A few weeks ago, there was an awesome event in Brooklyn in partnership with UnHerd called Dissident Dialogues. It was exactly what it sounds like: debates and discussions on the most pressing questions facing our society today. Questions like: Have we reached peak woke? Can universities be saved? Can liberalism be saved? Is government censorship justified? Is this the end of mainstream media? and What is the future of feminism? So basically, just the light stuff.
Briana’s use of the term “Old Testament retribution” reeks of anti semitic tropes. It’s the fundamentalist Christian notion that an “eye for an eye makes everyone blind”. A clear misunderstanding of the Torah and a through line to justify hatred of Jews and Judaism as a corrupt religion that was replaced by Christianity. Beware the Christian do gooders.
Anti-Zionism needs to be discredited as hate speech. We need to get past this as an acceptable position before we can have a rational debate on this topic.
No we don't. Zionism is the self-determination of the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland. You seem confused with being against a particular government. What we need to do is get over using the word Zionist as some slur that has connotations of evil.
I agree with previous comments that Briahna Joy Gray was AWFUL...she never actually answered the questions and, as previously stated, was rude and clearly incapable of listening. She came in with an agenda. But Eli...Eli was GREAT! He knew the facts, the history, and was able to CALMLY articulate a well-reasoned, thoughtful response. Well done, Eli!!!
Oh crap. I just realized the reason you invited those two clowns to take the pro-Palestinian side is because you WANTED the most ridiculous people on that side of the debate.
But it also begs the question - is there anyone on that side of the debate who doesn’t sound ridiculous? I mean, they are literally arguing in favor of terrorists, so it’s not surprising that they’re not very bright.
I found this debate hard to listen to. Neither of the "no" side even thinks Israel should exist as a Jewish majority state. And one was so delusional he thought a "one state solution" could work out. Israelis just give up the great institutions they've built, and the Jews live as a minority in an yet another Arab Islamic state surrounded by people that hate them. So incredibly naive.
It is that it is hard to articulate this point of view without being declared 'racist' which probably the reason why those supporting Israel didn't make this case.
Briahna really bombed this debate - she behaved like an ill-informed, emotional teenager. I don't think she even answered one question directly, except for when - through much incoherence - she posited that the appropriate response from Israel after October 7th was to institute a palestinian "right of return." And the other guy arguing on her side sounded like some stoner who "just wanted everybody to be nice, bro" and had only a very surface understanding of the topic being debated. Definitely not an impressive showing for the pro-palestinian/terrorist side of the argument.
There are two sure ways for me to tune out of a podcast. One is where the moderator completely loses control of the debate and everyone talks at the same time - constantly. The second is where one debater decides that the event is merely an opportunity to spew their biased philippic dominance over all the other presenters. Sadly this podcast nailed both of my hot buttons from the onset. Either you need better moderators or a better vetting of you debaters. I absolutely love Honestly's attempt to bring debate back to the mainstream. Let this serve as an example of how it is NOT done well.
I read that briahna and claudine gay are writing a book on “DEI and the Poles of World War 2”…theyre exploring why the Poles were at the back of the line at Auschwitz….oh and briahna, “Auschwitz” is not a beer (credit given David Sedaris)
Brihana is honestly so cringe. You’d think a Harvard graduate would know how to have a respectful debate. Along with the continuous interruptions, she says “Hamas doesn’t want to eliminate all Jews, they want to eliminate a Jewish state” GIRL, sit down LOL
Im with bari! We have to have these debates and “fight it out”! BUT when u cant follow instructions theres no debate. Answer the f-ing questions! Dont need your “feelings”! That aint a debate. Frustrating. The “liberal” side was not about solutions. When did the people that have their “heart in the right place “ become so lost and ignorant?
Way too much time was spent on debating the total number of dead, the ratio, and what is the acceptable number.
The single issue here is that Hamas has stated that October 7 was simply the first of many attacks that will continue until Israel is gone. There can be no other reasonable option for Israel but to continue waging war until the representatives of the people of Gaza say they will stop all future attacks. That would be best achieved if the people of Gaza replaced Hamas as their leadership and had a new leadership agree to live in peace with Israel If the people of Gaza are unwilling to declare an end to aggression than Israel should continue the process of eliminating fighters, and the innocent civilians supporting them will continue to suffer and die.
If Hamas and the people of Gaza view the eradication of Israel and its people as a viable option than the Israelis must see the elimination of Gaza and its people as a viable option.
How did this Brihana Joy Gray ever get picked for this debate?
She refused to follow the moderators requests, constantly shouted over the other panellists and never did answer a question.
Her technique is a common one amongst a certain group of activists. Spew a river of hate, lies, half truths, misinformation and gaslighting in such volume that if another speaker is given an opportunity to get a word in, there is no hope of addressing the falsehoods in time allotted. That allows this the misinformation to remain out there, perceived by some as valid when it is not, If an opponent happens to establish a reasonable point, the response is shout over top with another stream of unrelated ignorance. The primary objective of this type of speaker is never to establish any truth or fact but to smear the target at every opportunity and with every word. eg. Netanyahu is a BAD person who delivers "suitcases of cash" to Hamas so that simply proves Israel doesn't deserve to exist.
I’m unfamiliar with this person but her selection to be a “debater” was a fatal blow to this being a fruitful discussion.
Whoops messed up that last one. This debate wasn't very helpful. The anti-Israel side very explicitly said, early on in the discussion, that Israel does not have a right to exist. I am not putting words in their mouths; they said that. That is an argument in and of itself (one I disagree with), but it kind of renders the rest of the debate moot, right? If Israel doesn't have a right to exist, then they don't have a right to wage war, just or otherwise. It logically follows that they don't have a right to tax their population, print money, maintain borders, or do anything! So to answer the question "is Israel waging a just war?" and answering that question by saying Israel shouldn't exist, makes the rest of the discussion rather pointless. That and Briana Joy Gray is truly unhinged. Yikes.
I have a complaint about how the death toll is discussed in this debate. Doing the math, if a population of 2,500,000 people has a life expectancy of 75 years, then 91 people will die of natural causes every day. In 7 months (the duration of the war), over 19,000 people will have died from natural causes (91 people per day X 210 days). The "official" death count is stated as approximately 35,000 of which 1/4 to 1/3 are combatants. How much of the remaining 35,000 are natural deaths? Doesn't this significantly change the narrative on how many civilians are being killed in the fighting per the number of combatants killed?
Briana’s use of the term “Old Testament retribution” reeks of anti semitic tropes. It’s the fundamentalist Christian notion that an “eye for an eye makes everyone blind”. A clear misunderstanding of the Torah and a through line to justify hatred of Jews and Judaism as a corrupt religion that was replaced by Christianity. Beware the Christian do gooders.
Anti-Zionism needs to be discredited as hate speech. We need to get past this as an acceptable position before we can have a rational debate on this topic.
No we don't. Zionism is the self-determination of the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland. You seem confused with being against a particular government. What we need to do is get over using the word Zionist as some slur that has connotations of evil.
I agree with previous comments that Briahna Joy Gray was AWFUL...she never actually answered the questions and, as previously stated, was rude and clearly incapable of listening. She came in with an agenda. But Eli...Eli was GREAT! He knew the facts, the history, and was able to CALMLY articulate a well-reasoned, thoughtful response. Well done, Eli!!!
Oh crap. I just realized the reason you invited those two clowns to take the pro-Palestinian side is because you WANTED the most ridiculous people on that side of the debate.
But it also begs the question - is there anyone on that side of the debate who doesn’t sound ridiculous? I mean, they are literally arguing in favor of terrorists, so it’s not surprising that they’re not very bright.
I found this debate hard to listen to. Neither of the "no" side even thinks Israel should exist as a Jewish majority state. And one was so delusional he thought a "one state solution" could work out. Israelis just give up the great institutions they've built, and the Jews live as a minority in an yet another Arab Islamic state surrounded by people that hate them. So incredibly naive.
It is that it is hard to articulate this point of view without being declared 'racist' which probably the reason why those supporting Israel didn't make this case.
Briahna really bombed this debate - she behaved like an ill-informed, emotional teenager. I don't think she even answered one question directly, except for when - through much incoherence - she posited that the appropriate response from Israel after October 7th was to institute a palestinian "right of return." And the other guy arguing on her side sounded like some stoner who "just wanted everybody to be nice, bro" and had only a very surface understanding of the topic being debated. Definitely not an impressive showing for the pro-palestinian/terrorist side of the argument.
I’m not surprised to learn that Briahna went to Harvard.
LOL yes!
There are two sure ways for me to tune out of a podcast. One is where the moderator completely loses control of the debate and everyone talks at the same time - constantly. The second is where one debater decides that the event is merely an opportunity to spew their biased philippic dominance over all the other presenters. Sadly this podcast nailed both of my hot buttons from the onset. Either you need better moderators or a better vetting of you debaters. I absolutely love Honestly's attempt to bring debate back to the mainstream. Let this serve as an example of how it is NOT done well.
Hear! Hear!
I read that briahna and claudine gay are writing a book on “DEI and the Poles of World War 2”…theyre exploring why the Poles were at the back of the line at Auschwitz….oh and briahna, “Auschwitz” is not a beer (credit given David Sedaris)
Brihana is honestly so cringe. You’d think a Harvard graduate would know how to have a respectful debate. Along with the continuous interruptions, she says “Hamas doesn’t want to eliminate all Jews, they want to eliminate a Jewish state” GIRL, sit down LOL
omg Harvard is looking worse and worse. But then again, ofc they churned out this antisemitic, Israel hater
Im with bari! We have to have these debates and “fight it out”! BUT when u cant follow instructions theres no debate. Answer the f-ing questions! Dont need your “feelings”! That aint a debate. Frustrating. The “liberal” side was not about solutions. When did the people that have their “heart in the right place “ become so lost and ignorant?
Way too much time was spent on debating the total number of dead, the ratio, and what is the acceptable number.
The single issue here is that Hamas has stated that October 7 was simply the first of many attacks that will continue until Israel is gone. There can be no other reasonable option for Israel but to continue waging war until the representatives of the people of Gaza say they will stop all future attacks. That would be best achieved if the people of Gaza replaced Hamas as their leadership and had a new leadership agree to live in peace with Israel If the people of Gaza are unwilling to declare an end to aggression than Israel should continue the process of eliminating fighters, and the innocent civilians supporting them will continue to suffer and die.
I wrote about this exact issue several months ago. https://fromtheboulevard.substack.com/p/the-innocent-civilians-of-gaza
If Hamas and the people of Gaza view the eradication of Israel and its people as a viable option than the Israelis must see the elimination of Gaza and its people as a viable option.
How did this Brihana Joy Gray ever get picked for this debate?
She refused to follow the moderators requests, constantly shouted over the other panellists and never did answer a question.
Her technique is a common one amongst a certain group of activists. Spew a river of hate, lies, half truths, misinformation and gaslighting in such volume that if another speaker is given an opportunity to get a word in, there is no hope of addressing the falsehoods in time allotted. That allows this the misinformation to remain out there, perceived by some as valid when it is not, If an opponent happens to establish a reasonable point, the response is shout over top with another stream of unrelated ignorance. The primary objective of this type of speaker is never to establish any truth or fact but to smear the target at every opportunity and with every word. eg. Netanyahu is a BAD person who delivers "suitcases of cash" to Hamas so that simply proves Israel doesn't deserve to exist.
I’m unfamiliar with this person but her selection to be a “debater” was a fatal blow to this being a fruitful discussion.
Whoops messed up that last one. This debate wasn't very helpful. The anti-Israel side very explicitly said, early on in the discussion, that Israel does not have a right to exist. I am not putting words in their mouths; they said that. That is an argument in and of itself (one I disagree with), but it kind of renders the rest of the debate moot, right? If Israel doesn't have a right to exist, then they don't have a right to wage war, just or otherwise. It logically follows that they don't have a right to tax their population, print money, maintain borders, or do anything! So to answer the question "is Israel waging a just war?" and answering that question by saying Israel shouldn't exist, makes the rest of the discussion rather pointless. That and Briana Joy Gray is truly unhinged. Yikes.
Yeah this wasn't very
I have a complaint about how the death toll is discussed in this debate. Doing the math, if a population of 2,500,000 people has a life expectancy of 75 years, then 91 people will die of natural causes every day. In 7 months (the duration of the war), over 19,000 people will have died from natural causes (91 people per day X 210 days). The "official" death count is stated as approximately 35,000 of which 1/4 to 1/3 are combatants. How much of the remaining 35,000 are natural deaths? Doesn't this significantly change the narrative on how many civilians are being killed in the fighting per the number of combatants killed?