• Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    Yea I just watched the whole thing. One of my favorite things I’ve heard recently is people arguing if Charlie was a good debater or not.

    One person just said “did he ever once change his mind?” There isn’t one time in the past decade he has changed his mind. Charlie was not debating.

    What pisses me off is how their wasn’t an effort to collect material for times like this for us to repost. Sure there’s content but everybody on the left checks out and doesn’t bother to archive anything worthwhile. I think that hurts us in the end

    • nialv7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Charlie was not doing debates. He was a propagandist. What he did was performing in the shape of a debate, in front of an audience to spread his agenda, and he was very good at that. If you scrutinize his “debates” in terms of logic soundness or other things good arguments would have, they don’t stand a chance. But that was not the point, nor would it matter.

      • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I think his debates were actually very well done. It’s just that debates are not a good format to find truth. Charlie was one of the best at debates. Saying all that, we all should be better at being on other platforms and sniping these clips to highlight the hypocrisy and bullshit. I’m absolutely convinced that right wing groups convinced all of us to abandon all other social media so they can spread their ideas easier

        • nialv7@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 minutes ago

          Depends on what you think debate is, I guess. After posting my comment I did realize people probably conceptualise “debate” differently. If you think debate is just a form of performance to influence people’s ideas, then sure. But if you think debate should be a form of intellectual conversation, a collaboration between two disagreeing parties in order to find truth, then what Charlie is doing couldn’t be further from that.