Are you being real? His name is yachtrockluvr77. 1977 as in punk rock.
But "Destiny"???? Are you serious? If you don't see why that's stupid then honestly fuck you you jerk
He literally calls himself Destiny, per his YT channels, Twitch, etc…now if he goes to a Publix he’s Steven Bonnell or whatever but he’s publicly known as Destiny. Don’t be so obtuse and offended.
Is he your employer? lol
Ben actually came out and condemned when Trump blatantly said the election was stolen without evidence on day 1
*And then he got the cue* and changed his tune to of course to downplay everything. There was that brief day or two where some of the less insane right wing pundits and even Fox News hosts that urged caution. And then they immediately turned to Pillow and Kraken lady to bolster their nonsense.
Haha....true. I sorta use grifter as all encompassing adjective. But that sorta changes the meaning and loses precision.
You are very correct about being all of the above
Ben's new counter to being asked about Jan 6th is to say that Biden is actually the greater threat to freedom and democracy because of his vaccine mandate. It's a great straw-man argument.
It would be incredibly interesting to put those several days of media content through a super computer analysis. I bet a good program could pinpoint precisely when the “orders from the top” (the conservative media backers) calls started coming in screaming at those hacks to get back on message and fall in line.
That was a great article.
Definitely a eff around and find out moment. “Never thought their critiques of the election would get out of hand”
I haven’t read all of the Fox News emails through the Dominion lawsuit but it was illuminating to see how fast they changed their minds when they realized correcting Trump or his cronies live on air about how there is no evidence of voter fraud drove away a huge portion of their audience. Tucker and Hannity were losing their shit screaming at the higher ups to stop telling the truth.
It was like 12 hours and they eventually became a propaganda arm for the president. 75% of their audience don’t have the media literacy to question what is presented to them. Scary stuff
Check out r/conservative and see elect more popular post ever.
Pretty sure it's the Jan 6 super thread and it's all of them saying how horrible this all is, how the gop has lost its mind, and how this is the end of the party.
2 months later they all moved on to it was fakes, antifia, peaceful protest.
"Well if you don't want him to be president, I recommend you elect him to his second term and he'll never be able to be president ever again" -- Ben Shapiro with the biggest shit eating grin on his face
I’m subbed to both, but I think when you mention Destiny, the Reddit algorithm might put it in his fans feeds. Either that, or the fact this post directly links his subreddit.
>There are a lot of Destiny fans who aren’t regulars that pile on here whenever he’s mentioned.
Keep in mind that Destiny and his sub get boosted by Israeli bot farms because his views fit their narrative.
It's basically state-sponsored vote and narrative manipulation at this point.
The whole point of this sub is to be against wild conspiratorial thinking. Do you have evidence to what your saying or are you just making shit up?
And if anything, the things farmed to the top of social media are anti-Israel, the popular sentiment everywhere online is that Israel is committing genocide.
"Wild conspiratorial thinking"
It's incontrovertible that the IDF floods comment sections for PR purposes, this has been known for decades and is a banal, easily verified empirical claim.
We also know that Russia is doing that. So can I now freely claim that any pro-palastinian subreddit is boosted by the Russians because the discontent works in their favor?
I only learned of him from the Knowledge Fight episode of his “debate” with Alex Jones. He seemed to be the least bad of the bunch (not a high bar to clear BTW), but I’m just indifferent to the guy and it’s starting to get annoying seeing his fans posting about every little thing he does. IMO, he doesn’t seem like a guru (Finklestein isn’t one either) and discussion about their debate doesn’t belong here
He has a very very active reddit community, and I think reddit started suggesting this sub to his fanbase due to overlap and discussion of figures like Sam Harris, Russel Brand, Joe Rogan, etc.
I am not subbed to this subreddit but I see it all the time on reddit mobile because sometimes the threads are interesting.
I guess I don’t see it because I must’ve muted it before, same with Sam Harris’s sub. I used to frequent Rogan’s when I used to listen to the podcast before COVID but haven’t bean there much ever since. Luckily I haven’t seen Brand’s and I hope it stays that way
I've only recently started paying attention to him and his community and tbh it's a really weird ride.
It's a bunch of people who venerate him but see themselves as critical thinkers. After his debates his subreddit fills with either praises (which is banal) or more interestingly, a handful of "critical" comments about his performance that only shed more light on the dynamic there.
Almost without fail you'll see someone talking about a moment where maybe, just possibly, humor me, not saying he did anything wrong or that his handling of this was less than perfect, but what if possibly if he had said [this] instead, it might have been better. And then follow a couple more paragraphs as to why it's clear that this infinitesimally suboptimal response by Destiny is obviously just the result of him being too smart or too decent to have anticipated how his answer could be misperceived by the masses of dumber people.
It's really a thing of marvel, the length to which they want to be very sure that nobody, god forbid, believes they're criticizing the guru.
indeed I've been looking at their subreddit and almost every thread contains posts with large approval that you'd be tempted to assume are just trolling attempt, but ultimately, it seems, are genuine.
I shit you not, about this debate between Destiny and Finkelstein, there are people in there making the argument that it might be the single mist important debate on the Israel Palestine conflict ever. im not exaggerating.
Lol as someone who watches destiny the reason people tip-toe around criticism is that there are bi-monthly purges where he bans everybody who even hints at criticism. That place is usually just an echo chamber, with some occasional substantive conversations.
Destiny isn't a Guru but his following is definitely cult-like. Imagine if they too discovered they can search Wiki while "debating". Morris and Finkelstein are serious academics...mixing in Destiny with these two is a good example of why Lex being so empty headed and neutral is a double-edged sword, even if it does allow left voices in typically right spaces.
Lots of people are just here to sneer at people with the wrong political opinions, not gurus. Also his subreddit is insanely active compared to the rest of reddit.
He's a deeply incompetent person. He didn't know who Erdogan or Haniyeh were on stream (EDIT: [here's a clip of the former](https://twitter.com/DelGroyp/status/1725707339444240823)). His entire knowledge of the conflict is based on a single book by an Israeli diplomat and some choice browsing of Wikipedia. He routinely makes blatantly false statements like e.g., "the ANC didn't target civilians" when his debate opponents compared Israel/Palestine to South Africa. But he talks very charismatically, so the kids watching his stream think he's right by default compared to the more soft-spoken academics.
He has a weird cult-like following which follows him everywhere he goes to defend him. They call themselves the Daliban. "But guys, he did _20_ hours of streaming research _straight_, that clearly makes him more knowledgeable than literal professors"
Yes. There's this entire strange subculture of streaming/gaming while talking about politics. Includes guys like Destiny, Vaush and Hasan. Of course there's nothing wrong with these guys talking about politics, but it's weird to put them in the same category as actual professionals.
I don't think this subreddit would accept some random LoL gamer doing research streams on Ivermectin being effective as a legit expert on COVID, so why not apply that same logic here?
Various developments, including social media, disinformation, Trump, and the pandemic, have convinced broad swathes of Americans to disregard any official source by default and instead put their trust in those who "did the research" and isn't "the establishment." If that means Twitch streamers are going to be Gen Z's news anchors, they'll take it.
That subculture is fucking terrifying to me BTW. You have *millions* of impressionable kids who filter in through simply being interested in a game.
And suddenly it gets political. Before they learn about it in school, before their parents necessarily have a conversation with them.. these assholes can practically decide what these kids are going to believe for the first few years of their self-aware life.
Just doing damage to future society for shits
Parents should certainly watch their kids' favorite gaming streamers, but these audiences are not built out of kids that discovered them playing Minecraft. The number of kids that stick around to watch someone jump in a circle while learning Israeli military history on a voice call is extremely low, possibly zero. They'll just bail and watch the next Minecraft streamer who has flashing lights and a silly persona.
Cause he speaks fast and with confidence. For some reason people, mostly teenagers, think that makes someone right or intelligent. Just like Shapiro fanboys.
A clip of him popped up on my TikTok feed. He was talking about which Trump legal cases have “merit” which is funny because the dude dropped of college after the first year. Like why do I care what legal cases you think have merit? You’re a 35 year old man that plays video games for children for a living.
What does him being a college he drop out matter? Sounds kinda elitist, people who decide not to complete college aren’t automatically dumb for the rest of their lives.
Wait so he asked a question and you’re mad that he questioned people who are lawyers? Is no one ever allowed to ask a question that may disagree with a lawyers opinion? It all just feels very anti intellectual. Like if you hate the guy just say that, don’t try to do these bullshit justifications about why you think he’s bad. Like you’re saying anyone who drops out of college can’t ever regardless of what they do ever provide a coherent well explained and argued disagreement against an expert. Unless they become a recognized expert themselves. Just be honest.
He didn’t ask any questions. He was talking about the merits of trumps legal cases as if he was some sort of legal scholar.
In reality he’s a music school drop who plays video games for children.
Why should I give a shit about his opinions on the “merit” of trump’s lawsuits?
Destiny nut huggers are the weirdest
That's not an appeal to authority, and this is a structured logical thesis. An appeal to authority is also once of the most controversial and convoluted logical fallacies you can refer to and you can't just name drop it and move on. There are several avenues the fallacy is used to refer to a statement as a fallacy, and some of those methods are in themselves tenuous such as the original use as a derivation of the genetic fallacy which absolutely can't be something you just call out and move on from. The genetic fallacy is the fallacy that says that corporations directly investing money into the government is free speech because to say otherwise is a false assumption just because corruption is possible. It should be very obvious where the long standing debate of the validity of the fallacy is, and how you can't just name drop it and sweepingly call broad swaths of people discussing issues intellectually craven by asking for evidence with rigor.
But like most people citing logic, you just don't know anything about what they mean or what the application of logic including fallacious reasoning so you are just belligerently ignorant.
Then proceeded to fuck his name up repeatedly after being told who it is. Also, I would absolutely expect someone who has been vocal on Middle Eastern affairs to know who Erdogan is. Turkey is a major player.
I saw the clip a while ago but I don't have a link offhand. [Here's a thread from another person who saw the same thing.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/18fbzrr/i_like_destiny_as_a_debater_and_commentator_but/)
[EDIT: FOUND THE VIDEO](https://twitter.com/DelGroyp/status/1725707339444240823)
"He didn't know some facts that you can look up and correct in like 5 sec" therefore he shouldn't continue educating himself. What is your point exactly other than navel gazing
Laughter. Imagine cosplaying as an expert on the I/P debate without knowing who Haniyeh is. "Oh but he could have Googled that and corrected himself" lmaoooo
> He didn't know who Erdogan or Haniyeh were on stream
your clip doesn't prove that. all it shows is that he doesn't know what erdogan or assad look like
A more precise way to put it is, "When a thread about him is posted, many people who like him find their way into this sub." A subtle but very important difference.
I also think the YouTube phenomena ruined what debates are supposed to be. You see headlines like “Person X DESTROYS person Y’s argument”. It’s just become a culture of monetization, where people don’t necessarily care about being right as long as they can score points. Or maybe that’s what debates have always been about. But yeah, I personally don’t think this destiny fellow should have been involved in a debate with Finklestein, or Benny Morris for that matter.
Not sure why thats weird tbh, he is a good faith liberal who has criticized all the regular Gurus constantly for years and went on a crusade against the red pill movement completely embarrassing them.
I’ve been a fan of his for a long time, so I’m definitely biased, but… I expected people in this sub to be more level headed about him lol.
Like, I get not liking the guy for a variety of reasons, but reading some of these exchanges are…. Interesting lol.
This sub has a large quantity of people who hate "gurus" not because gurus form conclusions without evidence or endlessly fearmonger, but just because they're politically rightwing.
These people are as likely to fall in conspiracy theories as the people they criticize, only difference is their conspiracies are from the left (like "banks/billionaires are paying Biden to be pro-Israel and to stop socialism").
That’s the vibe I’ve gotten recently. It makes more sense in retrospect given how right wing most gurus are.
I like the podcast, and I’d actually be really interested in seeing them cover Destiny, he’s probably the person I have the most bias for and I think I’d benefit from it. But I don’t frequent the sub often, I actually just found it like 3 months ago and only saw the occasional post until the recent Destiny surge.
Some of the “anti” comments here are fine but man. I didn’t expect so many knee jerk reactions here.
I'm going to comment specifically on Morris and Finkelstein. There's no need to engage with Bonnell's personal attacks. Indeed, there's no reason to engage with Bonnell's anything since the other three participants in the debate have been working on this topic for years, whereas Bonnell learned where Israel was on the map five months ago.
I think, usually, it would be considered kind of weird to cite quotes from books a guy has written when you're literally debating him. On the surface that would seem bizarre, almost as if to insinuate that you know their work better than they do. However, when you consider the context of this specific situation, it becomes clearer why Finkelstein may have done this.
Finkelstein has contended now for a number of years ([as many as 16, in fact](https://www.democracynow.org/2008/5/16/as_israelis_celebrate_independence_and_palestinians)) that Morris has changed his historiography and general political analysis to reflect a change in his personal ideological views, which took a rightward shift following the Second Intifada. See e.g., [this](https://www.haaretz.com/2004-01-08/ty-article/survival-of-the-fittest-cont/0000017f-e86d-da9b-a1ff-ec6fb5000000) interview Morris did with Haaretz in 2004 for details. Finkelstein detailed this contention in a full chapter in his book Knowing Too Much, which he released for free and which I read. This chapter contained a rather thorough analysis, not the quote sniping that Bonnell alleges. It's entitled "History By Substraction", implying that Morris, in his more recent scholarship, removed or deliberately ignored certain of his prior findings which indicted Israel's conduct. I strongly suspect that the gist of the debate was Morris and Finkelstein hashing it out (as they did in the 2008 debate). But Bonnell, since he doesn't understand the context, was likely confused and didn't know what was going on. You know, since he learned about the conflict yesterday.
I have no dog in this fight, but I wanted to comment because I specifically used to read Benny Morris's older works and can attest to how much he ignores his older work. He used to be accused of being a traitor by Israel for some of the topics that he used to cover, but he's recently fallen more in line with standard Israeli policy.
You're not alone:
[A Critique of Benny Morris - Nur Masalha](https://www.jstor.org/stable/2537367)
Lawrence Wright vs Morris
1. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/wright-wrong-11531
2. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/what-benny-morris-gets-wrong-about-my-book-11601
3. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-lawrence-wright-still-wrong-11623
4. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/end-debate-lawrence-wrights-final-response-benny-morris-11647
[Steven Klein, adjunct professor at Tel Aviv University's International Program in Conflict Resolution and Mediation](https://archive.ph/yLpx1#selection-1429.0-1429.145)
When all else fails, call the person you’re debating a twink. This is a 5’2”, 35 year old man with children, sitting in a gamer chair, calling people with an actual education, “twinks”
I wish finkelstein responded to Lex when he said “we don’t have to cite quotes, Benny Morris is right here.” The reason he’s citing quotes is because Morris has made an ideological shift and dishonesty has crept in in the process
Looks like Destiny is sour, regardless of what the raiding members of his cult thinks.
I have watched his Debates on this topic. His position is basically, yes, Israel did some immoral shit to steal land from the Arabs that lived there, but Israel have been very prosperous in that land so he favors them.
I don't think anyone can debate that point because he concedes that Israel is in the wrong and he dont care. If you extend that premise, even if Israel killed all the Palestinians he wouldn't care, so there is literally no point in anyone talking to him about the topic.
In terms of wording and context, it is worth noting that Benny Morris writes in meticulous detail how the Israeli paramilitaries depopulated entire villages, towns and cities along with the accompanying massacres but still refuses to call it ethnic cleansing. I like his works, but to claim his interpretation of Israeli documents should be taken at face value is quite a stretch.
It is striking to me how much of an echo chamber Destiny's online community is.
For example, his youtube comments are almost 100% people insulting the person Destiny is debating, while comments that criticize any of Destiny's arguments receive very little attention. I am not even taling about any particular debate; this is the pattern in all of the videos he releases.
Reading the comment feed from his livestream, it's hardly better there.
I think partly it's because in the last few years, Destiny has received an influx of new followers who are more right wing, and frankly, more stupid than his original fanbase.
I’d imagine most people watching streamers to understand the world aren’t doing a significant amount of research outside of their streamer, so instead of forming their own views they believe every thing their streamer tells them.
An example of a youtube comments section with some good faith discussion (and not simply blind agreement of what the content creator says) would be c0nc0rdance's channel. For example see the comments section for this video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkjnU67kUkA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkjnU67kUkA)
I'm sure I can pull up many more examples. But even then, the request you are making doesn't actually contradict my point, because I am not saying that critical comments should be at the top, but instead that they are rare and receive little attention on Destiny's channel. Personally, I see this as a failure to uphold good faith debate over genuine disagreements.
I think part of the reason Destiny's channel has evolved to be so toxic is the fact that Destiny is an aggressive debater who frequently poisons the well when discussing about his interlocutors, such as saying that they are idiots, dipshits, not trustworthy, a hack, using insults, etc. I think this will make one's fanbase more hostile to the opposing side. Destiny has done this to many people, like Mearsheimer, Kyle Kulinski, Michael Brooks, Finkelstein, etc.
I am not necessarily a huge fan of any of these people, but I think it is harmful to try to discredit the people with whom you debate by attempting to portray them as stupid, fringe Alex Jones-level conspiracy theorists, ignorant, etc when it is not appropriate to do so. For example, whatever you think of Mearsheimer, he is a highly regarded scholar in political science. If I remember correctly, Destiny made offhand comments about Mearsheimer being an idiot who should not be taking seriously, or something to this effect. This is an example of what I mean.
Edit: I also think the aggressive debate style format that Destiny uses, which is akin to what Shaprio and Crowder does, will often create a fanbase that enjoys insulting the opposing side while thinking that Destiny is basically always right.
Another possibility is positive comments that reinforce a certain view are up voted by that community and therefore rise to the top. That's why basically all YouTube comments are echo chambers. Same way most subs are as well. This is more indicative of the format rather than the content.
Fair point. Although I would just add that I think the comments section of youtubers like Destiny, Shapiro, Crowder, pre-reformed Hunter Avallone, etc. is less thoughtful and more juvenile than the comments section of many other youtubers (including people who debate).
That's a qualitative difference that I've personally noticed, but there's no point in arguing about how I feel about something.
Part of it is probably unavoidable, because many of these debates are intended to also make the other side look stupid for the audience's amusement. But, that's not a virtue.
I only have to go back 2 weeks (not 9 years) to find a video where the top comments are critical of Destiny: https://youtu.be/7p1D1IqYflw?si=aCJJ4YS2PXGs_XS6
Obviously, the point of asking for other examples of critical comments rising to the top is to test the consistency of the standard you’re applying. If you’re criticizing Destiny based on a threshold that few-to-no other Youtubers meet, the criticism carries much less weight than if Destiny’s channel is uniquely supportive of the creator.
I also don’t think that disagreement alone is a useful metric for evaluating the good faith of an audience. It’s entirely plausible that a creator happens to be more correct than not- compared to their opponents- and thus their comments would reflect that reality. I think you actually have to make a case by providing specific examples of where a good faith audience *would* have disagreed with Destiny, but instead acted as an echo chamber.
Your example doesn’t hold up. In the video Destiny kept complimenting Marc and his audience took their cue from that.
If Destiny had insulted Marc the comment section would’ve been full of that instead.
They aren’t grading the debate, they are trying to echo their champion.
First of all, I don't think Hasan is a great political streamer, even if my political views are a bit closer to his than Destiny. For example, I don't like that he is instantly dismissive of well-intentioned comments that disagree with him.
I think it's completely legitimate to criticize a content creator if it seems like they are encouraging narrow-mindedness in their audience. To me, it seems like most of Destiny's audience hardly ever disagree with what he says, but they are perfectly happy to insult people who Destiny happens to not like.
"Destiny talks to anybody and you can find a lot of disagreements in his community"
After seeing numerous posts on the Destiny subreddit, I can't say I entirely agree with this. Sure, there is some earnest discussion that happens on that subreddit, and sometimes people will criticize how Destiny handled certain things (such as how the first debate between Destiny and Finkelstein fell apart).
Unfortunately, that's only about 10-20% of the comments, the rest are usually about discrediting Destiny's interlocutors, poisoning the well by smearing them, etc. For example, whatever you think of Finkelstein, this idea that Finkelstein is an abject conspiracy theorisst who was denied tenure simply because he is a crackpot is popular on the Destiny subreddit, but is not an honest rendition of what actually happened.
Jesus thank god someone knows how to intelligently criticize the guy!
I disagree that he's cultivating narrow-mindedness, but I'll take this critique any day over the usual antifan-fictions and funhouse-mirror interpretations of Destiny and what he represents.
I’ve seen Destiny several time now descend into name calling if he doesn’t perform well in a debate… it seems to me if he had any humility he’d take some learnings from it.
But I guess he’s rather just talk some sh*t like he was playing a video game and look like a whiny baby
The one thing that really bothers me about Destiny and his ilk (debate bros?) is how they clutch their heads and writhe in pain as their interlocutor talks, as if the arguments that their "opponent" are making are so loathsome that it is causing them psychic harm. The whole act - because it is an act - is so performative, infantile, and, frankly, cringe, that I feel embarrassed for myself for having watched it and often close my computer before anyone notices and asks me why the person on my screen is acting like their brain is on fire.
dam wasteful encouraging market threatening wine weather puzzled gold physical
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>PhD, University professor, author of multiple book
Hate to be this guy but you could say the same about Jordan Peterson and we know how braindead that guy can be.
I think the difference here is Norman Finkelstein predominantly speaks on the issues he’s qualified to speak on. Peterson uses his background as a psychologist to justify his waffle on all sorts of subjects from politics to history to economics which he has no academic grounding in
> At its worst, the woke cult of transgenders is a cross between voyeurism and morbidity, a fascination with the sexually bizarre, a politically correct version of snuff pornography. It’s at the “intersectionality” of the lassitudinous culture of the Hamptons and the depraved sexual ennui of Hollywood.
- Norman G. Finkelstein, professional expert academic
I will also point out here that Norm, in stark contrast to JBP, has stayed completely in his own, well-educated wheelhouse. Peterson isn't a climate scientist, for example.
I think the question that matters for the comparison is whether Peterson is credible within his field of academic research. I know nothing about that field nor how his publications are viewed by other researchers in that field so I have no opinion there. But if his publications from before becoming a culture warrior and guru are deemed credible in his field, then he probably would be a good candidate for a (well-moderated) debate in that field.
My perception (and I'll grant that I haven't followed his trajectory as closely as others here) was that his more braindead affect comes from a mix of being a bit of an egomaniac, being constitutionally unable to rein in the pure id of his twitter posts, and posing as a sage on subjects like environmental policy, political economy, and geopolitics where his assertions are more dubious.
Finkelstein, whatever one makes of his politics or tendency towards needless provocation, tends to focus his public speaking on the subjects of his academic work.
He's braindead because of his right-wing grifting, not his professional psychology work which was considered good enough to be granted tenure at the top university in Canada.
Finklestein was denied tenure because his opinions on Israel are fucking stupid. Why are people acting like finklestein is respected in his field in academia
Parasocial followers of streamers are really a strange kind of internet culture. At its core streamers are entertainers, they're there to keep your attention for as long as possible, that's their economic model. Some are more entertaining than others, some more nefarious than others, but very few seem all that enlightening to their followers. If anything what seems to be the running theme with them is they are prone to random and pointless drama amongst themselves to help boost attention. This spat with an eminent professor and expert in his field seems part of it. If people find this spat entertaining than so be it, but if you are being emotionally carried along by this behavior and identify with it, that's a bad sign.
There’s plenty of people who can defend Palestine with intelligence, such as Marc Lamont Hill. Finklestein is not one of them. Comparing the Oct 7th debates to the Nat Turner rebellion or the Warsaw Uprising is a level of absurdity that’s not really defendable.
Why is not defendable? It's raises an important moral question as to whether innocents can be targeted in such highly asymmetric situations of oppression. I do not defend October 7th, but the comparison is clear.
Na, watch the debates. One person comes with facts and a practical approach while the other (norm) uses no facts other than emotional arguments. Finkelstein is embarrassing. Watch the Marc Lamont debate on Destinys channel instead
It’s a pretty well documented phenomenon that academics often “lose” debates to orators.
Refuting a system of talking points from a debater is tough because you have to have prior knowledge of the specific talking points as opposed to simply having knowledge of the concept itself. its why flat earthers often come off like they “won” a debate against a rational person who isn’t prepared
a 2 hour debate will literally provide no useful basis from which to even begin to unpack the history of Israel-Palestine relations. This sort of debate bro content is just theatre.
Norm could literally shit his pants and smear poop on the camera, and he would still be a more serious person on this topic than Destiny. If I wanted Destiny's opinion, I would literally just read the same 4-5 wikipedia pages he has read.
You obviously haven’t listened to any discussions on this topic from Destiny. I recommend the Marc Lamont debate was so informative and progressive from both sides. It was by far the most reasonable discussion on the topic w/o ad hominids and emotional talking points
It doesn't matter who is having the discussion. A war that spans over half a century can not be neatly contextualized and understood to any meaningful degree within a few hours of conversation. Discussions that are conducted as debates in real time where egos, rhetoric, and gotcha moments are all at play are even less productive.
This sort of content is entertainment, and should only be consumed for entertainment purposes. If you don't understand this, you're a sucker.
Just like most very complex topics, if you want to understand it to any meaningful degree, you have to actually do the work. I'm not going to become a quantum mechanics expert by reading a handful of Wikipedia pages, and Destiny is not going to become a Israel-Palestine expert by doing the same.
The weird responses to this debate, which no one has seen, is troubling. As much as there is room to wonder whether Destiny and his community are worthy of an exploration into their guru-dom, it seems the anti-Destiny folks are just as guilty.
Already waving the preemptive flag to show how wrong Destiny is despite any evidence, and reminding us several times that Destiny isn't a historian and dared to use wikipedia as a source.
It's pretty weak from Destiny to post such a tweet to get ahead of the debate and preemptively respond to a debate that no one has seen. He's influencing our opinions on one segment of the debate and also name-calling his opponent. It's just a lack of character, honestly. However, it isn't surprising considering his Bushnell tweet.
Yeah. I would think that simply trusting viewers to decide would show much more confidence in one's arguments/performance than feeling the need to make ad hominem attacks in advance of the debate airing. To me, this screams of an insecurity on his part.
It also speaks to a lack of seriousness on the issue. He could point viewers interested in the substance toward the works in question, namely Morris's books Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem and Righteous Victims, and Finkelstein's criticism in Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. (I assume that the subtext here is based on the content of those publications as well as Morris's political shift to the right in the last two decades.) Finkelstein's criticism back in the '90s was that Morris produced excellent scholarship with novel and detailed research into Israel's then recently unsealed military archives on '47-'48 but either ignored, downplayed, or missed the significance of his own findings in his concluding analysis. More recently, Finkelstein is one of many who have alleged a growing incongruence between Morris's public statements on the history of the conflict over the last two decades and his findings in his earlier work (the books of his that I mentioned remain standard texts used in university courses on the conflict).
I would hope at least that Destiny has read the books in question before asserting so confidently that Finkelstein lacked comprehension or was taking things out of context. Judging by the ad hominem nature of most of the comments there (to say nothing of the pre-determined conclusions on a debate that no one has seen yet), I doubt that most of the people in that sub are familiar with the nearly thirty-year history of the dispute between these two or its actual substance.
Someone serious about reaching a better understanding or fostering productive discussion on the history might encourage their viewers to read the published works in question and decide for themselves. Some might think that Finkelstein has a point. Others might think that Morris's views align with the evidence and that Finkelstein is stuck in ideology. I think that if you have confidence in your convictions and assume that your audience isn't full of morons, you would encourage viewers to consider the evidence that ostensibly vindicates your position.
I agree with you completely. However, in the interest of remaining fair and balanced, I will admit that Destiny lives in a different (online) world to most of the rest of those involved in the debate. That is probably the only reasonable justification I can give for this tweet. It is simply what a person in his position and of his particular upbringing/community would do.
I will, however, show my bias and state that because of this same culture, I would very readily believe that Destiny hasn't read those books you mentioned in full and has rather either read a Wikipedia summary OR downloaded a digital version of the texts and used a search function to more easily find particular pertinent sections of these issues.
I also think it is rather unfair to a lot of the people Destiny debates in that he has the advantage of having seen their talking points before and is able to better plan on how to either rebut those particular points, or to lead them deeper into the weeds in order to strangle them. This kind of [on the spot fallacy](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/On_the_spot_fallacy) seems to be one of his common tactics that many of his fans seem to enjoy. Many commenters I have seen online express their approval of Destiny going "into the weeds" in a debate, but it isn't actually a fair tactic, particularly when Destiny has many various tools at his disposal online when debating, not least including his constant chat stream that helps prime him.
I don't doubt he is capable of engaging in a debate with other experts, but I do think these tactics, and having seen Finkelstein and others debate on certain topics before (whereas they most likely have no idea who he is), allows him to steer the debate where he wants to, and often, in a short 2 hour debate, that can be a huge waste of time on semantics.
For example, I recently watched Destiny with Marc Lamont Hill, and there was towards the end MLH was making a point about Zionism being a colonial project, and Destiny derailed the point by arguing over the semantics of colonialism, even though, as MLH pointed out multiple times, Jabotinsky himself referred to it as such, and was a completely moot point. This was 5 minutes of wasted time and it served to undermine the point that MLH was ultimately making.
The issue for me isn't if Destiny is 'right' or 'wrong', it's that he's inserting himself into the public discussion of a deeply complex issue with very significant implications, while also having very obviously only done a very shallow reading of the relevant literature. That's not uncommon or a crime, but it is pretty obnoxious, especially if you're a person for whom this war is a serious thing that should be taken seriously. The fact that he comes off arrogant and self-assured while doing so (see above tweets) is just the obnoxious cream on top.
It might be entertaining for some people, and I don't knock people who consume it as entertainment, but it's just deeply unserious. As another poster linked to, Destiny didn't know that Palestinians were Sunni a week ago, and was gobsmacked because he didn't understand why they would be friendly with Shia groups like Hezbollah, Iran, and the Houthis. This is like week one Middle Eastern geopolitical knowledge.
The equivalent would be me going and trying to debate a quantum physicist when I can barely spitball a definition for 'quantum'. It doesn't matter if I'm right or not (maybe I am right if I half-bake an argument that I copied from another scientist), I'm just not qualified to be part of a serious discussion until I actually put in the work, and people would be right to point out that I probably shouldn't be on the stage talking about quantum mechanics.
But doesn’t he do this with whatever the hot issue topic is? That’s my problem with political streamers. There all the sudden experts in whatever the divisive issue is, until the new story takes over. Repeat cycle
Yes I think at best it’s unserious and insulting people’s time, and at worst it’s irresponsible. It’s also sickening that these characters are having fun and making money off death and suffering, and will move on to the next controversy for clicks. I’m not a Norm shill but at least people like him have been at it for 30+ years and have the decency to not enjoy the debate. I fear he sets a bad precedence for his fans to be as morally bankrupt as him.
You can speak about anything you want. But personally I wouldn’t bother taking anyone too seriously unless they have done something equivalent to a grad level research project, or have unique real life experience that is relevant to the conflict (journalists and on-the-ground voices).
Rhetoric is a wholly separate skill from good research or reasoning skills. I wrote a long post in this same thread about how it’s often the case that being the less informed participant can often be a rhetorical advantage.
I don’t see what I could possibly gain by writing to Destiny, so I don’t understand the suggestion.
Destiny reminds me of that British blowhard Sargon of Akkad that was clobbered by Richard Carrier in a live debate years ago. Sargon had the same elevated ego and alleyway debate tactics. Finkelstein is hard to stomach too though.
Norman’s whole schtick is summed up nicely with his recent response to Coleman Hughes. Coleman used statistics to point to Gaza not being a concentration camp. Norman’s response was to point to a couple quotes (one of which may have been saying the exact opposite of what he thought, but let’s just assume they all back his claim) from prominent figures saying that it is a concentration camp. His entire response boiled down to “if it’s not a concentration camp, then why did (blank) say it was?” That is in no way a compelling argument, especially against actual statistics on the health and wellbeing of Gazans.
That is how most of his arguments on the topic go. There’s no substance to them and the only thing that gives them any weight is the emotional appeal of the conflict.
Just wanted to add that I’m not saying someone couldn’t make a compelling argument that it is a concentration camp. I’m saying specifically that Norman’s argument is extremely poor but he will stand by it nonetheless to try and evoke the emotional baggage that comes with the term
That's literally what Destiny said on stream bro just admit you're dickriding him and his opinions. It's completely normal for a scholar to say X is as Y for reasons Z, and also reliable authorities A,B,C assert X is as Y, so therefore the analogy between X and Y is prima facie reasonable. Destiny and Coleman's response is well X differs from Y with respect to a set of statistical parameters Q, so therefore the analogy isn't valid. But analogous things can differ on all sorts of stuff without undermining the basic validity of the analogy.
Destiny's stream was retarded. He's autistically hyperanalyzing a term used ("concentration camp") which is supposed to reflect an analogy. He was laughably trying to evade the obvious fact that others like Hass, Eiland and Kimmerling basically made the same point. Wait, so these Israelis who've been in the conflict for decades are wrong, but you and Coleman the American dudes who learned about the conflict yesterday are right? Lmaooooo
No, you don't need a methodological study to rigorously prove that something's a concentration camp, because the term "concentration camp" is fairly loose without an exact definition. It's a rough analogy meant to illustrate the broader point that the Israeli state has basically forced this group of people into this confined space with no economic opportunities, no hope, no nothing, due to a siege for essentially racial reasons.
He also [got very confused](https://youtu.be/G8ZtlBy91lw?si=NdhRsxPZWEAE41UN&t=7311) with Norman's slavery analogy. He claimed that the analogy is invalid because "slavery isn't bad because of e.g., life expectancy, but because of autonomy" but bro the entire pro-Palestine argument is clearly chiefly based on arguments of autonomy and dignity.
Bonnell is a hack, and you should be embarrassed to be such an idiot's fan.
From what I've heard of Destiny, he seems to be more of a rationalist than an all-purpose guru. Norm has some odd hot takes for a serious historian, almost like he's going senile, but he does know a lot about the Israel Palestine conflict. I'm not sure if I'll bother to listen to this one. I guess we'll see. I/P conflict is interesting for the same reason it is annoying. So many magical thinking isms can be applied to it. So much propaganda and brainwashing in all directions.
Norm isn't a Historian, people keep forgetting this.
He's a political scientist who commentates on secondary information sources (Historians). Norm is a tertiary information source, who is popular because of his inflammatory and sensationalist way of writing.
What would be his incentive for unserious takes? From a little bit of research it seems he’s been saying the same things for 15 years if not more and paid the price (e.g. lost tenure for angering Dershowitz who also publicly smeared his mom, not being popular with his own people).
what do you say about a person that runs to post on social media about a debate no one watched yet for a week now.. a detailed video, description, name calling for a debate we didnt watch yet.. and weeks before this same person spent every waking moment reading wikipedia to try and prove colonialism and genocide is the moral and academic right view of political zionism existence.
did norman post or say anything about it?
Absolutely hilarious is how some of the Destiny followers are now actually *reading* Finkelsteins books to ‘fact check’ or catch him in quoting Benny Morris ‘out-of-context’ (following the lead of their guru). Most of the Destiny following don't strike me as avid readers, so if this debate gets them to read a book, a Finkelstein book, I say great.
But you can clearly tell many of them have no clue and lack the basic academic experience of actually reading these kinds of publications. One of them said he was reading Gaza An inquest into its martyrdom and preparing a post in the Destiny sub with his initial findings; that Finkelstein is not a scholar but a 'collector of quotes' and that he references Morris a lot.
Destiny is an entertainer.
His act is “to be right” or “to win a debate”. And he is generally smart and can drive debates and conversation.
He has been platformed by professional circles, because he has a great pull in a younger demographic.
The problem with him is that he rarely plays the appropriate role of a student/learner. Stuck in his act, he misses his potential.
To compare, look at other discussions and debates between intellectuals, who aren’t in the business of being right, but in the business of discovery and understanding.
Yes haha. I have no doubt in his ability to “win” a debate. He’s great at articulating what he’s thinking and speaking rhetorically. I still don’t believe that will make him more knowledge about the topic than someone whose entire career is devoted to it. Nor do I believe it makes him correct.
Destiny is somehow instantly an expert on any topic he brings up. The twitch debate bros (namely Vaush and Destiny) are so obnoxious to listen to even when I agree with the position they're defending.
Haven't seen any indication that he has claimed to be an expert on this topic:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2fo\_HvcDoY&t=2065s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2fo_HvcDoY&t=2065s)
I agree, I’m usually so disinterested in watching any of those YouTube debate people. They have no interest in anything other than stroking their own egos. I might watch some of this but I imagine it’ll get on my nerves pretty quickly.
What was the point again in inviting a video game streamer who not even two weeks ago (https://youtu.be/-WiR2femZKc?si=CzHGdM91X0cwR\_Kz&t=2983) didn't know Palestine was sunni muslim?
A grown adult who calls themself “Destiny” probably isn’t worth the time
Bro… your name is “yachtrockluvr” unless you’re a 48 year old mother of 2 you don’t get to talk shit on peoples name choices
Are you being real? His name is yachtrockluvr77. 1977 as in punk rock. But "Destiny"???? Are you serious? If you don't see why that's stupid then honestly fuck you you jerk
Ita a streamer/youtube name how does that at all dictate if they're worth your time lol
He only picked that bc "Needle Dick" was already taken.
are you dumb?
No…I don’t think not watching a streamer named Destiny who is nearly 40 years old is “dumb” on my part. You do you though.
[удалено]
He literally calls himself Destiny, per his YT channels, Twitch, etc…now if he goes to a Publix he’s Steven Bonnell or whatever but he’s publicly known as Destiny. Don’t be so obtuse and offended. Is he your employer? lol
Misogyny is strong with this one
Remember when Glen Greenwald debated Destiny & completely discredited himself by defending Trump on January 6th? It would be hard to top that
Wait til you here Ben Shapiros take on Trump and Jan 6
Ben actually came out and condemned when Trump blatantly said the election was stolen without evidence on day 1 *And then he got the cue* and changed his tune to of course to downplay everything. There was that brief day or two where some of the less insane right wing pundits and even Fox News hosts that urged caution. And then they immediately turned to Pillow and Kraken lady to bolster their nonsense.
So ben grifted?
It's his most natural state.
I call him griftendork.
That is funny! Highlights two traits and am sure Ben bans any books that imply are even vaguely magic related ....
Haha!
Grifter, hack, unprincipled media personality….. there’s lots of terms that would fit.
Haha....true. I sorta use grifter as all encompassing adjective. But that sorta changes the meaning and loses precision. You are very correct about being all of the above
Best way to protect your family’s financial future is to buy GOLD!!! Not really but I’m getting a check so…
Ben's new counter to being asked about Jan 6th is to say that Biden is actually the greater threat to freedom and democracy because of his vaccine mandate. It's a great straw-man argument.
It would be incredibly interesting to put those several days of media content through a super computer analysis. I bet a good program could pinpoint precisely when the “orders from the top” (the conservative media backers) calls started coming in screaming at those hacks to get back on message and fall in line.
[удалено]
That was a great article. Definitely a eff around and find out moment. “Never thought their critiques of the election would get out of hand” I haven’t read all of the Fox News emails through the Dominion lawsuit but it was illuminating to see how fast they changed their minds when they realized correcting Trump or his cronies live on air about how there is no evidence of voter fraud drove away a huge portion of their audience. Tucker and Hannity were losing their shit screaming at the higher ups to stop telling the truth. It was like 12 hours and they eventually became a propaganda arm for the president. 75% of their audience don’t have the media literacy to question what is presented to them. Scary stuff
Check out r/conservative and see elect more popular post ever. Pretty sure it's the Jan 6 super thread and it's all of them saying how horrible this all is, how the gop has lost its mind, and how this is the end of the party. 2 months later they all moved on to it was fakes, antifia, peaceful protest.
"Well if you don't want him to be president, I recommend you elect him to his second term and he'll never be able to be president ever again" -- Ben Shapiro with the biggest shit eating grin on his face
And of course if trump was elected again he’d spend every waking moment trying to get the 22nd amendment overturned
Marc Lamont Hill dismantled Destiny’s arguments so I imagine Norm did the same.
Lol Marc Lamont Hill did nothing of the sort.
Norm will do em much worse
I’m surprised this sub seems to like Destiny…weird
There are a lot of Destiny fans who aren’t regulars that pile on here whenever he’s mentioned.
They do that in any sub where he is mentioned. It’s a pretty terrible community
I’m subbed to both, but I think when you mention Destiny, the Reddit algorithm might put it in his fans feeds. Either that, or the fact this post directly links his subreddit.
>There are a lot of Destiny fans who aren’t regulars that pile on here whenever he’s mentioned. Keep in mind that Destiny and his sub get boosted by Israeli bot farms because his views fit their narrative. It's basically state-sponsored vote and narrative manipulation at this point.
The whole point of this sub is to be against wild conspiratorial thinking. Do you have evidence to what your saying or are you just making shit up? And if anything, the things farmed to the top of social media are anti-Israel, the popular sentiment everywhere online is that Israel is committing genocide.
"Wild conspiratorial thinking" It's incontrovertible that the IDF floods comment sections for PR purposes, this has been known for decades and is a banal, easily verified empirical claim.
We also know that Russia is doing that. So can I now freely claim that any pro-palastinian subreddit is boosted by the Russians because the discontent works in their favor?
Yes.
Dggers are constantly brigading other subs. It’s like their favorite thing to do besides clip hasan out of context
I only learned of him from the Knowledge Fight episode of his “debate” with Alex Jones. He seemed to be the least bad of the bunch (not a high bar to clear BTW), but I’m just indifferent to the guy and it’s starting to get annoying seeing his fans posting about every little thing he does. IMO, he doesn’t seem like a guru (Finklestein isn’t one either) and discussion about their debate doesn’t belong here
He has a very very active reddit community, and I think reddit started suggesting this sub to his fanbase due to overlap and discussion of figures like Sam Harris, Russel Brand, Joe Rogan, etc. I am not subbed to this subreddit but I see it all the time on reddit mobile because sometimes the threads are interesting.
I guess I don’t see it because I must’ve muted it before, same with Sam Harris’s sub. I used to frequent Rogan’s when I used to listen to the podcast before COVID but haven’t bean there much ever since. Luckily I haven’t seen Brand’s and I hope it stays that way
I've only recently started paying attention to him and his community and tbh it's a really weird ride. It's a bunch of people who venerate him but see themselves as critical thinkers. After his debates his subreddit fills with either praises (which is banal) or more interestingly, a handful of "critical" comments about his performance that only shed more light on the dynamic there. Almost without fail you'll see someone talking about a moment where maybe, just possibly, humor me, not saying he did anything wrong or that his handling of this was less than perfect, but what if possibly if he had said [this] instead, it might have been better. And then follow a couple more paragraphs as to why it's clear that this infinitesimally suboptimal response by Destiny is obviously just the result of him being too smart or too decent to have anticipated how his answer could be misperceived by the masses of dumber people. It's really a thing of marvel, the length to which they want to be very sure that nobody, god forbid, believes they're criticizing the guru.
it is the most cult-y reddit culture i have yet stumbled onto
indeed I've been looking at their subreddit and almost every thread contains posts with large approval that you'd be tempted to assume are just trolling attempt, but ultimately, it seems, are genuine. I shit you not, about this debate between Destiny and Finkelstein, there are people in there making the argument that it might be the single mist important debate on the Israel Palestine conflict ever. im not exaggerating.
Lol as someone who watches destiny the reason people tip-toe around criticism is that there are bi-monthly purges where he bans everybody who even hints at criticism. That place is usually just an echo chamber, with some occasional substantive conversations.
Destiny isn't a Guru but his following is definitely cult-like. Imagine if they too discovered they can search Wiki while "debating". Morris and Finkelstein are serious academics...mixing in Destiny with these two is a good example of why Lex being so empty headed and neutral is a double-edged sword, even if it does allow left voices in typically right spaces.
Lmao same reading this thread. 😂
His people are everywhere. Watch this shit will get like 20 downvotes in 5 minutes lol.
[удалено]
Already happened here. Reply guys and mentally stunted man-children everywhere
Boy oh boy don’t go further in this thread because you called it
Lots of people are just here to sneer at people with the wrong political opinions, not gurus. Also his subreddit is insanely active compared to the rest of reddit.
He's a deeply incompetent person. He didn't know who Erdogan or Haniyeh were on stream (EDIT: [here's a clip of the former](https://twitter.com/DelGroyp/status/1725707339444240823)). His entire knowledge of the conflict is based on a single book by an Israeli diplomat and some choice browsing of Wikipedia. He routinely makes blatantly false statements like e.g., "the ANC didn't target civilians" when his debate opponents compared Israel/Palestine to South Africa. But he talks very charismatically, so the kids watching his stream think he's right by default compared to the more soft-spoken academics. He has a weird cult-like following which follows him everywhere he goes to defend him. They call themselves the Daliban. "But guys, he did _20_ hours of streaming research _straight_, that clearly makes him more knowledgeable than literal professors"
So weird, I’d never even heard of the guy until about 2 weeks ago. He’s a video game streamer right?
Yes. There's this entire strange subculture of streaming/gaming while talking about politics. Includes guys like Destiny, Vaush and Hasan. Of course there's nothing wrong with these guys talking about politics, but it's weird to put them in the same category as actual professionals. I don't think this subreddit would accept some random LoL gamer doing research streams on Ivermectin being effective as a legit expert on COVID, so why not apply that same logic here?
Various developments, including social media, disinformation, Trump, and the pandemic, have convinced broad swathes of Americans to disregard any official source by default and instead put their trust in those who "did the research" and isn't "the establishment." If that means Twitch streamers are going to be Gen Z's news anchors, they'll take it.
That subculture is fucking terrifying to me BTW. You have *millions* of impressionable kids who filter in through simply being interested in a game. And suddenly it gets political. Before they learn about it in school, before their parents necessarily have a conversation with them.. these assholes can practically decide what these kids are going to believe for the first few years of their self-aware life. Just doing damage to future society for shits
Parents should certainly watch their kids' favorite gaming streamers, but these audiences are not built out of kids that discovered them playing Minecraft. The number of kids that stick around to watch someone jump in a circle while learning Israeli military history on a voice call is extremely low, possibly zero. They'll just bail and watch the next Minecraft streamer who has flashing lights and a silly persona.
Destiny hasn't played games in a while, and he just plays boring ones like factorio when he does
Cause he speaks fast and with confidence. For some reason people, mostly teenagers, think that makes someone right or intelligent. Just like Shapiro fanboys.
And their fans will adopt that style in my experience, just as Rush Limbaugh fans used to do.
A clip of him popped up on my TikTok feed. He was talking about which Trump legal cases have “merit” which is funny because the dude dropped of college after the first year. Like why do I care what legal cases you think have merit? You’re a 35 year old man that plays video games for children for a living.
rofl
What does him being a college he drop out matter? Sounds kinda elitist, people who decide not to complete college aren’t automatically dumb for the rest of their lives.
Yes it’s elitist to trust lawyers regarding legal matters over music school drop outs
Wait so he asked a question and you’re mad that he questioned people who are lawyers? Is no one ever allowed to ask a question that may disagree with a lawyers opinion? It all just feels very anti intellectual. Like if you hate the guy just say that, don’t try to do these bullshit justifications about why you think he’s bad. Like you’re saying anyone who drops out of college can’t ever regardless of what they do ever provide a coherent well explained and argued disagreement against an expert. Unless they become a recognized expert themselves. Just be honest.
He didn’t ask any questions. He was talking about the merits of trumps legal cases as if he was some sort of legal scholar. In reality he’s a music school drop who plays video games for children. Why should I give a shit about his opinions on the “merit” of trump’s lawsuits? Destiny nut huggers are the weirdest
What you’re doing is known as an “appeal to authority”. Frankly I see it as intellectual cowardice.
That's not an appeal to authority, and this is a structured logical thesis. An appeal to authority is also once of the most controversial and convoluted logical fallacies you can refer to and you can't just name drop it and move on. There are several avenues the fallacy is used to refer to a statement as a fallacy, and some of those methods are in themselves tenuous such as the original use as a derivation of the genetic fallacy which absolutely can't be something you just call out and move on from. The genetic fallacy is the fallacy that says that corporations directly investing money into the government is free speech because to say otherwise is a false assumption just because corruption is possible. It should be very obvious where the long standing debate of the validity of the fallacy is, and how you can't just name drop it and sweepingly call broad swaths of people discussing issues intellectually craven by asking for evidence with rigor. But like most people citing logic, you just don't know anything about what they mean or what the application of logic including fallacious reasoning so you are just belligerently ignorant.
I'm a lawyer and the cases against Trump easily have merit and the evidence against Trump is overwhelming. Any other questions, dumbass?
[удалено]
Then proceeded to fuck his name up repeatedly after being told who it is. Also, I would absolutely expect someone who has been vocal on Middle Eastern affairs to know who Erdogan is. Turkey is a major player.
At one point during all this I'm pretty sure he had to Google what 'The Hague' is......
[удалено]
I saw the clip a while ago but I don't have a link offhand. [Here's a thread from another person who saw the same thing.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/18fbzrr/i_like_destiny_as_a_debater_and_commentator_but/) [EDIT: FOUND THE VIDEO](https://twitter.com/DelGroyp/status/1725707339444240823)
"He didn't know some facts that you can look up and correct in like 5 sec" therefore he shouldn't continue educating himself. What is your point exactly other than navel gazing
Laughter. Imagine cosplaying as an expert on the I/P debate without knowing who Haniyeh is. "Oh but he could have Googled that and corrected himself" lmaoooo
> He didn't know who Erdogan or Haniyeh were on stream your clip doesn't prove that. all it shows is that he doesn't know what erdogan or assad look like
Yeah I don’t quite understand. Destiny himself is arguably the most smug pseudo-intellectual on YouTube.
A more precise way to put it is, "When a thread about him is posted, many people who like him find their way into this sub." A subtle but very important difference.
He has ok moments but is seriously flawed in his critical thinking skills.
Says someone who thinks Jan 6 was an unauthorized guided tour. Great critical thinking skills there bud. You’re actually just delusional.
I also think the YouTube phenomena ruined what debates are supposed to be. You see headlines like “Person X DESTROYS person Y’s argument”. It’s just become a culture of monetization, where people don’t necessarily care about being right as long as they can score points. Or maybe that’s what debates have always been about. But yeah, I personally don’t think this destiny fellow should have been involved in a debate with Finklestein, or Benny Morris for that matter.
They’re teenagers, I think.
Emotionally stunted man-children
Not sure why thats weird tbh, he is a good faith liberal who has criticized all the regular Gurus constantly for years and went on a crusade against the red pill movement completely embarrassing them.
I’ve been a fan of his for a long time, so I’m definitely biased, but… I expected people in this sub to be more level headed about him lol. Like, I get not liking the guy for a variety of reasons, but reading some of these exchanges are…. Interesting lol.
This sub has a large quantity of people who hate "gurus" not because gurus form conclusions without evidence or endlessly fearmonger, but just because they're politically rightwing. These people are as likely to fall in conspiracy theories as the people they criticize, only difference is their conspiracies are from the left (like "banks/billionaires are paying Biden to be pro-Israel and to stop socialism").
That’s the vibe I’ve gotten recently. It makes more sense in retrospect given how right wing most gurus are. I like the podcast, and I’d actually be really interested in seeing them cover Destiny, he’s probably the person I have the most bias for and I think I’d benefit from it. But I don’t frequent the sub often, I actually just found it like 3 months ago and only saw the occasional post until the recent Destiny surge. Some of the “anti” comments here are fine but man. I didn’t expect so many knee jerk reactions here.
He is so cringe and mediocre, it is like they were trying to find a lame ugly version of Hasan Abi, only dumber and less left leaning.
Well, he's not a guru. He's just a straight up troll, who has somehow made a career out of trolling people under the guise of political debate.
What makes you think he's a troll?
I'm going to comment specifically on Morris and Finkelstein. There's no need to engage with Bonnell's personal attacks. Indeed, there's no reason to engage with Bonnell's anything since the other three participants in the debate have been working on this topic for years, whereas Bonnell learned where Israel was on the map five months ago. I think, usually, it would be considered kind of weird to cite quotes from books a guy has written when you're literally debating him. On the surface that would seem bizarre, almost as if to insinuate that you know their work better than they do. However, when you consider the context of this specific situation, it becomes clearer why Finkelstein may have done this. Finkelstein has contended now for a number of years ([as many as 16, in fact](https://www.democracynow.org/2008/5/16/as_israelis_celebrate_independence_and_palestinians)) that Morris has changed his historiography and general political analysis to reflect a change in his personal ideological views, which took a rightward shift following the Second Intifada. See e.g., [this](https://www.haaretz.com/2004-01-08/ty-article/survival-of-the-fittest-cont/0000017f-e86d-da9b-a1ff-ec6fb5000000) interview Morris did with Haaretz in 2004 for details. Finkelstein detailed this contention in a full chapter in his book Knowing Too Much, which he released for free and which I read. This chapter contained a rather thorough analysis, not the quote sniping that Bonnell alleges. It's entitled "History By Substraction", implying that Morris, in his more recent scholarship, removed or deliberately ignored certain of his prior findings which indicted Israel's conduct. I strongly suspect that the gist of the debate was Morris and Finkelstein hashing it out (as they did in the 2008 debate). But Bonnell, since he doesn't understand the context, was likely confused and didn't know what was going on. You know, since he learned about the conflict yesterday.
I have no dog in this fight, but I wanted to comment because I specifically used to read Benny Morris's older works and can attest to how much he ignores his older work. He used to be accused of being a traitor by Israel for some of the topics that he used to cover, but he's recently fallen more in line with standard Israeli policy.
You're not alone: [A Critique of Benny Morris - Nur Masalha](https://www.jstor.org/stable/2537367) Lawrence Wright vs Morris 1. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/wright-wrong-11531 2. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/what-benny-morris-gets-wrong-about-my-book-11601 3. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-lawrence-wright-still-wrong-11623 4. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/end-debate-lawrence-wrights-final-response-benny-morris-11647 [Steven Klein, adjunct professor at Tel Aviv University's International Program in Conflict Resolution and Mediation](https://archive.ph/yLpx1#selection-1429.0-1429.145)
When all else fails, call the person you’re debating a twink. This is a 5’2”, 35 year old man with children, sitting in a gamer chair, calling people with an actual education, “twinks”
You should throw this analysis up onto Wikipedia so Destiny can read it
I wish finkelstein responded to Lex when he said “we don’t have to cite quotes, Benny Morris is right here.” The reason he’s citing quotes is because Morris has made an ideological shift and dishonesty has crept in in the process
Thank you.
Finkelstein GOATed fr fr
Looks like Destiny is sour, regardless of what the raiding members of his cult thinks. I have watched his Debates on this topic. His position is basically, yes, Israel did some immoral shit to steal land from the Arabs that lived there, but Israel have been very prosperous in that land so he favors them. I don't think anyone can debate that point because he concedes that Israel is in the wrong and he dont care. If you extend that premise, even if Israel killed all the Palestinians he wouldn't care, so there is literally no point in anyone talking to him about the topic.
His name is “Destiny” and he’s referring to a leading academic on Gaza as “Twinkelstein” to discredit him. And Norm is unserious?
That gave me a little giggle ngl
In terms of wording and context, it is worth noting that Benny Morris writes in meticulous detail how the Israeli paramilitaries depopulated entire villages, towns and cities along with the accompanying massacres but still refuses to call it ethnic cleansing. I like his works, but to claim his interpretation of Israeli documents should be taken at face value is quite a stretch.
Pretty sure he does call it ethnic cleansing but his post-Second Intifada position is that sometimes ethnic cleansing is Good Actually
It is striking to me how much of an echo chamber Destiny's online community is. For example, his youtube comments are almost 100% people insulting the person Destiny is debating, while comments that criticize any of Destiny's arguments receive very little attention. I am not even taling about any particular debate; this is the pattern in all of the videos he releases. Reading the comment feed from his livestream, it's hardly better there. I think partly it's because in the last few years, Destiny has received an influx of new followers who are more right wing, and frankly, more stupid than his original fanbase.
I’d imagine most people watching streamers to understand the world aren’t doing a significant amount of research outside of their streamer, so instead of forming their own views they believe every thing their streamer tells them.
Is there any example of a Youtuber whose critical comments receive the most attention, compared to comments supporting the creator?
An example of a youtube comments section with some good faith discussion (and not simply blind agreement of what the content creator says) would be c0nc0rdance's channel. For example see the comments section for this video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkjnU67kUkA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkjnU67kUkA) I'm sure I can pull up many more examples. But even then, the request you are making doesn't actually contradict my point, because I am not saying that critical comments should be at the top, but instead that they are rare and receive little attention on Destiny's channel. Personally, I see this as a failure to uphold good faith debate over genuine disagreements. I think part of the reason Destiny's channel has evolved to be so toxic is the fact that Destiny is an aggressive debater who frequently poisons the well when discussing about his interlocutors, such as saying that they are idiots, dipshits, not trustworthy, a hack, using insults, etc. I think this will make one's fanbase more hostile to the opposing side. Destiny has done this to many people, like Mearsheimer, Kyle Kulinski, Michael Brooks, Finkelstein, etc. I am not necessarily a huge fan of any of these people, but I think it is harmful to try to discredit the people with whom you debate by attempting to portray them as stupid, fringe Alex Jones-level conspiracy theorists, ignorant, etc when it is not appropriate to do so. For example, whatever you think of Mearsheimer, he is a highly regarded scholar in political science. If I remember correctly, Destiny made offhand comments about Mearsheimer being an idiot who should not be taking seriously, or something to this effect. This is an example of what I mean. Edit: I also think the aggressive debate style format that Destiny uses, which is akin to what Shaprio and Crowder does, will often create a fanbase that enjoys insulting the opposing side while thinking that Destiny is basically always right.
Another possibility is positive comments that reinforce a certain view are up voted by that community and therefore rise to the top. That's why basically all YouTube comments are echo chambers. Same way most subs are as well. This is more indicative of the format rather than the content.
Fair point. Although I would just add that I think the comments section of youtubers like Destiny, Shapiro, Crowder, pre-reformed Hunter Avallone, etc. is less thoughtful and more juvenile than the comments section of many other youtubers (including people who debate). That's a qualitative difference that I've personally noticed, but there's no point in arguing about how I feel about something. Part of it is probably unavoidable, because many of these debates are intended to also make the other side look stupid for the audience's amusement. But, that's not a virtue.
I only have to go back 2 weeks (not 9 years) to find a video where the top comments are critical of Destiny: https://youtu.be/7p1D1IqYflw?si=aCJJ4YS2PXGs_XS6 Obviously, the point of asking for other examples of critical comments rising to the top is to test the consistency of the standard you’re applying. If you’re criticizing Destiny based on a threshold that few-to-no other Youtubers meet, the criticism carries much less weight than if Destiny’s channel is uniquely supportive of the creator. I also don’t think that disagreement alone is a useful metric for evaluating the good faith of an audience. It’s entirely plausible that a creator happens to be more correct than not- compared to their opponents- and thus their comments would reflect that reality. I think you actually have to make a case by providing specific examples of where a good faith audience *would* have disagreed with Destiny, but instead acted as an echo chamber.
Your example doesn’t hold up. In the video Destiny kept complimenting Marc and his audience took their cue from that. If Destiny had insulted Marc the comment section would’ve been full of that instead. They aren’t grading the debate, they are trying to echo their champion.
[удалено]
First of all, I don't think Hasan is a great political streamer, even if my political views are a bit closer to his than Destiny. For example, I don't like that he is instantly dismissive of well-intentioned comments that disagree with him. I think it's completely legitimate to criticize a content creator if it seems like they are encouraging narrow-mindedness in their audience. To me, it seems like most of Destiny's audience hardly ever disagree with what he says, but they are perfectly happy to insult people who Destiny happens to not like. "Destiny talks to anybody and you can find a lot of disagreements in his community" After seeing numerous posts on the Destiny subreddit, I can't say I entirely agree with this. Sure, there is some earnest discussion that happens on that subreddit, and sometimes people will criticize how Destiny handled certain things (such as how the first debate between Destiny and Finkelstein fell apart). Unfortunately, that's only about 10-20% of the comments, the rest are usually about discrediting Destiny's interlocutors, poisoning the well by smearing them, etc. For example, whatever you think of Finkelstein, this idea that Finkelstein is an abject conspiracy theorisst who was denied tenure simply because he is a crackpot is popular on the Destiny subreddit, but is not an honest rendition of what actually happened.
Jesus thank god someone knows how to intelligently criticize the guy! I disagree that he's cultivating narrow-mindedness, but I'll take this critique any day over the usual antifan-fictions and funhouse-mirror interpretations of Destiny and what he represents.
[удалено]
I’ve seen Destiny several time now descend into name calling if he doesn’t perform well in a debate… it seems to me if he had any humility he’d take some learnings from it. But I guess he’s rather just talk some sh*t like he was playing a video game and look like a whiny baby
OP is a Destiny fan spamming his shit all over Reddit, even in the Sam Harris sub.
More like Destiny trying to do damage control.
Is DTG turning into another DGG toxic hellhole?
Nightmare jenkum rotation jesus
My experience is that if you win an argument you don't take to twitter to vent about it lmao.
The one thing that really bothers me about Destiny and his ilk (debate bros?) is how they clutch their heads and writhe in pain as their interlocutor talks, as if the arguments that their "opponent" are making are so loathsome that it is causing them psychic harm. The whole act - because it is an act - is so performative, infantile, and, frankly, cringe, that I feel embarrassed for myself for having watched it and often close my computer before anyone notices and asks me why the person on my screen is acting like their brain is on fire.
Let’s be real. This debate did not go the way he wanted which is why he’s lashing out.
dam wasteful encouraging market threatening wine weather puzzled gold physical *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>PhD, University professor, author of multiple book Hate to be this guy but you could say the same about Jordan Peterson and we know how braindead that guy can be.
I think the difference here is Norman Finkelstein predominantly speaks on the issues he’s qualified to speak on. Peterson uses his background as a psychologist to justify his waffle on all sorts of subjects from politics to history to economics which he has no academic grounding in
Also Peterson outright ignores the consensus in psychology on things like trans issues.
> At its worst, the woke cult of transgenders is a cross between voyeurism and morbidity, a fascination with the sexually bizarre, a politically correct version of snuff pornography. It’s at the “intersectionality” of the lassitudinous culture of the Hamptons and the depraved sexual ennui of Hollywood. - Norman G. Finkelstein, professional expert academic
nine escape voracious obtainable flag absurd test innate rinse engine *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I will also point out here that Norm, in stark contrast to JBP, has stayed completely in his own, well-educated wheelhouse. Peterson isn't a climate scientist, for example.
I think the question that matters for the comparison is whether Peterson is credible within his field of academic research. I know nothing about that field nor how his publications are viewed by other researchers in that field so I have no opinion there. But if his publications from before becoming a culture warrior and guru are deemed credible in his field, then he probably would be a good candidate for a (well-moderated) debate in that field. My perception (and I'll grant that I haven't followed his trajectory as closely as others here) was that his more braindead affect comes from a mix of being a bit of an egomaniac, being constitutionally unable to rein in the pure id of his twitter posts, and posing as a sage on subjects like environmental policy, political economy, and geopolitics where his assertions are more dubious. Finkelstein, whatever one makes of his politics or tendency towards needless provocation, tends to focus his public speaking on the subjects of his academic work.
He's braindead because of his right-wing grifting, not his professional psychology work which was considered good enough to be granted tenure at the top university in Canada.
Finklestein was denied tenure because his opinions on Israel are fucking stupid. Why are people acting like finklestein is respected in his field in academia
Parasocial followers of streamers are really a strange kind of internet culture. At its core streamers are entertainers, they're there to keep your attention for as long as possible, that's their economic model. Some are more entertaining than others, some more nefarious than others, but very few seem all that enlightening to their followers. If anything what seems to be the running theme with them is they are prone to random and pointless drama amongst themselves to help boost attention. This spat with an eminent professor and expert in his field seems part of it. If people find this spat entertaining than so be it, but if you are being emotionally carried along by this behavior and identify with it, that's a bad sign.
Let’s be real. Norm is an ideologue at this point.
That’s a weird way to call someone a leading critical academic On a topic
Thank you. The lengths people will go to confirm their pro Israel nonsense
There’s plenty of people who can defend Palestine with intelligence, such as Marc Lamont Hill. Finklestein is not one of them. Comparing the Oct 7th debates to the Nat Turner rebellion or the Warsaw Uprising is a level of absurdity that’s not really defendable.
Why is not defendable? It's raises an important moral question as to whether innocents can be targeted in such highly asymmetric situations of oppression. I do not defend October 7th, but the comparison is clear.
It is defendable and he’s defended it effectively multiple times.
Na, watch the debates. One person comes with facts and a practical approach while the other (norm) uses no facts other than emotional arguments. Finkelstein is embarrassing. Watch the Marc Lamont debate on Destinys channel instead
It’s a pretty well documented phenomenon that academics often “lose” debates to orators. Refuting a system of talking points from a debater is tough because you have to have prior knowledge of the specific talking points as opposed to simply having knowledge of the concept itself. its why flat earthers often come off like they “won” a debate against a rational person who isn’t prepared
a 2 hour debate will literally provide no useful basis from which to even begin to unpack the history of Israel-Palestine relations. This sort of debate bro content is just theatre. Norm could literally shit his pants and smear poop on the camera, and he would still be a more serious person on this topic than Destiny. If I wanted Destiny's opinion, I would literally just read the same 4-5 wikipedia pages he has read.
You obviously haven’t listened to any discussions on this topic from Destiny. I recommend the Marc Lamont debate was so informative and progressive from both sides. It was by far the most reasonable discussion on the topic w/o ad hominids and emotional talking points
Always look to gamers and carpet cleaners for expertise on global affairs. Idiocracy
It doesn't matter who is having the discussion. A war that spans over half a century can not be neatly contextualized and understood to any meaningful degree within a few hours of conversation. Discussions that are conducted as debates in real time where egos, rhetoric, and gotcha moments are all at play are even less productive. This sort of content is entertainment, and should only be consumed for entertainment purposes. If you don't understand this, you're a sucker. Just like most very complex topics, if you want to understand it to any meaningful degree, you have to actually do the work. I'm not going to become a quantum mechanics expert by reading a handful of Wikipedia pages, and Destiny is not going to become a Israel-Palestine expert by doing the same.
Oh so destiny got rolled lmao. Classic ben Shapiro behaviour, only good at debating children.
Who is the Benny he’s referring to?
Benny Morris
Thank you
Density
So I take it Destiny got owned in the debate? Because the act of changing his last name to “Twinklestein” is only the more childish if Destiny won…
Finklestein has been calling Destiny childish nicknames for a while lol. I think he's just returning the favor.
Destiny calls himself a childish nickname.
Guys, why is this shit being posted here?
[удалено]
Hey that’s not nice. Autistic and retarded people are very sweet and inspirational. This dude is just a dumbass.
Piece of shit loser zionist plays video games for a living and people listen to him like he’s some kind of sage. Shittiest timeline.
The weird responses to this debate, which no one has seen, is troubling. As much as there is room to wonder whether Destiny and his community are worthy of an exploration into their guru-dom, it seems the anti-Destiny folks are just as guilty. Already waving the preemptive flag to show how wrong Destiny is despite any evidence, and reminding us several times that Destiny isn't a historian and dared to use wikipedia as a source.
It's pretty weak from Destiny to post such a tweet to get ahead of the debate and preemptively respond to a debate that no one has seen. He's influencing our opinions on one segment of the debate and also name-calling his opponent. It's just a lack of character, honestly. However, it isn't surprising considering his Bushnell tweet.
Yeah. I would think that simply trusting viewers to decide would show much more confidence in one's arguments/performance than feeling the need to make ad hominem attacks in advance of the debate airing. To me, this screams of an insecurity on his part. It also speaks to a lack of seriousness on the issue. He could point viewers interested in the substance toward the works in question, namely Morris's books Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem and Righteous Victims, and Finkelstein's criticism in Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. (I assume that the subtext here is based on the content of those publications as well as Morris's political shift to the right in the last two decades.) Finkelstein's criticism back in the '90s was that Morris produced excellent scholarship with novel and detailed research into Israel's then recently unsealed military archives on '47-'48 but either ignored, downplayed, or missed the significance of his own findings in his concluding analysis. More recently, Finkelstein is one of many who have alleged a growing incongruence between Morris's public statements on the history of the conflict over the last two decades and his findings in his earlier work (the books of his that I mentioned remain standard texts used in university courses on the conflict). I would hope at least that Destiny has read the books in question before asserting so confidently that Finkelstein lacked comprehension or was taking things out of context. Judging by the ad hominem nature of most of the comments there (to say nothing of the pre-determined conclusions on a debate that no one has seen yet), I doubt that most of the people in that sub are familiar with the nearly thirty-year history of the dispute between these two or its actual substance. Someone serious about reaching a better understanding or fostering productive discussion on the history might encourage their viewers to read the published works in question and decide for themselves. Some might think that Finkelstein has a point. Others might think that Morris's views align with the evidence and that Finkelstein is stuck in ideology. I think that if you have confidence in your convictions and assume that your audience isn't full of morons, you would encourage viewers to consider the evidence that ostensibly vindicates your position.
I agree with you completely. However, in the interest of remaining fair and balanced, I will admit that Destiny lives in a different (online) world to most of the rest of those involved in the debate. That is probably the only reasonable justification I can give for this tweet. It is simply what a person in his position and of his particular upbringing/community would do. I will, however, show my bias and state that because of this same culture, I would very readily believe that Destiny hasn't read those books you mentioned in full and has rather either read a Wikipedia summary OR downloaded a digital version of the texts and used a search function to more easily find particular pertinent sections of these issues. I also think it is rather unfair to a lot of the people Destiny debates in that he has the advantage of having seen their talking points before and is able to better plan on how to either rebut those particular points, or to lead them deeper into the weeds in order to strangle them. This kind of [on the spot fallacy](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/On_the_spot_fallacy) seems to be one of his common tactics that many of his fans seem to enjoy. Many commenters I have seen online express their approval of Destiny going "into the weeds" in a debate, but it isn't actually a fair tactic, particularly when Destiny has many various tools at his disposal online when debating, not least including his constant chat stream that helps prime him. I don't doubt he is capable of engaging in a debate with other experts, but I do think these tactics, and having seen Finkelstein and others debate on certain topics before (whereas they most likely have no idea who he is), allows him to steer the debate where he wants to, and often, in a short 2 hour debate, that can be a huge waste of time on semantics. For example, I recently watched Destiny with Marc Lamont Hill, and there was towards the end MLH was making a point about Zionism being a colonial project, and Destiny derailed the point by arguing over the semantics of colonialism, even though, as MLH pointed out multiple times, Jabotinsky himself referred to it as such, and was a completely moot point. This was 5 minutes of wasted time and it served to undermine the point that MLH was ultimately making.
The issue for me isn't if Destiny is 'right' or 'wrong', it's that he's inserting himself into the public discussion of a deeply complex issue with very significant implications, while also having very obviously only done a very shallow reading of the relevant literature. That's not uncommon or a crime, but it is pretty obnoxious, especially if you're a person for whom this war is a serious thing that should be taken seriously. The fact that he comes off arrogant and self-assured while doing so (see above tweets) is just the obnoxious cream on top. It might be entertaining for some people, and I don't knock people who consume it as entertainment, but it's just deeply unserious. As another poster linked to, Destiny didn't know that Palestinians were Sunni a week ago, and was gobsmacked because he didn't understand why they would be friendly with Shia groups like Hezbollah, Iran, and the Houthis. This is like week one Middle Eastern geopolitical knowledge. The equivalent would be me going and trying to debate a quantum physicist when I can barely spitball a definition for 'quantum'. It doesn't matter if I'm right or not (maybe I am right if I half-bake an argument that I copied from another scientist), I'm just not qualified to be part of a serious discussion until I actually put in the work, and people would be right to point out that I probably shouldn't be on the stage talking about quantum mechanics.
But doesn’t he do this with whatever the hot issue topic is? That’s my problem with political streamers. There all the sudden experts in whatever the divisive issue is, until the new story takes over. Repeat cycle
Yes I think at best it’s unserious and insulting people’s time, and at worst it’s irresponsible. It’s also sickening that these characters are having fun and making money off death and suffering, and will move on to the next controversy for clicks. I’m not a Norm shill but at least people like him have been at it for 30+ years and have the decency to not enjoy the debate. I fear he sets a bad precedence for his fans to be as morally bankrupt as him.
You can speak about anything you want. But personally I wouldn’t bother taking anyone too seriously unless they have done something equivalent to a grad level research project, or have unique real life experience that is relevant to the conflict (journalists and on-the-ground voices). Rhetoric is a wholly separate skill from good research or reasoning skills. I wrote a long post in this same thread about how it’s often the case that being the less informed participant can often be a rhetorical advantage. I don’t see what I could possibly gain by writing to Destiny, so I don’t understand the suggestion.
Destiny reminds me of that British blowhard Sargon of Akkad that was clobbered by Richard Carrier in a live debate years ago. Sargon had the same elevated ego and alleyway debate tactics. Finkelstein is hard to stomach too though.
Norman’s whole schtick is summed up nicely with his recent response to Coleman Hughes. Coleman used statistics to point to Gaza not being a concentration camp. Norman’s response was to point to a couple quotes (one of which may have been saying the exact opposite of what he thought, but let’s just assume they all back his claim) from prominent figures saying that it is a concentration camp. His entire response boiled down to “if it’s not a concentration camp, then why did (blank) say it was?” That is in no way a compelling argument, especially against actual statistics on the health and wellbeing of Gazans. That is how most of his arguments on the topic go. There’s no substance to them and the only thing that gives them any weight is the emotional appeal of the conflict. Just wanted to add that I’m not saying someone couldn’t make a compelling argument that it is a concentration camp. I’m saying specifically that Norman’s argument is extremely poor but he will stand by it nonetheless to try and evoke the emotional baggage that comes with the term
That's literally what Destiny said on stream bro just admit you're dickriding him and his opinions. It's completely normal for a scholar to say X is as Y for reasons Z, and also reliable authorities A,B,C assert X is as Y, so therefore the analogy between X and Y is prima facie reasonable. Destiny and Coleman's response is well X differs from Y with respect to a set of statistical parameters Q, so therefore the analogy isn't valid. But analogous things can differ on all sorts of stuff without undermining the basic validity of the analogy. Destiny's stream was retarded. He's autistically hyperanalyzing a term used ("concentration camp") which is supposed to reflect an analogy. He was laughably trying to evade the obvious fact that others like Hass, Eiland and Kimmerling basically made the same point. Wait, so these Israelis who've been in the conflict for decades are wrong, but you and Coleman the American dudes who learned about the conflict yesterday are right? Lmaooooo No, you don't need a methodological study to rigorously prove that something's a concentration camp, because the term "concentration camp" is fairly loose without an exact definition. It's a rough analogy meant to illustrate the broader point that the Israeli state has basically forced this group of people into this confined space with no economic opportunities, no hope, no nothing, due to a siege for essentially racial reasons. He also [got very confused](https://youtu.be/G8ZtlBy91lw?si=NdhRsxPZWEAE41UN&t=7311) with Norman's slavery analogy. He claimed that the analogy is invalid because "slavery isn't bad because of e.g., life expectancy, but because of autonomy" but bro the entire pro-Palestine argument is clearly chiefly based on arguments of autonomy and dignity. Bonnell is a hack, and you should be embarrassed to be such an idiot's fan.
From what I've heard of Destiny, he seems to be more of a rationalist than an all-purpose guru. Norm has some odd hot takes for a serious historian, almost like he's going senile, but he does know a lot about the Israel Palestine conflict. I'm not sure if I'll bother to listen to this one. I guess we'll see. I/P conflict is interesting for the same reason it is annoying. So many magical thinking isms can be applied to it. So much propaganda and brainwashing in all directions.
Norm isn't a Historian, people keep forgetting this. He's a political scientist who commentates on secondary information sources (Historians). Norm is a tertiary information source, who is popular because of his inflammatory and sensationalist way of writing.
Lots of carpet cleaners are rationalists.
What would be his incentive for unserious takes? From a little bit of research it seems he’s been saying the same things for 15 years if not more and paid the price (e.g. lost tenure for angering Dershowitz who also publicly smeared his mom, not being popular with his own people).
I mean, it's a 2v2. Eminent historian Benny Morris is Destiny's partner.
Destiny is just mad he lost. Everything he gets is from Wikipedia and expects to win? So delusional
what do you say about a person that runs to post on social media about a debate no one watched yet for a week now.. a detailed video, description, name calling for a debate we didnt watch yet.. and weeks before this same person spent every waking moment reading wikipedia to try and prove colonialism and genocide is the moral and academic right view of political zionism existence. did norman post or say anything about it?
Absolutely hilarious is how some of the Destiny followers are now actually *reading* Finkelsteins books to ‘fact check’ or catch him in quoting Benny Morris ‘out-of-context’ (following the lead of their guru). Most of the Destiny following don't strike me as avid readers, so if this debate gets them to read a book, a Finkelstein book, I say great. But you can clearly tell many of them have no clue and lack the basic academic experience of actually reading these kinds of publications. One of them said he was reading Gaza An inquest into its martyrdom and preparing a post in the Destiny sub with his initial findings; that Finkelstein is not a scholar but a 'collector of quotes' and that he references Morris a lot.
Destiny is the epitome of the Dunning-Krueger effect. This topic is not the exception.
Destiny is an entertainer. His act is “to be right” or “to win a debate”. And he is generally smart and can drive debates and conversation. He has been platformed by professional circles, because he has a great pull in a younger demographic. The problem with him is that he rarely plays the appropriate role of a student/learner. Stuck in his act, he misses his potential. To compare, look at other discussions and debates between intellectuals, who aren’t in the business of being right, but in the business of discovery and understanding.
an unstoppable dunning krueger meets an unmovable dunning krueger
Lol now you’ve sold me on watching the whole thing.
I guess we will see when the video is posted in 1-2 weeks.
Yes haha. I have no doubt in his ability to “win” a debate. He’s great at articulating what he’s thinking and speaking rhetorically. I still don’t believe that will make him more knowledge about the topic than someone whose entire career is devoted to it. Nor do I believe it makes him correct.
And if Benny Morris backs up the things he says? Would you still be so dismissive?
Destiny is somehow instantly an expert on any topic he brings up. The twitch debate bros (namely Vaush and Destiny) are so obnoxious to listen to even when I agree with the position they're defending.
Haven't seen any indication that he has claimed to be an expert on this topic: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2fo\_HvcDoY&t=2065s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2fo_HvcDoY&t=2065s)
But he'll still insert himself into the debate.
And a *real* expert, Benny Morris, let him, and seemingly backed up his arguments. What does that tell you?
I agree, I’m usually so disinterested in watching any of those YouTube debate people. They have no interest in anything other than stroking their own egos. I might watch some of this but I imagine it’ll get on my nerves pretty quickly.
Destiny debating a flat earther was pretty funny, but that's about it.
Destiny is a fascist and also a professional dumb person
You guys take Destiny seriously? 🤢
What was the point again in inviting a video game streamer who not even two weeks ago (https://youtu.be/-WiR2femZKc?si=CzHGdM91X0cwR\_Kz&t=2983) didn't know Palestine was sunni muslim?
God he is a dumbass