Larry Sanger

Well, all of those things need to be debated.

And I'm not saying that they're obvious and straightforward.

People can have good faith disagreements about how to solve such problems.

But something like that, that Gaza genocide article simply cannot be debated.

Justified for the very simple and straightforward reason that, you know, the people who are involved and a lot of other people outside are disagree with the description.

So I do want to.

acknowledge that it's not easy, of course, right?

But it's, there are clearer examples and less clear examples.

And this is one of the clearer examples.

So clear, in fact, that Jimmy Wales himself weighed in on the talk page of that particular article and said that it's biased and

And I followed up and said, well, here's something we actually agree on.

And a lot of people were up in arms about that because Wikipedia does tend to take, as I say, a sort of progressive stance.

And apart from some Jewish progressives, they tend to be...

very much pro-Palestinian on any issues connected to the war.

And that shows itself in the Wikipedia articles.

See, this is difficult because here we're talking about the law of nations, not criminal law, which is very different.

International tribunals have never been regarded by legal philosophers as quite the same thing.

as other sorts of, you know, ordinary tribunals.

And that actually does affect how people write history books, or at least it can.

You know, if somebody...