Getting in the Ring Is Better than Pointless ‘Debates’ and Twitter Spats
Tom Arnold apparently challenged Mike Cernovich to a boxing match. Cernovich accepted that challenge and said he plans for the fight to occur March 1 in Washington, D.C. I fully support the idea of settling politics in organized, sporting fights. “Debating” and going back and forth on Twitter are pointless. In fact, I’d like to get in on this event. And if not, I’d be willing to consider doing something similar at a different time. Here’s a quick rundown of what happened with Arnold and Cernovich, along with my idea for political pugilism.
Arnold’s challenge and Cernovich’s acceptance are pretty straight forward. I’m just going to embed a tweet below. That, and this link to Cernovich’s website, will tell you everything you need to know about it.
Tom Arnold Challenged Me to a Charity Boxing Match for Veterans. I Accept
Fighting instead of pointless debates/Twitter spats is something I’ve wanted to do for some time. I’d like to be in on this. Only I need money, so I’d like to be paid. Also, I’m willing to fight an opponent who overmatches me. Contact me. Seriously. (PS: I’m a vet.) @Cernovich
(Someone on Twitter didn’t get why I mentioned I’m a veteran. I did so because while I guess it’s a more noble cause to donate money to a charity, in a sense, I could be that charity.)
I highly doubt they’ll bring me in to fight anyone else at the above event. And that’s okay. But I still support the idea of settling political differences in the ring. I have for quite some time.
Last year I made a brief appearance on Taleeb Starkes’s “Safe Space” show on Compound Media. During our discussion, we talked about my idea of fighting instead of debating.
There’s no point in what we call “debating” any longer. We don’t agree on even the most fundamental of things. Debates accomplish nothing. So in certain instances, we can make things a little more interesting; a little more consequential.
As I told Taleeb, I wouldn’t look for a pushover opponent. Fights should be fair. And as I mentioned, I can use the extra income. The purse would have to at least be $10,000. Likely more.
I’m serious about this (for a limited time, at least). But is anyone else interested in this innovative idea? Political pugilism (actual, not metaphorical) wouldn’t be an everyday thing. And it always would have to be worthwhile by way of having a significantly large purse..
Yet it would be a win for everyone involved. People would get paid, we’d actually resolve our spats by way of a sporting fight, folks would be entertained, and it would raise the stakes for shooting one’s mouth off in public.
So what do you think about it? Let us know in the comments section below. (Seriously, use the comments section here instead of just posting on Facebook.)
Header Image © Paul Hair, 2019.