If the government passes a law saying "you can only be a psychologist if you have a license from the College of Psychologists", and the College of Psychologists will only let you have a license if you go to a re-education camp, why should we look upon that any differently than if the government passes a law saying "you can only be a psychologist if you go to a re-education camp" directly? If you choose to delegate your authority for something to others, shouldn't you be responsible for what they do with it?

It's different for many reasons;

* Second hand biased reporting makes it unclear what the official statement from the the College of Psychologists of Ontario actually is and whether they can pull his licence if he ignores them.

* The Government does not auto-kneejerk magically back the College and Peterson has a right of appeal, he's already publicaly grandstanding on the issue and claiming to have preemptively filed application for judicial review with the Ontario Divisional Court.

Going by past performative peak Peterson this is likely a mountain of outrage in response to a molehill of criticism .. and far removed from the spectacle of beiong dragged away and beheaded w/out appeal.

Re-education camp is Jordan’s words. As far as I’ve seen, it doesn’t appear in the correspondence from the professional group.