Ben Shapiro Gets INTELLECTUALLY DEMOLISHED BY A LIBERAL And Then CUCKS OUT ON INTERNATIONAL TELEVISION In His First Actual Interview With A Real News Source

The fast-talking radio host Ben Shapiro, known for his bombastic video titles, glib rhetoric, and shilling for whatever cause will make him popular had his first actual interview with a real news source, that of the BBC. While he presents himself as a sort of intellectual giant, Shapiro was cut down in size quickly and then when he could not talk over the host or evade the questions he was being asked, stormed out of the interview scarcely three minutes into it:

Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro walked out of a BBC interview after being pressed on old comments he made.

Shapiro appeared on the BBC to talk about his new book “The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great.”

But shortly after exchanging the pleasantries, the host Andrew Neil went on offense and drilled down on Shapiro’s views, asking the commentator whether the recent pro-life bill in Georgia is like bringing back the “Dark Ages” in the U.S.

Shapiro retaliated against Neil, a former editor of the Sunday Times and a chairman of a media group that includes right-leaning magazine The Spectator, and accused him of harboring left-wing views.

“You purport to be an objective journalist, BBC purports to be an objective, down the middle network,” Shapiro snapped. “It obviously is not, it never has been. And you as a journalist are proceeding to call one side of the political aisle ignorant, barbaric, and sending us back to the dark ages, why don’t you just say you’re on the left.”

“Mr. Shapiro, if you only knew how ridiculous that statement is you wouldn’t have said it,” Neil replied and went on to question Shapiro about comments he has made previously on abortion and transgender rights, as well as his remarks questioning the Jewishness of those voting for President Barack Obama.

Soon before the interview was put to a halt, Shapiro said Neil tried to go through and find “lone things that sound bad out of context” as a way to make “a quick buck on BBC off the fact that I’m popular and no one has ever heard of you.”

“This whole thing is a waste of time. Frankly, I don’t care — I don’t frankly give a damn what you think of me since I’ve never heard of you,” he added. “I think we’re done here.”

Shapiro later admitted that his attack on Neil was misdirected, tweeting that “As I’m not familiar with him or his work, I misinterpreted his antagonism as political Leftism (he termed the pro-life position in America ‘barbaric’) – and that was apparently inaccurate. For that, I apologize.” (source, source)

For a long time, Ted and I have surmised that if Ben Shapiro were put into an actual interview, he would be intellectually destroyed because he lacks substance and relies on a controlled environment to impart the appearance of having superior wisdom or insight.

This interview is proof of just this.

The next question to ask is what will be the future of Ben Shapiro? The American conservative movement is notorious for rocketing people to fast fame through concentrated funding and then withdrawing all funding so to send said star crashing out of public sight, at the same time as he is being replaced by another new “rising star” to repeat the process all over again.

In September 2018, I wrote a piece about Blaire White, a sodomite who was rocketed to fame in the “conservative” movement and has since left. This one-time famous “tranny for Trump” said that most of the people in the conservative movement do not believe in anything that the profess, and what they do say they do in order that they might get power. The movement itself is highly eugenic because it believes that the ends desired justify any necessary means, and as noted above, the movement is ready to use and then destroy anybody once it is believed that a person is no longer “useful” to them.

Given that this was Shapiro’s first real interview and considering his behavior on international television, this might be the beginning of the end of the widespread fame he has so enjoyed. It will be something to watch for.

If the above is true, then the question is who will replace him, and what will his positions be? The person who does, and if not in the near future then in the not distant future, will likely support homosexuality, nationalism, and eugenic beliefs even more so than what Shapiro has, for with the passing of each “commentator” for the news, their positions become more in favor of the evils of the 19th century that culminated in the horrors of the first half of the 20th century.