Over the past decades in the western world those conservative orthodoxies have been challenged and a new set of norms have emerged and are perceived as the new orthodoxies. Peterson's followers follow him because of his "guts" to speak up, but he's doesn't seem to be proposing new norms but rather showing how the conservative worldview can still offer a cure for the current pain points.

His followers follow him because he reinforces existing points of view. Nothing wrong with that, just saying that having such following doesn't imply original ideas.

I recommend the "what is true?" making sense podcast episode (https://samharris.org/podcasts/what-is-true/). It helped me better understand Peterson outside of the spotlight generated by him touching the controversial topics if our society. My opinion on him after that interview is even less flattering: he seemed interested in bending terminology and logic itself for the benefit of crafting a worldview he deems innate to humans, instead of researching our nature though inquiry. The feeling I got was that of an erudite anti-scientist.

This piece has stuck with me (I think it's the one I'm remembering but can't read the whole thing because paywall): https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-pete...

In particular, the anecdote about how Peterson wanted to be a preacher.

Why not? Lots of people (not just conservatives!) like having their existing beliefs confirmed. Peterson's gift, if it can be called that, is in making conservative orthodoxy sound profound, and the fact he's a professor which helps his air of authority.