An Old School Plutocrat Showdown
Will there be a showdown in Silicon Valley for the new digital aristocracy? Mark Zuckerberg tweeted recently that he is up for a “cage fight” against (with) fellow billionaire Elon Musk.
The Spectator admits that it takes “no house view on whether the “jiu-jitsu-loving” Zuckerberg or the “barrel-chested” Musk should be viewed as the favorite.” The Spectator does find this approach to dispute resolution “refreshingly old-school.”
Bring It On, Bro
It’s also a welcome antidote to the rise of the tedious “debate me, bro” tendency that has infected public life of late. In June, long-shot presidential candidate and prominent vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. invited scientist Peter J. Hotez to a public debate on vaccines. Podcaster Joe Rogan offered to donate $100,000 to a charity of Hotez’s choice if he accepted. Around the same time, Florida governor Ron DeSantis and his Californian counterpart Gavin Newsom were touring the country challenging one another to debate. These debate-me bros are heavy on “bring it on!” bravado and light on concrete plans for actual argument.
The Spectator confesses that it stands firmly in favor of actual, diligent debate, not just performative chest-puffing.
At its best, debate can be illuminating — bringing the participants, and their audience, closer to the truth. But even when it falls short of that, a polite, good-faith exchange of ideas is a mark of civilization.
But debate is in trouble, including at the presidential level. The first debate of the Republican primary, scheduled for later this month, may take place without the race’s front-runner. Donald Trump is threatening to boycott the event because he thinks Fox News, whose anchors are set to moderate, hasn’t given him a fair shake. A debate without the candidate who’s thirty points ahead of the rest of the field is hardly worth having. “Not to be braggadocious but the debate will not be a very exciting one if I’m not there,” Trump said of his threat to skip the first bout. He’s right.
Trouble in Paradise
Last year, the Republican National Committee withdrew from the Commission on Presidential Debates, alleging bias. If that dispute cannot be resolved, 2024 could be the first presidential election in almost half a century that does not feature the two candidates going toe to toe in a televised debate.
Reality TV: Insults and Entertainment
The irony of Trump possibly boycotting primary debates, maybe even passing on the chance to take on the chronically low-energy Joe Biden, is that his subversion of the debate format worked masterfully in 2016. Trump gave the audience what it wanted: not a serious exchange of ideas, but reality television-style insults and entertainment. Why would he miss the chance to put on another show?
Debates evidently are in trouble. There is a flareup over high school debate clubs.
Former champions have lifted the lid on the way in which the National Speech and Debate Association has been hijacked by left-wing politics. Debate judges warn students against making conservative-leaning arguments — and mark down anyone who dares to deviate from progressive orthodoxy on a range of social issues. Censorship and appeals to identity politics are anathema to genuine debate — and too many of today’s high-school students are missing out on the benefits of rigorous, no-holds-barred argument as a result.
Make Debating Great Again
How? The Spectator advises readers to become more comfortable with being uncomfortable.
Institutions like the NSDA must be open to arguments that judges and other students might disagree with. Moderators in Republican primary debates need to ask difficult questions that shed light on the differences between the candidates, rather than inviting them to parrot partisan talking points.