What debates do you wish happened?

>>2807473
I would have killed to see a Friedman vs Keynes or a Friedman vs Chomsky debate.

I fucking love that little Jew.

William Lane Craig vs Richard Dawkins one-on-one and not that silly Mexican debate that they had where it was three-on-three.

>>2807473
Saddam vs Bush

File: 1470916672239[1].jpg (26KB, 460x276px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 460x276px

Have Chomsky and Scruton ever debated?

File: sam-harris-rape-quote.jpg (96KB, 720x436px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 720x436px

>>2807473

>reminder that Noam Chomsky wouldn't give Sam Harris the time of day

The guy is still so triggered over it. He brings up Chomsky at every opportunity to shit on him.

For those that never read it,

https://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-limits-of-discourse

>a debate beween a popsci figure and ideologue who contributed absolutely nothing worthwhile to science, and a guy that basically invented a field of study and is the most cited intellectual in modern times
What's next? Bill nye vs von neumann?

>>2808221

Careful, anon. Someone might post this on /r/atheism and show how you're disrespecting their religious figure.

>>2807918
The one with Hayek should've been recorded for posterity but he wasn't at his full power yet.

>>2808221
Please be trolling.

>>2807473

Barack Obama Vs. Donald Trump

Barack Obama Vs. Ted Cruz

Barack Obama Vs. Rand Paul

Spoiler alert: Obama wins each time

>>2808221

Who's who? Chomsky is the most cited one right? I've never seen anything about Sowell anywhere but 4(or 2^3)chan.

>>2808235
You're talking about Bill Nye right? Fitting that cancerous popsci would be the favorite person on a cancerous board.

>>2808573
Obama is not a great debater, he was chosen for his speaking abilities.

https://youtu.be/NXJ3V55ii-U

>>2808586

>You're talking about Bill Nye right? Fitting that cancerous popsci would be the favorite person on a cancerous board.

I mean they love all of them there. Though Dawkins and Harris have probably lost some traction since they started speaking against ((((((feminism)))))).

Sam just had a podcast a few weeks ago that touched on IQ and race disparity in IQ, so he's probably the enemy of all SJWs now.

>>2808692
>((((feminism)))))
Gb2/b/

>>2808179
Don't know much about Sam Harris but basing him on that quote I wouldn't give him time of day either.

>>2808729

> If I could wave a magic wand and get rid of either rape or religion, I would not hesitate to get rid of religion. I think more people are dying as a result of our religious myths than as a result of any other ideology. I would not say that all human conflict is born of religion or religious differences, but for the human community to be fractured on the basis of religious doctrines that are fundamentally incompatible, in an age when nuclear weapons are proliferating, is a terrifying scenario. I think we do the world a disservice when we suggest that religions are generally benign and not fundamentally divisive.

In context.

>>2808699

Social justice warriors don't count as real feminists. So, yes, (((((feminism))))).

>>2808573
If Obama won a single one it'd be a miracle.

Zizek vs Chomsky

>>2809083
They don't like each other that much. Chomsky considers Zizek a buffoon (and he's partially right), and Zizek considers Chomsky to be an academic overlord, as he considers academy to be a tool of power (although he's much more nice to him, he seems to appreciate his work). So, hard to say it'd happen. After all, Chomsky BTFO'd Molyneux

>>2808573
Rand would crush Obama

File: Nuumale.jpg (84KB, 597x822px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 597x822px

>>2808573
>Barack Obama vs Donald Trump

Obama would crush him

>Barack Obama vs Ted Cruz

I think its fairly even. Ted Cruz is a more trained debater but he's a weasel faggot

>Barack Obama vs Rand Paul

Rand would win

>>2808752
>I think more people are dying as a result of our religious myths than as a result of any other ideology.

And he is already wrong in that one sentence. The idea that 'relgion' is the cause and be all or indeed the motivating factor with the strife we see in may regions is so shallow and misinformed - or willfully ignorant.

The guy just hates religion and takes any chance to shit on it even twisting scenarios where it is a sideline player into the crux of the matter.

Robert Anton Wilson vs pretty much any skeptic

>>2809387
Dassit mane

Ron Paul V. Ralph Nader

>>2807473
>Friedman versus Chomsky
>Marx versus Sowell

Daily reminder that Chomsky recently called the Republican Party the most destructive force in HUMAN HISTORY.

This man has gone senile.

>>2809171
>Chomsky BTFO'd Molyneux

Link

File: Smug Trump.jpg (29KB, 750x393px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 750x393px

>>2809379
>Obama would crush him

Are you serious? Trump would destroy him on economics and trade, just like he destroyed Clinton on economics and trade.

>>2810958
He's not wrong.

>>2810958
most dangerous organization*
also said it was an outrageous statement*
he seriously might feasibly be right*

>>2810974
>Are you serious? Trump would destroy him on economics and trade
Read this recent interview with Trump and then try to say that again, with a straight face:
http://www.economist.com/Trumptranscript

The man is absolutely clueless about economics and trade.

>>2807918
Friedman would get destroyed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72ntkmdF9Yk

>>2811193
Literally starts out with
>I think Friedman's intepretation
he says interpretation, implying it is a personal view rather than objective evaluation, remember Chomsky is a linguist amd thereofr capable of wording opinions as fact and vice versa
>of Marxist success is wrong
>I think Friedman's faith of market systems to desirable ends systems is grossly mistaken
Once again Chomsky uses carefully chosen wording- it is Friedman's faith (religion!) that market systems work- not Friedman's extensive research and evaluation.
Chomsky is the epitome of academic filth.
>I don't think the ability to succeed in a competition has much value
He's retarded.
>The US developed economically through massive state intervention
For one, thatbis only half truth. Two, the taxes capable of the "state intervention" were obtained from a competitive market system.

Chomsky a shit. A SHIT.

File: 1478906740841.jpg (32KB, 456x384px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 456x384px

>>2811193
I don't get it

>>2808179
Yeah that edgy little Ben Stiller look-alike isn't in the same league as Chomsky

>>2808573
>Obama Vs. Ted Cruz

I hate Cruz as much as the next non-ultra Christian, but man that guy is amazing when it comes to debates. He would get destroyed

Kissenger v. Chomsky, with Fukuyama making a guest appearance at the end. It will never happen, but my god it would be glorious.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4R7NG_xFJ28

Robert Ingersoll and G.K. Chesterton.

>>2808573

He would win against Trump and get his ass handed to him by Ted and Rand

>>2808573

>Romney wins 2012 election
>Sanders is 2016 D nominee (plausible since OTL Hillary ran as Obama third term)

Who wins the debates? Election winner depends on state of the economy/global situation of course.

>>2810974
t. economic illiterate

>>2810993
Go back to leftypol

People really think a senile old Marxist Jew like chomsky is some kind of brilliant mind? Please inform me why.

>>2812619
>Marxist

Lol no

Regardless of what you think of his politics, he was a huge trailblazer in linguistics

>>2812601

NO THE TAX CUTS WILL TRICKLE DOWN THIS TIME I PROMISE

>>2812654
Uh they do.

The Reagan rally proved it. This is why every president after him has emulated his popicies. The rich drive the prosperity in the west.

>>2812592
>Romney vs Sanders

Romney would win re election because incumbency as long as shit wasn't too fucked up.

Romney would probably lose on healthcare and social issues, but with foreign policy and broader economic policy he would at least hold his own if not win.

>>2812806
muh bayonets 2012 debates