Podcast Summary: Response to Dave Smith: NO! Conspiracy Theorists and Anti-Semites Must Be Called Out

Podcast: The Comedy Cellar: Live from the Table
Date: March 14, 2025
Host: Comedy Cellar Network
Main Hosts & Contributors: Noam Dworman, Dan Benelli, Periel Aschenbrand, Sally Sattel, Aaron Berg, Rob

Episode Overview

The episode dives deeply into a heated Twitter feud involving Noam Dworman and comedian/political commentator Dave Smith. The central thesis: public figures, especially within the comedy and political commentary space, have a moral obligation to denounce conspiracy theories and anti-Semitic rhetoric, even (or especially) from within their own circles. The show critiques the reluctance of notable personalities, specifically Dave Smith, to rebuke associates like Candace Owens and Jake Shields for anti-Semitic or conspiratorial statements, and explores the wider consequences of such silence.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Twitter Feud: Noam Dworman vs. Dave Smith

• The Spark: Noam criticized Dave Smith for being "a hostage to his followers," particularly his refusal to condemn anti-Semitic or conspiratorial statements from people like Candace Owens and Jake Shields.
  • Noam: "He's in a golden cage ... he doesn't condemn people, doesn't call them out for antisemitism or crazy shit." — [01:08]
• Dave Smith's Public Reaction: Dave retaliated harshly, attacking Noam’s career and standing.
  • Noam describes: "He said, you're a failure and I'm a success ... go do your $75 spots." — [01:56]

2. Calling Out Conspiracies and Anti-Semitism

• Pattern of Non-Criticism: Noam and Dan note that within right-wing/conspiratorial circles, public figures rarely rebuke each other, offering a form of “innocence by association.”
  • Dan: "It becomes like a chain ... and it winds up on the Joe Rogan show in one form or another." — [05:39]
• Examples Cited: From Candace Owens’ social media posts to Tucker Carlson’s segments, a litany of conspiracy narratives are recounted, many with anti-Semitic overtones.
• Sanitizing the Unacceptable: Noam likens the lack of pushback to glossing over dangerous patterns: “You're elevating and converting a notion that nobody took seriously ... [into] 'reasonable minds can differ.'”

3. Danger of Conspiratorial Thinking and the Jewish Connection

• Noam argues anti-Semitism is “the mother of all conspiracy theories,” and that, historically, many conspiracy theorists "wind up at anti-Semitism's door.”
  • Noam: "With very few exceptions, people who are into conspiracies wind up at anti-Semitism's door, even if they may not actually be anti-Semites." — [08:08]
• Escalating Claims: The episode skewers specific recent examples (all attributed to the "crew" around Joe Rogan/Dave Smith/Candace Owens):
  • LBJ and Stalin were Jewish
  • Kamala Harris is secretly Jewish
  • “The Holocaust is a gross exaggeration”
  • Israel did 9/11
  • The US is run by a Zionist mob
  • "It's just too crazy for words." — Dan, [22:32]

4. The ‘Magic Words’ Defense and Historical Echoes

• Critics say ‘I don’t mean all Jews’: Noam unpacks the rhetorical move (“I have no problem with the Jewish people—just a cabal...”), showing its deep roots in classic anti-Semitism.
  • “Almost all of them ... will have something in there saying, I have no problem with the Jewish people. It's just ... the bankers and the communists.” — Noam, [28:14]
• Historical Continuity: Comparing modern rhetoric to that of Father Coughlin, Henry Ford, Dostoyevsky
  • “You hear the echoes of Father Coughlin and Henry Ford, and Charles Lewis... and they say, ‘I don’t mean all the Jewish people.’” — Noam, [30:07]

5. Engagement vs. Elevation: How (and Whether) to Argue with Conspiracists

• Should we debate anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists? Noam once considered hosting a Holocaust denial debate, seeing value in factual engagement to counter ignorance—but warns of unintended side effects:
  • “When someone has a pattern of making absolutely outlandish, obviously false arguments ... it is also fair to engage with that pattern, that inability to change the subject.” — [25:53]
  • "Engagement is not without its risks ... you elevate and convert [nonsense] into ‘reasonable minds can differ’." — [25:53]
• Comparing Patterns: “With Dave, ... he is generally presents as a reasonable person ... it’s as if I had people who hate blacks ... and I just won’t ever ... say, ‘No, I don’t think he’s a racist.’” — Noam, [31:02]

6. Responsibility and Consistency: The Double Standards Debate

• Dave Smith’s Defense: "If you rebuke your own side, you’re punished; if you don’t, you’re complicit." Dave accuses Noam and others of failing to call out their “own team.”
  • Noam rebuts: “I've done shows ... really upsetting people on my team ... because I feel like I should engage with the fact.” — [45:24]
  • “If Dave Smith tweeted at me, did you let Aaron Berg say this on your show? ... I have zero use for a guy like that ... I am not in the same awkward bind that Dave is, 'cause I'm not surrounded by these crazy bigots and lunatics.” — [51:10]
• The Aaron Berg Incident: When Aaron Berg says on a past episode, “I get excited when people are being massacred,” the hosts reflect on whether they failed to challenge it in the moment. Noam clarifies after the fact, “I’m sorry I didn’t push back. There’s no evidence ever that I don’t push back on these things ... Balls in Dave’s court to do the same thing.” — [62:06]

7. Free Speech—Value and Limits

• Philosophical Foundations: The group debates whether the purpose of free speech is as a good in itself, or whether it depends on open debate to seek truth.
  • Noam: "The Bible on free speech is John Stuart Mill's On Liberty ... only through everybody being able to speak whatever their version of truth will we be able to have a clash of ideas and eventually determine what is or isn't true." — [56:47]
  • “If we don’t allow some latitude ... we will damage the debate necessary for a democratic society." — [58:40]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Candace Owens and Social Media Rhetoric

  • "He'll refer to her as the 'great Candace Owens'... She's incredibly smart and thoughtful and willing to search for the truth, no matter how controversial it might be." — Dan, [05:39]

• On the ‘Innocence by Association’ Effect

  • “It creates a kind of innocence by association as opposed to guilt by association ... the whole entity becomes sort of sanitized by ... the social clique of it all.” — Dan, [05:39]

• On the Urgency of Rebuke

  • “We're not asking him to hate her, just to rebuke ... crazy stuff within his ranks.” — Noam, [05:33]

• On the Consequences of Wild Claims

  • “Untruth is dangerous. Garbage in, garbage out... In a democratic society ... it’s essential that they’re making decisions and forming opinions based on what the best ascertainment we’re capable of, of what is true and what's not.” — Noam, [08:08]

• Christopher Hitchens on Anti-Semitism:

  • “A dead giveaway in distinguishing the obsessive or morbid anti-Semite from the garden variety is an inability to stay off the subject.” — quoted by Noam, [11:35]

• On Tucker Carlson

  • “He’s enamored with David Irving, the Holocaust denier. ... The Jews installed Winston Churchill to pursue Zionist interests ... the reason the worst thing in human history happened was because the Jews put Hitler in fair.” — Dan, [15:26]

• On the Dangers of False Equivalence

  • “To compare ... Dave is just ... it bothers me so much because I can't believe there's any good faith in this. All too clever avoidance of the obvious. These people are just spouting out one retread anti-Semitic, classic anti-Semitic theory after another.” — Dan, [62:06]

• On Being Called Out/Falling Short

  • “If you comb through them and you find, aha! Here’s an example ... pretend that’s the pattern, when actually, that’s a totally dishonest use of evidence. The pattern is exactly the opposite ... with Dave ... I can't even find one counterexample.” — Noam, [54:22]

Segment Timestamps of Note

• [01:08] — Noam on Dave Smith's refusal to rebuke
• [05:33] — Rebuking crazy within your ranks
• [08:08] — The link from conspiracy to anti-Semitism
• [11:35] — Christopher Hitchens quote and the 'can't stay off the subject' test
• [22:32] — "It all becomes just too crazy for words."
• [25:53] — Engagement vs. Elevation: Risks of debating conspiracy theorists
• [31:02] — Noam on patterns and the responsibility to call out anti-Semitism
• [45:24] — Dealing with Aaron Berg's 'massacre' comment
• [54:22–56:47] — Free speech: Truth-seeking vs. autonomy
• [62:06] — The challenge to Dave’s consistency

Conclusion & Takeaways

• The episode lays out a robust, nuanced argument for why public figures have a duty to overtly reject conspiracy theories and anti-Semitic rhetoric within their own communities.
• Noam and the crew refuse to allow sanitized associations to go unchallenged — “innocence by association” is described as an insidious force.
• The hosts distinguish between engaging in debate to educate and the risk of elevating fringe ideas to a “reasonable minds can differ” zone.
• Deep historical roots of contemporary anti-Semitic tropes are traced and explained, with nods to the rhetorical tricks (“I don’t mean all Jews”) that have persisted for a century.
• Questions about double standards, moral responsibility, and the limits of free speech are directly addressed, often with philosophical references and self-reflection.

For listeners or readers wanting clarity in the noise of online debate: This episode is a trenchant, detailed exploration of why silence, ambiguity, or selective solidarity in the face of conspiratorial anti-Semitism is itself dangerous — and why everyone, but especially those with a platform, must draw the line clearly.