Interesting article! I will have to listen to the interview because I would like to know what the state of the war is in Ukraine. It's truly an honor for Mr. Shapiro that he was able to interview President Zelensky. I'm glad Ben let him speak and was respectful, but it's sad that that is noteworthy, though it is. What do you think the Trump admin's policy will be in regards to Ukraine? It seems like his supporters (i.e. JD Vance) are more anti-Ukraine than he is, but I don't know enough about it.
Imo, by not expelling the anti-semites from their respective movements, political leaders on both the right and left have not only greatly cheapened the word "anti-semitism" but also entirely lost credibility when pointing it out on the other side, which is unfortunate. Seems like either way the governing party is willing to turn a blind eye to it - scary stuff.
As of now, it seems the current admin is acquiescing to Russia on Ukraine’s behalf (not that that’s their place). It appears they’re advocating for terms of a cease fire that would essentially give Putin everything he wants while Putin has made no concessions. It’s not a good situation.
Re: the political parties responses to antisemitism:
Our political parties are, of course, run by human beings. I think humans often believe that if they ignore something it will just magically go away. Sometimes, if the belief is fringe enough, it either will go away or will continue not to matter politically. There’ll always be people with bigoted worldviews, whether they’re antisemitic, racist, and/or something else, so I don’t think it’s possible to entirely root out the bigotry.
In this case I think it often makes sense for politicians to ignore people with bigoted views who support them because giving attention to the bigotry has negative effects too.
The reason antisemites are more visible on the left now is because of what’s happening in Gaza, which ought to be criticized to say the least (I’m using my words carefully given the anti free speech policies of the current admin). So, a minority of the people protesting the Israeli government are anti semitic, but the right has conflated the terms. And the left has bought into this conflation to a degree, as we unfortunately often do. Those are my unedited initial thoughts.
That's concerning to hear but not surprising. Do you think Zelensky will give in? I would be interested to read an article about what you think the future of Ukraine looks like or what you think should be done if our government was willing to do it! What do you think VP Harris would've done to broker a peace, if that's even possible without Ukraine giving up too much?
Yeah that's a good point that sometimes giving attention to bigots can be like fanning the flames in a sense. It feels to me like Republicans made the mistake of ignoring Trump, and Democrats make this mistake of giving him all the attention for the worst things he says. Imo the parties have it backwards - i.e., critique your own side's extremes (and in general) more harshly, and engage more with the good faith actors on the other side.
I would disagree with your characterization of the left's response to the war in Gaza, in part because it seems like an aberration from the widely-held liberal notion that America doesn't have a right to tell other countries what to do. But as your article wasn't about Israel/Gaza, so I'll leave it at that. Given your knowledge of Middle East politics, I would be very interested to read a longer - and less politicized than one would find elsewhere - break down of what you would like to see happen to resolve the conflict and what you think the dynamics are on all sides impeding that. Thanks for your response!
Yes, I definitely think Dems need to give less attention to the current admin and not revolve their messaging all around him, and I agree that the GOP ought to stop ignoring his activities.
Re: Ukraine, those are tough questions so I’ll have to think about it!
Re: Israel and Gaza, I wonder what sources you’re referring to? I think the reality in terms of living conditions on the ground there is pretty cut and dry. I agree it’s a highly politicized issue in US politics, but I don’t think that means the news coming from Gaza ought to be viewed as automatically political. (Editing this to say that it’s hard to say what resolution would look like in Gaza given how decimated it has become and given the current Israeli governments position on it. It’s also something I’ll think about!)
As somewhat of a tangent, I do think it’ll be interesting to see how the Israeli government responds to the current US admin’s shift away from Israel and towards states like Qatar. They’ve also been in talks with Iran from what I’ve heard/seen, which seems to go against typical GOP policy.
On that note, I think the Iran Nuclear Deal of 2015 (I think) is one of many examples of liberals in the US involving ourselves in other countries affairs and trying to tell them what to do. :)
I appreciate the suggestions for future articles and your thought provoking comments!!
Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts on my questions and comments! Would love to chat more about it offline sometime :) looking forward to reading more of your posts on these subjects!
Of course and same here re: chatting more :) and THANK YOU so much for sharing your thoughts on all of these subjects!!! I think this is how we move our country forward is by communicating and hashing out our opinions on all of the issues and finding common ground (among other ways)!! 😄🇺🇸
This seemed like a better place to share this than the other comment thread since that’s longer haha, even though I think it’s possibly more relevant to that, but anyway— here’s my most recent post which is related to some of our discussion here! Would love to know your thoughts!😊 https://open.substack.com/pub/sarahsroughdraft/p/you-belong-here?r=7eqh6&utm_medium=ios
I’d add that I don’t think we ought to expel people with bigoted views. Instead, we ought to talk to and inform them as I think their bigotry overwhelmingly comes from ignorance or something akin to that. To my memory, Ben Shapiro has expressed some pretty racist views himself, but I don’t think the answer is to shun him either.
I agree we shouldn't shun people, but expelling them from the party is warranted at a certain point don't you think? - not for the sake of punishing bigoted views but for the sake of maintaining one's own integrity and party identity. If there's nothing that's clearly out-of-bounds for a member of a party to say, than what's even the point in having a party?
I personally would like to see much more willingness to cooperate with or at least talk to those with opposing political views. But I think it's important to say where there are important disagreements in order to talk about them.
I would also disagree that bigotry mostly comes from ignorance - if only that were the case. I think some of it does, and some of it is from a lack of empathy, but I think we have to accept that some of it is from malice or hatred of another group. Why do you think it's mostly from ignorance?
1. To your point about there not being as much distinguishing person from their actions, I think the reason for the blurred lines is polarization. When we know someone IRL, we trust them more and view them as a whole person; whereas, in our current times, when we only know someone through politics, which is the case more and more as people have become more sorted according to a variety of factors and identities, then we may feel like we don’t “know” the person who’s on the other side and therefore may be less trusting of them.
I think this goes to a point you’ve mentioned when we’ve talked offline, if not in these comments as well, about the need to humanize people in our politics today.
Also, I want to respond to the idea that there’s attempt (intentional or not) to do this. I don’t think it’s intentional nor that it’s even like an active thing people do so much as it is a passive non action, i.e., we don’t act to humanize one another as much as we ought to. Overwhelmingly, I don’t think people have malicious intent. We are all the heroes of our own stories!
As for the idea of thought crimes, and i agree we don’t need to debate it further rn, but I want to respond to what you said! So, i think part of what i was saying in the other piece is that the “arguments” that I was critiquing are not actually thoughtful, reasoned arguments. Rather, they are ones that dismiss and prevent real thought and debate. I think, unfortunately, while you and I and many people may consider some thoughts and opinions off limits (e.g., eugenics just to give an example), not everyone does. Therefore, we need to engage with those people! (Maybe I’m being redundant in which case, my apologies!)
2. Here’s a question I’d pose to you— what about people falsely convicted of felonies? Should they be doubly punished and deprived of their freedoms by being denied the right to free movement and such as well as the right to vote? I understand you’re not saying they should be, but just posing the question as food for thought!
As for the social contract, i totally agree and that’s a good point that we get to decide what are country is and becomes and chooses to care about!! I agree we ought to be able to expect things of one another, and i think among those things are empathy and forgiveness and mercy— though that may be yet another tangent for another time?!
Here was your original reply (though it was formatted better) :
Marie, I’m so glad you asked! Allow me to first ground my views in my Pope-Franciscan Catholicism: 1. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone! 2. Jesus teaches us that when a sheep strays from the flock, a good shepherd is one who goes to find just that one sheep to bring him back into the fold. He is worth saving and bringing back no matter how far he strays. 3. Love thy enemy, and love thy neighbor. I think all human beings think some wild thoughts sometimes, including hateful ones. Personally, I raise more of an eyebrow at someone who acts as though they are so pure and clean as to have never gotten their hands a bit dirty, so to speak, fighting for their beliefs and rights. It’s giving Pontius Pilate washing his hands of the crucifixión after giving the kill order. In other words, I don’t think we lose integrity when we allow people to work through their views while remaining inside the fold. I think we acknowledge that we all have a responsibility for what happens in the world, if that makes sense. I think our integrity lies in our empathy and compassion and kindness in the face of hate. In yet other words, I believe in restorative justice. I believe people can make mistakes and hold hateful views, and then change their minds and hold better views. I think the Democrats’ problem is that they’re selective in terms of whom they apply the principles of restorative justice for.
I found this article interesting. I too need to listen to the interview as I’m curious. Thanks for the insight!
Thanks Mom! If you do end up listening to it, I would be curious to know if you agree with my analysis :)
Interesting article! I will have to listen to the interview because I would like to know what the state of the war is in Ukraine. It's truly an honor for Mr. Shapiro that he was able to interview President Zelensky. I'm glad Ben let him speak and was respectful, but it's sad that that is noteworthy, though it is. What do you think the Trump admin's policy will be in regards to Ukraine? It seems like his supporters (i.e. JD Vance) are more anti-Ukraine than he is, but I don't know enough about it.
Imo, by not expelling the anti-semites from their respective movements, political leaders on both the right and left have not only greatly cheapened the word "anti-semitism" but also entirely lost credibility when pointing it out on the other side, which is unfortunate. Seems like either way the governing party is willing to turn a blind eye to it - scary stuff.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Marie!
Re: US policy towards Ukraine:
As of now, it seems the current admin is acquiescing to Russia on Ukraine’s behalf (not that that’s their place). It appears they’re advocating for terms of a cease fire that would essentially give Putin everything he wants while Putin has made no concessions. It’s not a good situation.
Re: the political parties responses to antisemitism:
Our political parties are, of course, run by human beings. I think humans often believe that if they ignore something it will just magically go away. Sometimes, if the belief is fringe enough, it either will go away or will continue not to matter politically. There’ll always be people with bigoted worldviews, whether they’re antisemitic, racist, and/or something else, so I don’t think it’s possible to entirely root out the bigotry.
In this case I think it often makes sense for politicians to ignore people with bigoted views who support them because giving attention to the bigotry has negative effects too.
The reason antisemites are more visible on the left now is because of what’s happening in Gaza, which ought to be criticized to say the least (I’m using my words carefully given the anti free speech policies of the current admin). So, a minority of the people protesting the Israeli government are anti semitic, but the right has conflated the terms. And the left has bought into this conflation to a degree, as we unfortunately often do. Those are my unedited initial thoughts.
Thanks again for your comment :)
That's concerning to hear but not surprising. Do you think Zelensky will give in? I would be interested to read an article about what you think the future of Ukraine looks like or what you think should be done if our government was willing to do it! What do you think VP Harris would've done to broker a peace, if that's even possible without Ukraine giving up too much?
Yeah that's a good point that sometimes giving attention to bigots can be like fanning the flames in a sense. It feels to me like Republicans made the mistake of ignoring Trump, and Democrats make this mistake of giving him all the attention for the worst things he says. Imo the parties have it backwards - i.e., critique your own side's extremes (and in general) more harshly, and engage more with the good faith actors on the other side.
I would disagree with your characterization of the left's response to the war in Gaza, in part because it seems like an aberration from the widely-held liberal notion that America doesn't have a right to tell other countries what to do. But as your article wasn't about Israel/Gaza, so I'll leave it at that. Given your knowledge of Middle East politics, I would be very interested to read a longer - and less politicized than one would find elsewhere - break down of what you would like to see happen to resolve the conflict and what you think the dynamics are on all sides impeding that. Thanks for your response!
Yes, I definitely think Dems need to give less attention to the current admin and not revolve their messaging all around him, and I agree that the GOP ought to stop ignoring his activities.
Re: Ukraine, those are tough questions so I’ll have to think about it!
Re: Israel and Gaza, I wonder what sources you’re referring to? I think the reality in terms of living conditions on the ground there is pretty cut and dry. I agree it’s a highly politicized issue in US politics, but I don’t think that means the news coming from Gaza ought to be viewed as automatically political. (Editing this to say that it’s hard to say what resolution would look like in Gaza given how decimated it has become and given the current Israeli governments position on it. It’s also something I’ll think about!)
As somewhat of a tangent, I do think it’ll be interesting to see how the Israeli government responds to the current US admin’s shift away from Israel and towards states like Qatar. They’ve also been in talks with Iran from what I’ve heard/seen, which seems to go against typical GOP policy.
On that note, I think the Iran Nuclear Deal of 2015 (I think) is one of many examples of liberals in the US involving ourselves in other countries affairs and trying to tell them what to do. :)
I appreciate the suggestions for future articles and your thought provoking comments!!
Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts on my questions and comments! Would love to chat more about it offline sometime :) looking forward to reading more of your posts on these subjects!
Of course and same here re: chatting more :) and THANK YOU so much for sharing your thoughts on all of these subjects!!! I think this is how we move our country forward is by communicating and hashing out our opinions on all of the issues and finding common ground (among other ways)!! 😄🇺🇸
This seemed like a better place to share this than the other comment thread since that’s longer haha, even though I think it’s possibly more relevant to that, but anyway— here’s my most recent post which is related to some of our discussion here! Would love to know your thoughts!😊 https://open.substack.com/pub/sarahsroughdraft/p/you-belong-here?r=7eqh6&utm_medium=ios
I’d add that I don’t think we ought to expel people with bigoted views. Instead, we ought to talk to and inform them as I think their bigotry overwhelmingly comes from ignorance or something akin to that. To my memory, Ben Shapiro has expressed some pretty racist views himself, but I don’t think the answer is to shun him either.
What do you think of this argument?
I agree we shouldn't shun people, but expelling them from the party is warranted at a certain point don't you think? - not for the sake of punishing bigoted views but for the sake of maintaining one's own integrity and party identity. If there's nothing that's clearly out-of-bounds for a member of a party to say, than what's even the point in having a party?
I personally would like to see much more willingness to cooperate with or at least talk to those with opposing political views. But I think it's important to say where there are important disagreements in order to talk about them.
I would also disagree that bigotry mostly comes from ignorance - if only that were the case. I think some of it does, and some of it is from a lack of empathy, but I think we have to accept that some of it is from malice or hatred of another group. Why do you think it's mostly from ignorance?
Hi Marie! Sorry now I’ve taken so long to reply!
1. To your point about there not being as much distinguishing person from their actions, I think the reason for the blurred lines is polarization. When we know someone IRL, we trust them more and view them as a whole person; whereas, in our current times, when we only know someone through politics, which is the case more and more as people have become more sorted according to a variety of factors and identities, then we may feel like we don’t “know” the person who’s on the other side and therefore may be less trusting of them.
I think this goes to a point you’ve mentioned when we’ve talked offline, if not in these comments as well, about the need to humanize people in our politics today.
Also, I want to respond to the idea that there’s attempt (intentional or not) to do this. I don’t think it’s intentional nor that it’s even like an active thing people do so much as it is a passive non action, i.e., we don’t act to humanize one another as much as we ought to. Overwhelmingly, I don’t think people have malicious intent. We are all the heroes of our own stories!
As for the idea of thought crimes, and i agree we don’t need to debate it further rn, but I want to respond to what you said! So, i think part of what i was saying in the other piece is that the “arguments” that I was critiquing are not actually thoughtful, reasoned arguments. Rather, they are ones that dismiss and prevent real thought and debate. I think, unfortunately, while you and I and many people may consider some thoughts and opinions off limits (e.g., eugenics just to give an example), not everyone does. Therefore, we need to engage with those people! (Maybe I’m being redundant in which case, my apologies!)
2. Here’s a question I’d pose to you— what about people falsely convicted of felonies? Should they be doubly punished and deprived of their freedoms by being denied the right to free movement and such as well as the right to vote? I understand you’re not saying they should be, but just posing the question as food for thought!
As for the social contract, i totally agree and that’s a good point that we get to decide what are country is and becomes and chooses to care about!! I agree we ought to be able to expect things of one another, and i think among those things are empathy and forgiveness and mercy— though that may be yet another tangent for another time?!
3-4. Awesome! And thank you! 😊
I was trying to edit my comment and deleted it. I will try to repost/remember what I’d written!😅
(Still learning how to use substack; at least it was my own comment)
Lol I posted my original comment 3 times by mistake so I feel 😂
But what do you think?
Oh know 😭 I did read it just fyi but was going to again before I responded
Here was your original reply (though it was formatted better) :
Marie, I’m so glad you asked! Allow me to first ground my views in my Pope-Franciscan Catholicism: 1. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone! 2. Jesus teaches us that when a sheep strays from the flock, a good shepherd is one who goes to find just that one sheep to bring him back into the fold. He is worth saving and bringing back no matter how far he strays. 3. Love thy enemy, and love thy neighbor. I think all human beings think some wild thoughts sometimes, including hateful ones. Personally, I raise more of an eyebrow at someone who acts as though they are so pure and clean as to have never gotten their hands a bit dirty, so to speak, fighting for their beliefs and rights. It’s giving Pontius Pilate washing his hands of the crucifixión after giving the kill order. In other words, I don’t think we lose integrity when we allow people to work through their views while remaining inside the fold. I think we acknowledge that we all have a responsibility for what happens in the world, if that makes sense. I think our integrity lies in our empathy and compassion and kindness in the face of hate. In yet other words, I believe in restorative justice. I believe people can make mistakes and hold hateful views, and then change their minds and hold better views. I think the Democrats’ problem is that they’re selective in terms of whom they apply the principles of restorative justice for.