If you could make any two historical figures debate, which?

[Level 7 Dragon]

Salute, Escapist.

History is filled with colourful characters. Philosopher Kings, Prophets and Explorers. Each of those people managed to change the world to what it is now and inspire followers for centuries to come though their unique view of the world. Now, imagine if you could resurrect any two of them and put them on a pedestal and make them debate and defend their views. What questions will you ask them?

For the sake of the argument, let's say that they are all equiped with a universal translator of some sort. The debate can be centered around any three questions of varying topic and complexity.

So, you can put Plato and Aristotile on the stage and make them argue the existance of choice and fatalism and so on.

Personally, I would love to see a debate between Ayn Rand and VI Lenin. Mostly because their worldviews are the opposite of each other, both are rather well educated and are able to argue their point. I would ask them about the role of religion in modern society and how to ensure the protection and expansion of social mobility.

 

[Saelune]

Lincoln and Reagan. Primary topic: "What does the 'Republican' party stand for?"
Trump and Reagan. "What does the 'Republican' party stand for?"
Martin Luther King Jr and Trump. "What do you think of the state of equal rights today?"
Trump and Hitler. "How would you make your country great again?"

Edit: And I guess a slightly less serious one...
Martin Luther King Jr and Malcom X. "Best X-Men character?"

 

[sageoftruth]

Winston Churchill and Diogenes.
I'm not certain about what they should argue, but both are amusing characters who would put on quite a show.

Also, a 4-way debate between Socrates, Confucius, Lenin and Ayn Rand about how to design the ideal society.

 

[sageoftruth]

Martin Luther King Jr and Trump. "What do you think of the state of equal rights today?"

I have to admit, I'd like to hear that one as well, or maybe just Dr. King's opinion, since any debate with Trump is cringe-worthy at best. Things have changed a lot since King's assassination and I'd love to hear what he thinks of the state of things now. The good and the bad.

 

[MysticSlayer]

William Shakespeare and Donald Trump

The difference between how they articulate their hatred of the other should be fun to listen to.

 

[Saltyk]

George Washington and Karl Marx would certainly be an interesting debate. I'll allow you all to imagine how that would go and who would win.

 

[09philj]

Clement Attlee VS Vladimir Lenin - "What is the worker's state?"

Benjamin Disraeli VS Ronald Reagan - "What's the best way to be conservative?"

Epicurus VS Jesus Christ or God - "Does Christianity make any sense, and is it moral?"

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

George Washington and Karl Marx would certainly be an interesting debate. I'll allow you all to imagine how that would go and who would win.

Mabye not Washington but definately the one of the Founding Fathers, I think it was Madison that truly codifyed the Political Philosophy of the Consitution and the US in general at the time?

 

[Fox12]

Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul

 

[stroopwafel]

Probably Woodrow Wilson, David LIoyd George and Georges Clemenceau in a kind of ''Versailles 100 years later'' roundabout. Would be fascinating to hear what they would have done different or, looking back, the regrets they shared in the six months they changed the course of history during the Paris Peace Conference in 1919.

 

[Saltyk]

George Washington and Karl Marx would certainly be an interesting debate. I'll allow you all to imagine how that would go and who would win.

Mabye not Washington but definately the one of the Founding Fathers, I think it was Madison that truly codifyed the Political Philosophy of the Consitution and the US in general at the time?

I feel you're underestimating the intelligence of Washington. Dude is highly quotable and was definitely an intelligent man.

"Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company."

"Friendship is a plant of slow growth and must undergo and withstand the shocks of adversity before it is entitled to the appellation."

"My observation is that whenever one person is found adequate to the discharge of a duty... it is worse executed by two persons, and scarcely done at all if three or more are employed therein."

"It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it."

Not saying another of the Founding Fathers wouldn't also work, he was simply the first one to spring to mind.

 

[TakerFoxx]

Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul

See, why couldn't this be our presidential race? Granted, I have my doubts about either of them actually surviving a full term, but still...

For me, Theodore Roosevelt and Vince McMahon. No specific topic in mind, I just want to see what would happen if you put those two in the same room.

 

[Recusant]

My first thought is: Saints Valentine and Patrick. Bring them to the United States of the twenty-first century and ask the question "Seeing them in person, which of you is more dissapointed in what your feast day has become?". But that would be more about getting an outsider's look at a specific portion of modern culture.

After some reflection... G.K. Chesterton and Kahlil Gibran. Two of my favorite authors, and two poetic geniuses of very different schools of art and philosophy. Two very different perspectives on the world from almost the same period. I'd just ask the two "what is the meaning of life?" and let them take it from there.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I'm a bit of a spiteful sort so I'd want to see one of the founders of feminism talk with modern feminist, "wait, you are okay with the guy next door making his wife wear a tent?!"

Eh, for that to work you'd need to pick the right two, plenty of "Ban the Burqa" types amongst modern feminists, and plenty of feminist founders that were interested exclusively in the rights of middle class Christian women. Get two of those and you'd get your argument, I guess, but the other way around.

In any case, you don't need anything so fancy, plenty of feminists arguing yea or nay on this issue at the moment.