Watch: The Free Press Live!
Tune in here for our latest coverage of the most important news stories.
The Free Press Live is our weekly show bringing you sharp commentary from friends of The FP, and helping you to make sense of a chaotic news cycle. This morning, co-hosts Michael Moynihan and Batya Ungar-Sargon sit down with Bari Weiss, Haviv Rettig Gur, and Joe Nocera.
To support our work, become a subscriber today:
Watch recordings of past live shows below:
I thought this experiment very interesting, I love good well moderated debate and discourse, but it is very different from print journalism which has more boundaries and there has been more opportunity to research and reflect before releasing material or weighing in on hot button topics. So I took some notes as I listened. First, there seems to be an acknowledgement that there is misinformation vs. disinformation, (and my I add, fake news). It seems to be one of intent, inadvertant (misinformation) vs. disinformation (deliberate). I am a great supporter of the First Amendment Right to Free Speech. I agree that hateful speech is usually protected (while hate crimes are clearly not). But not all speech is protected. None of our "fundamental" rights in the US are absolute and have no limitation. Misinformation seems to fall within protected margins, but disinformation which is designed to deliberately mislead with intent to harm might not be. I think it becomes part of that slippery slope and gray area. I don't have the answer, I just raise it. Second, "Vibes" is a terrible measure for a voter to rely upon to elect the most powerful and life-changing politicians in our country, Pres/VP/Sen/Rep., but that is precisely what we do because we are too lazy to look beyond TikTok/X/FB/Insta. Nobody can seem to manage to focus on anything for more than a minute. Mr. Hughes has that dead to rights. Third, the boxing horribilus - "anguish" of anybody is not the equalizer here. Again, Mr. Hughes is correct in my opinion. It is not the exterior that determines your gender, it is the interior. I can cut my hair, remove my breasts, ovaries and uterus, even take male hormones and estrogen suppressors. That does not make me a "male". It may make me look and sound like a man, but I will never by fully male without a Y choromosome. I would always be a "man-in-transition". I will never have testes, I will never produce sperm, I will never be able to impregnate a female. The opposite scenario is IMO also true. I can become a woman in sound and appearance, but I cannot become "female", requiring XX.) Yes, there most certainly appears that nature has created a third gender, those who we unfortunately refer to as having DSD. It is not the outside that is the determinant, it is how the inside has acted upon the physiological development that separates the brawn between all 3 sexes. Another class of boxing must be created to permit all to compete fairly, including trans-athletes. Lastly, the riots in the UK. I beg to differ that we are not seeing the same kinds of violence here. We are. Our American campuses and cities have been a perfect picture of this. We have similar racial divisions here and also widespread anti-Semitism that needs to be called out, just like everywhere else around the globe. I think that the issue we are also dancing around is that immigration in previous generations in the US have been largely Judeo-Christian based immigration, and those who seek to adopt Western values. What we do not wish to tackle is that issue. We, like the UK, are now dealing with not just religious differences as we have faced in the past, but religions that are more than that, they are ideologies (more along the lines of how we think of Socialism/Communism/Capitalism as ideologies), that may be or are incompatible with Western value systems. It is very much in issue of integration into a country which someone or someone's family chose to move into. Ms. Sumbramanya says Brits are Brits second while Americans are American first, that I think is in flux when dealing with anti-Western value systems being advocated here. Add "wokeism" that has raised individualism to a fever pitch, and we insist on having others "accept" everything we bring with us. I would suggest that this is backwards. When you choose another country, you then have entered into the social compact of that country and that country's underlying values. You must respect its laws and customs and be a participating citizen. You must to a pretty significant degree, work to assimilate and integrate. You can still value your heritage, follow your customs at home, but you do not have the right to foist your "wants" on anyone else and insist that somehow you must be treated differently than any other citizen of this country. (Even guests are required to abide by the rules of their hosts homes). Immigrants are important to every country. In the US we are all from immigrant stock. But here, we are a plurality not multicultural. "Out of many, One" is on our Great Seal. We are in the midst of one of the greatest periods of turmoil I have ever seen in my life. Again, I have no answers, and am open to discourse and debate.
Looking forward to more conversations from a briliant group of people. I think the 'groupthink' referred to by others will decrease as the members get used to the format and each other. It's so nice to see polite disagreement, a great way to stay out of the bubbles we increasingly live in.