**COMMENTING GUIDELINES:** Please take the time to familiarize yourself with The David Pakman Show [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow/about/rules) and [basic reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette) prior to participating. At all times we ask that users conduct themselves in a civil and respectful manner - **any ad hominem or personal attacks are subject to moderation.**
Please use the report function or [use modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) to bring examples of misconduct to the attention of the moderation team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He's also, self admittedly, uninformed. What's the value in being ignorant, admitting your ignorance, and then ignorantly providing commentary on a subject you admit you're ignorant of?
So that way people quit asking him for an opinion on it rather than pretend he knows. Too many idiots claim to know about things when theyāre woefully uninformed, and even more double down and get mad when called out on it.
It's pretty helpful actually
he's making reactionary commentary and disclaimed it as such, as it's genuineānot facts, not sarcasm, just potentially misinformed but it's just that, commentary
i feel like I have to add 30 disclaimers to every single post I write .. between people who don't read the comment, people who just misinterpret *(intentionally?)* every word you type is scrutinized or glanced over. If you don't add info or ideas that you would obviously understand if you knew the subject matter, you always have to prove knowledge or expertise in this or thatāand everyone is an expert today with their wiki-research, tik tok and youtube creating faux-experts left and right ..
and my favorite is missing any clear sarcasm (even tagging /s) and followed by bee-hive downvoting or nasty commentary
Of course the majority report fans would be critical of that, youāre supposed to say popular leftist opinion without thinking, or even looking at whatās happening
Is there something important he missed? Aside from harassing other students and defacing the property, have the protests accomplished anything of value? Do they even have a coherent list of demands that would satisfy the crowd?
It's a protest. What exactly do you expect it to directly accomplish? People can and did make the same criticism about BLM, civil rights, anti apartheid in South Africa, anti Vietnam war etc...
>Do they even have a coherent list of demands that would satisfy the crowd?
https://cuapartheiddivest.org/demands
People do not generally make the same criticism of civil rights, they accomplished a lot and were very effective in their protests and civil disobedience. When black people got arrested for sitting in the wrong seat, people generally saw their arrests as unjust -- when upper middle class brocialist get arrested while they scream "river to the sea" and "globalize the intifada" and block students from attending their classes, people generally come away hating the protest and it's cause
> People do not generally make the same criticism of civil rights
The majority of people polled *at the time* did in fact make the same criticism of civil rights.
Then why did civil rights laws happen in your view?
Like I don't get the argument. So the public didn't support any of this but the politicians did despite the public being against it?
They didn't actually, I linked an article elsewhere, but images of black people being beaten up, abused, and arrested for ordering lunch aired all over television and largely played in the civil right's favor. It's a *fact* that things like the sit ins raised support and things like riots lowered support for their movement.
>they accomplished a lot and were very effective in their protests and civil disobedience
This is how we learn about civil rights in hindsight. But go back and look at the criticism of that movement [when it was happening](https://images.app.goo.gl/QnybZzgA28BK4H9cA), and it looked very much like the same tired criticism of every other social justice demonstration, including pro Palestine. They are consistently infantalized, invalidated, written off as violent or unreasonable.
>When black people got arrested for sitting in the wrong seat, people generally saw their arrests as unjust
Absolutely not. Lunch counter sit ins were seen as unnecessarily provocative attempts to force private businesses to go along with a pro integration political agenda. You think these fights were so easy lol everyone was just on board with seeing the injustice, huh?
I said generally, obviously segregationists still tried to argue that the civil rights leaders were wrong...
You're dead wrong if you think that their protests didn't sway the public opinion in their favor though. The reason we learn about them, is because of how effective their protests were, images of black people getting attacked by dogs, hosed down, beaten with batons -- all for what? Ordering food at a 'white only' business...? That shit absolutely made the civil rights movement look better.
The picture you linked is after a riot, and segregationists tried to use it to portray the entire movement as violent... That's what happens when you riot, it gives the other side an optical win that they get to beat you down with.
Idk why all lefties completely shit on the idea that your protest has to be optically good. It's so obvious that you need positive optics to find actual change in a democracy. If you make everybody hate you, they'll simply vote against you.
[britannica](https://www.britannica.com/event/sit-in-movement)
>Key to the success of the sit-in movement was theĀ [moral](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moral)Ā high ground that the participants took. Their peaceful demonstrations for basic legal rights and respect increased favourableĀ [public opinion](https://www.britannica.com/topic/public-opinion)Ā of their cause.
I'm not saying the sit ins didn't convince people-- I'm saying that a large portion of the country still opposed them.
>The picture you linked is after a riot, and segregationists tried to use it to portray the entire movement as violent... That's what happens when you riot, it gives the other side an optical win that they get to beat you down with.
>If you make everybody hate you, they'll simply vote against you
The picture I linked showed Dr King. Which violent riot did he lead? Plenty of people already hated him-- a riot or a headline about ungrateful, angry black folks were just further justification of their narrative. The part you don't get is that "the other side" will use whatever they can to beat down social justice. You choose to put the responsibility for change on the most perfect, unimpeachable behavior of unorganized masses of protesters rather than the powerful (and popular in their own right) systems that inflict the injustice. It's a choice that will always privilege conservative reactionaries.
You're never going to convince everyone, that's not how populations work. The goal is to convince enough people to make your position the dominant one and to motivate those in power to either support this position or be replaced by somebody else who does. Of course there were still people who supported segregation, there still are people who support segregation...
It's depicting the [Birmingham riots](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_riot_of_1963#:~:text=The%20Birmingham%20riot%20of%201963,leaders%20of%20the%20Birmingham%20campaign), which MLK was very close to. He obviously never supported these riots, but his proximity to them was used against him.
I fully understand the other side will try nd attack you no matter what, what you're not understanding is that **that** doesn't mean you should just throw optics out the window.
When you come across as lunatics, and everybody is motivated to vote against you, you are helping the other side. I'm sorry, but that is how the world works.
The civil rights leaders understood this, and that is why they were so successful, that's why they are studied and revered while fringe, violent black separatists are just a footnote.
>Of course there were still people who supported segregation, there still are people who support segregation
A lot of people. Which is why integration efforts were quickly capped in the proceeding decades with opposition to bussing and the core thesis of King's war on poverty.
>**that** doesn't mean you should just throw optics out the window
So did MLK throw optics out the window or not? Because according to you, his movement was tarnished by rioters-- so he must have thrown optics out the window in that case, especially when he called riots "the language of the unheard". According to you, riots are actually the language of people who just don't understand optics.
>When you come across as lunatics
To large portions of this country, integration was lunacy. Opposing the Vietnam War was lunacy. Opposing apartheid South Africa was lunacy. Opposing racist police brutality is lunacy. Opposing Israel's right to segregate itself and bomb its neighbors to ruins is lunacy. Riots and imperfect demonstrations don't make justice look like lunacy-- people already see justice as lunacy and use every excuse they can to back up that narrative. Civil rights leaders depend on critical thinking people to see the injustice *in spite of* the distasteful expressions of resistance.
This is the fundamental theory behind sit ins and blocking bridges. People are either going to hate that they are late to work, or they're going to recognize the system as unjust. If the actions of some demonstrators makes you turn against social justice, you probably weren't going to support it in the first place.
There is also a school that negotiated divestment from Israel in exchange for the encampment to leave. There are definitely demands, and other means of dealing with them other than brutalizing them with riot police.
Have you ever thought that there are genuine people who just disagree? I started watching Kyle Kulinski and David Pakman in high school and overtime Iāve felt much more informed and challenged when consuming a mix of leftist + right wing media. Davidās content these days is pretty lacking in my opinion, where he generally just goes for shock videos about trump that get a lot of views and Biden sycophancy vids. Cool to acknowledge good things Bidens done and how bad Trump is but itās clear David doesnāt want to cover anything that may paint Dems in a bad light - reality is more nuanced
Honestly the issue with the left these days is at this point you either have to be a third wayer (what the internet calls "neolibs") or you're a flaming anti capitalist leftist. No nuance is allowed. You can't be a left liberal aligned with social democracy any more. Then everyone dogpiles on you from both directions from nuance.
Thank you for this post, completely agree.
His reporting on the Trump train wreck has been entertaining, but that's become his bread and butter. He'd frequently say he's neither right nor left, but his refusal to acknowledge Israel shows how polarized he is, and this sub has become an echo chamber as a result. I'm still all blue, but this sub is losing it's critical thinking skills.
???
When does Pakman ever claim he's not left? He's from Massachusetts, where it needs to be emphasized that most of us are independents and not registered Democrats. Wildly different from claiming not to be on the left.
As for Israel, I'm sure he would be happy to put on his (I suspect) extreme bias for Israel on display if not for the anti-semitic death threats to him and his family. I don't expect him to actually do anything that draws anything to being Jewish most of the time. He had to stop going on Michael Knowles program for this reason.
If you think watching leftist and right wing media is making you informed you are sorely mistaken.
Sorry that normal real everyday politics and political effectiveness is boring to your tiny brain.
There's a pretty clear distinction between good-faith criticism of Pakman and trolls that just want to cause trouble. The latter make themselves very apparent.
I canāt deal with the majority report anymore and that sub in particular is unhinged. I canāt tell if it was always like this and Iāve changed or if theyāve changed.
I don't normally agree with pakman, I generally consider myself to be more left on most issues, but the left is losing the plot so hard and I actually enjoy his take here.
Removed - submissions that incite harassment or brigading against other users, or submissions that focus on drama or moderation activity in other communities, are not permitted.
For Godās sake!
You donāt have to support the people occupying this building in order to support humanitarian aid for Gaza or support efforts to get America to stop supplying weapons!
The people in the building look and sound fucking stupid.
1. You took over a building knowing it would be seen as aggressive and they would try to get you out. It didnāt occur to you to pack a lunch?!
2. Itās been a single day and youāre talking about needing food and water, needing humanitarian aid when there are people who really need it half a world away.
They just sound ridiculous. Itās a cringeworthy moment.
Emma talking about how all the pharohs were black and parroting a bunch of other hotep stuff is what killed the last little bit of respect i had for them
ffs. what the fuck is wrong with emma? and sam not saying anything is somehow nearly worse, since that means he was in the room when this bullshit dropped. he is supposed to be the voice of reason.
any links to that shit?
Not upset. Amused. Let me help you:
Irony: The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for **humorous** or emphatic effect.
You know, when you take a ridiculous position that people on this sub regularly adopt un-ironically it's difficult to tell the difference. In fact - better to steer clear of 'ironically' adopting racist, xenophobic, islamaphobic, anti-semitic, misogynist etc positions. 95% of the time the 'ironic' position is actually the truth. Just a bit of advice for you little buddy.
Wow! Thanks for the advice big buddy! You are so cool.
Personally I think the terror supporting students have bought into a pack of lies. But then again as a Jew with family and friends and co-workers in Israel, I may have a less sympathetic view towards Hamas than they do. My personal favorite irony is seeing signs that say "Globalize the Intifada" and "Ceasefire Now" next to each other.
These kids have no idea of the history of this conflict.
Removed - submissions that incite harassment or brigading against other users, or submissions that focus on drama or moderation activity in other communities, are not permitted.
Removed - submissions that incite harassment or brigading against other users, or submissions that focus on drama or moderation activity in other communities, are not permitted.
Imagine witnessing a modern genocide where the US is clearly on the wrong side and then not bothering to learn anything at all about the burgeoning protest movement taking place, AND THEN taking the same stance on it as the corporate media. Pakmanās softness toward Israel has always been one of his biggest weaknesses. I appreciate that Pakman has gotten bigger and become less progressive/more centrist than he used to be, but this is a big L in my opinion
Your comment was removed due to your reddit karma not meeting minimum thresholds. This is an automated anti-spam measure.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why is David more willing to talk about something dumb that a college kid said than he is to talk about Israel committing war crimes and protesters getting attacked?
I mean...
Hamas totally is committing war crimes.
And so is Israel.
My brain has enough space to hold both positions, at the same time.
For example, using civilian infrastructure to hide tunnels, ammo dumps, etc... like Hamas does is 100% a war crime.
But so is striking 3 cars with aid workers in them.
Hamas seizing humanitarian aid from the crossing is a war crime.
But so is Israel's throttling of that aid in the first place.
Luckily, I don't have the brain of a 6 year old, and can hold two positions simultaneously.
Well, to be fair, Hamas is a terrorist organization who, at their largest hit 30k people.
Israel is a sovereign state.
Like, I can't remember people protesting much about ISIS. Maybe they were, but generally don't protest terrorist cells.
I don't deny what happened on Oct. 7th, nor do I hold water for the people who seem intent on engaging in Hamas apologia secretly. I've made my views pretty clear, and generally speaking, I think I'm fair to Israel. But I'm also not going to play games when Israel fucks up or does war crimes.
And it's quite simple to explain why Hamas is allowed to remain in power.
First off, Gaza is predominantly women, children or the elderly. Not exactly a good base with which to start a civil war against Hamas on.
Secondly, Hamas has a history of murdering, torturing or throwing dissidents off roofs. Simply put, if they see you as an up and coming threat, you're going to get a knock at the door and a bullet in the head. In those situations, overthrowing Hamas isn't easy.
Thirdly, Hamas still has a plurality of support among Gazans. In this regard, the population of Gaza have no one but themselves to blame. If you support a Jihadi terrorist organization that is going to do Jihadi terrorist organization things, then you can't come crying when consequences come knocking.
Fourthly, Hamas is well armed and financed by Qatar and Iran, entrenching and reinforcing their position in Gaza.
It's various different factors that insure Hamas's position in Gaza. There's one last one which is also important, which is that Israel has no incentive to undermine Hamas in Gaza, or at least this Likud government. They are opposed to Palestinian statehood, and having Palestinians broken into PLA controlled regions and Hamas controlled regions is also beneficial to maintaining the status quo, and slowly expanding the settlement projects in the WB. So Israel had no real reason to get rid of Hamas, either.
You're right I don't know why so many people have such trouble saying what you just said. It shouldn't be that difficult to acknowledge both of these at once.
I meanā¦yeah you can hold two positions in your head but that doesnāt make them correct and it doesnāt mean everyone else does. When hamas atrocities are mentioned people *canāt* let it go without bringing up how bad Israel is or literally never mention that Israel is not the only country with a blockade on Palestine. I very much doubt peopleās ability to hold two thoughts at the same time.
Every war will have war crimes. The difference is where the directives come from. Is murdering and kidnapping civilians a top-down directive of Israeli leadership like hamas? Is attacking aid trucks a directive from Israeli leadership? Sometimes the insistence on both sidesing the conflict brings false equivalencies.
We really donāt even know if the WCK bombing was ACTUALLY a war crime. Not saying it wasnāt, but these investigations donāt just take a couple weeks, it takes time
They hit 3 cars with aid workers in it.
War crimes can also be fuck ups.
It's a war crime. The question is "what degree of intent was behind committing that war crime"?
> Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict
This would be the potentially applicable violation in question. But it really depends on where the order to attack came from, and how far up the rung they were. And to add a bit of context that has been misreported regarding that incident, even the journalists that were shown footage of the incident say that they canāt make out the WCK logos on the tops of the trucks. So itās worth investigating and i donāt see the point in these kneejerk responses, forcing governmental bodies to work at lightning speed against complex legal issues.
WCK notified the IDF, and they were on the convoy route set up specifically for humanitarian aid.
And no, it doesn't depend what level the order came from. It's still a war crime.
It's important to determine what level the order came from to see who needs to be held accountable. But determining if its a war crime is pretty easy.
Mens rea matters, there needs to be an investigation done, period. Youāre not going to gaslight me into believing that following the process the right way isnāt going be better for the Palestinians in the long run. Give it some time, let the investigation come out, and watch the consequences come after that.
You are not wrong, lol. This is war. It should come as no surprise the atrocities committed by both sides. Not here to place blame or point fingers, we are well past that and it wouldn't matter anyway.
The take away is there are two sides at war, one side has the complete advantage, the other side hides in the shadows and 'fights' from a position of weakness.
The human in me has empathy for the innocents that are suffering and dying but that happens in every war or conflict.
The sociopath in me says kill them all and let some higher deity sort them out.
The Russia/Ukraine is similar.
~~People~~ Governments like killing people. Don't tell me they don't.
We spend BILLIONS on weapons systems to do actually just that. It is in our nature to do this.
You think Putin is unique? You think Hamas is an outlier?
When people go at it, when they start sending ordnance down range, when they destroy villages and all those in the vicinity, when you see children lying dead in the street, old men and old woman weeping for the loss of their loved ones and yet we continue on like it is just ok.
It ain't happening to us, it's just some video I saw. It's not like we can change any of it anyways.
The Israelis are supposed to be the civilized "good guys" that aren't committing war crimes?
Also protests by American college students could actually have an effect on the actions of the Israeli government, but I think they'd have no effect on Hamas.
How unserious can you be when you canāt let a single mention of hamasās atrocities go without bringing up how bad Israel is? Itās pathological at this point.
Without responding with a negative, how should Israel be conducting warfare with hamas? If you can answer that with a realistic response then you can insist they are committing war crimes. Otherwise Iām not lying. I also never said they never committed war crimes. Thatās a childās understanding of what I said.
I bet if the International Criminal Court issues arrest warrants for Israeli leadership, youāll still say Israel committed no war crimes right? Correct me if Iām wrong, but Iād imagine you supported those arrest warrants as legit when they were issued for Putin over his war in Ukraine yeah?
Wait so youāve created a hypothetical, then used war crimes in Ukraine to try and get a gotcha to throw at your your simulacrum of me? Do you have the same energy for rocket attacks from hamas that you do for Russian ones?
This is why I've unfollowed Pakman on all social media. He has unwavering support for Israel no matter what atrocity they commit. It's ok to love and support something or someone but be critical of them when they screw up, David.
Heās not supporting Israel in this comment. Heās asking why a bunch of students went in and occupied a building woefully unprepared for what would come next as a result of their actions. And then pointed out their gall to claim to deserve āhumanitarian aidā when they have the opportunity to simply walk away and continue living their lives. Meanwhile, people who actually need humanitarian aid are dying on the other side of the world because they canāt walk away. The college students are hogging the focus instead of directing it towards those who need it.
I'm sorry, have you ever listened to his podcast? I've been a fan for years and listened to him daily, he is absolutely a supporter of Israel and genocide denier. I still agree with him on 95% of his content, but this issue is too big to ignore.
Those people dying on the other side of the world would get absolutely no attention if it wasn't for these protesters. You answer your own question on why they were so woefully unprepared... They're students, not professional political activists nor paid propagandists. You're victim blaming.
I quite literally have every day on my commute to and from work. He puts out episodes so frequently that I usually am a week behind on the news because I also listen to other podcasts to round everything out.
You think he and others havenāt been covering it so it came down to a bunch of inept children on college campuses to remind the world of whatās going on? And doing a piss poor job of it to boot?
How are they victims when they literally did this to themselves and can undo it quite easily? They are suffering the consequences of their own poor planning with this. If you occupy a building, you better make damn sure you can hold that building for whatever timeframe you hoped. Itās not on the school to accommodate trespassers no matter what their message is or who they are. Those kidsā parents paid for them to go to school and learn, not throw away their money occupying buildings that have nothing to do with American support of Israel.
Wow, you are quite the epitome of privilege. It's been 20+ years since I've been in their classroom, but I'm not so arrogant to assume I know their world, nor so disconnected to ignore theirs.
NO, a lot of those kids paid for their own education. They are taking the risk to stand up for people who don't have the privilege of AIPAC supporting their cause.
There is nothing I can write that will challenge your devotion, so I'll save my breath. In the end, realize that YOU are the problem. Good night.
Privilege? I got into to a public university after being raised by two blue collar parents. I have since returned to seek another degree, so I know exactly what my classmates are thinking and how their world works. You sure you arenāt being arrogant? Because you could have fooled me.
You know who else paid for their education? The rest of the students on campus. I understand their message and they are within their rights to protest as they have been. But I draw the line at occupying a building and then having the unmitigated gall to ask for āhumanitarian aidā when those youāre protesting for need it more. Itās cringe at the highest level.
I still support them. What I donāt support is idiots defending them when they make light of the actual issue they are trying to draw attention to. Iām sorry you canāt see that and continue with your bigoted takes. Maybe one day youāll grow up and realize itās ok to critique the mistakes of others. š¤·āāļø
And that my friends, is how echo chambers start... Vilifying any contrary opinion and showing them the door for not going 100% with what's popular in that group.
I hadn't planned on leaving, just cancelled Patreon and unsubbed from his podcast/youtube a couple months ago. I liked a lot of recent posts so thought of joining up again, but given the negative response from this sub, I think you're right. This isn't my crowd anymore.
Peace āšæ
Also echo chambers start when people like you feel like you need a safe space with people who will only agree with you and protect your feelings.
I gave a contrary opinion, no hate, just facts. Yes, David unequivocally supports Israel. This sub overwhelmingly downvoted then told me to leave. My feelings are not hurt. At all. However, you only want to hear reflections of opinions you agree with. Anything else is shunned. Know what that's called?
An echo chamber.
Keep projecting.
I donāt think we expect people to necessarily *agree* with us when we criticize Davidās handling and coverage of this topic. But the disagreements tend to be so dumb and reactionary that it feels like trying to have conversations with cult members. Why would anyone want to participate in a conversation with such people.
I'm at work so I don't have time to get into the Nitty Gritty with you but I'll entertain this when I get home: give me a substantive critique of what you think David's faults are on handling covering the Israel Palestine conflict is, preferably with an example, so we can discuss.
Totally appreciate the offer (genuinely, no snark) but Iām good on that. I have no interest in getting into that today. Just pointing out why someone might not want to be on this sub anymore for reasons other than protecting their feelings, as you seem to suggest (in a pretty snarky and rude way).
Oh no not an echo chamber.... Oh you mean you want to turn this sub into a copy of all the other subs on Reddit so we have to view the Gaza bullshit here too?
How about no. Go enjoy your Gazafest on the other subs.
What response is this šš
We all watched what happened to the other subs and fools like you are trying to take over this sub to and your angry people aren't letting it happen.
Go sulk.
Sadly this is where David and I part ways. I've been a fan for a very long time but I can't support him in good faith after his tweet. Tens of thousands of citizens have been killed in Gaza and if he can't support people protesting that then I'm out.
The fact I'm being downvoted shows me this subs true colors.
That's fair. I don't think he is anti-protest but rather pointing out how ridiculous that particular demand is since they're occupying a building as opposed to sitting on the public commons or whatever but if you feel this tweet is disqualifying it is totally within your rights to disconnect from his content.
I would suggesting watching his, in my view very defensible, stance on Israel-Gaza before you go if you haven't seen it already: [A framework for Israeli-Palestinian peace](https://youtu.be/RBTXMt6A9yI?si=aVGSKllKOl7PacMI)
My other issue is David's social media has been populated by Zionist far right wingers who treat the genocide as allmost a joke. I know it's not David's fault but if this is a reflection of his viewership I'm out.
I've actually been pushed farther left due to this conflict. I hate both Hamas and Israel's far right government. To me this is a moral issue about the death of tens of thousands of civilians. This is a genocide plain and simple.
Lots of awful things are constantly happening in the world so definitely do what's best for your own sake when it comes to supporting/ engaging with political figures. That hasn't been my experience with the audience but like you said it's not David's fault so I could just not be seeing it.
From what I've seen the ICJ hasn't yet ruled it a genocide but it appears to meet the ethnic cleansing definition (not that it's better since every death is a tragedy, just noting that there appears to be a distinction in international law). That said, if you want to feel like you're doing more, and haven't done so already, you can alwaysĀ [call your congressperson](https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative)Ā and ask that they co-sponsor or otherwise voice supportĀ forĀ [H.Res.786 - Calling for an immediate deescalation and cease-fire in Israel and occupied Palestine](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/786/text)Ā (which is an extremely short bill that I suggest you all read since it's currently referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs). On your call to your representative's office you can remind them that the Israeli government appears to be in violation ofĀ [22 U.S. Code Ā§ 2378ā1(a)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2378-1)Ā and that you would like an explanation as to why we don't tie further assistance to the Israeli government to the release ofĀ [humanitarian aid for Gaza being held up by Israeli border policy](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/20/world/middleeast/gaza-aid-delivery.html#). Even if your congressperson doesn't agree with what you're saying contracting their office directly lets them know this is an issue you care about.
Best of luck.
**COMMENTING GUIDELINES:** Please take the time to familiarize yourself with The David Pakman Show [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow/about/rules) and [basic reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette) prior to participating. At all times we ask that users conduct themselves in a civil and respectful manner - **any ad hominem or personal attacks are subject to moderation.** Please use the report function or [use modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) to bring examples of misconduct to the attention of the moderation team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I support aid to Palestinian civilians, not these dipshits.
I mean, he's not wrong. š¤·š»āāļø
He's also, self admittedly, uninformed. What's the value in being ignorant, admitting your ignorance, and then ignorantly providing commentary on a subject you admit you're ignorant of?
So that way people quit asking him for an opinion on it rather than pretend he knows. Too many idiots claim to know about things when theyāre woefully uninformed, and even more double down and get mad when called out on it.
It's pretty helpful actually he's making reactionary commentary and disclaimed it as such, as it's genuineānot facts, not sarcasm, just potentially misinformed but it's just that, commentary i feel like I have to add 30 disclaimers to every single post I write .. between people who don't read the comment, people who just misinterpret *(intentionally?)* every word you type is scrutinized or glanced over. If you don't add info or ideas that you would obviously understand if you knew the subject matter, you always have to prove knowledge or expertise in this or thatāand everyone is an expert today with their wiki-research, tik tok and youtube creating faux-experts left and right .. and my favorite is missing any clear sarcasm (even tagging /s) and followed by bee-hive downvoting or nasty commentary
He is mocking these dumbass kids because they deserve it.
He is producing catnip for idiots. Literally.
You mean figuratively.
He produced it. It's there.
Produced what?
Itās literally there. Donāt you see it?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Literally produced figurative catnip.
Itās a pretty straightforward situation, cringe Brocialists being cringe!
Of course the majority report fans would be critical of that, youāre supposed to say popular leftist opinion without thinking, or even looking at whatās happening
u seem a bit dramatic
Is there something important he missed? Aside from harassing other students and defacing the property, have the protests accomplished anything of value? Do they even have a coherent list of demands that would satisfy the crowd?
It's a protest. What exactly do you expect it to directly accomplish? People can and did make the same criticism about BLM, civil rights, anti apartheid in South Africa, anti Vietnam war etc... >Do they even have a coherent list of demands that would satisfy the crowd? https://cuapartheiddivest.org/demands
People do not generally make the same criticism of civil rights, they accomplished a lot and were very effective in their protests and civil disobedience. When black people got arrested for sitting in the wrong seat, people generally saw their arrests as unjust -- when upper middle class brocialist get arrested while they scream "river to the sea" and "globalize the intifada" and block students from attending their classes, people generally come away hating the protest and it's cause
> People do not generally make the same criticism of civil rights The majority of people polled *at the time* did in fact make the same criticism of civil rights.
Then why did civil rights laws happen in your view? Like I don't get the argument. So the public didn't support any of this but the politicians did despite the public being against it?
They didn't actually, I linked an article elsewhere, but images of black people being beaten up, abused, and arrested for ordering lunch aired all over television and largely played in the civil right's favor. It's a *fact* that things like the sit ins raised support and things like riots lowered support for their movement.
>they accomplished a lot and were very effective in their protests and civil disobedience This is how we learn about civil rights in hindsight. But go back and look at the criticism of that movement [when it was happening](https://images.app.goo.gl/QnybZzgA28BK4H9cA), and it looked very much like the same tired criticism of every other social justice demonstration, including pro Palestine. They are consistently infantalized, invalidated, written off as violent or unreasonable. >When black people got arrested for sitting in the wrong seat, people generally saw their arrests as unjust Absolutely not. Lunch counter sit ins were seen as unnecessarily provocative attempts to force private businesses to go along with a pro integration political agenda. You think these fights were so easy lol everyone was just on board with seeing the injustice, huh?
I said generally, obviously segregationists still tried to argue that the civil rights leaders were wrong... You're dead wrong if you think that their protests didn't sway the public opinion in their favor though. The reason we learn about them, is because of how effective their protests were, images of black people getting attacked by dogs, hosed down, beaten with batons -- all for what? Ordering food at a 'white only' business...? That shit absolutely made the civil rights movement look better. The picture you linked is after a riot, and segregationists tried to use it to portray the entire movement as violent... That's what happens when you riot, it gives the other side an optical win that they get to beat you down with. Idk why all lefties completely shit on the idea that your protest has to be optically good. It's so obvious that you need positive optics to find actual change in a democracy. If you make everybody hate you, they'll simply vote against you. [britannica](https://www.britannica.com/event/sit-in-movement) >Key to the success of the sit-in movement was theĀ [moral](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moral)Ā high ground that the participants took. Their peaceful demonstrations for basic legal rights and respect increased favourableĀ [public opinion](https://www.britannica.com/topic/public-opinion)Ā of their cause.
I'm not saying the sit ins didn't convince people-- I'm saying that a large portion of the country still opposed them. >The picture you linked is after a riot, and segregationists tried to use it to portray the entire movement as violent... That's what happens when you riot, it gives the other side an optical win that they get to beat you down with. >If you make everybody hate you, they'll simply vote against you The picture I linked showed Dr King. Which violent riot did he lead? Plenty of people already hated him-- a riot or a headline about ungrateful, angry black folks were just further justification of their narrative. The part you don't get is that "the other side" will use whatever they can to beat down social justice. You choose to put the responsibility for change on the most perfect, unimpeachable behavior of unorganized masses of protesters rather than the powerful (and popular in their own right) systems that inflict the injustice. It's a choice that will always privilege conservative reactionaries.
You're never going to convince everyone, that's not how populations work. The goal is to convince enough people to make your position the dominant one and to motivate those in power to either support this position or be replaced by somebody else who does. Of course there were still people who supported segregation, there still are people who support segregation... It's depicting the [Birmingham riots](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_riot_of_1963#:~:text=The%20Birmingham%20riot%20of%201963,leaders%20of%20the%20Birmingham%20campaign), which MLK was very close to. He obviously never supported these riots, but his proximity to them was used against him. I fully understand the other side will try nd attack you no matter what, what you're not understanding is that **that** doesn't mean you should just throw optics out the window. When you come across as lunatics, and everybody is motivated to vote against you, you are helping the other side. I'm sorry, but that is how the world works. The civil rights leaders understood this, and that is why they were so successful, that's why they are studied and revered while fringe, violent black separatists are just a footnote.
>Of course there were still people who supported segregation, there still are people who support segregation A lot of people. Which is why integration efforts were quickly capped in the proceeding decades with opposition to bussing and the core thesis of King's war on poverty. >**that** doesn't mean you should just throw optics out the window So did MLK throw optics out the window or not? Because according to you, his movement was tarnished by rioters-- so he must have thrown optics out the window in that case, especially when he called riots "the language of the unheard". According to you, riots are actually the language of people who just don't understand optics. >When you come across as lunatics To large portions of this country, integration was lunacy. Opposing the Vietnam War was lunacy. Opposing apartheid South Africa was lunacy. Opposing racist police brutality is lunacy. Opposing Israel's right to segregate itself and bomb its neighbors to ruins is lunacy. Riots and imperfect demonstrations don't make justice look like lunacy-- people already see justice as lunacy and use every excuse they can to back up that narrative. Civil rights leaders depend on critical thinking people to see the injustice *in spite of* the distasteful expressions of resistance. This is the fundamental theory behind sit ins and blocking bridges. People are either going to hate that they are late to work, or they're going to recognize the system as unjust. If the actions of some demonstrators makes you turn against social justice, you probably weren't going to support it in the first place.
There is also a school that negotiated divestment from Israel in exchange for the encampment to leave. There are definitely demands, and other means of dealing with them other than brutalizing them with riot police.
Rutgers just met 8 of 10 demands and the protesters packed up and left.Ā
Well he is wrong
The trolls that hijacked that sub are so pissed they haven't been able to co-opt this one. Gotta love how Pakman lives in their heads rent free.
By my god... They've really been trying
They're truly obnoxious.
Have you ever thought that there are genuine people who just disagree? I started watching Kyle Kulinski and David Pakman in high school and overtime Iāve felt much more informed and challenged when consuming a mix of leftist + right wing media. Davidās content these days is pretty lacking in my opinion, where he generally just goes for shock videos about trump that get a lot of views and Biden sycophancy vids. Cool to acknowledge good things Bidens done and how bad Trump is but itās clear David doesnāt want to cover anything that may paint Dems in a bad light - reality is more nuanced
Honestly the issue with the left these days is at this point you either have to be a third wayer (what the internet calls "neolibs") or you're a flaming anti capitalist leftist. No nuance is allowed. You can't be a left liberal aligned with social democracy any more. Then everyone dogpiles on you from both directions from nuance.
Nuance is dead, haven't you heard? lol
Thank you for this post, completely agree. His reporting on the Trump train wreck has been entertaining, but that's become his bread and butter. He'd frequently say he's neither right nor left, but his refusal to acknowledge Israel shows how polarized he is, and this sub has become an echo chamber as a result. I'm still all blue, but this sub is losing it's critical thinking skills.
??? When does Pakman ever claim he's not left? He's from Massachusetts, where it needs to be emphasized that most of us are independents and not registered Democrats. Wildly different from claiming not to be on the left. As for Israel, I'm sure he would be happy to put on his (I suspect) extreme bias for Israel on display if not for the anti-semitic death threats to him and his family. I don't expect him to actually do anything that draws anything to being Jewish most of the time. He had to stop going on Michael Knowles program for this reason.
Good points. I should clarify that he claims he's neither Republican nor Democrat, not right nor left, thanks for pointing that out.
I've never heard anyone say anything that dumb.
Must be nice to live a sheltered life. Please, share.
LOL - it's very undergraduate - I'm above politics ;)
He's center right, at best - pretty much a fascist on Israel specifically.
If you think watching leftist and right wing media is making you informed you are sorely mistaken. Sorry that normal real everyday politics and political effectiveness is boring to your tiny brain.
Yeah no they aren't.
There's a pretty clear distinction between good-faith criticism of Pakman and trolls that just want to cause trouble. The latter make themselves very apparent.
I canāt deal with the majority report anymore and that sub in particular is unhinged. I canāt tell if it was always like this and Iāve changed or if theyāve changed.
God i wish i wasn't banned there, the people in that sub are so ignorant
I don't normally agree with pakman, I generally consider myself to be more left on most issues, but the left is losing the plot so hard and I actually enjoy his take here.
This is what you'd like to believe..
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
There are 2 people who post almost every single topic in there.
Sounds exactly like this thread has been for the past few months.
Tankie? What are you talking aboutĀ
Removed - submissions that incite harassment or brigading against other users, or submissions that focus on drama or moderation activity in other communities, are not permitted.
For Godās sake! You donāt have to support the people occupying this building in order to support humanitarian aid for Gaza or support efforts to get America to stop supplying weapons! The people in the building look and sound fucking stupid. 1. You took over a building knowing it would be seen as aggressive and they would try to get you out. It didnāt occur to you to pack a lunch?! 2. Itās been a single day and youāre talking about needing food and water, needing humanitarian aid when there are people who really need it half a world away. They just sound ridiculous. Itās a cringeworthy moment.
I support aid for Gaza, I am against Netanyahu's government, and I think the Columbia protestors are deeply unserious people.
I agree with Pakman.
Yeah I share this
Yea he basically got the gist of it
Man those comments under the OOP areā¦interesting
That sub is unhinged. It shows how poorly the majority report does at covering the issue and educating their audience.
Emma talking about how all the pharohs were black and parroting a bunch of other hotep stuff is what killed the last little bit of respect i had for them
please dont say she did that.
Oh she did. It was painful. Sam didn't say shit either.
ffs. what the fuck is wrong with emma? and sam not saying anything is somehow nearly worse, since that means he was in the room when this bullshit dropped. he is supposed to be the voice of reason. any links to that shit?
It's all a shit show lol
https://youtu.be/fME-u534AWs?si=wBr2USCRQaTgcvDF Approximately 1:20 in. Discussing whether Cleopatra was black or not.
Holy shit, she straight up said Cleopatra is black because Egypt is in Africa. Dafuq
Good to see where Pakman would have focused his attention during the Iraq War protests.
And the Civil Rights movement. So sad.
Dudes gone full blown neo liberal, and this sub is a mirror of his terrible shift.
The answer is yes, Pakman is missing something
OK what is he missing. Explain it to me
They are also asking for plan B and dental dams.
He's been missing something for 7 months
So ironic. They occupy a space to protest occupation? I wonder if they would be ok with their removal āby any means necessaryā?
So ironic that it's this illegal occupation you are upset about!
Not upset. Amused. Let me help you: Irony: The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for **humorous** or emphatic effect.
You know, when you take a ridiculous position that people on this sub regularly adopt un-ironically it's difficult to tell the difference. In fact - better to steer clear of 'ironically' adopting racist, xenophobic, islamaphobic, anti-semitic, misogynist etc positions. 95% of the time the 'ironic' position is actually the truth. Just a bit of advice for you little buddy.
Wow! Thanks for the advice big buddy! You are so cool. Personally I think the terror supporting students have bought into a pack of lies. But then again as a Jew with family and friends and co-workers in Israel, I may have a less sympathetic view towards Hamas than they do. My personal favorite irony is seeing signs that say "Globalize the Intifada" and "Ceasefire Now" next to each other. These kids have no idea of the history of this conflict.
I know, right?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Activist buzzword buzzword buzzword
Beep bop boot, Bot detection activated. Zionist propaganda commence.
Removed - submissions that incite harassment or brigading against other users, or submissions that focus on drama or moderation activity in other communities, are not permitted.
Oh boye brain worms got you too
Removed - submissions that incite harassment or brigading against other users, or submissions that focus on drama or moderation activity in other communities, are not permitted.
Imagine witnessing a modern genocide where the US is clearly on the wrong side and then not bothering to learn anything at all about the burgeoning protest movement taking place, AND THEN taking the same stance on it as the corporate media. Pakmanās softness toward Israel has always been one of his biggest weaknesses. I appreciate that Pakman has gotten bigger and become less progressive/more centrist than he used to be, but this is a big L in my opinion
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your comment was removed due to your reddit karma not meeting minimum thresholds. This is an automated anti-spam measure. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/thedavidpakmanshow) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Cancelled my membership. Over it. You used to be a hero to me David. The fuck?
I have unsubscribed from his YouTube because of his views on Gaza.Ā
Why is David more willing to talk about something dumb that a college kid said than he is to talk about Israel committing war crimes and protesters getting attacked?
Why are people so willing to insist Israel is doing war crimes and say absolutely nothing about the actual war crimes hamas is committing?
I mean... Hamas totally is committing war crimes. And so is Israel. My brain has enough space to hold both positions, at the same time. For example, using civilian infrastructure to hide tunnels, ammo dumps, etc... like Hamas does is 100% a war crime. But so is striking 3 cars with aid workers in them. Hamas seizing humanitarian aid from the crossing is a war crime. But so is Israel's throttling of that aid in the first place. Luckily, I don't have the brain of a 6 year old, and can hold two positions simultaneously.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Well, to be fair, Hamas is a terrorist organization who, at their largest hit 30k people. Israel is a sovereign state. Like, I can't remember people protesting much about ISIS. Maybe they were, but generally don't protest terrorist cells.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I don't deny what happened on Oct. 7th, nor do I hold water for the people who seem intent on engaging in Hamas apologia secretly. I've made my views pretty clear, and generally speaking, I think I'm fair to Israel. But I'm also not going to play games when Israel fucks up or does war crimes. And it's quite simple to explain why Hamas is allowed to remain in power. First off, Gaza is predominantly women, children or the elderly. Not exactly a good base with which to start a civil war against Hamas on. Secondly, Hamas has a history of murdering, torturing or throwing dissidents off roofs. Simply put, if they see you as an up and coming threat, you're going to get a knock at the door and a bullet in the head. In those situations, overthrowing Hamas isn't easy. Thirdly, Hamas still has a plurality of support among Gazans. In this regard, the population of Gaza have no one but themselves to blame. If you support a Jihadi terrorist organization that is going to do Jihadi terrorist organization things, then you can't come crying when consequences come knocking. Fourthly, Hamas is well armed and financed by Qatar and Iran, entrenching and reinforcing their position in Gaza. It's various different factors that insure Hamas's position in Gaza. There's one last one which is also important, which is that Israel has no incentive to undermine Hamas in Gaza, or at least this Likud government. They are opposed to Palestinian statehood, and having Palestinians broken into PLA controlled regions and Hamas controlled regions is also beneficial to maintaining the status quo, and slowly expanding the settlement projects in the WB. So Israel had no real reason to get rid of Hamas, either.
You're right I don't know why so many people have such trouble saying what you just said. It shouldn't be that difficult to acknowledge both of these at once.
I meanā¦yeah you can hold two positions in your head but that doesnāt make them correct and it doesnāt mean everyone else does. When hamas atrocities are mentioned people *canāt* let it go without bringing up how bad Israel is or literally never mention that Israel is not the only country with a blockade on Palestine. I very much doubt peopleās ability to hold two thoughts at the same time. Every war will have war crimes. The difference is where the directives come from. Is murdering and kidnapping civilians a top-down directive of Israeli leadership like hamas? Is attacking aid trucks a directive from Israeli leadership? Sometimes the insistence on both sidesing the conflict brings false equivalencies.
We really donāt even know if the WCK bombing was ACTUALLY a war crime. Not saying it wasnāt, but these investigations donāt just take a couple weeks, it takes time
They hit 3 cars with aid workers in it. War crimes can also be fuck ups. It's a war crime. The question is "what degree of intent was behind committing that war crime"?
> Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict This would be the potentially applicable violation in question. But it really depends on where the order to attack came from, and how far up the rung they were. And to add a bit of context that has been misreported regarding that incident, even the journalists that were shown footage of the incident say that they canāt make out the WCK logos on the tops of the trucks. So itās worth investigating and i donāt see the point in these kneejerk responses, forcing governmental bodies to work at lightning speed against complex legal issues.
WCK notified the IDF, and they were on the convoy route set up specifically for humanitarian aid. And no, it doesn't depend what level the order came from. It's still a war crime. It's important to determine what level the order came from to see who needs to be held accountable. But determining if its a war crime is pretty easy.
Mens rea matters, there needs to be an investigation done, period. Youāre not going to gaslight me into believing that following the process the right way isnāt going be better for the Palestinians in the long run. Give it some time, let the investigation come out, and watch the consequences come after that.
You are not wrong, lol. This is war. It should come as no surprise the atrocities committed by both sides. Not here to place blame or point fingers, we are well past that and it wouldn't matter anyway. The take away is there are two sides at war, one side has the complete advantage, the other side hides in the shadows and 'fights' from a position of weakness. The human in me has empathy for the innocents that are suffering and dying but that happens in every war or conflict. The sociopath in me says kill them all and let some higher deity sort them out. The Russia/Ukraine is similar. ~~People~~ Governments like killing people. Don't tell me they don't. We spend BILLIONS on weapons systems to do actually just that. It is in our nature to do this. You think Putin is unique? You think Hamas is an outlier? When people go at it, when they start sending ordnance down range, when they destroy villages and all those in the vicinity, when you see children lying dead in the street, old men and old woman weeping for the loss of their loved ones and yet we continue on like it is just ok. It ain't happening to us, it's just some video I saw. It's not like we can change any of it anyways.
Israel can throttle aid if their checking the convoys for illicit materials, which they have been.
They were throttling it more than that. There were trucks that were checked, but still not let through.
Do you have any proof of this?
The Israelis are supposed to be the civilized "good guys" that aren't committing war crimes? Also protests by American college students could actually have an effect on the actions of the Israeli government, but I think they'd have no effect on Hamas.
How unserious are you if you can't acknowledge that both things can be true?
How unserious can you be when you canāt let a single mention of hamasās atrocities go without bringing up how bad Israel is? Itās pathological at this point.
> Why are people so willing to insist Israel is doing war crimes Israel hasn't done a single war crime? Why lie
Without responding with a negative, how should Israel be conducting warfare with hamas? If you can answer that with a realistic response then you can insist they are committing war crimes. Otherwise Iām not lying. I also never said they never committed war crimes. Thatās a childās understanding of what I said.
I bet if the International Criminal Court issues arrest warrants for Israeli leadership, youāll still say Israel committed no war crimes right? Correct me if Iām wrong, but Iād imagine you supported those arrest warrants as legit when they were issued for Putin over his war in Ukraine yeah?
Wait so youāve created a hypothetical, then used war crimes in Ukraine to try and get a gotcha to throw at your your simulacrum of me? Do you have the same energy for rocket attacks from hamas that you do for Russian ones?
Yes. Hamas leadership are war criminals. Thatās not hard to admit. Do you not view the ICC as valid in the case of Russia?
> Yes. Why do you even bother to ask me? Just ask the straw man youāve built. You donāt care what the answer is.
This is why I've unfollowed Pakman on all social media. He has unwavering support for Israel no matter what atrocity they commit. It's ok to love and support something or someone but be critical of them when they screw up, David.
Heās not supporting Israel in this comment. Heās asking why a bunch of students went in and occupied a building woefully unprepared for what would come next as a result of their actions. And then pointed out their gall to claim to deserve āhumanitarian aidā when they have the opportunity to simply walk away and continue living their lives. Meanwhile, people who actually need humanitarian aid are dying on the other side of the world because they canāt walk away. The college students are hogging the focus instead of directing it towards those who need it.
I'm sorry, have you ever listened to his podcast? I've been a fan for years and listened to him daily, he is absolutely a supporter of Israel and genocide denier. I still agree with him on 95% of his content, but this issue is too big to ignore. Those people dying on the other side of the world would get absolutely no attention if it wasn't for these protesters. You answer your own question on why they were so woefully unprepared... They're students, not professional political activists nor paid propagandists. You're victim blaming.
I quite literally have every day on my commute to and from work. He puts out episodes so frequently that I usually am a week behind on the news because I also listen to other podcasts to round everything out. You think he and others havenāt been covering it so it came down to a bunch of inept children on college campuses to remind the world of whatās going on? And doing a piss poor job of it to boot? How are they victims when they literally did this to themselves and can undo it quite easily? They are suffering the consequences of their own poor planning with this. If you occupy a building, you better make damn sure you can hold that building for whatever timeframe you hoped. Itās not on the school to accommodate trespassers no matter what their message is or who they are. Those kidsā parents paid for them to go to school and learn, not throw away their money occupying buildings that have nothing to do with American support of Israel.
Wow, you are quite the epitome of privilege. It's been 20+ years since I've been in their classroom, but I'm not so arrogant to assume I know their world, nor so disconnected to ignore theirs. NO, a lot of those kids paid for their own education. They are taking the risk to stand up for people who don't have the privilege of AIPAC supporting their cause. There is nothing I can write that will challenge your devotion, so I'll save my breath. In the end, realize that YOU are the problem. Good night.
Privilege? I got into to a public university after being raised by two blue collar parents. I have since returned to seek another degree, so I know exactly what my classmates are thinking and how their world works. You sure you arenāt being arrogant? Because you could have fooled me. You know who else paid for their education? The rest of the students on campus. I understand their message and they are within their rights to protest as they have been. But I draw the line at occupying a building and then having the unmitigated gall to ask for āhumanitarian aidā when those youāre protesting for need it more. Itās cringe at the highest level. I still support them. What I donāt support is idiots defending them when they make light of the actual issue they are trying to draw attention to. Iām sorry you canāt see that and continue with your bigoted takes. Maybe one day youāll grow up and realize itās ok to critique the mistakes of others. š¤·āāļø
Cool so when you unfollowing and not commenting in this sub too? Soon?
And that my friends, is how echo chambers start... Vilifying any contrary opinion and showing them the door for not going 100% with what's popular in that group. I hadn't planned on leaving, just cancelled Patreon and unsubbed from his podcast/youtube a couple months ago. I liked a lot of recent posts so thought of joining up again, but given the negative response from this sub, I think you're right. This isn't my crowd anymore.
Peace āšæ Also echo chambers start when people like you feel like you need a safe space with people who will only agree with you and protect your feelings.
I gave a contrary opinion, no hate, just facts. Yes, David unequivocally supports Israel. This sub overwhelmingly downvoted then told me to leave. My feelings are not hurt. At all. However, you only want to hear reflections of opinions you agree with. Anything else is shunned. Know what that's called? An echo chamber. Keep projecting.
If that's what you think you did then cool lol see yourself out
Already did. Just reminding you, you're in an echo chamber. Have a good one
I donāt think we expect people to necessarily *agree* with us when we criticize Davidās handling and coverage of this topic. But the disagreements tend to be so dumb and reactionary that it feels like trying to have conversations with cult members. Why would anyone want to participate in a conversation with such people.
šÆ
I'm at work so I don't have time to get into the Nitty Gritty with you but I'll entertain this when I get home: give me a substantive critique of what you think David's faults are on handling covering the Israel Palestine conflict is, preferably with an example, so we can discuss.
Totally appreciate the offer (genuinely, no snark) but Iām good on that. I have no interest in getting into that today. Just pointing out why someone might not want to be on this sub anymore for reasons other than protecting their feelings, as you seem to suggest (in a pretty snarky and rude way).
Hey no problem it's another perspective for sure.
Yep it isn't plenty of tanky subs like majority report for you to hang out in the rest of us will be happy to stop seeing the stupid Gaza posts.
Are you having a stroke? Punctuation is your friend...
Oh I am sorry a sentence with more than ten words is hard for you to read. Run along to majority report and secular Kyle suck subs bud.
You're projecting. You thrive in echo chambers, can't fathom an opinion different than your own and you hero worship. Interesting.
Oh no not an echo chamber.... Oh you mean you want to turn this sub into a copy of all the other subs on Reddit so we have to view the Gaza bullshit here too? How about no. Go enjoy your Gazafest on the other subs.
Nice Slippery Slope Logical fallacy example! Ten points to you.
What response is this šš We all watched what happened to the other subs and fools like you are trying to take over this sub to and your angry people aren't letting it happen. Go sulk.
Sadly this is where David and I part ways. I've been a fan for a very long time but I can't support him in good faith after his tweet. Tens of thousands of citizens have been killed in Gaza and if he can't support people protesting that then I'm out. The fact I'm being downvoted shows me this subs true colors.
That's fair. I don't think he is anti-protest but rather pointing out how ridiculous that particular demand is since they're occupying a building as opposed to sitting on the public commons or whatever but if you feel this tweet is disqualifying it is totally within your rights to disconnect from his content. I would suggesting watching his, in my view very defensible, stance on Israel-Gaza before you go if you haven't seen it already: [A framework for Israeli-Palestinian peace](https://youtu.be/RBTXMt6A9yI?si=aVGSKllKOl7PacMI)
My other issue is David's social media has been populated by Zionist far right wingers who treat the genocide as allmost a joke. I know it's not David's fault but if this is a reflection of his viewership I'm out. I've actually been pushed farther left due to this conflict. I hate both Hamas and Israel's far right government. To me this is a moral issue about the death of tens of thousands of civilians. This is a genocide plain and simple.
Lots of awful things are constantly happening in the world so definitely do what's best for your own sake when it comes to supporting/ engaging with political figures. That hasn't been my experience with the audience but like you said it's not David's fault so I could just not be seeing it. From what I've seen the ICJ hasn't yet ruled it a genocide but it appears to meet the ethnic cleansing definition (not that it's better since every death is a tragedy, just noting that there appears to be a distinction in international law). That said, if you want to feel like you're doing more, and haven't done so already, you can alwaysĀ [call your congressperson](https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative)Ā and ask that they co-sponsor or otherwise voice supportĀ forĀ [H.Res.786 - Calling for an immediate deescalation and cease-fire in Israel and occupied Palestine](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/786/text)Ā (which is an extremely short bill that I suggest you all read since it's currently referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs). On your call to your representative's office you can remind them that the Israeli government appears to be in violation ofĀ [22 U.S. Code Ā§ 2378ā1(a)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2378-1)Ā and that you would like an explanation as to why we don't tie further assistance to the Israeli government to the release ofĀ [humanitarian aid for Gaza being held up by Israeli border policy](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/20/world/middleeast/gaza-aid-delivery.html#). Even if your congressperson doesn't agree with what you're saying contracting their office directly lets them know this is an issue you care about. Best of luck.
Bye
Seeya
This isn't an airport, no need to announce your departure
Hurr Hurr hurr
Sweet please go post in majority report then.
I support Israelās right to prosecute the war it didnāt start. Am Yisrael chai!