>>518733073
I agree with this.
The spirit of debate is wonderful, but that particular format stunts real discussion. It’s entirely performative for the clicks and attention.
It’s like the difference between calling your friend a gay retard in front of a group of his colleagues at a business conference and calling him a gay retard when it’s just two of you drinking beers on the porch.
Same “spirit,” but one environment might yield productive discussion while the other only yields defensive peacocking and status-driven performance.
I’m not sure what the right format is for the open exchange of ideas on a college campus, but I know it’s not what Kirk and Crowder are doing.