Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"
Showing
1
of 1 result for
hbd
Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please try again later.
Debates have flaws that can be exploited, but so does every other manner of exchanging ideas. Writing off this style of debate enitrely just sounds like sour grapes.
How effective any particular debate tactic is depends on the audience. For mass appeal, sure, it's all theatrics. But convincing idiots is only useful for getting their votes or their money. They are memetic dead ends.
Politicians are optimized for this type of debating, because they're optimized for winning votes. When was the last time you heard any interesting arguments in a Presidential debate? It's not a flaw of the format, but the audience. When was last time a politician ever changed your mind? That's not their job.
Convincing intelligent people is trickier, but also a force multiplier on your ideas. Moldbug has a much smaller audience than Kirk did, but the former is more influential. Scott is even more influential. Hasan has a bigger audience than Destiny, but Destiny is more influential.
These people can't really roll over serious opposition. Look at how Rogan tried to handle Flint Dibble. Amongst Rogan's fans, Dibble was discredited. But outside that bubble, it was just another case of what everyone already knows: Rogan is a loud conspiracist with a loose grasp on reality.
People have poopooed Jubilee's surrounded format for being all theatrics, and it mostly is. But I've never seen a more metaphorical destruction than that kid telling Peterson "you're really quite nothing." The memetic power of that moment is hard to overstate. The stock of Peterson's brand of Christianity went into the toilet overnight.
The tactic of concern for me is cherry picking opponents. Kirk had been dodging Fuentes for months knowing full well a debate on Israel would leave him fumbling. Destiny has been eternally dodging debates on HBD knowing full well the subject collapses his world view. People like Tim Pool, Sam Seder, Crowder, F&F, etc. build their shows around the image of being all about open debate but only engage with opposition when they're screened as losers, i.e. mostly debate morons.
Kirk was at least holding open mic challenges in a real physical space. He could still control the frame to some degree, but much less than other formats. We'll see less of that now.
More options
Context Copy link