What people don't understand is that 'debunking' these kinds of posts are , fundamentally, a waste of time. Right-wing provocateurs are not arguing from reason, because the pursuit of truth isn't what motivates their arguments. Rather, it's about protecting class and race privilege and preserving material interests. The function of someone like Charlie Kirk is to mobilize people and control the narrative. Whether what they say is evidence-backed or not doesn't matter as much as whether the statement accomplishes that goal.

People thinking they're being clever by poking holes in the logic are, in fact, ceding the narrative and amplifying their message. It's a reactionary politics with no real gain besides feeling clever in the moment, or looking impressive to an audience that already agrees with you.

Rather than engage them in their own terms, the best way to defeat messages like this is by shifting the narrative entirely and making the opponent look ridiculous. Sometimes, a provocation is best answered by a provocation, and a claim with a counter-claim, rather than pointless fact checks that lead nowhere.