Ben Shapiro Admits His Biggest Blind Spot | PBD Podcast #842

Ben, we’ve done this before, first in Boca and now here. People remember the Constitution on Piers, the gun arguments, the campus clips that made them conservative. But after October seventh, parts of the right made you the bad guy. How did that happen?

Conservatism is breaking up. It was easier to unite against Obama than to agree when your side has power, and Trump is singular enough for everybody to project onto him. I spoke forcefully after October seventh, and critics used Israel to define a career built on the same arguments since I was seventeen. The deeper split is moral and economic: I believe people create, own what they produce, and flourish through markets. Tucker is far more hostile to capitalism and innovation. He’d ban autonomous cars to preserve trucking jobs; I think that discounts safer technology and makes government responsible for spiritual fulfillment.

On Israel, the middle can reject both blaming Israel for everything and pretending it never errs. Israel faces real survival threats, but did Netanyahu, conservative Jews, or Israel itself make mistakes that helped create this backlash?

Israel makes mistakes, like every country. But “Israel caused everything” and “Israel caused nothing” are not equally detached from reality. It’s a small democracy in a violent region, not the force controlling American elections, policing, European migration, or the global economy. Those are conspiracy theories. Netanyahu also isn’t isolated: after October seventh, much of Israel moved toward confronting threats earlier, often from his right. I’ve long favored ending routine aid to prosperous allies, while accepting emergency wartime support. That’s why I supported Ukraine aid too: Russia is hostile to American interests. My line on the 2020 results and January sixth has been stable as well.

When young people call you a villain, do they want someone to tell them their problems are somebody else’s fault? Your point that an unaffordable young New Yorker may need to leave town became a Tucker villain clip.

It’s a normal American idea: if opportunity is limited where you are, look elsewhere. You can live where you grew up, but you’re not entitled to stay without paying market rent. Traditional conservatism was responsibility, virtue, markets, and skepticism of the welfare state. The new message is that life is rigged and unsolvable. Choices shape most outcomes, though government should remove needless barriers. I’m religious, but disagreement is not permission to be indecent. I oppose gay men adopting children and wouldn’t attend a same-sex wedding, yet I treat friends who make choices I consider wrong as friends. I’m accountable for my decisions, not clicks.

Piers and Charlie could create debate, but you’ve called Piers political Jerry Springer. Is there any upside to that, or social media generally?

If I could erase social media tomorrow, even at substantial cost, I probably would. People read less, know less, and turn complicated questions into clips. Piers performs moral discovery, often taking whichever side grants him the high ground. Markets, foreign policy, and public health need depth. The vaccine record was distorted the same way: I opposed lockdowns and mandates, never required vaccination at my company, and we sued over a federal mandate. I favored vaccines for older or high-risk people, not my children, based on the evidence then available. Later evidence changed on transmission and younger people’s risks. Criticize my judgment, but changing evidence doesn’t mean every loud nonexpert was right. I’d rather follow data that works most of the time. My blind spot is that dishonesty still shocks me; truth was central in my home.

You’ve also said relationships are a blind spot. Charlie made everyone feel like his closest friend; Tucker and Megyn can be more relational. What does that mean for coalition-building, the Groypers, and twenty twenty-eight?

I’m good personally, not great, and I’ll usually choose dinner with my family over a Washington event. But friendship shouldn’t shield public figures from public criticism. I describe arguments, not invented motives, and I won’t tell incompatible things to different people for a coalition. Transgression attracts young people: on the right, Hitler jokes can become actual belief. Nick is intelligent and funny, but his beliefs are morally awful, and humor lets him evade scrutiny. I’ve offered Tucker a conversation. With Nick, I’d only do a serious discussion, not a clip setup; choosing whom I speak with is also free speech. JD is the clear 2028 primary favorite unless Trump withdraws support, but Trump’s coalition was uniquely his. JD’s best version is warmer, less sour, more family-focused, and aimed beyond the Tucker-Fuentes ecosystem. Rubio could broaden the map, though he may not run.

You’re not looking to run yourself. You’d rather build Daily Wire. So what’s next?

I want Daily Wire to grow around a range of conservative views and larger projects while I say what I think is fully true, not eighty percent true for a bigger crowd. We rebuilt the pipeline: films, documentaries, religious content, new talent, and “Run Hide Fight: Infidels” in September. I’m more confident in the company’s direction than I’ve been in a long time. The work has to speak for itself.