problem is not Netanyahu, it is not Ben Gvir. it is the white supremacist mindset of Israeli public.
problem is not Netanyahu, it is not Ben Gvir. it is the white supremacist mindset of Israeli public.
Israel #Genocide #Politics #Inhumanity #Racism
@palestine@lemmy.ml @palestine@a.gup.pe @israel
You're viewing a single thread.
Same thing in the USA. Trump is a symptom. He could drop dead tomorrow and somehow take half of the admin with him, and the problem would still be there. The underlying problem is that roughly 1/3rd of your population is frothing at the mouth to slaughter another 1/3rd while the final third stand by and watch silently. This is not something you can fix with elections alone.
@Kyrgizion exactly.
This is the problem I have with blue MAGAts on bluesky. They are so focused on Trump and the BS story of Russia causing the problem in their society, they ignore the massive army of evangelical Christian Zionist movement that got Bush and Trump into power and control most of the media in the country.
It's the pre programmed mindset Hollywood worked so hard for decades to get into people's heads that the problem is always because of one bad guy not the movement behind it
If trump were the problem, that means that other republicans would fall in line behind a more centrist candidate. However, that means they don’t actually stand for their own beliefs and that they’d also fall into line behind a more extreme right candidate, of which we have plenty in the line of succession.
There’s something somehow even more hateable about a politician who’s not actually fascist themselves, but who will gladly support them.
"There’s something somehow even more hateable about a politician who’s not actually fascist themselves, but who will gladly support them."
I fully and wholeheartedly supporting that statement.
Those enablers are far worse than those fascist themselves.
It's just sickening to watch them sell their sole to the devil for fame and fortune.
Sigh. Bluesky was so much better before blue maga showed up. The shitposting was top notch and people were allergic to discourse.
I miss those days.
In your example, where’s the fraction of people who aren’t watching silently?
they are protesting or are high on xanax or pot
And russia. Just dont learn russian and play on east euro servers.
while the final third stand by and watch silently.
And according to some on here, we shouldn't blame any of the individuals in that final third because it's not fair to put the blame on them for the shit they stand by and tacitly support or something.
It's amazing how far some people will go to excuse the actions of those who are content to watch fascism take hold and murder it's fellow citizens while doing nothing about it.
It's funny how this comment can be read by two opposing sides who would still agree with it:
I personally strongly disagree with one of those statements but both can be interpreted 100% in agreement with what you wrote
Democrats endorse genocide, and people who supported them during Kamala’s campaign are supporting this
I'd love to see you make that argument, considering the 'did not vote' crowd would be much closer to supporting this than the democrat vote.
I will excuse a lot of those people here in the US.
In my own case, I am physically disabled at the moment watching the people taking care of me and providing me transportation be horribly overworked to the point where it is painful to watch. What should I be doing with my time? Should I judge my caretakers for not making some sort of time? Is it inexcusable that I am not pressuring them to do something?
I'd like to know actually what I can do, because I'm not happy with where things are. You suggest it's a moral failure but I literally don't know what action I can take that would not be judged a moral failure.
Maybe my situation is unique in some ways, but it's not that unique in the idea that for a lot of people, finding more time could cost the livlihoods of both them and their dependents. Maybe the people you meet in your day-to-day life can easily find time to organize, etc at no significant cost, but the majority of the remaining population are oppressed themselves, just in a less severe way. Every family is isolated, and when you are isolated with a precarious livlihood, setting aside time for something comes at a cost, so is a serious choice. The obvious answer is to try to become less isolated, but that requires setting aside time without guaranteed payoff. It's easy to judge people for not doing that when there's no potential cost to your own dependents.
Most people here are living day-to-day trying to cling to what little joys they have. You can come up with laundry lists of ways they are wasting their time and money, but those wastes are hard to give up for someone living day-to-day. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but decrying the inaction from the majority of our population is shifting blame to the powerless.
I'm sorry to hear that you're disabled friend, I have a few friends that are fairly disabled as well, so while I can't understand your situation, I can at least sympathize with what you may be going through.
I’d like to know actually what I can do, because I’m not happy with where things are. You suggest it’s a moral failure but I literally don’t know what action I can take that would not be judged a moral failure.
Being housebound definitely limits your options, but there are ways to vote early (which takes much less time and would likely not impact your caretakers as much if planned ahead of time) and absentee which would allow you to still vote even when the cards are stacked against you. I know that those options are not universal, but they've at least been available in the couple states I've lived in and the ones my friends live in (which, is still only like a half dozen total).
Maybe I’m misunderstanding something, but decrying the inaction from the majority of our population is shifting blame to the powerless.
See, I don't see it as shifting blame to the powerless, I see it as calling out the culpability of those who are powerless because they choose not to exercise the little power they have. I understand there are quite a few who are able to vote on paper are unable to vote due to circumstances in life. But, speaking from personal experience, I've also known plenty of people who choose to do nothing while complaining about the state of the world or their life while they passively watch time slip away. I want to make sure you understand I'm in no way suggesting you are a part of this group, but I've had this argument with blood family for over a decade until they passed as well as with many acquaintances over my life. Most were the type you see on lemmy that would rather not vote if there isn't a perfect candidate on the ballot, even if there was one candidate that they agreed with the majority of items.
So it may be personal experience coloring my opinion, but I see nothing positive coming from not acknowledging that there is a full third of our country that chooses not to participate in the process when that inaction is how we get shitheads like trump in office. I'm a firm believer of 'inaction is still a choice', so I'm not going to let people who chose not to participate have a pass without commenting on it. Because a fraction of those people participating could have changed where we are today and prevented letting the American Nazi Party from running rampant on the people and their rights.
Most were the type you see on lemmy that would rather not vote if there isn’t a perfect candidate on the ballot, even if there was one candidate that they agreed with the majority of items.
I have trouble taking the judgment about "lesser evil" seriously of someone who describes "actively aiding and abetting the most brutal genocide of the era" as "not perfect"
Because a fraction of those people participating could have changed where we are today and prevented letting the American Nazi Party from running rampant on the people and their rights.
And allow the American Nazi Party (but Blue) to run rampant on people and their rights
And allow the American Nazi Party (but Blue) to run rampant on people and their rights
BoTh SiDeS aRe ThE sAmE arguments are why people don't take you seriously. It's almost hilarious how arguments like this devalue just how awful the right is, when you're comparing concrete domestic trans, POC and intellectual attacks from a party that supports Israel to the party that just supporta Israel.
I would laugh if I was sure you didn't actually drink the flavoraide.
when you’re comparing concrete domestic trans, POC and intellectual attacks from a party that supports Israel to the party that just supporta Israel.
just supports Israel. Oh boy.
People in Gaza has so less value for you than the American citizen?
People in Gaza has so less value for you than the American citizen?
Of course I care about the Gazan people, that's why I didn't want the "glass them all" party to win. But because they're not good, we let fucking awful go for it instead. One side has a chance to be reasoned with, and the other is no chance in hell. Inaction chose the no chance in hell option.
I'm not going to lie and say there was a good choice available. But we chose greater violence while preaching for no violence. So I don't know what to tell you, other than sometimes you have to compromise to engage in harm mitigation otherwise you can end up with harm maximization.
that’s why I didn’t want the “glass them all” party to win.
The Democracy are also that party.
they’re not good
Actively genocidal is more than just not good. I should even go so far as to call them "fucking hell".
One side has a chance to be reasoned with, and the other is no chance in hell. Inaction chose the no chance in hell option.
Anthony Blinken and the Democrats are the no chance in hell option. They spent over a year proving it! They would rather lose the election then stop doing genocide. At least Trump is so mercurial and narcissistic that an Arab leader flattering him or an Israeli politician being rude sometimes makes him break from Israel a bit.
But we chose greater violence
No, you didn't. You just chose the one that doesn't bother to mask it.
to engage in harm mitigation otherwise you can end up with harm maximization.
But that doesn't mean much coming from someone who cannot properly assess the harm that the two options are doing. It seems that every "lesser evil" advocate ends up having to white wash the Democrats to justify their position. Apparently even they can't justify voting for the actual Democrats as they really are.
I don't think you can talk about other people devaluing how awful things are when you're trying to pass off "actively participating in the most brutal genocide of the era" as "not perfect". Also when you're trying to say that only the lives of domestic citizens are "concrete", it really sounds like you just don't consider foreigners fully human. The democrats absolutely support killing trans people, PoCs, and intellectuals, they just support doing it in Gaza. The number of people being killed domestically by the right, as terrible as it is, is not even a rounding error compared to the number of people, even just LGBT people, being killed in Gaza as a bipartisan policy. And yet only the lives of the first matter, and caring about the lives of the latter is "drinking the flavour aid"
Most were the type you see on lemmy that would rather not vote if there isn't a perfect candidate on the ballot, even if there was one candidate that they agreed with the majority of items.
Okay, I thought we were discussing something wholly different. I worked in Dearborn and we all had friends who lost relatives as our country refused to stop sending arms. One of my best students completely fell off after losing a lot of her extended family and it was painful to watch.
But you don't need to have personal experience with someone affected to be outraged. It's a line some people are unwilling to cross. I am one of them. Downplaying that as they "would rather not vote if there isn't a perfect candidate on the ballot" is either wholly disingenuous or a complete absence of empathy. A candidate I have "agreed with the majority of items" but disagreed on the morality of supplying weapons used to commit a genocide is one I will not vote for.
If the president is aware that he is sending weapons killing innocents and still signs off to send more, and one of those bombs kills someone I love, would you blame me for not voting for him? If not, why would you blame someone who empathizes with me for making the same decision?
The democrats did not have to support this, and would have won the election if not for this complete moral bankruptcy. Blaming nonvoters is shifting blame from the powerful to the powerless.