I would have liked to see Bari challenge Netanyahu on specific points. However he is most certainly a charismatic, mesmerizing and brilliant Master Manipulator and I can understand how even Bari would be overawed.
She WIF: You presume too much. If I would have had an abortion, I know I would not have felt any guilt, because I would have had a compelling reason and I know the difference between a fetus and a human born baby.
I have tried to address the issue with you from a principled point of view. You have resolutely not understood. You don't even answer the "generation gap" question [sigh].
I would support private abortion clinics and private grief counseling as a result of any trauma. Both positions engaged as government functions are repugnant and immoral. I would never support anyone who takes government money for either position. Not even the state of Maine. No government should use its power of law and taxation to prevent or promote abortion.
What is so difficult about this view that you continually fail to understand?
Rights are a fact of nature for homo sapiens. They do not come from God or other men (or women). Rights do not come from government. Human nature is the basis of rights. The fact that we survive by means of our mind, our rational faculty, is the basis of rights. There is no other basis of rights: not God, country, king or society.
Individualization, that is, becoming an individual entity, is the start of rights for homo sapiens. Modern technology enables humans to incubate premature babies. The baby in an incubator has rights. The fetus in the mother, feeding from the mother's bloodstream has no rights.
If anti-abortion people were smarter instead of dogmatic, they would encourage scientists to develop early incubation, so a woman with a 6-week-old fetus could give her fetus to a woman who desperately wants a child to raise. That 6-week-old fetus would have rights in the incubator and the woman (or couple), would be fully responsible. Eventually, people may want to have babies for profit, as they do in Europe (secretly) right now, transferring to a host mother's uterus.
If you can imagine that humans have rights by the nature of being human and having a mind capable of reason, that is unlike any other creature on this planet, then agreement between us is possible.
The fetus becomes an entity (a primary existent) when it is outside the woman's womb. Before that, it is a potential human. The woman is an actual human. You say you want to help both, but if the woman has a different priority, you say the woman is subordinate to the fetus, and probably to her romantic partner or husband, because the fetus is human. That's not good enough.
Pleased be aware, if you want to help any woman to carry a fetus to term, I won't stop you. I'll applaud you. You deserve applause, and sometimes, I may even help you. But if you say one word about it being my duty to stop a woman from having an abortion that she wants, that she finds a doctor who will do it, and she can pay for or find others willing to pay, I won't stop her. I may even help her, especially if I know her and her situation.
You say this is a generation gap issue. How old are you that you claim it is a generation gap? I say it is a principle of humanity for about 100,000 years.
At some time 2+ million years ago, there was a new "great ape" in the world. Instead of 24 pairs of chromosomes like gorillas and bonobos, this new creature had 23. Chromosome two and six were combined. Approximately 100,000 years ago, homo sapiens were making cultural relics (mostly funeral burial sites with tools, jewelry, etc.). No animals do that. Even Neanderthals didn't do that.
I did not miss your bunch of questions from prior posts. I thought you knew what I was talking about. Your questions are inappropriate because you keep saying you want to help both the woman and the child, but if the woman doesn't want to carry the child to term, you have your rules that put the child first. In my book, this is called a contradiction between speech and action.
There is no use addressing any of the many side issues you raise. Taking responsibility is not a guarantee of success, it's not even a guarantee that you will learn from your mistakes. However, taking someone else's responsibility away from them, is preventing them from learning and guarantees they will continue their abhorrent behavior.
You ask, "Who gets to decide who gets rights then?" Here's my answer: NOT YOU. I have my rights. The pregnant woman has her rights. You have your rights. 10 million people agreeing with you that the pregnant woman has no rights while she is pregnant, are 10 million people in the wrong.
Oh, Lord, a great piece, best I have read in some days. As a Jew I have not been very sympathetic to Netanyahu because I believe he unduly antagonizes Palestinians, but I have moved much closer to his viewpoint (with which I already partly agreed) reading this article. Again, what Americans do not understand is that Israel is in a very dangerous part of the world where weak nations don't survive. And the line that I found resonant, Jews won't have a second chance for a Jewish state, this is it.
Topping it off the man is obviously very intelligent and has good insights on our politics as well.
I am a new subscriber here and I’ve enjoyed all of the articles and interviews so far, especially one entitled “A better way to disagree.” But when I listened to this interview with Bibi, I was struck by an unconscious hypocrisy. It seems Barry Weiss finds it easier to talk the talk, than walk the walk. I’m referring to her condemnation of Donald Trump‘s meeting with Kanye West, and Nick Fuentes.
Barry Weiss seems affected by the same malaise that has been poisoning main stream media for the past 20 years. She takes the view that, rather than engaging and speaking with people, with whom you deeply disagree, you should shun them because some ideas and people are just too reprehensible.
That idea is at the heart of toxic practices like the de-platforming, shadow banning, censorship, and cancel culture. It underwrites foul journalistic practices like guilt by association and smearing of reputations. I believe it is responsible for our deep level of political polarization. Worst of all, it is a lazy, easy dodge, and a short cut to virtue signaling.
It’s no good to say that some people are simply incorrigible and it’s advisable to shun and ban them. Simply consider the case of of Daryl Davis, a black blues musician who spent 30 years meeting with - and befriending- members of the Ku Klux Klan - to astonishing effect. His courage changed minds and indeed countless lives.
As counterintuitive as it seems, Bari should have stood up for Donald Trump‘s meeting with those two lunatics. Not because she believes in what they believe, but she believes that talking with your political opponents and enemies is a far better solution than any other.
If we do not engage with people with who would deeply disagree, we have no opportunity to dissuade them of their opinions, and politically we become far more polarized. It is difficult yet essential for us to talk with people with whom we deeply disagree: our democracy depends on it.
This was one thought-provoking transcript and definitely going to listen to the audio as well. Thank you for this Bari and my favorite part:
“I think it's very important when people who have radically different views find a way to work together. I think that one of the things that's holding America back right now is our inability to do that.”
I still haven’t fully settled on my views with Bibi - some things I agree and align on, others, not so much (his dear friend Biden who is now being shown to the American public as compromised?). There is likely also much Truth beneath the surface and therefore, waiting patiently for the clarity.
Also, my personal thoughts on the Messiah - it’s definitely coming by next Wednesday, we just don’t know which week yet. Feels like it could be sooner rather than later based on how the energies are vibing though 💜🙏🏻
“Because the Palestinians don't want peace with Israel. They want peace without Israel. They don't want a peaceful state next to Israel. They want a state instead of Israel. That's the obstacle that has prevented peace for a century....If you keep waiting for the Palestinians to make peace, then you can't make peace with the Arab countries unless you first make peace with the Palestinians. “
Such a true statement. Hamas, rulers of Palestine, keep their people poor & hungry, while blaming Israel for everything, because it keeps them in power. Israelis don’t want war or death. Many Palestinians do, because there is a strong belief in heaven after Jihad. Hamas also gives $$$$$ financial benefits for Jihad. Keep everyone poor but Families want their kids to be suicide bombers b/c then Hamas gives your whole family $$$$ for life + stardom & fame for your son being a suicide bomber.
I’m very happy Israel was able to make peace treaties w so many Arab nations & hope this expands to more nations!!
Whether or not you agree with Bibi's religious faith and/or his politics in theory or in practice - and I'm guessing that most people outside Israel are pretty ignorant about the actuality of Bibi's time in power in more than a general sense - the big items that come across in the interview are:
Courage, huge unapologetic self-confidence, big dollops of optimism, a refreshingly plain speaker, a leader who knows exactly what he's aiming for and can express that in a coherent and realistic way. I realised while listening that we have no leaders in the Western democracies - apart from maybe Zelensky - who are able to do this. They are all scared stiff of speaking honestly about the basics that we depend on our governments to provide and are - mostly - apologetic mumblers petrified of being called 'deniers', 'racist', 'sexist', various forms of phobic and so on.
Bibi is accused of all sorts of nasty things including corruption and I have no idea whether there's any truth in any of it, however, as I listened couldn't help wishing more of our democracies had leaders as ready to watch our backs as Bibi is to watch the backs of his people.
Bari, thank you for this interview and thank you to both of you for sharing Bibi's story. It is always great to learn about people's past/present circumstances and experiences to truly make sense of their motives and motivations.
While I really believe in and root for a free and prosperous Palestine, I also firmly support Israel's right to exists and it's leaders' dedication to making the country secure. What I cannot get behind is the settlements or more accurately put- the occupation of Palestinian territories and the displacement of Palestinians (that has been deemed illegal by International human rights laws).
Although you asked some tough questions there, I am disappointed that you didn't broach the topic of settlements, which is what most people supporting Palestinians have an issue with. Most rational, human rights advocates are not pushing for the eradication of Israel, but just asking the dismantling of the occupation, that Bibi has vowed to legalize and expand. Would love to hear his and your thoughts/justification of this issue.
Bibi is the politician that tells the people what they don't want to hear, so they oust him. Nobody likes bad news. But, eventually, the people realize he's been right more often than he's been wrong. His errors are typical human errors, and he obviously loves his country, and his people.
I would have liked to see Bari challenge Netanyahu on specific points. However he is most certainly a charismatic, mesmerizing and brilliant Master Manipulator and I can understand how even Bari would be overawed.
She WIF: You presume too much. If I would have had an abortion, I know I would not have felt any guilt, because I would have had a compelling reason and I know the difference between a fetus and a human born baby.
I have tried to address the issue with you from a principled point of view. You have resolutely not understood. You don't even answer the "generation gap" question [sigh].
I would support private abortion clinics and private grief counseling as a result of any trauma. Both positions engaged as government functions are repugnant and immoral. I would never support anyone who takes government money for either position. Not even the state of Maine. No government should use its power of law and taxation to prevent or promote abortion.
What is so difficult about this view that you continually fail to understand?
Rights are a fact of nature for homo sapiens. They do not come from God or other men (or women). Rights do not come from government. Human nature is the basis of rights. The fact that we survive by means of our mind, our rational faculty, is the basis of rights. There is no other basis of rights: not God, country, king or society.
Individualization, that is, becoming an individual entity, is the start of rights for homo sapiens. Modern technology enables humans to incubate premature babies. The baby in an incubator has rights. The fetus in the mother, feeding from the mother's bloodstream has no rights.
If anti-abortion people were smarter instead of dogmatic, they would encourage scientists to develop early incubation, so a woman with a 6-week-old fetus could give her fetus to a woman who desperately wants a child to raise. That 6-week-old fetus would have rights in the incubator and the woman (or couple), would be fully responsible. Eventually, people may want to have babies for profit, as they do in Europe (secretly) right now, transferring to a host mother's uterus.
If you can imagine that humans have rights by the nature of being human and having a mind capable of reason, that is unlike any other creature on this planet, then agreement between us is possible.
The fetus becomes an entity (a primary existent) when it is outside the woman's womb. Before that, it is a potential human. The woman is an actual human. You say you want to help both, but if the woman has a different priority, you say the woman is subordinate to the fetus, and probably to her romantic partner or husband, because the fetus is human. That's not good enough.
Pleased be aware, if you want to help any woman to carry a fetus to term, I won't stop you. I'll applaud you. You deserve applause, and sometimes, I may even help you. But if you say one word about it being my duty to stop a woman from having an abortion that she wants, that she finds a doctor who will do it, and she can pay for or find others willing to pay, I won't stop her. I may even help her, especially if I know her and her situation.
You say this is a generation gap issue. How old are you that you claim it is a generation gap? I say it is a principle of humanity for about 100,000 years.
At some time 2+ million years ago, there was a new "great ape" in the world. Instead of 24 pairs of chromosomes like gorillas and bonobos, this new creature had 23. Chromosome two and six were combined. Approximately 100,000 years ago, homo sapiens were making cultural relics (mostly funeral burial sites with tools, jewelry, etc.). No animals do that. Even Neanderthals didn't do that.
I did not miss your bunch of questions from prior posts. I thought you knew what I was talking about. Your questions are inappropriate because you keep saying you want to help both the woman and the child, but if the woman doesn't want to carry the child to term, you have your rules that put the child first. In my book, this is called a contradiction between speech and action.
There is no use addressing any of the many side issues you raise. Taking responsibility is not a guarantee of success, it's not even a guarantee that you will learn from your mistakes. However, taking someone else's responsibility away from them, is preventing them from learning and guarantees they will continue their abhorrent behavior.
You ask, "Who gets to decide who gets rights then?" Here's my answer: NOT YOU. I have my rights. The pregnant woman has her rights. You have your rights. 10 million people agreeing with you that the pregnant woman has no rights while she is pregnant, are 10 million people in the wrong.
In this interview and the recent Hoover Institution interview the subject of Ukraine/Russia is conspicuously absent. Is Bibi cozying up to Putin?
Oh, Lord, a great piece, best I have read in some days. As a Jew I have not been very sympathetic to Netanyahu because I believe he unduly antagonizes Palestinians, but I have moved much closer to his viewpoint (with which I already partly agreed) reading this article. Again, what Americans do not understand is that Israel is in a very dangerous part of the world where weak nations don't survive. And the line that I found resonant, Jews won't have a second chance for a Jewish state, this is it.
Topping it off the man is obviously very intelligent and has good insights on our politics as well.
Wow...thank you for the transcript!
Bari, may I please ask why you did not ask Netanyahu about his corruption trial?
I am a new subscriber here and I’ve enjoyed all of the articles and interviews so far, especially one entitled “A better way to disagree.” But when I listened to this interview with Bibi, I was struck by an unconscious hypocrisy. It seems Barry Weiss finds it easier to talk the talk, than walk the walk. I’m referring to her condemnation of Donald Trump‘s meeting with Kanye West, and Nick Fuentes.
Barry Weiss seems affected by the same malaise that has been poisoning main stream media for the past 20 years. She takes the view that, rather than engaging and speaking with people, with whom you deeply disagree, you should shun them because some ideas and people are just too reprehensible.
That idea is at the heart of toxic practices like the de-platforming, shadow banning, censorship, and cancel culture. It underwrites foul journalistic practices like guilt by association and smearing of reputations. I believe it is responsible for our deep level of political polarization. Worst of all, it is a lazy, easy dodge, and a short cut to virtue signaling.
It’s no good to say that some people are simply incorrigible and it’s advisable to shun and ban them. Simply consider the case of of Daryl Davis, a black blues musician who spent 30 years meeting with - and befriending- members of the Ku Klux Klan - to astonishing effect. His courage changed minds and indeed countless lives.
As counterintuitive as it seems, Bari should have stood up for Donald Trump‘s meeting with those two lunatics. Not because she believes in what they believe, but she believes that talking with your political opponents and enemies is a far better solution than any other.
If we do not engage with people with who would deeply disagree, we have no opportunity to dissuade them of their opinions, and politically we become far more polarized. It is difficult yet essential for us to talk with people with whom we deeply disagree: our democracy depends on it.
This was one thought-provoking transcript and definitely going to listen to the audio as well. Thank you for this Bari and my favorite part:
“I think it's very important when people who have radically different views find a way to work together. I think that one of the things that's holding America back right now is our inability to do that.”
I still haven’t fully settled on my views with Bibi - some things I agree and align on, others, not so much (his dear friend Biden who is now being shown to the American public as compromised?). There is likely also much Truth beneath the surface and therefore, waiting patiently for the clarity.
Also, my personal thoughts on the Messiah - it’s definitely coming by next Wednesday, we just don’t know which week yet. Feels like it could be sooner rather than later based on how the energies are vibing though 💜🙏🏻
“Because the Palestinians don't want peace with Israel. They want peace without Israel. They don't want a peaceful state next to Israel. They want a state instead of Israel. That's the obstacle that has prevented peace for a century....If you keep waiting for the Palestinians to make peace, then you can't make peace with the Arab countries unless you first make peace with the Palestinians. “
Such a true statement. Hamas, rulers of Palestine, keep their people poor & hungry, while blaming Israel for everything, because it keeps them in power. Israelis don’t want war or death. Many Palestinians do, because there is a strong belief in heaven after Jihad. Hamas also gives $$$$$ financial benefits for Jihad. Keep everyone poor but Families want their kids to be suicide bombers b/c then Hamas gives your whole family $$$$ for life + stardom & fame for your son being a suicide bomber.
I’m very happy Israel was able to make peace treaties w so many Arab nations & hope this expands to more nations!!
Great interview.
Whether or not you agree with Bibi's religious faith and/or his politics in theory or in practice - and I'm guessing that most people outside Israel are pretty ignorant about the actuality of Bibi's time in power in more than a general sense - the big items that come across in the interview are:
Courage, huge unapologetic self-confidence, big dollops of optimism, a refreshingly plain speaker, a leader who knows exactly what he's aiming for and can express that in a coherent and realistic way. I realised while listening that we have no leaders in the Western democracies - apart from maybe Zelensky - who are able to do this. They are all scared stiff of speaking honestly about the basics that we depend on our governments to provide and are - mostly - apologetic mumblers petrified of being called 'deniers', 'racist', 'sexist', various forms of phobic and so on.
Bibi is accused of all sorts of nasty things including corruption and I have no idea whether there's any truth in any of it, however, as I listened couldn't help wishing more of our democracies had leaders as ready to watch our backs as Bibi is to watch the backs of his people.
I liked “Common Sense”. It was so simple, but so accurate. Across the poltical spectrum, the people had common sense. I’m kinda sad now…
Thanks for this explanation, Ilene, I very much appreciate your taking the time.
Bari, thank you for this interview and thank you to both of you for sharing Bibi's story. It is always great to learn about people's past/present circumstances and experiences to truly make sense of their motives and motivations.
While I really believe in and root for a free and prosperous Palestine, I also firmly support Israel's right to exists and it's leaders' dedication to making the country secure. What I cannot get behind is the settlements or more accurately put- the occupation of Palestinian territories and the displacement of Palestinians (that has been deemed illegal by International human rights laws).
Although you asked some tough questions there, I am disappointed that you didn't broach the topic of settlements, which is what most people supporting Palestinians have an issue with. Most rational, human rights advocates are not pushing for the eradication of Israel, but just asking the dismantling of the occupation, that Bibi has vowed to legalize and expand. Would love to hear his and your thoughts/justification of this issue.
Bibi is the politician that tells the people what they don't want to hear, so they oust him. Nobody likes bad news. But, eventually, the people realize he's been right more often than he's been wrong. His errors are typical human errors, and he obviously loves his country, and his people.