584
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] ceenote@lemmy.world 191 points 11 months ago

He was not a debater, he was a propagandist.

[-] UnexpectedBehavior@lemmy.world 84 points 11 months ago

CK was a pussy who got his ass whipped every time he left his faschist echo chamber and debated someone with more than two brain cells

[-] iturnedintoanewt@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

As someone not from the US, do you have examples?

[-] oyo@lemmy.zip 10 points 11 months ago

He was a content farmer. And he worked hard for that content because most average, random college kids absolutely destroyed him.

[-] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 123 points 11 months ago

It was bad arguing. There's a reason why he only argued with children and never with any actually serious debate clubs.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 51 points 11 months ago

We can probably thank decades of shout shows on television, especially cable, in which "debates" took place that were not really actual debates.

Same with the way our "debates" are run when it comes to politicians running for office.

[-] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 48 points 11 months ago

This. He was terrible at arguing. You are describing a terrible orator with no skill to analyze it present ideas.

But we took humanities out of school curriculum long ago, so most can't tell.

In the land of the blind the one-eyed is king.

[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 4 points 11 months ago

never with any actually serious debate clubs

In my experience, many debate clubs have at least a few members who are wankers like Kirk.

For example, Ted Cruz was a debate whiz kid in college. But outside that artificial, controlled environment, he still resorts to bullying and flooding the zone with bullshit. That's because propaganda is a different game than debate, and debate skills have limited relevance to political discussions.

[-] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 2 points 11 months ago

I didn't know that. I always assumed people who argued like he did would quickly be shut down by the basic rules of the format and give up if they couldn't learn to adapt

[-] TheJesusaurus@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

Know how everyone hates lawyers because they basically manipulate the meaning of the rules to serve themselves? It's like that.

If you're an absolute killer at the kind of rules and admin of debate, you can rack up points with nonsense and keep your opponent from doing the same.

It's an insanely stupid use of people's time

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 76 points 11 months ago

I hate that most people seem to be unaware of the Gish Gallop.

Ben Shapiro does the same thing, as did "Dr" Dino (an evolution denier).

[-] axexrx@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

I was in middle school when Adam Sandler's Billy madison came out. The year following, we had debate class.

Anything remotely approximating a gish-gallop was immediately responded to with the ben stein quote

"what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

Im disappointed this did not just become the standard shut down.

[-] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 14 points 11 months ago

the ben stein quote

It was Jim Downey, but Ben Stein probably would've worked just fine in that role as well. Too bad Stein's an anti-abortion creationist weirdo though.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Jim Downey is a comedy legend. If you know, you know.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

That's awesome. I've heard that clip played for so many things over the years, and honestly, I wish public political "debates" would push a buzzer, cut the mic of the offender and play that clip. Being able to spot and name a Gish Gallop should be in every American's toolbox and maybe a humorous way to teach it would be that clip. :)

I've never been in debate class or on a debate team, but I'm well aware that what is often called a "debate" isn't anything like what a debate should be. Most of it seems to be about who is able to craft and get in a well-scripted zinger, but one that doesn't come off like it's well-scripted.

Like Ronnie Raygun's "there you go again". I mean, that's the classic case of this kind of thing, and even today, conservatives that remember that think it's a real counterpoint. When it just sounds like something barely evolved past the playground's "I know what you are, but what am I?"

And people, even with the rise of the Internet, are still able to get away with the Gish Gallop and have people think the abuser is really smart and a master debater.

[-] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 8 points 11 months ago

Fucking Aquaman?!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLqXkYrdmjY&t=191s

It's sad how stupid your message can be and still amass an army of idiots to line up behind you.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

LOL, I forgot about that stupid argument by climate denialists about just being able to sell your house and move when the tides rise and claim your property....

But Aquaman is the perfect response!

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago

Call him by his name so folks can better shame him. Kent Hovind is a bitch less whoreson who has willingly and knowingly exposed children to pedophilic sexual predators.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Wow, for some reason, I thought "Dr" Dino/Kent Hovind had died.

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

Nope fucker is still alive and causing trouble, though his influence is still well and truly weakened. He also probably isn't far off from getting shot or ending up in prison again.

[-] criss_cross@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

TIL

Like I’ve seen it in action and have had to counter it but never knew there was a formal name for it.

[-] Catma@lemmy.world 41 points 11 months ago

Cant wait for his next debate

[-] makyo@lemmy.world 37 points 11 months ago

If y’all aren’t familiar yet, the ‘Alt-right Playbook’ videos on Youtube explain all this really well and explain what we have to continue to deal with

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 11 points 11 months ago

I typically avoid videos because I vastly prefer reading, but I make an exception for those. I just watch them at double speed.

[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 5 points 11 months ago

The way to deal with it is to not play by their rules. Fascists don't care about winning rational arguments, they just want to get you to waste your time and energy trying.

Drive them out of power, that's the only language they understand.

[-] hunnybubny@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 11 months ago

And this is why one of the correct answers is I do not care.

Try this on tankies. Or Hassan habibis. They will just continue with bullshit and insults.

Never a dialogue. It is a flood of hate.

[-] NochMehrG@feddit.org 22 points 11 months ago

There are more „episodes“ from this event on YouTube. They are all pretty great. Kirk seems to have problems debating with people who actually know their stuff and don’t let themselves be tricked.

[-] Kolanaki@pawb.social 20 points 11 months ago

Him and a bunch of other dipshits that hold these "debates" would have failed high school debate classes or an actual judged competition.

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 15 points 11 months ago

Yeah since his death I watched a couple of videos and he ~~is~~ was so robotic and insincere. Like he would just cut off his opponent if he detected a keyword that relates to some lukewarm rebuttal (that anyone with a passing familiarity with the topic would see through) and use it as a rhetorical trap, to stop having a thinking debate and pivot to simply spewing talking points.

Smelling the feculent turn, the crowd would then cheer and whoop him on as he would pile on more and more bullshit over the original dishonest dump.

Then his Move: he would ask a question based on this insincere tower of turds. He would repeat it, it's a simple question, right? Just answer the question.

Obviously the original point is buried under several layers of shit by this point, so it's hard to tell what the debate was even about...

I think that's what honest people failed to realise when debating Kirk. It wasn't about anything other than winning the debate.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] BetaBlake@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago
[-] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 12 points 11 months ago

Never Play Defense is the alt right playbook

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wmVkJvieaOA

[-] Nightlight17776@lemmy.ca 11 points 11 months ago

I didn't know who kirk was and this disheveled looking British kid was my introduction to him. What a lad!! Multiple mic drop moments

[-] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Consider it rejected.

[-] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 5 points 11 months ago

With all of the game/competition shows out there they should have a "Debate Club" or "Celebrity Debate Club" which could possibly pass down critical thinking to the viewer.

[-] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Grading on a curve, sadly he was much better than a lot of the other right wing personalities.

He at least let them have a mic even in his own forum, which is more than you can say for most right wingers.

[-] answersplease77@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Spreading false, bigoted and genocidal propagonda is not debating. That's called selling out your humanity and sucking satan's dick for money

Btw people need to stop talking about charlie kirk, or else we will keep reminding everyone of how evil and hateful he was every time they mention him.
Let him rest in piss or we will keep shitting on him

[-] Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Guy never won a single argument as a result of not answering questions in kind.

[-] rickdg@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Classic fascist playbook archetype. The man of action that appeals to tradiction, rejects modernity and fosters fear from those that are different.

[-] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

Jubilee: 1 Charlie Kirk vs 1 Discord Lunatic: Who would win?

[-] PillowD@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

An asshole who picked fights all the time finally gets one.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2025
584 points (97.9% liked)

politics

31022 readers
2813 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS