Ben Burgis Debates Charlie Kirk 2021 (FULL REPLAY)
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 09. 2024
- For our final clip before we're back live, we revisit the fateful clash between right and left that took place at the lavish Turning Point USA studio.
Follow Ben on Twitter: @BenBurgis
Follow GTAA on Twitter: @Gtaa_Show
Become a GTAA Patron and receive numerous benefits ranging from patron-exclusive postgames every Monday night to our undying love and gratitude for helping us keep this thing going:
patreon.com/benburgis
Read the weekly philosophy Substack:
benburgis.substack.com
Visit benburgis.com
Writing was on the wall for Charlie as soon as he thought he had a gotcha with "no minimum wage in Scandanavia" and Ben countered with the fact that unions fill the role of pretty much making sure there's a minimum wage, and Charlie immediately drops the topic and moves onto the next.
That picture of Charlie Kirk on the thumbnail looks like Little Face from Dick Tracy. Look him up if you haven’t seen Dick Tracy before.
It's not too far off 😂
Your photoshop of the thumbnail really encapsulates the intellectual calibre you represent. You wouldn't need to defame and insult if you had facts on your side.
I think a great answer to the Euthyprho problem is that God IS the natural law. He is the personified energy (or code if you will) that writes the universe. When we do the right thing and flourish, we feel good and right with the world because we are participating in him. We are aligning our energy with him. So, when Euthyprho asks is something divine because the gods love it, or do the gods love it because it is divine, my Christian answer would be that God is in all divine things, and things are divine because he is in it. When he loves something, it is because the thing is aligning itself with his energy. A father loves a son he has a strong relationship with, but can't really love a son he has never met. The more you curate your soul, the more you understand God and are understood by God. I wonder if this answers Ben's question...
It was so refreshing to finally be able to watch a smart, knowledgeable, good speaker debate Charlie Kirk, and properly and articulately present the other side.
Charlie kirk pretending he's read Hegel is so embarrassing
he has read it to me at bedtime
Not even Hegel read Hegel.
If you’re so in favor of new small businesses being started, Chuckers, let’s socialize healthcare and free people up all over the country to start their own thing. It would be a game changer. It would fundamentally change our society, permanently for the better.
And I love how these guys love love love all those insurance company corporate bureaucrats. Just not the government ones.
If only western "healthcare" were actual Healthcare instead of "managed" Healthcare. I trust eastern medicine far more than I trust western Healthcare except for trauma relief.
Ben firing on all cylinders here. Classic vid
Debate summary: Charlie Kirk makes a misleading statement or psychotic assertion, Ben explains why Kirk is wrong/why Ben's philosophy is superior using facts and logic. Kirk interrupts constantly with additional false or misleading statements under the guise that these are little fun jabs or banter. Kirk then ignores Ben's response and either asks a new question or says he really wants to talk about X topic.
that's acutely not what happens at all, bro do research
Dont forget to line up for your 8th jab. Im sure Ben is a big proponent of this as well!
Charlie seems to be unable to explain his populism beyond “families should have more power” which doesn’t ultimately seem to correlate with his economic positions which put far more power in the hands of large businesses.
A good question you could've asked in regard to being responsible for your health and "unhealthy" people receiving health care, "do you think that unvaccinated people deserve the same healthcare treatment as the vaccinated? Also.. kind of disappointed that you didn't realize FICA tax was social security and medicare, which he sneakily tried to say it would be good to cut completely, I know you mentioned the benefits of the 7.5 percent tax or whatever BUT it would've been better if you directly confronted him on this.
appreciate you dude.
I couldn’t believe Charlie saying someone who saved up money their entire life should have to spend it all on healthcare
No way, did he? I don't wanna watch all 2 hours, do you have a time stamp?
Kirk reacts so much calmer when he's outmatched 😂🤣
man, charlie loves reading the headline of an article with no context and presenting it as his argument
How does family values and morals distribute income fairly?
Charlie STOP interrupting him, let him at least finish his point before you interject or interrupt him!
Dang you doctored Charlie's head yet you still are the funnier looking one lol
I cannot believe Ben is a professor. He really lives in la la land. Charlie Kirk runs rings around Ben. There's a new wave in town, Ben. It's called self responsibility. And how on God's earth should workers have the same say as the owner of a business? Everyone who has a job is blessed to have a job, secondly, nothing stops anyone from improving himself and moving up the ranks.
Kirk is a headline propagandist. He is incapable of running rings around Ben. Unless you take this as something like wrestling where he is like your hulkster and when he is talking nonsense you see that as him hulking up.
lol Charlie is a joke. He is a mile wide and an inch deep. He can talk about a bunch of stuff but there is no actual or very little actual depth to what he says to back those things up.
yeah he read some headlines. very impressive
CK claims he wants strong families and limited government. Empowering families includes giving women autonomy over their bodies. But there CK wants government to step in and enforce his anit-choice nonsense. I wish they would have discussed that. I'd have loved to see Ben take anti-choice apart.
I love you ben but kirk is just unlistentoable lol. I aspire to patience anywhere near yours
I'm actually shocked that, at 45 minutes in anyway, he's been largely agreeable, cordial and asking good questions
@@taintmueslix yes he is very agreeable in all of the debates I've seen him in, but conservative populist cannot really co exist as ideologies
@@loriEntropy true, but he's platforming Ben an engaging with his arguments, so many in his audience will be swayed by Ben
@@taintmueslix absolutely also true, on the other hand I've watched a lot of debates, one very good one w hasan piker and kirk if you are into that sort of thing, and hearing a person so smug and privileged promote used repackaged con ideas that will def kill people and make people generally miserable, w a face that is way too small for his head. OK that last part is probably much more like, my opinion maaan. Lol
When someone constantly talked over some one it's not a debate check out the public schools in Baltimore.
The Wire
@37:50 ish: "apres non le deluge" I'll give him an A for effort, but that he probably meant "apres nous le deluge." ("nous" is pronounced "nu," rather than non) What he said meant something like: "after not the flood." When the original phrase means: "after us, the flood." (Us being the king of france, speaking of himself in the plural, much like the royal "we").
Still, I shouldn't be surprised Charlie knows his french revolution quotes, considering he probably admires the guillotine as a political tool.
Scandinavian countries thrive on oil
Only Norway
@@rollespil1000 not true Denmark and Sweden
My answer to why is it good or how I guess. The answer is cuz God’s nature is good and automatically wants it. I know it’s kinda an easy answer despite being real complex. But then I kinda disagree with the laws of nature wouldn’t/ couldn’t be the same. I think that’s why Charlie couldn’t even sorta imagine kinda.
Charlie Kirk saying he supports price transparency for hospitals is what a provision in the ACA was supposed to address. Specifically Section 2718(e). The insurance companies and hospital industries opposed the rule in court.
So if you apply VA results to all medical service it will have better results???????
I can tell just by the thumbnail that this isnt genuine. Photo shopped him a tiny face. Kinda funny but still disingenuous. Anybody doing that i highly doubt gives fair and honest content. Bye
The idea that Mr Small Face is anywhere on Ben's level is ridiculous
A consequence of Rawls' theory would seem to be that net migration ought to run in a direction away from the more capitalist countries and toward the more socialist countries. But where has this ever happened ? During the time of the USSR people couldn't wait to get out of communist East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, and Albania and go to the market economies of the West. When the seven African countries of Ethiopia, Somalia , Benin, Congo , Angola, Mozambique and Madagascar were socialist, all of them experienced a migration outflow. And in the case of Congo, Angola, Mozambique, and Madagascar, most migration was to market economy South Africa, apartheid warts and all.
As for workers cooperatives anthropologist Sharryn Kasmir writes in her 1996 book, The Myth of Mondragon:
'From the perspective of workers, Mondragon differs little from managerial styles of private enterprises found throughout the Basque area.
Workers do not take advantage of the democratic forms available to them and are, in fact, more passive in asserting their rights than are workers in private
firms who engage in militant working-class action through trade unions. The very ideological stance of the cooperatives as harmoniously integrated
worker-manager teams mitigates the expression of antagonism based on structural opposition that persists in these settings. '
75 likes in 3 months 😂
Kirk used the phrase, democrat socialism; it's democratic socialism.
2 hour interview and that's what u take from it?
It’s a moronic theory, and only morons care about the proper phraseology for moronic theories…
@@glenpatrick3346 i mean if one person isnt even aware of what democratic socialism even is and thinks its "democrat socialism" then its a pretty large takeaway that someone is way out of their depth or is just them dishonestly trying to subtly tie two concepts together that are inherently different.