Who would be the best leftist to debate Stefan Molyneux over socioeconomics and political philosophy?

Who would be the best leftist to debate Stefan Molyneux over socioeconomics and political philosophy?

My vote goes to Chris Hedges.

Peter Joseph was far too wordy, technical and polite in his debate with Stefan. Professor Richard Wolff would also be too polite and seen as "weak". Abby Martin wouldn't be able to keep her cool and would just rage-quit halfway. Chomsky is too old and you could tell Stefan was pulling punches (he didn't do his usual hyper-reductionist douchebaggery and emotional manipulation techniques) and made the "debate" more of an interview, which made his viewers assume he tried to avoid appearing like a mean guy beating up an over-the-hill academic instead of revealing the truth in that he has no argument. Other YouTube leftist/left-leaning celebrities (too numerous to name) would get trapped by Molyneux's gotchas and gaslightings and appear like young, naive incompetents.

But Chris Hedges? Chris would smoke him. It wouldn't be close. He would expose Stefan Molyneux as the arrogant schizoid sociopath that he is for all to see. You think Stefan would be able to get away with his usual appeal-to-emotion reductionist arguments? Bitch, please. Chris is the master of imagery, specialized in conveying the existing dread, despair and decadence in as few words as possible. You, as a mere theater schoolboy, could never out-dread the dread god who's personally witnessed the brutalities of the system you're trying to defend. Stefan considers himself a social critic? Chris would effortlessly unveil him as the cultural gatekeeper. Should Stefan Molyneux manage to come out alive from his public debate with Chris Hedges, he would forever be branded to the public as one of the 1 Percent’s Useful Idiots.

What say you? Who do you believe would be the best person to put this popular right-wing propagandist in his place, who's been successfully pulling in millions of disillusioned millennials (largely white males due to racist pandering and scapegoating) to his ideology and cult?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/1TgdLkGwbTw
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Chirs Hedges is a fag who can't hold a steady opinion but Molymeme is a retard who can only "debate" Lauren Southern larping as a ML.

Tbh, what would we gain by debating stefan? The majority of his audience will blindly agree with anything he talks about.

You need to emphasize that imperialism is the biggest problem faced by the modern right.
It caused multiculturalism, the immigration crisis, and endless debt for wars that only caused terrorism and more money for porky.

These people can be easily subverted into further reasearching things that align with their worldview like anti-imperialism.
You can use these words without refrencing Marx and you will be able to easily persuade many of them.
Also if you get lucky their idpol will lead them away from anti-imperialism based upon idpol and to better arguments.

not likely, since for them things like imperialism are just crony capitalism/big government/necessary because we're bringing civilization to the darkies (remember how Molyneux did apologetics for Apartheid South Africa and British colonialism in India)
Stefan is a literal cult leader so I doubt many of his followers can be convinced

What's the point of debates? It's all masturbation for both sides. Only guy who should debate him is Zizek

molymeme would win with pure bullshitting ability.
hedges is a poor debater even though he's usually right.

throw him the cocaine sniffing man and you got a legendary shitpost dressed as a debate

The guy just yells and dramatizes in front of his cult crowd, nobody can debate him.

This really was the first thing that came to mind, but honestly it seems like kind of stooping a bit for Zizek. Like, honestly, doesn't the guy have something more dignified to do like drinking from a garden hose or something?