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? 

This debate was recorded on October 9, 2025 at 1 PM at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University in Phoenix, AZ. 

This event is part of a new partnership between Open to Debate and Arizona State University’s Institute of Politics to bring live debate programming to ASU’s campus in a special series titled PRO/CONversations. Produced by Arizona PBS in the Arizona State University Media Enterprise—which will air and promote the recorded programs—the series is designed to model civil discourse for students while offering hands-on production experience to ASU journalism students. 

 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. 

Take our podcast listener survey here: https://bit.ly/opentodebatesurvey

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices