Ben Shapiro 'walks out' of interview with BBC's Andrew Neil
63 replies, posted
"thank you for showing us that anger is not a part of the american political discourse."
Jesus. did i mis-hear that? because if not, that's hilarious for Shapiro to posit that in a book and then go behave like this.
This is the first time I've heard Shapiro's voice. I've heard impressions before and I gotta tell ya, the impressions were being far too kind.
I'd like to formally apologize for my embarrassment of a nation
If you can't hear opposing words without being thrown into a tizzy, you shouldn't be judging whether a platform is viable or not.
Ahahaha! AHAHAHAHA! Wow, what a great start to my weekend. Thanks for the smile Benny boy.
Global crisis as helium shortage takes hold, Party City begins c..
I think you're onto something.
someone edit the "just fuck my shit up" eyes onto him please
Shapiro's eyebrows look like they were sharpied onto his face.
This tweet is also good
https://twitter.com/TheLoveBel0w/status/1126899442223861761
Also goddamn the BBC kicks the shit out of anything the US has.
https://twitter.com/TheLoveBel0w/status/1126965675334017024
Ben Shapiro DESTROYS Ben Shapiro With Presumptions and Ignorance
Yeah I looked him up after hearing his fans go on about how he's this great speaker
He sounds like a nerdy cartoon mouse on fast forward.
Shapiro always sounds like he's on the verge of shitting himself when he's talking to anybody who actually has an ounce of clout or experience. He's so used to being a tiny bitchboy on Twitter and shouting a young adults that he just can't handle actual discussions with real people.
Squeaky voiced jackass.
I dont even like Ben Shapiro but i think he did the right thing walking off of this abyssmal segment. The only thing the interviewer did was bring up things Ben said in the past and took them out of context, it wasn't even a debate. It was just a personal attack.
The only reason Ben Shapiro has clout is because he speaks quickly, he speaks authoritatively, and the only people he "debates" with are useless American news anchors or college kids.
What a fucking dork.
BEWARE YE, LEFTISTS, WHO ENTERS THE A HALLOWED HALLS OF CONSERVATIVE INTELLIGENTSIA, FOR OUR MIGHTY BRAINS WILL SMITE YOU WITH FACTS AND LOGIC.
Well look he isn't wrong, the right has such high-level big-brained discussions like "Is global warming happening and if so, what can the free market do about it?".
Just look at all the legislation passed by Republicans who had a year and a half of complete control of Congress. Conservatives are all about great ideas.
I dont think Neil asked any big questions, so disagree on that part. He only took things Ben has previously said completely out of context and left out critikal information to skew his arguments in his
favour. Ben even admit and acknowledge that things he said in the past were stupid and Neil would still not give him a break. And yes Ben calling Neil a leftist was completely wrong. Ben has always
been a smug asshole with opinions that are to me god awful
"I don't like Ben Shapiro. But here is my 24 chapter essay on why Andrew Neil was wrong".
All Neil really wanted to know is why Ben holds the positions he does, why he insists that American is under some "leftist threat", why the American right doesn't seem to be doing ANYTHING at all of worth despite scumbags like Shapiro harping on about the progress they're making. He didn't ask any "big questions" (though lets be honest, any question is bigger than Shapiro) because that isn't how interviews are meant to work. You're meant to ask the interviewee about themselves and their beliefs. And what "context" is missing from Bens' statements? There's so few things that ingrate have said that are deep in meaning enough for context to really change their meaning.
You seem to have bought full into the "BBC ambushed him!!!" narrative Ben and his fanatics are pushing. They didn't. This is how Neil interviews. He's aggressive to the point to making the interviewee uncomfortable because that's how you can see who they really are. God forbid Paxman had been helming this interview. It'd be a slaughter.
for example?
He gave him positions from the opposite side for him to then express his side of the argument. Ben didn't understand this and decided to call Andrew fucking Neil, chairman of one of the UKs largest distributed conservative magazines, a leftist.
Ben Shapiro is an actual moron, he's so used to debating with dumb college kids while in a room full of supporters he doesn't know how to have a proper equal debate with someone who is by and large on the same side of the political spectrum as him (not nearly as far to the right but still a conservative none the less).
Best part of this is that the left ideas are yes in fact, actual new ideas, even if they take old ideas and reinvent them, they're still THINKING about how to solve these issues
While the right however has no plans to actually solve issues at all and would rather instead just lead the gas on raising the stock market to unstable peaks while increasing spending and decreasing corporate taxes at the same time.
I think theres a misunderstanding, i wrote 3 sentences explaining why i think Neils rhetoric is rude and flawed. Not sure how most of the paragraph you wrote is in topic with anything i said. And i agree
with your explanation of what an interview is (thanks for clarification??)
I mean, every time Ben argues he personally attacks them
How is that not fair game
again, examples of where he misrepresented shapiro's position, and how context would've explain them, please? considering you're arguing for reasoned debate it'd be super odd if you didn't care to back up your claims
In America everyone fears being called a leftist, a socialist or a communist; its' that label alone that spurs the concept of a red threat amongst American minds both indoctrinated young people who're
pulled to the radical right and the adults who lived through the cold war which will utterly damn you in anything political or social that you do. It's become a bogeyman term for anyone who's capable and
willing to use such a bad article of faith to prove their moral, ethical and 'logical' superiority over the opposing party. And it's amazing that it's such a tried and true tactic that it still remains to this day a
potent weapon of those who argue in bad faith for the best of the American people while pushing their own moral views on how they should behave.
Ben Shapiro is a lot like most Republicans in that by his very nature they're paradoxical to the wants and liberties that America should naturally strive to attain. It's no wonder that when such a man is
going to be attacked for things that he cannot truly back that he immediately relies on faux-paus 'debating' of trying to control the narrative almost immediately by speaking over his opponent, declaring
his opponent to be unable to be impartial (while simultaneously claiming he already was and is) and more sham tactics. Funnily enough that the British - or should I say European politicians are simply
too grown and mature to fall for them as they needn't apply. I think it stems from having a multiple parties in the parliament competing and having a variety of different views from die-hard communism
to the authoritarian right (not facism) that dispells such bullshit.
So when Shapiro can't actually stun his opponents and get an edge with his horrible tactics that he storms off so he doesn't have to sit and have a credible journalist grill him and proceed to rip Shapiro's
true intentions of being a shyster out of the darkness and into anyone who sees it. The man was running scared and it rightfully shows him that there's nothing quantifiable to his arguments whatsoever.
Good. Fuck Shapiro.
Okay, this is epic.
idk, whenever I think about an interview I imagine it goes like this
Journalist: "ask questions"
person: "answers questions"
My past roommates thought that Shapiro is legitimately a genius, it's always great to see that lie debunked time and time again
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.