This fact of modern political discourse is still lost on a lot of conservatives. Progressive radicals are bullies at their core. They are not interested in discussion. They are not even interested in any kind of an exchange of ideas. It's not about wisdom at all. It's about raw power, and silencing opponents, whether through shame or brute force.
Conservatives need to expose the shameful lies and abusive tactics of the left. When entering into a wide-range or public discussion about issues, every conservative needs to decide whether they are dealing with a true believer or a craven showman.
Ben Shapiro understood this distinction, and as a guest on Piers Morgan's CNN talk show, he demolished the British elitist before he could ask the first question.
Check out that stunning interview below:
You will notice that Shapiro invites Morgan to have a "rational discussion," knowing full well that the British propagandist was not interested in a reasonable discussion in the first place.
Now, let's look at how NOT to debate or discuss issues with raging progressive leftists.
Check out the hour long "discussion" between The Young Turks Host Cenk Uygur and Dinesh D'Souza:
Throughout this discussion, Cenk bullies and shames Dinesh. He has very little interest in discussion. Uygur just wanted to mock and shame his opponent. He made freuent personal attacks against the conservative panelist. He repeatedly reminded the audience that D'Souza had serve time following a conviction.
If anyone bothers to listen to the Young Turks spokesman, they will notice how often he characteristics D'Souza and the facts of his criminal case, as well as his political views, and also the history of the Democratic and Republican Parties.
Uygur refuses to answer uestions, refuses to respond to D'Souza ...
Refuses to debate.
It was never really about debating in the first place. The whole scene, including a large mass of Young Turks cheerleaders in the audience, was designed simply to humiliate Dinesh, and turn the mini-drama into further proof that conservatism is wrong and the Left, the liberal progressives are right.
What is the proper way to handle left-wing bullies? Conservatives need to recognize that a combative approach does not mean that ideas will not be shared. Confronting arrogant liberals and proving them wrong is easy and fun. They also need to encourage supporters to join them in making their case.
Conservatives have the inherent advantage. Our ideas are consistent with reality and correct. Therefore, an argument which reverts to facts will work in our best interest. Because liberals rely on contradictions which they refuse to face, exposing their errors, humilitating them essentially in front of a third party, is not hard to accomplish.
But setting terms of debate and ensuring conflict as a rule, playing to an audience, is essential.
Witness how Alex Jones of InfoWars handled Cenk Uygur at the Republican National Convention earlier this year:
Essentially, Alex Jones gave Cenk and his fellow Young Turks a taste of their own medicine.
He did not want for a staged and prepared debate, but confronted Uygur.
He asked the Young Turk about his "Hillary for Prison" T-shirts.
This is not just a plug for his products. He makes a strong assertion about the Democratic Presidential nominee. She is corrupt, and she belongs in prison. Will Cenk respond to this charge? Notice that Jones is not interested in trying to engage a placid discussion, but rather expose how the progressive "newscaster" is a mouthpiece for liberal ideas rather than a forum for discussing ideas.
In fact, the Progressive Left is not about discussion at all, never has been never will be. It's about power and force, it's about the employment of Saul Alinksy tactics to personalize, polarize, then demonize political opponents. Why? Because the left does not have any winning ideas worth debating! It's all identity politics and power differentials.
Notice that Roger Stone shows up, a conservative anchor who finally gets a few words in with Cenk. "You never gave me a chance to talk when I'm your show," chides Stone. At the same time, Jones takes out a Bill Clinton shirt with the word "Rape" underneath it. This attacks stirs up more anger from Cenk.
He is losing his cool. He is no longer the bully. He is the one getting bullied, because that's all that Cenk Uygur and his illiberal cohorts really do on their show. Then the argument gets heated. An audience of conference attendees joings around the two talk show hosts, and Uygur the control-freak loses his cool. He resorts to the only skills that he and other leftists possess: personal attacks.
It makes Cenk look really bad!
Then Ana Kasparian shows up and shouts "F--k" over and over again, trying to get Alex Jones' staffers of the stage. Now, all of this would have been easily settled if Cenk Uygur answered some of Stone and Jones' uestions. Notice at one point Alex invited Roger to come back and debate Cenk, but Cenk didn't want to debate!
The aftermath of this confrontation was interesting. Uygur tried to smooth out his terrible response:
It was awful. The fact that he had to explain himself--he automatically lost again!
Cenk Uygur exposes to the world that Alex Jones and Roger Stones got completely under his skin, and under Ana Kasparian's skin too. That was ten more minutes of his broadcast taken from his left-wing rants. Cenk complains about their rants and insults. He also faulted Alex Jones and Roger Stone for not offering rational arguments and to have a reasonable discussion.
And yet, that’s exactly what the Young Turks do!
Win-Win for Alex Jones.
Take copious notes, and go forth and drive liberals crazy!