no you don't.

these people don't argue to uncover the truth, they just provoke you into some debate-bro logical gotcha that is simply borne in ignorance.

it's not even if you agree or not with him, he has no intention of ever learning your side, it's just a smorgasbord of conservative bs on repeat.

murder bad. but this guy was a provocateur who tried to get the most "impact" for his side. that is why his hot takes are so insane. they aren't points to argue against, they are dog whistle rallying points for all the racists and misogynists to think society is theirs. so let's not defend his work as "just having opinions i disagree with" ...

I am a liberal person who lives in a deeply conservative area (Utah). I have had many conversations with staunch conservatives, some of them close friends and family. One-on-one is different from the one-to-many format, or the one-to-one-in-front-of-others format. It's quite possible to have a civil conversation about such things when there isn't an audience.

I have seldom (probably never) seen anyone have a big change of heart from such discussion, but often both sides concede a little, and it feels like progress toward common ground, minuscule though it may be.

It sounds like you’ve never watched any debating, whether at a world class university, parliament, or a high school. They’re no greater or lesses than Kirk’s debates were.

[flagged]