Comments by "Keifer" (@keifer7813) on "David Pakman Show" channel.

 @aggressiveattitudeera887 You shouldn't have to claim or denounce anyone for sharing your skin colour
2
@someonenotnoone I said you don't get to make up your own definitions of words AS YOU LIKE. I then clarified you can in theory but it doesn't supercede the colloquial usage of the word. Otherwise language is useless. In every dictionary definition I came across, the meaning of the word, "theft" focused on consent, not justification. So you're just wrong. You don't know the meaning of the word. Quit embarassing yourself and be humble next time
2
 @ДжейкобКосточко Allah and Muhammad can suck a D. Don't pretend like the Quran and hadiths aren't full of hate towards non Muslims
1
Spot on. The fear of eternal torture made me accept whatever I came across in the religion. The most egregious thing was always the fact Muhammad married a 6 year old . In my mind, it was either I accept it and try to rationalise it OR face eternal torture...
1
3:35 Are you for real? What a ridiculous apologist response
1
4:10 Trust me as a Brit in London, stabbings are very common. Outside of London, shootings would be my worry. We dont really have any self defence rights so yeah. Cant even defend your home. You have to pray the police get there on time. Also, Marjorie Green Taylor is right. Imagine going to your friend's house and seeing their family bickering and I chime in like "Well, in my house we do this and this". Extremely disrespectful. Glad she got put in her place 😂
1
1. Nobody is saying taxation is illegal. We're talking about theft in a 'moral' sense, if you like. 2. Saying you can leave at any time is disingenuous. No, not everybody can just get up leave to move to another country. Besides, that logic is pretty wild. If I regularly grope a coworker and she hates it but doesn’t leave the job, is it no longer sexual assault because she's still here? No 3. Its also victim blaming. If you were the manager of the above coworker and she complained to you, would you tell her that she should just leave or would you handle the guy who violated her instead? 4. You're being disingenuous again by saying you have options to not pay your tax. No. Its mandatory. And no, the option to starve is not an option. Ultimately, I'm not even against taxation for now. I think it's a necessary evil but also believe we should gradually phase it out into a more voluntary system. I just don't pretend it's not theft. It is. A justified form of theft though imo
1
@someonenotnoone All taxes are theft by definition. You may think collective ownership is the way to go, but you'd still need to steal to get there because the owners still own it. Thus, that would also be theft. Justified? Depends on your values, I guess. Still theft
1
@someonenotnoone No, dude. The concept of theft is not a "subjective choice". It is a universally understood concept that taking things that don't belong to you without permission is bad and we happen to call this act, "theft" in English. Nothing subjective about that. What? Theft CAN be justified. That was my point all along. If a child is starving and steals food to survive, is it justified? I'd say so absolutely. Is it still theft? Absolutely. Just completely strawmanned me at the end. My statement, "depends on your values", was referring to whether or not you think theft is justified for the sake of socialism. Not whether or not you think it's theft.
1
@someonenotnoone I mean yeah language has subjectivity but you make it sound as if classifying theft is arbitrary. It's not. It's pretty straightforward if you believe in property rights. So I'll ask you - what do you think "theft" means?
1
@someonenotnoone Is the starving child discreetly taking food from a stall or store without paying justified? If so, is the act then not theft? I'm sorry but you don't get to just make up your own definitions as you like. Well, I mean you can but don't expect us all to go along with it when virtually everybody else uses it the way I described.
1
@someonenotnoone Another ridiculous point. If I take your bike without consent, and you stole that bike from someone else before, have I then stolen from you? Is my action not theft anymore because it didn't even belong to you? Especially when I had no idea it's not actually your bike? You sound dumb af Besides, 'rightful' and 'justifiable' are not synonymous. Wtf is a "justifiable owner"?
1
@someonenotnoone I literally clarified this to avoid confusion and you still end up confused. Let me try and dumb it down even more. If I take a bike from you non-consensually THINKING it belongs to you, but it turns out you stole that bike from somebody else, would you say my action was an act of stealing? No. They are not synonymous. "Justifiable owner" does not make. It's like saying "Tom was a justified man". Doesn't make sense. "Justified" and "justifiable" are used to describe actions, not people. "Rightful" describes people, not actions. They are not synonymous. Of course they're made up rules, but they aren't arbitrary. That's the point. These rules are how they are for a reason. We wouldn't be able to communicate if we all just start distorting words willy nilly and nobody understands eachother.
1
@someonenotnoone Can you just answer the question - did I steal or not? Ahh so you're describing the action now? Which indicates what? That "justifiable" describes actions. Not people. Like I said, the two words are not synonymous. Can an action be "rightful"? It can be right but not 'rightful'. That wouldn't make sense. Bro, it's like you're just arguing for the sake of it. At least concede when you're demonstrably wrong. We all make mistakes No. Language doesn't require violence to maintain. Btw I'm not talking legal terminology which is what you seem to be referring to. Language just evolves naturally, like the landscape or whatever
1
@someonenotnoone Thieves get robbed all the time. Do you just not consider that to be stealing because the thief never owned it? As if the robbers knew that? Lol its still stealing Again with the strawmanning. Yes, your morals are for you to decide but the fact is 'justifiable' and 'rightful' are not synonyms as I've demonstrated pretty clearly repeatedly. Sure, but the point wasn't about maintaining property. It was about maintaining the rules of language and meanings. This is just strawman galore lmao
1
@someonenotnoone Every single rebuttal in your comment was a strawman. You keep strawmanning over and over on the exact same points. So either you're incapable of using basic logic or you're doing this in bad faith to keep going in circles. In any case, I'm done. Have a good day, man
1
0:17 Oh the cringe when she said "based"
1
@theotherview1716 Uhm, no. Yes, we all have subconscious bias to some extent but anyone who is genuinely looking for the truth would do their best to be as impartial as possible. Especially a pundit who always talks about "arguing in good faith" like Pakman. Smh
1
Tbh they both keep doing it
1
I don't think it's irrelevant. I like Bernie Sanders and what he advocates but it does raise an eyebrow that he has 3 houses when there are plenty of homeless people. That's a pretty clear example of wealth inequality that he somehow is okay with.
1
Where did this Trump fan flip out? Come on now with the clickbait
1