Ben Shapiro, stable genius
Renowned conservative windbag Andrew Neil interviewed Ben Shapiro, giving America's toughest ( :haha: ) conservative debater an opportunity to address some of the criticism he has received over the years for his various statements on social, cultural and political matters—and to defend one of the ideas he discusses in his new book. Neil has many flaws, but he's a decent interviewer who often goes to the trouble of finding & presenting reasonable challenges to his guests' political positions, giving them an opportunity to develop their thoughts. See Shapiro's interesting reaction to this treatment:
Twitter Link
It seems to have gone downhill from there:
https://www.google.se/amp/s/www.medi...rd-of-you/amp/
Quote:
“You talk about undermining the public discourse — it seems to me that simply going through and finding lone things that sound bad out of context, and then hitting people with them, is a way for you to make a quick buck on BBC off the fact that I’m popular and no one has ever heard of you.”
“This whole thing is a waste of time. Frankly, I don’t care — I don’t frankly give a damn what you think of me since I’ve never heard of you.”
“I think we’re done here,” he added.
“Thank you for your time and for showing that anger is not part of American political discourse,” Neil dryly said back.
Can't help but think that this may say something quite unflattering about the state of right-wing political debate in the US. These people—Shapiro, Carlson, O'Reilly before them—have tens of millions of people hanging on their every word. Aggressive debate (of a fashion) is ostensibly the foundation of their brands. And, yet, when met with the gentlest resistance...
