Enjoyed the episode! The decrease in Christian Zionism appears to coincide with a rise in younger Christians moving towards classical Protestantism and Roman Catholicism (sociological). Theologically, there is an aversion to Premillennial Dispensationalism (Left Behind Books) and move towards Amillennialism with regards to eschatology. As a Presbyterian minister, I always tell my congregation that I support Israel for political reasons. However, classical Protestantism has many different interpretations of Paul in Romans 9-11. Sam Goldman - I believe - wrote a book on this particular topic. I believe he was a former guest a ways back.
For a discussion where I came in wanting to agree with Kirchick, I found his views just relentlessly ill-informed, ill-defended, and odious. Saying of course you can be critical of Israel but then saying, but I just think everyone who is critical of Israel is an ant-semite. Saying of course I am for free speech but I can't even agree with the lukewarm and obvious observations of Damir that the extreme heavy handed overreaction (including by the actual federal government) to pro-Palestinian speech further polarized the issue in an unhelpful way. Claiming that somehow he should be the one to pick and choose who should be admitted to the country on the standard of whether they "love America," which apparently means being passionate defenders of Israel and not complaining when tens of thousands of civilians are murdered with American weapons. I think he is blind to seeing how his views undercut his stated concerns -- the idea that the "conservative movement" shouldn't permit antisemitism but defending it continuing to be dominated by Islamophobia, Xenophobia, and using government powers to enforce "correct views" (but only with regard to Israel, Kirchick of course passionately opposes the same tools being used with regard to any other group or issue.) Really frustrating conversation for me, guess I didn't realize just how offensive Kirchick's views were, which is probably my own fault.
Do any other believers in free speech roll their eyes when we talk about de-platforming? They should. Good grief. This is woke-right nonsense.
If you want to come out and say you disagree with someone or will no longer associate with them. THAT's the line. Not whining about how some jackass had the wrong guest host.
I'm curious if Jamie can actually show me the line where criticism of Israel becomes antisemitism. On one hand he has legitimate complaints about Fuentes hatred and the conspiracy theories that prompt pogroms. While on the other he wants to lump in a bunch of pro-Palestinian kids (who admittedly were annoying and uncivil, but not so clearly pro-hamas) into this camp.
Damir was right about the administration's heavy handed rebuke of universities. It's yesterday's news but it calcified both sides of the Israel debate and it's boiling over now.
Closing on free speech. The problem with those kids is not what they said, it's how they said it. Occupying public squares is NOT speech, it's intimidation and mob rule. You want to stand on the sidewalk and hold a sign as people go about their day, THAT is speech. Sit-ins (looking at you Shadi), tent camps, harassment are tools of the mob. Exactly the same as January 6th.
It DOESN'T Matter what you say in a free country... its how you go about saying it, and the mediums that we communicate through that we should interrogating.
I really enjoyed James's book on Europe and will make sure to read the other. I really fear for the American right; it has become not only close to undemocratic, but it is now flirting with literal fascism. The fact that Republican leaders can't just say no to their 'base' and say what they mean more clearly is bizarre to me. Fundamentally, Fuentes is not only boring, but he's a loser, as are his weird associates, who constitute the flotsam and jetsam of the fourth tier of American cultural and intellectual life. Louis Theroux did a good documentary on Fuentes a couple of years ago, and he came across as a sad, vindictive, idiot. But then, I know plenty of people said the same about Hitler and the Nazis at the time, so Americans cannot be complacent about the threat that Fuentes poses, given the collapse of mainstream Republican politics.
I do think James was wrong on a few fronts, but what I really did agree with was this odd approach that combined racism, juvenile kicks against conventional opinion, and bracketing everything under the banner of humour. I think more political actors need to take these chumps head-on and show them up for what they are. Merely ignoring them is not helping, and neither is taking on part of their lines and dressing them up in more appropriate language.
It really does make me worry about what is happening when these people become more mainstream, and we need to act now.
Republicans had better disavow antisemites like Fuentes and Carlson PRONTO or it will do what Progressivism did to the Democratic Party.
Enjoyed the episode! The decrease in Christian Zionism appears to coincide with a rise in younger Christians moving towards classical Protestantism and Roman Catholicism (sociological). Theologically, there is an aversion to Premillennial Dispensationalism (Left Behind Books) and move towards Amillennialism with regards to eschatology. As a Presbyterian minister, I always tell my congregation that I support Israel for political reasons. However, classical Protestantism has many different interpretations of Paul in Romans 9-11. Sam Goldman - I believe - wrote a book on this particular topic. I believe he was a former guest a ways back.
For a discussion where I came in wanting to agree with Kirchick, I found his views just relentlessly ill-informed, ill-defended, and odious. Saying of course you can be critical of Israel but then saying, but I just think everyone who is critical of Israel is an ant-semite. Saying of course I am for free speech but I can't even agree with the lukewarm and obvious observations of Damir that the extreme heavy handed overreaction (including by the actual federal government) to pro-Palestinian speech further polarized the issue in an unhelpful way. Claiming that somehow he should be the one to pick and choose who should be admitted to the country on the standard of whether they "love America," which apparently means being passionate defenders of Israel and not complaining when tens of thousands of civilians are murdered with American weapons. I think he is blind to seeing how his views undercut his stated concerns -- the idea that the "conservative movement" shouldn't permit antisemitism but defending it continuing to be dominated by Islamophobia, Xenophobia, and using government powers to enforce "correct views" (but only with regard to Israel, Kirchick of course passionately opposes the same tools being used with regard to any other group or issue.) Really frustrating conversation for me, guess I didn't realize just how offensive Kirchick's views were, which is probably my own fault.
Do any other believers in free speech roll their eyes when we talk about de-platforming? They should. Good grief. This is woke-right nonsense.
If you want to come out and say you disagree with someone or will no longer associate with them. THAT's the line. Not whining about how some jackass had the wrong guest host.
I'm curious if Jamie can actually show me the line where criticism of Israel becomes antisemitism. On one hand he has legitimate complaints about Fuentes hatred and the conspiracy theories that prompt pogroms. While on the other he wants to lump in a bunch of pro-Palestinian kids (who admittedly were annoying and uncivil, but not so clearly pro-hamas) into this camp.
Damir was right about the administration's heavy handed rebuke of universities. It's yesterday's news but it calcified both sides of the Israel debate and it's boiling over now.
Closing on free speech. The problem with those kids is not what they said, it's how they said it. Occupying public squares is NOT speech, it's intimidation and mob rule. You want to stand on the sidewalk and hold a sign as people go about their day, THAT is speech. Sit-ins (looking at you Shadi), tent camps, harassment are tools of the mob. Exactly the same as January 6th.
It DOESN'T Matter what you say in a free country... its how you go about saying it, and the mediums that we communicate through that we should interrogating.
James’ quote from around minute 14 about the left’s role in all this is perfect
I really enjoyed James's book on Europe and will make sure to read the other. I really fear for the American right; it has become not only close to undemocratic, but it is now flirting with literal fascism. The fact that Republican leaders can't just say no to their 'base' and say what they mean more clearly is bizarre to me. Fundamentally, Fuentes is not only boring, but he's a loser, as are his weird associates, who constitute the flotsam and jetsam of the fourth tier of American cultural and intellectual life. Louis Theroux did a good documentary on Fuentes a couple of years ago, and he came across as a sad, vindictive, idiot. But then, I know plenty of people said the same about Hitler and the Nazis at the time, so Americans cannot be complacent about the threat that Fuentes poses, given the collapse of mainstream Republican politics.
I do think James was wrong on a few fronts, but what I really did agree with was this odd approach that combined racism, juvenile kicks against conventional opinion, and bracketing everything under the banner of humour. I think more political actors need to take these chumps head-on and show them up for what they are. Merely ignoring them is not helping, and neither is taking on part of their lines and dressing them up in more appropriate language.
It really does make me worry about what is happening when these people become more mainstream, and we need to act now.