A debate I actually learned from!

[Mishelle]

Have y'all seen this one yet?  I usually don't like debates, but this was great I thought.  Helped it was moderated, imo.

 

Larken Rose with Tom Wilcutts

 

 

 

[Culain]

Wait wasn't Tom Wilcuts the guy that Stefan debated? It was one of the worst debates I've ever seen in my life.

[Mishelle]

will look for it, thanks!

[Dylan Lawrence Moore]

Just wanted to pop in:

 

Richard Grove, the guy moderating the debate here, is the producer of Peace Revolution Podcast and one of the finest alternative media sources out there right now. If you haven't gotten around to checking out more of his stuff, I can only recommend it.

 

 

Wait wasn't Tom Wilcuts the guy that Stefan debated? It was one of the worst debates I've ever seen in my life.

 

Yea, that's him. I could barely watch it. There were several times during the "debate", after Tom made a total mess of himself and Stefan let him know it quite directly, that I had to pause the video because I was too embarrassed to keep watching. I've chatted with Tom a few times over at the Tragedy & Hope site (Richard Grove's network), and all I can say is the guy is the King of the Strawmen. I'm glad Larken Rose was able to produce something a little more useful to listen to out of him.

[dsayers]

Richard Grove, the guy moderating the debate here, is the producer of Peace Revolution Podcast and one of the finest alternative media sources out there right now. If you haven't gotten around to checking out more of his stuff, I can only recommend it.

 

That's good to know. I thought he was sharp, if not a little biased (towards the truth).

 

I really like Larken Rose. However, in my personal journey, I sort of tossed him aside in favor of Stef because Stef doesn't stick to just government and his manner of presentation was less caustic. Not that I held that against Larken, especially when you consider that in interviews and debates, he's quite personable. I just thought it was more of a turn off to outsiders. I must say though that lately, he's really overcome this one "flaw" of his.

 

I know this debate isn't recent, but I was impressed with how well he handled himself. At first at least. I only watched the first half because everybody involved sort of started going off track at that point.

 

Mishelle, if you don't mind me asking, what did you learn from the video?

[Mishelle]

I have really enjoyed Richard Grove's work, but I know it from his Tragedy & Hope site--I've watched almost everything there, but haven't been to the Peace Revolution podcasts, so thanks for the recommend.  I really appreciate his demeanor--the way he can seem casual and professional at the same time, very informed but very  grounded, not at all a know-it-all-type.

 

There was a stretch where the debate did start to veer off I noticed too, but I thought Larken really pulled it back in and pressed his point so often and directly it did help me to really see that from a philosophical perspective there's no other way than anarchy.  Because I also struggle sometimes with Tom's points around caring for weak, ill, old, poor, etc., but Larken would not concede to anything and kept going back to the issues of authority and violence.

 

For me, once things get heated, I find I can no longer pay attention, and they stayed calm, which I think was Richard's influence.  I also liked it because I was able to see Tom's error in his words and his "history" -- if I can say that.  I've never seen him before, never heard of him, but the way he kept saying "Larken" repeatedly, and sometimes in a condescending tone I felt, was quite paternal and so it made me think like Stef--ah, lingering authority issues, no wonder he wants the state to have the power to "save" people.  Could be totally off on that of course, but that was my impression.

 

Thanks for asking and any other good material recommendations!  (not Mark Passio please) 

[Carl Green]

An interesting aspect of the debate was the tables being turned on the whole "well how would your fancy new system work".