This is a really important point, so if you’ll permit, just one response:
There’s an important distinction you make worth thinking about deeply. You define white nationalists by their preferred policy outcomes but “SJW’s” by their tactics. Similarly, you seem to have glossed over my point about Medicare at the end and brought in anti-fa and its tactics as a stand-in for progressivism. But the policy outcomes are so much more important than the tactics.
I reject Horseshoe Theory generally based on my experiences working on science policy for many years. It leads to false equivalences like that ones I think you’re making throughout this response. For instance, I would disagree with your characterizations of BLM policy goals entirely. In fact, here’s BLM’s policy platform. https://policy.m4bl.org/platform/ There’s plenty to argue with there, but it’s not a call for segregation at all — it’s a call for justice.
Also, just one other side-point to be clear: I brought in white nationalists and the so-called “alt-right” because they are such a hot-button feature of the debate and I wanted to put that in the context of them co-opting what’s in the culture, including Peterson. For instance, you can see here how a white nationalist website purposefully tries to hijack what’s in the culture to mainstream its views: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/daily-stormer-nazi-style-guide_us_5a2ece19e4b0ce3b344492f2. Peterson is getting hit with a similar set of tacts, but doesn’t seem to realize it or hasn’t figured out a better way to respond.