I have never thought it a bad thing, in a contentious situation, to restate back to the person what I think they are trying to say.
But I am careful to do it in such a way that it actually does reflect what I hear the person trying to say. And I give them plenty of room to modify what they have said, and I restate it.
What you describe sounds like a leftist malicious magic trick to me...
Yes. Peterson has actually explained this in some videos.
Normally, people converse because they seek a destination -- some truth or new insight. It's a team effort, and they help each other get to a good place.
The other approach is to try to "win" every conversation. Peterson says that normal people do not do this, but that many of the people who interview him do exactly that. They just try to "beat" him on every sentence he utters. And he stays calm, rational and factual, so he really cannot be "beaten" -- which drives them crazy. Mind you, saying he "cannot be beaten" isn't the same thing (really) and saying "he always wins" because he doesn't try to win. He tries to have an adult conversation. But he's the only one doing it.
He ends up looking good. They end up looking like Cathy Newman.
It is or at least was a Psychology fad. When I was in the VA hospital after I got scraped up off the highway I had to do a disability series of “interviews.” One was with a psych. She kept thinking she heard me say something psychopathic. I fed it right back to her, “I think I hear you saying that you want me to fit into one of your boxes,” etc. She got frustrated and gave up. I was NOT looking for disability but because I wound up in a VA hospital instead of the civilian one after I got scraped up off the highway with no insurance card but a DD213(or is that 214? I don’t remember) in my pocket I had to do all that stuff.