Anti-Zionism Is Antisemitism: A Conversation with Michal Cotler-Wunsh (Episode
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 июл 2024
- Sam Harris speaks with Michal Cotler-Wunsh about the global rise of antisemitism. They discuss the bias against Israel at the United Nations, the nature of double standards, the precedent set by Israel in its conduct in the war in Gaza, the shapeshifting quality of antisemitism, anti-Zionism as the newest strain of Jew hatred, the “Zionism is racism” resolution at the U.N., the lie that Israel is an apartheid state, the notion that Israel is perpetrating a “genocide” against the Palestinians, the Marxist oppressed-oppressor narrative, the false moral equivalence between the atrocities committed by Hamas and the deaths of noncombatants in Gaza, the failure of the social justice movement to respond appropriately to events in Israel, what universities should have done after October 7th, reclaiming the meanings of words, extremism vs civilization, and other topics.
Michal Cotler-Wunsh is Israel’s Special Envoy for Combating Antisemitism. She is a prominent public speaker, author, researcher, and independent policy and strategy advisor on intersecting issues of antisemitism, law, human rights, and Zionism. Michal was a member of Israel’s 23rd Knesset, where she chaired the Addictions Committee & Subcommittee for Israel-Diaspora Relations, was a member of the Foreign Affairs & Security, Constitution, and Law & Justice committees, and co-founded the Interparliamentary Task Force to Combat Online Antisemitism. Michal is a Trustee in the Rabbi Sacks Legacy.
Twitter: @cotlerwunsh
July 2, 2024
SUBSCRIBE to gain access to all full-length episodes of the podcast at samharris.org/subscribe/ OR become a channel member to access episodes on RUclips. For those who can't afford the full subscription price, we offer full and partial scholarships www.samharris.org/subscribe/s...
Subscribe to the YT channel: ruclips.net/user/subscription_c...
Follow Making Sense on Twitter: / makingsensehq
Follow Sam on Facebook: / samharrisorg
Follow Sam on Instagram: / samharrisorg
For more information about Sam Harris: www.samharris.org 
Наука
Free Palestine from Hamas and Islamic fanaticism 🙏🏾
Free Palestine from ISLAM!!!
What Islamic fanaticism?? When Islam took over Palestine they had to invite the jews back because the crusader Christians kicked them out. Same story in Spain. The Christians did the holocaust not Muslims. Jews lived in Ottoman Palestine for decades even centuries. And most or all the stories of Oct 7th turned out to be fake, it wasn't an antisemitic attack, it was a military operation. So what Islamic fanaticism?? Islam has a better history with jews than Christianity
Free Israel from the Talmud and hatred of Jesus.
Lol thats like trying to unscramble an egg.
Palestinians ARE hamas.
Islam IS extremism when adhered to
Free it with what? Jewish fundamentalism and supremacy?
Durban resident from South Africa here, I LIVED during apartheid : This is NOT apartheid. She's 💯 correct. I'd like 2 let the world know that MILLIONS of SOUTH 🇿🇦ns stand with 🇮🇱
@@janestorm9813 I lived it too and respect those South Africans who went there and said it's even worse. SA's meticulous case at the ICJ was incontrovertible
I think I'll trust Archbishop Desmond Tutu, who knew a thing or two about apartheid, who said that Israel's apartheid is far worse. I suggest that you watch the documentary - available to view for free on RUclips - Roadmap to Apartheid, which was made by South Africans.
@@janestorm9813 white South African?
Imagine being the Israel's envoy for anti semitism, and I thought I had a stressful job 😂
Must keep him busy, changing definitions and finding victimhood niches in every corner.
@@FutureDeadGuy007 if you'd actually watched the podcast you'd know it was "Her" ya clown
@FutureDeadGuy007 No need to look for: anti-Semites blame the Jews for all the sins of the world.
@@Sharetheroad3333
She actually seems to be AGAINST antisemitism.
She is able to make the longest sentences I have ever heard.
Too long!
@@mckeeskIt challenged my listening-endurance skills, which I consider good practice. She had some very good points, and I learned new stuff.
And they're so well constructed!
Read Marcel Proust. Or don't.
Yeah. Sam hardly got to say a word
You put truth above popularity. Excellent podcast with an extremely knowledgeable guest who says it like it is.
Peak comedy
If you want to know what a politician is thinking, all you have to do is interview their spokesperson, right? That's where you go for the truth!
Zionism Is Nazism
He literally doesn't which is why he refers to all of his previous compatriots as "former friends". He refuses to confront his own bias and blind spots and it has cost him greatly.
@@nba25678 this is the opposite of truth. This episode is so full of bias it’s unreal
I’m just here for the Housekeeping …and am in absolute agreement.
Sam, your guest was great but can you please do more uploads where you just speak about your thoughts regarding what's currently going on in America/the world?
That might be what his substack is going to be for 👍
He does that in every video dang near and including this one. lol
@@tcgdiscussions2413 Gees, it's as if he hasn't really been listening.
Will that be another thing we need to pay $14.99/mo for?
@@sulljoh1 nothing he does needs to be paid for, your argument is invalid
To those who think otherwise: Sams fear of Islamic jihad is justified. We are seeing in the west now a suicidal attraction to something committed to our own demise. At least we're courageous I guess, or are we just extremely naive?
Of course it is. But he’s still only selectively applying his logic
@@Giddygooncave bingo
@@Giddygooncaveright because Zionists seek the downfall of the west? What is the double standard here?
Hungarian ruling government party will say you are pro war if you advocating for self defense of Ukraine.
Although I work with dozens of Muslims who are the most peaceful kindest people. It seems more Muslims have been attacked in their places of worship by crazed white westerners than islamists that have attacked westerners. There is no doubt there are more states in the Middle East that have t changed in 2,000 years. Stay away from them, quit killing Palestinians and every thing will be fine.
Genuinely baffling how Sam can argue for years on end that calling someone Islamaphobic is used only to stifle conversation on Islam yet can’t see that the very same thing is now being done with Anti-semitism and a criticism of Zionism or Israel
Denying the right of Jews to their homeland state and being critical of Islam, which is a set of ideas, are two very different things.
In due time you should be due to adjudicate his Jewish traits.
He's a Jewish nationalist, plain and simple. It's time for whites to start looking out for their interests in the same way that jews and everyone else look out for theirs.
@@drcrocodile1two different things but doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be able to criticise Zionism. Christopher Hitchens (someone of Jewish descent) was Anti-Zionist. Calling him anti-Semitic for his reservations is only used to stop conversation on the topic
Yes, this is going to trigger the Leftists and Muslims with their 51 Islamic countries and 99.7% of the land area of the Middle East.
Just here to honor the memory of Vivian Silver (who Michal erroneously referred to as Lillian multiple times), a peace activist who is from my hometown in Canada. May her memory be a blessing.
Sam Harris should talk to Einat wilf she has a really good way of explaining this
Ask her about that historical claim and see how it goes
@@sulljoh1 What historical claim?
@@serpentines6356 The historical claim that "Jews" have to the land of Israel
While I generally find Harris’s analysis of various subjects to be accurate or at least balanced, his one-sided commentary on the Israel-Palestine conflict is disappointing and confounding. While Hamas’s atrocities are indefensible, this doesn’t exempt Israel’s response from criticism and the question of whether they are committing war crimes and even potential genocide given many of the actions of the IDF and statements of Israel’s extremist government. And it’s hard to argue that Israel’s treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank does not raise the question of apartheid. Rather than an interview with an Israeli politician who mouths the same talking points as Harris, I would LOVE to hear Harris in conversation with articulate Jews like Gabor Mate, Naomi Klein, Gideon Levy and many others who have credibly criticized the Israeli regime but who can’t be accused of anti-semitism.
Gabor mate is a self hating Jew. I would take any of these arguments seriously if you could demonstrate how this is actually apartheid and why non of you are one whit about the other 2,000,0000 actual refugees in the world today
Have you heard his conversation with Rory Stewert?
Wow…that was amazing! Thank you both so much! 🇮🇱💜
The world has gone totally insane. Religion is ripping us apart.
Much less than it did a thousand years ago, really.
@@JM.5387 But with much better weapons.
@@jamesfranklin2360 Exactly. How many chances do we get to totally fuck up geopolitically? Just one.
@@JM.5387 It's poor rhethorical practice to compare contemporary events with Middle Ages.
The word "articulate" was designed for someone like Michal Cotler-Wunsh .
True, she is a top notch propagandist for sure.
@@menzere2009 That's a good thing for Israel, and the world.
Podcast description ‘ the death of noncombatants in Gaza’ euphuism for ‘the death of innocents (kids) in Gaza’.
Who exactly are the ones supposed to protect these kids? THeir parents and government which happens to be Hamas. Good riddance. Using kids as a means to force the West to be anti-Israel is one of the sickest things a people can do. But Palis have no issues with doing that whatsoever. And the West keeps falling for it instead of looking at these people for what they are...absolute monsters.
@@RazzyBee666Good riddance to children dying?
Civilians for you are innocent 3 years old crying in a corner, for others it could be civilian adults that held Israeli hostages in their homes or helped building the dungeon tunnels and rockets
@@baronnuuke7821 none of those are targets
take your propaganda to al jazeera, ya hamas lover
"If you chant "from the river to the sea," you have an IQ of 43."
- Francis Foster -
Zionism Is Nazism.
And if you believe that, you are brain dead.
How about when the Likud party founding principles is the same? The evidence are there that Zionists are seizing the land of people by force, deceit and divine warrant … whoever behave and continue to ethnically cleanse the inhabitants of the land must stop the demands of not being hated
Attempting to denigrate someone’s intelligence using a rhyming non sequitur is ironic, to say the least... 🤣
@@jameshegeman5660 It's 0.
Not a moment of pushback in the entire interview. It felt a bit like a FOX news circlejerk. You're better than this, Sam.
Pushback on what exactly?
There was an ever so slight pushback re' the confused mindset of a percentage of university protesters Vs. university protesters that are simply antisemitic
Regardless, I know I don't listen to Sam to receive basic arguments from tribe a, b, or whatever, but rather a detailed & reasoned analysis of deeper dynamics & processes that either maintain &/or birth bad ideas. For this reason, this episode explored nothing new - I've heard it voiced by others 1000 times before.
@@BarrySometimes Thanks for saving me 1hour and 40minutes
@@Alnivol666 There are several places where Sam could have dug deeper but since he basically agrees with his guest, he didn't.
Some examples of ideas that he could have explored were:
(1) whether other forms of Anti-Zionism (such as the belief that all ethnonationalism is wrong or that the self-removal of Jews from the civic nationalist project would not protect them -- Hitchens-style Anti-Zionism), which may violare the IHRA Definition, would actually be Antisemitic and to clarify the confusion on how to identify the Antisemitism in Anti-Zionism.
(2) discussing the conflicting aspirations in the Jewish community that alt-righters often discuss but in a more santizing way, such as how Jews generally believe that Israel should be an ethnonationalist state but that Western countries should be civic nationalist states and what the motivations and meanings are behind that.
(3) pressing her to provide more detail on the double standards, such as pointing out that despite China's vast human rights violations, China has a permanent UNSC seat, so it can vote against resolutions that implicate it, resulting in few being proposed. A discussion of how these international organs fail Israel/Jews would be interesting.
@@oremfrien I can discuss your points:
1)Anti-Zionism and Antisemitism:
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism includes denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor. Some forms of anti-Zionism, such as the belief that all forms of ethnonationalism are wrong, may not inherently violate this definition unless they specifically deny only the Jewish people this right. Christopher Hitchens' style of anti-Zionism, which questions the safety and efficacy of a Jewish ethnostate, can be debated without necessarily being antisemitic, provided it applies consistent principles that are also applied to other nations and peoples. The key to identifying antisemitism in anti-Zionism is consistency; if criticism of Israel is disproportionate compared to similar situations in other countries, or if it delegitimizes or demonizes Israel uniquely, it may cross into antisemitic territory.
2)Conflicting Aspirations and Ethno vs. Civic Nationalism:
The debate about Jews supporting ethnonationalism in Israel while advocating civic nationalism in Western countries can be viewed through the lens of historical context and security. Jews have historically been persecuted minorities in many countries, and the creation of Israel as an ethnonationalist state is seen as a necessary safeguard, a homeland where Jews can defend themselves and preserve their culture. In contrast, in stable, diverse societies where Jews are minorities, civic nationalism - which promotes equal rights regardless of ethnicity - is seen as the best guarantee of safety and equality. Thus, the motivations are not necessarily conflicting but are responses to different historical and social contexts.
3)International Double Standards:
The discussion of double standards often revolves around how international bodies, such as the United Nations, handle different countries. For example, China, despite its human rights issues (e.g., treatment of Uighur Muslims), rarely faces the same scrutiny or number of resolutions that Israel does at the UN. This discrepancy can be partly attributed to China's permanent seat on the UN Security Council, which allows it to veto unfavorable resolutions. In contrast, Israel, lacking a similar level of protection, is often subjected to more resolutions and scrutiny. This imbalance illustrates a failure of international bodies to apply standards consistently, often to the detriment of Israel's international standing. This highlights a broader issue with how international law and norms are applied selectively, often influenced by political alliances and power dynamics rather than consistent principles of justice and human rights.
Been looking forward to this introduction after the debate.
Lol, Harris is so full of it. "When it comes to the Jews, no one cares." Are you kidding me?! Name me one other group of people that has had 16 resolutions passed in Congress for them? Is there an "Anti-White Awareness Act" or an "Islamophobia Awareness Act"? No. But there is an Anti-Semitism Awareness Act
Sam, who certainly has valuable things to say on some topics, has abandoned any pretence of being a sensible, rational, compassionate, and fair-minded person when it comes to the topic of Israel/Palestine.
Thanks for releasing the whole episode. This was definitely a conversation the world needs to hear.
Sadly there are a lot of people who don't want to and wont hear this.
I'm not completely closed to the idea of Biden dropping out, but my question is who replaces him? Is it as simple as Kamala taking the reigns and a new VP nominated?
There are literally 10's of thousands of more qualified individuals. Yes that does become the question but only once we can agree he needs to be replaced.
I’m warming to the idea that it’s the only realistic path …and it’s better than the one we’re on.
In the 2020 primary, one of the few things the left and right could agree on was that they didn't like Kamala. I think she'd struggle to get support now too. From an electability standpoint, Gavin Newsom is probably the best choice. I don't like his politics, he's uninspiring, but he's well-established and doesn't have cognitive decline. Pete Buttigieg is not nearly as established and probably a bad pick, but I throw his name in there because he knows how to give Trump a taste of his own medicine in debates and is quick-witted.
@@synchronium24 Probably agree with you …from a feasibility standpoint, I don’t…although still searching for good counters to the logistical, legal, and political hurdles to going non-Kamala (have not found anything even mildly decent as of yet …)
Does it really matter who the puppet is?
To any self-proclaimed zionists who may read this, I have both an endorsement and a follow up question. Yes, the asymmetry of the UN's treatment of Israel is utterly appalling, and the nation of Israel (as it currently stands), for all its flaws, represents a sion of civilization in a part of the world that by default seems determined to fall short, and is certainly a gem in the crown of global innovation and cultural achievement that outshines all of its neighbors for at least 500 miles in every direction. That being said, I propose the following thought experiment:
- Would you rather the hostilities from the immediate and (to a lesser degree) wider world continue unabated, but with the assurance that some nucleus of judaism will ultimately survive intact, perhaps bloodied and battered, but never completely destroyed? Or...
- Would you rather all hostilities cease, all nations of the world formally acknowledge the current state of Israel's sovereignty, and the state itself rise to ever greater heights in the realms of science, art, music etc. (civilization, in short) BUT not have a single person on Earth participate in any aspect of religious or tribal judaism?
I await all responses to this challenge.
_Clearly_ the latter. I'm a secular Jew btw.
This is a very strange dichotomy.
"any aspect of religious or tribal Judaism"
Why would that be needed?
Is it okay for Japan to exist as the nation state of the Japanese people, only insofar that the Japanese identity is emptied of any traditional Japanese symbolism and ritual?
Are the Hindus ever asked to choose between the existence of India and the survival of Hinduism?
Our country exists precisely so that we CAN live our own lives as we see fit and not ask for permission to be ourselves from any "benevolent host".
@@IkisDragonFist Both India and Japan would benefit greatly from abjuring their anal retention of tribal-identiatrian-ism and nativist ritual, and however strange you find my question, that's the thought experiment I've chosen to run; I'm not issuing an ultimatum; I'm formulating a hypothetical challenge to see where individual priorities lie: If the guaranteed price of lasting peace and prosperity was the abandonment of judaism as a practice, would you pay it? Yes or No?
sam harris:
"Islamists have worked very hard to make any criticism of Islam (as a system of ideas) seem like bigotry against Muslims as people".
also sam harris:
"aNtI-ZiOnIsM Is aNtIsEmItIsM"
zionism is the right of jews to live in their indigenous land, so anti-zionism is a call for Jewish genocide. Concert about islamic terrorism and jihad is not the same as calling for all muslims to be removed from their lands through violence. This is all so basic how stupid is everyone?
I hope to not be labeled as antisemitic for asking this question. Your guest mentioned that the UN created a second entity related to refugee status especially for Palestinians and characterized it as ridiculous for refugee status to be handed down generationally. If it is wrong to regard Palestinians as ongoing refugees, why is it correct to regard modern Jews as having a claim to the land that is now Israel? You both mention double standards as problematic. Isn’t this an example of that? Palestinians shouldn’t be handing down their refugee status, but Jews should be handing down land claims from antiquity?
Wow! I've never heard anyone, including leading thinkers and intellectuals, make the point you just did. Every now and then, I am rewarded for reading the comments.
Jews weren't refugees since the antiquity. Wherever they went, they integrated into the society, learned the language and became citizens. In the Roman Empire, Arab caliphates, ottoman empire, Europe, United States....etc. Yes in their heart they wanted to come back but it didn't paralyze their life. Palestinians are thrown to the side of society in Arab countries and live in refugee camps, most of the time without local citizenship only for the purpose of serving as a political weapon. That's very different.
In much of Europe, from the late 1800s to the end of World War 2, Jews were refugees fleeing persecution and genocide. Before then, they were citizens of the respective countries in which they lived and were not considered refugees. When they escaped Europe, many Jews fled to British-mandated Palestine, however, many more migrated elsewhere and became citizens of those respective countries. There were also 800,000 Jews who were forcibly exiled from all Arab countries after 1948. Nevertheless, once these Jewish refugees were settled they became citizens of these new countries and were no longer refugees. In the case of the Palestinians, there is not a single Arab country that grants Palestinian refugees citizenship, even if they have lived in that country for 4 or 5 generations. This is done for political reasons to ensure that Palestinians have permanent refugee status with the aim of keeping their cause alive and with the cynical intention of ultimately returning all Palestinian 'refugees', all 6 million of them, to Israel to overwhelm the region with sheer numbers.
Palestinians have been given multiple chances over the years to have their own state. Their governments threw these chances away--they want the whole thing. I don't even see what point you are driving at; that even the Jews' ancient ties with the land somehow don't mean anything, that they have no right to be there? Why should the ancient claim to the land not mean anything? How could it not, against constant accusations that the Jews "stole" their own homeland? And there are already plenty of Arab/Palestinian Israeli citizens...
@@dannyurbinder5965Yes. "The palestians", a people that didn't exist before the state of Israel was formed, are pawns used by Arab states to keep the conflict going.
Why doesn’t Sam interview some Israeli thinker that is actually knowledgeable of history and is critical of Israel’s politics? Because this unconditional support of Israel is just nauseating. There’s so much evidence of their apartheid policies! I’d like to hear a good debate with differing views.
Sam is afraid and blind to this
Can you give a one example of the Apartheid?
Why doesn't Sam interview someone from the true right? Dissident right, god forbid.
@@Yara-Li west bank, which technically does not even belong to Israel
@@miszcz When the Palestinians offer a real credible peace partner that the center and left of Israel can negotiate with instead of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran pointing a gun at their heads, then you can talk about apartheid in the West Bank. Until then Israel is fighting every day for its very existence--not at all the situation of South Africa. No kidding Michal Cotler-Wunsh talks about a double standard.
Sam is officially going mask off. And he should know better. He is using the same "criticizing Islam is anti-Muslim bigotry" fallacious reasoning that was levied at him for so long to dismiss criticism of Israel.
It's worse than that because nobody is even criticizing Judaism. They're criticizing a state and that state's government.
Being anti Zionist is specifically saying the Jews have no right to sovereignty in their homeland.
I’d love to know how you can be anti Zionist and not against Jews in general
@@Stumashedpotatoes Being anti-Zionist is specifically saying that the Jews rights to sovereignty does not include them violating the human rights of other, non-Jewish people that also lived in that land.
Can we please stop doing this thing where we attempt to reduce opposing positions down to snappy one-liners and cut out all possible nuance behind our opponents' position? It's beneath us as a species.
@@Nofixdahdress No we can't stop doing it and you show your foolishness by believing otherwise. Also, please explain how giving full rights in your country to a hostile group of people, that want you dead for who you are, is going to lead to peace and prosperity. You quarantine a diseased populace, not invite them to into the heart of your population.
@@Stumashedpotatoes I'm an American descendant of English puritans who were exiled from Britain over their fervent religious beliefs. Do I have a "right to sovereignty in my ancestral homeland"?
This video is making me question Sam's honesty when he claims he separates Islamists from Muslims. Why can't he do the same with Zionists and Jews? Jews who denounce Zionism are not rare, does this not prove they are not the same?
Of all people to discuss this with he invites an Israeli official against antisemitism. Is she not clearly a professional and official mouthpiece of state propaganda? There aren't enough grains of salt on earth to consume this content and come out objectively informed.
If anti-zionism is a dogwhistle for antisemitism, then anti-islamism is a dogwhistle for islamophobia. You cant argue one without accepting the other. If Sam is true to his opinion on islamism, he must accept anti-zionism as a political philosophy.
Atheists of neither Arab or Jewish decent see the similarity as clear as day. If the events and mania weren't so tragic, it would be laughable like the spider man meme. It's the individuals from both sides whom are NOT brainwashed by political ideology or religiosity [no matter the form it takes] are the ones who we should be listening to; Sam isn't one of them. He is clearly lost in the mania because we are left with a conclusion that makes absolutely no logical sense.
That's like saying that there are authentic interpretations and philosophies in the Islamic world besides Salafism. In fact, it isn't the same and there are significant differences in their gravitation.
There are authentic forms of Judaism that are Non-Zionist or Anti-Zionist and there are authentic forms of Islam that are not Salafism. However, the difference is that the overwhelming majority of Jews feel some degree of kinship with Israel whereas the overwhelming majority of Muslims do not identify as Salafist.
Furthermore, the real issue with the rejection of Zionism is that it rejects the Jewish political voice, which is to say that Jews are only allowed to be politicale when their politics align with other populations and not speak their own truth -- to self-determine.
Michal has a radiant intelligence and much to share. Yet while I appreciate such a solid education on anti-semitism's past and present history, I come to Sam's podcasts to hear conversations, specifically to hear Sam's unique heart and mind interact with another's - often people I wouldn't necessarily otherwise be so interested to hear. I don't think Michal was rude or ungracious, but what's missing here for me is the chemistry of conversation - it is more of a lecture. And a bit of a missed opportunity as a result.
I agree. I felt like Sam Harris was performing an interview for us rather than having a two-way discussion.
I agree. I wonder how much of this has to do with it being a free episode.
Yes, the super ethical Israeli army that have such high standards... They've totally held their own soldiers to account for the various, high profile "incidents of war" that have taken place since oct 7th... You can definitely read all about the trials of those soldeirs in a publicly transparent way through reliable media, a hallmark of any strong democracy.
And who runs the trials!?
An independent third party!?
Or the IDF!?
@@NPC-fl3gq Yes, most countries run their own trials. The point is, they have a trial that is public, and if it's a sham trial everyone can at least see it. Israel don't even bother with trials, no prosecutions of their own soldiers or commanders. Probably explains why they're not afraid to create plenty of "incidents of war".
Well, I mean, why even bother commenting if you don't believe I..s.real on anything it reports. But I am guessing you will believe H..mas, Al J...zerra, other organizations that have stated goals to rid the world of j...s.
Why are THEY more believable than I...r..ael?
How can I find Michal's speech at the UN which happened 3 weeks ago. I can only find the one 7 months ago.
That's the one
Should France exist has a state for native french?
20% of Israeli citizens are Arab, and most of them are Muslim.
55:00 The notion that a person with no family connection to a region for over a hundred generations should be considered “indigenous” to that region simply because they share a religious tradition is extreme. The implication that anyone from the Jewish tradition has an “indigenous right” to settle in that region is extreme and scary.
Why would you ignore Mizrahim who are the majority heritage people in modern I..r.l, or the fact that Jerusalem was always J.. ish and had rebbi there for millennia. I agree that I also have a problem with the 'indigenous' framing, but they are a PEOPLE who have a strong connection to the place and a righteous and legal claim. And the Shia who built al-aqsa ALSO have a strong connection, which is why this issue is so entrenched. If anything, we should be mad at the British who promised the land to BOTH groups and then peaced out.
@@Itsstuff7328 I don’t follow the logic.
You seem to be arguing that because some of the indiginous people who live in Jerusalem are Jewish, everyone that is Jewish is indigenous to Jerusalem.
I’m sorry. I can’t respect that opinion.
@@MarkLeBay No, I am saying that there are a people called "the J..ws". These people were in diaspora for a thousand years, although always maintaining a connection with one another.
I reject wholeheartedly the 'indigenous' argument for BOTH parties.
But I will say the j..ws made a legitimate and legal claim established between 1880s (ish when the Ottoman empire lifted its ban on j..ish land ownership in this region) and 1948.
I will also say the British severely misled the a...rabs who eventually gained the territory of J. or dan. To these people, the British promised the whole of the empire in exchange to fight in their war. Instead, they got j. or dan, the Christians got L eba. non, and we know what happened w/the j-- is.h state. I say, blame the Brits
You are correct. We live in a time when the loudest voices aren't the most rational ones, though.
@MarkLeBay first of all, there have been Jewish who lived in Israel always. There are many Jews who lived in close proximiry to the Israel.
They are indigenous because their ancestor were born there, they kept the same way of life, religion, culture which originated from there.
Thank you for this PSA, Sam. With all due respect, NO ONE is as articulate as you are on the topic of antisemitism. 🙏🙏🙏🙏
Anti-Zionism is Antisemitism the exact same way that Anti-Nazism is Anti-German. Sam, I thank you very deeply for The Moral Landscape getting me out of a very dark place in my life, but at some point in the past few years you've shit the bed and think the stench is coming from somewhere else. You've become consumed by dogma and personal bias, and have grown too arrogant to be capable of recognizing your own faults.
You clearly don't understand the definition of Zionism and Antisemitism if you're going to claim that's the same as Nazism and Germany. Keep trying though.
no, thinking that it's wrong for the Jews to have a country in their historic homeland that was colonized by Romans, Muslims, and British is fucked up. While every other country used to have other people living there before, but no one gives a fuck until it comes to the Jews.
Or anti-CRT is anti-black. Zionism is an ideology - it isn't an ethnicity. A woke sacred victim identity ideology that weaponized victimhood to make demands on third parties whereby they had to suffer costs to make up for group victimhood - this is something Harris and tons of the anti-woke Zionists don't permit say black people.
zionism is just the movement and right of jews to live in their indigenous land, its not whatever u think it is
Just because you can throw anti in front of two words does not make them synonyms in comparison to other things 😂 or is it the same way being anti-bidenism or anti-trumpism is anti-americanism 😂 Sams fear of Islamic jihad is justified. We are seeing in the west now a suicidal attraction to something committed to our own demise. At least we're courageous I guess, or are we just extremely naive?
Leading with a logical fallacy was a strong signal of what was to come. That fallacy labels anyone critical of the recent behaviour of israel as antisemitic - which is a clear failure of brain function. Huge respect for SH the neuroscientist but the quality of this discourse seems atypical to the man.
As usual, there is a failure to recognize the Israeli occupation and a predisposition to paint everything in a post Oct 7 light. Sam, you're not convincing people back Israel if you don't address the elephant in the room. I feel the reason you don't address the elephant is because the occupation, illegal settlements and subjugation of the Palestinian people prior to Oct 7 (as well as disregard for international courts) is an indefensible position to hold. If you can't address this aspect, people cannot relate to the things you're saying, and you're going to lose subscribers as a result.
Honestly, the injustices against the Palestinians are just so apparent to people, it just seems bewildering as to how anyone could hold any other position, so much so one does question whether there is a financial incentive to hold the position you currently do. Whether this is the case, I don't know (or care), but could you please just play devils advocate on the topic for once and try to critically assess things from both sides. I feel subscribers will be a lot more receptive if you accurately represent their viewpoints rather than if you misrepresent them and assume them clueless anti-Semites. Even if you can argue in favour of Israel occupations pre-oct 7, I'm sure people would be willing to listen to and consider what you have to say.
Without stating your views prior to Oct 7, there is a fundamental disconnect to the views you hold post Oct 7. I hope you can understand this.
Sam hasn't only lost subscribers. He's lost the respect of the thousands of people who respected his clear thinking and intellect. He' ll never come back from this.
@@MD-bu3xc you are both moral idiots
If the Arabs had not caused the 67 war, there would be no Israeli in the west bank. There have been several attempts by successive Israeli governments to negotiate a peaceful path to a two state solution, all rejected by the Palestinians who prefer a no state solution for themselves and the Jews. The Palestinians, through terrorism, created the conditions for Israel's policies toward the population on the west bank who spawned the combatants committed to suicidal crimes. Yes, they are responsible for the movement of the Israeli public to the right and the imposition of the strict measures designed to ensure Jewish security.
as an israeli, and a life time peace activist In isreal the harsh reality is that the palstinians just don't want land or peace settlement to get there state.
I wish they will, but sadly this is not the case. the vast majority clearly say and act in a way that leaves no two way about it
there aim is to KILL US.
So, would you be willing to condemn the atrocities of October 7 and point out how the Palestinians have been a causal factor (however limited) in their own suffering ALONG with a condemnation of the Israeli abuses as an occupying power in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip? Or is a "fair representation of his viewer's perspectives" that Israel is an oppressor that can do not right and Palestine is an oppressed that can do no wrong?
I would also point out that Sam Harris did not claim that people were mindless Antisemites but rather that they mindlessly absorb talking points made by Antisemites that have been sanitized with either DEI or Human Rights language and reiterated them without thinking. You don't have to actually hate Jews to believe that Israel is an apartheid state, even if the characterization does not actually fit.
As someone who has been sympathetic to arabs, I think the argument that Israel was the only legitimate government of the entire place 1948-1998 makes sense. But arabs do not want jewish rule. Give them Jordanian passports and a vote in local elections. Israel will pay Jordan a bounty for any Palestinian anywhere who chooses to move to Jordan.
Thank you so much for this. I have heard many conversations in the last months over this subject, she was without a doubt the most eloquent and clear. I enjoyed listening.
“If you can’t see which was is up here, there’s something wrong.” Yes, Sam there is. The lack of nuance you explore on this subject is kind of non-existent. And the US, for example, does hold a standard of preventing collateral damage, interview someone with military leadership experience on this subject, rather than make unfounded statements.
Beyond all this, the real problem is both Hamas and Isreal, yes both, are ok with children’s deaths as a part of their justification for retaliation.
Israel also holds a standard for lack of collateral damage. Israeli military policy is actually heavily informed by American military policy. I would encourage you to find the Israeli military commanders who "are OK with children's deaths" any more than US military commanders are.
Hamas use their own people as human shields...so you are advocating the right of terrorists to butcher, rape, burn and murder and then hide behind their own women and children and therefore they become untouchable? Hamas won't even allow their people in the hundreds of miles of tunnels they built under Gaza...part of their strategy is to get their own women and children killed so people like you cannot see that Hamas is responsible for every death since Oct. 7. So next time ISIS or another terrorist group murder people in the US or anywhere else we should do nothing because they are shielded by their own children?
He absolutely does not lack for nuance and your thinking he should interview someone with military leadership was literally done within the past couple months - ruclips.net/video/xqxzscalX2E/видео.html. Guess what? Conclusions are the same.
@Salty_Cyclist Do you believe the killing of Hind Rajab, her cousin, and the heroic paramedics who tried to save her was collateral damage?
Yeah uh huh. Sam isn’t going to get in to an adversarial debate on this topic.
Listen to his conversation with Rory Stewert
Sam, I know you don't read the comments... but if you do read this, I'm saying this from a place of love and constructive criticism. How do you not see the incredible double standard between what you are saying now about AntiZionism being equivalent antisemitism and what you've been saying for years about anti-Islamism not being equivalent to Islamaphobia?? You're a very bright guy Sam, but we all have our biases and this seems to be a glaring one. Please have on someone serious who does not agree with your view for a conversation. I think this may be enlightening for you and many of your listeners.
The criticism of the actions of a nation state is not equivalent to the condemnation of its people or its culture or its right to exist. Most Zionists in the US are actually Evangelical Christians, and many Jews do not support the state of Israel inherently. Help me make sense of this seeming blind spot Sam, please.
People have been saying this for a while in the comments section and he has failed to address any of it
WEll said. I've been saying this for a while, but most of my comments get deleted.
💯
What are your thoughts on Arab nationalism? Would you consider suggesting Arabs move somewhere else to avoid upsetting neighbors?😮Please also address the fact that Arabs occupied much of Middle East after concurring the lands that were not historically theirs.
@@hinahinananoha7783 I'm not OP, but I think anyone with an education in history can see that Arab nationalism, and Islamo-fascist colonialism has a pretty deep stain on that region of the world. It is indeed also true that Jewish presence in Israel predated Arabs or Islam itself.
The problem becomes, what do we do with that information? Are you seriously in favor of everyone returning to their ethnic homeland? That is an absolute mess. People don't want to be kicked out of a land because their great-great grandfather was from somewhere else. What if their ancestors had immigrated peacefully? Are you developing a system to differentiate those people from the descendants of colonizers, and will allow them to stay? As for the people that should leave in favor of the ethnically native, what is your strategy that won't lead into a Gaza-like situation?
The point is this is absolute madness to incorporate. The world is messy, people move around everywhere. Most people don't live in their ancestor's ethnic homeland today. Migration is a natural human phenomenon. The fact we are even discussing the efficacy of "returning a people" to their ethnic land is completely insane. Jews should be allowed to immigrate anywhere, including Israel, and be afforded full rights. That's what self-preservation looks like. "Zionism" is not that. Zionism is what leads to what we are seeing in Gaza now..
The difference between "antisemitic" and "anti-Zionist" is the same as the difference between "racist" and "race realist". The fact that we're supposed to buy this exceedingly minor rebranding as some sort of conceptually new and entirely distinct ideology is intellectually insulting.
I think it's reasonable to have a viewpoint that the modern state of Israel should never have been created (in Palestine) and that viewpoint is presumably anti-zionist. Some people hold that position without any firm viewpoint on the future of Israel and Palestine (as it is too complex).
@@davegold - OK, but that kind of logic can apply to any and every country on this planet, including the one you live in. How's that different from saying "France should have never been created... so let's wipe it off the face of the Earth and give the land to, oh I don't know, the Huguenots or the Normans or the Suebi. I'm not anti-French, I just think they should not exist as a concept."?
@@davegold That kind of logic can apply to literally any country on this planet. "France should have never been created, so we should wipe French people off the face of the Earth and give the land back to, oh, I don't know, the Gauls or the Aquitani or the Huguenots. I'm not anti-French, I just think that France should not exist as a concept." There is literally no difference.
But somehow that logic doesn't apply to ANY other country besides Israel. Not one other country out of 195. It isn't broadly acceptable in the civilized world to call for eradication of any of them, only Israel. Sure, some very localized issues exist (e. g. I think Serbia and Russia don't recognize Kosovo) but broadly, proudly acceptable around the modern world? None.
@davegold That kind of logic can apply to literally any country on this planet. "France should have never been created, so we should wipe French people off the face of the Earth and give the land back to, oh, I don't know, the Gauls or the Aquitani or the Huguenots. I'm not anti-French, I just think that France should not exist as a concept." There is literally no difference.
@@davegold But somehow that logic doesn't apply to ANY other country besides Israel. Not one other country out of 195. It isn't broadly acceptable in the civilized world to call for eradication of any of them, only Israel. Sure, some very localized issues exist (e. g. I think Serbia and Russia don't recognize Kosovo) but broadly, proudly acceptable around the modern world? None.
Beautiful, beautiful conversation. Thank you so much. ♥️
Thankyou Sam and Michal for this deep conversation. Extremism is the bass note here and the Wests response and reaction to it,here and now,concerns and affects all of humanity.
Awesome conversation. Thanks for making this a PSA. :-)
Thanks Sam, for this. I am an Israeli leftist, and as Michal says so articulately - it was the RESPONSES to Oct 7 that MADE me into a Zionist. To celebrate the genocide pilot, to wish for my total destruction and call that a path to justice(!!!) is incomprehensible, inexcusable, and unforgivable.
I used to think that Jews and Israelis can simply be citizens of the world, and that countries, as a concept, weren't important anymore. I was wrong. To treat my very existence as an Israeli as a stain upon the world's conscience, regardless of what I (or we Israelis) do, means that the only possible protection for both Israeli and Jews is exactly the state of Israel. Israel is not just relevant as a concept, it is IMPORTANT now as it was when Zionism was first conceived in the late 19th century.
Who exactly was celebrating "the genocidal plot"? Certainly none of the main organisations supporting Palestinian rights. I live in London and have been to many of the pro-Palestine demonstrations that have taken place since October 7th and the speakers there have been very clear that they condemn the attacks on civilians that took place on that day. However, there is a context to what happened on that day which is the brutal oppression of Palestinians. Pointing out this context is not the same as justifying inexcusable actions against innocent people. I suggest that you take a look at +972 Magazine which is written by both Israelis and Palestinians and is highly informative.
@@adamwaterhouse3263 What exactly does "glory to our martyrs" and "from the river to the sea mean?
What does "settler apartheid colonial nazi state" mean, exactly?
What does "go back to Europe" means, exactly?
What does "keep the world clean" with the Israeli flag in the dumpster mean, exactly?
ffs man, you're really not paying attention.
Also, yes, there is definitely a "context" to the Oct 7 genocide pilot, and that's the refusal by the Palestinians (and the mandate-era Arabs) to acknowledge Jewish sovereignty in the area, ever, in any borders. It's not about the occupation, it's not about the imagined "apartheid", it's not about "Palestinian rights" (what rights exactly? to destroy Israel? No such right exist).
This fight predates the West Bank settlements, it predates the occupation, it predates 1948, it predates all of this. From the get-go, as soon as the first Jewish refugees (not settlers; refugees) got off the boat in the 1880s, there has been a complete and total refusal to acknowledge any and all type of Jewish presence in the area, infused with nascent Arab jihadism - both national denial and murderous fundamentalism. Until that changes, the wars will not stop, and THAT'S the context that needs discussing. Search for Einat Wilf's lecture here on youtube for more.
@@idanlib Let's try to wade through this all slowly.
So, firstly, I have to point out to you that you are moving the goalposts. Your initial point was that "To celebrate the genocide pilot, to wish for my total destruction and call that a path to justice(!!!) is incomprehensible, inexcusable, and unforgivable.", and I simply pointed out to you that the main organisations campaigning for Palestinians rights, and their speakers, haven't done this. They have said that they opposed the attacks on civilians that took place on October 7th.
That doesn't mean that no one has done this. But they don't speak for everyone.
You ask: What exactly does "glory to our martyrs" and "from the river to the sea mean?
What does "settler apartheid colonial nazi state" mean, exactly?
What does "go back to Europe" means, exactly?
What does "keep the world clean" with the Israeli flag in the dumpster mean, exactly?
How am I supposed to answer a question like that?! The truth is that there are LOTS of different people at these demonstrations - in the hundreds of thousands on some occasions - saying and chanting lots of different things. There is no consensus, and you cannot provide a clearly articulated position about anything in the context of a march.
You talk about "the refusal by the Palestinians (and the mandate-era Arabs) to acknowledge Jewish sovereignty in the area, ever, in any borders." I suggest you read Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid by former President Jimmy Carter. The reality is that Palestinians and Arabs have tried on multiple occasions to agree to a two state solution. It is the dominant power - Israel - that has prevented this.
You say: "It's not about the occupation, it's not about the imagined "apartheid", it's not about "Palestinian rights" (what rights exactly? to destroy Israel? No such right exist)." You are responding in such a biased and emotional way. Can you not see that? It is obvious that you are trapped in a very biased tribalistic mindset, just like Sam Harris and so many others.
You say: "This fight predates the West Bank settlements, it predates the occupation, it predates 1948, it predates all of this. From the get-go, as soon as the first Jewish refugees (not settlers; refugees) got off the boat in the 1880s, there has been a complete and total refusal to acknowledge any and all type of Jewish presence in the area, infused with nascent Arab jihadism - both national denial and murderous fundamentalism. Until that changes, the wars will not stop, and THAT'S the context that needs discussing."
Prior to mass Jewish immigration there were Jews living in Palestine peacefully alongside their Jewish neighbours. Palestinians were understandably alarmed by mass Jewish immigration, and were especially alarmed by the Zionist movement. Should that really come as a surprise? They didn't see European antisemitism as their problem or as something that they should have to atone for with their land and their rights. Yes, they rejected Zionism, as did the majority of Jewish people themselves until after the Second World War.
It is amazing to me that Sam can be so at odds with his own logical underpinnings on this issue. Everything about how he reasons and has decided every other issue of that last 20 years should bring him to the exact opposite conclusion. His outright lies about the supporters of the Palestinian people are nothing short of disgusting. He also lies about the meaning and intent of anti Zionism, and he acknowledges as much. He comes out and says it in his prologue.
He uses so much selective framing to make his points while ignoring rock solid rebuttals I'm sure he's aware of that would end his position conclusively. He just paints an absolute Israeli government sponsored picture of history and current events. He just talks about how put upon the Jews are, never the Palestinians under Israeli rule. He never talks about what Israel has been doing to Palestinians for 70 years, or what it has taken to make an Israel in the first place. He even starts this podcast by talking about what the Nazi's did to the Jews as if to tie Palestinians to that crime against them.
He has truly become a disappointment and at this point he's just pissing on his legacy. I thought his rapid fire tour of right wing/self help finance/influencer bro pod-casters was bad enough, but he has thoroughly set fire to any place I could hold for him.
Care to share any of these 'lies' about supporters of the Palestinians? Or is this just some hyperbole to support your BS?
totally agree. a jew supporting other jews unconditionally even if in the wrong
@benjohnson785 sure. The idea that college students in America support hamas is a lie. College students simply saw the mass murder of children on social media and protested against that. Israel supporters block Palestinian journalists online so they can't see the consequences of their favorite country's bombings of civilian infrastructure. But everyone else can.
No, he's spot on. He has recognized the moral inversion of intersectionality and his logical decisions are based on that basic recognition.
Well said. Maybe he never had any core beliefs. He’s just as illogical as anyone else.
Sounds like history started on October 7th from what I'm hearing from these two.
@@Impressive__ started when Muhammad told them to take over the world.
@@mannmusica started on 8 June 1967 on the USS Liberty actually .
@@Impressive__are you really gonna cry over that incident for 50 years ? 😂
Exactly. They are leaving out all context.
Strongest ‘criticism’ on Netanyahu and religious orthodox jewish settlers Sam ever had (and only when pushed):
‘They’re unhelpful’
Is thinking Isreal should not be committing genocide anti semitism?
Honestly yes. To get to that idea you have to first accept the premise that this isn’t a war of self defense and a war to recover hostages.
You also have to to accept the claim that the hostages are being hidden by well meaning civilians instead of people that are holding people against their will, making them also combatants.
Additionally, in order to thing this is a genocide you have to think that Isreal is killing a race of people on purpose just to kill that race.
So I ask you, in what other situation would a country not respond to a terrorist attack? What country would not try to recover hostages? What country would continue to support their enemy with aid, electricity and water? No country would do this when trying to win a war. But the west expects Isreal to do this.
Why? What makes Isreal the only country expected to exist and not fight back while they have Missiles launched at them and terrorist attacks at pizza shops and on busses and during music festivals ?
And then one must think - is it because they are Jews that the world expects them not to be powerful? To have literal boundaries with countries full of people determined to murder them?
We expect no other country to be a sitting Duck, so why Isreal?
Yes
if you only accuse Israel of a genocide but ignore to apply this standard to any other country, anti-semitism is a reason you might do that, but you can produce another reason. But I haven't heard any yet.
YES. According to elite logic of the moment.
@@guidobolke5618 but you don't need to have full awareness of every all the worlds international conflict to ask whether the IDF exhibit genocidal intent upon the civilian population of gaza. To do so has very little to do with judgement of the jewish people.
I tried watching the debate but it was so painful i had to turn it off
I watched 30 seconds (that was enough to get the gist of it)
Pity you probably needed to hear it most.
@Abcnz1989 I'm not eligible to vote, there's a large moat between my country and the U.S. called the Atlantic
Painful because of the watered-down description of what actually happened on October 7th, or painful because you don't want to hear the truth? True, the truth is unbearable to even imagine.
@maltija1 painful to see the condition Biden is in and the way he struggles to form sentences. He's obviously not mentally competent. Which I'm gutted about by the way, I can't vote but if I could I would vote for Biden.
Learning without changing isn't a plan for never again. Ideologies of speciality tend to find each other.
Holy Cow. In 17 words you summed up a concept I’ve been trying to articulate for years. Sir, please don’t be offended, but I can’t help but think you’re a bot.
Excellent conversation. Thank you.
Oh boy. Just here for the comments section 🔥🍿🔥🍿🔥
Same. It's about to get spicy
The characterization of Zionism as a form of colonialism is a contentious and complex issue, with differing perspectives among scholars, historians, and political commentators. Here are the key points on both sides of the debate:
### Arguments for Zionism as Colonialism:
1. **Settler-Colonial Paradigm**: Some scholars argue that Zionism shares characteristics with settler colonialism, as it involved the migration of Jews to Palestine, the establishment of settlements, and the displacement of the indigenous Palestinian population.
2. **Land and Resource Control**: Critics point to the expropriation of land and resources from Palestinians, and the establishment of a state primarily for Jewish people, as hallmarks of colonial practices.
3. **Indigenous Displacement**: The Nakba, or the 1948 Palestinian exodus, is often cited as evidence of colonial practices, where an indigenous population was displaced to make way for settlers.
### Arguments Against Zionism as Colonialism:
1. **National Liberation Movement**: Supporters of Zionism argue that it is a national liberation movement for the Jewish people, aimed at establishing a homeland in response to centuries of persecution and statelessness.
2. **Historical and Religious Ties**: Proponents emphasize the historical and religious connection of Jews to the land of Israel, which differentiates it from traditional colonialism, where colonizers have no historical ties to the land they colonize.
3. **Self-Determination**: Zionism is also framed as an exercise in self-determination for Jews, who sought a safe and sovereign homeland in the face of widespread anti-Semitism and the Holocaust.
### Nuanced Perspectives:
- **Dual Nature**: Some scholars suggest that Zionism contains elements of both colonialism and national liberation. They acknowledge the genuine aspirations of Jews for a homeland while also recognizing the colonial-like impacts on the Palestinian population.
- **Postcolonial Analysis**: This perspective examines how colonial legacies and power dynamics have influenced the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, without necessarily labeling Zionism strictly as colonialism.
In summary, whether Zionism is considered colonialism depends on the interpretive framework and the perspectives of different stakeholders. The debate remains highly polarized, reflecting broader tensions in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
@@everythingandmore5537 dude really copy pasted the AI view in here
@radscorpion8
AI viewpoint shows both sides. The solution is all displaced people should go back to their original villages. The idea of a Jewish or non-jewish state should be abandoned. A secular democratic state which respect human rights is the solution. The law of return should be extended to non-jews. For every returning jew a non-jew also returns. So the population is balanced.
@@everythingandmore5537This is the true moral position, but saying it’s secular vs non Jewish is practically the same thing.
58:10 - Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank is an apartheid, by the definition of “apartheid”.
10% of Jewish Israeli citizens have illegally settled the occupied territories. The settlements and policing around those illegal settlements severely and indefinitely restrict the freedoms and movements of the non-Jewish people in the occupied regions. And most salient, a pathway to Israeli citizenship is denied to the people living under occupation - why? … because those people are not Jewish.
Did I get a fact wrong? Please tell me which one.
Is it possible for us to join together with Israel in the fight against Hamas (a truly toxic organization - the worst of the worst), while at the same time recognize the harmful ( and yes, racist ) ideology that is now prevalent within Israel?
The situation is not analogous to South African apartheid because the distinctions are based on citizenship and security considerations rather than race. Israel's policies are aimed at security and are temporary measures in response to ongoing conflict.
@@scientifikx99Exactly, in order to come to OP's conclusion you'd have to ignore all rhetoric and actions from certain A... r.ab political movements from 1919 to present, that includes multiple wars, terr.. ist attacks, random stabbings, kidnappings and two in..fad.s. You'd also need to ignore the words and stated goals of multiple A..b leaders, starting with the Mufti of Jerusalem straight through to Y...er..A..fat, considered the father of the political movement known as P..le..ine.
@@scientifikx99 it’s my understanding that if a non-citizen living in the occupied region is Jewish, they have a pathway to Israeli citizenship, yes? But if a person is Muslim living under occupation, they do not have the same (or any) pathway to Israeli citizenship. Am I wrong? (i.e., policies are different depending on your ethnicity )
Also, the security policies that severely restrict freedoms in the occupied regions have persisted for years (decades?) and appear to have no timeframe for resolution.
@@MarkLeBay It is correct that Jewish individuals living in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and other occupied regions have a pathway to Israeli citizenship, primarily through the Law of Return, which grants every Jew the right to immigrate to Israel and obtain citizenship. This policy stems from Israel's identity as a Jewish state, designed to provide a safe haven for Jews worldwide, especially in light of historical persecutions.
However, the distinction between Jewish settlers and Palestinian residents is unlike South African Apartheid as it's not as a racial segregation akin to apartheid, but rather as a consequence of the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Jewish settlers in the West Bank are governed by Israeli civil law, while Palestinians are governed by a combination of Palestinian Authority laws and Israeli military regulations.
The Law of Return, which grants automatic citizenship to Jews, is rooted in the historical context of providing refuge to Jews globally, especially post-Holocaust. This policy is intended to safeguard Jewish self-determination and survival, which is a core principle of the Israeli state. This is fundamentally different than South African policies solely based on racial superiority.
As far as your second point, Israel has made significant offers for peace, including land swaps and the dismantling of settlements, as part of efforts to achieve a two-state solution. The lack of a final agreement is viewed as a result of complex political dynamics and mutual distrust, rather than a desire for permanent segregation.
Apartheid in South Africa was characterized by a systematic, legally enshrined policy of racial discrimination aimed at maintaining white minority rule over the black majority. This included laws that dictated where people could live, work, and travel based solely on race.
In contrast, Israel’s policies are a response to ongoing security threats and the unique historical circumstances of the Jewish people. The restrictions on Palestinians are security measures rather than racially motivated discrimination.
The legal distinctions are based on citizenship and security considerations, not racial hierarchy.
@@Itsstuff7328 Regardless of political identity, there are millions of people who are essentially stateless living under occupation. The children born into this situation are victims of this history. Israel has unilateral power in the occupied region. What is Israel doing to resolve this issue now? What is the pathway to citizenship for these people?
Saying that "anti-zionism is antisemitism" is worse than the logic of other people who say "being against Islamic ideas is islamaphobic" . Because at least in the latter case, ideas are being compared to ideas, but in the former case an ideology is being compared to an ethnic group of people. There are Jews who are don't like Israel or zionism
Sam has lost the thread completely.
It could hardly be funnier that Sam turned out to be a radical ethnonationalist, just not for anyone but his own tribe. It is racist for you to want demographic continuity for your tribe, but Jews get a pass, and actually you are racist if you oppose this special exception for Jews.
Here's another funny: Sam's complete obliviousness/state of denial that his white knuckled TDS (anybody/thing but Trump) is precisely what has powered what he now suddenly, hand wringingly, out of the blue decries as "There's a proper insanity surrounding the president now where people are just torching their reputation coming forward defending him..."
Only just "now", Sam?
Bingo!
Butttttttt the jews born in USA, and moved to Israel did it for "safety", and not all the free Palestinian land and houses, along with zionist "charities" giving people tens of thousands of dollars and employment guarantees for moving to Israel, from USA, which we all know the jews are "being persecuted in"🤔🤔
Haha, it’s kind of hilarious; but also, it isn’t.
From past comments, He never really took anti-semitism seriously. Something has obviously changed since October 7 for him, and probably not just because of the unprecedented barbarity of the attacks. I’d bet his mail-bag is horrific; I wouldn’t be surprised if all the Jewish podcasters we like have experienced a spike in anti-Semitic sentiment.
So he gets a pass lol.
@@vanessa1569 Yes, when his homeland gets attacked then we need to shut down immigration and build the wall, ha?
Curious how that works.
Could could you bring on Norman Finkelstein?He called you a big old dummy.
Norman is a Jew trying to fit in like those who posed as Christians while our forefathers where being turned into Ashes...
no the world has had enough of rule by American academic
A debate or a discussion between Sam Harris and Norman Finkelstein would be epic and we would all greatly benefit.But Sam does not want to be challenged because he knows.
He cannot win The argument.
@@00Julian00 doubt it finkelstein is an idiot
Does anyone take Finkelstein seriously after the Density debate?
Sam conveniently leaves out the reason for the protest at the synagogue in LA. A Jewish real estate group had an event promoting the sale of disputed land in the West Bank. You expect no reaction when a Jewish group does something so inflammatory? Especially at a synagogue? Where are the free speech.
Who cares? Palis should be sent to their brothers in established Islamic countries. They do not deserve any land if we are to be honest with ourselves.
Brilliant and spot on. Great guest.
Thank you for an amazing conversation. This woman is awesome!
I would love to hear Sam's opinion about project 2025 and what that would mean to America going forward should Trump win november.
I recommend that hundreds of thousands of liberals sign up as candidates for the presumed 2025 project. This will screw up their bookkeeping and probably get some bright liberals appointed to positions where they can function as double agents.
@@jamesfranklin2360 I would recommend that liberals and leftists put aside their petty differences and vote the only vote that can preserve democracy, ie vote Biden or whoever is the Democrat nominee. Any action other than that is handing fascism the throne.
@@ibnwarraq7826 Agreed, but just in case...
So, it's very clear that this guest is one of the most qualified persons in our species in order to articulate the full spectrum of ideas as they relate to the concept of modern Israel. However, as a political scientist, I think her propensity to dig into how "Jew hatred" is the oldest in the world, I just know it can't be true. Humans have always just hated other humans for any part of their "other". It's not hatred, it's nature. If we started seeing people's hatred as properly categorized as nature versus nurture, then I think we could come to some very "just" conclusions.
I wish Sam would actually talk to well educated people who has different views on this issue.
On what points do you differ with Sam?
@samdg1234 This conflating of anti zionism with anti semitism and the treatment of Palestinians by the Israelis government. In an earlier video a couple months ago the literally said it's was an "accident" that the idf targeted and drone strikes three aid trucks from the world kitchen organization. I expect that disgusting propaganda from Israeli officials not from a western educated liberal who proclaims to care about liberal societies who protect freedom and safety.
@@gregorycampbell9386 He never will. He didn't on Trump, he didn't on Covid, he didn't on vaccines. Why expect it now?
Its funny to see sam harris immediately resort to ad hominem attacks when it comes to this topic and then to pretend to be the paragon of reason and wisdom. What a pompous fool.
Ad hominem? Where?
A J-liberal like Sam would never say that being against Irish nationalism is equal to the hatred of Irish people (insert any European ethnic group and the statement still holds).
He especially wouldn't say that for European Americans in America, of course, who founded and built the country from the ground up, which Sam convinced to hate Muslims and be ultra-liberal and anti-nationalistic.
That's where his visceral hatred of Trump (Christianity too, BTW) comes from. It's not driven by Trump's vulgar nature or primitivism. No siree bob, he paranoidly sees in Trump a glint of White self-awareness and a potential awakening and that's what scares him above all else.
okay Adolf calm down
@@seanupton709 So typical. Huge hypocrisy and a double standard.
Here you have it folks, "crying in pain while striking" in action.
Why don't you address my arguments, little snake?
@@seanupton709 You can try to offend me, but you can't say I'm lying and more and more people is realizing that every day.
BTW just to mention that Chrisbsjr's excellent comment was deleted by the algorithm (I see it in my notifications).
@@seanupton709 don't feed the troll
@@Masamune_91 Am I wrong? Be specific.
12:37 to 16:54 - An unnerving fact overlooked about 20th century antisemitism.
Anytime I wonder if people are overstating the prevalence of antisemitism, all I have to do is go to a RUclips video saying Jews have a right to exist and look at the comments.
There is not a single person in this comment section [or anywhere in daylight] saying Jews don't have a right to exist. I hope I was able to put your mind at ease, but you still may want to work on your generational trauma; you're seeing things that truly aren't there.
Yet, I do see comments like - Palestine and the Palestinians aren't real. Shoot, why argue for a right, if you can deny the recipient of that right to have ever existed?
But, more to your point, people ARE saying they aren't fans of Israel or the people that support such a ethnonational place because the modus operandi of the State is less than ideal. And, that's putting it lightly.
Just so we're clear - Zionists aren't all Jewish, and all Jews aren't Zionists. People can have distaste for a place and it's overarching ideology, but love all people all of the time none the less. You have a right to exist regardless if a State stands or declares it so, or so says the constitution of my country, the one in which I swore to defend and protect.
Has Sam Harris had ONE prominent pro-palistine guest on since 10/7?? Honest question. I literally respect Piers Morgan over Sam now. Truly sad.
Why would any rational human, especially one as rational as Sam, host an Islamist POV? Lmao😂
Since they will try; anyone who tries to tell you that the Palestinian cause is anything but an Islamist cause masquerading in leftist jargon is either a useful idjet or a Taqqiyaist
Why would any rational human, especially one as rational as Sam, host an Isla mist POV? Lmao😂
Since they will try; anyone who tries to tell you that the Palestinian cause is anything but an Isla mist cause prettied up with leftist jargon is either a useful idjet for the left or a Taqqiyaist
It IS sad. It suggests you aren't a sound critical thinker.
@@jamesfranklin2360 Piers actually makes a point to air the opposition. Sam has closed himself off into one of the saddest shit-lib echo chambers I've ever witness on the internet.
Sam Harris must be a good human overall, but he's a poor public figure right now. Why hide from the world and talk to people whom you only agree with? Why not talk to people like Dave Smith, Joe Rogan and others? Why keep saying the same thing over and over again to people who already agree with you? If you believe Israel has a better argument to defend itself (which I think doesn't exist), come out of your bubble and talk to people. Have conversations and try to convince people who think Israel has doing evil for decades now. Convince me to believe otherwise.
Yeah Joe Rogan is especially a brain powerhouse XD
No, I don't think he is. He's shown an affinity to racist ideas and guests a few times too often now for it to be a coincidence, a blind spot or an oversight. He's a softly spoken racist
He would be toast if he went up against Norm Finklestein, John Mearsheimer and several hundred other very knowledgeable and thoughtful and humane people. But he's a coward.
@@cowbless Why does that matter? It's about his audience and Harris' arguments reaching them.
I was just reading the comments on a FB post which started off as poking relatively harmless fun at Brits on July 3rd, saying "Have fun at work tomorrow" from America. The discussion was quite sensible and non-adversorial, talking about American workers rights and the American political system and of course that we're having a general election today in the UK (4th July 2024). Someone said that we're chucking out the Tories - the Conservative Party - which is the expectation. And THEN, someone replied and said "but replacing them with Starmer [Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour Party] "the Zionazi".
There you have it, the rot is complete in the UK!
As a lifelong listener and supporter of Sam Harris, it’s just so wild to hear him speak so one sidedly on a topic and moment in history like this. I’m all for hearing this side of the argument, but Sam has evaded doing almost any investigation into the merits of the opposing ideas here. This is not as simple as he’s making it out to be, and he’s doing a disservice to this community that he’s fostered for so long, by getting sucked into the dogma of his Jewish heritage. It’s almost like he’s captured by religion, despite having battled against it his entire career.
Nothing but love for the man though. I use his meditation apps. I consume most of his content. I respect him as a voice, and in a way, the fact that he too is just a fallible human, prone to this sort of cognitive bias and error; only makes me empathetic to our combined condition. Like, if Sam cant see the middle ground here, then let’s not be so hard on ourselves. It’s clearly THAT divisive.
Still holding out hope that he starts digging into the real conversation going on out here tho. We need him in the middle of this. Helping us forge a path forward. Not slinging mud and anger from the sidelines.
He’s so full of shit on this topic it’s unreal
October 7 demonstrated that the "middle ground" was wrong. 80% of Palestinians (or more) don't want a two-state solution or any solution that allows Jews to live in peace and safety in the land of their ancestors.
Its because he's Jewish
the idea that you get to have an opinion on this topic is wild entitlement.
On what recent episode have you see Sam engage opposing ideas? He didn't on Trump, he didn't on Covid, and you expected him to be different now?
"Anti-Zionism Is Antisemitism" Really Sam, so are these terms now interchangeable? I think not. Please examine your definition of antisemitism. You are well aware that all Palestinians are Semites.
Got another one that didn't listen to the podcast. Thanks for your deeply uninformed commentary.
@@mdgprogrammerif anything Palestinian are more Semitic because they didn't leave for centuries. That's why most western jews just look white. Because they are.
Of course, criticism of Israeli policies are fine. rejecting Israel's existence as a whole no matter what they do, aka antizionism you're either ignorant of the world or an antisemite.
Yes, Sam = Greenblatt.
Let me ask you a question,
Have you visited an Arab country , even a liberal one ,I.e Say Morocco?
Pretend that you are one of them and you will hear shit that will make you lose sleep at night.
Yes antizionism is new hatred so much that for weak heart will send you to a mental institution
Are you ever going to get someone on you disagree with ever again? Or is it going to be circlejerk after circlejerk from this point on?
Boom headshot
Instead of engaging with the arguments such as "The Gaza strip and the West Bank are occupied territories", he just says disregards them as "lies", or "moral confusion". I used to think Noam Chomsky was crazy. After some years I started listening to what he had to say about this subject and now I don't think I can agree with Harris ever again on this topic.
exactly. Thank you lol. I'm so glad to see these comments. What Sam is doing is disgraceful
fuck are you on 99% of all podcasts are circlejerk interviews
@@berrutti_ Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, and uprooted the Jewish communities who lived there, in the name of "peace". Gaza hasn't been "occupied" since then, except by Hamas.
eh, wouldve been more fun to also include 'Zionism is Antisemitism' as well. Qualities of that viral morphology.
Anti-Zionism is the cat's paw for Islamism.
Ironically it is
Such an information and great podcast ... thanks Sam Harris.
Sam's "moral confusion" on this issue would be tragic if were not so infuriating.
This isn't moral confusion. This is a man who sides with his tribe and morality can go to hell.
Of course. Any criticism towards my ideology or tribe is bad. Am I doing this right ?
Just incorporate dramatic music and academic phraseology and you're there 😃
Literally the best podcast I’ve listened to
Sam doesn't want a world with less suffering. Hes a state intellectual who is lying. please stop listening to Sam.
I haven't listened to Sam's podcasts in months since he's gone full IDF. It's sad, he was my favorite podcaster.
Well it’s sad that you are so closed off to ideas you may not agree with. One of the biggest signs of intelligence is being open to other’s perspectives.
@@Heydrayheyhey LOL then that applies to Sam just as equally, who apparently refuses to have any conservations with Palestinians or opposing views on this topic. Instead its just Douglas Murray for the 25th time followed by "why anti-zionism means you hate the jews".
Cry more jihadi
@@radscorpion8 you literally do not know what Sam listens to and reads. Not giving pro-Palestinians platform on his podcast doesn’t mean he doesn’t listen and analyze them lol. Again showing lack of intelligence that you can’t understand this nuance LOL
Is there any level of collateral damage that Sam would deem too far? Or is that not a consideration to him if they are Muslim?
You're talking about collateral damage on people who deliberately maximize it. Firing rockets from playgrounds to draw return fire. Militarizing hospitals, mosques, and schools so the optics are bad when they get attacked. Your question is a good one for more than just Sam.
He has another episode on urban warfare you might be interested in.
20 years ago, he advocated for preventive nuclear strike against muslims.
It's impossible to use logic against those who don't value facts.
There is not Palestinian nation or Palestinians. They are Jordanians, Egyptians, Syrians and Lebanese. The biggest mistake Israel made is to call them Palestinians.
It is not so...there are Christian Zionists, I´d say majority of Zionists are Christian. Palestinians are also Semitic people.
Both the things you said there have nothing to do with anything. And antisemitism is about Jew hatred. There is no such thing as a Semitic peoplehood - that's a language family
There is no such thing as a Christian Zionist. Its like saying there are Christian satanists. Cause thats what it would mean literally
This is the word salad that antizionists use to defend their Jew-hatred.
one Zion forever
First time I give an episode thumbs down. I want the old objective Sam back. The guy that could hold himself to a higher standard.
Yeah, this episode is shameful
Sam has always been fanatical jewish fascist. In The End of Faith, book from 2004 he advocates preventive nuclear strike against muslims.
I have never met a person who denies pol pots genocide of cambodians...you are right
We don't talk about it all the time. There aren't any genocide remembrance days except for the one you go to jail for questioning.
Excellent interview ❤
She is sooooooo well spoken and in her zone. Bravo!!!!!
She sounds zealous and angry...
It's a pity she had no cogent arguments to make, only rhetoric, assertions, and appeals to emotion.
That's never ever been true in my lifetime, and being Jewish myself I've lived among Jews all that time (I'm 73). Why would it be true now, when Israel's actions are condemned universally?
Universally, name one country Israel should listen to?
@@solvingpolitics3172South Africa ?
70% of Americans support Israel, their actions are not "universally condemned, it is only legacy leftwing media reporting this messaging. They are fighting a war to eliminate a real threat to their survival, just as the US would if we were attacked.
@@sambones1092 South Africa? An absolute failed state about to genocide its remaining white population. It'll soon be Zimbabwe #2.
@@sambones1092 South Africa is the applicant of corruption.
Sam love these vids. To best attack the woke west arguments please focus on the specific details how idf is not geocoding in its routing of hamas, is going out of their way to protect Palestinian civilians, how isreals has just reasons to live where they are currently located historically are valid. Go deep and hard on the specific arguments that are being raised in pro pal west protests. This is how we reach those on the fence, those too scared to stand up against pro pal. We also need to make islamaphobia not a bad thing or banned word. islam inspires terror and hate, its hate based lived beliefs need to be judged for what it is.
Imagine converting to a religion just to claim you are receiving prejudice when we all know your history and where you come from and why you change your names.
Imagine not having the balls to say what you mean even while under the cloak of anonymity.
@@gregoryreynolds3612 they delete your comments when you mention the Khazars,
@@krono5el Can confirm.
@@gregoryreynolds3612love it! They fear us so much they can't even name us
@@gregoryreynolds3612 - Imagine being so egotistical and stupid you post comments under your own name, which of course we do not know is your name.
Pretty stupid claim. Zionism is nationalistic ideology with theocratic tendency, and you can be against such ideology without being racist. Anyone can be zionist, it is not about ethnicity. And about apartheid policy of Israel, questioning that is pretty much anti-racist no matter who is the perperator (there are other etchinicities living in Israel too, you know).
Next you gonna claim that Anti-Khomeinism is same as being islamophobic?
Indeed, most zionists are Christians
The whole terminology is a retarded nightmare.
I can't believe that you have to come here to say this, but Sam has gone so far down the rabbit hole that I'm afraid his head has got stuck
The claim is - given the obvious historical persecution of Jewish people and the atrocities we saw on 10/7 - to be opposed to there being a Jewish nation-state which bears the raison d-etre of providing protection to Jewish people is, by extension, antisemitic. Posed like this, you can see how one might claim anti-zionism is antisemitic as it would appear that being opposed to there being state protection for Jewish people would result in their inevitable genocide. More straightforwardly, the claim is anti-zionism = anti-existence of Israel. Non-existence of Israel = death of Jews. Make sense?
Virgin take.
Chad: nationalism is the only thing that prevents wars. Strong nations know the stakes. Weak nations cause wars.
Saying the hebrews do not have a right to self-preservation is antisemitism
Now switch Hebrews with white and you have a problem, the future is mixing of everybody, "creolisation", like in Brazil
And "self-preservation" includes drone strikes on women and children because there might be a Hamas member somewhere within a mile or two?
It's a complete mystery why, if there are any children who survive to the end? I think they might just grow up to have just the tiniest issue with Israel. I'm serious. I think there might be some very strongly worded letters of complaint.
What does committing genocide have to do with self-preservation? And if you're still delusional enough to deny that it's a genocide, listen to the comments from the Israeli government where they relate the story of Israel vs Amalek as to what's happening now and pair that with the sheer amount of destruction and death we have seen with our own eyes through social media.
They have a right to self preservation. Just not a right to displace other people to do it.
@davidvenegas6401 they were displaced from the area first. Those there now moved into the vacuum left by their pogrom. Do they not have a right to reclaim their land and reach self preservation?
Great discussion but there is much Michal says which is debatable, and Sam was the man for it!
Spot on Sam!
ethno-nationalism for me not for thee
EXACTLY.
That's the issue with ethnoreligious communities that believe their people are the chosen ones. They're more inclined to believe in rules that only apply to them.
I support ethno-nationalism for everyone, but I can't speak these views in public. Sam supports ethno-nationalism only for his tribe while in my country, and his views are mainstream.
It makes you wonder...
Most Islamic countries are Muslim ethno-nationalist. If you want to stop being a Muslim to change your beliefs, they have apostasy laws which often grant the death penalty. So when we talk about athno-nationalism, we need to first do a deep examination of Muslim led nation states and their policies. And if you are not willing to do that, you are dishonest from the very start of the argument.