June 7, 2025 • 27 mins
Today’s guest, Ami Horowitz is an American conservative documentary filmmaker and activist. He is the writer, producer, and director of Ami on the Loose, a satirical short film series. He is also the host of the recent documentary The Art of War—a look into the practices of the IDF
In the first half of the show, Ami explains his latest film—a defense of the IDF and Israel’s campaign on the ground in Gaza. We also discuss the approval rate that conservative voters have for Trump’s first few months in office and how that figure largely differs from non-conservatives.
Support the show: https://www.patreon.com/civiccipher?utm_source=search
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Broadcasting from the Hip Hop Weekly Studios. I'd like to
welcome you to another episode of Civic Cipher, where our
mission is to foster allyship, empathy and understanding.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
I am your host, ramses Ja.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Big shout out to my man q Ward who is
out of town making history with the history makers. But
have no fear, because this week we got something special
in store for you. Longtime friend of the show, Amy
Horowitz joins us. And for those that don't know, Amy
is an American conservative documentary filmmaker and activist. He is
a writer, producer, and director of Amy on the Loose,
(00:32):
a satirical short film series. He's also the host of
the recent documentary The Art of War, a look into
the practices of the IDF. And I know that if
your ears perked up because Amy is a conservative activist,
have no fear. That is intentional. Amy is a dear
friend of mine and a dear friend of the show.
(00:54):
And while we don't agree on much politically speaking, we
certainly have spirited conversations, and we feel, as often as
we're able to have these conversations that you might find.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
Some meaning in the exchange.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
Today we're specifically going to focus on sort of how
to have conversations with people that disagree with you in
the spirit of finding some common ground and moving forward
together as human beings. And so welcome back to the show, Army.
I appreciate you taking the time to hang out with
us again.
Speaker 3 (01:32):
Man, it's always a pleasure. It's an honor to always
be with you. And yet, look, you and I have
these spirit debates on air, and we also have them
personally over dinner.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Indeed, indeed, and no, this is a.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
Really important topic because we're living in such a fracture society,
and I think that's difficult for both sides. Frankly, it's
not just one side being closed mind to the other
side of being open. I know each side wants to
pretend that is you know, my friends that I go,
we're open, and the other side and vice versa, and
it's not sure. It's very difficult for all size to
have real conversations about real import issues.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Well, that's exactly what we're going to do today. But
before we get there, it is time for some ebony excellence.
So today's ebony excellence. We're shouting out the ancestors. So
this comes from Black Enterprise, the Notaway Plantation, a monument
is Southern grandeur built on the backs of enslaved people,
has been destroyed by a fire that rage for nearly
forty hours beginning late May fifteenth. The infernal gutted the
(02:27):
one hundred and sixty year old estate turned resort, once
the largest Antebellum mansion remaining in the South. I know
a lot of folks already know about this story, but
we're just getting to it.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
So bear with me.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Staff at the rename Notaway Resort No to smoke in
the South wing. On the night of May fourteenth, the
fire quickly spread through the sixty four room fifty three
thousand square foot property, including a three story rotunda. It
had been listed on the National Register of Historic Places
since nineteen eighty. Despite efforts for multiple departments, the structure
was lost. While the Yberville Parish government grieves the destruction
(02:59):
of what calls an economic cornerstone, other sea poetic justice,
and the ashes of the plantation that never meaningfully confronted
its legacy of slavery. Built in eighteen fifty nine by
sugar magnate John Hampden Sorry John Hampden Randolph, the estate
was powered by the forced labor of more than one
hundred and fifty enslaved people of fact, often glossed over
(03:20):
in tourist bouchures. While the Yberville Parish government bemoans the
loss as a blow to the local economy and a
piece of piece of national significance, others aren't mourning. For
many of the destruction feels less like a tragedy more
like a reason to celebrate. And this from the Atlanta
Black Star. A fallen tree during a storm destroyed the
Fort Branch Confederate Museum in North Carolina, leaving the building
(03:41):
a total loss. The museum was immediately closed due to
insufficient insurance to cover rebuilding costs. While the historical society
seeks donation, social media has had other reactions, many noting
the destruction alongside other recent events involving Confederate landmarks, karma,
or ancestral justice. So shout out to the sisters looking
at one time. Okay, Amy, Before we get into this,
(04:07):
I want to make sure that the part of this
conversation that I want our listeners to take away from
it is well established. So I will go first in
saying that Amy is a person that first came to
my attention through social media. And this was years ago now,
(04:29):
but you know, he is a media personality, and he's
a filmmaker, he's a journalist, and you know, your algorithm
serves up the things that you're into, and as a
journalist and as a media personality, Ammy was one such individual.
He ended up reaching out and we said, you know,
let's have a conversation on the radio. And in short order,
(04:54):
I think that we both I don't want to speak
for you, but I think that we both made a
decision that we are going to be bread earlier than
we do with perhaps most people. Certainly, I'll say that
for myself. And I'm going to love this man right here,
Amy Horowitz, no matter what, no matter what he says
out of his mouth that infuriates me to no end,
(05:16):
I'm going to love him. And in doing that, I
have learned that this is a beautiful human being. And
a lot of the things, a lot of the anguish
and a lot of the misunderstandings that I associate with
people on the right, Amy is a living testament.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
To the fact that I can't paint with too broad
a stroke. Right.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
So, are there people who are racist? Are there people
who are calloused? Are there people who are unkind, mean
spirited on the right, Absolutely, But I can't pat when
too broad of a stroke, Nor can I say that
the ideology in and of itself is only for people
who fit those descriptions, because I don't associate any of
those things with Amy. I believe Amy is a man
(05:59):
who was put on this planet to love people, and
the filter through which he views the world is a
conservative filter, which is fundamentally different from the filter through
which I view the world. And I wanted to say that,
and I also want to get your response to that.
But right on the heels of that, I definitely want
(06:20):
you to talk about your recent film because you're here
on the show, you're promoting your film, and I want
to make sure you have the grounds to do so.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
So please, Yeah, look.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
That First of all, it was a lovely introduction, maybe
one of the nicest introductions I have ever had, that
written by my mother, and probably nicer than what she'd
have written. Also, look, it has been you know, to
be your friend has been a real pleasure and also
something of a learning experience for me. And I think
that what you said about how you viewed people on
(06:54):
the right, I certainly had some of that viewpoint for
people on the left, and I think that not just
because we disagree on things, it doesn't it doesn't mean malice.
Right people disagree on different topics. Sometimes it is. And
don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there isn't malice
(07:15):
for people on the right and there isn't malice for
people on the left. Obviously that is the truth. But
I think for the most part, we distinguish between difference
of opinion and how and and and coming from a
darker place. And I think those two things could live together,
but oftentimes they don't, and I love them. We had
(07:35):
the discussions. We actually are highlighting the fact that I
think for most people it doesn't come from a bad place.
Speaker 1 (07:40):
Sure sure, Now now we're going to get into the
weeds here, So we're going to get into some topics
and people are going to hear us and how we
have our conversations because we do this from time to time,
either on the phone, in person, on on uh, you know,
on the radio, or you know, whatever it is we're
doing professionally. But talk of about your recent documentary, because
(08:02):
you know, you put a lot of effort into it,
and I know that you want to share that and
you know.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
Please so yeah.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
So this this documentary was in response to a lot
of what people are saying about the conflict, the war
in Gaza and how Israel has executed that war. And
I think it's an important and this is why this
platform is so important, because you share an opinion that
I don't really share when it comes to is I
(08:31):
think we certain I think we you and I have
made some progress from both perspective. I think we've you
and I both mediated some of our views on this topic.
But the crux of the video was this is that
there's a narrative going on that Israel essentially is committing
genocide and that Israel's intent is to harm civilians, that
(08:51):
they are trying to wipe out the civilian population in Gaza.
And this video, this documentary is a response to that
where I try to bring in experts, try to go
there myself, go through data because I think data ultimately
is really important. I know a lot of people will
say to me, well, data excludes dead children. Just because
(09:14):
you say data, they're still dead children. I go. I
get that emotional response, but ultimately, war is war. And
in order to come up to some kind of conclusion
on whether or not this war is being prosecuted in
the most ethical way possible. And I say most ethical
way possible because Ramsey's war, you know, is that quote
(09:36):
by I think it's by patent war as hell, and
it is. War is a horrific human dnaver that is
sometimes necessary, sometimes unnecessary. But in both cases, war is
difficult and it's bloody, and people are are killed, many
(09:57):
people were killed who are not combat In fact, generally,
when one engages in war, even if you're trying, even
the most ethical armies in the history of the Earth,
let's say, Native one would argue that Western European war
is as ethical as one can make war. The majority,
the vast majority of civilians that are the people are
(10:18):
killed are still going to be civilians. It's the nature
of war. So getting past the emotion, I wanted to
get into some of the data to get a sense
of is Israel committing war crimes as a matter of course,
obviously every army is a commit certain amount of war crimes.
So it's impossible because humans are involved, and you're going
to have a certain amount of unethical behavior, right, Even
(10:42):
some that account.
Speaker 2 (10:43):
To war crimes, bad actors.
Speaker 3 (10:44):
That doesn't mean what's that bad actors, that you're good
bad actors for sure. That doesn't mean that the war
itself is being prosecuted in an ethical way, right, as
opposed to let's say Russia and the way Russia's prosecuting
its war. Its entire war plan is war crimes. That's
all it's trying to do. It's not trying to avoid civilians.
It's trying to kill as many civilians as possible. I
(11:08):
would argue that that's the entire intent of Hamas. Hamas
isn't looking to to never mind, it is not never mind,
that's not trying to reduce the amount of Israeli civilian casualties, right,
trying to kill as many is really civil as possible.
I would argue the Hamas is trying to kill and
have as many of its own civilians killed as possible
as because that's a propaganda wind for them. So that's
(11:29):
essentially the the idea of this documentary.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Okay, one more time, what is the name of it?
Speaker 3 (11:35):
The Art of War?
Speaker 2 (11:36):
Where can people find it?
Speaker 3 (11:37):
They can find it anywhere on YouTube. Okayger you is
one one of the distributors. I knew again. Chuckle out
of you on that.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
Yeah, that's an inside joke between Amy and myself. I'm
not a fan of Prager you and Ami is a
is a fan of Praguer you. But that that's for
another day. Okay, so let's get into it, Imy, my brother.
You know, I was with my son today and I
(12:07):
knew we'd have this conversation. And yesterday, my son, he's
ten years old, he went and got his ears pierced. Okay, no,
that's probably not a thing that you know people do widely,
but in our culture, that's the thing that we do.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
Right, So I took my little boy to get his
ears pierced. He wanted his earrings.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
We got him done, and then I looked at him
and he's a young man, right, So just that, just
like that, and I'm like taking it in that I
get to watch my son grow up. And I know
that I'm gonna have this conversation with you, and I
know you're going to talk about your film, and we're
going to talk about many other things, and I want
(12:47):
you to talk about your film. When we were last together,
I made a comment, shooters are going to shoot, right,
You're going to do what it is that you do.
You're a journalist, your personality. You make content that is
widely received, well received, and it brings a perspective to
(13:11):
the common dialogue that has just as much a place
as something I would bring. Okay, I famously will say that, hey, look,
I have my own personal political biases. I think that
the world should look this way. I think that people
should behave this way. I think that we should be
(13:32):
good to each other. And what I know to be
good to each other differs from what other people what
their line is. Right, So in that I admit my bias,
and for you to say that you're a conservative filmmaker,
I think therein lies your conservative bias. Right admitted conservative bias.
(13:56):
These things are all really good to establish upfront, because
these aren't hidden elements. These are things that you know.
I'm being fully transparent. You've always been very transparent to me.
While we're on the subject of Israel, one of the
things that I might say in a conversation with you
(14:17):
that I want our listeners to know, given what you've
said and I've actually seen your film, is that while
I appreciate the additional perspective that helps that helps a
man that grew up with Jewish people, played with Jewish
children when I was a child, taught Jewish children my culture,
(14:37):
and was taught Jewish culture from Jewish friends of mine,
some of whom are still my friends today. And along
the way we've grown and we've maintained friendships, and we've
lost people along the way, and we've gained new family
and new friends along the way, etc. The whole time,
knowing not much about Israel, but Jewish people have always
(15:00):
had my heart. I would say to you, my brother
Amy Horowitz, that if I lived in a parallel universe,
the moral stance that I have with respect to Palestine
and Israel's response to Palestine, not Jewish people's response, but
(15:23):
Israel's response to the people in Palestine.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
I believe it would be exactly the same.
Speaker 1 (15:31):
If I lived in an alternate universe where Palestine was
bombing people and they had every single justification, and they
were doing it as ethically as possible as they could,
and everything was all buttoned up as much as they
could make it, and they could pass inspection or take
it to court and win, you know whatever.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
I would have the same response.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
If I looked at the numbers and I saw that
there were ultimately less Jewish children in the world as
a result of a Palestinian campaign. Living in that reality
for me would be unconscionable, and my reaction would be
the same.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
And so the love that I have.
Speaker 1 (16:14):
For Jewish people is for the people first, the culture second.
And I recognize, and you and I have this conversation before,
that there is a finite number of Jewish people. When
I found that, I think you might have been the
one that told me that that there was it was.
(16:35):
It might have been like sixteen million Jewish people on
Earth or some incredibly, you see what I mean, what
a small number? Right, So, human beings that value human beings,
human beings that recognize our path would recognize, oh, we're
losing this precious group of people, and that is not
(17:01):
the world that I want to live in. We need
to be growing this group of people. These people are
valuable and special and precious. And all of these narratives
and all of these anti Semitic comments and all these
Kanye West people and people that allow that to have
all that sort of stuff, you know, these Nazi salutes
by these people on stages and whatever. That is the
(17:23):
sort of thing I push back against. But I like
to think that I would keep that same energy when
it comes to Palestine, just like if the roles were reversed,
I'd keep that same energy if it was the nation
state of Palestine that was taking out buildings and institutions
and lives of Jewish people, and then where do we
(17:44):
go from there? And everybody's okay with this? There's a
stunning silence, and indeed there's a documentary that comes out
that provides some cover, which again I understand, Ami, I do,
I understand.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Because people need to be able to say their peace
with this.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Society indeed is built on you say what happened, I
say what happened, and there's a judge or arbitrator whoever
that finds out what the truth will be. That will
be chronicled and we will move forward as a society
based on that. So having the other the opposing narrative
I suppose is valid. But the end result, the thing
(18:22):
that you said, People's reaction is strongest when they're digesting that.
The end result I believe is consistent with what I
know to be human morality. In short, people A that
don't have anything to do with this, and B that
(18:43):
are dying. It's so permanent. What will be Palestine on
the other side of this? And again, when you reverse
the roles, what would be Israel on the other side
of a similar campaign in the hypothetical universe is where
I find myself. So your response to that will move
to I want to make sure I give you the
last word as often as I can, But your response
(19:04):
to that will move to some other topics.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
Look, h what you said is part of the reason why
I love because you do have a big heart, and
I do believe that you would have the same response
if if, if, if the shoe is the on their foot,
I think you said, I I believe because I know
you and you're honest. But my response that is, we
don't live in a perfect world. In fact, I would
(19:28):
argue that perfect the perfect, is the enemy of the good,
and every time we try to pursue perfection and saying, look,
every life is precious. First of all, not every life
is precious. Right, anyone who's a murder or a killer,
his life is less precious than an innocent person. Certainly,
any any innocent life is something that we that we
any any good person more right, And obviously no one
(19:52):
wants to have innocent life or not a not no,
Actually it's part of the problem. Some do want innocent
lives to be lost. But good people, all good people
don't want innocent lives loss. Certainly Israel doesn't want innocent
lives lobs and it bothers them, you know. There there
was a famous quote by Goldemeyer. She was a Prime
Minister of Israel, right, female prime minister of Israel, and
(20:15):
she had a number of very famous quotes, and one
of her more famous ones were the one thing I
will never forgive the Palaestudians for is making us kill
their children. It's a powerful statement because it says two things.
One is the fact that she so in her bones
like most Israelis do not want to kill Palestinian kids.
(20:39):
But on the other hand, understands the reality of the
situation that sometimes we're forced to right and that it
bothers us to our bones. But that's the reality when
we're facing war.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
You know.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
There's also a famous saying in Israel, which is the
moment all Padians put their weapons down is the moment
we have peace in the region. And the moment Israel
puts its weapons down is the moment we have genocide.
I think there's a difference. There is a difference, operating difference.
(21:13):
The mantra of look the truth is that this this
this this argument is it was left op, was left
bare and open and and obvious. When the the mantra
of the Palestinian protesters in America and in Europe is
from the river to the sea. And I don't want
to I don't want to wash that over saying, oh,
it's just some kind of random thing. It's not. It's
(21:33):
a very specific statement which means they don't want self
determination of these people, of of just the West Bank,
and and and and Gaza. I'm for that, I'm for
their self determination. I want a healthy, strong Palestinian state
(21:54):
that works with Israel, Paladian people, that works with Israel
to make the region a better place. Well, when they
the river to the sea is a very specific concept.
It is we want to get rid of every Jew
that lives between the Jordan River and the ocean and
the sea right the Mediterranean Sea, and they want it
(22:15):
cleansed of Jews. They want the Palestinian nation to take
all of the land. And that's what Israel's fighting against.
And yes, there have been innocent people who have died,
and good people moan more than that, and certainly I do.
At the end of the day, we have to look
at ultimately how it's producting conducting itself, and I would
(22:36):
say it's conducting yourself in a in a one of
the most if not the most ethical war we've seen,
an urban warfare.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Okay, I think that to a lot of people.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
I'm gonna I'm going to back up to the same
hypothetical here and again last word is yours. But if
there was there's a version of this that we had
to deal with where let's say Ramses is the decider.
I get to decide who lives and who dies. And
there is a Palestinian person or a Jewish person, let's
(23:15):
say a Jewish person who is a bad person. Right,
This Jewish person is attacking the world. Right, this Jewish
person is evil, the epitome of evil, just a bad apple, Okay.
And in order to get to that Jewish person, I
had to shoot a bullet through the head of a
Jewish little girl. Now I could shoot through this little girl,
(23:38):
hit that bad person, and rid the will of this evil.
I'm safer my children, I'm safe for everyone safer, right,
But I have to shoot through this little Jewish girl's head,
and then I'm telling myself that that's just the price
of doing war. Sometimes you just have to eliminate people
and that's collateral damage. That's a very callous way of
looking at it, and that's what it feels like. And
(24:01):
there are people this is going to be a moral
debate for all of the ages, but this is what
I'm trying to say, where my line is because living
in a world without that little Jewish girl is not
worth living in a world without that evil Jewish man. Okay,
give me twenty seconds your response and then we'll move
to Another's.
Speaker 3 (24:19):
So fascinating because it does get the crux of what
we're talking about.
Speaker 2 (24:23):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (24:23):
And ultimately one has is that a war crime? Right?
Is that a war crime? And there's very specifical rules
on what makes a war crime. And the truth is
is that the Geneva Convention says if the person you're shooting,
that evil Jewish person you're shooting, is going to kill
more of your side than that one girl that you
have intelligence saying he is perpetrating more damage that one death.
(24:46):
According to the laws of war, you could do that,
you could hit a school.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
So that means according to the laws of AMI.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
No, these are no, not at all.
Speaker 2 (24:56):
So you agree with this law.
Speaker 3 (24:58):
Oh look, yeah, I think that there's they're there for
a reason.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Yeah, and and and just for me again, for me,
that is unconscionable.
Speaker 2 (25:07):
So we'll leave that one. We'll leave that one right there,
because I do I actually love that about you. Well,
well let's leave it right there. Thank you for that.
But I want to get to some other stuff because
we got a lot to cover it, all right.
Speaker 3 (25:17):
So.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
Let's bring it back home.
Speaker 1 (25:21):
According to some recent polls that I read, around ninety
percent of Republicans approve of Donald Trump's current performance in office.
So I'm going to get your thoughts. We don't have
a lot of time because we talked a lot about that,
but we'll come back to.
Speaker 2 (25:35):
It if we need to.
Speaker 1 (25:37):
Republicans, most Republicans approve of Trump's performance, Uh, talk to
us about why that is and what Republicans are seeing
that the rest of the world is missing because outside
of Republicans, not a lot of people are fans of
what Donald Trump's doing, not even Elon Musk as of late.
Speaker 3 (25:55):
Yeah, I didn't know that that ninety percent number. I
thought the number to come down a little bit recently.
Speaker 1 (26:00):
But yeah, yeah, maybe this is a little old because
I planned on talking to you about this, But give
me about thirty seconds.
Speaker 3 (26:05):
Yeah, there's good Trump, bad Trump, right that this has
been the story of Trump since the beginning. There's stuff
about Trump that I love, that I think is great,
that I think is helpful, and there's stuff about Trump
that drives me insane, I don't like, I don't support,
So I think for most people in the country, frankly,
it's a mixed bag. Look, Republicans are always going to
support the Republican candidate, right, and the Republican president and
(26:29):
Democrats and the support the Democratic president. I think, you know,
Joe Biden probably had a number similar to to uh
to Trump. But ultimately, I think what people voted for
were somebody's gonna come in and say we're going to
change the way things are done because what we have
seen in the last four years has not been good
for the country. Uh, And I think he has changed
things for good and for bad.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
Okay, Well, giving that insight, I think that's gonna set
us up for the next part of the show.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
So stick around and will be right back
Broadcasting from the Hip Hop Weekly Studios. I'd like to
welcome you to another episode of Civic Cipher, where our
mission is to foster allyship, empathy and understanding.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
I am your host, ramses Ja.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Big shout out to my man q Ward who is
out of town making history with the history makers. But
have no fear, because this week we got something special
in store for you. Longtime friend of the show, Amy
Horowitz joins us. And for those that don't know, Amy
is an American conservative documentary filmmaker and activist. He is
a writer, producer, and director of Amy on the Loose,
(00:32):
a satirical short film series. He's also the host of
the recent documentary The Art of War, a look into
the practices of the IDF. And I know that if
your ears perked up because Amy is a conservative activist,
have no fear. That is intentional. Amy is a dear
friend of mine and a dear friend of the show.
(00:54):
And while we don't agree on much politically speaking, we
certainly have spirited conversations, and we feel, as often as
we're able to have these conversations that you might find.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
Some meaning in the exchange.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
Today we're specifically going to focus on sort of how
to have conversations with people that disagree with you in
the spirit of finding some common ground and moving forward
together as human beings. And so welcome back to the show, Army.
I appreciate you taking the time to hang out with
us again.
Speaker 3 (01:32):
Man, it's always a pleasure. It's an honor to always
be with you. And yet, look, you and I have
these spirit debates on air, and we also have them
personally over dinner.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Indeed, indeed, and no, this is a.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
Really important topic because we're living in such a fracture society,
and I think that's difficult for both sides. Frankly, it's
not just one side being closed mind to the other
side of being open. I know each side wants to
pretend that is you know, my friends that I go,
we're open, and the other side and vice versa, and
it's not sure. It's very difficult for all size to
have real conversations about real import issues.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Well, that's exactly what we're going to do today. But
before we get there, it is time for some ebony excellence.
So today's ebony excellence. We're shouting out the ancestors. So
this comes from Black Enterprise, the Notaway Plantation, a monument
is Southern grandeur built on the backs of enslaved people,
has been destroyed by a fire that rage for nearly
forty hours beginning late May fifteenth. The infernal gutted the
(02:27):
one hundred and sixty year old estate turned resort, once
the largest Antebellum mansion remaining in the South. I know
a lot of folks already know about this story, but
we're just getting to it.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
So bear with me.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Staff at the rename Notaway Resort No to smoke in
the South wing. On the night of May fourteenth, the
fire quickly spread through the sixty four room fifty three
thousand square foot property, including a three story rotunda. It
had been listed on the National Register of Historic Places
since nineteen eighty. Despite efforts for multiple departments, the structure
was lost. While the Yberville Parish government grieves the destruction
(02:59):
of what calls an economic cornerstone, other sea poetic justice,
and the ashes of the plantation that never meaningfully confronted
its legacy of slavery. Built in eighteen fifty nine by
sugar magnate John Hampden Sorry John Hampden Randolph, the estate
was powered by the forced labor of more than one
hundred and fifty enslaved people of fact, often glossed over
(03:20):
in tourist bouchures. While the Yberville Parish government bemoans the
loss as a blow to the local economy and a
piece of piece of national significance, others aren't mourning. For
many of the destruction feels less like a tragedy more
like a reason to celebrate. And this from the Atlanta
Black Star. A fallen tree during a storm destroyed the
Fort Branch Confederate Museum in North Carolina, leaving the building
(03:41):
a total loss. The museum was immediately closed due to
insufficient insurance to cover rebuilding costs. While the historical society
seeks donation, social media has had other reactions, many noting
the destruction alongside other recent events involving Confederate landmarks, karma,
or ancestral justice. So shout out to the sisters looking
at one time. Okay, Amy, Before we get into this,
(04:07):
I want to make sure that the part of this
conversation that I want our listeners to take away from
it is well established. So I will go first in
saying that Amy is a person that first came to
my attention through social media. And this was years ago now,
(04:29):
but you know, he is a media personality, and he's
a filmmaker, he's a journalist, and you know, your algorithm
serves up the things that you're into, and as a
journalist and as a media personality, Ammy was one such individual.
He ended up reaching out and we said, you know,
let's have a conversation on the radio. And in short order,
(04:54):
I think that we both I don't want to speak
for you, but I think that we both made a
decision that we are going to be bread earlier than
we do with perhaps most people. Certainly, I'll say that
for myself. And I'm going to love this man right here,
Amy Horowitz, no matter what, no matter what he says
out of his mouth that infuriates me to no end,
(05:16):
I'm going to love him. And in doing that, I
have learned that this is a beautiful human being. And
a lot of the things, a lot of the anguish
and a lot of the misunderstandings that I associate with
people on the right, Amy is a living testament.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
To the fact that I can't paint with too broad
a stroke. Right.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
So, are there people who are racist? Are there people
who are calloused? Are there people who are unkind, mean
spirited on the right, Absolutely, But I can't pat when
too broad of a stroke, Nor can I say that
the ideology in and of itself is only for people
who fit those descriptions, because I don't associate any of
those things with Amy. I believe Amy is a man
(05:59):
who was put on this planet to love people, and
the filter through which he views the world is a
conservative filter, which is fundamentally different from the filter through
which I view the world. And I wanted to say that,
and I also want to get your response to that.
But right on the heels of that, I definitely want
(06:20):
you to talk about your recent film because you're here
on the show, you're promoting your film, and I want
to make sure you have the grounds to do so.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
So please, Yeah, look.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
That First of all, it was a lovely introduction, maybe
one of the nicest introductions I have ever had, that
written by my mother, and probably nicer than what she'd
have written. Also, look, it has been you know, to
be your friend has been a real pleasure and also
something of a learning experience for me. And I think
that what you said about how you viewed people on
(06:54):
the right, I certainly had some of that viewpoint for
people on the left, and I think that not just
because we disagree on things, it doesn't it doesn't mean malice.
Right people disagree on different topics. Sometimes it is. And
don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there isn't malice
(07:15):
for people on the right and there isn't malice for
people on the left. Obviously that is the truth. But
I think for the most part, we distinguish between difference
of opinion and how and and and coming from a
darker place. And I think those two things could live together,
but oftentimes they don't, and I love them. We had
(07:35):
the discussions. We actually are highlighting the fact that I
think for most people it doesn't come from a bad place.
Speaker 1 (07:40):
Sure sure, Now now we're going to get into the
weeds here, So we're going to get into some topics
and people are going to hear us and how we
have our conversations because we do this from time to time,
either on the phone, in person, on on uh, you know,
on the radio, or you know, whatever it is we're
doing professionally. But talk of about your recent documentary, because
(08:02):
you know, you put a lot of effort into it,
and I know that you want to share that and
you know.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
Please so yeah.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
So this this documentary was in response to a lot
of what people are saying about the conflict, the war
in Gaza and how Israel has executed that war. And
I think it's an important and this is why this
platform is so important, because you share an opinion that
I don't really share when it comes to is I
(08:31):
think we certain I think we you and I have
made some progress from both perspective. I think we've you
and I both mediated some of our views on this topic.
But the crux of the video was this is that
there's a narrative going on that Israel essentially is committing
genocide and that Israel's intent is to harm civilians, that
(08:51):
they are trying to wipe out the civilian population in Gaza.
And this video, this documentary is a response to that
where I try to bring in experts, try to go
there myself, go through data because I think data ultimately
is really important. I know a lot of people will
say to me, well, data excludes dead children. Just because
(09:14):
you say data, they're still dead children. I go. I
get that emotional response, but ultimately, war is war. And
in order to come up to some kind of conclusion
on whether or not this war is being prosecuted in
the most ethical way possible. And I say most ethical
way possible because Ramsey's war, you know, is that quote
(09:36):
by I think it's by patent war as hell, and
it is. War is a horrific human dnaver that is
sometimes necessary, sometimes unnecessary. But in both cases, war is
difficult and it's bloody, and people are are killed, many
(09:57):
people were killed who are not combat In fact, generally,
when one engages in war, even if you're trying, even
the most ethical armies in the history of the Earth,
let's say, Native one would argue that Western European war
is as ethical as one can make war. The majority,
the vast majority of civilians that are the people are
(10:18):
killed are still going to be civilians. It's the nature
of war. So getting past the emotion, I wanted to
get into some of the data to get a sense
of is Israel committing war crimes as a matter of course,
obviously every army is a commit certain amount of war crimes.
So it's impossible because humans are involved, and you're going
to have a certain amount of unethical behavior, right, Even
(10:42):
some that account.
Speaker 2 (10:43):
To war crimes, bad actors.
Speaker 3 (10:44):
That doesn't mean what's that bad actors, that you're good
bad actors for sure. That doesn't mean that the war
itself is being prosecuted in an ethical way, right, as
opposed to let's say Russia and the way Russia's prosecuting
its war. Its entire war plan is war crimes. That's
all it's trying to do. It's not trying to avoid civilians.
It's trying to kill as many civilians as possible. I
(11:08):
would argue that that's the entire intent of Hamas. Hamas
isn't looking to to never mind, it is not never mind,
that's not trying to reduce the amount of Israeli civilian casualties, right,
trying to kill as many is really civil as possible.
I would argue the Hamas is trying to kill and
have as many of its own civilians killed as possible
as because that's a propaganda wind for them. So that's
(11:29):
essentially the the idea of this documentary.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Okay, one more time, what is the name of it?
Speaker 3 (11:35):
The Art of War?
Speaker 2 (11:36):
Where can people find it?
Speaker 3 (11:37):
They can find it anywhere on YouTube. Okayger you is
one one of the distributors. I knew again. Chuckle out
of you on that.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
Yeah, that's an inside joke between Amy and myself. I'm
not a fan of Prager you and Ami is a
is a fan of Praguer you. But that that's for
another day. Okay, so let's get into it, Imy, my brother.
You know, I was with my son today and I
(12:07):
knew we'd have this conversation. And yesterday, my son, he's
ten years old, he went and got his ears pierced. Okay, no,
that's probably not a thing that you know people do widely,
but in our culture, that's the thing that we do.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
Right, So I took my little boy to get his
ears pierced. He wanted his earrings.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
We got him done, and then I looked at him
and he's a young man, right, So just that, just
like that, and I'm like taking it in that I
get to watch my son grow up. And I know
that I'm gonna have this conversation with you, and I
know you're going to talk about your film, and we're
going to talk about many other things, and I want
(12:47):
you to talk about your film. When we were last together,
I made a comment, shooters are going to shoot, right,
You're going to do what it is that you do.
You're a journalist, your personality. You make content that is
widely received, well received, and it brings a perspective to
(13:11):
the common dialogue that has just as much a place
as something I would bring. Okay, I famously will say that, hey, look,
I have my own personal political biases. I think that
the world should look this way. I think that people
should behave this way. I think that we should be
(13:32):
good to each other. And what I know to be
good to each other differs from what other people what
their line is. Right, So in that I admit my bias,
and for you to say that you're a conservative filmmaker,
I think therein lies your conservative bias. Right admitted conservative bias.
(13:56):
These things are all really good to establish upfront, because
these aren't hidden elements. These are things that you know.
I'm being fully transparent. You've always been very transparent to me.
While we're on the subject of Israel, one of the
things that I might say in a conversation with you
(14:17):
that I want our listeners to know, given what you've
said and I've actually seen your film, is that while
I appreciate the additional perspective that helps that helps a
man that grew up with Jewish people, played with Jewish
children when I was a child, taught Jewish children my culture,
(14:37):
and was taught Jewish culture from Jewish friends of mine,
some of whom are still my friends today. And along
the way we've grown and we've maintained friendships, and we've
lost people along the way, and we've gained new family
and new friends along the way, etc. The whole time,
knowing not much about Israel, but Jewish people have always
(15:00):
had my heart. I would say to you, my brother
Amy Horowitz, that if I lived in a parallel universe,
the moral stance that I have with respect to Palestine
and Israel's response to Palestine, not Jewish people's response, but
(15:23):
Israel's response to the people in Palestine.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
I believe it would be exactly the same.
Speaker 1 (15:31):
If I lived in an alternate universe where Palestine was
bombing people and they had every single justification, and they
were doing it as ethically as possible as they could,
and everything was all buttoned up as much as they
could make it, and they could pass inspection or take
it to court and win, you know whatever.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
I would have the same response.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
If I looked at the numbers and I saw that
there were ultimately less Jewish children in the world as
a result of a Palestinian campaign. Living in that reality
for me would be unconscionable, and my reaction would be
the same.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
And so the love that I have.
Speaker 1 (16:14):
For Jewish people is for the people first, the culture second.
And I recognize, and you and I have this conversation before,
that there is a finite number of Jewish people. When
I found that, I think you might have been the
one that told me that that there was it was.
(16:35):
It might have been like sixteen million Jewish people on
Earth or some incredibly, you see what I mean, what
a small number? Right, So, human beings that value human beings,
human beings that recognize our path would recognize, oh, we're
losing this precious group of people, and that is not
(17:01):
the world that I want to live in. We need
to be growing this group of people. These people are
valuable and special and precious. And all of these narratives
and all of these anti Semitic comments and all these
Kanye West people and people that allow that to have
all that sort of stuff, you know, these Nazi salutes
by these people on stages and whatever. That is the
(17:23):
sort of thing I push back against. But I like
to think that I would keep that same energy when
it comes to Palestine, just like if the roles were reversed,
I'd keep that same energy if it was the nation
state of Palestine that was taking out buildings and institutions
and lives of Jewish people, and then where do we
(17:44):
go from there? And everybody's okay with this? There's a
stunning silence, and indeed there's a documentary that comes out
that provides some cover, which again I understand, Ami, I do,
I understand.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Because people need to be able to say their peace
with this.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Society indeed is built on you say what happened, I
say what happened, and there's a judge or arbitrator whoever
that finds out what the truth will be. That will
be chronicled and we will move forward as a society
based on that. So having the other the opposing narrative
I suppose is valid. But the end result, the thing
(18:22):
that you said, People's reaction is strongest when they're digesting that.
The end result I believe is consistent with what I
know to be human morality. In short, people A that
don't have anything to do with this, and B that
(18:43):
are dying. It's so permanent. What will be Palestine on
the other side of this? And again, when you reverse
the roles, what would be Israel on the other side
of a similar campaign in the hypothetical universe is where
I find myself. So your response to that will move
to I want to make sure I give you the
last word as often as I can, But your response
(19:04):
to that will move to some other topics.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
Look, h what you said is part of the reason why
I love because you do have a big heart, and
I do believe that you would have the same response
if if, if, if the shoe is the on their foot,
I think you said, I I believe because I know
you and you're honest. But my response that is, we
don't live in a perfect world. In fact, I would
(19:28):
argue that perfect the perfect, is the enemy of the good,
and every time we try to pursue perfection and saying, look,
every life is precious. First of all, not every life
is precious. Right, anyone who's a murder or a killer,
his life is less precious than an innocent person. Certainly,
any any innocent life is something that we that we
any any good person more right, And obviously no one
(19:52):
wants to have innocent life or not a not no,
Actually it's part of the problem. Some do want innocent
lives to be lost. But good people, all good people
don't want innocent lives loss. Certainly Israel doesn't want innocent
lives lobs and it bothers them, you know. There there
was a famous quote by Goldemeyer. She was a Prime
Minister of Israel, right, female prime minister of Israel, and
(20:15):
she had a number of very famous quotes, and one
of her more famous ones were the one thing I
will never forgive the Palaestudians for is making us kill
their children. It's a powerful statement because it says two things.
One is the fact that she so in her bones
like most Israelis do not want to kill Palestinian kids.
(20:39):
But on the other hand, understands the reality of the
situation that sometimes we're forced to right and that it
bothers us to our bones. But that's the reality when
we're facing war.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
You know.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
There's also a famous saying in Israel, which is the
moment all Padians put their weapons down is the moment
we have peace in the region. And the moment Israel
puts its weapons down is the moment we have genocide.
I think there's a difference. There is a difference, operating difference.
(21:13):
The mantra of look the truth is that this this
this this argument is it was left op, was left
bare and open and and obvious. When the the mantra
of the Palestinian protesters in America and in Europe is
from the river to the sea. And I don't want
to I don't want to wash that over saying, oh,
it's just some kind of random thing. It's not. It's
(21:33):
a very specific statement which means they don't want self
determination of these people, of of just the West Bank,
and and and and Gaza. I'm for that, I'm for
their self determination. I want a healthy, strong Palestinian state
(21:54):
that works with Israel, Paladian people, that works with Israel
to make the region a better place. Well, when they
the river to the sea is a very specific concept.
It is we want to get rid of every Jew
that lives between the Jordan River and the ocean and
the sea right the Mediterranean Sea, and they want it
(22:15):
cleansed of Jews. They want the Palestinian nation to take
all of the land. And that's what Israel's fighting against.
And yes, there have been innocent people who have died,
and good people moan more than that, and certainly I do.
At the end of the day, we have to look
at ultimately how it's producting conducting itself, and I would
(22:36):
say it's conducting yourself in a in a one of
the most if not the most ethical war we've seen,
an urban warfare.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Okay, I think that to a lot of people.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
I'm gonna I'm going to back up to the same
hypothetical here and again last word is yours. But if
there was there's a version of this that we had
to deal with where let's say Ramses is the decider.
I get to decide who lives and who dies. And
there is a Palestinian person or a Jewish person, let's
(23:15):
say a Jewish person who is a bad person. Right,
This Jewish person is attacking the world. Right, this Jewish
person is evil, the epitome of evil, just a bad apple, Okay.
And in order to get to that Jewish person, I
had to shoot a bullet through the head of a
Jewish little girl. Now I could shoot through this little girl,
(23:38):
hit that bad person, and rid the will of this evil.
I'm safer my children, I'm safe for everyone safer, right,
But I have to shoot through this little Jewish girl's head,
and then I'm telling myself that that's just the price
of doing war. Sometimes you just have to eliminate people
and that's collateral damage. That's a very callous way of
looking at it, and that's what it feels like. And
(24:01):
there are people this is going to be a moral
debate for all of the ages, but this is what
I'm trying to say, where my line is because living
in a world without that little Jewish girl is not
worth living in a world without that evil Jewish man. Okay,
give me twenty seconds your response and then we'll move
to Another's.
Speaker 3 (24:19):
So fascinating because it does get the crux of what
we're talking about.
Speaker 2 (24:23):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (24:23):
And ultimately one has is that a war crime? Right?
Is that a war crime? And there's very specifical rules
on what makes a war crime. And the truth is
is that the Geneva Convention says if the person you're shooting,
that evil Jewish person you're shooting, is going to kill
more of your side than that one girl that you
have intelligence saying he is perpetrating more damage that one death.
(24:46):
According to the laws of war, you could do that,
you could hit a school.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
So that means according to the laws of AMI.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
No, these are no, not at all.
Speaker 2 (24:56):
So you agree with this law.
Speaker 3 (24:58):
Oh look, yeah, I think that there's they're there for
a reason.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Yeah, and and and just for me again, for me,
that is unconscionable.
Speaker 2 (25:07):
So we'll leave that one. We'll leave that one right there,
because I do I actually love that about you. Well,
well let's leave it right there. Thank you for that.
But I want to get to some other stuff because
we got a lot to cover it, all right.
Speaker 3 (25:17):
So.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
Let's bring it back home.
Speaker 1 (25:21):
According to some recent polls that I read, around ninety
percent of Republicans approve of Donald Trump's current performance in office.
So I'm going to get your thoughts. We don't have
a lot of time because we talked a lot about that,
but we'll come back to.
Speaker 2 (25:35):
It if we need to.
Speaker 1 (25:37):
Republicans, most Republicans approve of Trump's performance, Uh, talk to
us about why that is and what Republicans are seeing
that the rest of the world is missing because outside
of Republicans, not a lot of people are fans of
what Donald Trump's doing, not even Elon Musk as of late.
Speaker 3 (25:55):
Yeah, I didn't know that that ninety percent number. I
thought the number to come down a little bit recently.
Speaker 1 (26:00):
But yeah, yeah, maybe this is a little old because
I planned on talking to you about this, But give
me about thirty seconds.
Speaker 3 (26:05):
Yeah, there's good Trump, bad Trump, right that this has
been the story of Trump since the beginning. There's stuff
about Trump that I love, that I think is great,
that I think is helpful, and there's stuff about Trump
that drives me insane, I don't like, I don't support,
So I think for most people in the country, frankly,
it's a mixed bag. Look, Republicans are always going to
support the Republican candidate, right, and the Republican president and
(26:29):
Democrats and the support the Democratic president. I think, you know,
Joe Biden probably had a number similar to to uh
to Trump. But ultimately, I think what people voted for
were somebody's gonna come in and say we're going to
change the way things are done because what we have
seen in the last four years has not been good
for the country. Uh, And I think he has changed
things for good and for bad.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
Okay, Well, giving that insight, I think that's gonna set
us up for the next part of the show.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
So stick around and will be right back
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.