Charlie Kirks wife forgives the killer

Wow, definitely did not pick that. In that context, and in the nicest, non antagonistic way, you come across as a reformed smoker, including the way you were charging at Plastic Trees!

Corbyn was too much for me. The realist side of me couldn't take his idealism. But would never vote right.

https://www.standrewslawreview.com/post/prison-privatisation-a-failure-of-the-british-penal-system

In addition, if you address the root causes of crime, it interferes with private enterprise. Like most industries built on social issues, it needs a constant supply of offenders to keep the money flowing.

It boggles the mind that such a fundamental issue is part of the capitalist machine, rather than for the good or protection of society.

I am left in the UK. Labour & Remain voter, supported Corbyn and McDonnell (less so now). Read the guardian for decades (but got a lifetime ban from commenting on the guardian online so don't bother reading it anymore).

That's interesting. Are you left in the US, or left in Britain? They are quite different!

Edit to say that if you're on the left, and don't find Kirk's views extreme, I'd say you are US based.

I would say I was on the left. (Unequivocally until a couple of years ago, now with a list of "buts").

Not only that, prisons don't actually work. Except for obviously removing the person from society for a finite period of time.

Rehabilitation and going to the root causes is the only way to improve crime rates. But that's not a vote winner for the baying mob.

You realise that prisons are expensive and that it is cheaper to tackle the root causes of crime, such that fewer kids end up in the criminal justice system in the first place?

Are you in the US? Were the left obsessed with Kirk? In what way? Do the right get obsessed with left wing commentators? Or does it only work one way over there?

If you're on the right, then I imagine Kirk's views were not too extreme. But, for those of us on the left, he did have extreme views. So, it's all relative.

But, not to overplay his popularity/notoriety in the UK, though. I'd say before last week, about 5% of people (tops) would have known who he was.

@Underthinker 100% agree with you.

I think paradoxically, how controversial someone is, can often be because their moderate stance allows a critical message to gain popularity. JK Rowling is very far away from the most extreme critic of gender ideology, but she was hated far more than others because she could influence ordinary people. I think Kirk is somewhat less moderate than JKR but he was still far from the most far right or extremists influencer out there. But the extremists don't gain anywhere near as much support from average members of the public, so the left are less concerned (obsessed) with them.

@BerylSnow I love his voice! I actually like him, always find him interesting and generally learn something new.

@AzurePanda what do you make of Sam Harris?

@BerylSnow Agree on Megyn Kelly - I get embarrassed when she goes off on one and she often accuses the left of what she herself is guilty of. I love Jordan Peterson on the psychology and the Bible (I’m an atheist) but can’t bear him on culture war issues. My favourite is Brendan O’Neill as he really lets people speak and is well prepared. Also enjoy an awful lot of Novara. Love being able to pick and choose from such a wealth of options!

I agree that we must listen to all as how can we possibly have any sort reasonable discourse (at whatever level) if we refuse to listen to opposing views.

I draw the line at Megyn Kelly, though. She spews bile and offers nothing but spite. She's a click and rage bait merchant. Peterson, I disagree with mostly, but agree on a few things. Don't know Brendan O'Neill. Will look him up.

@BerylSnow I wouldn’t describe myself as a conservative. I’m not aware of Kirk being hugely controversial with USA conservatives (as most understand views centred on religious texts) but obviously he was with nutjobs and anti semites such as Fuentes.

I listen to everything from Novara Media to Megyn Kelly, Brendan O’Neill and even Jordan Peterson occasionally. It’s hard sometimes but it does help to understand and respect people having different opinions.

@AzurePanda you have called Kirk "one of the most controversial conservatives in the world". If I assume you're a conservative and may know, was he controversial among conservatives? If so, why was that?

@5128gap you implied she did not by suggesting she was belittled. Charlie Kirk’s debating style is a lot softer and less aggressive than many who appear on the floor of either Union. She was treated lightly for someone asking a weak question.

@Plastictreees I don't think anyone would expect you to support or defend people you disagree with but if people could learn not to hate those with different views we might end up in a better place.

I’ll continue to not defend and support racist misogynists like Kirk, unlike you. 👍🏻 As we have established in the last thread, you have nothing of substance to add and just keep bleating on despite the evidence presented to you, so continue being wilfully blind as I’m not wasting my time engaging with anyone so painfully intransigent.

CK had the honour of debating against some of the greatest young minds in the UK. Yet he lowered himself to sneer and belittle. Seeing his discomfort as he floundered through the knotty questions, he should probably have been grateful for the soft start.
I'm not sure what you're suggesting about the woman expecting to be treated equally? Is there any suggestion she did not?

@5128gap as you say, we all have our own opinions. I thought her question was a truly bizarre choice, she has the honour of the opening question on the floor of the Cambridge Union to ask absolutely anything of one of the most controversial conservatives in the world and rather than ask a knotty spiritual, political or theological question she asks why he won’t debate a random YouTuber, who in fact he has debated and has a full debate scheduled.

I’m sure she would expect to be treated in the same way as any other adult who puts themselves forward to debate at the Union.

Do you think Democrats prefer higher crime rates? Why do you think this is?

I'd like to hear a definition of 'merit'.

If you read one book this month, let it be The Tyranny of Merit by Michael Sandel. He exposes 'merit' for what it is. In my view, anyway.

I don’t think federal funding should be used for these programs. They should be funded through individual donations or through private charitable foundations.

and I just don’t think Dems are serious about controlling crime. I hope they prove me wrong (murder rates still haven’t come down from Covid highs)

We can only each watch and form our own opinion. I didn't say CK failed to answer the first woman's question. I said his response to her question, the first time she asked was to sneer at her and say "I've come all this way to be asked that..?" was belittling and rude.