029: Should Anyone Debate the Far-Right? feat. Mehdi Hasan

Mehdi Hasan, a journalist renowned for confronting power directly and dismantling opponents in political debates, joined Posting Through It to reflect on his viral appearance on "Surrounded" — a YouTube debate show that recruited him to argue against 20 "far-right conservatives."

Over nearly two hours, his opponents took turns sitting across from him and espousing racist bigotries, antisemitic conspiracy theories, and anti-democratic beliefs. When the cameras stopped rolling, Mehdi said one participant stood up and declared: "Left or Right, we all hate the Jews."

"No one said a word," Mehdi recalled.

The episode's explosive popularity (10.2 million views on YouTube alone) has reignited debates about "platforming" extremism and whether engaging with the far-right this way serves any constructive purpose. On this episode, we explore those criticisms with Mehdi, discuss his “hygiene tests” for debates, and explore why so many people who try to face off against the far-right end up failing.

Links for Mehdi:

* Check out Zeteo.com

* Read “Win Every Argument: The Art of Debating, Persuading, and Public Speaking”

* Watch “7 Debate Lessons YOU Can Learn From My Jubilee Video”

* Follow @mehdirhasan on X and @mehdirhasan.bsky.social on Bluesky

Transition Music: “WILL U STILL U” by Jeff Rosenstock

Throw a few bucks in our digital tip jar: https://tiptopjar.com/postingthroughitpod

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit postthroughit.substack.com

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
That's the whole thing. How do you?
Know Carl Smith autocrats tend to kill everyone because they
make. This point very well in his
work. It's the friend enemy
distinction, right you? Called Schmidt the Nazi
theoretician. Absolutely.
I don't care. Are you a fan of the Nazis?
I don't care. I frankly don't care being
called the Nazi I. Didn't say that.
I didn't actually say that. I said, are you a fan of the
Nazis? Well, they persecuted the church

(00:20):
a little bit. I'm not a fan of that, but.
What about the persecution of the Jews?
Well, I mean, I I certainly don't support anyone's human
dignity being assaulted. I'm a Catholic.
But you don't condemn Nazi persecution of the Jews.
I I think that there was a little bit of persecution.
We still have to. Rename this show because you're
a little bit more than a far right Republican.
Hey, what can I say? I think you say I'm a fascist.

(00:42):
Yeah, I am. Absolutely.
I'm just checking who's clappingjust to get my set of where
everyone is on. This because you know that.
Millions of people are going to be watching you on YouTube and
checking out who the fascists and the Nazis are.
I'm. I'm not ashamed of that one.
No, clearly you're not. During the.

(01:30):
Welcome back to posting Through IT, I'm Jared Holt.
And I'm Michael Edison Hayden. We are very hyped for this
episode. Today we're talking about
debating the far right with one of the best to do it, Mehdi
Hassan. But before we bring him in,
we're going to fill in some context here, just in case
people aren't up to date with the viral debate.

(01:51):
He did on a YouTube channel called Jubilee in a series
called Surrounded. You've probably seen clips of
this by now. It's been really, really big in
progressive circles online. It's probably also big in far
right circles online, or I've seen a little bit of that,
largely because Mehdi has been pitted against a lot of people
who have very ugly views who areexpressing fascist or white

(02:16):
nationalist sentiment. You know, I, I, I even have a
group chat where somebody made Mehdi's face like reacting and
discussed the kind of main imageof the chat.
It's, it's, it's sort of kind ofhad a big impact on people.
I think we're both in that chat,Mike, but the for people who
don't know what we're talking about here, first, I'll start

(02:38):
with Jubilee Media. It's a digital media company
based in LA that makes content about social issues.
I think that is probably the generous way to put it.
A not so generous way to put it would be that they pit random
people against each other and profit off the conflicts that
occur. This company is kind of weird.

(02:59):
It leaves a strange taste in my mouth, mostly because it
pretends that this content is something revolutionary, not
just an extension of reality television.
This is from its website. Jubilee Media is a digital media
company that pushes boundaries, tackles taboos, and breaks the
rules. We believe discomfort and

(03:19):
conflict are pivotal forces in creating human connection.
In short, we're not afraid to gothere.
OK? Personally, I find this genre of
content sort of unsettling. Something about it to me feels
weird. But I must be an outlier because
it is wildly popular online. One of their popular shows, and

(03:42):
they have several. It's called Surrounded.
That's the show that our guest today was on, and here's how it
works. They bring in a notable figure,
usually somebody known for debating politics, taking clear
positions, and they throw them in a room with 20 or 25 people
who hold opposite beliefs. There's a table in the middle of
the room where the featured guest sits, and their opponents

(04:04):
seated in the circle surroundingthem.
Get it? Take turns going up to the table
and arguing with the guest. If you watch the show, you'll
also see people in the circle holding up red flags at various
points. That's a voting system.
If someone on their side is crashing and burning, or if
they've simply had enough of theconversation, you'll see them
start to raise these up. If enough flags go up, it closes

(04:26):
down the debate and cycles on tothe next person.
Jubilee debuted Surrounded in September last year, and there's
been I think 18 episodes so far by my count.
Some of the guests on past episodes include Right Wing
Pundit like Charlie Kirk, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, and
Candace Owens. There's also been some liberals
and progressives in the hot seatto Pete Buttigieg, Sam Cedar,

(04:50):
and Destiny. The latter being a live streamer
who I have many unkind thoughts about.
But I'll just say that for another time, because that's not
why we're here today. That's right, Jared Mediasan was
the featured guest on an episodeof Surrounded the Jubilee Media
uploaded on July 20th. And in addition to the 10.3
million views it's racked up on YouTube as of the time we're
recording this, it's also reignited some arguments that

(05:13):
those of us who have covered extremism are pretty familiar
with by now. Arguments about platforming and
amplifying the radical right, whether these sorts of shows can
actually accomplish anything, etcetera, etcetera.
Basically, is there enough to gain by doing this that
outweighs the cost? We figured what better person to
discuss those kinds of questionsthen the man himself, Mehdi

(05:36):
Hassan. So excited about this interview.
I think you guys are going to love it.
I'm a big fan of made these work.
Joining the podcast now is MehdiHassan.
He's the editor in chief and CEOof Zeteo, an independent news

(05:58):
media organization, and the author of a 2023 book called Win
Every Argument, The Art of Debating, Persuading and Public
Speaking. That's down in the episode
description. Mehdi, how's it going?
Thanks for having me, Jared. Yeah, well, thanks for joining
us. You've been very busy since a
certain YouTube video came out. We're talking about the

(06:20):
appearance you made on the Jubilee show Surrounded.
First off, can you just take us a little bit behind the scenes
and tell us how a video like that comes into existence?
Because I think a lot of our audience, you know, might have
seen the video or saw clips of it, but but how does something
like that come into existence? Did they reach out to you or
their rules? What was that like?

(06:43):
Yeah, it's a good question. They reached out to me via my
agents. I had heard of Jubilee,
obviously. I'd seen bits of Charlie Kirk
and Ben Shapiro. I don't think I'd watch the
whole 1 till they reached out tome and I was kind of on the
fence as to is this something I want to do?
It looks entertaining, looks a little crazy.

(07:03):
What would that look like? I mean, look, it's very easy to
persuade me to have an argument.Doesn't take long to get me into
an argument. I like a good argument.
I like a good debate. If you say 20 people against
one, I'm like, I like those odds, let's do it.
But obviously I was aware of thepitfalls and some of the
criticisms that would come my way that have come my way since
it dropped legitimate criticisms.

(07:24):
But I did speak to Sam Cedar, who's a good friend of mine from
the Majority Report, who had done surrounded a few months
before me. He was one of the few
progressives to have done it. Most of the people who have done
it tend to be on the right. Charlie Kirk, Ben Shapiro,
Candace Owens, what's his name, Jordan Peterson.
All of those folks have done it.And I was like, well, maybe it's

(07:45):
a good chance for a progressive to go in there and do it.
I know Pete Buttigieg had done it, but his was a kind of mild
1. So that was the kind of thinking
I had when they approached me. I kind of asked the questions I
thought needed to be asked for due diligence, You know, how
does it work? Is it taped?
Is it edited? Where do you find the people?
What's it going to be called? Do I get to pick my own topics?
All of that good stuff. And clearly, I think going

(08:08):
forward, somebody asked me, would you recommend other people
to do this? And someone has asked me, a very
prominent journalist has been asked by Jubilee to do.
And he called me and he said, I just saw you or should I do?
And I said, look, I'm not going to be able.
I'm not going to tell people to do it or not do it.
What I would say is just be moreaware of what's coming your way,
maybe maybe be a little bit moreinvolved in the vetting of the
20 people. Yeah, well, we wanted to ask

(08:30):
about that. A lot of the people who showed
up to your debate, you know, they were identified as far
right conservatives, which, you know, in today's politics could
mean anything. You know, far right
conservatives are right in the country.
But the people who showed up were particularly just, you

(08:52):
know, in my opinion, you know, nasty and nasty to you, you
know, questioning your legitimacy as an American.
One guy, I think this is probably the clip that went
around the most where you asked him, you know, are you, are you
a fascist? And he was like, Oh yeah, maybe,
maybe I am. So what do you know about the

(09:15):
Venning? You know, you mentioned that as,
you know, something you've thought about in hindsight.
But do you know where they got these people?
Or did you know who you would betalking to?
Yeah, I don't know where they found these people or how they
found them. I did ask beforehand who's going
to identify as a far right conservative, like when they

(09:35):
said that was the title of the show.
The title morphed over months preparation and when it was far
right conservatives, I I did askhim at one point, like who who
identified who proudly comes on and says, yeah, I'll be the far
right conservative. But you know, I guess my answers
were my questions were answered on the night.
I don't know, to be honest. And I've asked Jubilee and
journalists have asked Jubilee. I didn't.

(09:56):
They've made any comments since the show came out.
I don't see any statement or anything they've put out.
I know a lot of media has covered the story.
I just did an interview with theGuardian this week about it.
I think the Guardian reached outto them as well.
They haven't put out a statementand they haven't told me either
exactly how they found these people.
What worries me is that some of these people were not just
ordinary regular folks off the street.

(10:17):
They are quote UN quote influencers.
They have Instagram pages with lots of followers where they say
and do anti-Semitic and racist things.
They are associates of Nick Fuentes and his kind of gripper
group of Holocaust deniers and Nazis.
So that is worrying that you know more than one of them got
through the net. So I think it's also concerning
that that's the type of mental fatality you need to have to be

(10:38):
an influencer on the right now, particularly for young people.
I think that's that's something that really concerned me when I
was seeing it. It's just how they seem to want
to be rewarded for being furtherand further to the right or, or
or more aligned with, with with open fashion.
Did that surprise you? There's just the willingness to
give voice to the the great replacement stuff, to say that

(11:00):
they are that that surprised you.
Yeah, you had great replacement.You had white genocide, you had
all of the greatest hits from these folks turning up.
And what did surprise me and understand me a little bit is
the way they were so open about it, so proud of it.
Remember, this is not 20 pensioners in their 60s and 70s,

(11:20):
retired white folks in Mississippi talking to me.
These are 20 young people in a warehouse in LA on YouTube.
And I was surprised that they were willing to say this stuff
so out loud. If you when that guy Connor says
I'm a fascist, four or five people clap and cheer.
And there's a moment if you see the video where I turn around
and say I'm just seeing who's who around me is supported.

(11:42):
It's not an aberration. There's not just one guy.
Whoever else like, oh, sheesh, he's let down the side.
It's this is seems to be the near consensus of the room or at
least a, a a rather vocal minority in this room.
So that was worrying. Look, I'm not naive enough to,
you know, to not realise that these views have been held by
many Americans for many, many years.
The difference now is that you're willing to say it out

(12:04):
loud. You're willing to say it
proudly, you're willing to say it to applause and laughter.
You're willing to say it on a ona YouTube show that millions are
going to watch. You're willing to say it without
any repercussions. I mean, I know Connor claimed to
have been fired because of it. Whether that's true or not, I'm
not sure. But the rest have done fine out
of it. Joseph the the young kid in the
baseball cap who insisted I'd beget out of his country.

(12:25):
Apparently, you know, he's been he's been loving all the new
followers and and fame he's beengetting out of this, which is
one of the arguments against doing a show like this because
you give these people even bigger platforms, which is a
legitimate critique. I don't.
I don't dispute that. I want to get into some of those
arguments, but I have one more question about the logistics of
doing that video. I'm just curious what that room

(12:45):
was like when the cameras were off.
I can imagine based on my read of how you did, which seemed,
you know, I think you did a perfectly fine job holding your
own and pushing back and and frankly just embarrassing some
of these people. But, you know, I imagine the
room felt a little different before and after that

(13:07):
conversation. I'm curious what these folks
were like when the cameras turned off or, or if any of
them, you know, had conversations with you
afterward. What was that?
Like, I mean, look, I'm limited in what I can say about what
happened behind the scenes, but I will say this.
When I walked into that room, I,you know, at that moment, I
didn't realize how bad it was going to get.
It got very bad very quick Once the camera started rolling.

(13:29):
I think one guy waved at me and said, oh, I remember.
Just for context, a lot of people don't realize this.
I walk into that room, the 20, the way surrounded on Jubilee
works is they have no idea who'scoming out.
All they know is it's a progressive.
So they did not know it was me. Just as the liberal woke folks
who sat in a circle when Ben Shapiro, Charlie Kirkovich had
no idea it would be them. So in that sense, when I walked

(13:50):
out, there's a little bit of surprise from the folks who knew
me. Some folks had no idea who I
was. Some folks were, oh, I've seen
you on Piers Morgan. One guy, she said, I like you on
Piers Morgan, which was amusing given what then transpired over
the next hour, 40 minutes. And look, I didn't really
interact with them at all. There was a toilet break in the
middle in which I kind of held my hand, head in my hands and
said, what the Hell's going on here?
Do I have to go up for Part 2? And at the end of it, me and a

(14:14):
couple of people I took with me got the hell out of Dodge.
We kind of like we're leaving. We don't want really any
interactions. When they were leaving the set,
one guy did lean over and whispered to me I wouldn't
deport you, which I thought was very generous.
Wow, very kind. I mean, I did hear them as they
walked off, make some pretty bigoted remarks which I won't
quote. Even worse than what you saw on
TV. Jeez, so that's the how of this

(14:35):
came together. I, I want to get into the
questions that you've kind of hinted at already, which is why
do a show like this at all? Is there anything that
progressives or or I guess just anybody who's not far right has
to gain by debating fascists? No, Is he, I've just done a

(14:58):
video for today. I don't think there's a value in
debating fascists. And people might say, well, why
did you do that? Because I genuinely didn't
believe I was going to be confronted by open fascists.
I thought I was going to debate a bunch of Trump supporters who
were going to say Donald Trump, rah, rah, rah, greatest
president ever. Tariffs are wonderful.
He's the best. He's the free speech champion.
We love him. You know, he's restore making

(15:18):
America great again. I did not know that I would face
people who say, I don't even believe in democracy.
I don't believe there should be election.
I believe in a General Franco figure who is a dictator who
gets to kill people. I don't like.
We were going to face people whose who I was going to go up
against people who say, you know, oh, the Republican Party
right now is way too moderate for me.
So that was a bit of a, a shock to the system.

(15:41):
No, if if the Jubilee folks had said to me beforehand, you're
going to go up against a guy whosays he's a fascist, another guy
who talks about great replacement theory, multiple
guys who tell you to get out of their country, I'd have said,
I'll pass. I'm I'm a little busy that day.
I wouldn't have gone into that willingly.
I thought there was value in debating some MAGA folks, not
because I want to change their minds.
I believe the MAGA movement is acult.

(16:02):
There's no, there's no changing of minds there.
But I do think a show that gets millions of viewers and not just
millions of viewers, millions ofapolitical, low information
voters, young people who don't follow politics.
One of the reasons I did this isbecause I didn't know much about
Jubilee other than the kind of couple of clips I'd seen from
Kirk and Shapiro. But my daughter, my niece, bunch
of young people, like, Oh yeah, we know Jubilee.

(16:23):
And I was like, oh, it's a totally different demographic.
It's a different audience. It's a good way to reach people
who can't normally be reached bypolitical journalism and the
kind of stuff I do and the kind of places I go.
So that was an incentive. And the idea of reaching people
and showing them how ridiculous pro Trump and far right
arguments are, that did appeal to me.
And I do. I am someone who values debate.

(16:44):
I do believe debate has intrinsic value.
I did write a book about debating because I think it's
important to debate. I think it's important to debate
well actually enjoy a debates. As I say, the the I actually
looked forward to the idea of, OK, this will be actually fun.
Taking on 20 people who I disagree with wasn't that fun in
the end. Well, you're very, you're,
you're very good at debating andit's a big part of why people

(17:08):
know you. But I do have a question in
there, which is you say, OK, you, you don't want to debate
fascists, which I totally understand, but you, you, you
might be willing to speak to some people who are MAGA.
So I perceive MAGA as A to be a fascist movement.
And I'm just curious, like, whatif, if there's a distinction
there for you? Because for me, you know, it's,

(17:28):
it's, it's, it's obviously complicated because we're
talking about half the country is on board with it.
But for me, it is a fascist movement.
I feel like we're in the middle of it.
And if you know, God willing, years later, when we look back
on it, we may have the the ability to actually see what's
happening. I hope that everybody will see
it and be disgusted, but I'm just curious, what's your

(17:49):
thoughts about it? And Michael, it's a great.
Question that distinct. It's a great question.
And I also believe that the MAGAmovement is a fascistic
movement. I I think I was the first person
on MSNBC to use the F word aboutDonald Trump back in the summer
of 2020. When when, when, you know,
unmarked cars were people in masks pre the ice days of today.
We're grabbing people off the street in Portland, OR and just

(18:09):
disappearing them. I've been going on about that
since then. And you know, when I was on
MSNBC, I had a hygiene test on my own where, you know, I
wouldn't have election deniers on the show, which basically
ruled out the majority of the elected Republican Party in
Congress. I remember having Dan Crenshaw
and Googling to see like Dan Crenshaw agreed to come on.
I was like, is he is he electionto, oh, he signed the Texas

(18:30):
lawsuit, but he didn't vote against on January 6th.
Like, does that make him a denier?
So the problem was as we got closer and closer to 2024, some
of us with those hygiene tests had to kind of think about it
again. Because when, as you say, half
the country, I don't think it's half the country, but about 30%
of the country. When when you say half the
country, you mean one of the twoparties followings, right?
We only have a two party system.So if one of those two parties

(18:52):
that represent roughly half, butprobably much less than half of
the country has is going fully fascistic, then you're in a
really weird place as a political journalist.
Do you then just ignore and refuse to speak with, interview,
engage, debate, as you put it, 1/2 of the country or one of the
two major parties? Do you just sit in an echo
chamber talking to Democrats? So that's something I had to
wrestle with. It's not an easy decision to

(19:12):
wrestle with. It's easy.
You know, as a journalist, you Iwant to have, you know, as you
say, Michael, I'm known for doing tough interviews.
That's how I got known in the USI do with Eric Prince on Al
Jazeera English. That's how most Americans and
most American journalists first came across me.
And I like challenging people I disagree with, even Israelis who
are engaged in ethnic cleansing right now or neo conservatives
who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people

(19:33):
in Iraq. But yes, I, I did try and have
this hygiene test which says if you're an election denier or a
climate denier or a Holocaust denier, if you think up is down,
black is white, hot is cold, there's no value in debating you
just for click bait. And I, and I've tried to hold on
to that. I, I still kind of am.
It's become harder and harder, Iguess.
I, I guess, Michael, to go back to your question, I perceived

(19:54):
the Jubilee thing as something slightly different.
I didn't see them as open fascists.
And I would distinguish from theopen fascists and non open
fascists in the sense that. Does Donald Trump want to be a
dictator? Clearly he does.
But do all of the Trump people go around saying we don't
believe in democracy? No, they don't.
They pretend they do, right? It's like Orban style illiberal
democracy. What surprised me, Connor, is
the Connor's like, well, I don'tbelieve in democracy.
I don't think we should have anyelections.

(20:15):
I think that my guy should be incharge and kill whoever he
wants. There's no value in debating
that person or that viewpoint. Of course, that's violence,
right? Why would I do that?
That's someone who doesn't consider me an equal.
Same way I don't debate open white supremacists.
But if you're going to debate a lot of Republicans these days, a
lot of Republicans are racist. So it's a tricky 1 I don't have
an easy answer for other than it's complicated.
It's a spectrum, and I try and pick each case on its merits and

(20:37):
demerits. And maybe I got it wrong with
Jubilee, but I did think there would be a worthwhile debate to
have with some MAGA folks. And don't forget, these are
supposed to be ordinary people. And I'll tell you what, I do
give ordinary people a bit more of a pass than I give elected
officials, right? Elected officials.
Your Marjorie Taylor Greens and others and Lauren Boebut we know
what they're doing. They are trying to get clicks.
Many of them are grifters. They're playing to the cameras.
They're playing outrage porn, ordinary MAGA folks.

(20:59):
I want to hope that some of themare just brainwashed or ill
informed or ignorant and there might be some value having a
debate. As it turns out, a lot of these
people were not ordinary folks. They were influencers and
grifters in their own right. So one of the criticisms that I
hear about debate shows like this is one that's very familiar
to Mike and I as people who havecovered extremist movements in

(21:21):
the US going on a decade now. It's actually how we became
friends was, you know, both getting doxed and harassed
simultaneously and and connecting and sharing horror
stories. And I've probably heard these
arguments in a million differentforms, a million different
times, that covering the far right or confronting the far
right has a risk because it amplifies or it platforms bad

(21:46):
people. And, you know, I imagine you've
heard that as you've debated people on the right.
You've probably heard plenty of that.
I've made that argument. I've.
Made that argument myself to other media organizations.
You say, oh you know, the best sunlight is the best
disinfectant. Better to have the debate than
not. Not always.
Not always, actually. So I I'm curious like if you're

(22:07):
going to engage, you know, somebody like yourself, you've
got, you know, a good sized media, your profile, people
TuneIn to watch you debate necessarily that platforms the
other person alongside you. So I'm curious when you're
making those decisions, like yousaid earlier about, you know,
approaching case by case, what'sworth it, What's worth covering,

(22:28):
what's worth who's worth debating?
What are the kind of considerations that are going
through your head? That is such a good question,
Jared. I'm glad you asked it because
there, that is a quite complicated subject for me.
And I would, you know, I wrote abook about debating, but I'm
not, you know, I'm not a debate,bro.
I'm not like, let's just debate any place, anytime, anyone.
No, I do have hygiene tests and standards.
In fact, the Jubilee folks got mad at me.

(22:49):
You remember the guy in the red tie?
I forget his name. He came up and he's like, oh,
how Can you believe in free speech?
You're refusing to debate some people in this room.
And I was like, and I was like, yeah, yeah.
I don't, I don't debate everyone, nor do you.
I just wanted to touch on that. You said that you support free
speech, of course, right. So what I'm confused about is
you've refused to debate people that I've disagreed with you
because you said that they're racist or they're.
Fascist, right? No, no, no.

(23:09):
If we're going to do facts, theysaid they were racist and
fascist. Get your facts right before you
start arguing. So isn't the whole entire point
of the debate to debate people that you don't agree with?
I don't debate people who don't see me A, as equal, no point or
B, support democracy because that would undermine the whole
idea of the debate. If you don't support democracy,
as our friend here doesn't, and support General Franco, then
what is the point of a debate? The 1st Amendment doesn't mean

(23:30):
you have to debate everyone. Somebody comes up to you in the
street and starts talking to you.
You don't. You don't have an obligation to
carry on talking to them. I'm sure you go about your
business. Somebody comes up to you in the
subway and sits next to you and starts ranting in your face.
So you're not going to start debating everybody here.
So everyone here has hygiene standards, as do you.
There are people you wouldn't debate.
I'm sure as well. Everyone has their own, you
know, bottom line of somebody they won't sit down with you go
down the far right like they all, you know, somebody won't

(23:52):
talk to Tucker Carlson, but Tucker Carlson won't talk to
Nick Funder. Like we can go down the everyone
has their own kind of hygiene test pretty much.
And I do try. And I'm not somebody who just
says debate anytime, any place. I wrote a book on debating,
which I was very explicit in thebook that I believe in good
faith debate. I don't believe in bad faith
debate. If Marjorie Taylor Green said
tomorrow, let's have a public debate, you and me, I would
probably say no, there's no value in it because she's a

(24:14):
fraud and and I don't want to amplify him insanity and there's
nothing to be gained. I don't think so.
But you know, Piers Morgan is a good example of this.
His show is a debate show, right?
I do his show quite regularly, but I never do his panels.
You'll never see me in those four person panels in that in
that thing. I will go on and do a one-on-one
with Piers because I think debating Piers is of value

(24:37):
because he has a huge platform and he's someone who claims to
be open minded and does seem to have shifted a little bit on
certain views I care about, for example, Gaza, I've been on
Piers Morgan's show and I've debated Israeli military
spokespersons. I've debated recently, Alan
Dershowitz had to take a shower after that.
I've debated, you know, I've debated Dan Crenshaw, member of
Congress. So I think it's fair to say I am

(24:59):
trying to think these through and think, OK, debating a
sitting Republican member of Congress, that's worth it.
That is a debate worth having because they are someone who,
you know, they're not gaining from sitting next to me.
I'm not giving them undue. They're already there.
They're a powerful person makingdecisions that affect our lives,
worth debating them. Same with the Israeli military,
literary type person or Israeli politician.
Even Dershowitz, Like whether I like it or not, he is one of the

(25:20):
most famous lawyers in American history.
He has represented Trump and impeachment.
He did represent Epstein and therefore it was worthwhile.
And he has written multiple books on Israel.
So that's how I decide. It's like, is the person vaguely
credible? Do they have a status and
stature that's nothing to do with me?
And then there is the argument. This is the weakest argument of
all, but I'm going to say it. There is the argument.

(25:40):
I don't know, it's weak. And if I was arguing against
myself, I would to attack me forit.
But I'm going to say it. There is the argument that says
these shows exist and if you don't go on them, someone else
will go on them. And I'd rather it be me than
someone who's not very good. And Jubilee is not disappearing
tomorrow. Had I not done that jubilee,
someone else will do that Jubilee.
In fact, Cheng Wieger's jubilee just came out a week ago.
They got Cheng from The Young Turks to do 1 slightly different

(26:02):
angle. He got slightly saner people.
But that's the other problem too.
Like, I can say no to someone when I lived in the UK and I
lived in the UK and I became a public figure in 2910.
And that was at the height of the kind of still War on Terror,
radicalization, ISIS was coming up.
All the things I used to get invited for was to be the Muslim

(26:23):
guy who comes on to debate, likesomebody saying Islamic
extremism is the biggest threat to our way of life.
And I was the most prominent British Muslim on TV at the
Times. I always got the call after a
terrorist attack or after some big story, like, can you come on
and debate some rabid Islamophobe?
And I always have to decide thatdo I want to do that?
And there were times when I would say I'm not doing it.
And then I would watch that BBC panel and some other person

(26:45):
would get their ass handed to them and I was like, I should
have done it. So that kind of guides me as
well in terms of like, if it's abig enough platform, it's
already out there. Is there value in doing it?
Now, having said that, I would never do Fox.
I've been asked, I was asked to go on Laura Ingraham show.
I was asked to go to Tucker Carlson show.
I've always said no to Fox because no matter how big a
platform Fox is, I refute. That's my.
That's a red line for me. I said no to Tucker Carlson in

(27:08):
2017, but that would have been adeath trap for me because I was
not as good a debater as you are.
With that, with that network, itdoesn't matter whether you're a
good debater or not. The whole thing is ambushed from
South Finnish. What I want to ask about is
being the Muslim guy, which you mentioned, because I think it's
a big thing. I mean, it's it's, it was a very
visceral thing for me. My mother's an immigrant from

(27:30):
Egypt. My kids are mixed Indian, Arab
and white. And I watched, you know, you,
you take a lot of racism directly to your face in that
setting in a, in a YouTube video.
And I know how that can really sting.
And I was always, I was, I was really trying to look at your
face to see how that felt. Because I mean, you, you're,

(27:50):
you're dealing with people who, you know, have a very limited
grasp on some of the things they're talking about, but
they're treating you like you'rea moron.
And it's not just how you're treated, but also the rhetoric
that they used. I was like, I mean, I'm just
curious how you kind of tough that out and then and then
broader. And I think this is an important
one. I've seen a lot of racism
directed to you, even from the left because you're so prominent

(28:13):
and because, I mean, because of who you are and, and and so
forth. Also not from the like the red
scare type people, the teal adjacent type people.
There's a lot of, you know, vitriol towards you that I
really think is very racial. And I'm just curious, like how,
you know, how do you compartmentalize that stuff and,
you know, hold on to your emotions because it's really,
there's a lot of bait to try to make you, you know, to make you

(28:35):
angry, try to make you into the characters where they want you
to be. Oh yeah, they, they love kind of
angry Muslim guy and I and I it's, it's difficult for me a
because I do have a temper and I'm a very passionate person and
not known for my calmness or composure.
A lot of people ask me after Jubilee, how did you stay calm
for hour and half? I was like, I don't know.
I'm asking myself that question because when I watched that
back, I'm like, wow, that was, I'm impressed to my own

(28:55):
restraint. There are moments where you can
say I'm about to just lose it that especially with good old
Richie. But the, when I, when I, when I
think about that question, I wrote in my book in when every
argument I wrote about the importance of staying cool and
calm. And I say very openly, it's hard
for me to do that. I'm writing this very, that
chapter is very personal chapterfor me because it's not easy for
me. And I gave the example of the

(29:16):
book of when I debated Douglas Murray in Oxford about 15 years
ago, something like that, where we were talking about free
speech in Europe and kind of thethreat of Muslims to free
speech. I remember he kept saying
outrageously offensive things about the prophet of Islam,
about Prophet Muhammad on purpose.
And the Murray, he was doing it just to get see what my reaction

(29:39):
would be. This was the shortly after,
shortly before Charlie Hebdo. And I remember sitting there
smiling and and a friend of minewatched the video afterwards on
YouTube and said Muslim phantom,Why the hell are you smiling
where he's saying all this ridiculously offensive things
about our prophet? That's what I'm smiling because
inside he's having the effect hewants on me.
I'm, I'm livid, furious, you know, I want to punch him in the

(30:01):
face, but I don't want to give him that victory, right.
That's what Douglas Murray wants.
That's why he does all the racist provocations to people he
goes up against. And you know, it is bait, as you
say. And I think you just want to, he
just defended himself against a libel case from a, a, a Muslim
rabble rouser in the UK called Muhammad Hijab.
He loves all this stuff. He loves, he loves, he loves
doing that. And people, you know, people

(30:23):
fall for it. And I wasn't going to fall for
it then. And I debated him last year for
my sins in Canada and Israel. And same thing where keep
sticking in Hamas jobs, your friends in Hamas, your friends
in Qatar. I did a debate with Michael
Gove, the conservative politician, a few weeks ago in
London. It hasn't dropped you on
YouTube, but he did the same thing your friends in Tehran.
And that's these are all racially coded insults, like the
arguments I'm making, your arguments made by mainstream

(30:44):
white leftist, centrist conservatives even.
But because I'm making it, it must be that I'm a Iranian
stooge or a Qatari apologist. So that, you know, as you say,
Michael, that's from across the political spectrum, that kind of
stuff. And I've gotten used to it, but
it still pisses me off. I mean, you can see when that
video drops of that debate in London, I'm pissed off that
Michael Gove immediately went there right at the start of the

(31:04):
debate to say your friends in Tehran.
Like the irony is there are manypeople in the Shia community
that I belong to who attacked mebecause I'm critical of Iran.
So there's the irony of being inbetween those two places.
So yes, it is very hard to deal with that.
And actually about Jubilee, look, I'm a pretty thick skinned
guy. Like it's like you said, like I,
I'm known for debating. I like debating.
I debated at university. I debated in high school.

(31:27):
I spent my life arguing with friends and family.
You know, I've argued with random people in the street.
I've, you know, I've gone to foreign countries and
interviewed dictatorial leaders.I've done all of that.
So I'm pretty used to this stuff.
But still, even then, the Jubilee stuff, I'm only human
being. And I've said this, and I've
said this elsewhere with the journalist and debate I had on

(31:47):
fine, but take the journalist debate I had off.
I am a brown Muslim immigrant. I am the person they most want
to target. I am the person this
administration is most obsessed with him, you know, after our
Latino brothers and sisters. But it's probably the Muslim
immigrants, you know, in a very close #2 And that is a real
issue. Because even if I was OK with it

(32:07):
and I wasn't OK with that, you can see I'm pretty annoyed when
people keep telling me to get out.
By the time the fourth guy said I'm pissed.
But actually one regret I do have when people say, do you
regret doing it? I don't regret doing it.
I did what I did. But one, one bit of sadness in
me where I feel like I let down some folks.
I did see some comments from some brown folks saying that
they felt upset and infuriated on my behalf.

(32:31):
Right. There were people who watched it
at home saying it was traumatic for them to see someone who
looked like them with a name like theirs having to be go
through that. And I think that is something
that Jubilee need to think long and hard about, especially in a
context like mine versus a, a, you know, a Destiny or a
Buttigieg or a Sam Cedar. That is that you know, I was in

(32:51):
a room as an immigrant with a bunch of people who came bent on
demonizing immigrants, immigration and doing great
replacement bullshit. Despite that, despite the
emotions you feel, the things people say to try to provoke
you, you manage to keep a cool head.
You write about that in your book when Every Argument, which

(33:11):
I really enjoyed it. That book outlines strategies
that people can use in argumentsto win over audiences with the
truth and pick apart bad arguments.
In it, you talk about ways of connecting with people, how to
choose your words carefully, howto strategically cast doubt on
your opponent, employ humor, allkinds of things people can do to

(33:34):
win over people that they're talking to or other people in
the room. I read that book on a flight
during some work travel shortly after it came out and I really
enjoyed it. I you would not catch me dead in
a debate. It's just not my thing.
I, I have a very visceral reaction.
But people who can do it well, I, I respect a lot and I think

(33:58):
there's a lot of value for people, even if they're not, you
know, signing up to go on the next Jubilee video.
Things to understand about how arguments work and how
persuasion works. That can be useful in their
day-to-day life. So my question for you is some
of the different strategies you outline in this book, You know,
you've been doing this for a long time.
I imagine it's muscle memory to a large degree, but how

(34:19):
conscious of you, of these strategies?
When you go into a debate setting, obviously, there's the
facts of the matter and what's being talked about.
But in terms of like, you know, I guess, are you sitting there
thinking, you know, in the middle of a conversation, you
have a thought in the back of your head that's like, this
would be a great time for a joke.
You know, this needs to get lined up a little bit.

(34:39):
Or how does that work in your head?
No, it's intriguing. You put it that way.
I think muscle memory is a good phrase from my for me now.
I've done this so much for so many years that it does come
naturally. But what I make clear in my book
is this isn't about natural bornorators.
This isn't, oh, Mehdi Hassan does this stuff and I couldn't
do what he does. I genuinely believe people can

(35:00):
do what I do if they, you know, understand how it works, if
they're willing to put in the hours, if they're willing to
really work at it and understandthe techniques and tips.
And I give examples in the book of people like Winston Churchill
who were not great speakers and not great debaters, but we
remember them as some of the great orators and debaters of
our time. But they worked on it.
So that's one point, which is it's something you can actually
build up and prepare for over time.

(35:21):
And I don't need to do that anymore because I've just spent
so much time doing it professionally and personally.
In the case of Jubilee specifically, it's interesting
because we've just put out a video this morning on 7 debate
lessons from my Jubilee video, which a British Labour Member of
Parliament messaged me and said you should do a video breaking
down what you were doing in thatdebate because I found it

(35:43):
fascinating, your body. And I was like, OK, that's a
good idea. But what's interesting, to go
back to your question, Jared, isI had to go watch the whole
debate again and work backwards and go, oh, I was doing that.
I was doing that because it wasn't planned.
It's just stuff I do in the moment.
But when I watch your back, I'm like, oh, yeah, there's me using
humor. There's me being sarcastic to
mock the guy and make him small,which is something I think you

(36:04):
should do to your opponents. There's me bringing receipts.
There's me, you know, dividing and ruling, which is something I
like to do with big groups of people, turn them against one
another, which I did with Pearl Mateen, the Iranian guy who
didn't quite understand that everyone else there hated him as
well. So that I, you know, I worked
backwards from first principles.But I do think there are lessons
to be learned from all of these things.

(36:24):
As you say, even if you're not adebater like yourself, these are
things, A, you can use in your daily life, and B, to understand
what's going on around you. It's not just that you're able
to debate yourself, but you're able to see someone maybe on TV
make an argument and go, well, that doesn't make any sense.
What they've just said there is self contradictory or what?
They've just, oh, I know what they're doing there.
They're using emotion to pull upmy heartstrings to avoid from

(36:44):
the fact that what they're saying is BS.
So it also helps you identify bullshit.
It also helps you identify the truth.
That's fundamentally why I love debating is because I do
believe, I genuinely believe it is a useful tool to get to the
truth through back and forth if it's done in good faith.
But yeah, for me at this point, I guess, I guess for Jubilee,
the only thing I really consciously did was just prepare

(37:04):
facts and figures, which was kind of a waste of time because
I turned up with all this information ready.
And then I'm, I'm like, OK, let's go.
One of my claims was Trump is defying the Constitution.
I was like, I got it. I'm ready to go.
First Amendment, 4th Amendment, 5th Amendment, 14th Amendment,
22nd Amendment. I've got all my anecdotes.
I've got my Supreme Court rulings.
I've got all my case studies, but this guy's like, I don't

(37:26):
give a shit about the Constitution.
We don't care. Oh, how do you debate that?
Then? That's that's that's OK.
Throw everything up in there. As Mike Tyson says, everyone has
a plan till they're punched in the nose.
There goes all the planning and I'll go, OK, we're in a very
different place right now. That's when I, that's when
you're seeing my face. The dawning realization that
like, they don't care about my Supreme Court rulings or the
statistics I've got. They just don't care.

(37:49):
But I did go along with a lot ofprep and there is a great
moment. We've we've done a little
montage for Azator video today, which is all you see the
independent fact straight arrow news or whatever.
They're they're fact checker. They have all these fact checks
and it's like they're all backing me up, which is great.
A friend of mine said to me it was wonderful to see every stat
you said came up on screen next to you.
So that is important to bring receipts.
But obviously in this particulardebate, they didn't care about

(38:11):
the receipts. But then who cares if they care
about the receipts? I care about truth independently
of whether people agree with me or not.
And I again, I hope that the, ofthe, the 10 million people who
watched it on YouTube, if even amillion of them, if even 110th
of them, a million people went into that debate not knowing who
I was, not know who they were, just completely impartially to
say, oh, what's going on here? And they came away thinking that

(38:34):
guy had some good points, Then that's a victory, a small
victory for me. I.
Want to ask you about the last section, which was about Trump's
plan to ethnically cleanse Gaza.And it's really just a way into
a bigger question. You, you, you, we debated some
people who were not very subtle about being anti-Semitic where
you could just see this is sort of yeah.

(38:55):
And this is something we've we've talked about a lot on this
show. A lot.
We've talked about this, this kind of anti-Semitic strain in
the in, in Trump's base that is sort of latched onto this really
horrific situation in Gaza and sort of try to, you know, use it
for anti-Semitism, anti-Semitic reasons or whatever. 100% it

(39:16):
struck me when I saw it as I waswatching it, I was like, well,
this is, this is something you couldn't even imagine five years
ago, this conversation. You could, you could, it's so
strange. It's not that anti.
It's not that anti-Semitism didn't exist.
Of course it did. It's not that there, there
wasn't pain in that region. Of course there was.
But there's something has changed, I think after October

(39:38):
7th. And I, I just wanted to pull
back and just ask, like what, what do you think has changed in
the sort of the media landscape,which is obviously media also
includes this, this interview since October 7th, because it is
been, I think really crazy. You know, it's been, there's a
lot of changes about what can besaid, what can't be said, the

(40:00):
way people speak about Jews, theway people speak about Arabs.
And Muslims, in the case of thisparticular debate, I'm just
curious about that, what your thoughts about how things have
changed and I don't also your media company also is sort of a
sort of post October 7th. I mean, that's not what you know
it is, but it really does happenstarts to grow in the in the

(40:21):
aftermath of that. So I'm just curious what your
thoughts about that would be. Well, I'm glad you raised the
issue of anti-Semitism because Ihave been frustrated, worried,
concerned that some on the left and some in my own Muslim
community have embraced a bunch of far right conservatives
who've jumped on the pro Palestine bandwagon.

(40:41):
But not for the reasons the restof us are on that wagon, if I
can call it that. And it does worry me that
wherever I go these days, I'm getting texts or people coming
up to be saying, hey, you shouldsit down with Tucker Carlson.
You guys have a lot in common. No, we don't.
What about Marjorie Taylor Green?
Why don't you have her? Isn't she great?
No, she's not. Why don't you hire Candice
Owens? It's a tail over my dead body.
But like, this is the kind of stuff that because, and it's for

(41:03):
one reason only, which is they have, you know, stop clock is
right twice a day, said the right thing about Gaza.
They've said what's happening inGaza is a genocide.
They've said that Israel should stop killing kids.
They've said that AIPAC has too much influence in our politics
and that U.S. Congress should stop sending
weapons to Israel. All true things, but #1 doesn't
cancel out the fact that the rest of their political agenda

(41:24):
is horrific, is racist, is fascist, is reactionary, is all
of those things. And #2 they do question some of
these people's intentions. Not all of them, but some of
them I do worry about. And you saw it in that Jubilee
debate where, you know, there was one, I can't remember her
name, blonde, young white woman who sits opposite me and says,
well, Trump doesn't really believe any of this stuff.

(41:44):
He's been controlled by a group,minority group.
I'm like, well, do you want to say which group?
That is Like, it's very clear where we're going with this.
Why do you think? That Trump is saying this, do
you think that he has some personal interest in cleansing
Gaza or do you think there mightbe some special interest group
or perhaps religious or ethnic group that's, you know, that
maybe he received money from them and that's the whole reason
why he wants to cleanse Gaza? Or why do you think that is?

(42:08):
I don't do Donald Trump's motivations.
I really don't care. My claim is that what he's doing
is ethnic cleansing. Well, do you agree with that?
I would actually, yeah, probablyagree.
But you. Agree that it's ethics.
You agree with doing ethics. No, I don't agree with that, but
I agree that's probably his plan.
But I'm trying to figure out whydo you think that is?
Because Donald Trump is a white man.
He identifies as Christian. I'm not sure if he really is.
Well, what interest does he havein preserving a Jewish ethno

(42:29):
state? It's a good question.
You'd have to ask Donald Trump that question.
I've got multiple views. I'm sure you have many views.
I'm, I'm not sure I like where you're going with your views,
but I think Donald Trump is definitely someone who's got
financial interests. I haven't said this before, but
once the taping was over, one ofthe people who was behind me,
the the worst people all seem tobe sitting behind me.

(42:50):
One of the people stood up and said left or right, we all hate
the Jews. And no one said a word.
And they filed out of the studio.
And I was like, wow. And I left.
I said to a colleague of mine tocome with me.
I said, I wish Jonathan Greenblatt could have been here
today because I just feel like organized Jewish American
establishment groups are really,really in a weird place where

(43:16):
they are obsessing on behalf of Israel over some kids on campus
with placards about river to thesea.
And they're totally ignoring themassive genocidal threat they
face from parts of the Trump base that would happily get rid
of a bunch of Jews from America tomorrow.
And I just, you know, OG anti-Semitism, the original
brand, the far right Holocaust denying white supremacist brand

(43:38):
is very much alive, well and growing in the US with the tacit
approval of this administration and this president.
And it's bizarre to me that you just find all of the leading
American Jewish organizations obsessed over Mahmoud Khalil,
obsessed over what AOC has said or done this week and ignoring
the fact that there is a young generation of completely racist,

(43:58):
anti-Semitic conservatives led by the Nick Fuentes of this
world and others. And they're not declining in
number. They're growing in number.
And I think Jubilee, some of thefolks who turned up on Julie,
example of that when I went withthat 4th claim, Michael, about
ethnic cleansing in Gaza, most of that circle who had been
running for the chair to fight would be on edge of it.
They had no interest in debatingme.

(44:18):
They agreed with me. They they're not, they're anti
Israel, but they're not anti Israel for the reasons you and I
might be anti Israel. As we're getting closer to the
end of our time with you, I, I want to zoom out a little bit.
The debate tactics that you outline in when every argument
are not, you know, original medicreations, right?

(44:39):
You know, these kinds of strategies are also used by the
far right. They're used by politicians,
they're used by anybody, you know, who is a skilled public
persuader, right? And that's part of the value I
see in the book is being able, you know, helping to recognize
that kind of thing. But a lot of media outlets,
Soteo is kind of a exception to the rule, which is why I

(45:03):
appreciate it so much, seem to just get railroaded by this over
and over and over again. You know, they have far right
figures come on and try to do a hostile interview and get Gish
galloped out of their own interview.
Or they just get you know, or some YouTube who thinks that
they have what it takes to go, you know, in the pit with Tim

(45:24):
Poole or whatever. Just gets mowed down because
there's like 5 guests that won'tlet them get a word in and, and
pick apart what they're saying like by the third word.
Why? Why do you think that is?
Do you think it is like a lack of understanding or I'm just?
I think it's many things. I'm glad you highlighted that

(45:45):
because it is a source of frustration for me as someone
who does debate for a living, ifI can say that when I watch.
Look, my critique of the American media has been, you
know, I've said it ad nauseam endlessly for years.
I said it while I was at MSNBC. We don't do tough interviews in
this country. We don't have a combative
confrontational media setup. It's all very cozy and friendly

(46:05):
and courteous. Sunday morning shows are all
very pally and inside the Beltway.
It's why a lot of people have tuned out of the media.
It's a lot. It's one of the reasons I did
well in the US. Clearly there was an appetite
for what I do. People are, oh, Mandy does
interviews other people don't do.
But it's frustrating to see in general, U.S. media does not do
challenging interviews. And therefore, when you have,
you know, conspiracy theorists, far right folks, extremists,

(46:28):
whether it's, you know, Alex Jones or Nick Fuentes or whoever
it is, yeah, people are not, they're not equipped to
interview your average Republican senator who's Gish
galloping them, let alone your gripper online who's skilled in
the arts of YouTube confrontation and online combat.
So yes, I do think it's old mainstream media, not at all
prepared for what's coming theirway, haven't done the homework,

(46:51):
don't understand the tips and techniques.
And look, that is why my position is better not to have
these people on and not give them a platform, especially the
extremists and the fascists and the folks who push racism and
violence. But if you are going to have
them on, then at least challengethem, confront them and that's
what doesn't happen. So, you know, you look at Steve
Bannon. Have you ever seen an interview
where Steve Bannon just got absolutely battered?

(47:13):
I haven't. He goes on he and has friendly
interviews with journalists who he's friends with because
despite being on the far right, he's kept very good relations
with mainstream media. Or you have people try and get
him and they fail. I remember Mike Cernovich, I
think it was, he went on a 60 minutes years ago and he was so
proud of himself and, and he, and he and he put that interview
out there as look at me. They thought that they could get

(47:35):
me and they didn't. And he was right, they didn't.
So I think, you know, if you're going to, if you're going to do
that kind of interview or preparation, it's going to be
done in a much savvier way. Journalists have to really
understand who they're going up against and not be ambushed, not
be deceived, not be caught out. They have to have eyes wide
open. They need to talk to people like
yourselves who understand this world better than they do.

(47:56):
They need to have done their homework, which is a chapter in
my book. Do your freaking homework, Steel
man. The argument.
Another point, as you say, not something I invented, but
something that people have forgotten about.
And I stress in the book, something I do, I don't, I take
every opponent seriously, whether they're student or a
world leader. And that doesn't happen in U.S.
media. And by the way, there's also
just generally the time constraints.
To be fair to Jubilee Media, it's an hour and a half but you

(48:17):
get your fell your average cablenews interview.
I worked in cable for years. What?
6 minutes? 7 minutes and you've got
producing go to break. What could you do in 6-7
minutes? Not very much.
Some of what you're really good at, I just want to point out, I
mean, it's not a question, but one thing I love about it is
just like The Who, what, where, when, why that you ask.
That is just natural journalistic things that you
would have said who, what, who are The, Who is, who's the hey,

(48:39):
I love, I love those questions because it was always disarming
in the context of that interview.
And I just thought it was, it was great.
It made me, made me, it made me look, look, look forward to my
next confrontational interview. But but, but, but, but on a
serious note, like go back to the American media failures.
Like you will watch interviews on Sunday morning shows.
We have a little bit longer than6 minutes, but still not very

(49:01):
long. And they will just run through a
list of topics, right? There's no accountability
journalism that it's like, OK, let me ask you about this story
in the news. Then tick next question.
Let me ask you about this story in the news.
And there are no follow-ups. And you cannot do an interview
without follow-ups. I've seen times when a
politician is on the ropes. You're like, oh, wow, he's
cornered. They fight.
They did get that quote. You know, hats off to that

(49:22):
interviewer. They got the quote that proves
they're lying. And then the interviewer will
save the politician and say, well, let's move on to the next
topic. And you see relief on the
politician face. I mean, Terry Moran, who did
that ABC interview before ABC canned him at the Trump
administration's request. You remember the knuckles
situation where Trump is saying again and again that Kilmar
Brigo's, it says MS13 on his knuckles, absurd, insane.

(49:44):
And Moran, instead of going, wow, this guy's nuts.
I've got this great moment now of interview.
That's what I would be doing about Moran's like, Mr.
President, let's move on. Let's agree to disagree.
No, don't agree to disagree. Call him out.
This is your moment, SO. But that frustrates me a great
deal when journalists don't do that.
We are out of time, so unfortunately we won't get to

(50:05):
ask any more follow up questions.
Mehdi Hassan, thanks for joining, posting through it.
Where can people check out Zeteoand everything that your outlet
is, is up to? I, I really, really just have
nothing but positive things to say about what what your team is
doing there. It's a breath of fresh air in

(50:26):
alternative media. Thank you so much.
I appreciate the kind words. We've worked very hard to get
off the ground over the last year and a bit.
I can't believe it's been over ayear.
Please do check us out at zeteo.com, Z eteo.com, become a
paid subscriber, support independent journalism.
We're also on YouTube where we just crossed a million
subscribers. So we're having an impact.
We're growing our audience. We're trying to change the media

(50:46):
landscape in this country and beyond.
And I'm glad to say it's working.
Slowly but surely, but it's working.
Thanks so much for coming. We appreciate it.
Thanks both. I could not do what he does and
there's not like a bone in my body that really wants to to do
what he does, to be honest. But I'm glad somebody is.

(51:10):
Mike, have you ever debated people on the far right?
I mean, in private, private, private, like text that would go
on for a very long time. I actually remember there, there
there's a guy that's for the forthe real heads out there.
And I know there's at least a few people in our listener base
that will know who this person is.
But there's a character named Millennial Matt.
He he was, he was one of the Charles foe guys.

(51:30):
And I had a conversation with him about fascism and, and
Hitler and whatever else. And I got in trouble for it,
Newsweek, because it got so heated.
And they're like you, you cannottalk to your interview subjects
like that. I mean, it's like, well, it's
also not your business how I do my job.
Like, necessarily it doesn't affect you unless I'm publishing
the interview. Like the interview.

(51:51):
It just, yeah, I got lost my temper a couple of times because
he was so atrocious. But that's that's why I learned
that actually, you know, Mandy'sright, You should not actually
debate fascist, at least publicly.
I've had other conversations where I just get lied to.
I don't know if you're familiar with that, where it's just sort
of like, oh, that's, you know, anything that you find
objectionable about their worldview, they should tell you

(52:11):
a sort of gaslight you to tell you it's not happening.
Yeah. Infuriating conversations.
I've had infuriating conversation in private.
And to Matey's credit, I think this is important to note.
There are not many people where I would tolerate them doing that
and platforming those participating in the platforming
of those people. And he is one of the few that I

(52:32):
would partly because he was ableto handle it so well.
That's just my take on it. I really thought he did an
amazing job. Yeah, On the platforming note, I
feel like something that I want to bring up that we didn't get
to in terms of like how Jubilee found these people.
I can't say for sure this is howevery person ended up on that
show. But when I was researching

(52:54):
Jubilee, I came across a web page that they have that is
basically just full of differentcasting calls for the videos
that they make. So there's one on the website
right now that's looking for people to star in something that
will be called Goth core women versus Barbie core women,

(53:15):
whatever that is. But but the point is that like
the people that are in these videos are not getting pulled
off the street. You know, if you respond to this
casting call and they pick you, it's my understanding that they
will buy you a ticket to Los Angeles house you up.
You know, I so the people that are going on this show are kind

(53:37):
of seeking it out. And I think that makes a
difference for a show like this.You know, it's not a
conversation, which is like 20 random people who, you know,
kind of disagree with Mehdi. But the people in this room, all
of them have, you know, or I'm sure most of them at least have
some kind of either existing plug into influencer land or

(54:00):
have aspirations of being an influencer or I don't know,
maybe they just want a free tripto Los Angeles.
You know, I love, I love visiting LA, you know, but.
It's very similar to to reality TV calls from back in the day,
right where they had go to the mall.
And like, talk to people and they'd see if you were like,
crazy enough to be on Big Brother, right?

(54:22):
I I remember that. Right or or do you want to be on
Flavour of Love, which was, you know, more my speed.
But yeah, the what I was going to say, I'm one of the few
Barbie core males, so I hope they do another show of that and
I can get involved in that. I'm both a goth core and Barbie
core male. But the big question here is

(54:43):
like, how many of how many youngpeople who would vote for Trump
again are like some of the people that were in this
audience? And I, And my guess is that the
anti-Semitic, white supremacist group is disproportionately
represented online and thereforedisproportionately represented
in videos like this. And that is not to say that
there aren't a hideous number ofthem, but I think people are

(55:06):
rewarded for extreme performances in these spaces.
And those are the type of peoplewho wanted to be there.
I mean, Betty had some, you know, seem to have some regrets
about aspects of the Jubilee debate that he did, particularly
just the the people that they brought in were just people that

(55:28):
didn't sort of meet his bar for being worthwhile to debate,
which is totally fair. But if I disagree with him a
little bit, I still think there was maybe some kind of value.
And I don't know, this is like the strongest argument, but if
that sort of class of people or people that think that way, I
mean, are overrepresented onlineas media consumption patterns

(55:52):
change, especially, you know, young people are getting all
their information online, maybe there's some kind of secondary
value in just wiping the floor with them and embarrassing them.
I worry that that mode of thinking through the Internet,
through exposure, I think the real risk is kind of

(56:12):
normalizing. And something I appreciated that
Mehdi did during that debate wassort of refused to normalize the
people that said they didn't care about the constitution or
they were giving voice to weird racist conspiracy theories and
stuff and really just kind of treated them as the freaks that
they are. I'm.
Going to give the counterpoint to that, which is Hillary

(56:36):
Clinton was, you know, people widely believed her to dominate
Donald Trump and in those debates and largely what he was
known for was being petulant, sniffing a lot.
I mean, he was at standing in a weird way, etcetera, etcetera.
And it didn't do her any good tosort of out argue this guy.
Now, that's just a sample size of one thing and there's so much

(56:56):
extra baggage there. Who Hillary Clinton was, who
Trump was, what the moment was like, etcetera, etcetera.
But I'm just, I just want to putthat that sort of thing as a
counter because I think, you know, history is full with
people who made better arguments, but but lost to a
brutal psychopath. And, you know, there's a reason
to sort of, kind of keep those people away from microphones.

(57:19):
Yeah, yeah. I mean, I think that's a
fairpoint. On that note, what I want to say
is if thank you for coming today.
Thank you for listening to the podcast, hanging out with us.
If you enjoyed what you heard, Iwant to remind you that the tip
jar is in the episode description of the podcast.
You just kind of Scroll down andtake a look at it.

(57:40):
Any donations you make goes to producing shows exactly like
this and and helping us produce shows with guests that you want
to hear. What I would also say is we are
hoping to expand the show in thecoming weeks.
Yeah, a bit about that. I posted something about this on
Blue Sky, but this podcast we currently distributed through

(58:03):
Sub Stack because it is just easy and low cost and for an
operation like this, you know, those are things that make it
valuable. But because this show has had
such an overwhelming positive response since it relaunched,
you know, earlier this year and Mike came in as Co host and

(58:25):
everything, we are now looking to move to Patreon and start
broadcasting twice a week. How that would look is that
there is a episode on the main feed that is free, and then
there's kind of a looser episodethat is for premium members.

(58:47):
So keep an eye out for that. Moving a podcast has a lot of
moving parts. It's complicated.
We're still hammering out the exact details.
I'm also trying to see if there is an easy way for us to offer
something to people who have contributed to the tip jar so
far and who will contribute to the tip jar until we make that

(59:10):
transition. To see if I can give people like
a few free months or something, offer them that to show our
appreciation. But keep your eyes out for that.
And also, if there's any technical hiccups in the coming
weeks as I'm trying to switch things over, please forgive me
in advance. Yeah.
And, and, and one thing I would like to highlight also about the

(59:31):
Patreon thing, it is a solution to the advertisement question.
Because if you know, once we getthe Patreon going, you will be
able to get the podcast ad free.And that does not not
necessarily guaranteed when we have the if you listen to it
just on Spotify or whatever. So you get an ad free version
that is funded by that because we we need to sell the soap

(59:51):
proverbially one way or another.So more on that later, but we'll
update you guys as we know more and as that kind of comes
together. I think that's all we've got for
this week though. So like Mike said, thanks for
tuning in. We hope you enjoyed this
episode. I really enjoyed our
conversation with Mehdi and we'll see you next week.

(01:00:13):
All right, talk to you next week.