I suffered an emotional rollercoaster watching the must-see debate between Mehdi Hasan (Zeteo) and Eylon Levy (Israeli government spokesman until march 2024). You will too!
It was an interesting debate. Mehdi's opening remarks were spectacular. Yes the whole thing was a bit of a spectacle. It was good to hear the arguments that Levy presented, as I am in a bit of an anti-genocide bubble, constantly reading the reports of the atrocities, seeing the comments about them, and wondering how a whole nation could support them. Levy presented the reasons that he felt justify the actions of Israel and many people in the audience supported him, though I think Mehdi had more supporters there. What astaunded me was the amount of lies that Levy repeated and though they were challenged, he kept repeating them. This is the reality of our world, those in power often depend on lies and those that support them will basque in those lies. So we have to be careful where we find our light. The personal attack part was not good. Both debaters used it, and I was surprised since they came from the Oxford tradition that they used it as often. I guess this what the online and political world is about these days: personal attacks.
It was an interesting debate. Mehdi's opening remarks were spectacular. Yes the whole thing was a bit of a spectacle. It was good to hear the arguments that Levy presented, as I am in a bit of an anti-genocide bubble, constantly reading the reports of the atrocities, seeing the comments about them, and wondering how a whole nation could support them. Levy presented the reasons that he felt justify the actions of Israel and many people in the audience supported him, though I think Mehdi had more supporters there. What astaunded me was the amount of lies that Levy repeated and though they were challenged, he kept repeating them. This is the reality of our world, those in power often depend on lies and those that support them will basque in those lies. So we have to be careful where we find our light. The personal attack part was not good. Both debaters used it, and I was surprised since they came from the Oxford tradition that they used it as often. I guess this what the online and political world is about these days: personal attacks.
While crowds cheer, dudes in suites argue.
Meanwhile the genocide continues.
I admit I couldn't watch the whole thing.
The audience got to me.
Did they think they were at football game?