Lori Falce: The difference between debate and argument

Put your hands up! You’re “Surrounded.”

No, you aren’t a bank robber being confronted on all sides by police. In this case, you would be on a YouTube video by Jubilee Media, a content producer with 10.2 million subscribers.

“Surrounded” is a series that debuted in the lead-up to the 2024 election. It takes one well-known person with a defined position on an issue and puts them in what looks like an abandoned warehouse with brick walls and a cement floor. They sit on a folding chair at a plain table. An empty chair faces them.

And they are literally surrounded by their opponents — a ring of 20 to 25 people who disagree with a core belief and can’t wait for a chance at that empty seat to argue.

That is the problem. It is an argument — not a debate.

It is not a right or left situation. The first person in the hot seat was conservative and Turning Point co-founder Charlie Kirk who sparred with 25 liberal college students. The most recent was progressive journalist Mehdi Hasan who was faced with 20 far-right conservatives. Other battles have been on topics like feminism, vaccination, religion and abortion.

Hasan’s episode has gone viral over moments, including one confrontation with Connor, a man who openly and downright giddily promoted the idea of changing the U.S. Constitution to support his own positions while vehemently saying it is wrong for Democrats to do the same.

What does Connor believe in?

“Autocracy,” he said with a smile, clearly assuming an autocrat would agree with him.

After listening to Connor acknowledge that his ideas might lead to people being killed and also quote Nazi theory, Hasan suggested the man might be a fascist. Connor agreed, again with a smile.

It was shortly after this that Hasan shook his head, in what might have been disgust or simply demoralization, saying, “I don’t debate fascists.”

Some of the others in the circle came back to this repeatedly as their turns came up. How could Hasan not talk to someone who disagreed with him.

They missed the point. Hasan did continue to speak with Connor for almost a minute. What he said was he wouldn’t debate him.

There is a difference between talking and debate.

Debate is a reasoned laying out of an argument. It requires good faith, open minds and an acceptance of mutually agreed-upon truth. If we don’t agree that apples fall from trees, it’s hard to debate gravity.

But what passes for debate these days, and often in the “Surrounded” circle, is not that. It is an exercise in futility where argument is the end game not a resolution where thoughts are exchanged, positions may be adjusted and minds might be swayed.

Debate has the potential to find common ground. What we do now is about winning.

The problem with “Surrounded” is that it feeds that idea. Despite lofty statements from Jubilee founder Jason Y. Lee about empathy in media, “Surrounded” plays to the worst instincts in our political and oppositional interactions. It turns complex issues into a gladiator arena and revels in feeding the enemy to the lions.

This is entertainment. It has more in common with professional wrestling than forensic debate.

But that’s exactly what our polarized climate has encouraged us to expect from any interaction with someone who has a different opinion. It becomes a hunt to take down the other side rather than understand our own arguments better through reasonable, passionate exchange of ideas.

That’s sad because what we become surrounded by is a population where no one is really listening.