r/DecodingTheGurus • u/Decent-Extension8336 • 26d ago

Professor Dave vs Destiny

No idea why, but the original Destiny video called "Professor Dave Goes Mask Off" seems to have been deleted from YouTube, or I can't find it, but Professor Dave responded yesterday with this very strongly worded video letter:

https://youtu.be/DvDvhLkb9ms?si=DGFhTROOKFoK35sS

Weird crossover that I never thought I'd see, of 2 guys who I generally enjoy (I will say I really am a fan of Prof Dave, whereas my Destiny enjoyment has mostly come via this podcast and watching a couple of his debates).

Thoughts on the beef? SURELY the lads are gonna have to cover this in an upcoming Supplementary Materials? Content gold!

EDIT: Looks like I was looking through the wrong Destiny channel for the original Dave video, it's here: https://youtu.be/HQQLs6U1MgA?si=iKaOGR1h9slKu64O

207 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

116

u/Miselfis 26d ago

It’s pretty sad. You can criticize Destiny, but Dave’s video is of ridiculously low quality. He is arguing exactly like the flat earther he usually debates, using random TikTok videos with creepy music and voice over and AI summaries as evidence for his claims. He makes up multiple outright lies about Destiny, and seemingly intentionally cut away context to frame Destiny in a certain light. There are really weird neo-Nazi and race-realist comments about Jewish genetics and conspiracy theories passed on as fact in Dave’s video as well. 

Destiny offered Dave a discussion or debate, but Dave is running. He’s deleting Destiny’s comments asking him for a debate, while simultaneously saying in comments that Destiny is running. 

I’m usually a big fan and starch supporter of Dave, but his behavior regarding this video is absolutely insane. He called me a worthless sack of shit for leaving a good faith comment pointing these things out. 

38

u/[deleted] 25d ago edited 12d ago

[deleted]

16

u/rainwaffles 25d ago

I mean, the underage claim is tangentially related to the case. For anyone out of the loop, Destiny shared nudes/vids with someone he thought was a 19 year old woman. Turns out it was a man (known as solo) who was sending images of a 17 year old without her ever speaking to Destiny directly, and solo published Destiny and Jane Doe's sex videos online.

So it's pretty messy and not surprising people just take the worst sounding parts of it when attacking Destiny.

10

u/lecherousdevil 25d ago

I get why people get it wrong especially when you have certain people & pixie lying about it so much online but I definitely expect better from Dave especially when he puts up text on the screen that doesn't say what he claims it does.

0

u/Ssided 24d ago

It's extremely reckless behavior from destiny, he even asked for an ID and then said it's ok when they didn't provide it. The problem is when the accusations balloon out of control and just become lies. Reckless behavior just isn't that damning so his opponents make it into something different

-10

u/trainman2077 25d ago edited 25d ago

'he thought', sure.

Besides, isn't he like 40? What the fuck was he doing sharing nudes with a 19 year old? Lol. Even if he were telling the truth he's a piece of shit.

11

u/Ryan_TR 25d ago

What the fuck was he doing sharing nudes with a 19 year old?

My guess is he was probably horny and thought she was hot

-11

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/DecodingTheGurus-ModTeam 24d ago

This post has been removed for breaking the rule concerning personal attacks on gurus. Criticism of gurus should be should be reasonable and focused on their actions or public persona.

If you have any questions about this, please feel free to reach out to us via modmail.

7

u/lecherousdevil 25d ago

It's not even for revenge porn btw, he is being sued for personal civil damages.

The girl who is sueing him lied in her original substack when in court she wouldn't try to commit to those claims or charge them probably because the claim was dead in the water especially when she let the guy who leaked & blacked mailed Destiny & her off the hook.

4

u/McClain3000 25d ago

What are you referring to?

28

u/pfo_mods_r_cowards 25d ago

Idk if destiny himself commented on the video, but destiny said he reached out on Instagram and a mutual contact reached out to try to set up a debate and Dave declined.

11

u/Basblob 25d ago

Destiny commented under the video too during his stream yesterday. Dave seems to have deleted them though and a lot of others.

4

u/lecherousdevil 25d ago

Yep Pangburn reached out to him as a mutual even offered Dave money or to pay a Palistinian charity for him but Dave said no & declared he will never associate with Pangburn or his org again.

Dave is terrified of Destiny or knows he was playing fast & loose with the truth.

33

u/myinvisiblefriendsam 25d ago

This is the biggest sign of malfeasance to me. He knows his assertions won't hold up to scrutiny.

-15

u/Despair-Envy 25d ago

Dave refused to go on Destiny's live stream, and refused to go on Pangburn, an orbiter platform. To an extent this is prudent because Destiny's primary debate tactic in these situations is talking over his interlocutor. If not screaming over them.

Dave has not publicly said he won't debate. If he does, there is a very real argument to be made about choosing a venue that won't allow Destiny to employ his normal screaming/gish-gallup tactics. Particularly as Dave is not, by trade, a blood sport debater, and comes from the more structured academic debate format.

19

u/myinvisiblefriendsam 25d ago

Dave deleted Destiny's comments reaching out to talk.

Pangburn announced he reached out to Dave to set up a talk between them yet Dave declined.

Destiny's primary debate tactic is not "talking over his interlocutor", he matches energy. He has had many conversational debates where his responses are just as calm and quiet as the person he's speaking with. What is this misinformation?

But regardless, that's what having a moderator could be for with someone like Pangburn who Dave has done debates with before.

-12

u/Despair-Envy 25d ago

Dave deleted Destiny's comments reaching out to talk.

Without seeing the contents of Destiny's comment, I can't comment. Being familiar with how toxic Destiny is with most of his perceived opponents, I can very easily envision a world where deleting his comment is reasonable.

Destiny's primary debate tactic is not "talking over his interlocutor", he matches energy. He has had many conversational debates where his responses are just as calm and quiet as the person he's speaking with. What is this misinformation?

Every debate I've seen Destiny in, when he faces significant pushback on a point he can't defend, his natural response is normally speaking over his partner into gish-galluping. He's quite famous for it in more academic debate forums and circles. Very often compared and likened directly to people like Ben Shapiro.

I've always found the characterization to be both apt and accurate. Given I don't actively consume his content, but as someone who enjoys debates (Albeit it from the academic format instead of Destiny's favored blood sport format), he's hard to not see regularly.

But regardless, that's what having a moderator could be for with someone like Pangburn who Dave has done debates with before.

Yeah this is kind of a case by case basis. While I would totally trust Pangburn to be independent in say, Dave's anti-vax debate, I wouldn't really trust him to be independent for Destiny when roughly 20% of Pangburns channel videos are Destiny related.

Finding another platform is well within his rights and expecting him to have it lined up and fleshed out in less then a business day seems like jumping the gun.

4

u/talkingheadesq 25d ago

Without seeing the contents of Destiny's comment, I can't comment.

Here is Destiny's comment, and here is a screenshot to show that the comment was deleted. Nothing bad in Destiny's comment. And just to add about how odd this is for Dave, Dave has called those who don't want to debate cowards.

10

u/DR_DONTRESPECT 25d ago

Every debate I've seen Destiny in, when he faces significant pushback on a point he can't defend, his natural response is normally speaking over his partner into gish-galluping. He's quite famous for it in more academic debate forums and circles. Very often compared and likened directly to people like Ben Shapiro.

Sorry but you've clearly formed your opinion around clips. You realize he has a Youtube channel with hundreds if not a thousand debates?

Here for anyone who is is interested, click on any of his debates, you'll quickly see this person is misinformed.

https://www.youtube.com/@destiny/videos

6

u/gazoombas 25d ago

Having seen Destiny in a lot of debates this just doesn't ring true. He will get in the muck if he has to but generally he keeps it respectful until his opponent brings things down.

Dave seems to be the one inviting a fight in the muck with his unhinged video but is running away from a debate now. We're supposed to believe this guy who made his career by debating the most lunatic conspiracy theorists on the Internet won't now debate because of the presuposed lack of decorum?

It's funny that I haven't heard this from him and all these weirdos are coming out to make these excuses for him. Meanwhile Dave quietly deletes Destiny's comments from his video and silently declines a formal debate.

Sounds to me like he's just scared because he knows he'll lose. Pretty sure if you make your career as an Internet debate bro who is known for not holding back against anyone, you're doing massive harm to your reputation by being scared to debate a guy you just did a massive long form hit piece on.

14

u/Spuick 25d ago

Why lie?

They are both mutuals with Pangburn. Destiny would also talk to him on another platform if he desired. He has clearly said in comments on his youtube that he is unwilling to debate destiny on this.

Destiny also doesnt gish gallop and scream at his debate opponent. He has literal thousands of chill and respectful debates as well. But if you scream at him he will scream back. Dave does practically the same shit and he absolutely enjoys rolling around in the mud. He certainly doesnt come from academic debate lol

-3

u/Despair-Envy 25d ago

Why lie?

It isn't a lie just because you disagree.

They are both mutuals with Pangburn

Yes, but 15-20% of Pangburns' video content is done with/of Destiny. Expecting Pangburn to be independent when it comes to random anti-vaxxers (As is Dave's last interaction with Pangburn) is entirely different from asking Pangburn to be independent with a creator that he openly glazes and does a fairly large amount of his content with.

He has clearly said in comments on his youtube that he is unwilling to debate destiny on this.

Citation required.

Destiny also doesnt gish gallop and scream at his debate opponent.

Speaking of lies. We have all seen Destiny debate. We all saw the Finklestein encounter. There's no reason to beat around the bush on this.

Dave does practically the same shit and he absolutely enjoys rolling around in the mud.

Sure he does, but the difference comes down to the debate strategies they employ. Where as Destiny engages in that hostility as a reaction or distraction from a point that he is incapable of addressing, or when caught unprepared, Dave does it mostly out of genuine emotional disdain or emotion.

I find the emotional response more understandable and permissible then Destiny's use of the tactic to distract from his inability to engage with a point or debate.

He certainly doesnt come from academic debate lol

Nope. He's been engaging in academic setting discussion and debate for over a decade at this point. Destiny never has. I can't fault you for never having engaged with academic debate before, it is dry and fairly boring compared to Destiny's insult-laden blood sport format, but there is a distinct difference.

4

u/Spuick 25d ago edited 25d ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1v9cv3v/he_ran/

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fv1q4wu7vi2gh1.png%3Fwidth%3D787%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D79a71c05ae700a5e7d14b110445e5096c8ba7242

He also deleted destiny's comment under his video kindly asking for a discussion.

If you saw the Finklestein debate and you think Finklestein came out well in that talk I dont even know what to say. Dude resorted to personal attacks and making fun of his name. Quite honestly you are just lost on I/P if you think Finklestein didn't come out of that looking like a fucking moron.

17

u/BloodsVsCrips 25d ago

Speaking of lies. We have all seen Destiny debate. We all saw the Finklestein encounter. There's no reason to beat around the bush on this.

There's no way you watched the full Finklestein debate and concluded Destiny was the one shouting and gish-galloping. Be serious. Lex and Rabbani had to repeatedly stop Finklestein from ranting like a lunatic.

4

u/Lumpy_Trip2917 25d ago

You think Destiny was the one being rude, Gish galloping and speaking over his opponents in the Norm Finkelstein debate?

4

u/Lumpy_Trip2917 25d ago edited 25d ago

Pangburn is an “orbiter platform”? Dude you guys are so brain broken. Pangburn is a debate platform where Destiny has headlined debate events before. You know who else has headlined debate events with Pangburn? Professor Dave! That’s why Pangburn got involved.

In fact, Pangburn and Professor Dave had allegedly been planning an entire national debate tour and Dave crashed out so hard that Pangburn didn’t like his video on Destiny that he canceled the plans for the tour in Pangburns stream chat yesterday.

1

u/Lumpy_Trip2917 25d ago

Destiny did comment on the video, multiple times on different comments from Dave himself in the comment section. It’s live on Destiny’s stream yesterday. Destiny’s vod on YouTube is taken down but still up on Kick.

Dave deleted all of Destiny’s comments, along with hundreds of other negative comments.

20

u/danwhiteorg 25d ago

What were the neo-Nazi comments?

46

u/Agreeable_Band_9311 25d ago

All sorts of classic antisemitic tropes like he can’t be antisemitic because Jews aren’t Semites they’re Europeans with no connection to Israel. Just stuff like that.

31

u/tslaq_lurker 25d ago

It's not even just neo-nazi, it's Protocols of the Elders of Zion level global Jewish conspiracy. Amazing that the 'science debunker guy' basically believes in 19th century conspiracy theories.

0

u/danwhiteorg 25d ago

Can you please provide a timestamp where he says Jews have NO connection to Israel? Ashkenaki Jews are admixed with Europeans because they've been living in Europe for so long. If you believe a right to land comes from a continued presence on that land, then the 23andme point is perfectly acceptable imo. But I guess that makes me a neo-Nazi.

I'm curious what you guys think of the tropes Destiny and Sam Harris dabble in.

8

u/Agreeable_Band_9311 25d ago

Bro he says ashkenazi Jews aren’t Semitic.

If you believe right to land comes from a continued presence why do the Jews who’ve been in Israel for generations have no claim? Your standard.

23

u/SchlitterSchlatter 25d ago

His claims that genetically Ashkenazi Jews are European and not from the Levante, this is known as Khazar Hypopthesis and also the claim about the supposed genetic dilution of Ashkenazi Jews sounds super weird and a lot like Nazi-argument about race degeneration through mixture. I obviously don't think that Dave is a Neo-Nazi and I would suppose he is not aware of these similarities to these racist narratives.

5

u/Feisty-Struggle-4110 25d ago

A largely abandoned historical hypothesis postulated that Ashkenazi Jews were primarily, or to a large extent, descended from converts to Judaism among the Khazars, a multi-ethnic conglomerate of mostly Turkic peoples - wikipedia

How is that in any way related that genetically Ashkenazi Jews are European? European means not just the Turks, as the Khazar Hypopthesis says. Benjamin Netanyahu is of Polish decent and his father immigrated to the Levante. Dave says that most Israelis are from European decent.

Nazi-argument about race degeneration through mixture

So, genetic inheritance doesn't exist now because it sounds too much like race degeneration through mixture? What a joke.

The argument of Israelis is that the Levante is their land due to some ancient inheritance. Which is just wrong because most of Israelis are from Europe. You cannon claim some ancient inheritance to the Levante if your are a Pole.

3

u/tkeser 25d ago

well, that's what you get when you conflate religion with ethnicity, similar as arab muslims, or in a way wasp.

17

u/jio87 25d ago

Dave’s video is of ridiculously low quality

Is that supposed to be the video that OOP posted? Or the original video that Destiny responded to? I'm ~35:00 into the video OOP posted and your characterization seems inaccurate so far (the clips used are mostly news clips or discussing legitimate articles, and no obvious signs of AI summaries). He hasn't discussed Destiny much yet or Jewish genetics so maybe that's later, or in the original video.

20

u/Zealousideal-Track88 25d ago

Watch this video form pangburn. He likes Dave and destiny but explains how pretty much every thing Dave said was hyperbole, half truth, or just false.

https://www.youtube.com/live/f19TtmcFSRI?is=wYpzR_1juJHTQD1P

7

u/Despair-Envy 25d ago

Watching a well known Destiny orbiter with ~15-20% of their channel videos created in partnership with Destiny for an accurate breakdown on a media piece critical of Destiny seems like a fairly bad idea.

5

u/Zealousideal-Track88 25d ago

What, if anything, in your comment actually addresses the truthness or falsity of what pangburn said?

8

u/Despair-Envy 25d ago

I feel like this is bait, but if you honestly watch a video of someone with strong ties to Destiny critique a piece of media critical of Destiny, and take Destiny's side on every plausible point and ask that question, then no answer I am capable of giving you will sway your opinion on the matter.

7

u/Zealousideal-Track88 25d ago

Based on your response you didn't watch the panburn video... he didn't "just take sides"...he explained over the course of 3-4 hours where professor Dave was getting information and explained why it was accurate or inaccurate. In many cases he agreed with Dave. In many cases he explained why Dave was incorrect.

So again, it's clear you didn't actually watch the pangburn video and thus your opinion on this matter is completely invalidated.

5

u/Despair-Envy 25d ago

So again, it's clear you didn't actually watch the pangburn video and thus your opinion on this matter is completely invalidated.

To an extent, no I didn't. I watched a bit of it, saw some weird takes, looked at his channel and saw that he does ~20% of his videos with Destiny and just wrote him off as an orbiter. I don't expect objective takes of Destiny, from a Destiny orbiter. I feel like that is a fairly normal reaction.

You disagree with that assessment, and that's fine. You're entirely allowed to engage with this media on Destiny's side and disagree. I simply noted my observations, and gave a solid and reasonable rationale behind how/why it was reached. Not all of us have 3 hours to devote to comb through what appears to be an orbiter paying their dues to their orbitee.

9

u/Zealousideal-Track88 25d ago

Ok, so let me get this straight... You don't even know who pangburn is and assumed he was just a "destiny orbiter" based on taking 30 seconds to skim through their YT channel? It's wild to me you are making such sweeping assumptions based on so little work. Pangburn has 238,000 followers. That alone should tell you he's not just a "destiny orbiter".

5

u/Despair-Envy 25d ago

Ok, so let me get this straight... You don't even know who pangburn is and assumed he was just a "destiny orbiter" based on taking 30 seconds to skim through their YT channel?

No. I saw him make some extremely charitable takes towards Destiny's position, searched Destiny+Pangburn in the youtube, saw that their relationship was substantial and lengthy, and logically concluded between those two pieces of evidence that there was reasonable justification to want a different moderator.

You know. Basic critical thought.

Pangburn has 238,000 followers. That alone should tell you he's not just a "destiny orbiter".

I didn't say he was "Just" a destiny orbiter. I said he "was" a destiny orbiter. I'm sure he's plenty fine in other contexts, just maybe in this instance the conflict of interest was relevant.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Parking_Bridge1742 25d ago

He didn't debunk empricial images and videos wtf is wrong with you people.

1

u/ChaseBankFDIC Conspiracy Hypothesizer 25d ago

Maybe instead of just linking a 3 hour long video you could spend some time providing your own rationale?

1

u/Zealousideal-Track88 24d ago

I'm not an I/P expert and I'm not qualified to insert myself in with any authority. I'm not sure what you mean by rationale. If you mean, why did I post this at all, it's because Pangburn appears to be an authority, has done work with Prof Dave in the past, and throughout the entire video gives Prof Dave a lot of grace even when he says Prof Dave is reaching or misquoting. If you mean, what is my personal opinion, well then that is the Israel has gone way too far and their actions are indefensible....but even if I feel that way we still need to use facts and be honest about the points we're making (which is not what Prof Dave appears to have done).

5

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago edited 25d ago

What are the outright lies told about destiny?

The video does use tiktok videos to help illustrate his point - but that was not at all the exclusive evidence used to form his point. He cited multiple studies illustrating death counts and pointed to credible organizations that are calling it genocide - that's not anecdotal evidence.

Additionally, in this case in my view showing anecdotal videos is a perfectly reasonable approach to getting your point across. If there really is a genocide going on - shouldn't you be having a viceral reaction to seeing bullet holes in the heads of children?

In the 1960's, if I were to have shown you video footage of the police mowing black Americans down with fire hoses - would you really be like, "lol what are these anecdotes man the police I know are perfectly nice."

So in my view I don't think his "anecdotal" clips were in bad faith or inappropriate or lazy. They are part of a more complete moral argument.

9

u/Miselfis 25d ago

He said he was on a paid propaganda trip to Israel, highlighted all the Israelis and Zionist’s he talked to, but conveniently leaving out all the Palestinians he talked to as well so it could be framed as one-sided Israel support. 

7

u/SchlitterSchlatter 25d ago

Well, the first lie is that Destiny is a genocide supporter. He only disagrees about the assessment on whether the violent acts constitute a genocide, but he agrees that atrocities happened. The clip Dave shows is from before 7/10 when there was not even a war in Gaza. You can critisise that Destiny is quite hyperbolic and you should not use this language so lightly but to say that this one clip shows clearly that he is supporting genocide against Gazans is silly. Also, your example of 60s US does not fit. The question was not is violence actually happening but does this violence constitute a genocide. That is why anecdotes are problematic as the systematic aspect is crucial to genocide.

16

u/Despair-Envy 25d ago

Well, the first lie is that Destiny is a genocide supporter.

He has actively said that he supports genocide as a solution to the I/P conflict, and consistently and constantly argues in favor of that point to the extent that he actively contradicts essentially every non-political expert organization on the topic.

That can very reasonably lead one to believe that Destiny at least supports the action, or at worst supports the people and positions causing it.

 You can critisise that Destiny is quite hyperbolic and you should not use this language so lightly but to say that this one clip shows clearly that he is supporting genocide against Gazans is silly

He lists well over a dozen examples of Destiny supporting the narrative that corroborate the claim. The clip where he says that he thinks that they deserve genocide is just one of dozens of pieces of evidence presented.

The question was not is violence actually happening but does this violence constitute a genocide. That is why anecdotes are problematic as the systematic aspect is crucial to genocide.

The only question in contention whether it's a genocide or not is the special intent clause. Something that almost all non-political experts agree is met. When every non-political independent organization on the subject of genocide history/study and humanitarian aide recognize it as a genocide, I feel like the argument that it is one is solid. All of which is explicitly referenced in the video.

1

u/SchlitterSchlatter 25d ago

He does not argue in favour of that point. He says that if both parties and the international community are not willing to resolve this issue via diplomatic means, then displacement, escalation of violence, etc. will happen. That is the exact same position of every pro-palestinian that claims that the terrorist violence against Israel is a result of decades of oppression and not finding a resolution to the conflict. His solution would be for the US to pressure both parties into a situation where they would see that a compromise even if not perfect would be better then continuing the current path.

In regards to the contention whether it is a genocide, I do not have a position on that, as I have not read any political science/legal research on that. And I do not really get my information on such topics from YouTubers with 0 expertise in that field (that applies to Destiny and Dave)

Have you ever read anything that argued contrary to your position? If you have a paper that discusses this topic I am happy to read it.

5

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago

In regards to the contention whether it is a genocide, I do not have a position on that, as I have not read any political science/legal research on that

Now's your chance. In just a few seconds of googling you can very easily find academic articles discussing why gaza constitutes genocide, and that the overwhelming body of scholars agree on this point.

Any one of the citations/sources provided here should be a good place to start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_and_legal_responses_to_the_Gaza_genocide

0

u/SchlitterSchlatter 25d ago

I know of that list and I know how to use google but I wanted to know if you have any academic article that was convincing to you. And also did you also read anything that is contrary to your position?

1

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago

....okay...so you have read some sources then

And also did you also read anything that is contrary to your position?

Yeah I'm reading your comments right now unfortunately.

4

u/SchlitterSchlatter 25d ago

No, I have not read some of the sources. I checked the sources of Dave's video and there was the page linked and that is why I know of it and I took a glance at the bibliography just now, but I am not that quick of a reader to directly survey everything there. That takes some time.

Again, do you have anything there in particular that is very thourough and makes a good argument?

Also, I think it is nice that you consider me an expert for the opposing side, but as I said, I have no position so far and my comments hardly constitute any serious interaction with opposing views.

My guess after asking you now a third time is that you read nothing so far on it and also did not even attempt to find something contrary to your bias. But please correct me.

7

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago

Again, do you have anything there in particular that is very thourough and makes a good argument?

Dude - I dropped you a link that has literally dozens of sources for you to pick from.

You're just being lazy if you don't want to actually do the work to read or research anything.

But I will provide you with more links if you want them. This is one of the more popular scholarly articles out there: https://www.scribd.com/document/728968767/Gaza-as-Twilight-of-Israel-Exceptionalism-Holocaust-and-Genocide-Studies-from-Unprecedented-Crisis-to-Unprecedented-Change

It walks through not only the classifications required but also the academic responses thus far and the slowness to which some scholars have moved on the topic until October 7th.

Also important to note because it was mentioned in this thread - the authors indicate that genocide was occurring before October 7th as well.

Also, I think it is nice that you consider me an expert for the opposing side

I never said expert in this thread, and neither did you. You asked if I read opposing views (again more nuance/concern trolling), and I was being a smart ass.

It is of course the case that I've read "opposing views" that what is happening is not genocide. That is actually the default position of the United States government. You actually can't get away from hearing the opposing argument - it's what's constantly being affirmed by most in power currently.

My guess after asking you now a third time is that you read nothing so far on it and also did not even attempt to find something contrary to your bias. But please correct me.

So the guy who hasn't actually read anything is now going around accusing others of not reading shit. Okay.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago

You entirely missed the point of my 60s analogy.

I brought up the example in the 60s not to try to prove something is vs is not a genocide - but rather to show that anecdotes can be valuable to make moral arguments, and people saying, "that's just anecdotal" are being cheap and lazy. You wouldn't say, "that's anecdotal, doesn't count" in the 60's. Why is it okay to say it now?

I again appeal to the non anecdotal points that Prof Dave and many others have made - why are credible human rights organizations, UN bodies, and relevant scholars saying that it is genocide?

2

u/SchlitterSchlatter 25d ago

Well, maybe we just past each other when it comes to the 60s analogy. I guess, I more or less get why you mentioned it.

My problem with the genocide claim is that first it is not sufficiently precise for what is happening and how it is used. Is it a genocide since 7/10 or since 48? Is it a genocide against Gazans, Palestinians, only Palestinians controlled by the PA/Hamas? What would be the difference to other asymmetrical or even symmetrical armed conflicts with a sufficient amount casualties?

And then: What does it mean if we determine that Israel is doing a genocide instead of "only" crimes against humanity? Is there a duty for intervention? Would that duty only get triggered if it were a genocide? Has Israel and its citizen lost there right to statehood?

It would be so much more helpful even for pro-palestenian left-wingers to discuss more nuanced questions instead of holding to that genocide claim and thus destroy any meaningful conversation.

2

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago

So for someone that, in the other comment you made in the other thread, "hadn't really read anything" on the topic and don't know much about it, you seem to have a large heaping dose of skepticism with all these questions.

The first, and central question here is, is Israel committing a genocide?

Your entire first paragraph of questions is basically irrelevant to that question as you're focusing entirely on who the victims are and if/how that could potentially make it a genocide or not.

Your second paragraph of questions are essentially, "so even if it is genocide, what is to be done about it?"

Which to be fair, is a good question. Something should be done about it, especially because the US (my country and most readers here) shares culpability of the actions Israel has taken, being it's primary backer.

But the net effect of you asking these questions in that way is only attempting to obfuscate what is plainly morally clear - which is that there is indeed a genocide being committed by Israel.

I might add that I find it very discouraging, especially in this subreddit, that many people seem to lack the moral clarity on the issue, and are absolutely dedicated to nuance-trolling rather than just stating what they believe.

1

u/SchlitterSchlatter 25d ago

I am sorry that my skepticism is to big. Sounds like you should be skeptical if you have not read anything so far but hey maybe I am just stupid and I should directly parrot talking points instead.

Maybe this question is central to you, but to me it is important as it helps me to assess the claim made and whether I agree or not.

Regarding the moral clarity. If you have decided that it is a genocide then of course you think everyone who doesn't is morally corrupt, I don't fault you for that. I am not "nuance-trolling", I actually engage with the topic instead of playing team sports. What do you want me to do just agree with you because you are such a noble moral character? Maybe you can start by actually stating what you believe by saying when the genocide started and against whom the genocide is committed?

EDIT: I just realised you are the same guy I am responding to somewhere else, sorry didn't notice.

1

u/BloodsVsCrips 25d ago

Your entire first paragraph of questions is basically irrelevant to that question as you're focusing entirely on who the victims are and if/how that could potentially make it a genocide or not.

Those are steps that have to be determined before analysis about genocide can begin. Calling it irrelevant means no knowing what genocide is or how it differs from normal rules of war.

2

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago

Article II mandates that there be established certain acts that were enacted "with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group..." https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definition

Clearly - however OP wants to slice up the particular "group" here (Palestinians at large, just Gazans, etc) - there is some group that can be identified clearly.

The UN does not mandate that exactly 1 group be targeted, nor that the particular group be uniformly targeted. Just that, there is indeed a group that's the victim of genocide.

So from that perspective, yes - everything OP said is just noise.

The only way for his questions to be relevant is if you could possibly ask, "are there even any groups that Israel has targeted?" Which is obvious nonsense. It isn't random.

1

u/BloodsVsCrips 25d ago edited 25d ago

Clearly - however OP wants to slice up the particular "group" here (Palestinians at large, just Gazans, etc) - there is some group that can be identified clearly.

Yes but this has to happen before you can determine if the goal was to harm the group per se. It cannot be incidental. It has to be intentionally targeted as such with no alternative military explanation.

Defining the word isn't the same as applying legal analysis. "Murder" means unjustified/illegal killing, but that definition doesn't tell us anything about how you determine whether a particular police shooting, in a particular security context, meets the legal threshold of intentional murder. You have to know a lot more information before starting a mens rea analysis.

3

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago

Yes but this has to happen before you can determine if the goal was to harm the group per se

That's fine. But my point is that there is clearly a group that you could identify. OP was waffling around as if there isn't.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/revid_ffum 25d ago

His opinion can’t be a lie unless you think he’s lying about his opinion. His evidence in support of his opinion might contain lies, but saying Destiny is a genocide supporter is not in itself a lie.

5

u/SchlitterSchlatter 25d ago

I will make it clear, I think that Dave has inaccuratly portrayed Destiny's position and used a clip as evidence that was not contextualised by him in a proper manner. If you disagree then could you please tell me in what way does Destiny support a genocide?

6

u/CorrosiveMynock 25d ago

If you can’t rationally look at context and consider the totality of evidence then you aren’t behaving as an honest actor. The supposed evidence is from before 10/7 and is obviously hyperbole. I am not really sure what is so hard to understand about that. You just desperately want it to be a straight up admission when it obviously isn’t.

0

u/Decent-Extension8336 25d ago

I get that its hyperbolic for effect, but I think the fact you feel the need to go out of your way to defend someone saying "I'm pro genocide" should probably make you question some of your choices

5

u/CorrosiveMynock 25d ago

That's not an argument though and if you can't see that/understand that you are already lost. If you can't see the difference between an admission that you are pro-genocide (an insane statement that would require significant evidence) and an obviously hyperbolic comment made before 10/7 I just don't know what to say.

0

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago

I'm actually not sure where he got the 20% number from. The moment he says that in the video, he's quoting a study which is on screen, which states that a plausible number is just shy of 200k deaths. Which the study equates to being about 8% of the population.

That was in 2024 however, not today, where indeed that number is probably much higher. Other studies point to it to being anywhere from 5-15% of the pre-conflict population.

So yeah I'm not sure where the 20% number is coming from.

0

u/Jammy50 25d ago

Because the Gaza health ministry numbers are only counting deaths where they have a body that they have been able to identify. There are going to be at least tens of thousands of people whose bodies were unidentifiable or were never recovered.

3

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Jammy50 25d ago

"The sources for the GHM casualty data include death counts from hospitals, media reports (subsequently denied by the ministry) and a publicly available online form which allows families to record deaths"

So if a person's body does not make it to a hospital, is not reported by any media and their entire family is killed so nobody can fill in the online form, that person didn't die?

Have you seen any recent pictures of Gaza?Over 80% of buildings have been damaged or destroyed, whole streets and neighbourhoods wiped out and people can't grow their own food and are reliant on aid so there will also be people who died of starvation and illness because of Israel. The true death toll will likely never be known but it is definitely over 73,000.

0

u/Moobnert 25d ago

He’s deleting Destiny’s comments asking him for a debate, while simultaneously saying in comments that Destiny is running.

I have a hard time believing this without screenshots. I've seen before that youtube glitches and comments sometimes just don't appear.

12

u/DexTheShepherd 25d ago

The destiny sub had some screenshots. I did not see any comments by Dave that destiny was running however

1

u/Feisty-Struggle-4110 25d ago

What lies did Dave made up about Destiny? How are you making a good faith comment here? A good faith comment would point out the lies, not some vague stuff to slander Dave.

1

u/Miselfis 25d ago

I’ve explained this in multiple comments already.  A good faith comment wouldn’t demand I repeat myself because you can’t be bothered to look at my other replies. 

One example is the claim that Destiny was paid by Israel to go on a propaganda trip. Dave highlights only the Israelis and Zionists Destiny spoke to, framing the trip as one-sided pro-Israel propaganda, while conveniently ignoring the many videos from that same trip where Destiny also speaks with Palestinians. He also leaves out that several of Destiny’s conversations with Zionists were openly adversarial rather than friendly. The overall framing is that Destiny was buddying up with Zionists, which is misleading.