Zone1 The rhetorical and physical violence public figures are facing in the political arena is what the USA was founded upon.

[Dante]

The Clean Debate Zone is to be used for the clean debating of Government Policies, Candidates, Current News and Events. No personal attacks, name calling, flaming etc is allowed in this section.

For obvious reasons, I figured this thread needed to be put in the "Clean Debate Zone" where reason itself could prevail if given an opening.

"For all the obvious reasons, hearing that Charlie Kirk had been shot was shocking for Hasan Piker, the progressive influencer and Twitch streamer with a massive following. But there was another explanation for why his stomach sank.

Not only had he personally known Kirk, he was set to debate him at the Dartmouth Political Union about young people and politics — left vs. right — in just two weeks."

The left and the right don't own some sort of moral high ground here and neither does either of them own the bottomless pit of vileness that from time to time enters the political arena. That vileness is and has always been there. It is usually kept simmering on the fringes of what is and is not acceptable in political life. But from time to time it boils over and when it does it takes over the entirety of the moment.

"And soon after, Piker watched as his own death threats started to arrive.

“That is the one fear that’s always in the back of your mind when you engage in any sort of political advocacy when you do these events,” Piker told POLITICO Magazine. “As a recipient of millions of death threats at this point over the years, watching that unfold in real time was devastating.”

Piker said he would likely “wait for the temperature to lower a little bit” but would ultimately keep doing public events; he doesn’t want to live in fear.

In a wide-ranging conversation, Piker also talked about his worries of a new era of “decentralized violence” in the United States, why Kirk found an audience among Gen Zers and whether our political discourse can be healed.

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity."

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/09/11/charlie-kirk-killing-hasan-piker-interview-00557837?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us

Make no mistake about it. The rhetorical and physical violence public figures are facing in the political arena is what the USA was founded upon. One mere has to go back to the Colonial days in Massachusetts alone. This fact is undeniable and undebatable: The Sons of Liberty? Try: The Loyal Nine. See: Popes Day in the colonies.

The rhetorical and physical violence public figures are facing in the political arena is what the USA was founded upon.

 

[Dante]

Here's a part of the interview with Hasan Piker

What do you think it said about Charlie Kirk that he thought debate was one of the ways to release that pressure valve?

I don’t think he was ever debating for the purpose of finding the truth or from a position of intellectual curiosity. I think a lot of people say that. Debates are only productive in the sense that it can test your opinions against your interlocutors’ opinions, and it’s good, it’s galvanizing. I’ve always said that 40 percent of the audience on either side have already made up their minds, and they’re not going to change. But then there’s a 20 percent in the margins that could swing in either direction. And it’s for that 20 percent in the middle, that you entertain the intellectual sparring.

For Charlie, I think the format was more so to just humiliate his ideological opponents. And he was very successful at doing propaganda of this sort, by going to college campuses and listening to what people had to say, and then giving them the right-wing talking points on the matter. Getting a couple dunks in the process. That’s a big part of the debate culture. Having said that, it still can be productive. There are still people who can have their minds changed in that process, where they go “Wow, my worldview that I took for granted is maybe seemingly not so smart.” There is some productivity that you can derive out of debates, which is why I was entertaining doing it with Charlie.

 

[elektra]

The rhetorical and physical violence public figures are facing in the political arena is what the USA was founded upon

No, no, and no.

Of all the hateful ignorant things to state. A false premise you must repost in the clean debate zone cause you are laughed at and ridiculed elsewhere. Rightfully so.

 

[Dante]

No, no, and no.

Of all the hateful ignorant things to state. A false premise you must repost in the clean debate zone cause you are laughed at and ridiculed elsewhere. Rightfully so.

Please cut any personal attack in here. Now back to the OP:

The left and the right don't own some sort of moral high ground here and neither does either of them own the bottomless pit of vileness that from time to time enters the political arena. That vileness is and has always been there. It is usually kept simmering on the fringes of what is and is not acceptable in political life. But from time to time it boils over and when it does it takes over the entirety of the moment.

...

The rhetorical and physical violence public figures are facing in the political arena is what the USA was founded upon.

You must not have any grounding in American history

 

[Dante]

Maybe people are ignorant of The 'Loyal Nine?"

Maybe people are ignorant of the history of "Tarring and Feathering?"

Maybe people are ignorant of...

class dismissed

 

[elektra]

Please cut any personal attack in here. Now back to the OP:

You must not have any grounding in American history

Quit trolling in your thread. There were no personal attack, you think there was, report it.

You are very ignorant soul. Our founding, how about zooming in on that 2nd pic of mine. Looks like I got everything from the great Page Smith to The Federalist Papers.

post a picture of your personal library, then we can discuss what you misunderstand about our founding

 

[elektra]

Maybe people are ignorant of The 'Loyal Nine?"
Maybe people are ignorant of the history of "Tarring and Feathering?"
Maybe people are ignorant of...
class dismissed

Those things happened, but they had nothing to do with our founding you big dummy.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

No, no, and no.

Of all the hateful ignorant things to state. A false premise you must repost in the clean debate zone cause you are laughed at and ridiculed elsewhere. Rightfully so.

The clean debate troll move is popular among leftist extremists.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

No, no, and no.

Of all the hateful ignorant things to state. A false premise you must repost in the clean debate zone cause you are laughed at and ridiculed elsewhere. Rightfully so.

Exactly what I saw.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Exactly what I saw.

A certain Welsh poster has a long history of using the same tactics.

 

[Captain Caveman]

The Clean Debate Zone is to be used for the clean debating of Government Policies, Candidates, Current News and Events. No personal attacks, name calling, flaming etc is allowed in this section.

For obvious reasons, I figured this thread needed to be put in the "Clean Debate Zone" where reason itself could prevail if given an opening.



The left and the right don't own some sort of moral high ground here and neither does either of them own the bottomless pit of vileness that from time to time enters the political arena. That vileness is and has always been there. It is usually kept simmering on the fringes of what is and is not acceptable in political life. But from time to time it boils over and when it does it takes over the entirety of the moment.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/09/11/charlie-kirk-killing-hasan-piker-interview-00557837?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us

Make no mistake about it. The rhetorical and physical violence public figures are facing in the political arena is what the USA was founded upon. One mere has to go back to the Colonial days in Massachusetts alone. This fact is undeniable and undebatable: The Sons of Liberty? Try: The Loyal Nine. See: Popes Day in the colonies.

The rhetorical and physical violence public figures are facing in the political arena is what the USA was founded upon.

It's not exclusive to the US, politicians across the planet are receiving more violence simply because they're not listening to their employer.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Here's a part of the interview with Hasan Piker

What do you think it said about Charlie Kirk that he thought debate was one of the ways to release that pressure valve?

I don’t think he was ever debating for the purpose of finding the truth or from a position of intellectual curiosity. I think a lot of people say that. Debates are only productive in the sense that it can test your opinions against your interlocutors’ opinions, and it’s good, it’s galvanizing. I’ve always said that 40 percent of the audience on either side have already made up their minds, and they’re not going to change. But then there’s a 20 percent in the margins that could swing in either direction. And it’s for that 20 percent in the middle, that you entertain the intellectual sparring.

I would agree but quibble on the numbers. The twenty percent figure I would say is a better estimate of the number of people who have been so put off by the vitriol in our politics that they have given up in disgust. Twenty percent may be low.

Of people who care about politics, I would say that it would be ten percent or less that can be pursueded. Far less could be purseuded by one appearance of Charlie Kirk, winning arguments or not.

For Charlie, I think the format was more so to just humiliate his ideological opponents. And he was very successful at doing propaganda of this sort, by going to college campuses and listening to what people had to say, and then giving them the right-wing talking points on the matter. Getting a couple dunks in the process. That’s a big part of the debate culture. Having said that, it still can be productive. There are still people who can have their minds changed in that process, where they go “Wow, my worldview that I took for granted is maybe seemingly not so smart.” There is some productivity that you can derive out of debates, which is why I was entertaining doing it with Charlie.

There was an uwitting "Washington Generals" dynamic to the college kids who would come to the microphone and debate Charlie. I'll say this: I disagree with them, but I admire them for stepping up and talking, instead of throwing food, as college liberals used to when a conservative spoke on their campus, or shooting bullets, which may be their new outlet.

For liberals, the kids who debated Charlie were remarkably well behaved.

Occasionally, it would be one of their professors who would debate Charlie, and you would think it would be more evenly matched. Maybe it was, but of course Charlie's people were the editors of what went on the air, so they do not fare any better.

The Clean Debate Zone is to be used for the clean debating of Government Policies, Candidates, Current News and Events. No personal attacks, name calling, flaming etc is allowed in this section.

For obvious reasons, I figured this thread needed to be put in the "Clean Debate Zone" where reason itself could prevail if given an opening.



The left and the right don't own some sort of moral high ground here and neither does either of them own the bottomless pit of vileness that from time to time enters the political arena. That vileness is and has always been there. It is usually kept simmering on the fringes of what is and is not acceptable in political life. But from time to time it boils over and when it does it takes over the entirety of the moment.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/09/11/charlie-kirk-killing-hasan-piker-interview-00557837?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us

Make no mistake about it. The rhetorical and physical violence public figures are facing in the political arena is what the USA was founded upon. One mere has to go back to the Colonial days in Massachusetts alone. This fact is undeniable and undebatable: The Sons of Liberty? Try: The Loyal Nine. See: Popes Day in the colonies.

The rhetorical and physical violence public figures are facing in the political arena is what the USA was founded upon.

Yes, there was the Whiskey Rebellion and other instances of violence inserted into the U.S. political process. I would argue that the less violence and the more civil discourse we have, the better. Therefore, losing Charlie Kirk was a blow to what is better about us.

IMHO.


.

 

[hondo 50]

Where did the OP go?