Admittedly, I only saw the first 40 minutes and it seems that the general consensus is that in the later parts the discussion in the podcast improved. I usually agree with you on pretty much everything, but here I diverge a bit. I think Murray's accent does a lot of heavy lifting and he comes across somewhat elitist. Instead of bringing up valid counterpoints to what Dave was saying, it appeared he made the typical appeals to authority. FWIW, he was there to promote his book (that the podcast has now gone so viral might actually help the sales) and Trump promoted Murray and his book on his Truth account (either shortly before or after the podcast aired). Mostly I think it was a lost opportunity to have a constructive conversation about this subject.
I appreciate hearing your POV. We don't always have to agree. I have friends who disagree with me on this episode as well. And others who agree. It's why it's so interesting. So I'm clear about what I saw: I think the opportunity to have that conversation was lost the moment Joe insisted that his pal Dave be there for it, to be honest. Dave had just been on the show the previous week, with no one on to argue with him. Those peddling fringe revisionist history, like Carroll and Cooper, didn't have anyone on to argue with them. Insisting that Dave be there ended any chance of a talk about the actual book. If I were Murray, I'm not sure if I would have accepted or not, but if I did accept I also would have tried to use it as an opportunity to reach Joe. FWIW - Joe himself has said “They can’t say that unless they’ve listened to your work. It would be like trying to opine upon a culture you’ve never read about or visited.” Is that an appeal to authority? No, I don't think it is. Neither did I hear Murray making an appeal to authority, but a plea for discernment and for accuracy.
I've always thought Dave's positions on forever wars were good and I've tended towards his perspectives for some time, on the occasion when i listen to him. I do lean a bit libertarian as well. I've never heard Murray and I quite thought Murray outdid him. His arguments were sharper and more precise and compelling. I dont know too much about the conflict, only what ive armed myself with over the last year or so, but i thought murray came out on top in this one.
Ive thought it was concerning from the beginning for what its worth, but the constant death abd destruction affects people and i cant begrudge them that.
I saw Copper on Tucker Carlson's network....it sort of disturbed me.....
The problem right now is.....there is NO "normalcy"...Everywhere you turn there is a conspiracy theory come true...think USAID..etc... It is very overwhelming and troubling to say the least.....
I have a friend who says the earth is flat. I asked her to explain how she came to that opinion because I truly want to know her thought processes. Turns out experts and government officials telling lies about the climate, health policies, so forth have swayed her into thinking nothing we're told is true, so using the literal text of the Creation where there's a firmament and thus the earth is flat now is easier to believe.
You see the debate as being about Murray pushing for a more sober and balanced media ecosystem. Although that does come up, I think it is a misreading of the 3 hours.
You say the first 40 minutes is where Murray “just asks questions”. Okay but if that is the case, Murray is doing the same thing he kept accusing Dave Smith of doing (ie. is he an expert? Is he just throwing out ideas? etc). It's also a laughably simple point that anyone can make at any time about anything - "we should have better discourse". Well, dur.
More importantly, you say the “end result” wasn't a discussion about Gaza but about how we should wield our freedom of choice. I don’t think that’s the case at all – big, prominent chunks of the discussion were about Murray telling Rogan to have more pro-Israel guests on his show (ie. pushing shallow, naked bias), deriding Smith for not going to Israel (bs about “lived experience”/ paid holiday), and then losing point after point after point on the very applied discussions of Russia/ Ukraine and Israel/Gaza.
This disparaging of Murray for asking Smith if he’d been to Gaza is ridiculous, can’t you see that? It’s not Murray touting “lived experience .” He’s a *war correspondent.* I’m a historical novelist, and it’s vital that I travel to the places I wrote about, because there’s vital information you can only understand in the place and with the people you’re writing about. This isn’t hard.
Substack marked this comment for deletion, but I chose to leave it up, so people can see an example of the Dark and Dangerous ideology taking root in the wild. Your support of "racialism" or race Marxism is very woke indeed, and I'm sure you claim to be on the "right." This - ladies and gentlemen - is Woke Right. Thank you for the illustration that you exist.
Admittedly, I only saw the first 40 minutes and it seems that the general consensus is that in the later parts the discussion in the podcast improved. I usually agree with you on pretty much everything, but here I diverge a bit. I think Murray's accent does a lot of heavy lifting and he comes across somewhat elitist. Instead of bringing up valid counterpoints to what Dave was saying, it appeared he made the typical appeals to authority. FWIW, he was there to promote his book (that the podcast has now gone so viral might actually help the sales) and Trump promoted Murray and his book on his Truth account (either shortly before or after the podcast aired). Mostly I think it was a lost opportunity to have a constructive conversation about this subject.
I appreciate hearing your POV. We don't always have to agree. I have friends who disagree with me on this episode as well. And others who agree. It's why it's so interesting. So I'm clear about what I saw: I think the opportunity to have that conversation was lost the moment Joe insisted that his pal Dave be there for it, to be honest. Dave had just been on the show the previous week, with no one on to argue with him. Those peddling fringe revisionist history, like Carroll and Cooper, didn't have anyone on to argue with them. Insisting that Dave be there ended any chance of a talk about the actual book. If I were Murray, I'm not sure if I would have accepted or not, but if I did accept I also would have tried to use it as an opportunity to reach Joe. FWIW - Joe himself has said “They can’t say that unless they’ve listened to your work. It would be like trying to opine upon a culture you’ve never read about or visited.” Is that an appeal to authority? No, I don't think it is. Neither did I hear Murray making an appeal to authority, but a plea for discernment and for accuracy.
I've always thought Dave's positions on forever wars were good and I've tended towards his perspectives for some time, on the occasion when i listen to him. I do lean a bit libertarian as well. I've never heard Murray and I quite thought Murray outdid him. His arguments were sharper and more precise and compelling. I dont know too much about the conflict, only what ive armed myself with over the last year or so, but i thought murray came out on top in this one.
Ive thought it was concerning from the beginning for what its worth, but the constant death abd destruction affects people and i cant begrudge them that.
My 3 cents.
I saw Copper on Tucker Carlson's network....it sort of disturbed me.....
The problem right now is.....there is NO "normalcy"...Everywhere you turn there is a conspiracy theory come true...think USAID..etc... It is very overwhelming and troubling to say the least.....
I have a friend who says the earth is flat. I asked her to explain how she came to that opinion because I truly want to know her thought processes. Turns out experts and government officials telling lies about the climate, health policies, so forth have swayed her into thinking nothing we're told is true, so using the literal text of the Creation where there's a firmament and thus the earth is flat now is easier to believe.
Excellent, and exactly what I heard/saw too, Keri. It's all very concerning.
Please allow me to disagree.
You see the debate as being about Murray pushing for a more sober and balanced media ecosystem. Although that does come up, I think it is a misreading of the 3 hours.
You say the first 40 minutes is where Murray “just asks questions”. Okay but if that is the case, Murray is doing the same thing he kept accusing Dave Smith of doing (ie. is he an expert? Is he just throwing out ideas? etc). It's also a laughably simple point that anyone can make at any time about anything - "we should have better discourse". Well, dur.
More importantly, you say the “end result” wasn't a discussion about Gaza but about how we should wield our freedom of choice. I don’t think that’s the case at all – big, prominent chunks of the discussion were about Murray telling Rogan to have more pro-Israel guests on his show (ie. pushing shallow, naked bias), deriding Smith for not going to Israel (bs about “lived experience”/ paid holiday), and then losing point after point after point on the very applied discussions of Russia/ Ukraine and Israel/Gaza.
I've written about it here. Not sure if anyone will agree with me but happy to discuss. https://drmattalford.substack.com/p/a-very-good-argument-douglas-murray
This disparaging of Murray for asking Smith if he’d been to Gaza is ridiculous, can’t you see that? It’s not Murray touting “lived experience .” He’s a *war correspondent.* I’m a historical novelist, and it’s vital that I travel to the places I wrote about, because there’s vital information you can only understand in the place and with the people you’re writing about. This isn’t hard.
Hi Vesper. As I say in my article, of course it’s good to have such experience in politics but it’s secondary to the arguments you’re making.
Plus, you doing legitimate contextual research for your novels is different to being complicit in a government approved PR tour.
https://drmattalford.substack.com/p/a-stopped-clock-thats-never-right
Substack marked this comment for deletion, but I chose to leave it up, so people can see an example of the Dark and Dangerous ideology taking root in the wild. Your support of "racialism" or race Marxism is very woke indeed, and I'm sure you claim to be on the "right." This - ladies and gentlemen - is Woke Right. Thank you for the illustration that you exist.
Great summation and commentary!