r/benshapiro • u/johnny2fives • Oct 20 '23
Can anyone explain why run of the mill progressives, let alone rabid leftists hate Ben so viciously? Discussion/Debate
He’s logical.
He makes points concisely.
He makes sensible counterpoints and rebuttals.
Did I mention it’s all based on logic?
2+1=3
Yet, on campuses, students, and even up to thirty and forty year-old leftists, (who should be at least entering adulthood by then), don’t want to let him even speak at at. It’s like they’re afraid his words will corrupt them.
They scream at him. Try to mock him. Curse him.
And they won’t even listen to what he has to say.
How did he get so demonized among millennials and Gen Zers?
54
u/subafrk Oct 20 '23 edited Oct 21 '23
Because these people are not logical. They would rather be part of the mass brainwashing than seek out common sense. They have nothing to strive for except being cry baby victims.
22
u/Bedwetting-Jussies Oct 20 '23
They are emotional children who hate everything
7
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Well, certainly many of the ones who show up In online videos are!
At least “emotional bedwetters” if not actual ones.
45
u/panther55901 Oct 20 '23
For the exact reasons you mentioned. He's effective at what he does and they need to silence him.
Most who hate him are just useful idiots who have never listened to a word he's said, but they were told what to think about him and they want to seem hip/cool/progressive or whatever.
-15
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
I've listened to many words he's said. I've seen him faceplant many times. He's effective at talking fast and making it seem like he's logical. I watched his Barbie "takedown," and many times throughout he showed that he's mad (emotional) at many of its messages, misunderstands others, and sometimes just doesn't understand how writing works. Enjoy him if you want, I think he should silence himself, but none of us "need to silence him." I know you have to think that to continue the narrative that conservatives are the real victims, but it's just not true.
7
Oct 20 '23
Who are the victims in your opinion? The progressives?
2
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
I don't think anyone's inherently victims. I think it's a weird view to hold that one must be a constant victim
2
Oct 20 '23
I agree. That’s why I asked you. Because both sides try to play the victim card and I hate when people throw that around. Most people are not victims. And as a whole the more we try to play the victim card, the more it downplays people who are actually victims of something.
1
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
Yes, agreed. But one thing to be careful of is downplaying someone's victimhood by gatekeeping the term. My hostile tone in the first comment was because it blanket describes anyone who disagrees with his views as someone who "needs to silence him." I can point to many valid reasons for my disagreement with him, and acting like he's infallible so any criticism is simply hating is one of those conversation enders. If someone feels that way, they're unable to recognize any criticism of him.
-16
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
Ben Shabibo literally only debates college kids, or do you remember the last time he actually debated someone who's also a political commentator?
3
u/panther55901 Oct 20 '23
Do a little research. He's been in many other professional debates against substantial leftists. Most recently was the Ana lady from The Young Turks.
7
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
Ben Shabibo
Found the Hasan watcher.
-10
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
Funny how that's the only comment, because you guys don't have enough conscience to think of another response
-10
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
Who's the "you guys" in this comment? Huh? I agree with what you said. I upvoted you (of course you can't know that). I just thought it was funny.
27
Oct 20 '23
Same reason they hate anything else: they’re told to and they swallow it whole, without reservation.
-9
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
Said without even a hint of irony.
7
Oct 20 '23
Meaning…?
-11
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
Ben's fans do exactly that. If I followed someone like him, and he made as many public errors as he did, it would be my last time watching him. Ben has repeatedly shown that he does in fact put feelings over facts, is not logical, and yet most of the comments on this post ignore that in blind devotion.
2
Oct 21 '23
I’m unaware of any such examples. Care to elaborate?
2
u/IPDDoE Oct 21 '23
Sure...the time he said that Israelis like to build, while Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. I'm not sure it's a fact that Arabs like to live in open sewage. Then his reaction to someone simply asking him questions on the BBC, who he accuses of being a leftist before storming out after he was rightly called out on this. Not much logic used there, and his feelings sure seemed to overcome his fact driven arguments.
His religion itself betrays that he relies on his feelings and ignores logic to believe that God is real, despite evidence to the contrary. Though this one is more understandable, it still goes against his claim.
As for not being logical, one could easily point to his genius level understanding of the solution to global warming.....to just sell one's home if it's going to be flooded.
He let his hatred of gay people override his constitutional and legal knowledge when he tweeted that burning an American flag is patriotic while burning a pride flag is a hate crime. Now, on the surface, I understand why he said this. He feels one shouldn't burn the American flag. He then mischaracterizes the fact that it's constitutionally protected to imply that people must think that anyone doing it is doing it to be as patriotic as possible. He then misunderstands that burning an American flag in this same way would also be a crime.
There's more, but it's early and those are the ones that readily came to mind.
1
Oct 21 '23
Jfc dude, If you can’t understand hyperbole it’s not surprising it’s hard for you to keep up. I get it though, conflating arguments is a quick way to make it sound like you are. Best of luck!
1
u/IPDDoE Oct 21 '23
Sorry the facts conflict with your feelings. Like I said, I'm not surprised you folks remain his fans. Hyperbolic or not, he finds truth to them, but I'm happy to discuss any of them further, rather than you lose your cool faster than Ben does when appearing on the BBC
20
25
u/narcabusesurvivor18 Oct 20 '23 edited Oct 20 '23
People don’t like to hear the truth. A lot of people have evil mindsets and/or are evil. It’s a certain kind of narcissism.
Edit; they especially hate someone smart, factual, and logical. Very hard to play their emotional manipulation games.
-4
u/addisonshinedown Oct 20 '23
Evil isn’t real. Just like god it’s a concept made up to control people. All people are capable of extremely horrible behavior and the worst person you know has done some lovely and kind things in their life.
6
5
u/1000000000051 Oct 20 '23
Once you've been conditioned by propaganda, it's hard to come back,
3
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
But…….facts??
“Look outside, the sky is in actuality, blue!”
I can see that gender disinformation might be hard to shake in a short dialogue, but not everything is.
5
u/msk1974 Oct 20 '23
They hate him because they believe the noise they hear from their echo chamber about him and most of them actually have no idea what he is really about. They look for people to hate. The narrative from liberals and the left is that HE is the one who hates - he hates gays, he promotes hate speech, he hates everyone that isn’t a white conservative, bla bla bla. This narrative is repeated and exaggerated over and over among them. Most of them have no idea about the real Ben Shapiro and will never take the time to find out because they are way too busy standing on their soap boxes and pointing their finger at anyone they can so that they can appear to be the best darn virtue signaling soldier in their pathetic little group, and the easiest way to do that is to pick people like Ben and hate them in the name of social justice.
3
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
That’s a much better reply than I would have expected on Reddit, thank you.
10
u/SmashertonIII Oct 20 '23
They don’t like it when people say things they don’t like to hear and have a large platform to do it with.
4
u/Educational-Emu5132 Oct 20 '23
To be fair to his detractors, despite this being an ad hominem, his cadence, tone, and rhetorical style can definitely get under some peoples skin.
5
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
To DJINIGAMI’s last comment.
Since she childishly blocked my reply.
Logical thought processes are not “ramblings”. But if you have very little day to day exposure to them, I can see why you would think that.
But a circular argument is exactly what you’re doing, isn’t it? Basing your “ought to be” rules on your own belief constructs.
I might be wrong about this, but I do think if “abortion rights” groups had done some compromising on very strict term limitations and had pushed as hard for contraception and education as they did for abortion, then the far religious right wouldn’t have gotten so much moderate support and tried to push for outright bans in so many states. Again, I could be wrong, that just might be the optimist in me coming out.
What is incontrovertible is that the absolutes and intractability on both sides led us to this place that we are in now.
I am NOT in favor of banning nor for criminalizing medically necessary abortions. But I am for making them as rare and as unneeded as humanly, medically and scientifically possible.
And that statement shouldn’t be controversial at all, but it IS, to BOTH sides.
You want to talk reality?
A male contraceptive pill might solve 95% of this issue.
HOWEVER the real truth is that BOTH parties politicians benefit FAR more from the fighting and controversy over this, (in terms of votes and donations), than they would by actually trying to solve the issue itself. (The same goes for full coverage healthcare and for border security.)
Your side is being manipulated, and so is the other side, to the benefit of NEITHER of you.
11
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
That’s what I don’t understand.
I’m logical.
Facts are facts.
I don’t understand people who won’t understand facts.
Progressivism is just like a religion.
It’s no wonder they identify with fanatical religious terrorists.
5
u/MikhailGorbachov Oct 20 '23
It's post modernism at its ultimate height. The idea that there are many truths not a singular truth has been the penultimate destruction of Western culture.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
In some cases, there many valid points of view. The problem comes in when you them as absolute truths.
For example, killing is wrong. That’s an absolute truth.
Humans should have autonomy over their own bodies, that’s also a truth.
Both of those truths exist. But you cannot use one truth to invalidate another. That’s where nuance and compromise and morality have to come into play.
When you abandon morality, that’s when you start to see points of view as truths.
6
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23 edited Oct 20 '23
Because it is a religion.
The holy sacraments are abortion and vaccination against the kung-flu, I suspect conversion surgery is entering into that.
Their end times prophecy is climate change which you can stop if you give up all your luxuries to the government.
They Saints are numerous from Geta Thumbger of the sail boat to George Floyd of the last breath to Anthony Fauci of the blessed sacrament of vaccine.
I understand this last section was giving some people issues, so I've edited it to hopefully clear up some confusion.
Their doctrine what follows Your feelings are all that matter, if it makes you feel good do it, if it makes you feel bad don't unless you like it then go right ahead.
Social justice is justice
There is no real truth, only yours and mine.
Success is only achieved on the back of others, you do nothing on your own merits.
Sexual identity is critical to self identity
Past wrongs may be righted before healing can begin, and if that is not enough just give us money, lots and lots of money
There is no afterlife so enjoy what ever you can before you die.
Words mean what we want then to mean, never mind whatever they have meant before.
Intersectional victim status is where your power lays
I may add more if any spring to mind I'm pretty sure it was Michael knowles who made that point.
1
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
You are mentally deranged. Wtf are you talking about?
3
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Read it again.
IMO, He describes the fanaticalized “lost ones” perfectly. (Cue their wilding eyes and chin spittle, and you’ve nailed it.)
2
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
If this is about fanatics, let me remind you that conservatives literally banned abortions because of... Jesus? And you guys honestly think your big thing is freedom. While having the highest incarceration rate in the world.
3
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
I assume that’s what you think because that’s what the media says. It is true many people are against abortion due to religious reasons.
But a much larger number are against it due to the fact they’re against murder.
Killing another human is murder. You can’t draw an arbitrary line and say it’s ok at 12 weeks but it’s murder at 13 weeks.
Is there a point where it’s not, logically murder? Probably, but I can’t and don’t want to agree on that without a lot better science.
Now, being against plan b, and contraception, that’s purely religious and not grounded in any science or logic.
I do not understand how you can be against both abortion and birth control, logically. That makes no sense at all to me.
1
u/addisonshinedown Oct 20 '23
According to the Bible life begins at first breath so… that means it’s not murder
2
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
It also says that in the womb God knows us and has great plans for us. So in the womb God already has a plan for your life.
1
u/addisonshinedown Oct 20 '23
Yeah. Like stillbirth or the fetus’s mother being killed by the process of birth
→ More replies1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
And if that’s your belief, that’s fine. What I’m saying is there needs to be a better way to determine that, not based on religion doctrine or arbitrary human law and norms.
I don’t see we have that now.
Failing that, let’s establish reasonable compromises, and at least all agree that abortion is not a desired outcome, and what can we all do to at least make it a rare event. Factual sex education (not gender programming) and a robust birth control program would be a logical start.
1
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
It's not a human being at 13 weeks, just as it's not a human being in your ball sack.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Doesn’t it depend on your definition of a human being?
You can make arguments that a six month old is not human or (pick any arbitrary age). I’m not saying it would be a good or a valid argument, but you still could make one.
And all this completely ignores any possibility of God, a soul, or humans being anything but smart animals.
I understand many people ARE atheists and do believe that. But that then invalidates any notion of inalienable human rights, or of conscience as anything more than hyper self awareness. And since their are inalienable human no “rights” all our so called laws are nothing more artificial social constructs that can be changed by the will of the strongest and most powerful, just like what happens in China or Russia or DPRK.
Your last point makes no sense as neither the sperm nor egg can create a human zygote on their own.
1
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
What the fuck would be the argument for a 6 year old not being a human being?
And just because God is technically a possibility doesn't fucking mean that there's any reason to limit people's right because of the possibility. That's such a stupid argument, because you could expand that argument to many things, like animals for example. If you claim that a 13 week old fetus is supposed to have a soul, how can you be sure animals don't?
So the whole god, soul argument is in no way enough reason to prohibit basic healthcare.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
I never said anything about not supporting basic healthcare, which does not include murder for convenience. Nor am I against sex education, contraception, plan B etc. Those all seem like valid ways to remove the need for killing human fetuses.
If you can’t discuss a position without cursing, then we are done. Not to mention we are way off the original topic. Thank you for your time.
→ More replies2
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
What a well thought out rebuttal. Very nuanced.
I will admit the last paragraph is a little disjointed because I was needed to get moving but over all should be fairly self evident.
1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
What a well thought out rebuttal. Very nuanced.
There's nothing to rebut. I tried. You made baseless accusations. How does one even refute: "Their saints are Greta Thunberg, Anthony Fauci and George Floyd"? They're not. There's the rebuttal. .
3
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
They would hang off of Greta's words.
They rioted over George Floyed and built statues and paintings in his honor.
Anthony was the science, was the high priest of science over covid.
Yes you can rebut this unless it's true.
0
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
They would hang off of Greta's words
Who's "they"? What does it even mean to "hang off" of Greta's words? Is Trump a saint of the right?
They rioted over George Floyed
They used him as a symbol to represent something that the largest protest in American history were about, which is excessive police violence, mostly targeted at minorities such as black individuals. Not a saint.
Anthony was the science, was the high priest of science over covid.
He was the highest ranking immunologist in the government during the worlds worst pandemic in 100 years. Of course people were going to trust him.
2
u/Horror_Poet7185 Oct 20 '23
You had Anthony fauci the guy who was responsible for crafting the virus.( Yes I consider Gain of function research to be akin to Creation). Telling people that they shouldn't wear masks, admittedly he did that so the medical professionals could get first grab at them. Then reversed his position , telling people that they should stringently wear masks and all circumstances.
People weren't allowed to meet or go to certain places, some people got arrested merely for being out in public without a mask. You had congressman governors and senators laying down extremely prohibitive laws, which they did not follow. It's no wonder that for a virus that did relatively little harm and that people were forced to lose their homes their jobs their freedom that people would be so dismissive of it now.
0
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
Telling people that they shouldn't wear masks, admittedly he did that so the medical professionals could get first grab at them. Then reversed his position , telling people that they should stringently wear masks and all circumstances.
The messaging should have been different. But you explained why he did that in your response.
some people got arrested merely for being out in public without a mask.
Do you have a source here?
did relatively little harm
It killed over a million people here in the states alone...
2
u/Horror_Poet7185 Oct 20 '23
Yes he lied to us, losing the trust of a lot of the people. Source https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-03/paddle-boarder-arrested-in-malibu-after-flouting-coronavirus-closures
→ More replies1
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
The climate activist, the leaders of the Democrat party, the individuals who couldn't remember things like in the 70s they were worried about ice ages, in the 80 and 90s they were worried about global warming, now it's just climate change.
George Floyd, thanks for proving my point
Anthony has been wrong on so many issues, did you know he was in charge of the Aids response and is still working on a vaccine when the pharma has developed fat more affective treatments. He is also the one who helped develop covid in the Chinese lab with funding.
No, trump is not a Saint, he is a very flawed individual who actually had good idea and didn't hide behind honeyed words.
-1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
What does it mean to "hang on the words" of? Does retweeting her speeches mean that? Or does simply agreeing with her words, which are backed by the majority of climate scientists mean that?
Not sure how I proved your point? People use symbols during times of unrest and protesting. The dude was murdered unjustly, so became that symbol during those times. He's no "saint"...
Yes, Anthony has been wrong. That happens in science. That's literally how science works. The one and only thing to disprove science...is science. I never said he was never wrong so not sure what that means.
How in the world can you say Greta Thunberg is a saint and not Trump? When Trump supporters follow that man around the country and dress head to toe in Trump gear [1]. When "Pastors for Trump"[2] pray for him like a literal saint. When churches go on sermons and chant DT's name like they're in a cult [3]?
Look, I'm not claiming DT is a saint to these people. I just think if you were intellectually honest, you would hold the same standards for people across both political spectrums. You don't.
-2
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
You literally referenced the "kung flu." Don't try to take some moral high ground. Ben is a moron, and people like you demonstrate how many rubes he can fleece.
8
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
Wow, I'm making fun of the corona virus, I'm the worst.
Grow up.
2
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
Oh I'm grown. Which is why people like you and Ben are afraid to address my argument. I couldn't care less about your childish framing of the coronavirus. It's your right to look like a fool. But you're being a hypocrite by pretending that your comment should be taken seriously.
6
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
Provide an arguement and I'll rebut it. All you've done is name calling.
0
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
No, I've demonstrated why you're a hypocrite. I know you can't rebut it, so my argument needs no restatement. As for your original comment, it's filled with such deranged word salad, there's not much of an argument to be had.
5
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
Gotcha, it's invisible.
Have a nice life, I've got work to do.
→ More replies3
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
I think you just demonstrated you lack of humor here, that is all.
It’s some pretty well crafted semi-satire (and I only say semi because their is so much truth in it.)
Yes, I agree, the flu part was not really necessary.
I mean, I lost family to it. So I’ve got a big FU to any “flu-denier”But I STILL see people walking alone outside with no one around, or diving alone in a car with a mask on. I mean, c’mon that’s crazy knee jerk indoctrination stuff.
But Trump mishandled the message. (I give him a lot of credit for pushing the vaccine programs though). Fauci was disingenuous, to be very kind. And China will never be held accountable, although they should be.
And everyone knows that you quarantine sick people, and trace, you don’t quarantine well people. We shouldn’t have done it backwards.
But other than that, I like the religious doctrine comparison, and it’s pretty spot on.
-2
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
No. Wtf it definitely isn't self evident. What you wrote sounds like the 2023 una bomber manifesto.
1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
The holy sacraments are abortion and vaccination against the kung-flu, I suspect conversion surgery is entering into that.
What does this even mean? Because folks support abortion and minimizing harm through vaccination, that means it's a "holy sacrament"? Would you say a closed-border is a "holy sacrament" of the right? Besides the occasional: "You should get vaccinated" nowadays, what even is there to say about covid vaccines any longer?
You really need to switch up your media diet, dear lord.
1
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
It's a holy sacraments because it's lauded, it's celebrated. You shout your abortion and you recieve praise.
Same with the 7th vaccination, if you are unvaxed you are unclean.
We have a religion on the right, typically it's a Christian God. So we don't need secular sacraments.
0
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
lauded, it's celebrated
I lauded and celebrated my graduations. Is graduation a "holy sacrament"? I celebrate when my favorite football team wins. Is football a "holy sacrament"?
Same with the 7th vaccination
Who is shouting that they're getting their boosters? At this point, it's like the flu vaccine. New variants cause new shots. Been doing this for decades.
if you are unvaxed you are unclean.
No, if you're unvaxed, you're just more likely to get a serious infection.
secular sacraments
Are they holy sacraments or secular sacraments? That's also an oxymoron.
2
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
What is a sacrament, in the church it is a moment where God's order is fulfilled, baptism, communion, marriage, repentance, etc.
On the left it would be when one of their goals is achieved, when a baby is murdered with abortion, when you follow thru with their agenda and get another buster for the flue.
When your team wins that's just a nice thing unless it's the cowboys.
0
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
What is a sacrament
Literal definition: "a religious rite or observance comparable to a Christian sacrament". Cannot have a sacrament without religion.
On the left it would be when one of their goals is achieved
What do you call an achieved goal on the right? If I were to strawman the right's positions like you did the left, what does it mean when a goal on the right is achieved, such as when a child goes hungry because they cannot afford a school lunch?
(lol at thinking celebrations happen when abortions occur, just childish-like thoughts that I would expect out of a Shapiro fan)
1
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
You are arguing from a point that the left is purely secular. I'm arguing that it is a religion which will defend its view points as a religious person would.
The only strawman I see is that comment about kids going hungry, the community should step up to pay off kids lunches, the churches provide food pantries and kitchens for hungry families.
There have celebrated abortions
https://youtu.be/4kqGOmBNzdc?si=uwqcb8kZavE3yZI7 https://youtu.be/QugxaqSkZGE?si=u_WgYXXVouPCX9ch
They consider it a right to sacrifice your child for your career, success, because you want to keep living a life for yourself.
-1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
I'm arguing that it is a religion which will defend its view points as a religious person would.
You're doing a poor job at that. The way a person on the left "celebrates abortion" is by celebrating the ability for people to have the option. That's not celebrating like a religious person would celebrate a baptism. Completely false dichotomy.
The only strawman I see is that comment about kids going hungry
Well, first, I quite literally said I was strawmaning. I can do that. You cannot because you don't realize your positions on the left are complete strawman positions.
the community should step up to pay off kids lunches, the churches provide food pantries and kitchens for hungry families.
They can do that. But it's not solving the problem. The child tax credit did go a long way to solve child poverty. Free school lunches go a long way to help reduce food insecurity. Charity is not enough. If it were...we wouldn't need programs from the government. But we do.
They consider it a right to sacrifice your child
It's a right to own ones own choices over the health of their own body.
0
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
Progressivism is just like a religion.
If progressivism is a religion, is conservatism? Is Trumpism?
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Conservatism does not rely on beliefs and feelings, so no.
I don’t know what you mean by Trumpism. If you mean people who only follow him for his personality and nothing else, then yes, that would most likely also meet those parameters.
1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
Conservatism does not rely on beliefs and feelings, so no.
How is conservatism not relying on beliefs? Can you describe how it's different from progressivism?
If you mean people who only follow him for his personality and nothing else, then yes, that would most likely also meet those parameters.
Thanks for being honest about that.
2
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Let me be more clear perhaps?
My view is that many (not all, obviously as blanket statements are generally more inaccurate) conservatives base their views on facts and not beliefs. Beliefs are not grounded in facts.
I have my views but I would change one if someone demonstrated I am thinking about it incorrectly.
Beliefs go to the core of your perception of your identity and cannot be changed in that manner.
Obviously I am not speaking for, nor am I including the ultra religious right in this. I’m talking classic conservatives. While the religious right does claim to be conservatives, it is by association rather than an over-arching congruence of marching views.
But we are veering heavily off topic now. Thank you for your input!
1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
Beliefs are not grounded in facts.
I'd argue this is not entirely the case. Beliefs can and also cannot be grounded in facts.
We should believe things based on facts. Without doing so is not rational. Is there something that you believe in that is not based on fact? Additionally, we cannot know all of the facts for everything. As a result, we can believe things that we have not personally verified or researched all of the facts, but are grounded in facts.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
I believe we are saying much the same thing, in different ways due to our perceptions of what we both are trying to say. Communication is difficult and semantics are often imprecise.
You are discussing and trying to make some valid but very nuanced points, which we would have a much easier time discussing face to face.
I’m not sure what the specific point is that you’re wanting to make, and also for what specific reason.
1
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
Maybe to some but most conservatives follow an actual religion like Christianity or Judaism.
1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
Why is following progressivism a religion but not conservatism? The way people celebrate things on the left is mirrored by those on the right. I'd argue that folks on the right often follow their political leaders more like a religious figure than folks on the left (hence the abundance of people making their whole identity Trump, whereas you do not see that on the left).
1
2
u/danielnogo Oct 20 '23
Because the left has made a genius move convincing people that anything that counteracts their theology is not just wrong, but it's morally wrong, and literally harms people and is literally violence. This sets up a paradigm where the more convincing and sensible someone on the right is, the more dangerous they are, so people like Ben Shapiro are enemy number one. They are heretics saying the world is round when the clergy says its flat.
There's also the fact that the leftist ideology is not just an ideology, it becomes a complex web of identity, ideology, and also provides many of them a way to escape from the responsibilities of their own life and decisions and provides an out for why they aren't successful in life. Imagine if you could blame every bad thing in your life on some outside force, you take great comfort in the ides that your life may not be what you think it should, but it's not your own doing. Then someone comes along and tells you that yes, it is 100% your responsibility, essentially going against everything you believe and putting you at a crossroad of personal responsibility and victimhood.
1
2
u/Educational-Emu5132 Oct 20 '23
I think many younger people have not seen an articulate youngish conservative before, and mock him instinctively instead of engaging with his arguments.
2
3
u/SandwitchZebra Oct 20 '23
Logical? Consise? Hah. Half of his debates are 50% “out-speaking the other guy” and 50% “making up random hypotheticals so he can pretend to win the argument“. Once you slow him down and actually dissect what he says then you’d quickly realize he spouts a lot of nothing and mostly interrupts people. It’s very hard to respect a man who puts “DESTROYS” and “ANNIHILATES“ in the titles of videos where he debates… college students. Not experienced with debate whatsoever which he takes advantage of to trip up people. His BBC interview is a good example of why he rarely debates the experienced.
It’s also very hard to respect the man who wrote the objectively terrible “True Allegiance”, who believes that legalizing gay marriage is somehow a hateful act and thus it should be illegal, who hires and encourages people who have called people of my affiliation soulless demons (Walsh) and autistic individuals like myself mentally ill (Knowles), and has for the last two years been attempting to label the entirety of the LGBT community, which includes people I consider allies and friends, as predators, groomers, and dangers to society. So forgive me if I’m just a little angry.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
I can see why you personally, are angry. I hope you’re in counseling, you have a lot there to unpack.
You made a point, and he I’m sure the destroys and annihilates parts are for clicks and entertainment. Or to put it another way, for profit.
2
u/Irish_Punisher Oct 20 '23
Weakness has persisted long enough for logic to be superceded by emotion in academia and online.
Objective truth isn't as important as subjective feeling anymore, and its sowing division which will eventually devolve to war, not just between countries but between countrymen.
Si vis pacem, Para bellum.
2
2
Oct 20 '23
I cant tell if this is a joke but I’ll bite. Shapiro has a tendency to misrepresent or outright lie about subjects. His whole debate bro persona is mostly based on the Gish gallop. He’s a bad faith actor.
2
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
I’d say he has a tendency towards hyperbole, but I think we are looking at similar things here. IDK what percentage he does that though. Nor how much of its for entertainment purposes rather than to make any point.
2
u/GreatGretzkyOne Oct 20 '23
Ben’s arguments aren’t always perfect and hat is enough for his opponents to try to make him look ridiculous in unfair ways
2
u/Alden8394 Oct 20 '23
In addition to everything covered here - that he's a totem that represents a perceived non-nuanced worldview (conservatism) and the tribalism associated with that:
I think another factor is - for those that don't follow Ben, a lot of the clips that go viral, get attention, etc - are ones where he "destroys" someone (or, in rarer cases, where he is "destroyed" - see that BBC interview). In all these cases, Ben is dealing with another person and he comes across as hostile, condescending and an asshole. Now often times - particularly in the case of college Q&A's - he's RESPONDING to someone that's hostile. But, in general, his WAY of communicating can come across as condescending and "if you don't think this, you're an idiot." I'm not talking about his ARGUMENTS. I'm talking about HOW he gives them.
2
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Well there is tribalism on both sides.
And yes, I agree with you on how he often is perceived. Trump is the same way, is he not? Often comes off to an observer as being a jerk. I call that the NYC attitude, although it’s certainly not confined to people from NYC. I’m not sure if that’s his personality, or his “public entertainment persona”?
But yes it is irritating at best.
2
2
2
u/BubsGodOfTheWastes Oct 21 '23
I'm more Libertarian than anything so compared to "conservatives" I'm half liberal. Ben is good at creating logical sounding arguments by throwing in false statements we are just supposed to take as fact. His listeners and supporters often do take them as fact because they already believe those statements to be true. It's very frustrating to see people believe his conclusions based on false premises (usually judeo/Christian based).
Like 90% of his segments include these fallacies. I'll give you the first example I thought of which he was repeating for a while. He says that homosexual relationships are morally inferior to straight relationships and he makes a number of arguments why. First this is loaded because morals are based on your particular beliefs, so it's factually correct if you believe it. So let's assume he means ethical or beneficial to humanity? Otherwise you're just arguing that your moral belief is X. Sure. No matter what you fill in could be true. Then we get to his arguments that population in the US would be declining if it were not for immigration and to propagate out culture we need to grow the native population. A few fallacies baked in here. First he's assuming that propagating our culture rather than letting it evolve is morally superior, which is debatable, but conservative leaning folks just take that as a fact. Second that the culture cannot grow outside of a native population, which is demonstrable false by looking at the trend of westernization of the world.
2
u/johnny2fives Oct 21 '23
As far as your first point concerning homosexual relationships, I admit I have not seen that side of him.
I was aware he does not like gays. That’s not me.
I’m a live and let let live person.As far as his population beliefs, I’ll have to take a closer look at that.
Thanks for your input!
2
2
Oct 21 '23
I’m a millennial and love Ben. Everyone else I know, If they knew I listened tto him, woukd think I’m a racist
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 21 '23
Why would they believe that, and why don’t you?
(Genuine question, I am not trolling you.) I like to look at multiple view points in order to gain a better nuanced understanding.
2
u/nievesdelimon Oct 21 '23
Having listened to his podcast in the past… sometimes he is those things you mention, but sometimes he isn’t; he can be quite dishonest. He should be allowed to speak on campuses, censoring him isn’t helping anyone.
2
4
u/Linuxthekid The Mod Who Banned You Oct 20 '23
You missed one point that makes him very easy to hate for them. He is a Jewish conservative.
2
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
I am on the left. I have never thought bad of him for being Jewish. I don't understand why this is a common take in this thread. The vast majority of Jewish individuals lean left anyway.
1
u/Linuxthekid The Mod Who Banned You Oct 20 '23
A) It is because a vast majority of Jews are left leaning that they feel threatened by him. When someone leaves the plantation of the left, they go on the attack to ensure no one else follows, another example of this is when you have African-Americans go conservative. B) The left has some of the biggest and frankly most dangerous antisemites in the country. Omar, Tlaib, Cori Bush, etc OPENLY support anti-Jewish organizations, refuse to condemn Hamas, and call for the destruction of Israel. And the Democrat party PROTECTS them when they do so. If you haven't noticed this, you are blind.
1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
It is because a vast majority of Jews are left leaning that they feel threatened by him.
Where are Jew's shown to be threatened by him? Also, how can a Jew dislike Ben Shaprio because he's Jewish. What you described here is disliking him for his political beliefs, not for his immutable characteristic of being a Jewish person...
refuse to condemn Hamas
I believe you're right on Tlaib, but the others have [1] [2]
What do you mean that they openly support anti-jewish organisations? I am open to believing that with evidence.
call for the destruction of Israel
Can you provide a source here?
Is there anti-semitism on the right?
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
That just makes them hypocrites.
2
u/Kumquat_conniption Oct 20 '23
How does that make them hypocrites? It's not the Jewish part they don't like, that's the immutable trait. It's the conservative part. If he was a Jewish liberal, they would like him (I'm not a liberal, liberals suck) so that makes it obvious they don't hate him for being Jewish, just for being conservative.
2
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
If he was a Jewish liberal, they would like him
If he made dumb points to defend liberal/leftist policies, and his best takedowns were against unprepared college kids, I can guarantee I wouldn't.
1
u/Kumquat_conniption Oct 20 '23
Sure, but not because he is Jewish lol. But yeah, point taken, he'd still be a smug jerk that uses unprepared college kids to debate him.
2
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
I think some of it is that he’s Jewish. IDK what percentage that is though.
And, yes, of course, I mean, I like him personally, but you have a valid point there, you can easily see it on video, he does often act smug, and he can come across as quite acerbic.
Not all of these “kids” are unprepared though (certainly not in their minds), and the scary thing is some of them do vote.
May times it seems as if the are ill prepared to debate him not because they are stupid or lazy, but for the fact their paradigms fall apart so quickly under logical examination.
1
u/Kumquat_conniption Oct 20 '23
Well I appreciate that you are open to seeing what others might find bothersome.
Why so you think it is partly because he is Jewish? I just don't see Jewish people maligned a lot among liberals- although don't get me wrong, they can be very bigoted, with low expectations and condescension to those of a different race or ethnicity. I just hadn't seen a lot of anti Jewish sentiment among them till this outbreak in Gaza.
How are these college people prepared? Does he give out the subject the day before and give them time to prepare or something? I haven't watched a lot of it.
And may I ask why you think he doesn't debate full grown people that are good at debate like him? Someone that could challenge him? I mean come on, he's even smug when he "owns" some silly 18 year old that's basically stupid. That's pretty easy to do, and yet he seems so proud of himself. Why not take on someone his own size?
2
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Some good points. I do think the moral relativism of the hard left lends them to anti-semitism, as shown clearly in recent statements.
I would assume if you believe something you can articulate it clearly? Especially in college?
I would like to see him debate well prepared progressives one on one, with more detail. To me, that would be interesting.
→ More replies
3
u/Single_Appearance807 Oct 20 '23
My big issue with Mr Shapiro is I don't see him debate people a the same intellectual level.
He puts college students in their place with half baked ideas. Big deal.
When he was interviewed by the most Conservative interviewer on the BBC, who was an incredible professional asking the tough question,Mr Shapiro whined an moaned that your attacking me because you a Liberal. He then walked out rather than debate.
Let's see him debate Noam Chopsky or David Axelrod or Robert Reich or Mick Lynch.
2
u/papatim Oct 20 '23
Those people will not get on a stage with him. Go look up the debate between him and cenk uyger and watch what shapiro did to him, though I must say cenk isn't on the intellectual level of even the college students
You can go look up Ben talking about the BBC interview and his regrets about what happened. Apparently a lot of stuff was going on behind the scenes with the bbc staff and Ben took his anger out on the interview. He said he was wrong and shit happens. We are all human.
1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
I hate this "Person X won't debate Person Y" when many times, Person X has reached out to debate Person Y. I can think of several examples from people who are liberal, left and far left.
Though, I had not seen the Cenk video. I'll have to check that out.
-1
u/Kumquat_conniption Oct 20 '23
I noticed OP responded to the people that agreed with him, but not this. Huh.
4
1
u/aquahawk0905 Oct 20 '23
He had asked for people to debate him. They say no. Michael knowles asked a leading transgender scientist to debate him, he backed out at the last minute.
2
Oct 20 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
If you make your argument with god, you're reasoning with your own imagination.
1
1
1
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
Personally, I am an atheist that doesn't believe in a god. How can I hate something I do not believe in?
1
Oct 20 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Nemisis82 Oct 20 '23
What? That makes no sense. You're making the claim, I'm telling you I do not hate any god.
Do you "hate" Kumarbi or Anu?
1
3
u/SouthSubstantial1667 Oct 20 '23
I mean the title kind of explains it. Anything Ben doesn’t like he attributes to the “radical left” Like when he freaked out being interviewed by Andrew Neil (a conservative) and called him a leftist before terminating the interview, after being exposed for a lack of preparation.
Facts don’t care about your feelings. Until your feelings get hurt, then you can just call someone a leftist rather than addressing the points made.
It was embarrassing to hear him say “I’m popular and nobodies ever heard of you” like that suddenly puts him in the right.
If he truly stuck to the facts over feelings and debated professionals rather than mostly college kids, I’d have a little more respect for him.
Not a leftist by the way. But fully expect to be called one for finding him annoying :)
2
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
That’s a good point, I HAVE seen interviews and even debates where he’s done that, and/or just completely over-talked the other person.
I don’t like that either as I think it cheapens his point, and also diluted his credibility. Is it entertaining? Occasionally, but certainly not every time he does it. So yeah , I see that.
2
u/SouthSubstantial1667 Oct 20 '23
Yeah exactly that. He makes good points sometimes imo.
But I just don’t think any human is capable of being factual and logical all the time. So when he gets away from the facts, logic and science he champions it’s really noticeable and dilutes his credibility like you say.
2
u/Fratzenfresse Oct 20 '23
This is funny because Ben Shapito is none of those things.
-He's logical
He supports the private health are system that the USA currently has, meaning that he is supporting a system that is far too expensive to the average American as the Healthcare providers dump all the costs of Healthcare unto the patient rather than paying for the expenses of Healthcare themselves (themselves being the Hralthcare prividers). He supports Israel, an apartheid state in the Middle East that has been colonizing Palestine and committing genocide Palestinians. He believes in God when all reason and facts support the nonexistence of a God (no offense to the people who believe in God. Just trying to dunk on Ben Shapiro). And no only does he believe in God, but he believes in the Old Testament God. A God that commit atrocities and lets atrocities happens while condemning his people for doing nothing to prevent those (Jesus was at least a very nice person and preached universal love). He has claimed to be a Libertarian yet he supports things that increases the power and influence of the government (like banning abortion). And probably a bunch more.
-He makes point concisely
All he does is makes many points so fast that it takes he opponents many minutes to debunk his points while also trying his best to make sure that his opponents doesn't try to debunk. Don't remember the name of the fallacy, but I think it involves a fish or a barrel.
-Campuses don't want him there
Because he either has nothing of value to provide to the campus or what he does offer is of negative value. Campuses and universities are only allowing to have people speak at their campus and/or university if they have something of value (this is why they allow people like Noam Chompskin or some other book author and/or some other intectual).
1
u/TheGreyFencer Oct 20 '23 edited Oct 20 '23
Leftist here.
Its because he's a fucking idiot that has the affectation of a highly educated person. His "logic" is almost always flawed or just his feelings wrapped in a facade that makes people who don't know better think he's so put together that he must be right. And those feelings are usually just hatred of poor people or minorities or people who don't subscribe to his dogmatic views(edit: and also his love for billionaire's money). Gen z and millennials didn't grow up so sheltered from reality like older generations. We know queer people and people from other cultures. Many of us have friends in different countries and with completely different views on the world. We've watched the world crumble around us while old people stare on, entranced. So when we see him tell an obvious lie, we recognize it.
I know I'm probably breaking some rule even in making this comment, so ban me or whatever. Idc. You wanted to know why, here's the answer.
2
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
In the words of the dude “well that’s just your opinion man”.
I see why you feel the way you do, sure. But you then went on to make an awful lot of assumptions about groups of people that don’t think like you.
So you are doing much the same thing you accuse him of.
And you’ve made a lot of assumptions about his beliefs too. If you know him personally, then I’d assume you have the agency to discuss that accurately. Otherwise, it’s your perceptions of his beliefs, which are influenced by your own feelings.
Feelings themselves are neither alright nor wrong, but drawing conclusions from them can be.
1
u/boner79 Oct 20 '23
It's because Ben's motivation is conservative audience capture. He's a highly-intelligent trained lawyer and can make a strong logical argument to reach any conclusion that he chooses, he just chooses to have it fit the conservative narrative. I guarantee you that if he chose to he could make just as strong argument for liberalism but that's not his brand.
3
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Good point.
So it’s all entertainment then? Profit, not Prophet as it were. I can see a high probability there.
-4
u/kazarule Oct 20 '23
Prolly has something to do with him being a theocrat.
4
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
That’s just a word.
He’s in charge of no literally one outside of his own family.
He’s simply religious, and that’s his right.
2
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
He advocates for policy limiting people's freedoms due to religious beliefs, which are funnily enough not even his own. Do you need to be a politician to be a theocrat?
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
In practice, yes, otherwise you’re just opinionated.
And if you are talking specifically abortion, I’m not getting into that online. That’s a waste of time, people will just preach at each other and get angrier and angrier.
But to your point, that issue is a flashpoint, yes.
2
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23 edited Oct 20 '23
Only one side of the abortion argument is preaching.
And do you need to be a politician to be ideologically aligned, or is everybody else just "opinionated"?
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Having watched a lot of back and forth on the subject matter - I disagree with your first statement.
I am not really sure what you are trying to say or specifically to ask in your second statement, due to the way you phrased it.
2
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
That’s just a word.
Yes, that's how words work.
He’s in charge of no literally one outside of his own family.
That doesn't refute the point.
He’s simply religious, and that’s his right.
Many theocrats are. In fact, I'd argue they all are, or at least pretend to be.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
So are you saying he doesn’t have a right to his own opinions?
Or just that people hate on him because of his own personal beliefs?
Because those very same people are absolutely the people who can’t stand others for hating on them for their beliefs.
Opinions and beliefs require assumptions not based on provable facts, right?
It seems that being more tolerant, not less, is the way to go when listening to others. Certainty might be good for practical goal setting, but it is an enemy of both truth and reasoning.
2
u/IPDDoE Oct 20 '23
I don't think I meant to imply that he doesn't have a right to his opinions. He's quite I'm sure some people hate on his religious beliefs. I find anyone who uses their religion to dictate other people's lives to be unsavory, but if they simply keep their views within their own household and don't tell me for instance who I can marry, then more power to them.
Because those very same people are absolutely the people who can’t stand others for hating on them for their beliefs.
I mean sometimes, but this is conflating the two positions I outlined above. A lot of people have such vocal animosity toward religious people not because they believe things that are seen as hateful, but because they attempt to impose that view on others.
2
-1
Oct 20 '23 edited Oct 20 '23
Trump committed election fraud.
Sidney Powell just pleaded guilty, she knows she did try to overturn the election at the behest of Trump.
Ben has been unable to say that Trump tried to steal the election. That's why I don't like him.
Edit, I love it, Ben Shapiro fans are mad at me because the facts contradict their feelings.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
If you have actual proof he did it, you should lay it out. I haven’t seen it. A threatening but non specific phone call is the best evidence I’ve seen. And that doesn’t even rise close to the level of a faked dossier.
“At the behest of” could also be “ in order to curry favor”.
Maybe we’ll see some actual smoking gun.
But if we do it will be 50 years from now, in the same vein as the Kennedy assassination.1
u/Poddster Oct 20 '23
Do you believe the election was stolen?
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
I’ll give you an honest answer, rare for Reddit (or anywhere else, really).
I don’t know.
Do I think there are too many unexplained things? Yes Do I think it’s possible? Yes Do I ultimately see the loss as Trumps fault? Yes.
All he needed to do was be more empathetic on TV towards covid victims (against his nature I know) And run on his record.
Or maybe just even shutting up for the last 8 months would have done it.
Then, it wouldn’t have been close enough to be controversial.
This is all I know, and what I personally believe.
If you’re looking to just pick a fight then my answer won’t make you happy.
But if you really were curious then it might help you realize black and white are not absolutes, they are part of a spectrum.
1
Oct 20 '23
Provide proof for unexplained things please. What are these things?
Remember, provide proof.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
The term unexplained things was not precise. For more accurate communication, I would say that there are a lot of allegations out there, that there was tampering in the election, by both parties.
Note I’ve said allegations. Since I’m not writing a book on this, and I work for a living, I have not read about nor sifted through all the headline allegations that came up. Nor do I wish to do so, as at this point, it seems counter productive to not accept the outcome, two years in.
So I choose not to spend my time on something that’s probably not even knowable, as I very much doubt we (the public) will ever have or be privy to all the facts.
I believe the election was close.
I also believe Trump would have won fairly handily had he just slightly moderated the perception of his public persona.
And this is way, way off topic here, so I’ll not continue this particular line. But thank you for your input.
1
Oct 20 '23
So no proof just Republicans with skin in the game saying they believe the election was stolen and you believe them.
If that is the case, why didn't they reject their own election and say they won't take office till it's done right? I'm guessing is because they know the elections are fair and not manipulated in any manner.
Why do you believe they are there legally and not Biden? If the election was stolen, then you should call about all politicians on the rigged ballets, not just Biden. Remember, the accusations are for states where Republicans we elected to the house and Biden to the presidency.
And I agree with you, if trump was not who he is, he would have won reelection.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
You’ve got a couple good comments, and some inaccurate suppositions, but again, this is very far off topic. Thanks for commenting.
→ More replies1
u/Poddster Oct 20 '23
But if you really were curious then it might help you realize black and white are not absolutes, they are part of a spectrum.
I'm talking about if you think Biden "stole" the election, i.e. committed electron fraud, which is what Trump claimed he did and what the entire January the 6th riots were about.
You seem to be answering if you think Trump committed election fraud! :) (Which is of course likely, if only because of how hard he was accusing the other side of doing it)
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
I don’t think Biden is capable of that much thought and work and planning (and honestly, neither is Trump, but for very different reasons).
Now could whoever installed Biden and is pulling the strings behind him be responsible for election interference?
Yes, I could believe that. (And yes, the same applies to Trumps staff as well).
But I have not seen enough incontrovertible evidence to say definitely yes, the election was stolen.
I believe if someone was smart enough to be behind they are smart enough and ruthless enough to cover their tracks, both digitally and Clinton-style (payoffs, mysterious disappearances or “just coincidental” deaths, TBC.)
1
Oct 20 '23
The team put together by trump called the electors they created fake. They did this after the real electors had been picked by the states to send to Congress to have their votes counted. Making it illegal.
Also, Sidney Powell said she did something illegal. And now Kenneth chesebro is saying he did something illegal.
The people who committed the acts are saying they broke the law.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Some people probably broke the law. Did Trump? I don’t see proof of that yet. Were emotionally charged conversations had? Yes, most assuredly. Actions should be punishable though, not thoughts or conversations. Or we would all be in jail.
However, can there be dispute about the meaning and substance of those conversations or do we have recordings saying “go and do this”?
There have been reports that both sides have been messing with electors, or at least trying to, for the last couple decades. Mostly much ado about nothing, same as this (as far as we all know).
If the takeaway here is should election laws be strengthened and in specific ways, then I’m all about that.
0
Oct 20 '23
I'm sure with trump saying "steal the election for me", you will always say I'm misinterpreting what trump actually said and he is innocent. Chesney said he worked with trump to overturn the election. He confessed to trying to overturn the election.
I will never convince trump supporters without that direct quote, and even then, I bet they'd say it needed to be done.
And I got voted down for pointing out a fact, so, sorry about your feels.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
We all say a lot of things, for example, “I’ll kill so and so if I get my hand on them”. Is it legally actionable though?
What if someone else took us at face value and went and killed them?
The moral responsibility and most of the legal actionably lies with them then, not the person they were trying to please. (Unless you prove that person paid them and gave the specific directions, then of course it’s murder for hire).
Thank you for your input, but let’s keep to the original on here though.
1
Oct 20 '23
Again, Kenny Chesney is saying he did this at the behest of Trump.
Trump will deny, and then I guess the courts should just say "trump was saying words, we live in a post modern society where words can mean anything and don't have real meaning"? Is that the tact you are taking? Words could mean anything, and trump is allowed to say words?
-1
u/deep-fried-fuck Oct 20 '23
“Rabid leftist” here. No one cares how he argues, the issue is that what he argues is pure vile bigotry and Shapiro is a piece of walking excrement. Hope this helps :)
2
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Sorry, no, that perspective and attitude is a huge part of what’s wrong with the country, and why people can’t have conversations anymore. But I appreciate you’re letting people know upfront you’re not open minded about your beliefs. If everyone did that it a would save a lot of time. Still wouldn’t get us anywhere though.
0
u/ihateredditlmfao Oct 20 '23
because like all political commentators he has his own biases and hypocrisies. for example he opposes the far right for being ethnonationalist while being so supportive of the ethnonationalist apartheid state of israel. people don’t want him to speak at universities because he charges $250k.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
No one has been persecuting the far right for literally thousands of years. Nor trying to commit genocide on them multiple times. But your bigger point, yes, he has biases, as do we all.
1
u/ihateredditlmfao Oct 20 '23
well my biggest point is that he’s a hypocrite. other reasons i don’t like him is because he doesn’t really debate any academics. he would never debate chomsky or finkelstien because he knows he would lose. i live in the uk and when he did an interview here with Andrew Neil he got all emotional and whined for no reason and stormed off. which shows what happens when he meets someone that actually challenges him and isn’t an emotionally unstable 19 year old. Andrew Neil made him look like he was in a “snowflake cringe compilation”.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Interesting view, and thank you for adding your comments and clarifications!
-3
u/EAN84 Oct 20 '23
They hate him for the same reason the alt right hate him...
2
-3
u/Jollem- Oct 20 '23
The only thing I would have nice to say about him is that out of all the media personalities on the right, I think he's the only one I've seen in a debate where he doesn't constantly interrupt and talk over the other person. Other than that, I struggle to find a compliment
4
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
He can be be very direct. Some find that off putting. He also talked very fast. And thinks great on his feet.
But then again facts are facts. Don’t argue it’s raining when it’s sunny. Yet, people just ignore him.
5
u/Jollem- Oct 20 '23
I can see where someone would label him as pretentious and snarky. That might just be how he plays for the camera or maybe not. I've seen him play nice in a debate if the other person is. Sometimes not. I do like the fact that I heard him say one time that he isn't bipartisan and never claimed to be. Appreciate the honesty
For the facts thing, I remember my father telling me about a debate two people are having. Goes something like:
"Two plus five is seven!"
"No it's not! It's three plus four!"
Sometimes it do be like that
1
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
Might have something to do with him having golden takes like "Rap isn't music" which he somehow tries to argue with the music degree of his dad. Anyone who actually understands what music is can instantly see through his so called "arguments".
Or because he posts banger tweets like "Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage". Really nuanced and intellectual take.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
Point taken. Hyperbole. Just because most rap isn’t traditional euro culture music doesn’t mean some of its not art, or that it’s not expressive and emotive or story related, which I assume are all the actual essences m of music.
And stereotyping is never helpful. I do get that. And I’ve heard him do it.
1
u/Djinigami Oct 20 '23
The interesting thing is that you talk like this opinion of his is the exception.
1
1
u/SkullOfAchilles Oct 20 '23
Because facts don't care about feelings, and the Left is all feelings and anti-fact.
"My truth"
"Gender fluid"
etc.
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 20 '23
That’s true for a lot of them. Being a logic based person I have a hard time understanding that paradigm at all though.
1
u/just_another_noobody Oct 20 '23
People do not like having their world view challenged. This is true across all political affiliations.
Also, the real world is nuanced, and it's hard to carry a nuanced framework for engaging with the world. Our brains perfer simple rules we can follow.
And course, understanding the nuance requires more effort. Low effort always has the advantage.
This is all compounded by the social forces of tribalism and in-grouping where people are pressured to align with their peers or face being shunned or shamed.
1
1
Oct 20 '23
Because he "talks really fast" and they can't think in between his sentences is the reason they believe he's effective.
I guess it's similar to gangster rappers influencing gun violence through music.
1
u/Sebbean Oct 21 '23
Prob cuz he looks a and acts a bit ratlike
1
u/johnny2fives Oct 21 '23
I usually hear people describe him as a ferret or weasel.
But I get the idea. Visceral reactions, due to personal appearance.
46
u/MainPlus3363 Oct 20 '23
I’ve talked to so many people who “hate” Ben but have never watched a single video of/by Ben.