If he really did read Marx, then I worry about how he could have gotten his conclusions so wrong
If you think anyone who reads Marx must come to the "right" conclusions, you're treating Marx like holy scripture, not political theory. And he doesn't disagree with Marx (he's a socialist, after all) so much as he disagrees with how Marxism is too often treated on the left -- i.e., as unchangeable holy scripture, not a theoretical text that is open to criticism and that should be updated periodically for application in new times and places. Again, this take is consistent with Lenin and Mao (and others) re-framing Marx to better speak to their immediate circumstances.
Jordan Peterson also claimed to have read Marx
How do you expect to get anything done if you treat fellow socialists the way you'd treat some chud grifter? If you went to a meeting, would you treat another socialist as if they were someone actively hostile to socialism, or would you treat them in good faith on the most basic of matters, like whether they've actually read a book they claim to have read?
If you think anyone who reads Marx must come to the "right" conclusions, you're treating Marx like holy scripture, not political theory. And he doesn't disagree with Marx (he's a socialist, after all) so much as he disagrees with how Marxism is too often treated on the left -- i.e., as unchangeable holy scripture, not a theoretical text that is open to criticism and that should be updated periodically for application in new times and places. Again, this take is consistent with Lenin and Mao (and others) re-framing Marx to better speak to their immediate circumstances.
How do you expect to get anything done if you treat fellow socialists the way you'd treat some chud grifter? If you went to a meeting, would you treat another socialist as if they were someone actively hostile to socialism, or would you treat them in good faith on the most basic of matters, like whether they've actually read a book they claim to have read?