Top products from r/benshapiro

> (the church aided Hitler and he has wide support among the Christian German population

This is incorrect. He had support among many protestant denominations but not Catholics, and the pope most certainly did NOT support Hitler ( https://eppc.org/events/the-myth-of-hitlers-pope/ )

​

Also, the Church of Spies is a good read on how the Catholic Church actively worked to undermine the Nazis.

I won't deny that Anti-semitism existed in Christian societies throughout history, but you are cherry-picking examples out of 2000 years of co-existence. I could just as easily argue the opposite by stating that more Jews were murdered in the secularized 20th century than in the previous few centuries combined. The historical persecution of the Jewish people transcend simple narratives about one religion being more welcoming than others.

Ben's point about Judeo-Christian values is that they are a combination of faith and reason. If you have faith without reason, you get a repressive theocracy like Iran. If you have reason without faith, you get Mao's Communist China and millions of citizens dead.

> The whole concept of judeo christian values seem to be made to intentionally exclude Muslim's

Not sure what the basis of this claim is, but I'd like to read your reasoning. It's also worth noting that both Judaism and Christianity pre-date Islam, so it's a bit odd to argue that their tenets were somehow purposefully crafted to exclude Muslims.

>I agree, I'm just saying that there was a very easy and reasonable answer he could have given.

This is the name of his Amazon book, How to Debate Leftists and Destroy Them: 11 Rules for Winning the Argument. He doesn't just like them, he personally endorses them. Any reasonable response claiming he doesn't like them would be a flat out lie, and that's why he never claimed to dislike them.

It is called: Black Powder Red Earth Yemen

https://www.amazon.com/Black-Powder-Earth-Yemen-Book/dp/1979235074

Don’t know if this was a troll but it says in “Sociology and Religion” now.

I believe this is from Factfulness.

https://archive.org/details/FactfulnessByHansRosling/page/n47

​

https://www.amazon.com/Factfulness-Reasons-World-Things-Better/dp/1250107814

>He has frequently criticized the tactic of trying to own the libs. Just because third parties use this in YouTube click bate tag lines doesn't mean he approves.

He literally wrote a book about this tactic he uses:

Ben Shapiro: How to Debate Leftists and Destroy Them: 11 Rules for Winning the Argument

He called planned Parenthood a genocidal organization.

If you're Ben's fan and consider yourself to be a "centrist" or mostly unbiased esp after this interview then you're at very high possibility an extremist.

​

What Ben displayed here was his and his fan's general habit of self-victimization, in an continuous attempt at normalizing fringe political views that have overlaps with even more extremist ideologies like white/"westernized" nationalism, religious extremism at the very least.

​

He accurately called SOME of the conservative polices (anti abortion laws) extremist and barbaric. If they had discussed economics or global warming they'd probably agree on everything and the interview would've been just like 99% of appearances on Fox news or probably even CNN on certain times. (imagine setting the bar that low..oh wait).

​

Even if you disagree with the above. Consider that Ben was EXTREMELY dishonest about the question on the political discourse topic when he does this often https://www.amazon.com/How-Debate-Leftists-Destroy-Them-ebook/dp/B00JRJQ7Z2 . (im ignoring his anti arab tweets and other crazy nonsense here). Everyone with a clear brain would think twice before calling him a "centrist" or expert at anything outside selling his "image" and brand.

"How to debates leftists and destroy them" written by Ben Shapiro.

Additionally, the two YouTube videos that Neil referenced were published on the Daily Wire's YouTube page, a publication that Benjamin is editor-in-chief to. Presumably he has editorial control over the titles of things posted there.

> Because Walsh constantly talks bad about white people as a group. It's pretty disgusting. Shapiro and co talk about self-hating Jews - what's the difference between that and race traitor?

That is a bald face lie to claim he was talking shit about white people as a group. He was criticizing a white supremacist who murdered innocent people. You're conflating the two because you can't defend what Fuentes said.

I defy you to find an example of Walsh or Shapiro for that matter saying anything close to: "Matt Walsh, shabbos goy race traitor. That’s what it is, folks. I know some people don’t like to use that expression, but it’s totally true—throwing his own people under the bus. He hates white people. Nobody else talks like that about their own people except for white people and it’s gross” .... “Yeah, OK, keep typing on Twitter dot com, faggot. Faggot. Pussy. Race traitor—you work for Jews, you know.”


That we even have to argue that Fuentes was wrong here shows the level of decay in our society. Fuentes is not making it better, but adding more fuel to the flames.

​

> The red herring is that we're talking about these loaded words instead of the actual criticisms and substance of the critique and of Nick's views.

As I said before, this is Fuentes's view of conservatives who criticized the El Paso shooter. They reflect that he believes, like you, that America is an ethnostate for white people. That's why I'm criticizing him and I haven't heard a good reason why I'm wrong. You want a debate on Fuentes's views, then answer my criticism.

>Germany at its worst is better than Mexico at its best. They still have the Cologne Cathedral, they still have a long long history of being civilized. The type of immigration and the amount of immigration are unprecedented. This massive demographic shift will change the country. It's a matter of fact that America was founded by white people, that white people built it, and that it's been majority white since its founding. It's not that I'm proud of it, that's just the truth.

Yet in the 1850s Germany was a splintered confederacy ruled by corrupt nobles forcing peasants to kill each other in pointless wars. Mexico has all sorts of similar problems that flair up in different periods (Today is kinda like their Revolution period in the 1910s) but it's ignorant to say they don't have civilization, churches, or cultural achievements. For someone who likes European culture so much you'd think you'd realize Spain planted European culture there by conquest.


Also, I know too many patriotic, first generation Mexican immigrants who do assimilate to believe that immigration from Mexico is a threat. It's that there is massive immigration illegally across the border encouraged by American corporations and ethnic studies activists that is the problem.

The answer is defending and understanding our culture which from it's founding was a melting pot. We were a specific type of white (which was already an umbrella for different peoples and faiths) at our founding, this expanded and fueled our country's growth to the present. I'm not saying this whole history of immigration has always been good nor that there aren't good arguments for restricting immigration (Shapiro is open to arguments for immigration restrictions as well). I am saying the argument that we need to keep America white because America has always been white ignores the scope of American history and the contributions non-whites have made to the American project. A demographic shift will change the country as my great-great grandfather did when he moved here too. But it doesn't have to if we defend to our values and show people that it means something to be American.

> I describe myself as a Christian. I've read the bible, and I believe it. My area is extremely liberal and doesn't have any good churches. I've looked. My family isn't religious. So it's challenging.

I can sympathize with that. I live in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas which has been a Democratic stronghold for 150 years! There are plenty of dissenters and believers down here though so don't give up. Do check out that website First Things and check out William Lane Craig at Reasonable Faith. Also, I'd highly recommend Land of Hope by historian William McClay. There's nothing wrong with getting heating in a debate and I hope you don't take anything wrote above as malicious. Check out those links and pursue God with an open heart.