I never paid much attention to his debates, but from what little snippets I’ve seen, along with the “Prove Me Wrong” schtick seems to indicate he already decided he was right and others were wrong.

There’s plenty of rhetoric and memes already, I’d like to avoid more rhetoric and memes, and I ask this question with genuine curiosity and earnest desire for learning and understanding.

  • Railcar8095@lemmy.world
    12·
    2 days ago

    I think there was one event in Utah were somebody shot an argument about guns being bad, and he thought about it for the rest of his life. Not sure if it changed his mind

  • pigeonholedpoetry@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    6·
    2 days ago

    This isn’t the place to get an unbiased actual real answer. No one here has watched anything beyond a clip out of context by a POS influencer.

  • Chip_Rat@lemmy.world
    21·
    3 days ago

    I was listening to… CBC front burner podcast I think? And they mentioned that he has shifted his position on immigrants. He was quoted in the past saying any immigrant who graduated post secondary in the US should have a green card attached to the diploma.

    Then some right wing nutjobs were mad about that and we’re targetting his events and harrassing him until he fell in line.

    So yeah. He will change his mind, if he is bullies enough.

    Also I think the group that were harassing his events was Nick Fuentas (spelling?) and now some of the coverage is indicating the shooter might have been a follower of Nick? I’m not sure how confirmed that is so do your own research.

    But if it’s just right wing nutjobs killing slightly less to the right right wing nutjobs… Idk man.

    • PolydoreSmith@lemmy.world
      18·
      3 days ago

      The guy who killed Charlie was 100% a groyper (Nick Fuentes lackey). The news has been slow to pick up on it, but his socials were full of Pepe memes and he is fully a member of the alt-right. Kirk was killed for not being racist enough. Which is insane

  • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
    11·
    3 days ago

    indicate he already decided he was right and others were wrong.

    That’s kind of a big part of debates, didn’t you do them in school?

    You can change opinions over time but you’d lose a debate if you said the other side was right in the middle of it.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      13·
      3 days ago

      I think that’s a problem with debating classes in the US where people lost sight on why debates are useful in the first place.

      It should be an exchange of ideas and views, an opportunity to learn, not a training in ways to just yell over your opponent so that then you can just claim you won something. Then again, writing this “out loud” makes me realize that that is the American way, no?

      May e that’s where a lot of gains can be made for the next generation. Teach them how to debate with reason AND LISTEN TO YOUR OPPONENT.For fucking once, actually listen, and try to understand, and not stick with your guns even though you’re obviously in the wrong

      • Vile_port_aloo@lemmy.world
        2·
        3 days ago

        I thought that’s what these “change my mind booths” were for. Highlighting the poor standard of debating shown extensively by the late internet celebrity. He was also a honey pot for online trolling at the expense of a poorly thought out statement or just too much raw emotion. From what I seen the whole set up was triggering but a choice and seemed to cover all health and safety issues at each campus.

        Listening is key . Context is everything.

      • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
        1·
        3 days ago

        Debate isn’t to convince the debaters, it’s to convince the audience.

        Being able to select what the audience sees is what makes it anti-education.

    • Ostrakon@lemmy.world
      13·
      3 days ago

      This is the root of the problem, isn’t it? When someone proves you wrong, and you persist despite evidence to the contrary, that’s pretty stupid, right? This high school debate sophistry that Kirk and his contemporaries engage in isn’t a good faith discussion and most of his audience isn’t equipped with the critical thinking skills to understand that.

      • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
        6·
        3 days ago

        isn’t a good faith discussion and most of his audience isn’t equipped with the critical thinking skills to understand that.

        This is the biggest crux. I found people also don’t realize that clips are either staged or handpicked.

        • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
          1·
          2 days ago

          The people asking questions are often fans lobbing questions they know fit the narrative. Like the tiktoker who streamed immediately and apparently stole merch from the booth: they were a fan and in line.

  • kidney_stone@lemmy.world
    15·
    4 days ago

    I am also interested in this.

    I guess that most people wouldn’t really know, because who with a sound mind would like to spend time listening to garbage being produced by right wing grifters. Most of us just assume they are trolls and cannot have their minds changed, and we are right in this assumption most of the time, I would say.

    The only right wing person I have ever heard to actually question his own beliefs is Jordan Peterson during the Žižek debate. That’s it. And it is probably because Peterson isn’t really a troll or a grifter, he is just endlessly confused and ignorant and angry. I can’t think of a single other case. And I would assume the same goes for Kirk. Everything I have ever heard about this guy is absolutely abominable.

  • zxqwas@lemmy.world
    4·
    4 days ago

    A political debate is intended to convince voters that your policies are the right decision. Not that they are correct in a factual sense.