Andrew Tate has carved out a niche with his brash confidence and swagger that has captured the attention of a generation of young men seeking guidance or entertainment. From luxurious cars to hyper-masculine soundbites, his approach is very much geared towards going viral on the internet.
During a recent episode of the Joe Rogan Experience (#2308), renowned psychologist Jordan Peterson made an interesting observation while speaking with Rogan. Peterson pointed out that Rogan possesses many of the characteristics that make Tate appealing to audiences, with one crucial distinction: Rogan is “respectable.”
This single word prompted the UFC commentator to delve into what truly sets him apart from Tate. Rogan acknowledged Tate’s captivating charm, particularly among younger audiences, and admitted that if he were a young man today, he might have been drawn to Tate as well.
“I get the posturing. I get how it would be attractive to young men—I get it. If I were a young man, I would certainly be drawn to him, and I was to many fighters,” Rogan stated. He added that success in challenging fields such as combat sports is often accompanied by narcissism and intense self-focus—traits that, while difficult, can drive exceptional achievement.
However, Rogan made it clear that understanding something doesn’t equate to endorsing it. This distinction forms the core of his philosophy. He traced the difference back to his own background and life experiences.
“I’ve got a completely different background than him, first of all. And also, my feeling in life is—whenever you can, be nice…that’s like the general guideline,” he emphasized, suggesting that his life philosophy combines kindness with strength.
While Tate has built his reputation around confrontation and domination, Rogan prefers a state of balance. In his view, toughness doesn’t have to come at the expense of sensitivity, and respectability enhances rather than diminishes one’s message. This perspective may be challenging to promote in today’s viral-content-driven society, but Rogan appears more concerned with his lasting impact than momentary popularity.
In essence, Rogan’s message isn’t about criticizing Tate but rather offering an alternative approach. Where Tate thrives on shock value and ego, Rogan values humility, even if it isn’t as flashy. Having experienced both worlds, he understands why young men might be drawn to certain expressions of masculinity. However, he wants to demonstrate that being “nice” and “good” represents strength, not weakness—it’s a conscious choice he makes daily in a world that often rewards the opposite.
The conversation between Rogan and Peterson eventually expanded into examining why someone like Tate has such widespread appeal, particularly when his persona differs so markedly from Rogan’s values. With Peterson’s psychological expertise, the discussion took a deeper turn, analyzing both Tate and the young men who follow him.
Peterson, drawing on his academic background and extensive experience studying human behavior, suggested that Tate’s appeal stems from offering a form of escape for young men feeling hopeless, disregarded, and unloved. Tate projects power, wealth, and confidence without apparent accountability to anyone.
“They’d rather be Andrew Tate than an in–l,” Peterson remarked, suggesting that for someone trapped in cycles of rejection and bitterness, Tate’s lifestyle appears liberating.
Rogan agreed, noting that emotional pain, especially romantic rejection, can distort one’s worldview. He’s observed how rejection can harden into bitterness and eventually hatred. “That’s how you get a woman-hater,” he stated plainly.
Neither Rogan nor Peterson excused toxic behavior; rather, they were analyzing its origins. They suggested that Tate’s appeal isn’t primarily about material possessions or fame, but about visibility and validation for young men who feel invisible themselves.
