Mehdi Hasan CLASHES With Douglas Murray: Munk Debate Review

Patreon: / lonerbox
Twitter: / boxloner
Twitch: / lonerbox​
Discord: / discord
Reddit: / lonerbox
Research notes: publish.obsidian.md/lonerbox
Become a Member: / @lonerboxlive
Donate Directly to Loner: paypal.me/lonerbox

[@8020drummer]

Hot take - I’m really sick of moderators allowing one participant to toss out a ton of ad hominems, then when the other tries to respond, interjecting and saying “we need to keep this on track”

[@jorjethezebra]

damn, if thats a hot take does your butthole melt when you look at a cinnamon stick?

[@fab006]

Amen!

[@SgtHawk13]

really weird from the oaesltine side... i know what u mean.

[@SgtHawk13]

plasticine **

[@andrewballard2783]

This has all the maturity of calling Israel Isnotrael.​@@SgtHawk13

[@sd-vx6bo]

“pro palestine” LB comments section full of ppl glazing douglas murray lmfao man u fell off, lovely audience you’re cultivated over the last year 🤣

[@brentoncarter4275]

@@sd-vx6bo but but but but the ethnostate has a right to exist

[@Drigallski]

"We should abolish Pakistan" >India liked this

[@motina10]

One should note that the Pashtun population could be ethnically cleansed from Pakistan. But that has more to with the Taliban being a Pushtun thing. So collectively punishing Pashtuns due to the Taliban is anti-Pashtun.

[@1984isnotamanual]

It should have never been brought into existence in the first place. Probably the worst “crime” of British decolonization was that partition.

[@GearedGaming76899]

@@1984isnotamanual Better than forcing a bunch of people into a country they don't want to be in for that will result in a civil war.

[@yeriscarat9241]

@@1984isnotamanualyes

[@DougStewart]

It’s so clever to wait for the audience to digest and watch these things on their own and then revisit a few weeks later

[@talsapps]

What do you mean by revisit? If you mean poll them then the problem is that you don't know what those people watched during that time period.

[@owen-ck3bi]

Douglas murray comes across as a first draft of a bond villian that was dropped because he came across as unrealistically evil and unlikeable.

[@hikelfin5941]

@@owen-ck3bi PERHAPS... if everything SOUNDS like a dog whistle.... YOU'RE the DOG.... 😎💥💣🫰🏾 Actual Douglas Murray argument in an interview. He's basically Horatio from CSI Miami from Temu

[@fensteroffen]

when you attack the person and not their arguments, everybody realizes you are biased and lack convincing arguments

[@fensteroffen]

@@Shane756 ask them why. improve the discourse instead of worsening it.

[@owen-ck3bi]

@@fensteroffen if you are an asshole when making arguments then do not be surprised when someone points it out..and couldn't care less about about your opinions

[@owen-ck3bi]

@@fensteroffen no its factual. Any non biased person on the topic of israel and Palestine will probably agree

[@LKJKSLDJ]

Antisemitism is just a word, what it means is important, not its origin. When Agata Christi wrote against Semites, she meant Jews, not Arabs, the same as everybody else. stop analyzing the word and debate the meaning instead.

[@ihavenojawandimustscream4681]

And when American Civil Rights activists talked about racism, they explicitly meant racism against black people. Does that meant you can't be racist against non-blacks, going by the original usage of the word? This is the ridculousness of your argument

[@LKJKSLDJ]

@@ihavenojawandimustscream4681 This reasoning might apply if Antisemitism was a commonly used term to describe anything other than Jew hatred, alas it isn't.

[@Linkman95]

I don't know why you're against the origin of the word. The origin of the word antisemite supports its meaning as a synonym for jew hatred.

[@LKJKSLDJ]

@@Linkman95 I'm not against the origin of the word, I am against debating it rather than just acknowledging the way it is used and sticking to the point.

[@raptzar1148]

​@@ihavenojawandimustscream4681 why do you guys act so dumb , anti semtism means hatred for jews in today's terms end of story

[@SpaceWampa]

I needed this upload thanks Editors

[@A-TEAMFrostback]

Great job lonerbox wish I had caught this live! I have so many questions!

[@fafolaw]

Mehdi and Gideon accepted one definition of Zionism at the start of the debate and then pretended the whole time that Zionism means supporting Netanyahu. Douglas and Natasha also accepted the definition but failed to explain that being critical of Israeli policy is not anti-Zionism, they decided to focus on defending Israeli policies instead.

[@motina10]

That is not accurate of Natasha. She tackled accusations. She defended the IDF in conducting it's war. Not sure about the the polices. She sort of talked about them as a matter of fact but maybe with a different verbage. Douglas Murray also didn't not go into Israeli policies but staying on topic and showing the rhetoric being used by the anti-zionist, which the two anti-zionist do engage in.

[@fafolaw]

@@motina10 They both defended how Israel is conducting this war, Douglass very briefly clarified that they're not saying that criticizing Israel is antisemitic but I think that they should've focused on the idea that anti-zionism is not the same as criticizing Israel, most people are confused about that.

[@adaptiveagile]

Another excellent Loner eposide. :)

[@the-gadfly4743]

That was a rather strange argument from Natasha Hausdorff, not just how Zionism is not a political ideology after describing a political ideology, but also by contradicting the very definition she provided. If Zionism is concerned with "the right of self-determination for Jewish people in their ancient homeland" then it certainly dictates that it should be within the borders of the "ancient homeland", as well as the makeup of the population. No Zionist would consider a state with minority Jewish population a fulfillment of Zionism, unless of course the minority was in control of the state regardless of the democratic will of the population as a whole.

[@gvstn]

Well yes, within the borders, but not how much land within the borders. And for the makeup of the population, not that either. You can have self determination without being the majority

[@the-gadfly4743]

@@gvstn As far as i'm aware there are no Zionists who believe that State of Israel should have less area than it had during any point of its existence, nor would consider anyone advocating for such to be a Zionist. The question is not whether it's possible to have self-determination without being the majority. The question is whether Zionists would consider a state where Jews are a minority that does not control the state a fulfillment of Zionism, when the totality of evidence points to the contrary.

[@brandonschneider9961]

​@@the-gadfly4743Well, that and if it would be possible to "fulfill the goals of Zionism" while living as dhimmi (if living at all)

[@tooitchy]

@@gvstn Good luck with that, especially with a muslim majority that is commanded by the prophet to rule over jews and christians as second class citizens.

[@E2Dima]

Because ethnic self determination is not possible when you become a Jewish minority in your own country. This is why there are so many nation states in the world.

[@ymilkman88]

Colonialism developed as a concept describing European colonial empires of the modern era, which spread globally from the 15th century to the mid-20th century, spanning 35% of Earth's land by 1800 and peaking at 84% by the beginning of World War I

[@adrien5834]

Call it colonisation then, that's what it is.

[@ymilkman88]

Just Remind me from which empire they came from or are you referring to the Arab colonialism?

[@Feefa99]

​@@adrien5834Colonialism and genocide are going hand to hand. Just look at US history.

[@aristonabril3837]

What was the score?

[@Brandon-ne3xz]

"Palestine Jewish Colonization Association" was formed in 1924. The Jewish Colonization Association (JCA or ICA) was founded in 1891 to help Jews from Russia and Romania to settle in Argentina.

[@craigfriedman4759]

By lonerbox's logic if we want to destroy every Arab State, that's not anti-arab just anti-arab ethnostate. Would that be correct, @ lonerbox ?

[@bengreen171]

I don't think that Balfour quote is as clear cut as you are claiming it is. it seems to me that Balfour is saying that the West has been dealing with the 'problem' of a Jewish presence for too long - and failed to solve the issue. It doesn't necessarily imply that he thinks Jewish people are not a problem. This sounds like Balfour pleading for 'someone to rid him of this meddlesome priest'. If he had said 'we have too long failed to expel the Jewish people', the connotation would be very clear. If he had said 'we have too long failed to absorb the Jewish people', the connotation would be equally clear'. Both statements seem to be inherent to the wider quote. So the only equivocal part is what he actually means by 'the west has too long regarded them as a hostile threat'. I agree that a modern reading of this would sound very much like someone apologising for the history of antisemitic treatment of Jewish people in the West. But language is a funny thing, and even a hundred years ago, the construction of sentences and use of words was sometimes very different, or subtly different to the way we apply them today. Put it this way. If the Austrian painter had claimed that for too long the West had 'too long regarded as alien' the Jewish people, we would not be having any debate about what the word 'too' was doing. It would be taken to be a synonym for 'so', and the emotive context would be very different. The Jewish people have suffered two thousand years of antisemitism - and that's 'too bad'.

[@mosmo618]

Just a recent fact about Gideon He reported in Haretz a few years ago that he saw settlers in Chomash hanging a Palestinian child and abusing him The residents of Chumash sued him for libel And over the last few years, the trial has been going on A week ago the court ruled that Gideon lied and he did not see it himself but only heard the story from someone from the village and the story he heard had contradictions in it and there was not enough evidence for the story The court ruled that it is not possible to give compensation to the residents of Chumash because the defamation is against a group and not against an individual That doesn't mean it didn't happen, but in the Haretz article he said he saw it himself

[@tooitchy]

@@LisbonLion7 99% odds it didn't happen. It's surprising Gideon parroted such a story, as it is extremely common for Palestinians to invent barbaric stories such as this about settlers, unfortunately there's a bit of an industry involved in taking "eyewitness accounts" from palestinians in the west bank, NGO's running with the stories, and disseminating them to the media to exacerbate the "settler violence" claims, and at no point does anyone even try to dig into the story, it's taken as fact from the start, credible orgs go to credible media outlets, and the lie becomes true. Not saying settler violence doesn't happen, but it's extremely hard to find anything beyond a self proclaimed eye witness for many of the stories, never a body, or a guilty party named directly. There's also the fact that in the west bank settlers are constantly under threat, and are armed for this reason (with a long history of violence against them to justify this) so people see armed settlers and think they're murderous lunatics hunting palestinians to steal their homes or something, when the reality is much different, and instances of offensive violence from settlers is quite rare, while the reverse is extremely common. Somehow there was literally no attention paid to palestinian violence in the west bank, following october 7th, but between 10-7-23 and 12-23-23 there was over 1350 terrorist attacks (569 cases of rock-throwing, which vary from harmless, to slinging sharp extremely dangerous large stones, 287 attacks with explosives, 143 Molotov cocktails and 70 shootings) against israelis in the west bank, and less than 10 credible instances of settler violence, a few of them confirmed to have been defensive but never reported internationally as such. this is something I wish people like Lonerbox gave a shit about, it's frustrating hearing about the supposed settler violence being out of control, without ever mentioning the insane violence coming from the other direction, and it's way too much to ask, but some acknowledgement of the danger settler villages are constantly under, thus necessitating the need to be armed (like the settler they were stopped by in the west bank, whose actions become a lot less unhinged when you see the number of attacks in such a short period of time, happening around his home, targeting people like him.).

[@squatch545]

An Israeli court ruled that? I'm shocked.

[@KainGerc]

I have to say, it's a bit frustrating for me for Israel to be defended by people like Douglas and Natasha, who are intellectuals and often raise good points, but you can see that their main agenda is anti-Muslim propaganda (especially in Britain) I have no real issues with those who practice Islam or Christians in general (though I have some thoughts on organized religions and how they in some countries force their edicts into law), but with groups that use those religions as justification for attacking Jews (or any other minority group) There are many places in Israel where Jews and Muslims do live in peace (even with the tension since Oct 7) and making this war about religion only serves to bring more division (obviously you can't remove religion completely out of the equation, but just saying Islam is at fault is reductive and counter-productive)

[@faikerdogan2802]

Hmm. As a person who comes from a Muslim background. The only reason people I know care about is because they Palestinianes Muslims 100%. I have never seen them defend any country like ukraine other than Muslim countries. Idk what this tells much but I think religion solidiefies Palestinianes ideology alot.

[@KainGerc]

@@faikerdogan2802 but Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank are not being fought against by Israel because of their religion, it's because they are governed by groups that are actively hostile and constantly attack Israel and its citizens. Muslim Israeli-Arabs are basically free to practice their religion without restrictions. There are tensions caused by the far-right ultra religious Jewish groups (including some factions in the government), but those are pushed back against even by moderate Israeli citizens.

[@JBHACKSAW]

I'm sorry but you haven't read islam. It is uniquely radical. It believes there will be no more revelations. It believes Muhammad was a perfect human being worth emulating, and it is actually open about enslaving non-believers in every practical sense. Christianity and Judaism have a lot of bad shit written in them, too. But I think islam has these uniquely bad central ideas.

[@faikerdogan2802]

@@KainGerc i don't think I said anything that would contradict what u said.

[@AFIXFORNIX]

If this conflict was not about religion, then why are Jews abroad attacked by Muslims daily? As a Jew living in Europe, the situation here is insane. The levels of violence and intimidation Jews are experiencing, despite having 0 connection to the conflict, is wild. Attacks on Jews and Jewish institutions (Synagogues, schools, community centers...) happen in Belgium, France, Germany, Sweden...really everywhere in western Europe. But somehow I don't hear of a Pakistani attacking Indians (or the other way around) in the same countries. Same for Azeris/Armenians or even Russians/Ukrainians. Arab Muslims are the only ones importing a supposedly local conflict (I/P) to completely unrelated places and populations. That's because they see Jews as their enemies, not just Israel.

[@liorkoren87]

I'm going to misuse quotes from Mehdi Hassan in the same way Mehdi misuses quotes: Mehdi Hassan openly agrees with antisemitism: "Some antizionists participate in antisemitism which I dont disagree with"

[@squatch545]

He doesn't misuse quotes. So much for your straw man.

[@Joelwkemp]

Damn that's thangin bruh.

[@1984isnotamanual]

I actually don’t know exactly what Islamophobia is exactly because I’ve heard that bringing up certain things say that the prescribed punishment for leaving islam is the death penalty is islamophobic. Maybe that’s just people who are trying to use it where it doesn’t belong. Like calling something racist when it isn’t idk.

[@ottz2506]

Sorry for the essay. Hopefully KZbin doesn’t delete it. Yeah people conflate criticism of Islam with anti Muslim bigotry (the latter of which I think is a better phrase to use instead when strictly discussing people who aren’t engaged in good faith criticism but wants an excuse to hate brown Muslims). When many think of a critic of Islam, sadly the first image is likely a genuine anti Muslim skinhead bigot whose rhetoric goes way beyond criticism, and they actually want to ban Islam and the Quran. They then ruin it for actual critics which they’ll exploit and then they get lumped in with them. The critics then get unfair guilt by association treatment and are viewed as just as bigoted if not more. And then people wonder why a lot of ex Muslims and a lot of critics of Islam tend to talk to right wingers, since they’re the only ones who will listen (never in good faith of course) and won’t throw ad homs at them. It’s especially bizarre when it’s left leaning people who defend Islam, calling it a progressive and/or feminist religion, but bash Christianity as barbaric, backward and woman hating. They’ll complain about how you should listen to Muslim women before talking about female oppression in Islam, but will talk about how women are oppressed in Christianity without the need to consult Christian women on how they feel about it. You won’t be asked if you know the quran in its original language or context when pointing out a terrible line but such a demand would not be made when criticising Christianity. Reasons why some left wingers don’t criticise Islam is because “we shouldn’t bash the faith of the powerless” as if there is not one Muslim who has significant power over others. There’s a reason why in a leftist conference, you’re likely to see someone burning a Bible and have that seen as bravery and you’re never going to find a Quran being burnt which would be seen as bigotry if it happened and would actually be a loooot braver.

[@pancakingon]

No, Douglas Murray sounds like Scar from the Lion King

[@petterbirgersson4489]

33:50 Spitting facts. Glorious bothsiding.

[@sasha_something]

This debate is like an advertisement for the position that debates are a complete waste of time lol.

[@robertcampomizzi7988]

Some people's minds were changed according to the vote count. Winning over everyone isn't a realistic goal in all instances.

[@sasha_something]

@@robertcampomizzi7988 I don’t think it’s necessarily desirable to win people over if you’re winning them over with a combination of terrible arguments and personal attacks. (Although I’m sure Douglas Murray is fine with it).

[@robertcampomizzi7988]

@sasha_something like you just did? The lack of self awareness is astounding 🤦‍♂️

[@Abzuhuzwn]

@@sasha_something I think the ultimate argument against debating would be address what there is besides debate, and identify whether the options besides debate are as inherently democratic and/or effective in changing minds. That is, of course, assuming someone arguing against debates hold democracy itself in high regard, which isn’t obviously guaranteed.

[@sasha_something]

@@robertcampomizzi7988 like I just did what?

[@yeriscarat9241]

personally i am against all states existing so i am “anti-zionist” then lol

[@Jaq2Jack]

Jokes on him: I want to abolish all states.

[@angelantayhua3096]

@@Jaq2Jack based.

[@yeriscarat9241]

same

[@MarvinAndross]

You seriously cutoff the end of the debate and see the crowd results?!!!!!!!

[@1jakerules1]

Lonerbox gets one guyed while video plays in background*

[@matsab7930]

I think if you work with the correct definition - the right for Jews to have a state - then being anti Zionist is pretty overlapped with being antisemitic. I don’t see how you can oppose a Jewish majority state existing without being anti-Jewish; just as I would say you probably can’t be opposed to any other minority having their own state without being prejudiced against said minority. You can disagree with how they run their country, but opposing the very existence of it is extreme.

[@brentoncarter4275]

@@matsab7930 guess what group was the minority before you started your ethnic cleansing last century?

[@bengreen171]

the only difference between British 19th century colonialism and Zionist colonialism is that the former was a process of establishing outposts from which to extract resources from a foreign territory and send them to the 'motherland', and the latter was the establishment of a 'motherland' in a foreign territory. And even that distinction breaks down when you consider how British colonial outposts over generations began to see themselves as 'motherlands' in their own right, distinct from the mother country.

[@talsapps]

Except that the british blocked jewish immigration almost as soon as they had control over the area. Also in order to colonize you need to subjugate a foreign people and exploit them. Back then there were no "palestinian people" and the arabs living there were not exploited.

[@fakenamerson1693]

The obsession with natural resources ignores that colonialism was a two-way street. I never hear Europeans complain about the vast amounts of scientific and technical knowledge that were "extracted" from their homelands and sent to colonized regions enabling them to develop.

[@bengreen171]

@@fakenamerson1693 what? Do you think the spread of knowledge is some sort of thing to be bartered for in exchange for ownership of your land? What exactly has this 'extraction' as you disingenuously call it' actually cost the West - and was it 'extracted' by coercion? Don't be ridiculous. Next you'll be saying, 'well, we did give them cricket'.

[@talsapps]

@@bengreen171 Except that the british blocked jewish immigration almost as soon as they had control over the area. Also in order to colonize you need to subjugate a foreign people and exploit them. Back then there were no "palestinian people" and the arabs living there were not exploited.

[@talsapps]

@@bengreen171 Except that the british blocked jewish immigration almost as soon as they had control over the area. Also in order to colonize you need to subjugate a foreign people and exploit them. Back then there were no "palestinian people" and the arabs living there were not exploited.

[@reactionaryjudaism]

Hamaz comes from the fidelity to English orthography. A single 's' at the end of a word is pronounced as a 'z'. It should be spelled Hamass.

[@megasalexandros2397]

ham ass😂

[@adrien5834]

How do you pronounce oasis? Or Christmas? Or uterus?

[@reactionaryjudaism]

@@adrien5834 That's obviously not true: has, his, is, as. The us ending is different. Christmas used to be spelled Christmass. Anyway, that's where Murray gets it from probably.

[@adrien5834]

@@reactionaryjudaism Amended my comment. But all latin and greek words ending in -is are pronounced with an s, such as hypothesis, syphilis, ellipsis, etc. And many words ending in -as as well, such as alas, canvas, gas, bias, alias...

[@reactionaryjudaism]

@@adrien5834 Hamas isn't a Latin or Greek word, but perhaps you could say the convention now is to do this for all loan words.

[@manveru_eilhart]

I think the problem is that most people who are anti-zionist end up also being anti-semitic. So are they different terms? Yes, but usually saying you're anti-zionist is just euphemistic. it makes me uncomfortable how it is usually anti-zionIST and not anti-zionISM, too. Feels like a giveaway but I couldnt prove that.

[@ottz2506]

I consider myself very anti zionist from an atheistic, secular and a general ethical standpoint. I don’t think any religion has a right to a “homeland”. If there is a word for the anti zionist equivalent to Christianity or Islam, I’d be that too. These states will inevitably turn into theocratic apartheid ethnostates as there is an incentive to maintain one ethnicity or group at the expense of another in order for its to remain a “insert religion” state. There has to be discriminatory laws put in place for the “homeland” to exist and to keep existing. I however do go out of my way to criticise those within anti zionist circles who are actually antisemitic and engage in Hamas/Hezbollah/Houthis/Oct 7th apologia. Annoyingly, despite my anti zionist position, I’ve been dismissed as a genocide supporter for the most tepid of criticism towards Hamas or any anti zionist protest or protestors.

[@manveru_eilhart]

@@ottz2506 The thing is that "being Jewish" is different from practicing Judaism. They are really more of an ethnic group. And that could still lead to discrimination to any non-Jews there, and it does to some extent. I feel like a lot of people, not yourself I think, just write of Jewishness as a religion because what they really want to do is frame it as white people hurting brown people. Even though Arabs and Israelis aren't that different looking.

[@ottz2506]

@@manveru_eilhart yeah I view “Jewishness” as both a religious and ethnic thing. Obviously you have secular Jews who don’t believe but engage in the ethnic/cultural side of it that doesn’t require them to be, at the very least, Ben Shapiro committed. But any state that refers to itself as a homeland for x group necessitates discriminatory treatment and laws in favour of x group at the expense of y. That’s why I can’t in all good conscience support zionism as well as the christian and islamic version. To me if I did, then I don’t think I’d be consistent when it comes to opposing ethnostates. If I were to say “oh I’m okay with this ethnostate”, I couldn’t really say “except this one” because you’re either anti ethnostate or you’re not. Then I could be rightly criticised for having double standards and preferential treatment for or against a group. Hopefully that makes sense. I understand that there are indeed antisemites who cloak it under anti zionism. And I like to pride myself in being one to call them out while also being committed to the label anti zionist. Now, of course, can there be a temporary space in which one group can be sent to to prevent total wipeout of said group? Of course. But the key word is temporary. To me that’s different to settling up a homeland where an already settled group is there and expecting them to be fine with it. I’m also opposed to a Palestinian state because that’s just going to be another oppressive islamic state that discriminates against the LGBT community, women, Christians and other minority religious groups and atheists. I shudder at the thought of Netanyahu’s government as I would a Hamas led Palestine state.

[@manveru_eilhart]

@@ottz2506 my understanding though is that you can convert to Judaism (which is way harder than converting to Christianity or Islam and they certainly don't proselytize), but that wouldn't make you a "Jew" exactly. It's mostly done for marriage sale when it is, I think. I'm generally anti-ethnostate, myself, but it gets complicated. Most countries in the world just naturally have an ethnic majority population. Depending on how broad we're using ethnicity. Im trying not to look at this from an American perspective. And in Israel, Arab citizens (so not Palestinians who aren't Israeli citizens) enjoy legal rights and government agency. So how much of an ethnostate is it? Somewhat, arguably, but not existing in the way people who want an ethnostate usually suggest. My only general critique of you is to maybe change your opposition to the ideology, so anti-zionism, instead of saying you're anti-zionist. Because Zionism in most western countries is a nebulous term that can mean anything from Jews have a right to live in Israel to Jews have a right to all of historic Palestine/Judea and Sumeria, to just any Jew. Depending on who you're talking to. I'm a gay man and I agree. It's hard to throw myself behind marches for Free Palestine when I can't say for sure I'd support whatever government that arises. Is self determination more important than human rights? I am not ready to say that. I can easily support ceasefire now, though. But most protests are beyond the latter now.

[@ottz2506]

@@manveru_eilhart to your criticism - I’m anti anarchocommunism/anarchocapitalism so I’m certainly not going to like the people who endorse those ideologies because the real life implementation can obviously only be negative and yet they still endorse it. If a Jewish people asked me what I mean by “I am an anti zionist/anti zionism, i’d be saying everything I’ve said to you and a person, I hope you would agree, would have to be incredibly dishonest and dense to call me antisemitic. An ethnostate in that there HAS to be an ethnic majority maintained jn order for it to remain a homeland for that ethnicity. Meaning some groups will have to be treated differently so they can never become the majority group and I don’t know how a state can do that without infringing on people’s rights.

[@zaper2904]

In regards to Palestinian immigration I don't dispute that most of the Arabs who were there during the mandate period were there before the mandate period but I'm almost certain there was immigration during the Ottoman era. If you look at population numbers between 1800 and 1900 the Muslim population doubled which was unusual compared to previous centuries in the territory and can be attributed to in my opinion economic migrancy due to European Jewish money flowing into what would become Mandatory Palestine.

[@abdihakimjama1556]

The population of Egypt quadrupled in the same time period. All of Palestine neighbours grew population at similar rates to Palestine except Egypt which grew fourfold. None of those countries population growths have anything to do with Jews. The same can be said for Palestine. In the year 1900, the population of Jews was just 24,000. That is not enough Jews to justify the population growth of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs.

[@zaper2904]

@@abdihakimjama1556 Where are you getting these numbers from? Egypt grew by a little more than two times between 1805 and 1897 while Jordan grew by less than 55k with Syria also only growing by a 20-30%. It should be noted that Egypt like Ottoman Palestine received a massive influx of foreign cash through the British.

[@abdihakimjama1556]

@@zaper2904 I simply searched Egypt's population in the year 1800 and then searched for it's population in 1800. I got 2.5 million in 1800 and 10 million in 1900. The British took Egypt in 1882, at that point Egypt had a population of 6.83 million. That is double the population at the beginning of the century. It's clear to me that the British did not have much to do with population growth. Also, Jordan didn't grow much because it's population was mostly bedouin and nomads don't really experience much population growth.

[@adrien5834]

In the end it does not really matter. Israel exists, and so does Palestine. The issues are the continued occupation of Palestine by the Israeli military and the illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

[@zaper2904]

@@abdihakimjama1556 According to the Egyptian population statistics as cited by Wikipedia Egypt had approximately 4 million people in 1805 and around 9.7 million in 1897 with an increase of over 3 million in between the British taking over in 1882 and 1897.

[@lukasa6374]

8:20 no youre being the ret by being overpedantic. People use antisemite to refer to jews, not other groups of people, despite the origin of the word

[@iftinaxmad781]

Don't lie most oftem are against and first there alweys against any pro Palestinians because there is many people who debate ended them like this

[@craigfriedman4759]

@lonerbox, you claim that anti-semitism also refers to Arabs but then you use philosemitism and it's common usage as being pro-jewish.

[@miquelcanosasanteularia1678]

5:30

[@ravenmusic6392]

Douglas murray is absoluetly repulsive. He lied about my univertify professor and claimed he'd run a "leftist" counter terror course he'd never even attended because they'd had a fued over Brexit. He called on him to lose his job and everything and sent fake legal papers to his office. Absoluetly awful human being. That aside, Natasha is pretty full of it (especially Dier Yassin and the settlements at the end) but is obviously levels above Murray in terms of intelligence and education on the topic. Mehdi was fine but poorly prepared imo. Balbour shit was just embarrasing

[@PhreakPhantom]

Mehdi lied on his opening statement. Stone face lied. That set the rest of the debate for failure. Murray is 100% correct.

[@bmxney3143]

@@PhreakPhantomDouglass Murray is a fraud

[@bmxney3143]

@@PhreakPhantom lmao tool

[@hikelfin5941]

@@PhreakPhantom but Murray lies about everything ever, including every single sentence in this debate. At least have consistency

[@ravenmusic6392]

@@PhreakPhantom Murray isn't correct about anything. He didn't make one coherent argument and most of them (such as the argument about Gaza being independent since 2005) are willful distortions without proper context. I really suggest you look into the case of my professor Peter Neumann, a centrist war studies lecturer who Murray smeared as a Hamas supporter and tried to ruin his career despite the new York times publishing a piece confirming Neumann had said NONE of the things Murray accused him of. It's a good case study for his character

[@DIN_A8]

Bots are fast on this one 😂😂😂

[@mallardofmodernia8092]

Indeed they are 😂

[@jakethebaker6946]

1:15:29

[@donnytonny730]

“thats all” after defending blood and soil

[@mistared4021]

Im commenting as im watching hence the multiple comments, but i remember early in the conflict the polling from a Jewish institution showed that American jews were three times as likely to consider Israel's actions as genocidal compared to the average American and something like half of younger jews were against the war or something similar, i can probably track down the article but i really don't want to.

[@pauliunknown8118]

That debate was a total mess, anti-zionism is OBVIOUSLY not the same as anti-semitism, only a severely dim witted person would believe that. On the topic of a 1 state solution, it is disgusting to hear Bonerbox consistently fall back on the status quo, since doing literally anything to disrupt that status quo would be inconvenient, " we can not give the Palestinians the vote because they will use it to hurt the Jews and vote for Hamas". Once again, it is the Israeli state that would like you to think that the obstacles to Palestinian statehood, or Palestinian emancipation are the Palestinians themselves. They ignore the fact that they are aggressively occupying Palestine, they ignore the fact that they have been using the IDF to terrorize Palestinians for 70 years, they get surprised when their open air prisoners vote for a prison gang (aka Hamas), and then they act as if this is the root of the problem and not a byproduct. The Palestinians say they want statehood, independence, freedom, and the Zionist hears that the Palestinians want more opportunities to attack Jews.

[@georgesprat9697]

Well said, thank you.

[@yeriscarat9241]

yes exactly

[@thomasmartinson8208]

I have Jewish friends. Medhi Hasan

[@Ron20042004]

Medhi is a true anti semite.

[@donnytonny730]

man douglas is so dishonest is maddening

[@arthurgoonie4596]

What was he dishonest about?

[@lakabaka]

Douglas was spot on

[@ravenmusic6392]

​@@arthurgoonie4596The Gaza strip being independent since 2005 when Israel in reality maintained population control measures. The protests containing an Islamist element when no British counter terror bodies have found any evidence of this. Calling Mehdi a Hamas supporter when he has specifically and explicitly condemned Hamas. He also lied about my university professor so there's that

[@evamurray2564]

​@ravenmusic6392 Israel did pull out of Gaza in 2005. There were no walls or any military operations in Gaza until hamas started launching attacks and rockets into Israel. Then Egypt and Israel placed a blockade on Gaza. The blockade and military operations are a response to hamas' attacks. Context matters.

[@ravenmusic6392]

@@evamurray2564 Yeah totally, accept they maintained control over: -6 of the 7 border crossings (Egypt controls the 7th) -The airspace -The population registry -A shoot to kill zone near the border -The communication sphere -The EEZ -Some of Gaza's clean drinking water These measures predated the Hamas takeover, and the number of rockets being fired into Israel did not increase drastically until 2007. The idea that Gaza was a sovereign Palestinian state in all but name is just dishonest

[@zephyr8072]

Did anyone check Mehdi for cocaine? The guy's going 5000 kilometers a minute.

[@brandonschneider9961]

Do people really use kilometers in their idioms like that? "A thousand miles a minute" is a thing I've said and heard said. Are you being sarcastic or do people actually speak that way?

[@kleptomanta]

​​@@brandonschneider9961Are you American? My only concept of a mile is it's sorta like a kilometre but a bit bigger or smaller (it's bigger but I had to google it). Would be weird to talk about anything in mph or being "like 100 miles away" when I barely have a sense of how fast/long it is. Best example is watching back to the future, especially as a kid, them going 88mph didn't sound very fast since we have 100km/h speed limits on the motorway. Converting it to like 140km/h instantly makes more sense

[@brandonschneider9961]

@kleptomanta I am American, but I've heard Irish, British, and Australians say miles and not kilometers when they're doing an idiom. I guess I'm wondering which English speaking countries say kilometers instead. Or maybe it's even more interesting, and some of you do, and some don't. Or most of you do, but just not on the internet. Trying mainly to find out why I've never heard it even though I've got friends all over.

[@brandonschneider9961]

@kleptomanta I am American, but I've heard Irish, British, and Australians say miles and not kilometers when they're doing an idiom. I guess I'm wondering which English speaking countries say kilometers instead. Or maybe it's even more interesting, and some of you do, and some don't. Or most of you do, but just not on the internet. Trying mainly to find out why I've never heard it even though I've got friends all over.

[@kleptomanta]

@@brandonschneider9961 It's probably a mix of all those reasons. I'm trying to think whether I've heard kilometres vs miles in real life. I'm sure some people would say miles especially nowadays. Fuck I've probably said things are "miles away", it just sounds better, less syllables. Online you assume anyone you're talking to is American so you'd probably say miles instead. I still actively spell colour with the u and all that stuff but at this point probably half my friends consistently use US spellings. One of them even wrote mom instead of mum the other day which felt super weird. I'm from New Zealand btw. I think people in the UK still commonly talk about things in feet, inches, acres, pounds, stone etc. Here everything's metric except for subway footlongs and sometimes height. It's probably the same for Australia, our regional stuff is usually pretty similar.

[@isaacfink123]

Don't know about his pronounciation of Hammas but his pronunciation of yeshivah is spot on

[@PhreakPhantom]

"I'm just antizionist" is a massive redflag. It's a much worse version of "but I have black friends"

[@adrien5834]

Complete nonsense. That's like a German saying that "I'm just antinazi" is a red flag. To nazis, sure.

[@adrien5834]

It's not a red flag. There are many antizionist jews.

[@adrien5834]

@@Shane756 Good job getting this comment through the filters. Mine were removed.

[@PhreakPhantom]

@@Shane756 Except Zionism means one thing and one thing only. Antisemites think otherwise.

[@PhreakPhantom]

​@@Shane756 lol except zionism means one thing and one thing only. But an anti semite wouldn't see it.

[@motina10]

Most Israeli Arabs do not call themselves Palestinian. In Israel proper, Palestinians constitute almost 21 percent of the population as part of its Arab citizens from wikipedia. And only 7% in a 2020 Jerusalem Post.

[@Codemeisters]

This is at best a misrepresentation. The majority of Arabs citizens of Israel identify as Palestinian, which can be easily found by looking up what Arabs in Israel actually say themselves. However there are differences since the Arab population is not a monolith, so Druze may be more likely to use "Arab-Israeli", whereas Bedouins and settled Arabs, both Muslim and Christian, overwhelmingly identify as Palestinian, and they constitute the vast majority of the Arab population. It would not even make sense for those groups to not identify as Palestinian since they are simply those who were able to stay within the Greenline after '48, in most cases still having family in the West Bank or Gaza, from which they are culturally indistinguishable.

[@motina10]

@@Codemeisters Don't see any fucking source. I provide two. So all that is blah blah.

[@Codemeisters]

We can cite sources at each other all day long since different research done at different times will yield different results, but I think the fact that you did not interact with a single thing I wrote is telling. If you want sources, all of which can be easily found, there's the 2012 New York Times poll, the 2017 Sammy Smooha survey, the work of sayed kashua or Mohammed darawashe, and many more. Even if I were to take your belief that Arabs in Israel don't identify as Palestinian, it doesn't change the fact that most Arabs in Israel and palestinians are literally the same families separated by borders, and clearly are deeply personally connected to the suffering of Palestinians.

[@talsapps]

​@@CodemeistersI have arab friends that vote Netanyahu because they do not want a palestinian state. They know that the arabs in gaza and the west bank view them as enemies which is why in oct 7 they were massacred together with the jews.

[@talsapps]

​@@CodemeistersI have arab friends that vote Netanyahu because they do not want a palestinian state. They know that the arabs in gaza and the west bank view them as enemies which is why in oct 7 they were m*** together with the jews.

[@killercaos123]

*comment for engagement*

[@tobysmith2081]

My comments are getting removed

[@craigfriedman4759]

I never hear people like @ lonerbox make the argument that Muslims should return to their lands in India and Indians should return to their lands in Pakistan. Millions of people were displaced there compared to the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. The Palestinians can't come back because if they did, Jews fear and reasonably so, that Palestinians would create a Sharia law Muslim Arab ethnostate were Jews are treated as second-class Citizens and pogromed as the urge arises.

[@angelantayhua3096]

@@craigfriedman4759 so why not let the UN in along with them then?

[@itaye666]

@@angelantayhua3096 Because the UN does such great things /s

[@matsab7930]

@@angelantayhua3096idk. Something about the hundred thousand UN resolutions against Israel probably doesn’t give them much credibility in the eyes of Jewish people.

[@LimeyRedneck]

🤠 💜

[@user-cn8vj5rs5c]

I like the part where Lonerbox had problem with every little thing Mehdi said no matter how logically consistent and on point it was and then just said nothing when Natascha proclaimed that zionism is not political....

[@jamesjarvis530]

If Zionism was the idea to create the Jewish state of Israel in Palestine now that’s been created and is a recognised nation what does it mean to be a Zionist that you support Israel continuing to exist ? Idk if that is very political not wanting the destruction of a nation, would advocating for a two state solution make you a Zionist?

[@PhreakPhantom]

LOL Mehdi lied right out of the gate. That set the tone for the rest of his bs

[@killzone866]

@@PhreakPhantom they are all liars frankly. Its embarrassing to watch.

[@The_Bear_Jew_1]

way lonerbox never make a video about the lebanonian corruption, islamic superiority and the ayatula regime occupation of jihad ???

[@adrien5834]

Why don't you?

[@The_Bear_Jew_1]

@@adrien5834 I'm not famous propergandalist like your master 🙃

[@adrien5834]

@@The_Bear_Jew_1 Calling Lonerbox famous seems overly generous. Anyway, you want some propaganda done, do it yourself.

[@angelantayhua3096]

@@The_Bear_Jew_1why hasn’t he talked about various African civil wars and coups, Myanmar civil war, and corruption in Indonesia then?

[@The_Bear_Jew_1]

@@angelantayhua3096 because he holds great haterd for the state of Israel and he dosent really give a f about other conflicts

[@tiggerbane4325]

Honestly this debate entirely depends on how you define Anti-Zionism which depends how you define Zionism... So I guess this is an invalid debate because neither side agrees on the definition of Zionism.

[@Feefa99]

Zionism is colonialism and nationalism (and everything horrible connected with it), Antizionism is criticism of such ideology. Antisemitism is just hatred.

[@evanb4189]

Slobadan Milosovic and Mladic are constantly smeared as some anti-Muslim, anti-Bosnian guys for simply criticizing a theocratic ethnostate. -Medhi Logic.

[@dshappir]

In theory anti-Semitism and and anti-Zionism are not the same. In practice the overlap is so high as to be essentially indistinguishable.

[@butterf1sh]

Nope

[@Linkman95]

"i get to define anti zionism and i define it as anti semitic checkmate anti zionists" k lady sure good debate

[@yayayayapewpew]

Douglas Murray 🫶🏻🫶🏻

[@user-hv7rq5zn3x]

Douglas and Natasha did a great job 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

[@angelantayhua3096]

Wrong

[@user-hv7rq5zn3x]

@@angelantayhua3096 I'm sure it's hard for you to admit…

[@angelantayhua3096]

@@user-hv7rq5zn3x I’m sure it’s hard for you to explain

[@peterjacobsen4246]

of course douglas is angry, he's debating people who spread unbelievably damaging misinformation

[@adrien5834]

Douglas Murray is a nazi. I find it delightful to see him defending Israel, he must hate himself.

[@ravenmusic6392]

@@peterjacobsen4246 Douglas is a professional liar. He's a huge fan of the "but the Palestinians controlled Gaza!" Theory even though Israel maintained dozens of various border and airspace controls after the withdrawal. He also pretty much said it'd be fine for the Israelis to push the Palestinians into the desert in the spectator

[@peterjacobsen4246]

I'd love to see a conversation with Douglas where he seems like the bigger liar than his opposition

[@ghosthunter0950]

1:52:00 a regarded point by lonerbox. so they accept it, except their goal is to have that sovreignty to wage war against Israel. now you have 2 Gaza's and expecting another massive war on the horizon. if you want a two state solution you have to work towards reforming education in Palestinian territories. something which Israel has no jurisdiction over. and yet Lonerbox is willing to call it apartheid despite the Palestinians having a statelet that is supposed to take care of them. the fact they can't vote is because they'd vote for H*mas.

[@adrien5834]

Speculation. THE FACTS of the matter are, Israel has been occupying Palestine for 57 years, and has been waging a war on the Palestinian people for that long or even longer. It's not a mystery why Palestinians hate Israel, anybody would in their place.

[@SesameMilk]

@@adrien5834 Pa;estine declared independence in 1988, and it's territories are signed in the Oslo Accord and respected by Israel fully since 2005. Palestinians can be angry all they want, but 57 years of occupation? - I disagree.

[@adrien5834]

@@SesameMilk Disagree all you like. Israel's borders are the 1967 borders, and the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza were always foreign territory. UNSC resolution 242 is clear on the matter.

[@SesameMilk]

@@adrien5834 Hi, The 242 is clear that it talks about territory conquered through war. So you could make the argument it applied to the WB between 1967 to 1993 (peace deal with Jordan) - but since then it was given to Israel as a mandate to make a territory deal with the Palestinians, hence the Oslo accords. So the WB no longer falls under the 242 UN resolution, because it is no longer considered a territory conquered in war - but rather in deals between governing bodies.

[@adrien5834]

@@SesameMilk That's irrelevant. The UN consider the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza to be Palestinien territory, and under Israeli occupation since 1967.

[@DonkeysinSpace]

18:18 Two million Canadians would imply 100,000 Palestinians

[@itaye666]

Don't take math lessons from people who believe hamas-propaganda numbers

[@daves465]

1:25:46 - If you had a Palestinian state in the WB and Gaza, then of course youd have Apartheid, but it would be the other way around, it would be the Palestinians that be segregating the Jews. Israel would still be 20% Arab, but Palestine would be 0% Jews.

[@PhreakPhantom]

Exactly!

[@ravenmusic6392]

@@daves465 Yes because a theoretical state which doesn't exists totally disproves present Palestinian concerns about treatment in the west bank

[@Jaq2Jack]

A minority population in a state does not make it an apartheid state, it is how the population is treated. That'd be like saying that now that South Africa isn't under apartheid dominated by the white population, they must now be under apartheid dominated by the black population. And to say there would be 0% Jews is disingenuous at best.

[@daves465]

@@Shane756 The anti-Zionists attack Israel by calling it a Jewish ethno state, even though 20% of Israeli citizens are Arab, yet you see no problem with the future Palestine being 100% Arab?

[@daves465]

@@ravenmusic6392 The so called apartheid in the WB is enforced only because of security concerns, it has nothing to do with racial superiority or racism, whereas the apartheid in the future Palestine has everything to do with racism and hatred.

[@mosbar1671]

1:05:00 About the notion that Zionists saw themselves as superior to Arabs. Where is this coming from? Why does LonerBox think that?

[@donnytonny730]

jewdism is a minority zionism is not

[@itaye666]

In what context? If Judaism is a minority, and not all jews (like the self-hating ones of the ones that fall for hamas/iranian propaganda) are zionists. How are zionists not a minority by the transitive property?

[@xanthipussofsparta6555]

Mehdi Hassan has always been underhanded in his 'debates'.

[@macaron3141592653]

I mean if you're debating people defending Israel's actions then why wouldn't be?

[@xanthipussofsparta6555]

@@macaron3141592653 are you suggesting that debating someone who defends Israel requires underhandedness? What does that say about the pro Palestinian position?

[@xanthipussofsparta6555]

@@macaron3141592653 are you suggesting that debating someone in defense of Israel requires you to be underhanded? What does that say about the pro Palestinian position?

[@Metaphix]

@@macaron3141592653 Because people whose minds you claim to want to change notice and it hurts your position?

[@komlat253]

This guy is hilarious talking about how isreal is so attacked. Like please domr look at the global south or previously occupied countries and stateless nations in the world...

[@talsapps]

The deir yassin massacre was indeed not a massacre, the person in the comments doesn't care about the reality that the people who have been there have explained how they were told to lie about what happened.

[@tooitchy]

The total dead is accepted to be about 107, which is a lot but it's hardly the massacre it's made out to be, and the myth of deir yassin is significantly worse than the reality, as it was less a massacre, and more a battle.

[@bgold06]

Imho, Mehdi Hasan and Gideon Levy didn't really participate in this debate at all. They defined Zionism as the right for jews to have self determination in their ancient homeland. Mehedi and Gideon argured about critisism of Israel. You can criticize the Israeli government and their army and still think Israel has a right to exist. Anti-zionism means jews do not have a right to self determination in their ancient homeland (in this context) and I'd say thay is pretty much anti-Semitism.

[@angelantayhua3096]

This applies for China, Russia, Saudi, etc. Wtf should I support Zionism?

[@Olinke]

You’re a cool guy but so edgy calling viewers things like morons for making invalid points

[@motina10]

1948 war ethnic cleansing still started with the Arabs. The argument is when Jews (Who you deny, like an idiot, to their indigeneity of that land) respond in kind it is constantly punished while you forgive constant Arab aggression? Mond boggling. "The broad working definition of Indigeneity is that it is a quality of a person's and a group's identity that links them to specific places with knowledge of and respect for original ways". This makes religious Jews more indigenous than non religious ones. Because they maintain the practices that have links to a specific place and respect for the original ways. Judaism is very similar to Samaritanism, minus the difference caused during the rift of the united Kingdom of Israel, which again, occurred on that land. Come on Lonerbox, please learn what indigenous means and under stand that just because a word is used, like "People's Republics", or the "Socialism" of fascism. Words get misused. It is technically an impossibly for an indigenous group to do to their own land. No matter how much you want to deny it.

[@mistared4021]

On the numbers, lancet has recently claimed that "conservatively" 189,000 Palestinians have been killed, so pretty much any number that is below that can be used imo.

[@RetractedandRedacted]

The lancet said that conservatively 189,000 *died*. The way they figured that was they multiplied each fatality by 5. To quote: "Armed conflicts have indirect health implications beyond the direct harm from violence. Even if the conflict ends immediately, there will continue to be many indirect deaths in the coming months and years from causes such as reproductive, communicable, and non-communicable diseases. The total death toll is expected to be large given the intensity of this conflict; destroyed health-care infrastructure; severe shortages of food, water, and shelter; the population's inability to flee to safe places; and the loss of funding to UNRWA, one of the very few humanitarian organisations still active in the Gaza Strip. In recent conflicts, such indirect deaths range from three to 15 times the number of direct deaths. Applying a conservative estimate of four (they actually multiplied by 5) indirect deaths per one direct death to the 37 396 deaths reported, it is not implausible to estimate that up to 186 000 or even more deaths could be attributable to the current conflict in Gaza." This assumes that none of the mortalities recorded aren't already included in the Ministry of Health figure given they don't provide a specific cause of death beyond 'israeli aggression'.

[@DonkeysinSpace]

"The Lancet recently claimed", it was an opinion piece published as a letter in the correspondence sections of the Lancet. It was an estimate of indirect deaths that could occur following the conflict, not already killed. And as the other commenter mentioned, 189,000 is assuming the Ministry of Health's unconfirmed total of 35,000ish deaths were all direct deaths. And, the indirect deaths in the other conflicts the author used as a reference for the 1:5 direct to indirect deaths, included deaths from famine. Which would seem unlikely in Gaza considering the enormous amount of food currently going in and the IPC downgrading their projection to say: "While the report notes there is still a risk of famine across the Gaza strip, all projections of famine with "reasonable evidence" have been removed." So probably should just go with the number of Palestinians killed that the Palestinian Ministry of Health uses - 35k, imo.

[@NC-kb4ik]

Jews are an indigenous population who used some settlor colonial tactics to return. Has any other indigenous population done this. If you coin Zionism as colonial, then you also have to recognize how unique it was and that it doesn’t fit fully into the definitions of colonialism.

[@AhmedFadel-jl7wc]

The audience were so dumb

[@Omnipoops]

It was like a Bill Maher show.

[@marca9955]

Lonerbox factchecking 101: Passionate advocate: "The military killed 100 children and ate their hearts for dinner" Lonerbox: "Well ACTUALLY the military killed 97 children and ate their hearts for lunch, so there".

[@derasiatelo3361]

Mehdi King

[@marca9955]

So he doesn't finish the video, we don't see if the audience was swayed... but thanks for the 20 minutes of talk about DMing your friends.

[@TizBaz5]

Debating whether anti-zionism is identical to anti-Semitism is not productive. That is because most of the anti-zionism on the planet is in bad faith and based in anti-Semitism. a satmar hasid may define himself as an anti-zionist, but that does not mean remotely the same thing as an Arab who defines himself as an anti-zionist. One of them wants to kill Israeli soldiers and may consider civilians fair game, and the other does not. Aside from that, the two terms clearly do not mean the same thing, they just overlap about 80-90%.

[@ottz2506]

I consider myself anti zionist however I’m incredibly optics pilled and will attempt to call out any antisemitic nonsense I see. I recognise that there are those out there who are legit antisemitic which is why purity testing is so important, at least to me. Obviously diversity of opinion on principle is good but there has to be an agreed line drawn at one point, and antisemitism goes beyond that line. My stance is purely from a “I don’t think that any religion has the right to a homeland regardless of circumstances as these inevitably will become theocratic ethnostates where one group is going to be discriminated while another isn’t in order to maintain an ethnic majority” perspective.

[@AFIXFORNIX]

A Satmar hasid is "temporarily" anti-Zionist. I don't understand why people keep misinterpreting this. Some Jewish factions believe that Jews have the religious permission to be in control of Israel only after the Messiah returns. And that establishing a Jewish sovereign state prior to that is pissing off god. But they still 100% believe that eventually, Jews will return to rule in that area. And when that happens, Arabs would be missing secular/moderately-religious Zionists, because under the ultra-Orthodox interpretation....yeah, they won't like it. Despite these ultra-orthodox factions not agreeing with Jewish sovereignty at the present, they wholeheartedly believe Jews should populate Israel (the more, the merrier!) as this is the best place to worship god from. Which means tons of Jews living on Palestinian lands, at the end of the day.

[@ryri51]

Looks like the nazi fans of Murray found this lol.

[@tooitchy]

entire stupid thing abuot "if people have a problem with anti semitism they should have a problem with islamophobia" is so stupid. one is a religion, one is an immutable characteristic aka ethnicity. Sorry, being a jew doesn't bring with it a set of held highly problematic beliefs that regularly result in innocent people being murdered in the name of those beliefs, while islam does.

[@whatsthatnoise5955]

That's not what islamophobia means though. There are plenty of progressive liberal- minded Muslims who are victims of islamophobia. It's not a disagreement about religious ideology but a hatred of a group of people.

[@ihavenojawandimustscream4681]

I'd say being a Jew does bring a set of rigid beliefs that lead to lots people being killed, and that belief is called 'uncritical support to Israel'

[@MisterS.]

​@@whatsthatnoise5955if they are progressive and liberally minded, they are so despite the Muslim faith and probably even counter to it. At this point why hold this anachronistic faith if you don't share its ultra traditionalist values?

[@whatsthatnoise5955]

@@MisterS. That has nothing to do with what I said. I said that progressive, liberal-minded muslims are victims of islamophobia, therefore islamophobia is not a disagreement with a particular religious doctrine, but a hatred of a group of people. Nice try shifting the goalposts though!

[@MisterS.]

@@whatsthatnoise5955 OP's comment was about pointing out the difference between hating on people because of their inate characteristics vs a set of beliefs they willingly subscribe to. If anything, my comment about the incompatibility of liberal tendencies with an anachronistic ideology is more relevant to that than your remark about some people being liberal Muslims, i.e. making a free choice to be a part of the disliked group. And if you dislike a certain set of beliefs, you are automatically prone to also dislike the people who adhere to it, even if some of them are exceptional. It is both.

[@sierrannomad]

Judaism IS Zionism. The centrality of the 3 standard daily Jewish prayers, Shacharit, Minchah and Maariv, pray for the end of the Jewish Exile and return to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the Holy Temple. That is the purpose of Judaism, that IS Zionism, that is Zion, mount Zion, Jerusalem. That is the definition of Judaism, to serve God in the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, Mount Zion. If anyone tells you differently, it's western sensibilities.

[@Linkman95]

This is stupid semantic bullshit on par with someone trying to claim antisemitism refers to Palestinians too, because they're a Semitic people. You're cherry-picking specific elements of the word to build your own definition and ignoring over hundred years of the way people have actually used the word.

[@angelantayhua3096]

@@sierrannomad nobody cares about what your religion says. We’re talking about ethnicities.

[@fridayfree8669]

Lul Israel is a secular state founded by mainly atheist leftist zionists. And most orthodox Jews hardcore disagreed with colonializing Palestine until the Shoah happened. Til this day an incredible amount of orthodox living in Israel don't even recognize Israel, like at all.

[@Nizaar1]

Yet there are many judaists who believe Israel shouldn't even exist. Also, even if they would be the same, that would only prove anti-zionism is a form of anti-religion, not a form of racism.

[@yeriscarat9241]

okay 😭 i am against all states so

[@mithranruwodoalvisbeseitri9811]

I noticed when lonerbox speaks about Israeli and Palestinian native he conveniently excludes the native Jewish population that was still holding on to their spaces there despite the generational hostile rules they were under. Like if you are going to say that the native Palestinians have a right to a state which was born as an idea in the 60s which came from Yasser who came from Cairo in Egypt as an idea than you could also say that the Palestinian movement is colonial as well, like this whole native Palestinian logic can be an equal defense for Zionism unless you think the entire region is Arab land by which you again exclude the Jews who stayed there from a right to self determination. if its about the settlements that started in 1967 if im right and its after Israel won the west bank

[@adrien5834]

Israel didn't "win" the West Bank. Israel is illegally occupying the West Bank. And Gaza. And East Jerusalem.

[@angelantayhua3096]

None of you get a state. The UN should colonize both of you and then can have representation after y’all calm down.

[@Namaewa32]

Mehdi Hasan was destroyed

[@KilimnikGenya]

Douglas and Natasha did a masterful job.

[@user-cn8vj5rs5c]

What tf are you even talking about?

[@DIN_A8]

Hahah … what?

[@KilimnikGenya]

@@user-cn8vj5rs5c: I was pretty clear in what I said and the final vote and change in rooms opinion further my point. Douglas more so than Natasha is a true expert on this topic.

[@zachabbott6633]

​@@KilimnikGenya the vote and the rooms opinion lol

[@KilimnikGenya]

@@zachabbott6633: I mean I’ve heard hundreds of Murray’s speeches on this and he is one of the only people that speak on the conflict and are always spot on. But we are discussing this specific debate so yeah the vote is kinda relevant…….

[@The_Bear_Jew_1]

lonerbox dont you tired from your double standards and manipulations?

[@SonOfTrunks224]

how?

[@Observette]

Yeah coz god forbid someone sees both sides of a story.

[@SonOfTrunks224]

@@Observette Bias & misinformation > facts, for some people i guess

[@The_Bear_Jew_1]

@@SonOfTrunks224 every video I saw that lonerbox made was full of double standards and cherry picking just like the video he made about the 48 war so many holes, and he uses manipulated words that holds double standards and showing his deep haterd to the state of Israel by the way I'm not a religious person, and so as the zionists leaders israel is the greatest justice ever made and you all can eat your hates

[@The_Bear_Jew_1]

@@SonOfTrunks224 cherry picking, using of manipulated words to distorte the actual facts, and focusing of mainly one sid, the Israeli one take for example the video about the 48 war he mentioned only the Hebron Massacre, that is distorted history to not mention the hundreds of jews that got murder in the following years until 48 you people just brainwashed

[@The_Bear_Jew_1]

antizionisem is indeed antisemitic, this is not debatable.

[@tobysmith2081]

Its almost like your in a cult where you're not even allowed to question the premise of the cult. I have a problem with where Israel is and not it being Jewish. Israelis could be any race and id still be antizionist. Thats not antisemitism.

[@tobysmith2081]

Zbhsh

[@howdoifindaname2743]

The fact that this comment shows up on a debate is honestly hilarious. No shade, do carry on. Just found it funny

[@hikelfin5941]

I mean it's quite literally a non-sequitur opinion but go off Rabbi

[@DIN_A8]

No its not …, go back to sleep sheep.

[@TornadoStrike]

"Israel does a huge disservice to their cause by maintaining settlements" Why would any nation give away their position esp. to a people that has been nothing but hostile. The onus is on the Palestinian people to negotiate and push for these. No idea how you have 35k+ subscribers with such stupid takes.

[@itaye666]

Sure, because Palestinians have ways to "negotiate and push for these" \s This burden is on both sides of this conflict It is on the side of the Israelis that hold the power of their state, their funding and resources, but this won't work while the Palestinians still have this dumb idea of a "Liberated Palestine" and keep voting for violent leaders like Hamas.

[@matsab7930]

I think if you work with the correct definition - the right for Jews to have a state - then being anti Zionist is pretty overlapped with being antisemitic. I don’t see how you can oppose a Jewish majority state existing without being anti-Jewish; just as I would say you probably can’t be opposed to any other minority having their own state without being prejudiced against said minority. You can disagree with how they run their country, but opposing the very existence of it is extreme.