fence in postmodernism.
43:12 Postmodernist pedophile conspiracy?!
48:00 Introducing Stephen Hicks– and his critics.
58:40 Is all this criticism of Stephen Hicks just postmodernist propaganda?
1:02:15 Agenda-pushing, ideological possession, and gender politics.
1:06:56 Stephen Hicks’ argument: tracing the lineage of postmodernism, and the common roots of right and left radical collectivism.
1:21:40 Why is it socially acceptable to call yourself a communist, but not a fascist?
1:32:20 Is postmodernism a real philosophy, or just a leftist front?
1:37:00 Is Jordan Peterson really a postmodernist?
1:43:36 Imagining a right-wing postmodernism.
2:01:35 Does epistemology lead to morality? Furthermore, does libertarianism lead to fascism?
2:08:48 Is Jordan Peterson right about postmodern neomarxism?
2:14:00 Our ‘final’ takes.
2:30:45 Diagnosing Slavoj Zizek