A Response to Norman Finkelstein's Moral Arguments - Coleman Hughes, Michael Moynihan
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 лис 2023
- Comedy Cellar, Live From the Table. Coleman Hughes, Michael Moynihan, and Noam Dworman respond to some of Norman Finkelstein's recent arguments about the Gaza war.
- Розваги
Very thoughtful. The three of you were fantastic. Thank you.
I love Coleman.
First time I have heard him...not a good look. The purpose of analogy is to draw attention to a broad point. Conflating that for an "apples for apples" comparison is a bad look.
@@fannonboxingYes a laughably weak argument delivered in a well studied dispassionate podcaster big brained voice. So cringetastic
Great analysis guys
But Norman never said that the levels of oppression between the slaves and the people of Gaza were the same, what he said was that these are both oppressed people. He didn’t say that the degree of oppression was the same. And it wasn’t just Nat Turner that he compared, it was also the Warsaw uprising that the Jews committed during World War II, that he also compared. The Jews were incarcerated in a concentration camp, but they were not slaves, but the comparison is still valid. People don’t have to experience the same level of oppression that slaves experienced for them to still be oppressed to the point that they would rebel. So your comment is misguided, because you have misinterpreted what he said.
But both examples (Nazi and slavery) are horrible and completely irrelevant. They are evil. Let's examine it:
Slaves were tortured and raped daily. Treated as chattel.
Jews were led to gas chambers and murdered by millions.
Let's think about Hamas. Hamas for decades killed Jews. Not just out of Gaza. Hundreds of suicide bombings. What atrocities. There wasn't even a fence before the Oslo Accords. Israel is only always reacting to security threats. They have no racist or any other approach against Palestinians in Gaza. They *traded* with Gaza. 10,000s of people entered to work in Israel from Gaza and went back daily.
There is no comparison. It is just an enemy entity. And there was no billionaires neighborhood like Rimal in concentration camps or at plantations. And palestinians murdered Jews before 1967 and before 1948. What occupation existed in 1929 when Palestinians did similar things to October 7 on the old yishuv of Hebron.
I would say the Palestinians have had it worse than the slaves. Imagine being kicked out your home and getting killed and on top of all of that you are being blamed for it? 😂
The Palestinians have been ethnically cleansed for decades and clowns like these 3 blame it on the Palestinians.
No, sir-YOU are misguided: Different people may CLAIM TO BE “oppressed”, but that does not make it so. This word is thrown about by every Tom Dick and Harry with any grievance at all. We even have men claiming to be oppressed if they are not allowed to use girls’ bathrooms.
He absolutely was putting them on the same level what are yoj talking about. That's the entire basis for his opinion.
@@DomAtaGlanceyou are being disingenuous. That's the nice way to put it. Actually, if you saw the show with Norman, then you are a liar trying to further genocide. A real p.o.s.
I was going to leave a comment but thankfully people in the comments have already made the points I was going to. Thank you for being thoughtful, smart people. It gives me hope.
20:33 "Can you envisage any scenario where this type of thing would be okay?"
1. The 1775 American Revolution open conflict, the 13 Colonies vs British rule
2. The 1791 slave revolt of the Haitians vs French colonial rule
3. Gabriel Prosser, Richmond VA. 1800
4. Denmark Vesey, Charleston SC. 1822
5. Nat Turner Virginia 1831
6. U.S imperialism in African and "so-called" Middle Eastern nations, circa
What kind of logic attempts to rationalize permanent oppression by one group or race of people over another and then penalizes the natural human right of self-determination when it fights back?
Prof. Finkelsteins' structure of facts still stand.
can only like this comment once - but deserves 1000s likes
I only clicked on this video as it popped up on the side and thinking how could these guys possibly question facts. Oh yes, they are zionists, so facts don't mean anything.
Noam will not recover from the intellectual drubbing he and his team of zionists received from Norman. Noam is trying hard to justify his position by speaking to other liars/zionists - but this is called confirmation bias. Just because a group of you zidiots all believe the same lies, does not change the FACTS.
So you think that killing babies is justified if you are oppressed?
@MrSportz1234 Redirect your question to those who OPPRESS AND KILL. Freedom, Justice and Equality belongs to the entire human family.
@MrSportz1234 Israeli police investigation has revealed one baby died on oct 7th and together with an Israeli kibbutz Woman's account, she was held hostage with other village members and has spoken very clearly about the IDF just not turning up for hours, and then when.they did they fired and bombed the Israeli homes - one home from which this woman was being held in had a baby there and she describes hearing the infant cry but then once the IDF had unloaded their wrath in hannibal directive style the infants cry was nonlonger heard. So, one baby died and hostage accounts speak of IDF bombing their homes one in which the baby crying then ceased and in a hail of gunfire the IDF killed Israelis aswell as Palestinian terrorists.
The number in Israel who died has also reduced again officially by Israel from 1400 to 1200 and now stands at 1000. The reason given is that they now realise the incinerated bodies killed by Israeli apache helicopter hellfire missiles included more Palestinians than they first thought... THAN THEY FIRST THOUGHT... take that in... Israel KNEW its helicopters had killed its own citizens and ASSUMED no palestinians were amongst them... but now theyre realising they did kill some of the terrorists hence the numbers of Israelis who died has reduced by almost one third...
You cannot ignore the fact that many Israeli citizens died by 'friendly fire' - that's what Israel are calling it. If Israel didn't have a hannibal directive I wonder how many Israelis would have still been alive today... sure, they'd have been taken as hostages into Gaza, but the only risk of death to these citizens would still be at the hands of their own governments IDF bombs and hellfire missiles...
It's a lot to take in. And for sure no Israelis would have died if the terrorists hadn't chosen to take hostages.... but tbf, Palestinian terrorists wouldn't exist if their homes had not been stolen, if the land they occupy wasn't brutally blockaded and occupied by Israel...
Peace has to start somewhere - Israel no longer occupying and murdering the people of Gaza and the West Bank would be a great start to that peace.
It's like you didn't even listen to what Moynihan said.
He said he was OK with him killing the slave owner that oppressed him but not the baby
thanks for an excellent discussion. couldn't agree more with you!
Coleman's whole spiel on the Clinton parameters is flat out false. He would know this, moreover, if he had checked what Norman has actually written about the parameters. In brief: We now have the document laying out Israel's reservations. The Israeli reservations are emphatically *not* within the parameters. Moreover, while Palestinian reservations lay within *international law* (the parameters depart from the law in several key respects), all of Israel's reservations lay outside international law. See Norman Finkelstein, Bill Clinton Lied-And So Did Everyone Else: A Mystery Solved in the Israel-Palestine Conflict," Jadaliyya (June 30, 2023).
They're still trying to justify an oppressive regime, bonkers
Yeah, unfortunately while I think Coleman's philosophical engagement with Finkelstein - and the issue generally - has been excellent in my opinion, he seems to have been sort of catching up on the scholarship of the conflict, with some serious gaps, while simultaneously pontificating on it. There's significant pressure to do this as a podcaster but it's pretty unfortunate. I have read a bunch on the conflict (just recently finished Seth Anzsiska's groundbreaking diplomatic history "Preventing Palestine") and yet would still be extremely uncomfortable pontificating on various episodes in the conflict in public. It's really difficult to acquire serious expertise on this stuff. If I were him I'd stick more to doing interviews, like he did with Benny Morris.
how can you say it is excellent when he repeats the sam harris role reversal, "intentions" thought experiment?@@philoshua
@@philoshuaso is the Palestinian situation better than the global average???
From the dozens of videos I have seen of Gaza and the West Bank, even the the most poorest looking areas look considerably better than most areas of urban areas in Africa,Asia and South America. Sure as hell doesn't look like a place with continous genocide and appartied taking place.
I am still a Palestinian supporter yet as I am constantly getting information without drifting into emotional bias I am getting more and more bewildered by many of the claims and accusations made by the Palestinians and supporters of the Palestinian cause.
@@yakari7983can you name a free accusations and claims you are bewildered by? Thank you
1:29:18 "The quote from a politician is essentially worthless", they say, after quoting extensively from Shlomo Ben-Ami book about the Clinton Paramaters without referring to, y'know, the Israeli document itself, which is available.
But, apparently, a politician quote is only worthless when it contradicts their point.
Because you can judge by actions, and Ben Ami's criticism of his own side shows that he lived up to his own actions.
UK invented the concentration camp...in South Africa: Finklestein isnt that far off: The American Heritage Dictionary defines the term concentration camp as: "A camp where persons are confined, usually without hearings and typically under harsh conditions, often as a result of their membership in a group which the government has identified as dangerous or undesirable"
Benny Morris validated the use of the Apartheid term on your show
you also grossly understate the efforts the israeli govt has taken to undermine a successful 2 state solution
@@Torric25 Can you provide a link to this? I"d like to watch it
As soon as the Nazi Party came to power concentration camps were settled with every oposition they could find including NSDAP former members. Gulags also means concentration camps. Of course Finkelstein doesn't use it in vain.
Speaking of South Africa! Israel was “‘South Africa's primary and most reliable arms supplier during a period of violent internal repression and external aggression…’ and Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin toasted ‘the ideals shared by Israel and South Africa: the hopes for justice and peaceful coexistence.’” “As South African repression of the black majority peaked, Defense Minister Shimon Peres [told] its leadership that Israeli cooperation with the apartheid regime was ‘based not only on common interests, but also on the unshakeable foundations of our common hatred of injustice’”
Have many problems with the arguments presented:
1. Norman Finkelstein doesn't condone Hamas attack. But he is unable to condemn it because he is not sure that if he were in that position, he wouldn't have done the same thing. It is a lack of self-righteousness, not the other way round.
2. Finkelstein likes and respects Gandhi. Gandhi didn't make it compulsory on everyone to NOT engage in violence at all costs. In fact, he hated cowardice more than violence. Finkelstein does have that framework in mind when he is analyzing this situation.
3. Hamas attackers might have it better than most Gazans (it was brought up in the context of how they are themselves not slaves like Nat Turner), but they still chose to lay down their lives. They were acting (in their minds) on behalf of Gazans who are indeed suffering.
4. Gaza is not a normal place. Just because there are some people who are rich.
5. Nat Turner analogy doesn't completely fit. But no analogy does. No point in pointing out "but Gazans are not slaves". I am uncomfortable with that analogy, but not for the reasons given. Same for the concentration camp analogy.
6. Noam is wrong to say that the second intifada happened despite Israeli leadership's sincere efforts for peace. I don't have evidence to deny that they weren't sincere, but I can clearly see why Palestinians won't have seen them as sincere, since they continued with the expansion of the settlements while negotiating for peace. Even Shlomo Ben-Ami, former Israeli foreign minister concedes this in his debate with Finkelstein.
7. Finkelstein is not a stickler to international law. He has said so on many occasions. For example, he agrees that all Palestinian refugees can't be settled in Israel. He just says that they still have the right to return. If one wants to stop them from claiming that right, they need to be given a generous offer (right to settle in a future Palestinian state, for example).
8. Coleman Hughes quotes from Shlomo Ben-Ami's book in order to blame Arafat. But when Noam says that the Israeli side wanted peace and Arafat didn't, Coleman doesn't correct the picture. According to Shlomo Ben-Ami himself, the deal presented to the Palestinians at Camp David was such that even he would have said no, let alone Palestinians. He also says that at Oslo, Israelis didn't really want to give Palestinians a sovereign state. They only wanted to give them a half-state, with security controlled by Israel.
9. Noam quotes a Palestinian minister who blames Arafat for not making a deal, and he says it is an insider himself, and hence something very significant. But Shlomo Ben-Ami was an insider too, a former foreign minister. He blames BOTH parties, not just Arafat.
Way to go.
well said.
Fantastic!
1 and 2, and 3 so? The point these gentleman make is that the conditions are not similar to the concentration camp (we normally think of) or the slaves. The things Norman Finkelstein constantly names to paint a picture of Gaza. And even than purposely killing innocent children is morally wrong according to these gentlemen. You can disagree with that but by simply stating that Finkelstein doesn’t know what he would do in that situation, doesn’t refute anything. You just restating his position without going against the arguments these men give.
4 no one says it’s a normal place. These men argue that part of why it’s not a normal place is because Hamas keeps attacking it’s neighbor and doesn’t want peace. And that Israel cannot simply stop the blockade because of security issues. If you disagree with this tell us why.
5 what analogy are you comfortable with and if there is no analogy simply don’t make analogies. And for what reasons are you not happy with the analogy? And why not the arguments these gentlemen give. You don’t give any reason why they are not good.
6 this is a serous argument you bring up. I lack knowledge about this. I can speculate that they eventually would order the settlers to retreat, but I don’t know this. I would like the gentlemen to go in to this issue. I do now think the settlers should be stopped.
7 I have never heard Finkelstein say something concrete about what a solution to the refugees was. I don’t think Hamas is someone you can negotiate with, especially after October 7, but before this they said they would agree with 1967 borders, with the right of return and agree to a period of peace after which they would resume the fight. This is not serious.
8 and 9 I have not read everything Schlomo has written but I think it’s pretty clear that he thinks Arafat was the reason the peace process failed. www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/camp-david-summit-two-state-solution-annexation-by-shlomo-ben-ami-2020-07
- I thought Finkelstein was interesting and honest but I knew that I didn’t know enough to know whether he was right or not. This podcast has convinced me Finkelstein is morally manipulative and paints a very selective picture.
@@edoblaauw4561 "And even than purposely killing innocent children is morally wrong according to these gentlemen." Norman wouldn't disagree, and he doesn't condone it either. Just that he doesn't find it in his heart to condemn the attack given 100 years of history. If you want to know why Norm can't condemn the attack, read his 2018 book on Gaza. He knows much more about the reality on the ground than we do. He has gone through all the human rights reports. I do not judge him for not being judgemental about the Hamas attack.
"conditions are not similar to the concentration camp" I agree with this, and I also agree that this argument has some force. But if you listen to Norman, he would tell you exactly what conditions Gazans live under. If he lies there, there is a point to it. Otherwise, if he were to himself agree (which I am sure he would) that the conditions in Gaza are not as bad as the concentration camps which Jews had to live in, I don't see what the hassle is all about. You will have to listen to Norm in entirety. The idea that people would listen to his analogy to a concentration camp, followed by him describing what the conditions in Gaza exactly are (which he does detail in each interview), and they would just be fooled into thinking that the situation is as bad as the Nazi concentration camps, then that is stupid. People are smart enough not to fall for such a manipulation (which you say Norm is engaging in). The truth of the matter is that most people don't really know what it is like to live in Gaza, and such analogies should make them want to know. I don't think of people as sheep who can be manipulated to think in a particular way. Also, Norm was asked this question by Noam, that the concentration camp analogy conjures up images of Jewish people being gassed. And Norm had clarified that that was a death camp, not a concentration camp. I think the term 'open air prison' is more suitable, although I have come to learn that the term concentration camp is much wider in scope. Norm should clarify if he means the Nazi concentration camps, or other such camps in history. But as I said, it doesn't seem like much of a problem to me.
" These men argue that part of why it’s not a normal place is because Hamas keeps attacking it’s neighbor and doesn’t want peace. And that Israel cannot simply stop the blockade because of security issues. If you disagree with this tell us why. "
Even on this point, I agree that I have reservations as well. But my understanding is that Hamas was born because of the occupation. And Israel was wrong to have done it. The occupation can be traced to the Nakba of 1948, the original sin that still haunts Israel. Now, if there has to be any solution to this problem, it will require enormous will power on part of Israelis to believe in the better side of the human nature. They will have to believe (and if the trauma of the holocaust doesn't let them be vulnerable, the world will have to assert pressure) that providing relief to the Palestinians from the occupation, reining in violent settlers in the West Bank, such steps taken over a period of time would give Palestinians hope for a future, and would make them less reluctant to fall into the arms of extremists. This will require vulnerability on part of Israelis, but it will have to be done. Because if they keep making children orphans in Gaza, keep giving a free hand to settlers in the West Bank, radicalisation will increase. And there is no knowing what will happen 50 years from now. The blind support of the US for Israel can't be taken as a given.
Regarding the blockade, again, I am not sure if it should be down away with immediately. But as I told you, it can be gotten rid of at some point in the future if Israeli leadership come to their senses, resolve to get a peace deal done. I know it is idealistic, but there is no other way.
"And for what reasons are you not happy with the analogy?" I am not happy with the analogy because I realise that as time has progressed, the arc of morality has proceeded in such a way that violence is considered much more abhorrent today than it was in the days of slavery. So, if abolitions couldn't condemn Nat Turner's rebellion, it had a lot to do with how violence was accepted as a norm in those days. So, Norman is not completely right (morally) about him not being able to condemn the atrocities just because the abolitions didn't. I am not that uncomfortable with the analogy because of the exaggeration that is built into it. I have explained this above. If you disagree, that is also fine to me. I just won't label Norman as a manipulator because of it.
' I can speculate that they eventually would order the settlers to retreat, but I don’t know this." I don't know what the long term plans are. I have not seen a good explanation of why those settlements exist and continue to expand. But given that many in the Right Wing coalition headed by Netyanahu explicitly say that Judea and Sameria belong to them, I am skeptical that there are good intentions behind them. I brought them up in the context of how the Palestinians wouldn't see them as being benign, given that the settlers often attack them, and given that the settlments have expanded while peace talks were going on.
But according to Noam , you can unilaterally expel people from the land and keep seizing new land (49:21).
so awful, right, and then he claims that Israel, this poor poor victim, hoped that the Gazans would have some moral values that would enable them not to let Gaza destroyed again. omg, how morally sick
Which is how the Muslim Jihadists got Palestine.
@@tnndll4294 Jews were never expelled from that land. Please try again from a different angle with the zionist lies and propaganda. this attempt has failed.
But did they unilaterally expel. Them? Where did the 20% of Israeli Arabs come from?
Um, this happens in literally every war. And the notion that Arabs were expelled as a result of the 1948 war ( started by the Arabs) has mostly been debunked.
left guy: still believes gaza is not that terrible place to live (flat-earther)
center guy: only focus on slavery aspect in norman’s analogy (narrow-sighted)
right guy: still can’t get over the fact he didn’t know the meaning of concentration camp (hurt feelings)
Thanks to you I didn't waste my time cause all that sounds like israeli defending NPCs talking
I guess you must have tuned out a lot.
very well put
Yes it was pitiful to watch...
Wow...its almost as if words mean things and you don't care about definitions
Finkelstein should just move to Gaza along with all the haters in the comment section.
Muslims and “America bad” liberals.
👍
Move to Gaza? Hell, Israel won’t even let journalist in there right now to visit because THEY DONT WANT PEOPLE TO REPORT ON THE HORROR OF THE ATROCITIES THEY ARE COMMITTING.
But it’s not only the people in this comment section who have woken up to the evils of the Israeli government and (sadly) the current majority of Israelis. The day has come when the whole world now sees these Jewish supremacists for what they really are. And their day of reckoning is coming.
And I’m speaking as an American on behalf of the majority of the American people (despite what your bs polls may lie and try to tell you).
11:22 maybe you should move there… I’m sure you will be safe since you’re not hamas
i think you should move there. maybe you will finally understand the terrible living conditions of the people living there. i am lebanese , and we have been living with israel as an offender to the whole region since i was born. they couldnt have picked a worse place to displace the jews. why they did not go the US , i really am flabbergatsed by how they forced themselves in the middle of the middle east
Just because you live a long time does not mean your life is not a struggle.
Your just another clown.
Sure, but Finkelstein isn't just talking about "struggle" - he compares it to nazi concenration camps.
I am guessing you think that you made a trenchant observation.
This is frankly so infuriating to listen to, because its so clear that none of the speakers have read Finkelstein's "Gaza: An Inquest into its Martyrdom". Had they done so, they wouldn't make so many arguments that he *specifically goes out of his way to respond to* in that book.
Have you considered fallable human memory?
@@spencerantoniomarlen-starr3069 If their memory is so fallable that they don't remember even the general ideas of Finkelstein's dismantling of their arguments that he preemptively made in his book what's the value of their arguments? They are then not more knowledgeable on the issue of ethics or politics of this conflict than any common person ranting about this at the bar or at the dinner table?
Then respond to any claim at all if you are so equipped to do so.
Can you give me 5-10 of the points he countered in his book?
exactly
Coleman says "Finkelstein's an international law professor" but his PhD is in political science.
Also, Coleman's hypothetical in which students are supposed to give a solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict in a "moral philosophy seminar" is extremely strange, to say nothing of the idea that international law is somehow off-limits as a justification for a position on the question.
Coleman is intellectually bankrupt.
This is true
@@guiseppe2862 I've said for years that Coleman is a hack "intellectual" that somehow has managed to impress enough folks to the point that he's been able to rise up to the level of a perceived deep intellect that is positioned to comment on topics beyond his ability to comprehend. This is especially curious considering that he has never experienced or lived through most of the things he talks about outside of "Moral Philosophy Seminar".
finkelstein at one point was teaching courses on international law in turkey, so it’s technically a true statement i guess.
a related amusing anecdote - finkelstein has said in interviews that he wound up completing his doctorate in princeton’s polisci program because he had a falling out with his original faculty advisors in the middle east studies dept. and had to find a new dissertation supervisor, which sounds about right knowing norman 😂 (iirc stephen cohen took over advising him at this point)
Can you imagine Coleman trying to debate NF? It would be very funny
Children should not speak on subjects they have no clear understanding about.
Douglas Murray was asked to debate Norman on Piers Morgan and Murray refused like a coward.
Why? Because Coleman is polite and civil and Norman is not?
@@MrSportz1234 no because norman is acctully a scholar who spent his life studying the conflict and know the facts
Why? Because Coleman would expose the holes in his arguments?
now invite norman finklestein to have the chance to reply
Be fair! Get Norm back on... Coleman hahhaha Coleman hack hack!
To be fair, they are doing this precisely to have Norm back on to address these arguments
Of course, we will.
I see you didn't even try to watch any of the video before commenting, because they state immediately that that's the point of this video.
This video is responding to an email request from Norman.
@@spencerantoniomarlen-starr3069 i watched it live but like 5 or 10 minutes had passed
A question of moral philosophy for coleman is " If there is a HAMAS soldier in New York and keeps a building hostage . Would it be justified to bomb the place with people in it.?? Because the HAMAS is so evil that everyone is justified in killing the HAMAS even if it means to kill the innocent people with it.""
Answer this honestly.
One thing that strikes me is that they never show footage of people being killed in the Gaza. Always shying away from talking about it.
This shows the dishonesty of these people.Never condemning the Acts of Israel and dehumanizing Palestinians as just HAMAS supporters is the approach of these people. Disgraceful War propagandists.
I didn't get that that is what Coleman was saying should be the uniform prescriptive ethic. Rather, he was saying rigidity in ethical principles can lead to regimentation that has non-uniform results because the principles and rules underlying them are indeterminate. Therefore, indeterminate rules of ethical behavior will inevitably lead to outcomes less than optimal and often disastrous. For example, it was mentioned how Judges often change laws or modify them because their consequences lead to ridiculous results when applied under a presupposed framework of uniformity of context. Your misapprehension of what Coleman's point was in the example you cite is par for the course of what's wrong in this entire Israel-Plaestinian conflict debate: Too many people who don't even understand the basic nuances of language.
@@ScottRachelson777 Coleman isn't applied consequentialism uniformly. He seems to be arguing that following international law threatens Israel's security. What about the consequence of subjugating 2 million people to a concentration camp. What about the consequence of not removing settlers? This is a grave miscarriage of justice.
The argument that laws change doesn't give you the ability to ignore international law. Israel hasn't made any attempt to argue and have UN change international law because there is no argument to be made. How can you argue for an illegal occupation and policies that amount to crimes against humanity.
And the point @Abdullah-hy2uv was making is that the Israel operation in Gaza amounts to terrorism and collective punishment. So, apply consequentialism theory to that. Are the consequences of the elimination of all civilians in a building for one terrorist morally justified ?
Sound like Zionists pick the little tiny points that have no bearing and call them nuance in order to justify genocide ?
@@DanReh These guys are just pro-Israel so they will say anything to fit their narratives.
That situation wpuld not be analogous. An analogue would be, if someone is holding someone hostage and threatening to kill other people, using the hostage to prevent those people from defending themselves.
No one desputes that there are good people in Palestine! However, they Elected HAMAS and HAMAS IS a terrorist organization. BTW...WWII, there were more Germans killed than British,. It's WAR.
I don’t think it’s fair to debate Finkelstein’s argument without him being present there to provide counter-arguments
why would they have finkelstein back when he destroyed all their fake bullshit news
Finkelstein is a public figure; hence what he said can be analyzed and debate in public. That is a fair game.
Did no one listen to what they said at the beginning of this podcast? He's coming back to counter these statements alone and does not want to debate
Pretty understandable though; when you sum up the intellectual capacity and IQ level of all three, it does not even reach to the half of Finkelstein has. If he were present, he would simply destroy these morons!
Yup it’s called being a coward specially when you were there to his face
A better title would be "The claims that Finkelstein's arguments are responses to (but we haven't read his book)."
How could you create any investment in an economy from a capital standpoint when there is a political or war risk that can’t be insured? It’s IMPOSSIBLE.
Arguing against the application of international law to the letter is not the right thing to do? Soft law?!? Jesus.
Coleman is applying philosophical thought to argue against the “letter of the law” position espoused by Finkelstein while also arguing that the professor’s arguments would get him failing grade in a philosophy class....WHAT?!? It is obvious Coleman is a child trapped in the mindset of a student in Hamilton Hall, how is he qualified to comment on this topic intelligently is beyond me. I will also add, adherence to the letter of the law is what keeps modern democracies safe, applying philosophical arguments and insights is dangerous and opens things up for gross injustice and crimes against humanity. The Nazi's were experts at applying Nietzsche, Kant, and others to their inhumane and criminal policies. Funny how Coleman never considered that.
The UN has called for the end of the Cuban blockade for decades. But that's not genocide either. that's hyperbole taken as literal fact.
Best I have heard on the conflict, and I listen across the spectrum. I appreciate how they explain the context and steelman the arguments and admit they could be in error, and focus on key issues. Deserves a broad audience
AGREED!
disagree!
5:20 the blockage was preemptive, Hamas didn’t fire rockets until after the blockade. In fact, before Isreal pulled out and remove the settlers, they made sure to bomb water salinization facilities , they bomb the seaport, they bomb the airport, power plant, electrical infrastructure , road, bridges, communications infrastructure, Historical Cultural Heritage, . All the bomball the things essential for independence. They made them reliance on energy.
I think the time stamp is actually 15:20 but you’re spot on. Additionally, Israel has rejected peace and broken ceasefires. Their supposed peace offers would include them still occupying land far past the green line. The government of Israel believes that the international rules of law do not apply to them.
Where are your sources for all these claims?
Hamas has been launching rocket attacks against Israel since at least 2001. You don't have a clue.
@@howardjoffe8406, Why are you lazy?
Israel actually left running greenhouses that all you had to is go in a pick the crop. Millions $$$ worth but your idols destroyed it with bulldozers!!!! Hamas destroyed the water system and took the pipes for rockets!!! Israel build a new pipeline without getting a dime from Gaza so they can have quality water.
Not to mention the people that got slaughtered October 7th are the one who drove kids with cancer for therapy in Israeli hospitals AT NO COST!!
Seperata truth from Normans fiction might force you to use critical thinking!
Tried to look up where to watch "The Natural History of Destruction" unfortunately I can't find it available anywhere
The holy trinity: Douglas, Mosab and Coleman.
The abolitionists did not condemn Nat Turner's actions. Look at it up. And I m against to any kind of terrorism ( Hamas + IDF ) Are you guys ?
NAT TURNER was a slave. The leader of Hamas is a BILLIONAIRE who lives in 5 star hotels. Look it up. Abbas is $100 million. False analogy.
Noam tries to save face by organizing a discussion with his likeminded buddies. You can't make this shit up.
He reposted his debate with Aaron Mate with a bunch of annotations and quotes inserted to bolster his side without giving Mate the same opportunity. Guy's a grade-A loser. A remarkably petty and dishonest midwit. He makes his own side look ridiculous though, so I'm not complaining too much.
With a name like his I gather he's jew
If you haven't experienced Moynihan's Finkelstein impression, you haven't lived.
The ANC of South Africa went to Israel and proclaimed that its apartheid was worse than SA
Well I guess that ends the discussion. One guy said it so it must be true. End of discussion
@DomAtaGlance not one many said it
@DomAtaGlance the difference is South African whites didn't have enough numbers to fully implement a total apartheid as they were the minority but Palestinians are facing a full on apartheid because they are the minorities
@@kipapula6838 Palestinians slightly outnumber Israeli Jews, but yes, demographics are one important difference. Another is the reliance on African labour in SA
Building a wall to keep terrorists out is not apartheid. But hyperbole is taken as literal speech by SA and the UN. woke bastards.
Their inability to understand Norm's analysis and history of the current plight of Palestine is unbelievable. If these are the "best arguments" against Norm's ideas, it will be laughably easy for him to dismantle them
So true, they won’t last a minute with Norm.
AMEN
Norm is the man. These three are amateurs.
It is like they believe he did not consider suxh obvious and invalid counter arguments, they fail to grasp that his intellect is not garden variety, and that his moral compass was honed under the teachings of one of the greatest minds to ever be (chomsky), and these are matters of fact, not opinion
These guys are trying so hard, there’s 3 of them! All they can do is further dehumanize Palestinians and continue to paint us all as Hamas
26:53 Concentration Camp: : a place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard
Often don't have strip malls and Mcdonalds
@@gor764 It’s a concentration camp. It is not a work camp and it is not Aushwitz… No different then the Riyadh Ritz Carlton was absolutely a prison from 2017-2019… All because it doesn’t look like a duck… it doesn’t mean that it isn’t a duck!
@@gor764says who?
If it is a concentration camp, it's because of Hamas
The arguments complicating Finkelstein’s analogy are considerable, but Noam’s assertion that the embargo of Cuba doesn’t contribute at all to its economic state is an absolute display of hubristic ignorance.
agree!
Coleman seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of analogies.
Yes, the Palestinian case is not identical to the case of Black slaves in America. But no, that does not mean that Norman's point doesn't still stand. Basically, Coleman's argument is "well it isn't THAT bad". As in, "Palestinian oppression doesn't reach the slavery threshold of oppression, therefore the reluctance to condemn Turner's atrocities shouldn't apply here." Clearly, the fact that these cases aren't identical brings a lot of comfort to the three of them.
Michael then brings it home to even more absurd territory, claiming that this wasn't a case of reaching a breaking point, rather, Palestinian murderousness derives from them being "taught" to hate. It seems that both Coleman and Michael's application of Occam's Razor leads them to the inherent barbarity and anti-semitism of Arabs rather than the predictable product of--to use Michael's words--"deeply unfortunate" conditions.
Boring Orientalist conclusions Edward Said deconstructed almost half a century ago.
Paragraph separations are your friend
Agreed. Thanks for the reminder!
First of all, no they don't. People routinely call Gaza a concentration camp or an open area prison, when it isn't, and any comparison between slavery and Gaza is way off. Second, Orientalism is bullshit. It's just a way to call anyone who describes the Middle East at all a racist of some sort. If I say, Arab women have beautiful black hair with open eyes, then even that is orientalism, which calls any description "exotifying." LOL
Coleman does understand analogies, his point is the Norman is making a ridiculous comparison between slavery and gaza, aka bad, dishonest analogy
@@Kevin-qz4eq sounds like you don't understand analogies either
Coleman Hughes exhibits a glaring lack of fortitude and compassion in his positions. Not once has he stood with the oppressed; rather, he consistently aligns himself with the oppressive establishment and power structures.
If he were present during the period of slavery, one can easily imagine him defending such abhorrent practices, likely employing fallacious justifications such as the supposed employment and skill development opportunities for slaves.
there's a word for that, but I won't repeat it here.
The word is Bookerism.
Neither option. Both are too vulgar and in poor taste.
I think the word might be Philosopher. Discussing moral precepts requires no affiliations to be done well.
Coleman is extremely consistent
Coleman criticizes Finkelstein for cherry picking stats that make Gaza look like a terrible place to live. Then he goes on to cherry pick stats to argue that Gaza isn’t so bad. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Also Finkelstein’s stats go to showing the poor condition of life in Gaza, whereas Coleman is merely presenting stats on the length of life in Gaza (as if living to 75 years old is a great life even if you live in abject poverty, with a “starvation plus” diet, under the threat of periodic bombings, with no hope of leaving).
Part of the reason for the plight of Gazans is because the resources they do receive are used for Hamas and neighboring Arab countries like Egypt refuse to do anything to help because the more Gazans suffer the more Arabs in Egypt and elsewhere can say that Israel needs to go
@taylorbarrett384 a negligible part compared to what Israel and the U.S. subject them to.
@@jeffjackson5277 Israel doesn't let anything in or out along it's borders. Neither does Egypt. Same thing. But they don't endlessly fire rockets at civilian cities in Egypt.
@@taylorbarrett384 the palestinians don't "endlessly" fire at Israel either. Neither does Hamas. But Israel is the occupying presence, the ones taking their land and subjugating them.
@@taylorbarrett384Also because they’re not Egyptian. Would u want to let 2 million Mexicans just come on in? I know the current situation on the American border of course.
If these three guys decide they have to get together and spend 90 minutes responding to one guy talking from his apartment for two hours about politics then you just know that guy must have presented some serious and powerful arguments and ideas.
Or some really stupid ideas that require addressing 😮
@@tylerhoward1075 What stupid idea? Finkelstein is the only serious scholar/scholar of the 4.
@tylerhoward1075 Do you routinely sit around with your friends and spend several hours addressing stupid ideas on a podcast?
That would be even more stupid.
Or the Jewish people CARE enough to examine themselves, even by the standards of those with the LEAST good faith
it doesn't mean that the arguments are correct though, powerful as they are.
Daaamn Coleman.
I was a huge fan, but you list me with this one.
No, it's not a mirror image between slavery and the occupation of Palestine...but that's a strawman. Norm never claimed that, what he did say is in both cases there was degradation, subjugation and laceration.
And the Gazans have been dehumanizing by Isreal, abused and killed on the regular.
You are lost on this one brother..history will not look kindly on you for this one.
Go look at what Gaza is experiencing, do your homework on the history, don't be blind.
who is paying you to write this? i see you, astroturf agent.
Never heard of him sounds like a complete shill who thinks he's smart but obviously is far from
A mirror image? Brother it's not comparable at all.
I agree, I thought Coleman was someone who is unbiased, who conducts interviews to find out, to learn. He has just shown here that he has not learned anything, and worse, that he is biased, horribly so.
I also like how Dr. Finkelstein observed that Oct 7 might be Israel's Nat Turner moment. Horrific violence, but one that eventually led to change.
These guys were so butt-hurt about Finkelstein absolutely destroying their argumentets for genocide and displacement that they dedicated an entire episode about rebuking his claims. Which were really not that controversial in the first place and were just stating what most of the world agree on.
The population of the Gaza Strip has increased by about 450 percent since 1967.
That is not genocide.
Don't claim to speak for the entire world. And yes they made a view responding to his comments. If they didn't you would say it's because they have no response.
@@philipskalla4312so did the Jews , why is the Holocaust a genocide?
or more to the point an entire episode not rebuking his claims.
Coleman Hughes is just shoring up his career, and not in anyway knowledgeable about the Middle East.
ua-cam.com/video/_TQuGAVVhHU/v-deo.html
@@philipskalla4312the population has drastically decreased at least, 1/100 have been killed , since October 7th , before the genocide started.
Interesting they chose the Nat Turner example instead of the Warsaw Ghetto example 🤔
They did mention that slaves and jews did absolutely nothing to incur the situations they were in. Palestinians are not like that, with the rockets, etc.
@@davidanderson6055there are components of oppression that existed in jewish ghettos of 1930s...not absolute parallel but there are similarities..Gazans definitely have more control over how they want to approach the situation
53:16 Israel is defending itself from the people the refugee’s they imprisoned? Please make that make sense??
1:10:56 There are million videos of the IDF killing civilians but they don’t want to kill civilians… 🙃
Can you please send me the link of these videos please? Of IDF pointing guns on Palestinians civilians? Thank you
@@Violette2016 Google it!
exactly, also they already killed at least 20,000, so they are really taking care not to kill any, fuck
@@romanahowe67 number given by Hamas I suppose. Again where are the evidences? The links to these videos please of IDF killing voluntarily Civilians or committing same atrocities as Hamas. Thank you
@@Violette2016 He didnt say pointing. He said killing.
Are you guys familiar with the phrase "flogging a dead horse"?
spot on!
NAT TURNER was a slave. The leader of Hamas is a BILLIONAIRE who lives in 5 star hotels. look it up. False analogy based on hyperbole.
When you debate against Palestine and Norman Finkelstein and all the comment section stands with Palestine and Finkelstein after hearing the podcast 😂😂
they debate him because he is not there 🤣
Paid HAmAS apologists trying to excuse the inexcuseable-and failing miserably.
He won’t let anyone debate him face to face, always manipulating the host with “they told me you are a good guy” or “I almost see your humanity”. This is why this episode is so important!!
Everytime I hear norman Finkelstein speak im more and more convinced of what an unmitigated psychopath he is and how abhorrent his opinions are so
You must have missed the intro to the video
lol, what happened to "I don't want to bring on second-rate debaters onto the podcast" Noam? Just keep your word and bring back khalidi. The college kid in the middle here is just not really intellectually there yet.
Completely disagree
agree completely!
This is one of the most interesting discussions I have ever come across online.
A few points:
Norman Finkelstein may talk a lot about international law, but he is not an international lawyer; he is a political scientist.
His argument that according to international law Israel is required to return to the 1949 Armistice lines is not even true.
The total number of Israeli civilians killed in the second intifada is 887.
Finkelstein himself denies that Hamas has ever used human shields.
Because many independent international organisations say so. IDF are well known to use Palestinians as human shields in Westbank ,if you don’t know. Every Israeli accusation is their admission. If you are genuinely looking for the truth and not propaganda,just lookup Owen jones ,just yesterday he made a video debunking the Hamas using human shields thing. No one uses their own people for such thing , that is a basic understanding of human nature . Hamas may be radical but not stupid to use their own people. IDF on the other hand does this . During 2 nd intifada they used this as a full blown tactic .
The only point i will give to the Israeli side online, is that Arafat was not serious about peace. But sadly, Israel was even less serious about peace and never called for someone more serious to talk to - despite the onus being on them to get things settled.
I love when see people trying to respond Norman while he is absent because they can not debate him that is so embarrassing and funny 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Haha! Nailed it!
He is an amazing debater. Doesn’t make him right. In my mind the goal should always be peace for Israelis and Palestinians. I don’t think that Norman Finkelstein's teaching/opinions bring peace closer. Also, he intentionally uses facts in a misleading way as Coleman in gentle polite way highlighted in the beginning for the video. Check out his debate with Benny Morris - it’s a disgrace, he quotes Benny Morris selected bits to discredit him in a way that makes you think that one of the main critical historians in Israel is dishonest and biased. It’s a nasty way to debate and dishonest.
I find him entertaining , but dishonest and not someone who supports a peaceful resolution…
😂😂😂 you missed the part of the video (in the beginning, shows how much you watched) where they said Finklestein ASKED for this and is coming back on😂😂😂😂 keep supporting hamas and the rapists! 😂😂
thank you for recommending that, that was so worthy to watch ! Morris is a lier like alote of the other zionist in the same face reaction they laugh while they are justifying crimes against humanity they alugh and smile because they are embarrassed because they dont have an argument and that makes them terrible you can see Morris face same like Alan Dershwitz sam Steve Malzberg when NF said to him "you are smiling but your stupid smirk will never change the fact " this phrase is implementable for all of them@@MrSportz1234
Regarding Morris's lies, I'll begin with the latest point in the debate where he attempted to justify bombing hospitals. You can find testimonies from human rights organizations and activists revealing that Israel targeted ambulance cars. So, the question arises: Were there mobile tunnels in those ambulance cars? Norman Finkelstein talked about white phosphorus being dropped on civilians, and Morris laughed. How can Morris be considered a trustworthy person?
In a previous instance, the discussion involved the Clinton resolution. Morris didn't allow Norman to present his previous views on the Clinton resolution, interrupting him and raising his voice. He falsely claimed that only Arab, Muslim, African, and Banana Republics voted for the right of return for Palestinians. like all those countries are a 2nd class so their votes not worth it only US vote is countable. However, a quick check shows that the 194 UN resolution was adopted by 35 countries, with only 15 voting against. The resolution acknowledges the right of return for Palestinians. It's important to consider that any Jew from around the world can come to Israel and claim houses and land, while Palestinians can't even visit their monuments.
Moving on to Morris's assertion that the root of the conflict began when Zionists returned from Europe, as if they were on vacation and already had houses in Palestine. This notion is absurd. It's as if Zionists arrived with their land in suitcases, wanting to peacefully coexist with Arabs. In reality, they established their state on the blood and corpses of Palestinians, as depicted in the documentary film 'Tantura,' which exposes ethnic cleansing.
Morris also mentioned the two-state solution, which Finkelstein criticized by highlighting its failure to address the Palestinian refugee problem. Morris, in his ignorance and audacity, believed Norman was serious and not satirizing the situation. Morris claimed that the two-state resolution doesn't resolve the refugee problem, and he lied by stating that even the international community doesn't recognize that right. As mentioned earlier, Morris and zionists are the only ones who doesn't believe in any rights for displaced Palestinians.
@@MrSportz1234
Hughe's explanation of why using international law hurts Finkelstein's arguments makes me appreciate Finkelstein's use of international law to make his arguments.
After Finkelstein mopped the floor with you… you had to call some buddies. Seems reasonable to me
It's like 3 internees giving presentation to the CEO
These three are cowards and genocide apologists.
Exactly what I thought!
Finkelshit is a sociopath. You cannot be normal if you support his views.
Literally untrue. Moronic.
A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.
Bertrand Russell
Professor Finkelstein is an intellectual giant… it is so clearly apparent that neither of your guests are remotely on the same intellectual plane.
He's not. He's a discredited professor a liar. He can't even find a position in any university
Go to Gaza disguised as Palestinian to get the full explanation. That's what these 3rd party observers need. Pain teaches truth.
Very good.
Finkelstein is so far from an intellectual giant but ok.
Also your sentiment that you can only interact with the someones points if you are on the same intellectual plane is fkn stupid and ignorant. Just as you can hear Finkelstein and be convinced of his genius despite clearly not being an intellectual someone can hear his opinions and believe him to be a fkn psychopath
the quote 🔥🔥🔥
If Coleman and Michael wanted any credibility they would at least acknowledge that Israel has done some terrible things and is not completely blameless.
I just re-watched it and they did.
@@spencerantoniomarlen-starr3069 They hardly even acknowledge that there is an occupation (which there is and it's not debatable). And Coleman wants to talk philosophy and morality, yet I don't think he ever criticizes Israel's occupation, blockade, and collective punishment of Gazans as immoral.
@@outlandish8 you sound like the pro Israeli people who start every discussion by asking the pro Palestinian person to say that October 7th was bad.
45:29 Finklestein, Gabor Mate, Gideon Levy, Noam Chomsky, Max Blumenthal… What are you talking about with ethics???
the college kid in the middle is total joke
To downplay the Palestinian struggle against ongoing occupation by drawing false parallels with past historical horrors, as if one negates the other, is deeply disrespectful to the plight of the Palestinian people today. It's an extremely dangerous approach used to diminish the unique ongoing suffering of the Palestinians, and their fundamental right to dignity and self-determination. Arguments like these not only show intellectual laziness, but also a profound moral shortsightedness.
It's finkelstein who was making those comparisons.
On the contrary, it is a profane disrespect to victims of ACTUAL historical attempted genocide and ACTUAL concentration camps and ACTUAL slavery, for every cheap Tom Dick and Harry out there to invoke incomparable historical events to support their grievances-and to excuse barbarity. As a Black person, I am sick of it.
What has this podcast done to change the material conditions in Gaza... nothing, nothing, nothing...
He studied both subjects and makes comparisons for the sake of understanding the morality and psychology, not the material conditions. He's not saying they're literally the same.
Gaza hasn't been occupied since 2008.
After listening to Finkelstein’s bizarre arguments and rationalizations for the actions of Hamas, I’m inclined to understand why he was such a pariah in academia these past few decades.
Douglas Murray has called Norman a “psychopath”, and I think that’s a bit harsh. But I do think there is something a bit off kilter about Finkelstein, and I’m not in any way convinced of his positions.
That means your IQ is at least average at minimum, probably higher. Too many people are fooled by this dangerous man
"Psychopathy is a neuropsychiatric disorder marked by deficient emotional responses, lack of empathy, and poor behavioral controls, commonly resulting in persistent antisocial deviance and criminal behavior."
In this interview he does a strange "my heart hurts" acting , I've seen the video where he abuses a girl who says calling Germans nazis is offensive, where he gets all worked up and seconds later is smiling. Classic psycopath behaviours.
And his worst was in the Candace Owen's chat where he manipulated her by doing all his usual lies but stamping children and babies ontop because she was pregnant, only a psycopath would do that.
He was overjoyed after October 7th and celebrated it. It's insane
How’s the sore losers convention going?
This entire conversation is nothing but one big runaround. These guys are simply denying the level of oppression that is inflicted on the Palestinians and which the Palestinians have endured for 75 years. The claim that the oppression of the Palestinians is not comparable to South African apartheid is absurd. If anything, the treatment of the Palestinians is even more severe than South African apartheid. Additionally, comparing Hamas, a rag-tag militia, with the military might of the Third Reich is even more absurd. Also, situations like Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki were among the reasons why postwar efforts to establish laws of war, standards for the treatment of POWs, arms control efforts, the framework of international law, etc., were created in the first place. The bottom line is that Israel is a First World country, armed and funded by the United States, which is engaged in the wanton and gratuitous massacres of hapless civilians who are oppressed by what is indeed an open air prison as even some Israeli officials have admitted.. Israel's objective is the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, forcing the Palestinians into Egypt, repopulation and annexation of Gaza with Israeli settlements, and seizure of the oil and gas resources in the Meditteranean. This entire episode is a joke. I like Coleman Hughes but he's dropping the ball on this one.
Tell me you haven't listened without telling me you haven't listened?
@@jeremyblock7032 I listened to the entire conversation twice.
Israel has tried to get the civilian population out of the warzone but Hamas prevents them from doing so, hides among them, steals their resources, and then reports their own dead fighters as innocent civilian children.
This conversation was extremely one sided. They brushed off the criticism of Israel, and talked at length about all the criticism of the PA and HAMAS
agree, it is awful, the way they talk is scandalous
These guys are self-righteous ad nauseum. Honestly just sickening. Hope they were remunerated appropriately. For the rest of humanity, just garbage.
The entire premise of 3 people debating a man, not present, is absurd.
Lol this is so true
Just cowards
They tried to get Finkelstein on but he refuses to debate.
Finklestein did recently debate them.
This video being called an unfair debate is a strawman, it's not considered a debate at all....its a response to his arguments, and a discussion of the issue while considering his arguments.
If they were cowards they would have picked a less informed palistine supporter.... that they discuss his arguments specifically is likely because he has the strongest arguments and is more honest then many others. I dont agree with finklstein on many of his arguments because he is selective, and fails to include certain facts..... but as somebody who I consider to be one of the louder and reasonable voices against Israel I want to see his arguments countered so I can discover what stands. But its cowardly to throw shade at these guys because finklestein isn't present, instead of refuting anything they're saying.
The fact that your calling them cowards is easy to refute for the fact Finklestein did recently debate with one of them.
@@worsethanjoerogan8061 Where do they say that
"I did two hours of googling, so this is why finklestein is wrong" lmao
Hamas chose not to seize a strategic opportunity to claim land and dismantle a significant portion of the barrier. Instead, they engaged in actions against the Jewish population in the area, reminiscent of a vengeful Holocaust approach- This point was highlighted by a former Egyptian military officer. Similarly, Nat Turner's rebellion wasn't an attack on the institution of slavery as a whole; it was more about exacting vengeance on specific slave owners
Nice pro isreal panel ... echo chamber next level
THIS
Pro-commonsense, as well. We try to leave our feelings behind our rational capacities.
@@38sman None of you watched the beginning, the entire point of it was by request of Finklestein who didn't want to debate, cause he's a fucking pussy. Dodging everyone lately.
I've seen a lot of Finkelsteins arguments and havnt seen a response like this. Colemam Hughes is a very thorough thinker with a very unbias approach. Would love to see Finkelsteins response to this.
ridiculous
There is one, it started with norman not commenting on hamas being a terror group, at that point he can fuck right off.
Half of this comment section did not watch the video lol
He says that because the whole world agreed with it what's the point of international law if you don't follow it
Hopefully you will get Dr. Norm on asap to correct every idiotic thing said on this podcast.
There's prejudices involved for sure. Good to get Prof Norm quickly. These "counter-arguments" are not new. I'm sure the Prof. have heard them before.
Exactly!
@@nazimbahrin3638 Norm doesn't have time to debate these Israeli paid amateur Genocide apologists.
Well it would be great if Norm actually agreed to a debate but he won't..
@@warbler1984I’m sure he’d debate. If it’s live and not someone continually cutting him off or giving the same old nonsense
There’s no need to debate anyhow
An analysis of each side’s positions would suffice
30:46 Did this guy really just say Gaza is not to be compared to the holocaust but that the October 7th attack should be? I hope I misunderstood because that is absolutely ridiculous.
Why? Israel isn't intending to kill civilians in Gaza. They have attempted to get civilians out of the warzone. But Hamas intentionally went after civilians.
@@taylorbarrett384 Firstly, your point is incorrect. You need to do your research. Israel does intend to go after civilians under the pretense that they are obscuring weapons and militants, or under the pretense that the children have a high chance of becoming militants ("mowing the lawn"). Secondly, the holocaust analogy depends on multiple principles: 1) A confined space with poor living conditions. 2) An oppressive group is guarding that confined space. 3) The people in that confined space are being tortured/killed. Gaza is not a concentration camp in a literal sense, but the analogy between Gaza and a concentration camp works a lot better than comparing a concentration camp to "October 7th". The terrorist attack is just that, but it is not analogous to concentration camps. As a reminder there are literally no journalists left in Gaza, they all got sniped or bombed by Israel. If that doesn't count to you as "going after civilians" then IDK what does. The killing of reporters in Gaza has been happening prior to Oct. 7th too by the way. Israel has been reusing the same tricks and tactics this whole time.
@@taylorbarrett384 WHAT? Israel is committing genocide and ethnically cleansing a land. it's a repeat of the 1930s.
@@taylorbarrett384 hahahaha, soo ridiculous, omg
Reading the comments, I can't help but wonder if you saw the beginning. Norm asked them to talk about what they wanted a response to. I don't think any of them would mind talking to him directly. But honestly I dont' know how anyone can listen to him. He is insulting and doesn't actually engage with direct questions. I would rather listen to anyone else have a rational debate regarding Gaza than Norm. I don't care how much he may know. Watch the five hour Lex Friedman debate. He does not come off well. He misquoted Benny Morris with Benny Morris sitting right there and correcting him. You are losing your argument when you resort to insults and the fact that Destiny could get so clearly under his skin was hilarious.
Yes!!! “Reached their psychological breaking point”
1:11:03 I am blown away by this discussion. Humanity is doomed!! I am shocked!! 😳
Which part?
@@MrSportz1234 🤣
Who would even waste their time? Not me,,bro lost me sucking on his anxious vape 1st clip
Yea, he definitely needs therapy for his hatreds. I noticed the vape sucking
what is vape sucking please?
14:11 this part should tell you everything you need to know about Coleman's views. The Palestinians here "are responsible for their own wretched conditions".
"whats more evil in the 20th century than South African apartheid?" you could argue a lot of things were more evil. Even in the continent of Africa alone.
Rwandan genocide.
Cool echo chamber, so let me offer some pushback. Great job not addressing 75 years of occupation after a premeditated landgrab by the irgun and hagannah militia and a current untrustworthy regime of Netanyahu neo-fascists that decided to fund and nurture hamas for 2 decades to weaken fatah and plo, embraced collective punishment in permanent violation of art 33 of the geneva convention (which makes it correct to call them war criminals) , and admits in private to have been working against peaceful resolutions and a 2-state solution the entire time. Benjamin Netanyahu was the architect of the catastrophy that culminated in oct 7 for Israel and the monstrous retaliation that the occupied population of Gaza gets to suffer, to the disgrace of the entire world. Condemn or condone all you want, the obvious historic parallel that should be made is the parrallel (not an equivocation) between the IRA and hamas, which backers of Israel will never make, because members of a violent terrorist resistance movement, ended up, generations later, to participate in constructive governing, which was an enormous step forward in the context of Northern Ireland. Watching you guys sidestep every inconvenient fact is painful. And when an academic thinks of a concentration camp, the first example that comes to mind is not necessarily a nazi deathcamp (which was admittedly thé most gruesome form of the word), but the red cross definition of a concentration camp, that existed in many different forms throughout all major wars and conflicts, not limited to the world war 2-context, just to say that Finkelstein is not comparing Gaza to the worst of the Nazicamps, as he stipulated to you in person if I remember correctly, but you brought it up again as if he didn’t. Gaza is a place where a group of refugees (driven from their homes in 1948) of a certain ethnicity and their descendants are being contained, and deprived of freedoms by an occupying force. Finkelstein is being very accurate in his description, if you even care about accuracy.
These guys are in lala land. So much ignorance, complete misunderstandings, and pettiness to boot. Take the language of concentration camps for one. It’s not even Finkelstein’s term. It was termed a concentration camp well prior to Oct 7 by at least two, maybe three, serious pundits that Finkelstein has cited, including Israeli scholar Baruch Kimmerling. Kimmerling called it such in 2003, so imagine what it’s become since. Amira Hass made the same observation. People should also look up how conservative UK politician David Cameron has referred to Gaza. He certainly called it a “prison camp”, if not a concentration camp. So this nonsense that Finkelstein goes off on these crazy tangents, it’s complete garbage. The guy is citing authoritative, reliable, perfectly acceptable commentary by well known people. I could go through another ten points where either their information is wrong, their reasoning is poor, or their logic is fifth rate. Seriously Noam, is this the best 2 people you can find to unpack Finkelstein’s arguments? These are the great minds you’ve been saving up for us? Jesus Christ 🤔 🤷♂️
Haha... yes agreed...
Gaza's government turned down $15 billion in economic aid.
It is not a concentration camp but a territory ruled by Islamo-Nazis whose main aim is to murder Jews.
It does not matter how many people call it a concentration camp.
It is nothing of the kind.
I mean is there an intellectually honest argument in support of Israel? I made myself listen to supposedly serious ppl defending Israel, but it was all hot garbage
What you are doing is exactly the problem. When Finkelstein uses concentration camps he's purposely trying to conjure feelings that comes from our understanding of the Holocaust. You saying "well technically" and then referencing a handful of people who used similar language in the past to justify it is just as weasly and bad faith as norm
WHAT DOES IT MATTER - YOUARGUING ABOUT CONTRATION CAMP - ITS A PRISON... there arent many words to describe the place as its the only one of its kind@@DomAtaGlance
"fuck international law because arafat was a bandit and couldn't control his own people enough to guarantee not assassinated." Meanwhile it was Rabin who got murked by his own constituent because he couldn't control the far-right's public response to the Oslo Accords.
In 47:24 following international IS the moral argument moving forward. How is carpet bombing Gaza or in Israels term "self defence" ethical in any way and killing children ethical.
As grim as the picture Finkelstein paints about the conditions in Gaza before this war, there are millions of Africans suffering far worse living with freedom. There are thousands, less than 1km from my home living in worse conditions.
It's important to compare the people flying in fighter jets overhead in Gaza and the people down there shooting "rockets" towards kibbutzes where their grandparents were expel from. It's a David (Palestinians) vs Goliath(Israel). The people in Gaza and the people in the west bank are the same people. So if Israel does settler colonialism in the west bank it effects the people in Gaza. These guys want to separate Gaza from the west bank by saying Israel is NOT doing settlements in the Gaza and thus should not fire "rockets"
@@everythingandmore5537 I recently saw a Saudi prince lambasting the Palestinians for always choosing violence - it does not work in their favour. Stop giving Israel a reason for restricting them. The ANC in South Africa never called for the eradication of 'white' people and had a very specific policy of NOT targeting civilians. Yes, it happened a few times, but but the 'white' population did not live in fear of being killed by rockets or suicide bombers.
Gaza was an experiment. Hamas could have used all the funding to build infrastructure. Had there been no firing of rockets there would have been no justification for the blockade. Had Gaza succeeded , and thrived, that would have helped the case in the West Bank.
@@everythingandmore5537 On that analogy of David and Goliath. A stone can be a deadly weapon - stop throwing stones at the IDF - they have to take it seriously. There is no equivalence between someone arrested for throwing stones at IDF soldiers, and a random civilian hostage abducted from their home after killing their family, and yet Hamas seems to thing that many of those prisoners should be swapped for 1 of the hostages. The whole point of the raid was to take hostages to use as leverage - it is sick.
@moonants
Resistance groups normally take hostages to exchange for their family members held as hostages by Israel. IDF will take the wife and children as hostages in exchange for information on Hamas
There arw different gradations of conditions people can live in. He's actually been to Gaza and it's doubtful you have. It's pretty ignorant to assume that the living conditions 1 km from your home are worse. Cognitive dissonance is real
Thanks for the laughs guys!!! y'all don't know a god dammed thing about Gaza or the history of Israel, but y'all had me dying with the comical ignorance
They undoubtedly know more than you.
I have doubts about this@@michaelmccay123
'Any analysis of an oppressed people, that does not include the actions of the oppressor, will result in an inaccurate analysis.' (at best).
This often leads to a convenient assessment of ' blaming the victim for their condition '
The Palestinian people simply lived on their land for MILLENIA only to be brutally and unceremoniously uprooted in 1948 by a Kabal of international land grabbers.
Any position that tries to blame the Palestinians for their condition is BLATANTLY inaccurate.
Identifying the oppressors should be easy.
Either I'm missing something or I'm not.
I would like to hear Matt Lieb chime in on this conversation. He is well-informed and somehow funny, despite the subject matter. Truly a righteous Jew.
These guys desperately want Finkelstein to come back on the show, as it was by far their largest audience. But no need, since Norm already responded to their arguments on Marc Lamont Hill’s podcast (also on UA-cam).
They don't want him to come back on. They want to straw man his ideas and pretend they actually addressed them.
Bring Norman back. He's the real deal. A real human and academic.
Didn't they say they were bringing him back, early in this podcast?
@shmilbert Yes ... they told Norman they would ask him back when they spoke to him Let's hope they do.
So Nat Turner was irrelevant. Name another Black slave revolt in the South. If Nat Turner never revolted you'd think only whites like John Brown objected to slavery.
If you haven't noticed it has been Israel that has dehumanising the Palestinians.
@@eatingeatingeatinghow are they dehumanising them? By allowing more of them to work in Israel, providing electricity to them and protecting the borders of Israel from terrorists?
I used to like coleman till recently when he talked about his trip to Israel, and he comes out to me as hypocritical. I bet he is going to go into politics, and he is smart if he wants to have a good chance at making it
He has given you evidence that this is a concentration camp. Concentration camp is a broad concept they had in the United States in relation to the Japanese. What did he tell you personally when communicating?
It’s actually hilarious to see that these comments are the exact opposite to what they thought would happen.Anyway free Palestine
Of course, it's not easy to convince brain-washed hating mobs with sober facts and arguments.
What do you want to do with the Israelis?
Pretty sure they knew what to expect from the obscenely large mob of ignorance and hatred.
@@MrSportz1234 ideally one state solution with equal rights for all. Pragmatically speaking, a two state solution with removal of the illegal settlements in the WB and with peacekeepers and monitors in place for a period of time.
@@jchan9761 why stop there? why don’t we make a globalist one state for all? Equal rights for all humans. No more Jordan, Egypt, Qatar. Let’s just share everything equally. I’m on board. One state for all citizens of the world. No more bs countries, ethnicities, divisions among humans….
When you bring together 3 none specialist in the topic, sh🎉t will go horribly wrong for sure
Yup, they are still peddling the human shield lies
exactly
My understanding is that Finklestein described the Hamas attack as an atrocity, or that it included atrocities or war crimes. So clearly that is a moral condemnation of the action. I think what he said he can't condemn is the mentality that led to those actions, because we know that whenever a population is pressured in the way that Gaza has been, violence is the result. That is more a law of nature than a moral statement.
Hamas isnt slaving any Palestine, you claim all Palestinians are Hamas you WRONG
Still feeling the pressure from Norman’s words so much that you’re discussing his words over and over again…..Just remember, Mandela stood with the Palestinians
Who cares what Mandela thought about this conflict? It doesn't prove anything.
Martin Luther King stood by Israel. I don't think Nelson Mandela gang raped women nor said he wanted to wipe out all Jews.
1:11:33 What is Coleman thinking? 🤷♀️
He's not thinking, that's the problem. This is the same prejudiced argument of "If the Palestinians drop their weapons, there would be peace, if Israel's drop their weapons, there would be dead Israelis." He's the gaslighting abuser.
nothing, just defending Israel at all costs
What Coleman is conflating is an exact equivalency vs. an analogy in the fundamentals of an argument. Not every argument against war should simulate the exact conditions of World War II for the argument to hold! That's just basic understanding which I wonder why a smart guy like Coleman is willfully ignoring. I think he's tendency to embrace the Right is taking precedent in rationalizing arguments. At the end of the day, one either chooses to go with the power or against the power. I don't blame Coleman to go "with" the power. It's a rational position but alas self serving rather than in the service of the truth.
These guests were invited by the Israeli government to tour settlements (they have admitted to this) and now don't think they are propaganda mouth pieces. Hilarious.
It's really mind-blowing the lack of insight and understanding of the Palestine question in general, and of Gaza in particular. However, what is even worse is the total misunderstanding of what the horrific event of the October the 7th really is! You have been speaking of hate for the jews, of the barbaric act of revenge, etc..though missing the core of it: a sophisticated military operation to force Israel to enter into the rabbit hole that has one and only one solution, namely the recognition of the necessity of a palestinian state as a general world consent! A terrible, horrific but genial move made by hamas. No more but definitely no less!
If any of you men lived in Gaza under that oppression you'd be fighting back too. End of story
No, as clearly shown by the millions of other Palestinians that don't behead, rape, and burn civilian Jews.
I would be fighting against Hamas.
I doubt it. These guys are cowards.
Did Norm respond to this? Hope you guys let him know of the existence of this video to see what he says.
EDIT: He did "watch?v=q0Af0j5vSlQ". It starts at @8:45, but I recommend watching the entire video.
Thank you!
One apt comparison of Nat Turner to Hamas is the breaking of the spell. The illusion was that the enslaved couldn’t turn the slaver’s violence back upon him and his kin.. Turner and his cohort realized they could equalize the relationship in a shocking spasm of violent action without restraint. Hamas broke the illusion that the techno-murder occupation force was an invincible wall of total control; reset the field and focused the world on Palestinian experience-the world asks why did this happen, those of us with humanity look at the history leading to this hemorrhage of violence.. the pressure cooker goes back 100+years. Those on the side of the occupation erased their memory files on Oct. 7th.
Thanks for this superb comment!
agree, well said!
As these guys know, it is always best to challenge Norman Finklestein when he is not there to respond and dismantle you