Unleash Your Productivity with These Powerful Time Management Techniques!
Hi Reader,
Welcome back to my Marketplace of Ideas. Over the past few days, two newsletters landed in my inbox—both tackling the Israel-Gaza conflict, yet from vastly different angles.
On one side, Isaac Saul, a self-professed Jewish centrist, delivers his thoughts through Tangle, an independent project that aggregates perspectives across the political spectrum.
I recently became aware of Tangle, a project that goes into aggregating perspectives on controversial issues from all sides. I look at tangle with admiration and dare I say aspiration.
The author, Isaac Saul, is a Jewish centrist (I like to think like I am😊) and wrote to his audience a piece titled "All my worst fears about Israel have come true."
On the other end, Mehdi Hasan, Founder of Zeteo, represented the extreme left in my inbox. True to his cause, Mehdi sent out a newsletter titled, "Everyone is Hamas (Or So Say Israel and Its Supporters)."
As I covered at length in prior newsletters and on my podcast, I follow Mehdi Hasan for exposure to extreme leftism. I also think his presentation skills are admirable.
Side point: I also recently watched his "head-to-head" clashes he had with Israeli historian Benny Morris, and another with Chinese Minister Victor Gao. I didn't know he'd still be doing work for Al Jazeera, now that he published his own outlet called Zeteo.
Over the war, Mehdi would tweet out acts of obvious wrongdoing on Israel's part and sarcastically caption it with "but Hamas."
|
6:33 PM • Jun 30, 2024
7183 |
Retweets |
22969 |
Likes |
|
|
I've linked to the two newsletters above in case you'd like to read them in full. But I will contrast the two newsletters based on their highlighted excerpts.
Saul indicates in his October 10 newsletter, his most interacted with newsletter, the most controversial section was when he mentioned:
Israel has already responded with a vengeance, and they will continue to. Their desire for violence is not unlike Hamas's - it's just as much about blood for blood as any legitimate security measure. Israel will "have every right to respond with force." Toppling Hamas - a group, by the way, Israel erred in supporting - will now be the objective, and civilian death will be seen as necessary collateral damage.
While I agree with 99% of this analysis, what you see here is nuance, rational moderateness, and dare I say centrism.
Contrast this with Mehdi Hasan’s approach. His newsletter screams with a relentless, almost obsessive focus on Israel's wrongdoings, wrapped in the sarcastic refrain:
“Hamas, Hamas, Hamas.”
It’s constant, incessant, never-ending.
Everyone the Israeli military kills in Gaza is Hamas. Everyone who speaks in defense of the people of Gaza is Hamas.
It is the biggest and – they believe – best smear they have.
I added the emphasis above. My intention is to highlight the point of the lack of nuance and measure in Mehdi's attitude.
Mehdi is trying to paint all supporters of the IDF as blind to the imperfections of army, warfare, and Israeli action. While many may be, others are nuanced. Isaac Saul being one of them. I like to think of myself being another.
Let us not forget, when we don't expose ourselves to the other perspectives of things, seek to divide and demonize the other side, you end up with ludacris accusations like you see here.
Mehdi’s strategy is clear: demonize, divide, and dismiss any defense of Israel as blind fanaticism. He paints with a broad brush, stripping away any chance of nuanced debate. His narrative leaves no room for the complexities that define this conflict, reducing it to a binary of oppressors and oppressed, right and wrong—it's intellectually dishonest.
By refusing to acknowledge the moral failures of Hamas, by failing to fault them for their deliberate, calculated sacrifices of civilian lives, Mehdi is complicit in perpetuating a cycle of intolerance and polarization.
Doing so only fuels the fire. Instead, we must strive to understand and address the nuances—no matter how uncomfortable that might be.
I encourage you to dive into both of these newsletters, critically analyze the arguments presented, and decide for yourself where the truth lies. Because, in the end, truth isn't found in absolutes—it’s discovered in the messy, complicated middle.
