To almost feel a shred of sympathy for Tommy Robinson

The tragedy of it is he's not stupid, but he thinks the people he's made an absolute killing by "being their voice" are, so there's no need for him to turn up to these things well prepared or with any cohesive argument.

This.

He's not stupid. He's actually pretty skilled at influencing people. Its his arguments that don't stand scrutiny when he's faced with people of intelligence.

Kmdt 😒.
Racism, especially the online variety, is a lucrative endeavour. He's who he wants to be. I'll save my sympathy for more meaningful issues.

Little Tommy Ten Names with his Irish passport and his house in Spain, he’s an odious oik

He might have been failed, who knows, but he’s an adult and still ACCOUNTABLE for his actions.

No. I struggle to think of any set of circumstances that would make me feel sorry for that nasty poisonous little twat.

You reap what you sow.

On one hand we have communities within the UK where people are abused and assaulted, or are in fear of it, every day, because of rhetoric that has demonised them because of their skin colour and/or religion. We have property damaged, children terrified, arson, and violence on our streets incited by this same rhetoric.
On the other we have a leading light behind the above chaos and misery, who can't justify his own arguments to a group of students and was probably annoyed about it.
Are you sure you feel sorry for him?

People like him mostly fail themselves to begin with. You can have the exact same background as Yaxley Lennon and not be a dick. People do have choices, especially when it comes to moral stance. I have no sympathy.

I disagree.

I don't like TR in the slightest. I think he's a troublemaking thug and a racist.

Having just now listed to the debate, I don't think every point of his was utterly destroyed. Far from it. I think that's comforting to believe because it substitutes tribal right-think for difficult moral and societal questions. (TR starts at about 29 mins).

s

TR cited various acts and sayings drawn on the Quran or hadith that to modern secular ears are barbaric (treatment of homosexuals, those who have sex outside marriage, child marriage, treatment of prisoners of war, cleansing Muslim lands of Jews and Christians), in support of the argument that the West should be 'suspicious' of Islam.

The arguments against were often either: "that's not what the Quran says" or "it is what the Quran/hadith say, but it's been taken out of context". Firstly, those arguments against are somewhat in tension with each other.

TR's basic response was: "when you look at how Islam is practiced across the world today, at things like rates of child marriage, treatment of prisoners of war, punishments for adultery and homosexuality, it is not unreasonable to be "suspicious".

I agree: I don't think it's at all unreasonable to be suspicious of any religion whose actual practice, justified on scriptural bases, results in those things.

Not when it's barbaric behaviour of Christian societies (past or present), not when it's Hinduism, not when it's Islam. (Nor, for that matter, when it's secular belief systems like fascism or communism).

OP, what was it about the students' arguments that you thought was so conclusive?

I think it is deeply problematic that fewer than 100 of the 400 ticket holders made it in to the debating chamber and that protesters were able to prevent the event from taking place as intended.

I think he is a racist, bigoted, nasty grifter. His arguments are built on sand and most of what he says flies in the face of facts and evidence. People need to hear his arguments and claims dismantled in a calm and measured manner.

Dismissing a view using a label alone (racist, sexist, transphobic etc) fails to illuminate the faulty reasoning underpinning it. That is far less persuasive than showing why and where the view fails.

Lots of people are becoming cynical about claims about people and positions being dismissed out of hand because of widening ideas about what is racist/ transphobic.

TR cited various acts and sayings drawn on the Quran or hadith that to modern secular ears are barbaric (treatment of homosexuals, those who have sex outside marriage, child marriage, treatment of prisoners of war, cleansing Muslim lands of Jews and Christians), in support of the argument that we should be 'suspicious' of Islam.

Have you read "The Bible" ?

Exactly, who could imagine that a religious book written one and 1/2 thousand years ago wasn't the same moral standards as today

Yes. There is a huge amount of barbaric stuff in it.

I note, thankfully, that a lot of the worst stuff is not practiced now, unlike in earlier centuries.

Do you think the Cathars, or the Jews of the Rhineland (or lots of medieval Europe, again and again), or the indigenous peoples of the new world were right to be suspicious of Christianity? I do.

Within living memory in Ireland, I think unwed mothers would have been right to be suspicious of Christianity, and that a bit more suspicion might have saved a lot of cruelty.

Today, I think gay Ugandans and many other groups have a lot to be suspicious of from Christianity.

I am thankful that such examples of religiously-justified mistreatment of unwed mothers, gays, and outsiders from Christians are relatively rarer in the modern world. The same cannot be said for Islam right now.

Debating is a skill. He was up against some of the best in the country, and he presumably doesn’t know how to debate at all.

a skilled student could’ve taken his position and potentially won- the debate, not the hearts and minds

To be honest most rational people could destroy any of his rhetoric easily. Tommy Robinson is an Elon Musk funded thug, his supporters are ignorant racists who have no understanding of economics or humanity. The number of Nazi salutes made at any event he organises speaks for itself. This country and most of its citizens are better than that. Fuck him.

The absolute panic in the room when Fox was about to reveal a picture of Mohammed.

Did kind of prove their point.

And the woman telling TR that he needed protection again, proved their point.

TR to me is just a common or garden football holligan grifter type. If he weren’t doing… what ever he’s doing he’d be fighting in his local every night and turning up at the building site with black eyes. He’s a loser.

Of course one of the benefits of a classical education was supposed to be rhetoric, logic and grammar.

He deserves anything he gets. He is a vile racist lying turd of a human being and deserves absolutely no sympathy.

……and this is why debates such as the one that had been planned is important.

Calm and reasoned discussion about the points and counterpoints will help people think critically and engage in the substantive issues.

Agree
Nick griffin formerly of BNP went to Cambridge

Can you share a clip of the panic when a picture was about the be revealed? Sounds interesting

Exactly this. Don’t fall for it. He’s benefitting a lot from his divisive politics. He knows and understand exactly what he is doing. His target audience is not Oxbridge candidates and they’ll probably complain about how pompous the students are some other thing.

If I see anything about him in the news, I leave it in the same place to hopefully die soon.

I agree. What stops this happening is a chronic lack to dialogue.

By dialogue, I mean listening and attending to the points being raised - rather than dismissing them as racist or simply taking a moralising stance and assuming a position of righteousness indignation.

We need far less emotion and more considered discussion.