Open to Debate

The U.S. and China are the two largest competitors in the race for semiconductors and in creating the most powerful AI chips. Europe could become a major stakeholder thanks to its demand for tech sovereignty and lithography near-monopoly, while others see the continent as too hampered by regulation, labor, and limited venture capital to get ahead. Now, in partnership with Bloomberg, we debate: Is Europe Too Late to Compete in the Chip Wars? Arguing "Too Late": Zach Meyers, Director of Research at the Centre on Regulation in Europe (CERRE) Geoffrey Gertz, Former Director for International Economics at the White House; Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security Arguing "Not Too Late: Cristina Caffarra, Economist & Co-founder of EuroStack Eric Baissus, CEO of Kalray Caroline Hyde, Bloomberg Television Anchor and Host of “Bloomberg Technology”, is the guest moderator. Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

At a time when misinformation thrives, institutions crumble, and algorithms mediate truth, trust has become one of democracy’s most fragile foundations. Our team at Open to Debate has been thinking twice recently about trust — how it’s earned, how it breaks, and how it might be rebuilt between one another in a time of deep division. Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, the Internet’s encyclopedia with an English-language version that has been viewed 11 billion times alone and allows anyone to contribute and edit a page, says that trust is a living treasure that can and must be cultivated. In this episode, geopolitical strategist and Wickett Advisory moderator Xenia Wickett sits down with Jimmy Wales to discuss his new book, "The Seven Rules of Trust: A Blueprint for Building Things That Last.” In this "Think Twice" episode, the interview explores how Wikipedia leveraged trust to help it become a global authority while the public’s trust in other institutions has faded. Our Guest: Jimmy Wales, Founder of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation; Author of "The Seven Rules of Trust: A Blueprint for Building Things That Last" Xenia Wickett, Geopolitical strategist, moderator at Wickett Advisory, and Trustee of Transparency International UK, is the guest moderator. Substack: https://opentodebate.substack.com/ Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Birthright citizenship guarantees citizenship to anyone born within the United States’ territory, regardless of a parent’s nationality. But should this legal principle be removed from the Constitution? Those arguing it shouldn’t say that it prevents children from being punished for their parents’ status, while encouraging long-term economic and civic contributions. But those calling to end the practice argue it fuels illegal immigration and strains the overburdened immigration system. Now, we debate: Should America End Birthright Citizenship? Arguing Yes: Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies Horace Cooper, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research; Chairman of the Project 21 National Advisory Board Arguing No: Kris Mayes, Arizona Attorney General Chris Newman, Legal Director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today, humanity is thriving, but there are fears the good times will not last. Will tomorrow be better than today? Those arguing “yes” say people have better access to resources and technological advances are making us more prosperous. Those arguing “no” say there are widening socio-economic disparities, our globalized world is bound to collapse, and we’re not doing enough to fight climate change. Now we debate: Will the Future Be Abundant? Arguing Yes: Peter Diamandis, Founder and Executive Chairman of the XPRIZE Foundation Arguing No: Peter Zeihan, Geopolitical Strategist Xenia Wickett, Geopolitical strategist and moderator at Wickett Advisory and Trustee of Transparency International UK, is the guest moderator. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

From ancient battles to modern proxy wars, conflicts have been a constant in human history. But does that mean we are destined to continue treating it as an option? Those saying war is inevitable argue that our global system is anarchic and no overarching authority exists to stop war, so states prioritize survival and power. But others argue that conflict is not the only form of dispute resolution; trade, diplomacy, international law, mediation, and peace treaties can avert war. Now we debate: Is War Inevitable? Arguing Yes: Dylan Motin, Visiting Scholar at the Seoul National University Asia Center Arguing No: Gabrielle Rifkind, Conflict Mediator; Director of Oxford Process Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

As modern warfare becomes increasingly automated and AI-reliant, questions arise about the use of a “kill switch” overriding autonomous weapons in conflict zones. Should the ultimate decision be in humans’ or AI’s hands? Those arguing for human oversight say moral reasoning, empathy, and legal accountability are essential, especially in wartime. Supporters of AI integration argue that machines can make faster, more precise, and less emotional decisions, which could prove more humane than past approaches. Now we debate: Wartime Kill Switch: Human or AI? Arguing "Human": Elliot Ackerman, Former Marine Raider Officer and CIA Special Activities Officer; Bestselling Author Laura Walker McDonald, Senior Advisor for New Technologies & Conflict at the International Committee of the Red Cross Arguing "AI": Michael C. Horowitz, Senior Fellow for Technology and Innovation at the Council on Foreign Relations; Director of Perry World House and Richard Perry Professor at the University of Pennsylvania Jack Shanahan, Inaugural Director of Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, Office of the Department of Defense Chief Information Officer Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It’s been five years since the pandemic began, but was our public health system or society to blame for our country’s failures to stop the spread? Some argue that public health leaders were unprepared, mismanaged the crisis, and provided inconsistent guidance. Others argue the failures were societal, citing widespread mistrust, misinformation, and other guidance, which undermined compliance and effectiveness. Now, in a new format, our debaters argue both sides of this nuanced and complex question: Was COVID a Public Health Failure or Did Society Fail Public Health? Dr. Tom Frieden, Former Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); President and Chief Executive Officer at Resolve to Save Lives Doctor Mike Varshavski, Board-certified family medicine physician, UNICEF Ambassador, and Influencer Dr. Jerome Adams, 20th Surgeon General of the United States Dr. Dara Kass, Practicing ER physician and medical news contributor during the COVID pandemic, Former Regional Director in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Men are falling behind in our society, and some point to traditional ideas of masculinity as the cause. What does it mean to “be a man” today, and how do labels like toxic masculinity impact that question? For some men, masculinity is a continually evolving identity that goes beyond narrow definitions placed upon it. For others, it's a rigid set of expectations that results in emotional isolation and other negative outcomes. Now we debate: Is Masculinity A Prison? Arguing Yes: Lux Alptraum, Writer, Journalist, and Sex Educator Arguing No: Mike Pesca, Host of "The Gist" Podcast Nayeema Raza, Journalist and Host of "Smart Girl Dumb Questions", is the guest moderator. Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It’s Back to School season, and TikTok has been taking a larger role in helping students learn — but should it? Some teachers argue that using TikTok can help make whatever subjects they study more digestible and adaptable to different types of learners. Others call the app distracting and capable of undermining classroom authority and prioritizing entertainment and short attention spans over education. Now we debate: TikTok in the Classroom: Enhancing or Eroding the Teaching Profession? Enhance: Phil Cook, Education Influencer and High School Chemistry Teacher Erode: Adrian Dingle, Second Schoolteacher and Education Consultant Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In some policy circles, the idea of the U.S. electing a CEO-style dictator running the country like a company is gaining momentum. But should the idea be embraced? Those proposing the Dictator CEO, like Curtis Yarvin, argue it would challenge existing institutions and deliver cutthroat efficiency. But democracy advocates, like E. Glen Weyl, argue that consolidating power under one leader undermines the core values fundamental to America’s political system. Now we debate: Should the U.S. Be Ruled by a CEO Dictator? Arguing Yes: Curtis Yarvin, Anti-democracy theorist and Tech Entrepreneur Arguing No: E. Glen Weyl, Co-Founder of the RadicalxChange Foundation, Plurality Institute, and the Faith, Family and Technology Network Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

More Americans are moving away from eating meat toward a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle. But is continuing to eat animals a personal choice—or an ethical failure? Those favoring a plant-based lifestyle argue that eating animals is morally indefensible when plant-based alternatives can provide the same nutrition without pain. But meat lovers argue there’s more to eating meat than seems obvious and caution against vilifying meat consumption. Now, we debate this motion: Don’t Eat Anything With A Face. Arguing Yes: Neal Barnard, Clinical Researcher, Author of "21-Day Weight Loss Kickstart" Gene Baur, President and Co-Founder of the Farm Sanctuary Arguing No: Chris Masterjohn, Nutritional Sciences Researcher; Blogger at The Daily Lipid Joel Salatin, Farmer & Author Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Fast fashion has taken over the fashion industry, but is less expensive, trendy clothing really worth the purchase? Those who say to “stop” argue fast fashion harms the environment in many ways and exploits workers in countries with lax regulations. Those who say “keep shopping” argue it’s up to shoppers to choose, as fast fashion offers affordable options, supports jobs, and boosts local economies. Now we debate: Fast Fashion: Shop or Stop? Arguing Stop: Kenneth Pucker, Former COO of Timberland; Professor at The Fletcher School at Tufts University Arguing Shop: Katherine Mangu-Ward, Editor-in-Chief at Reason Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The pressure to constantly be productive and achieve has become an aspiration one should aspire. But is this mindset worth the effort? Those claiming it’s toxic argue it creates impossible standards, opening the door for anxiety, burnout, and disconnection. But some argue the problem isn’t productivity itself, but how we’ve come to define success — and the unrealistic expectations that come with it. Now we debate: Is Our Productivity Culture Toxic? Arguing Yes: Jennifer Moss, Workplace Culture Expert; Author of "The Burnout Epidemic" Rahaf Harfoush, Digital Anthropologist and New York Times Best-Selling Author Arguing No: David Allen, Creator of the "Getting Things Done" Time Management Method and Author Amy Edmondson, Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management at Harvard Business School Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Take our podcast listener survey here: https://bit.ly/opentodebatesurvey Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Pope Leo XIV’s accession could mean a new opportunity to reform the Catholic Church by allowing women as ordained deacons. Those advocating for this change argue that allowing women would represent a return to early Church tradition and showcase an evolving Church ready for modernity. Those against this argue that it would blur theological lines and that women already play substantial leadership roles within the Church. Now we debate: Is It Time for the Catholic Church to Ordain Women as Deacons? Arguing Yes: Casey Stanton, Co-director of Discerning Deacons Arguing No: Pia de Solenni, Theologian; Former Chancellor of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange in California Nayeema Raza, Journalist and Host of "Smart Girl Dumb Questions", is the guest moderator. Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Take our podcast listener survey here: https://bit.ly/opentodebatesurvey Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The shocking 2022 murder of four University of Idaho students have resulted in a life sentence for the killer and still-unanswered questions — about new genealogy tech, media exposure, lessons for law enforcement —worth Thinking Twice about. John Donvan sits down with journalist Vicky Ward, who co-authored with James Patterson “The Idaho Four: An American Tragedy,” and discuss what drew her to the case, how collaborating with Patterson changed her process, and reconsidering elements of the criminal justice system. Our Guest: Vicky Ward, Co-Author of "The Idaho Four: An American Tragedy" Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Take our podcast listener survey here: https://bit.ly/opentodebatesurvey Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Love in the time of AI? Some people seeking romance or friendship are turning to AI chatbots to fulfill those desires, but could they surpass traditional human relationships? Those who say they can argue that AI can offer empathy and safety, and it’s a solution for those left out of traditional dating. Those saying they can’t argue that intimacy is complicated and cannot be replicated in code. Now we debate: Could Dating an AI Be Better Than Dating a Human? Arguing Yes: Thao Ha, Associate Professor of Psychology at Arizona State University Arguing No: Justin Garcia, Executive Director & Senior Scientist at the Kinsey Institute; Chief Scientific Advisor to Match.com Nayeema Raza, Journalist and Host of "Smart Girl Dumb Questions", is the guest moderator. Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Take our podcast listener survey here: https://bit.ly/opentodebatesurvey Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

President Trump has officially signed the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act into law. There is debate among conservatives about whether it will end up driving economic growth or increasing our debt. One side argues that ordinary Americans will pay the price and the long-term fiscal outcome is terrible. Another side argues these policies will encourage investment, growth, and job creation. Now, two conservatives debate: Is the Big, Beautiful Bill a Disaster? Arguing Yes: Jessica Riedl, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute Arguing No: Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Director of the Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment and the Herbert and Joyce Morgan Fellow in Energy and Environmental Policy at The Heritage Foundation Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Trump administration enacted severe actions against Harvard University that threaten its endowment, funding, and ability to enroll international students, based on accusations of antisemitism. Do these actions go too far? Prominent voices long affiliated with Harvard – former university president Larry Summers and law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz — engage in a nuanced debate and provocative discussion: Did Harvard Have It Coming? Arguing Yes: Alan Dershowitz, Emeritus Professor of Law at Harvard Law School Arguing No: Lawrence Summers, President Emeritus of Harvard; Former Secretary of the Treasury Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

As an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court for almost three decades, Stephen Breyer was no stranger to hearing arguments for different sides in major cases. In this episode, our moderator-in-chief, John Donvan, and Chief Content Officer, Lia Matthow, interview Justice Breyer and discuss his book “Reading the Constitution: Why I Chose Pragmatism, not Textualism.” He discusses how he used this philosophy to guide his decisions and why he thinks jurists should choose this approach. Our Guest: Stephen Breyer, Former United States Supreme Court Justice Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan and Lia Matthow, Chief Content Officer of Open to Debate, moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Open to Debate, in partnership with the Human Rights Foundation and the Oslo Freedom Forum, is examining a strategy employed by many countries to respond to aggressive or authoritarian regimes. In recent years, these have been levied against countries such as Russia, Venezuela, and Iran, which have ranged from freezing assets and trade bans to travel restrictions and full embargoes. But do sanctions work in deterring repression? Those arguing that they’re effective claim that they’re a nonviolent way to force change and serve as a deterrent for other countries. Those who are skeptical about the efficacy of sanctions say they are leaky, don’t lead to regime change, and can harm civilians and exacerbate humanitarian crises. Now with this background, we debate the question: Are Sanctions an Effective Policy Tool? This debate was produced in partnership with the Human Rights Foundation and was recorded at the Oslo Freedom Forum in Oslo, Norway, on May 26, 2025. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices