- 03 Aug 2017 16:34
#14829721
When I heard that Cenk Uygur was going to be debating Ben Shapiro, I imagined that it would be an absolute slaughter fest with Shapiro taking a decisive victory over Cenk. I personally agree with more of Shapiro's positions and Cenk has made himself out to be a pretty epic moron in the past when he interviewed brilliant men such as Sam Harris or Jared Taylor.
To my extreme surprise, Cenk did remarkably well and held his own against Ben with ease. He actually gave persuasive arguments and used facts to support his opinions, and Shapiro didn't do nearly enough to refute the things he said. Overall I would say Cenk came out on top, which I never could have imagined would be the case.
Unfortunately the audience seemed to treat the event like some kind of professional wrestling gig, and were booing Cenk before he even uttered a single word! The audience obviously was not interested in listening with an open mind and considering what the speakers were actually saying without bias.
What's interesting is that Cenk actually approached the event from logic and reason whereas Shapiro approached it with emotion. At one point the only thing he had in response to Cenk's argument is that he is kissing Bernie Sanders' ass, and the audience flared up in cheers, as if that somehow was a valid refutation of Cenk's point.
By and large I think the debate could have been a hell of lot better and more interesting if not for the emotionally charged audience, and if it were better moderated. They didn't cover nearly enough topics and the speakers were not given equal mic time. Shapiro would have fared much better if he had the chance to speak more than he did. When the speakers are freely allowed to go on long winded monologues, it isn't really a fair exchange of ideas.
I'd like to see a rematch in a more academic, intellectual atmosphere. Then I think Ben would win.
To my extreme surprise, Cenk did remarkably well and held his own against Ben with ease. He actually gave persuasive arguments and used facts to support his opinions, and Shapiro didn't do nearly enough to refute the things he said. Overall I would say Cenk came out on top, which I never could have imagined would be the case.
Unfortunately the audience seemed to treat the event like some kind of professional wrestling gig, and were booing Cenk before he even uttered a single word! The audience obviously was not interested in listening with an open mind and considering what the speakers were actually saying without bias.
What's interesting is that Cenk actually approached the event from logic and reason whereas Shapiro approached it with emotion. At one point the only thing he had in response to Cenk's argument is that he is kissing Bernie Sanders' ass, and the audience flared up in cheers, as if that somehow was a valid refutation of Cenk's point.
By and large I think the debate could have been a hell of lot better and more interesting if not for the emotionally charged audience, and if it were better moderated. They didn't cover nearly enough topics and the speakers were not given equal mic time. Shapiro would have fared much better if he had the chance to speak more than he did. When the speakers are freely allowed to go on long winded monologues, it isn't really a fair exchange of ideas.
I'd like to see a rematch in a more academic, intellectual atmosphere. Then I think Ben would win.
- By QatzelOk
- By FiveofSwords
- By JohnRawls