Matt Taibbi

Rank 33 of 47
|
Score -35
9/6/2025, 1:38:53 AM
X
In reply to:
PepeMimi
@PepeMimi5
·
9d
@mtaibbi How? You are refusing to back Israel.
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
9d
@PepeMimi5 Except I’m doing the opposite?
PepeMimi
@PepeMimi5
·
9d
@mtaibbi This is no different than Malcolm Gladwell picking sides based on which way the hysterical activist winds are blowing.
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
9d
How many times do I have to repeat I am not a supporter of Israel? I’ve never once written anything along those lines
michael friedmann
@michael04121218
·
9d
@wrs_willoughby @mtaibbi @bariweiss This is where we're going to have a problem. She's an apologist for Isreal's genocide. I have no doubt there's a rift here between Taibbi and Aaron Maté.

The statement 'Gladwell picked sides. I’m picking no side. Seems pretty different to me' is part of a broader conversation about public figures' stances on the Israel-Palestine conflict, which is a significant public issue. The tone of the statement is neutral and seeks to clarify the speaker's position as being different from Malcolm Gladwell's, who is perceived to have taken a side. The intent appears to be to distance oneself from taking a definitive stance in the conflict, emphasizing neutrality.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and maintains a neutral tone, avoiding inflammatory language. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By stating a neutral position, the statement could promote understanding by not escalating the conflict, though it does not actively promote empathy or compassion.
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement refrains from personal attacks and focuses on clarifying the speaker's position, which aligns with constructive dialogue. [+1]