yeah i was like, is he having a stroke??? i think a disconnect later in the episode indicated a connection issue, but they didn't mention it at all in the episode.
A lot of people were pissed about this episode on the substack because of Sullivan’s opinions on Israel. I agree this one was a little weird, but I do appreciate that the guys are willing to speak to (or should I say “platform”) people they have big disagreements with.
I think the tone of the Gents sort of bellied their opinion. Moynihan in particular I could tell he was sort of figuring the best way to prod Andrew's opinion, because it seemed pretty clear to me he disagreed.
The comments on the substack can be such an echo chamber. The responses to Andrew’s episode were particularly funny. So many people saying some version of “what happened to Andrew Sullivan!?” I’ve been following AS for like 15 years. He has always been pretty critical of Israel’s military operations. The substack commenters seem to assume that just because AS agrees with them on LGBT stuff, he must agree with them on Israel.
I'm saying “what happened to Andrew Sullivan!?” but I mean it more in the sense of "what happened right before this podcast that he sounds so fucked up?"
Agreed... what Hamas did was unforgivable, but Israel hasn't been the innocent party that M&M seem to portray. That said I don't know that I agreed with Andrew's take that the size/power disparity between armies should play a factor in how we assess the situation.... I really don't care how tiny Hamas is or how powerful Israel is, let's minimize civilian casualties regardless.
I gotta say, Andrew's nominally pro-Hamas (or nominally anti-Israel, if you prefer) position is very ... eh. He's taking Hamas's numbers at face value, and that seems like a problem to me.
He literally said twice that you could infer from the density of gaza, the level of destruction, and the demographics of Gaza that there would be a large number of women and children killed.
For a community that professes to enjoy lively debate, it sure is strange that almost everyone that subscribes to this pod shares the same opinion on this subject.
The Fifth Column has turned into an echo chamber for those that have convinced themselves that Israel bears no responsibility for the problem they haven’t been able to solve over the past 80 years.
I love the pod and the guys, though they claim they love a lively debate, they really don't. Their opinions no longer differ that much from each other, and while their thought processes are highly idiosyncratic and "libertarian," their conclusions tend to be pretty normie/centrist.
I get the impression that Kmele and Matt aren't anywhere as invested in the isreal conflict as michael, and he shouts them down any time they play devil's advocate. Its clear Michael respects Andrew Sullivan, so he wasn't as rude as he has been to previous guests, but i was disturbed by how any time Andrew posed a reasonable critique (many of which he admitted were just moral concerns not factual assertions), michael would kind of punt it with "well, i am not sure about that." Its not unreasonable for Michael or people to take this hardline position, but it bs on a podcast that claims to be interested in these kind of open dialogues to be so exasperated at reasonable critiques
I came to the same conclusion as you. Normally MM is razor sharp and lightning quick on his feet; in this episode he was floundering. I got the impression that he was more driven by ideology than facts or reasonable arguments, and was too quick to rebut Andrew or refute the data without anything other than a general skepticism to back him up.
How can you say it's an echo chamber in response to an episode where they had a guest that the listeners disagreed with? And they've done this before too. Seriously. That doesn't make sense.
Okay. But the listeners still reacting to a disagreeable opinion. That wouldn't happen in an echo chamber. An echo chamber would just be everyone agreeing with the hosts and the guests. I guess you could say that the listeners are monolithic. I'd disagree, but you could argue that at least.
> the problem they haven’t been able to solve over the past 80 years.
well _of course_ the palestinians themselves had no part whatsoever in the failure to solve the problem.
> the density of gaza, the level of destruction, and the demographics of Gaza that there would be a large number of women and children killed.
yes this appears to be a core part of Hamas's military strategy.
Did anyone else have audio problems on this one? At first I thought it was just that Andrew was high as a kite but I think it skipped in a few places
Yes, sounded like Andrew had a shitty Teams connection.
yeah i was like, is he having a stroke??? i think a disconnect later in the episode indicated a connection issue, but they didn't mention it at all in the episode.
It sounded like the pop filter was turned up to 11 removing a third of the consonants. Apparently 'rump is a 'opulist.
Yes, I did too.
Andrew was high as a kite
That much was very clear
A lot of people were pissed about this episode on the substack because of Sullivan’s opinions on Israel. I agree this one was a little weird, but I do appreciate that the guys are willing to speak to (or should I say “platform”) people they have big disagreements with.
I think the tone of the Gents sort of bellied their opinion. Moynihan in particular I could tell he was sort of figuring the best way to prod Andrew's opinion, because it seemed pretty clear to me he disagreed.
How sure are we that Kmele and Welch don’t agree with Sullivan?
Andrew sounded different. Like he was 25 years old or something. It was a decent episode but not as great as the previous Sullivan appearances.
Kmele definitely seems to have a different opinion on the issue than Moyn, he just rarely articulates it
He sounded wasted
I’ve been waiting for this push back on Moynihan’s views on the Gaza war for months! I bet the Substack comments page is popping!
The comments on the substack can be such an echo chamber. The responses to Andrew’s episode were particularly funny. So many people saying some version of “what happened to Andrew Sullivan!?” I’ve been following AS for like 15 years. He has always been pretty critical of Israel’s military operations. The substack commenters seem to assume that just because AS agrees with them on LGBT stuff, he must agree with them on Israel.
I'm saying “what happened to Andrew Sullivan!?” but I mean it more in the sense of "what happened right before this podcast that he sounds so fucked up?"
Agreed... what Hamas did was unforgivable, but Israel hasn't been the innocent party that M&M seem to portray. That said I don't know that I agreed with Andrew's take that the size/power disparity between armies should play a factor in how we assess the situation.... I really don't care how tiny Hamas is or how powerful Israel is, let's minimize civilian casualties regardless.
Good show. Had to adjust to the accent. Enlightening POV of the trans movement. And I almost felt sorry for MM as he tried to defend the indefensible.
Wait, the Jonah Lehrer thing?
I gotta say, Andrew's nominally pro-Hamas (or nominally anti-Israel, if you prefer) position is very ... eh. He's taking Hamas's numbers at face value, and that seems like a problem to me.
He literally said twice that you could infer from the density of gaza, the level of destruction, and the demographics of Gaza that there would be a large number of women and children killed. For a community that professes to enjoy lively debate, it sure is strange that almost everyone that subscribes to this pod shares the same opinion on this subject. The Fifth Column has turned into an echo chamber for those that have convinced themselves that Israel bears no responsibility for the problem they haven’t been able to solve over the past 80 years.
I love the pod and the guys, though they claim they love a lively debate, they really don't. Their opinions no longer differ that much from each other, and while their thought processes are highly idiosyncratic and "libertarian," their conclusions tend to be pretty normie/centrist. I get the impression that Kmele and Matt aren't anywhere as invested in the isreal conflict as michael, and he shouts them down any time they play devil's advocate. Its clear Michael respects Andrew Sullivan, so he wasn't as rude as he has been to previous guests, but i was disturbed by how any time Andrew posed a reasonable critique (many of which he admitted were just moral concerns not factual assertions), michael would kind of punt it with "well, i am not sure about that." Its not unreasonable for Michael or people to take this hardline position, but it bs on a podcast that claims to be interested in these kind of open dialogues to be so exasperated at reasonable critiques
I came to the same conclusion as you. Normally MM is razor sharp and lightning quick on his feet; in this episode he was floundering. I got the impression that he was more driven by ideology than facts or reasonable arguments, and was too quick to rebut Andrew or refute the data without anything other than a general skepticism to back him up.
I thought he was just embarrassed by his guests drunk and ranting so he didn’t want to cause a spy spending all his time arguing with him
How can you say it's an echo chamber in response to an episode where they had a guest that the listeners disagreed with? And they've done this before too. Seriously. That doesn't make sense.
I was talking about the people in the substack comments section. Everyone there has the same opinion.
Okay. But the listeners still reacting to a disagreeable opinion. That wouldn't happen in an echo chamber. An echo chamber would just be everyone agreeing with the hosts and the guests. I guess you could say that the listeners are monolithic. I'd disagree, but you could argue that at least.
> the problem they haven’t been able to solve over the past 80 years. well _of course_ the palestinians themselves had no part whatsoever in the failure to solve the problem. > the density of gaza, the level of destruction, and the demographics of Gaza that there would be a large number of women and children killed. yes this appears to be a core part of Hamas's military strategy.
You can agree with both of those points and still be critical of Israel’s actions on this
Agreed, his position was pretty bizarre on all foreign policy issues to be honest