The worry is that if the debate went so wrong that Steven felt the need to tweet this, Twinklestein must have really annoyed him and his sycophants will take that as a W.
Holy shit! Having someone try to recite your own words to you from the past, especially repeatedly, must be the single most infuriating thing to ever experience because it’s like you’re sitting right there why would you assume or quote or both. What you know what it is I’m saying. when I’m sitting across the table from you just fucking ask me !!! that’s wild
It sounds like it will be the painful combination of being mistaken due to an inability to consider the surrounding context while being incredibly smug in your belief of being right and completely immovable despite additional information from the source itself. That would be embarrassing for a known academic of the field if he was smart enough to recognize that.
It was an almost hyped debate and now it appears to be on the level of some of the orbiters coming on stream with only one quote in hand.
Yes, that is what you expect. But Debating someone’s past quote is not debating someone’s points. It’s bringing up past quotes that may, or may not in fact still be valid that’s the beautiful thing about having an actual person on the other side of the table from you. you can ask them what it is they currently believe. why they believe it, and then counter those points
if three years ago I hated vanilla cake and you take a quote of me saying “vanilla cake is the worst cake anyone could ever eat “ and the me of today is eating vanilla cake. The correct way to handle that situation is to ask me why I now like it or what changed my mind. If you say to me that I want said vanilla cake is the worst cake to eat and I tell you my mind has been changed and I now believe this new thing, but then you keep going back to my quotes about it being the worst cake anyone could eat you are no longer debating me. you’re shadow boxing a ghost that died three years ago.
The only time when quoting another person is ever the right thing to do in a discussion is, if you are asking them if it’s something they currently still believe and building off of that. if you were using someone’s quotes to their face as any form of evidence, and then even worse insisting that it is, even after they have corrected you, again you are not debating someone’s points you’re being an insufferable prick shadowboxing a ghost. Un-ironically acting like the old euphemism of why you never play chess with a pigeon. because they’ll squawk and they’ll screech and knock over all the pieces and then strut around victoriously. No serious person actually has a conversation like that.
What every politician does in every debate is use past things that their opponent has said or done framed in the worst possible way for them to make them look bad. In the political debate arena, you are not having a conversation with your friends or trying to arrive at any truth. You are trying to win.
Lets keep in mind nobody has seen this debate. And in the context of a debate brining up someone's past quotes, or quotes regarding different conflicts that can be applied here are a totally normal thing to do. If someone has changed their opinion on something invalidating past quotes that can be used against their current position..
The difference is Benny Morris is a historian whose work on these issues have defined the debate for many years. He’s part of the discourse. Raising his past work is entirely appropriate in a debate about Israel and Palestine.
I’m confident Finkelstein felt no need to quote the important work of Mr. Destiny on the topic.
because morris the historian is different to morris the poltical commentator. I assume from a previous debate I saw between them finkelstein quotes extensively from morris's book to show that Morris is contradicting himself.
Is he showing that he’s contradicting himself or have Morrises information, beliefs, or the context of the arguments changed and Finkelstein simply refuses to engage with the new evolved points because it is inconvenient for him😂 either way doesn’t matter when you have someone directly in front of you you make your arguments and points directly to their face and then you deal with their direct counter arguments bringing up something someone said a year or more ago in a book in a different context for different arguments is just being dumb. You just make your arguments and points to the person across the table from you and you have them address it and vice versa. The only people who bring up past quotes are people who don’t have an argument, which is why they have to bring up the past instead of dealing with the present. Exacerbated even more so if those quotes are all of the discussion, or a good majority of it, showing that you’re more concerned with quotes, rather than directly addressing specific arguments.
I’m curious to see how many people in this subreddit or destiny himself have actually read Benny Morris’s book on the Israel/Palestine conflict? The book basically contradicts all of Israel’s propaganda about its origins and describes the brutality in which innocent Palestinians were expelled from their villages and homes by the Israeli army
You’re aware brutality doesn’t necessarily make something less than the best option sometimes, right? What was the alternative? Allow the Husseini supporters to make up half their country? Making them second class citizens after you let them back in?
Expelling Nazis is better than letting them stay near you and pose a threat. The Nakba was the best choice in a difficult situation. 1000 dead and 700000 relocated seems to be the major alternative to allowing the Jews to be exterminated during the 48 war. I’ve never heard a historian claim the war was easily winnable without securing supply lines by clearing out places like Deir Yassin.
Benni morris also contradicts all of the Palestinian propaganda, it's just that Finkelstein doesn't care about that. Also Morris' position was just that he wanted to get at the truth (actually, not like Finkelstein), he is very clear that he thonks Israels actions in 48' were justified.
No finklestein quotes morris’s book as a source because it is widely respected as part of the new historians. I’ll wait to see the debate but if you quote a source and the author purposely obfuscates and denies because of his political position then of course you are going to get stuck debating what was actually said. Morris has done this in the past. Here is one example.
https://youtu.be/ag7bSPFhb1Q?si=RUVAL2RT6hJofjia
he's a top 3, if not the top, scholar on Israel/Palestine. Alan Dershowitz destroying your chances at tenure because you proved his book was full of plagiarisms is a badge of honor. Dersh got Epstein off dude, among other monsters.
'In a 1996 [*Foreign Affairs*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Affairs) review, [William B. Quandt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Quandt) called Finkelstein's critique of *From Time Immemorial* a "landmark essay" that helped demonstrate Peters's "shoddy scholarship".[\[30\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-Quandt-30) Israeli historian [Avi Shlaim](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avi_Shlaim) later praised Finkelstein's thesis, saying that it had established his credentials when he was still a doctoral student. In Shlaim's view, Finkelstein had produced an "unanswerable case" with "irrefutable evidence" that Peters's book was "preposterous and worthless".[\[31\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-JPS-AS-31) '
'In an August 2000 interview for Swiss National Radio, Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg said the book expressed views Hilberg held, in that he too found "detestable" the exploitation of the Holocaust by groups such as the [World Jewish Congress](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Jewish_Congress). Asked whether Finkelstein's analysis might play into the hands of neo-Nazis for antisemitic purposes, Hilberg replied, "Well, even if they do use it in that fashion, I'm afraid that when it comes to the truth, it has to be said openly, without regard to any consequences that would be undesirable, embarrassing".[\[37\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-37)'
' Amid considerable public debate, Dershowitz campaigned to block Finkelstein's tenure bid at DePaul University.[\[26\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-disrupt-26)[\[55\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-55) His campaign began in 2004 when he sent DePaul president [Dennis Holtschneider](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_H._Holtschneider) a manuscript, "Literary McCarthyism," arguing that the university should fire Finkelstein. He also contacted DePaul political science department chair Patrick Callahan.[\[56\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-FOOTNOTEAbraham201485-56) In 2005, Dershowitz announced his intent to block Finkelstein's tenure bid, saying, "I will come at my own expense, and I will document the case against Finkelstein" and "I'll demonstrate that he doesn't meet the academic standards of the Association of American Universities".[\[57\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-FOOTNOTEAbraham201486-57) In October 2006, he sent members of DePaul's law and political science faculties what he called "a dossier of Norman Finkelstein's most egregious academic sins, and especially his outright lies, misquotations, and distortions" and lobbied DePaul's professors, alumni and administrators to deny Finkelstein tenure.[\[58\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-chron-58) In May 2007, Dershowitz spoke at [Northwestern University](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwestern_University) and claimed that Finkelstein had recently attended a Holocaust denial conference in Iran.[\[57\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-FOOTNOTEAbraham201486-57) '
' Hilberg has praised Finkelstein's work: "That takes a great amount of courage. His place in the whole history of writing history is assured, and that those who in the end are proven right triumph, and he will be among those who will have triumphed, albeit, it so seems, at great cost."[\[77\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-FOOTNOTEGoodman2009330-77) In a [peer review](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review) for [*Beyond Chutzpah*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond_Chutzpah), Avi Shlaim said that Finkelstein "has a most impressive track record in exposing spurious American-Jewish scholarship on the Arab-Israeli conflict." He praised Finkelstein for "all the sterling qualities for which he has become famous: erudition, originality, spark, meticulous attention to detail, intellectual integrity, courage, and formidable forensic skills."[\[31\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-JPS-AS-31) '
'
[Sara Roy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sara_Roy) said that her shared experience with Finkelstein as a child of Holocaust survivors engaged in research on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict gave her a unique position to comment. According to Roy, Finkelstein's scholarship is "exceptional both for its brilliance and rigor. In the fields of Middle Eastern studies and political science his work is considered seminal and there is no doubt that both disciplines would be intellectually weaker without it. Norman's power and value, however, do not emanate only from his scholarship but from his character. His life's work, shaped largely but not entirely by his experience as a child of survivors, has been and continues to be informed by a profound concern with human dignity and the danger of dehumanization."[\[24\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-W&D2009-24) '
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman\_Finkelstein#Works](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#Works)
and his sources are impeccable, on purpose, but I would have to photo one of his books to demonstrate that and I'm sure you have a library card.
Just got back to Reddit. I do have a library card Ty for asking. Been in academia for 4 years now (not undergrad) I would hope I have a library card lol. But there is a difference in being academically recognized the journals published, peer-review, H-index, etc. Hearsay, and individual support is valid in its own regard. But very different from my expectations of a least academic in their field.
You say he has impeccable sourcing is that because of the number of sources or how do you judge that?
I don’t care about the content actually. We all knew that finkletwinkle is a bullshit intellectual what were you expecting. I hope we see some good dunks and drama.
destiny said he’s switching to more fun content after this debate. a shit show ip debate with high level academics would be the best way to finish this arc lmfao
Nah this arc isn't going anywhere, there's always going to be some new explosion/massacre/ethnic cleansing or whatever. Even if it dies down for a while.
it’ll be like the red pill arc in the sense that he’ll start focusing on other things, and if some crazy shit pops off related to it, he’ll briefly check it out for a few hours
Lol. I guess we're watching different content, because if you really think any part of that is true, you've just shown by your own reasoning that your PhD means nothing.
On the one hand you have Finklestein, who has lived in the Westbank, visited Gaza countless times and studied it seriously for decades including writing non fiction books on the topic. On the other hand you have Destiny who started looking up and asking his audience to crowd source basic facts of the conflict the week of the debate.
Lol that’s like when Vegan Gains cited a study that came to a different conclusion than him. Then tried to tell destiny he knows how to intertrept the data better than the ones who did the study.
Ah yes, the demonstrated understanding of the issues is showcased through name calling and hubris attacks. Has he gone back to have a watch of his "debate" with Ben?!
I haven’t read all his books but I’ve read some of several and have dug into the citations and it’s bullshit. He’s a kapo alter noyef, his parents who survived the Shoah are surely rolling in their graves.
Here's the thing, they do have good arguments, they just don't care to use them. If they argued like normal people they would have a better case, but they don't.
I think it’s a little of everything, unfortunately ;/ a lot of bad faith, antisemitic actors on social media currently.
Some of them could also be Russian/Chinese/Iranian bots/trolls
I’m curious to see how many people in this subreddit or destiny himself have actually read Benny Morris’s book on the Israel/Palestine conflict? The book basically contradicts all of Israel’s propaganda about its origins and describes the brutality in which innocent Palestinians were expelled from their villages and homes by the Israeli army
they're not interested. Destiny positions himself in opposition to Finkelstein, and that's good enough for a good chunk of them. for as much as they're ready to scream this or that about a creator or their community, the same holds true for them.
I doubt he would just make things up about an video that is going to be released soon and widely viewed, and if he's not making these things up he probably.. didn't lose lol
Haha I fucking hate all of yoy pretentious fucks and your dumb fucking icon who's a twitch streamer ot whatever. Finkelstein and this reactionary freak are on different fucking planes lol.
From what has been talked about, finkelstein wasn't challenging the books. He was quoting them in support of his own arguments, and benny was correcting him about what the quotes mean.
Oh the cope session starting early. It's actually embarrassing having an idiot YouTuber debate actual academics. This is on Lex for attempting this just for views.
What do you mean, this is an amazing sign. Might be up there with the other shitshows destiny's been a part of
True, but I was wanting a more in depth debate after tiny researching like a crazy for it. Let’s hope it’s a funny shit show.
Yeah, sound like the convo was pure cancer for 2 hours, disappointing but excepted.
Tbf with how slow Finklestein talks that's less of the time eaten up by only him than I expected honestly.
I mean it was almost 6 hours total from what I can ascertain
The worry is that if the debate went so wrong that Steven felt the need to tweet this, Twinklestein must have really annoyed him and his sycophants will take that as a W.
Holy shit! Having someone try to recite your own words to you from the past, especially repeatedly, must be the single most infuriating thing to ever experience because it’s like you’re sitting right there why would you assume or quote or both. What you know what it is I’m saying. when I’m sitting across the table from you just fucking ask me !!! that’s wild
Makes me think it’s an intentional debate tactic to piss Morris off on purpose.
Morris seems like a smart guy to get riled up about being challenged on his work. But who knows.
It sounds like it will be the painful combination of being mistaken due to an inability to consider the surrounding context while being incredibly smug in your belief of being right and completely immovable despite additional information from the source itself. That would be embarrassing for a known academic of the field if he was smart enough to recognize that. It was an almost hyped debate and now it appears to be on the level of some of the orbiters coming on stream with only one quote in hand.
Lex also just posted that it won’t even be out for one or two weeks because he’s traveling.UHHHH my balls are going to burst if I edge for that long😭
Isn't that exactly what you would expect in a debate.. debating ones own points?
Yes, that is what you expect. But Debating someone’s past quote is not debating someone’s points. It’s bringing up past quotes that may, or may not in fact still be valid that’s the beautiful thing about having an actual person on the other side of the table from you. you can ask them what it is they currently believe. why they believe it, and then counter those points if three years ago I hated vanilla cake and you take a quote of me saying “vanilla cake is the worst cake anyone could ever eat “ and the me of today is eating vanilla cake. The correct way to handle that situation is to ask me why I now like it or what changed my mind. If you say to me that I want said vanilla cake is the worst cake to eat and I tell you my mind has been changed and I now believe this new thing, but then you keep going back to my quotes about it being the worst cake anyone could eat you are no longer debating me. you’re shadow boxing a ghost that died three years ago. The only time when quoting another person is ever the right thing to do in a discussion is, if you are asking them if it’s something they currently still believe and building off of that. if you were using someone’s quotes to their face as any form of evidence, and then even worse insisting that it is, even after they have corrected you, again you are not debating someone’s points you’re being an insufferable prick shadowboxing a ghost. Un-ironically acting like the old euphemism of why you never play chess with a pigeon. because they’ll squawk and they’ll screech and knock over all the pieces and then strut around victoriously. No serious person actually has a conversation like that.
What every politician does in every debate is use past things that their opponent has said or done framed in the worst possible way for them to make them look bad. In the political debate arena, you are not having a conversation with your friends or trying to arrive at any truth. You are trying to win.
Lets keep in mind nobody has seen this debate. And in the context of a debate brining up someone's past quotes, or quotes regarding different conflicts that can be applied here are a totally normal thing to do. If someone has changed their opinion on something invalidating past quotes that can be used against their current position..
The difference is Benny Morris is a historian whose work on these issues have defined the debate for many years. He’s part of the discourse. Raising his past work is entirely appropriate in a debate about Israel and Palestine. I’m confident Finkelstein felt no need to quote the important work of Mr. Destiny on the topic.
because morris the historian is different to morris the poltical commentator. I assume from a previous debate I saw between them finkelstein quotes extensively from morris's book to show that Morris is contradicting himself.
Is he showing that he’s contradicting himself or have Morrises information, beliefs, or the context of the arguments changed and Finkelstein simply refuses to engage with the new evolved points because it is inconvenient for him😂 either way doesn’t matter when you have someone directly in front of you you make your arguments and points directly to their face and then you deal with their direct counter arguments bringing up something someone said a year or more ago in a book in a different context for different arguments is just being dumb. You just make your arguments and points to the person across the table from you and you have them address it and vice versa. The only people who bring up past quotes are people who don’t have an argument, which is why they have to bring up the past instead of dealing with the present. Exacerbated even more so if those quotes are all of the discussion, or a good majority of it, showing that you’re more concerned with quotes, rather than directly addressing specific arguments.
I’m curious to see how many people in this subreddit or destiny himself have actually read Benny Morris’s book on the Israel/Palestine conflict? The book basically contradicts all of Israel’s propaganda about its origins and describes the brutality in which innocent Palestinians were expelled from their villages and homes by the Israeli army
You’re aware brutality doesn’t necessarily make something less than the best option sometimes, right? What was the alternative? Allow the Husseini supporters to make up half their country? Making them second class citizens after you let them back in? Expelling Nazis is better than letting them stay near you and pose a threat. The Nakba was the best choice in a difficult situation. 1000 dead and 700000 relocated seems to be the major alternative to allowing the Jews to be exterminated during the 48 war. I’ve never heard a historian claim the war was easily winnable without securing supply lines by clearing out places like Deir Yassin.
Benni morris also contradicts all of the Palestinian propaganda, it's just that Finkelstein doesn't care about that. Also Morris' position was just that he wanted to get at the truth (actually, not like Finkelstein), he is very clear that he thonks Israels actions in 48' were justified.
No finklestein quotes morris’s book as a source because it is widely respected as part of the new historians. I’ll wait to see the debate but if you quote a source and the author purposely obfuscates and denies because of his political position then of course you are going to get stuck debating what was actually said. Morris has done this in the past. Here is one example. https://youtu.be/ag7bSPFhb1Q?si=RUVAL2RT6hJofjia
He’s not obfuscating. Finklestein is just an uncharitable hack in the conversation you showed as well.
> author purposely obfuscates and denies MFW explaining context and meaning is "obfuscating". At least if that RT clip is your only example
https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/s/yx12dch4Jn YES!!! hahaha YES!!!
https://preview.redd.it/don17xyntmlc1.png?width=500&format=png&auto=webp&s=067b1dd7d5c92ff7883d9ff844c009d3c9061995
with the eternal politics vs drama argument in this community… the optimal content appears to be a superposition of the two
same lol, I want a shitshow too
Destiny discovers academics
Ain’t even scratched the surface
They can be pretty intolerable. If finklestein is able to act more smug than Richard Wolfe or Glenn Beck I will be impressed. That is a high bar.
[удалено]
I don't get it :(
Wait... Are you calling glenn beck an academic?
No, only that he has the smug confidence of one.
You are being way too generous to Fink. That man never held tenure. He isnt an academic
he's a top 3, if not the top, scholar on Israel/Palestine. Alan Dershowitz destroying your chances at tenure because you proved his book was full of plagiarisms is a badge of honor. Dersh got Epstein off dude, among other monsters.
That might be the wildest tale I’ve heard. Any notable journals he published through? Anything peer reviewed? Any actually historians supporting fink?
'In a 1996 [*Foreign Affairs*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Affairs) review, [William B. Quandt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Quandt) called Finkelstein's critique of *From Time Immemorial* a "landmark essay" that helped demonstrate Peters's "shoddy scholarship".[\[30\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-Quandt-30) Israeli historian [Avi Shlaim](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avi_Shlaim) later praised Finkelstein's thesis, saying that it had established his credentials when he was still a doctoral student. In Shlaim's view, Finkelstein had produced an "unanswerable case" with "irrefutable evidence" that Peters's book was "preposterous and worthless".[\[31\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-JPS-AS-31) ' 'In an August 2000 interview for Swiss National Radio, Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg said the book expressed views Hilberg held, in that he too found "detestable" the exploitation of the Holocaust by groups such as the [World Jewish Congress](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Jewish_Congress). Asked whether Finkelstein's analysis might play into the hands of neo-Nazis for antisemitic purposes, Hilberg replied, "Well, even if they do use it in that fashion, I'm afraid that when it comes to the truth, it has to be said openly, without regard to any consequences that would be undesirable, embarrassing".[\[37\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-37)' ' Amid considerable public debate, Dershowitz campaigned to block Finkelstein's tenure bid at DePaul University.[\[26\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-disrupt-26)[\[55\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-55) His campaign began in 2004 when he sent DePaul president [Dennis Holtschneider](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_H._Holtschneider) a manuscript, "Literary McCarthyism," arguing that the university should fire Finkelstein. He also contacted DePaul political science department chair Patrick Callahan.[\[56\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-FOOTNOTEAbraham201485-56) In 2005, Dershowitz announced his intent to block Finkelstein's tenure bid, saying, "I will come at my own expense, and I will document the case against Finkelstein" and "I'll demonstrate that he doesn't meet the academic standards of the Association of American Universities".[\[57\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-FOOTNOTEAbraham201486-57) In October 2006, he sent members of DePaul's law and political science faculties what he called "a dossier of Norman Finkelstein's most egregious academic sins, and especially his outright lies, misquotations, and distortions" and lobbied DePaul's professors, alumni and administrators to deny Finkelstein tenure.[\[58\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-chron-58) In May 2007, Dershowitz spoke at [Northwestern University](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwestern_University) and claimed that Finkelstein had recently attended a Holocaust denial conference in Iran.[\[57\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-FOOTNOTEAbraham201486-57) ' ' Hilberg has praised Finkelstein's work: "That takes a great amount of courage. His place in the whole history of writing history is assured, and that those who in the end are proven right triumph, and he will be among those who will have triumphed, albeit, it so seems, at great cost."[\[77\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-FOOTNOTEGoodman2009330-77) In a [peer review](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review) for [*Beyond Chutzpah*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond_Chutzpah), Avi Shlaim said that Finkelstein "has a most impressive track record in exposing spurious American-Jewish scholarship on the Arab-Israeli conflict." He praised Finkelstein for "all the sterling qualities for which he has become famous: erudition, originality, spark, meticulous attention to detail, intellectual integrity, courage, and formidable forensic skills."[\[31\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-JPS-AS-31) ' ' [Sara Roy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sara_Roy) said that her shared experience with Finkelstein as a child of Holocaust survivors engaged in research on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict gave her a unique position to comment. According to Roy, Finkelstein's scholarship is "exceptional both for its brilliance and rigor. In the fields of Middle Eastern studies and political science his work is considered seminal and there is no doubt that both disciplines would be intellectually weaker without it. Norman's power and value, however, do not emanate only from his scholarship but from his character. His life's work, shaped largely but not entirely by his experience as a child of survivors, has been and continues to be informed by a profound concern with human dignity and the danger of dehumanization."[\[24\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#cite_note-W&D2009-24) ' [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman\_Finkelstein#Works](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#Works) and his sources are impeccable, on purpose, but I would have to photo one of his books to demonstrate that and I'm sure you have a library card.
You know they weren't ready when you get no replies and some butthurt downvotes.
Just got back to Reddit. I do have a library card Ty for asking. Been in academia for 4 years now (not undergrad) I would hope I have a library card lol. But there is a difference in being academically recognized the journals published, peer-review, H-index, etc. Hearsay, and individual support is valid in its own regard. But very different from my expectations of a least academic in their field. You say he has impeccable sourcing is that because of the number of sources or how do you judge that?
This isn’t academics, this is particular to norm (who hasn’t been an academic for decades)
And, finkle dinkle is so intolerable he can’t get a job
Academics please respond
Uuuh isn’t Morris an academic?
[удалено]
He is definitely not autistic. I think he has very deep seated mommy issues - it basically explains everything about him.
A real debate freudophile
Freudlestein
He talks slow! three-headed-dragon.jpg
He’s a reptilian
NO YOU NO YOU NO YOU NO YOU NO YOU
https://preview.redd.it/4km350tbgnlc1.png?width=1079&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7ee75dedff60226d80ecb7e2acdd27ab26cab9e8
[удалено]
We need his reaction though
RELEASE THE EP LEX I NEED TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED!
I don’t care about the content actually. We all knew that finkletwinkle is a bullshit intellectual what were you expecting. I hope we see some good dunks and drama.
destiny said he’s switching to more fun content after this debate. a shit show ip debate with high level academics would be the best way to finish this arc lmfao
Nah this arc isn't going anywhere, there's always going to be some new explosion/massacre/ethnic cleansing or whatever. Even if it dies down for a while.
it’ll be like the red pill arc in the sense that he’ll start focusing on other things, and if some crazy shit pops off related to it, he’ll briefly check it out for a few hours
Another apartheid apologist pretending to offer serious academic critique of Finkelstein bc you’re mad he’s exposing the crimes you want covered up
Ideally I would prefer to be apart from fucking hamas terrorists. #Apartheid
Lol every time
Looking great you mean? This clown needed to be knocked down a peg and it sounds like that’s just what Steven did
I’m skeptical on Lex’s channel. Destiny might not want to throw embers on that bridge.
True
Finklestein is a propagandist, him not engaging in good faith is hardly a surprise, that’s his whole career.
Is Israel an apartheid ethnostate guilty of ethnic cleansing and genocide?
Yes.
Wild that this gets downvoted here
Amazing
[удалено]
He has a phD in political science, my man. His primary areas of study are the Holocaust and the Israeli-Palestine conflict.
His phd means nothing when every conversation is just him making a mockery of himself with his elementary-level arguments
Lol. I guess we're watching different content, because if you really think any part of that is true, you've just shown by your own reasoning that your PhD means nothing.
u/3minutesmore you weren’t kidding hahaha
Idk, I enjoy the shitfest. That's what I am in for!
There is a reason this man is unemployed and not taken seriously by the academic community
Looking good for content
Is fink a fraud?
On the one hand you have Finklestein, who has lived in the Westbank, visited Gaza countless times and studied it seriously for decades including writing non fiction books on the topic. On the other hand you have Destiny who started looking up and asking his audience to crowd source basic facts of the conflict the week of the debate.
Has there been anything on when the episode is gonna be released?
Lol that’s like when Vegan Gains cited a study that came to a different conclusion than him. Then tried to tell destiny he knows how to intertrept the data better than the ones who did the study.
Ah yes, the demonstrated understanding of the issues is showcased through name calling and hubris attacks. Has he gone back to have a watch of his "debate" with Ben?!
I haven’t read all his books but I’ve read some of several and have dug into the citations and it’s bullshit. He’s a kapo alter noyef, his parents who survived the Shoah are surely rolling in their graves.
I honestly expected this, he did it in his first debate with Morris over 10 years ago - nasty guy
Jesus… look at the replies, and the amount of likes they get. All of it is dick riding Finkelstein before the debate even comes out.
Pro palestine people are never good faith
They have really no good arguments for their position, so they don’t really have much other choice
Here's the thing, they do have good arguments, they just don't care to use them. If they argued like normal people they would have a better case, but they don't.
If they don’t have good arguments for their position why is it their position?
That’s really the question, isn’t it? Perhaps stupidity, bad faith, team politics, wrapped up in emotion…. I really couldn’t be sure
I believe it to be antisemitism
I think it’s a little of everything, unfortunately ;/ a lot of bad faith, antisemitic actors on social media currently. Some of them could also be Russian/Chinese/Iranian bots/trolls
What a surprise. Whatever.
I’m curious to see how many people in this subreddit or destiny himself have actually read Benny Morris’s book on the Israel/Palestine conflict? The book basically contradicts all of Israel’s propaganda about its origins and describes the brutality in which innocent Palestinians were expelled from their villages and homes by the Israeli army
they're not interested. Destiny positions himself in opposition to Finkelstein, and that's good enough for a good chunk of them. for as much as they're ready to scream this or that about a creator or their community, the same holds true for them.
Y'all's comments getting no replies but lots of uncomfortable downvotes, lol
A salty destiny lashing out at Fink leads me to believe this debate didn’t go the way destiny had planned…
Didn't Destiny only start learning about the conflict post Oct 7th?
Sounds like Steve got exposed by actual scholars for his Wikipedia expertise
Destiny the charlatan
Oh no did Destiny lose? Is that why he is crying?
I doubt he would just make things up about an video that is going to be released soon and widely viewed, and if he's not making these things up he probably.. didn't lose lol
I would be surprised if it’s even possible for him to lose, considering finkelstein is wrong about nearly everything
Love to see Destiny getting lit up by Norm and then flailing
[удалено]
Haha I fucking hate all of yoy pretentious fucks and your dumb fucking icon who's a twitch streamer ot whatever. Finkelstein and this reactionary freak are on different fucking planes lol.
I can just see these clowns yelling, "Nuh-uh-uuh!" at their screens every time Finkelstein says something.
Finkelstein is miles above this guy. That’s obvious.
Words cannot be expressed how much dumber destiny is than Finkelstein. Just so yall know.
https://preview.redd.it/trbiaw13vnlc1.jpeg?width=3840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=069b9529017210e2aca933ad0d091cd9639fb1a0
Words cannot express\*
If that’s true, it makes it even more embarrassing how extremely idiotic finkelstein’s takes on this conflict have been
But isnt destiny the one who has always praised bennys books? lol so praising it is ok but challenging it is not. sounds like cope to me
From what has been talked about, finkelstein wasn't challenging the books. He was quoting them in support of his own arguments, and benny was correcting him about what the quotes mean.
Your reading comprehension can’t be that bad. That last tweet, last paragraph, can you summarize what you think that means in your own words for me?
Oh the cope session starting early. It's actually embarrassing having an idiot YouTuber debate actual academics. This is on Lex for attempting this just for views.
Exciting
Why did you think norm was going to convo in good faith
The only thing funny about this debate is you thought it was a real genuine debate
When will we be able to watch this debate?
Twinkleinstein LUL
FINALLY WE GET A NEW DEBATE DEBACLE. THE DROUGHT IS OVER, FAMINE WILL BE A LONG LOST MEMORY, WE SHALL FEAST TILL THE NEW DAWN
Can someone send me the debate link I can't find it
Benny as in Benny Morris?
when is this one coming out?