what scene in any movie is more romantic then in the addams family (1991) where gomez tenderly takes morticia’s hands and softly asks “tish, how long has it been since we waltzed?” and morticia sighs as she looks away and answers “oh, gomez…hours” before they begin slowly dancing as gentle gothic music plays in the background?
To go into a little more detail, debating people like alt-right Q-Anon types, cults, and yes, even TERFS, does a few things.
1. It legitimizes their platform. Whether you realize it or not, in debating these people, you are acknowledging their platform and ideals as worthy of debate, and therefor, legitimate. Think of it this way: if someone were to hold a ‘debate’ between an expert on viruses and an anti masker, this setup puts the anti-masker on the same ‘level’ as the expert, despite not having any real credentials. Though you might mean well, even if you’re extremely well versed in a topic, you are putting these people on equal footing when you debate them.
2. Debating them gives them an avenue to advertise their agenda. You basically give them a free platform with which to spread whatever crock of shit theyre peddling. Hell, depending on how charismatic this person is, they might even convince you to change your mind.
3. A lot of these people will choose to debate topics that don’t personally affect them (for example, a cis person debating against trans rights, a cis man advocating against abortion, etc) so that they can appear calm and level headed when they debate someone who is very passionate about these issues, or is directly affected by them and therefor has a personal stake. They want to upset you, because if you are visibly upset, they appear more collected and reasonable to an outsider.
Don’t give these jerks free airtime! Don’t give them free advertising! Don’t give them YOUR time! Starve them of attention. When they ask to debate you, or casually drop controversial statements trying to pick a fight, ignore them, blow them off, whatever. But don’t give them your time and don’t feed the troll.
There’s a time and a place for pointing out dangerous ideas, acknowledging them, and expressing your own ideas. Debating with copralites isn’t it.
Nah. You will not convert the people you are debating. But the people listening? Possibly yes! Lots of people who listen to these debates go on to realize that these buffoons are full of shit. Debate them. It’s a powerful deradicalization tool. But please, be good at it.
Exactly. If the right can recruit through debate the same holds true for the left. When my blog was new I used to debate antifeminists and anti-social justice types all the time. I educated a lot of people who watched these debates because I am well-versed in critical thinking and I know how to win a debate. On my blog it was clear that I did not see the positions I was shutting down as equally valid to my own. I often called out the immorality and irrationality of their views. The idea that debate implies that both positions are equal in all cases is pretty demonstrably false. Plenty of leftist youtubers regularly deconstruct right wing positions also. This does not mean they are treating the positions as valid but it helps to understand the reasoning of the other side to demonstrate why it is wrong.
Another thing: because people are so polarized, many people on the right have not been exposed to ACTUAL progressive talking points. They have only seen propaganda and straw man arguments that misrepresent the left. A debate is a way to expose them to these ideas. And it absolutely is possible to frame a debate as not between two equally valid positions. The right does it all the time with their “conservative destroys feminist in debate” videos. The left can and does this too.
The problem is when both sides ARE treated as equally valid: i.e. a teacher in a classroom has students argue either side of a topic, that youtube channel that has people defend two different positions, a TV program featuring “reasoned debate,” that cis dude friend who entertains his conservative friends with friendly debate, etc. When you have these types of platforms/people treating a fascist vs leftist as equal positions, or trans rights vs anti-trans views as a fun thought experiment, with the “right answer” being up in the air, then yes absolutely the criticism holds. But if these ideas are never dissected and these discussions never happen, then people just remain in their particular echo chambers, and we never win anyone over.
I will add though that in some cases treating both sides as valid has its advantages for the left too. If you treat what the average person thinks is a radically left proposition as equally valid to the current status quo in a debate, suddenly you shift the needle. Think about the fact that the democratic party debate last election included progressive positions like reparations for Black people, universal healthcare, and free college for all. These positions would have been seen as overly radical several years ago. The fact they are being treated as viable positions now gets people to consider them. You have to remember that outside your small circle of leftists the average person does not consider many progressive opinions to be valid at all. Sometimes you can challenge people’s assumptions they have never questioned before and the status quo by presenting a radically left view as an equal position in a debate. Now, suddenly, the conversation shifts.
