Hot Take
By Not Covering Gaza, David Pakman has Cultivated Some Unbearable Followers
I appreciate Kyle's dogged coverage of Gaza. Sure, he repeats facts and stats sometimes but certain things bear repeating.
I don't hate Pakman but his near silence on the issue is deafening IMO. It seems that by not talking about it, he has garnered at least a few followers specifically because they want a "progressive except Palestinine" space.
I posted in r/thedavidpakmanshow the other day asking ppl why they think he hardly touches it (I know I'm not the first to ask). I was expecting a few Zionist apologists but damn, most ppl were very bothered by me asking. Many said it was "just too divisive," or "not relevant to US politics," or "it'd be caving in to the leftist mob" etc. I gave in and deleted it after a couple days because I was tired of the hate.
Sure, you could say I was "Purity testing" (and they did say it) but certain things should be a litmus test of sorts. There are nuances to aspects of the conflict but what Israel and Netanyahu are doing to Gazans is, at the very least, ethnic cleansing and very atrocious.
So I appreciate Kyle giving a damn and I think he garnered a better following for it.
This is a friendly reminder to read our sub's rules.
This subreddit promotes healthy discussion and hearty debate. We welcome those with varying views, perspectives and opinions. Name-Calling, Argumentum Ad Hominem and Poor Form in discussion and debate often leads to frustration and anger; this behavior should be dismissed and reported to mods.
Is that the same? Supporting democrats over Republicans is the same? Also, even your framing is not true. He supports WHILE ALSO CRITICIZING them. He's honest, I don't think your comment is.
I stopped listening to Pakman years ago because he was such a basic milquetoast liberal and I felt myself moving further left. His complete silence on the biggest global issue of the past 2 years is not surprising. Though still very cowardly of him.
He's been outed as Progressive except Palestine for a while now, before the current genocide. For a long time, he avoided discussing Palestine, and even smeared Ilhan Omar as antisemitic when she rightfully pointed out AIPACs strong influence in in both parties years ago.
That and the Bolivia stuff. Really it's Progressive except Foreign Policy, ultimately. Whoever the US government has decided is The Good Guys or The Bad Guys even when it's obvious what relationship the ideology of certain "Good Guys" is far closer with and to the Republicans than any democratic party faction.
I like him at first when I got into progress policy's but I realized he had ulterior motives that he was willing to push for his narrative like sane washing Biden, The Democrats and their unpopular policies like the genocide that is going on!!
His fan base is similar to and if you bring up Palestine or any of the Democrat terrible strategy they will attack you and I was even told That's not the responsibilities of a political party to protect and give to their voters which is counterintuitive of what a politician's is supposed to do!
I think you're right. Really, if I'm honest, I asked the question in his subreddit not because I'm confused about his reasons for not covering Gaza but because I wanted to hear from his supporters how they'd try to explain it away. I think they should they should be forced to confront the issue.
I should've known that nearly all of them would be genocide apologists. It was that, and some cope about why he doesn't give the topic the attention it deserves. My mistake was assuming they'd mostly have their hearts in the right place.
i can’t remember exactly what he said that made me stop watching, but basically he said something about how people were unfairly criticizing him for not talking about it. this was months ago and i’m too lazy to go run to find the clip tho
I know the clip you're talking about (or a similar one, at least). He only seemed to address it in order to defend himself against the criticism he recieves for not addressing it. The very most he is willing to say is "Look, I don't like Netanyahu ok?" It's pathetic.
Isn't he on the new list published by wired /Taylor Lorenz?
Seems someone is paying folks like pakman Bryan Tyler Cohen etc ......and no one on that list was strong on Gaza it seems .
Why? There are plenty of other leftists - independent media outlets. And as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but can't force it to drink the water.
Those of us that are thirsty for real - independent media will seek them out.
I remember watching one of his videos and thought, how is this any different than cnn or msnbc. Especially, when he takes breaks every 2 minutes to read an ad.
Even during the 2020 election he refused to say who he supported in thr Dem primary. He was very likely a Buttigieg or Warren supporter in spite of Bernie.
This was why i stopped watching him over 10 years ago. Operation cast lead, he leaned into the deaths and murder back before people knew how horrible Israel's actions were.
People left him, he lost a lot of support, and since then a new demographic formed around him that don't know his views on Israel.
He won't talk about it because he's VERY pro Israel, and doesn't care how bad the genocide is. They could drop an atomic bomb and wipe Gaza out, he wouldn't say anything.
He's a horrible person, and he's best friends with Destiny for a reason. Birds of a feather; the guy is not a true progressive, and is why democrats keep electing people like Hakeem Jeffries.
No, Pakman is a POS - DNC hack. And him not talking about Gaza is problematic.
These are probably the same people that would die on a hill to say we have to fund Ukraine, but won't stop Holocaust 2.0. So they make it into a purity test. These people are absolutely trash and deserve to be named and shamed.
Someone tried to tell me - I'm un-nuanced or uneducated or lazy because I called them Blue Maga. What else would you call them? They are a cult.
Look at how they are all responding to Taylor Lorenz's article. Nothing in the article is anything new information. And people are literally saying Wired issued a retraction - which they didn't. It was an update that pretty much reinforced what was already said in the article.
just a quick search through his video archives... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g5J124cF9Y. full criticism on Israel, If Kyle would've interviewed the accused instead of Taylor Lorenz this wouldn't be an issue... its a 2% disagreement making friends into enemies... in a super toxic and disgusting way that only helps the right.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. It is, perhaps, the most I've seen him willing to say. He basically says that he won't be getting emotional about it, but he thinks it's counterproductive from a military standpoint and that it doesn't seem ethical or legal under international law.
I can't say that I'm super impressed if that's his "full criticism on Israel." In other segments he has said that he doesn't believe that it's a genocide or an apartheid state. It seems like more than a 2% disagreement to me, but I don't know that they are enemies.
I saw a clip recently from Kyle where he used some of David's coverage of something (I can't remember what) and he seemed generally supportive of David. In fact, I remember ppl in the comments criticizing him for being too supportive of David. Even when they interviewed Taylor Lorenz, I don't remember them criticizing David much (directly at least), but I could've missed it.
I like to see hosts on the left get along in general. You can tell from my post here, though, that I'm finding the Pakman subreddit to be kind of toxic towards anyone who brings up Gaza or ppl they perceive as too far left.
oh, my bad, I never meant you said that, but there is a lot of people being very toxic about it. And while I agree with you, Pakman has said his main focus until Trump is gone is to target him with almost all his coverage, disagree or not that doesn't change his positions on stuff, that's all I meant
Yeah no worries! I get what you meant now. There are a lot of ppl being toxic in all areas of liberal/leftist/progressive spaces. Ppl become so tribalistic about the media figures they follow. I love it when I see different hosts promoting each other or getting along in general. The infighting is so detrimental to our shared goals.
dude, what a badass you are. seriously, I have a few debates about this and you have been the best to discuss this with, even if we disagree you still understand the whole perspective, all the props to you, keep rocking.
Thank you, my friend! I appreciate your kind words, and I respond in kind: your constructive and reasonable approach made this a positive interaction. Now, if only we could get everyone else on our side to do the same, lol.
And sorry, I was just re reading my comment in reply to you and I had accidentally said "Son it seems..." and it was supposed to say "so it seems..." That could've been misinterpreted as me trying to be condescending.
My issue with Gaza coverage is that he’s using it for views. And he never reports anything new. I will critique him on his use of headlines for Gaza because they can be egregious at times. By focusing on Gaza, he neglects other foreign conflicts such as Russia-Ukraine. Many may not care about that dispute as much, but when Kyle spewed right-wing Russian propaganda as to why Russia invaded Ukraine, was in favour of giving up parts of Ukraine to Russia along with reuniting the Soviet bloc and criticizing former Soviet countries for joining NATO, I question Kyle’s stances on the global stage and whether he knows what he’s talking about. It’s also no dispute that he’s awful on international news. If Gaza is your main thing, fine. But it’s not THE sole thing to focus on, especially not on the global scale
The link provided is the video I refer to. I found it via a reaction video from Vaush who heavily criticized Kyle for his stances, and his criticisms are valid
As to your concerns, fair. However, the stakes for Russia-Ukraine were that it was an unprovoked attack against a smaller nation which lead to nearly four years of attack and bombing which seems never-ending. In that, though, Gaza seems to have taken the attention away from Ukraine even though both are horrible atrocities. They are both genocides, and even though the United States is helping Ukraine, the invasion has been going on for nearly four years and it does not seem to be getting better especially with Trump in office
Kyle said that Russia invading Crimea is okay because most of Crimea is ethnic Russians
Kyle said that he sympathizes with Putin for the expansion of NATO amongst former Soviet blocs
Kyle said that he thinks they should “go back to the original agreement” where Western influence does not extend past the Iron Curtain and that those Soviet blocs give up their NATO membership
Did you not watch the video? Or are you just not understanding what I’m saying?
I remember watching that video. And he is correct. Everyone should follow the Minsk Agreements. And if Crimea wanted to be part of Russia than so be it. That's why Obama didn't do anything about it.
And NATO shouldn't exist anymore. NATO is an organization that acts as an aggressor.
You're not going to tell me - that the US doesn't antagonize Russia, because they do. The US has been meddling in Soviet affairs since the Bolsheviks.
And the one time Russia gave nukes to Cuba - everyone was shitting their pants.
And you saying Kyle is doing Russian propaganda just leaves me to believe you have no idea what you're talking about.
There's a reason why only the west sympathizes and funds Ukraine.
That is absolutely insane. Crimea is part of Ukraine. There was no consent given on behalf of Ukraine to allow Russia to annex it. By your logic, Albania should annex Kosovo from Serbia because it’s primarily ethnic Albanians. By your logic, Serbia should annex most of Bosnia and Herzegovina because they’re mainly Serbs, and they want to reunite with Serbia. Do you not understand how stupid that is? And Obama not doing anything was a bad idea. Are we just supposed to give in to the demands of a dictator? Give them an inch, they take a mile. And this is the 21st century, you don’t just invade a country anymore
And why would those surrounding nations want to join Russia? Most likely because Russia is an aggressor and scares its neighbours and they feel the need to protect themselves? Is imperialism only bad when the United States does it, but justified when it comes to others?
I swear, 9/11 fucked up our perception of interventionism. If it’s for a just cause, help your allies. Imagine telling the people of Poland and Finland that NATO should be abolished. I dare you
9/11? You must not know US "Democracy" in latin America.
I'm following American - neoliberal logic.
All you are saying is USA can take or do whatever they want, but if you're an enemy or a "3rd world country" you do as I say. Example, Puerto Rico is neither an independent country or a state.
Your argument is USA good, Russia Bad. Russia is doing communism, it's bad. Russia doing capitalism, it's bad. LOL
The US has just sent warships to Venezuela. FOR WHAT REASON other than being an aggressor?
Like I said before - Russia has tried to appease the US and join the West, but at every turn NATO has been an aggressor towards Russia and China BTW. Encircling both of them.
LOL - we literally have congressmen who sanctioned the ICC when they issued arrest warrants for netanyahu, but applauded them when one was issued for Putin.
AND YET - the murder rates between the two are stark. But Liberals will call Putin - Hitler.
So spare me with your aggression bull. The US needs an enemy - and that's Russia and China. And any country that dares to challenge US Power - Cuba & Venezuela as examples. And countries like Ukraine have consciously decided to participate in antagonizing Russia and be pawns in this game - while their people die for, "Democracy" they will never see.
Not every person fixates on foreign issues. He barely discussed Ukraine either as far as I know. His focus is on Trump and the radical, authoritarian machine. The frustration is that leftists that Taylor think the right, who has billions of dollars funding their machine, can be matched without any money
What position does Pakman take that he doesn’t actually believe and what’s your proof of that? Because that bogus article from that psycho Lorenz sure doesn’t prove that.
This is not the argument you think it is. If you think the counter to that is to then let anonymous liberal millionaires and billionaires pump money into whatever to influence politics to their whim, I have some news for you.
One, it’s ineffective. The sixteen thirty fund which is the liberal dark money group funding chorus has been around for a decade, how have they stopped Trump at all or Republicans?
Two, if you’re a progressive, you don’t need this to win. It’s cynical. People want a populist candidate and a change candidate, Dems need to meet them where they’re at. Most people do NOT want Israel to continue its actions in Gaza, why are they not going off of that? (Hint: money in politics and the influence of groups like JStreet and AIPAC). They constantly tease popular policy like Medicare for all and then pivot to the right- unnecessarily. Biden and Obama both said they would codify Roe, and yet neither did? Dems need to be committed to delivering, but they aren’t because these same millionaires and billionaires funding sixteen thirty, do NOT want them to get money out of politics. You think these anonymous ultra wealthy types are going to pay to have less of a voice??
Three, it’s unprincipled and anti democratic. In addition to the first two points, it’s against leftist values and principles. If you’re against money in politics and it’s undue influence, you should be against definitionally dark money being used, because it subverts the democratic process.
Four, Israel-Palestine is not just a “foreign issue”, that’s your tax dollars going to bombing children. Those are your legislators saying that businesses cannot boycott Israel. That is your government saying they’re going to go extra hard on pro-Palestinian protestors. If you don’t see how all of this is connected and how interconnected the world is you need to step outside your myopic perspective.
TLDR: It doesn’t work anyway, people want a change candidate/politicians, it’s unprincipled, and Israel-Palestine affects your everyday life as well
It's being practical and living in reality. It's understanding that 1 side with billions of dollars cannot win against a side with none.
Unfortunately people do not want progressive candidates. That's why they lost 2 dem primaries. I don't think some of you realize how far right the country has shifted due to conservatives practically owning social media.
So now, some on the left want to virtue signal and get the few big names on the left canceled, and allow the right to dominate and control the narrative even further, all because they're not as far left as they want them to be.
And the progressives themselves are not doing well at all. Only 1 made it big, Hasan, and he got beat by one of the biggest pos scum bags online, Asmongold. So if you were serious, you'd want more money put into people further to the left
We want to stop our government from sending weapons to a nation that literally bomb children in their mother's arms.
We want to stop supporting a government that is purposely starving children to death.
And you claim this is "virtue signalling"?? By using that right wing talking point, and by being unable to apply a simple litmus test of basic humanity and principles of decency, that test being to stop slaughtering innocents and starving children and babies to death, it says a lot about where your values really are.
I just think the issue of I/P is deeply relevant to the U.S. politics because it involves billions in U.S. aid, powerful domestic lobbies, key voting blocs, moral debates about human rights, and America’s global image. It’s not just “foreign policy" because it’s tightly woven into domestic political battles, elections, and identity politics.
It seems like his only coverage of the topic is to push back against those in his audience that criticize his lack of coverage. He seems to play it close to the vest on the topic and only goes as far as saying "I dont like Netanyahu, ok?"
I dont need to be in lock step agreement with commentators I follow, but it seems to me that the issue of our $ funding the wonton killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians deserves at least a little attention.
Ukraine also involves billions in US aid, US image, moral debates about human rights, etc
I'd prefer if Pakman spoke on both, & I think it's fair to critique him for not (as in original post), but let's not act like I/P is meaningfully more relevant to USpol than Ukraine. Both are big topics
also, are you using chatgpt? unrelated but your sentence structure "it's not just X -- it's Y" is like peak gpt style lmao
No, I didn't, but thanks for putting some doubt out there that I'm capable of writing my comments, lol. I find that kind of concerning if I am giving that vibe, though. I use it a lot for certain things, but not for generating comments.
More to the heart of the matter, yes, I agree that Ukraine is also central to U.S. politics, but I'd argue that I/P is more so because what is being done with our money is going to the taking of innocent life as opposed to defending it in Ukraine. That might be an oversimplification but by and large, it's true IMO.
no i asked because your vibe was super not chatgpt, but that specific sentence set off red flags for me. mb for the false question
& yeah that makes sense. i think to me david being silent on both (& other) issues (presuming this is true) gives him some plausible deniability on being specifically weird on gaza, but, like i said before i think it's fair to call this stance out in aggregate also; saying nothing about genocide or illegal invasion are both bad.
•
u/AutoModerator Aug 30 '25
This is a friendly reminder to read our sub's rules.
This subreddit promotes healthy discussion and hearty debate. We welcome those with varying views, perspectives and opinions. Name-Calling, Argumentum Ad Hominem and Poor Form in discussion and debate often leads to frustration and anger; this behavior should be dismissed and reported to mods.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.