I mean…yeah…but also fuck the democrats. We shouldn’t be stuck in this position of genocide and fascism there and here or “just” genocide and fascism there. There are certainly degrees of being a piece of shit, but at this point, we are splitting hairs.
I think it is fucking reprehensible that the only two parties we have to choose from both support genocide. It doesn’t matter if they support “less genocide.” Supporting genocide makes them a piece of shit, regardless of how much genocide it is. You just find it better because it doesn’t affect you. The fact that I am being made complicit by the realities of the situation I’ve been forced into by the majority in my country (read: white colonizers) really pisses me off.
Incorrect. You’re either illiterate or pretending to be for political points. I’m voting for Harris. It wouldn’t matter if it was her or any other Democrat who supports the genocide, I’d still be angry at the white majority in this country who created this shit dichotomy. It is literally minorities, predominantly black women, who’ve kept fascism at bay in this country. You and yours are terrible human beings. If ya’ll weren’t, we wouldn’t be here.
You’re not going to jab me into thinking you’re contributing in good faith. You aren’t. There’s only a few reasons to dig at Harris and Democrats for something an entirely different country is doing.
None of them are good. None help those we do have the power to help. None deescalate.
Worse, you use the lives of those we can’t help as shelter to make your horrid stance against those we can help seem like it’s somehow a bad choice.
It’s awful. I can’t imagine how you got there, and I don’t want to.
In another country… that our tax dollars fund, we supply weapons to, and we implicitly protect with our military and political power. Ok, sure bud. I’m the one arguing in bad faith. 🤡
The day after Trump is on the TV telling people he’s ringing Netanyahu almost daily to convince him not to agree to Biden’s ceasefire proposals is a pretty shit day to be singing mud at the Democrats over Gaza.
We can stop sending them our tax dollars, seeking then weapons (as dictated by our laws), and stop threatening other countries who attempt to stop this massacre of civilians. How about that?
No one is illiterate here. This is a text platform. You keep accusing people of being illiterate, yet didnt say you were voting for harris until you assumed someone would have read it somewhere yet the only mention was way down.
For the record i agree with your position. Its an absolute shame that there is no viable vote AGAINST genocide. Sure we could vote third party, but the third party votes are mostly sapping away from democrats, therefore unfortunately helping trump, who would surely do more to enable israel’s genocide than the dems, who hopefully push back to some degree.
Ive got friends who are refusing to vote in protest of the democrats not taking a hard stance against israel. While i agree with then in theory, in practice i think trump will be worse both domestically and internationally.
All that said, you might benefit from taking a smoke break and stop accusing everyone of being illiterate.
It is called reading comprehension, which is a component of literacy. I’ll quote myself from the comment before I started pointing out the rampant illiteracy in this thread.
“The fact that I am being made complicit by the realities of the situation I’ve been forced into by the majority in my country (read: white colonizers) really pisses me off.”
A no-vote or third party vote didn’t help in the past dozens of elections. This problem is much deeper than who holds office, and what gets me is how it’s been politicized even though neither side has discussed it. It’s likely that Gaza has been used as a crisis tool to once again pit peon against peon while the ones in control laugh. And I’m not talking about the politicians, they are part of the tool, that’s why they aren’t talking about it.
Keep thinking a vote means this, and a non-vote means that. We’re doing exactly what they want us to do, bicker with each other instead of looking.
No. Complicity requires agency. Without a reasonable and viable choice to opt out, it would be unfair to hold you responsible. This situation is more like being a captive audience.
“splitting hairs” could mean the difference between up to a couple million people dying, and potentially tens of millions of people or more dying. That’s not splitting hairs at that point. That’s not “po-tay-toe/po-tah-toe” anymore. Anyone arguing otherwise is either brainwashed or is arguing in bad faith.
Imagine thinking that there’s no difference between one genocide and several, simultaneous genocides.
Bad faith? It is bad faith to find any genocide “acceptable,” while simultaneously becoming angry at anyone pointing out that genocide is unacceptable. Seriously, what the actual fuck? This is white liberalism in its most concentrated lethal form. Ironically, it’ll eventually lead to the genocides you don’t find acceptable. If it wasn’t for this shit mentality, we wouldn’t be here.
So, what’s your plan for the election? Not voting, sitting in a corner yelling “it’s unacceptable!!!”?
Or voting the lesser of two evils and working to better the system?
The democratic parties of 1920s Germany also were full of racists, antisemites and union busters, but not voting or worse voting for the NSDAP only achieved one thing - the Nazis power grab.
Boost for lemmy doesn’t show profile pics and usernames all look the same so I might have overlooked where you said that. Also your comment I replied to reads like that wasn’t the case.
I apologize for the mix up, but still feel your hostility is unwarranted and will now disengage.
Damn, you’ve been showing off a lot of privilege, my dude. I don’t usually like invoking that concept, but you’re dripping all over the floor. Maybe it’s time for you to stop and think about the fact that it easy to paint everyone with a broad brush and say, “it’s okay if the body count goes up by a few million, I’ll just wait until a better candidate comes along” when you’re not the one on the firing line.
It’s easy to say that when you’re not the one who may get bounced from country to country as you try to seek refuge from a genocidal dictator.
It’s easy to say that when you’re not the one who’s going to have to rip their entire life apart just to survive.
It’s easy to say that when you’re not the one who’s family is going to be split up as a result.
Like, feel free to criticize the Democrats as much as you want, I hate them too. But I don’t have the privilege to just sit around and wait for Mr(s) Perfect to arrive. I may have a matter of months, if not weeks before I have to flee the country.
So fuck you and your “both sides” bullshit. It takes some serious privilege, or at the very least, the mindset of a bucket of crabs to say something like that.
I’m trans and so fucking sick of people here using my existence as an excuse to support/ignore genocide. My rights are not more important than those of Palestinians and anyone saying that they support me while killing brown muslim people abroad will not get my support. The interesting part is that Harris won’t even plainly say she supports trans peoples rights, she has to dance around it and say it in the most vague meaningless terms. You know that trans people are the next in line to be thrown in front of the bus by the dems.
I stopped reading that screed after you accused me of privilege. Again, another lemmy illiterate. I am voting for Harris. I’m angry at those with privilege who’ve made this the only choice I have.
Yeah? But all you said was “fuck the democrats”. There are enough people on here who say “fuck the democrats” but mean “vote for someone else” that you can’t leave that ambiguity.
Alright, since you’re confused, let me try to break this down for you.
Here’s your original message:
I mean…yeah…but also fuck the democrats. We shouldn’t be stuck in this position of genocide and fascism there and here or “just” genocide and fascism there. There are certainly degrees of being a piece of shit, but at this point, we are splitting hairs.
Okay, so
I mean…yeah…
Okay, this could mean two things: you agree, or you are acknowledging someone’s position
but
Alright, so, now we know that if you agree, then you have a disagreement on how it’s presented. Alternatively, you have acknowledged their position and are disagreeing with it.
also
Again, this doesn’t tell me whether or not you agree, this just says you have something to say in addition to a prior statement (“I mean…yeah…but”). It still doesn’t indicate whether or not you actually agree or if you’re just acknowledging their position.
fuck the democrats.
Alright, so here’s an actual position. Not unreasonable imo; however, it is a very hostile statement.
We shouldn’t be stuck in this position of genocide and fascism there and here or “just” genocide and fascism there.
I agree with this too, absolutely a reasonable position to take. However, you’ve yet to clarify if you actually agree with OP, or if you’re taking an opposing side. If you think that it should be obvious by this point, you’re right.
In a sane environment this statement shouldn’t be ambiguous.
In a sane environment someone would read this and think that you’re describing the Dems (making an assumption here) as being the lesser of two evils.
However, this statement also indicates disapproval of the Democrats, which, again, is a reasonable position to take in a sane world. However, there are enough people who say this as a way to put people back on the fence (or even get them to vote for a different party) that I still can’t rule anything out at this point.
There are certainly degrees of being a piece of shit, but at this point, we are splitting hairs.
Now you’re reducing the idea of Palestinians being genocided vs Palestinians, LGBT, PoC, women seeking abortions, etc being genocided to “po-tay-toe/po-tah-toe”. That’s what splitting hairs usually refers to. It’s needlessly debating something considered trivial or mundane. I think that is what is getting you into trouble.
Implying that the difference between one group and many groups being subjected to genocide is not a trivial thing, and it casts doubt on the rest of your statement. Personally it makes me think you’re trying to argue for voting 3rd party during this election.
So, I can see how you thought your statement was clear, but unfortunately there are enough bad actors on Lemmy that it wasn’t as clear as you thought it was.
Edit: if you want to clarify your position, you could say something like, “fuck the Dems, I hate that Harris is our only option” or “I hate that I feel like I have to vote for Harris”. This way you have clarified that you intend to vote for Harris, or that you agree that Harris is better than Trump, while also voicing your distaste for the Democrats.
Youre stuck in this position and it sure as shit isnt the fault of “democrats”.
Have them change the voting system then, because not voting/voting 3rd party isn’t going to get you there either, and will make it far worse. Having this attitude in 2016 already made it far worse.
Youre also going to have to come to the reality that genocide is an American tradition, in the very foundation of its economy. That’s why Americans still have military weapon reveals lmao, and y’all love it
or as the great prophet George Carlin, may peace be upon him, said “Garbage in, Garbage out”
anyone still participating in this broken system believes genocide is an acceptable choice. The only responsible choice is to burn it all to the ground and start again.
Sweet plan, where do we meet up for the “burn it to the ground” option?
And while we are planning, do you think you could consider voting for Kamala, you know, so more of our potential comrades aren’t locked up? Best to shore up our numbers right? Sic semper tyrannis!
The only responsible choice is to burn it all to the ground and start again.
Huh, funny. Last i heard to achieve this you want to insert someone that have the exact believe that will change the system, and there’s two way to do this: one is to vote in a democratic process, slowly and surely move toward that future one vote at the time; and two is to cause a civil war. People that’s jaded but comfortable in their situation usually want to pick the latter, which mean killing people that’s not on your side and sending young people to die for your cause. Sounds familiar? That’s because it’s what Trump tried last time. Does that sounds responsible to you?
I mean…yeah…but also fuck the democrats. We shouldn’t be stuck in this position of genocide and fascism there and here or “just” genocide and fascism there. There are certainly degrees of being a piece of shit, but at this point, we are splitting hairs.
I don’t think “kill fewer people” is splitting hairs. I think it’s gross to leverage Palestine for political points but only against Democrats.
I think it is fucking reprehensible that the only two parties we have to choose from both support genocide. It doesn’t matter if they support “less genocide.” Supporting genocide makes them a piece of shit, regardless of how much genocide it is. You just find it better because it doesn’t affect you. The fact that I am being made complicit by the realities of the situation I’ve been forced into by the majority in my country (read: white colonizers) really pisses me off.
It only comes up with Harris because you don’t care as much about the genocide as much as you do about scoring political points. It’s horrible of you.
Incorrect. You’re either illiterate or pretending to be for political points. I’m voting for Harris. It wouldn’t matter if it was her or any other Democrat who supports the genocide, I’d still be angry at the white majority in this country who created this shit dichotomy. It is literally minorities, predominantly black women, who’ve kept fascism at bay in this country. You and yours are terrible human beings. If ya’ll weren’t, we wouldn’t be here.
You’re not going to jab me into thinking you’re contributing in good faith. You aren’t. There’s only a few reasons to dig at Harris and Democrats for something an entirely different country is doing.
None of them are good. None help those we do have the power to help. None deescalate.
Worse, you use the lives of those we can’t help as shelter to make your horrid stance against those we can help seem like it’s somehow a bad choice.
It’s awful. I can’t imagine how you got there, and I don’t want to.
In another country… that our tax dollars fund, we supply weapons to, and we implicitly protect with our military and political power. Ok, sure bud. I’m the one arguing in bad faith. 🤡
The day after Trump is on the TV telling people he’s ringing Netanyahu almost daily to convince him not to agree to Biden’s ceasefire proposals is a pretty shit day to be singing mud at the Democrats over Gaza.
One of the options is “unilaterally subject another country to our will”. I take it that’s what you want?
We can stop sending them our tax dollars, seeking then weapons (as dictated by our laws), and stop threatening other countries who attempt to stop this massacre of civilians. How about that?
It absolutely matters. In a binary choice, if you don’t support the side that supports less genocide, then you tacitly support some genocide.
The results of disregarding practicality for your principles can be ruinous. “The road to hell is paved on good intentions.”
Another illiterate. I’m voting for Harris, I’m just angry at the assholes who forced this choice.
Me too. Our voting system sucks. We need to get rid of the electoral college and have ranked choice or other system that makes 3rd parties viable.
The 2-party system means getting railroaded a lot.
No one is illiterate here. This is a text platform. You keep accusing people of being illiterate, yet didnt say you were voting for harris until you assumed someone would have read it somewhere yet the only mention was way down.
For the record i agree with your position. Its an absolute shame that there is no viable vote AGAINST genocide. Sure we could vote third party, but the third party votes are mostly sapping away from democrats, therefore unfortunately helping trump, who would surely do more to enable israel’s genocide than the dems, who hopefully push back to some degree.
Ive got friends who are refusing to vote in protest of the democrats not taking a hard stance against israel. While i agree with then in theory, in practice i think trump will be worse both domestically and internationally.
All that said, you might benefit from taking a smoke break and stop accusing everyone of being illiterate.
It is called reading comprehension, which is a component of literacy. I’ll quote myself from the comment before I started pointing out the rampant illiteracy in this thread.
“The fact that I am being made complicit by the realities of the situation I’ve been forced into by the majority in my country (read: white colonizers) really pisses me off.”
Another component of literacy is communicating clearly, which you failed to do. You then got upset that people didn’t understand your vague statement.
Paying taxes also makes you complicit in the arming of Israel. You never stated whether you were voting or not.
There are people beyond just you that still need to hear this, apparently.
A no-vote or third party vote didn’t help in the past dozens of elections. This problem is much deeper than who holds office, and what gets me is how it’s been politicized even though neither side has discussed it. It’s likely that Gaza has been used as a crisis tool to once again pit peon against peon while the ones in control laugh. And I’m not talking about the politicians, they are part of the tool, that’s why they aren’t talking about it.
Keep thinking a vote means this, and a non-vote means that. We’re doing exactly what they want us to do, bicker with each other instead of looking.
Bruh, why can’t any of you read. Goddamn.
No. Complicity requires agency. Without a reasonable and viable choice to opt out, it would be unfair to hold you responsible. This situation is more like being a captive audience.
And what about Palestinians who support Kamala?
https://newrepublic.com/post/187537/kamala-harris-donald-trump-stunning-endorsement
“splitting hairs” could mean the difference between up to a couple million people dying, and potentially tens of millions of people or more dying. That’s not splitting hairs at that point. That’s not “po-tay-toe/po-tah-toe” anymore. Anyone arguing otherwise is either brainwashed or is arguing in bad faith.
Imagine thinking that there’s no difference between one genocide and several, simultaneous genocides.
Bad faith? It is bad faith to find any genocide “acceptable,” while simultaneously becoming angry at anyone pointing out that genocide is unacceptable. Seriously, what the actual fuck? This is white liberalism in its most concentrated lethal form. Ironically, it’ll eventually lead to the genocides you don’t find acceptable. If it wasn’t for this shit mentality, we wouldn’t be here.
So, what’s your plan for the election? Not voting, sitting in a corner yelling “it’s unacceptable!!!”?
Or voting the lesser of two evils and working to better the system?
The democratic parties of 1920s Germany also were full of racists, antisemites and union busters, but not voting or worse voting for the NSDAP only achieved one thing - the Nazis power grab.
So what’s your plan?
Why are all of you so fucking illiterate? I am voting for Harris. I’m angry my choice is ANY genocide at all.
If you are voting for Harris then you must agree that both sides are indeed not “the same” which is the entire point of this post.
Boost for lemmy doesn’t show profile pics and usernames all look the same so I might have overlooked where you said that. Also your comment I replied to reads like that wasn’t the case. I apologize for the mix up, but still feel your hostility is unwarranted and will now disengage.
Damn, you’ve been showing off a lot of privilege, my dude. I don’t usually like invoking that concept, but you’re dripping all over the floor. Maybe it’s time for you to stop and think about the fact that it easy to paint everyone with a broad brush and say, “it’s okay if the body count goes up by a few million, I’ll just wait until a better candidate comes along” when you’re not the one on the firing line.
It’s easy to say that when you’re not the one who may get bounced from country to country as you try to seek refuge from a genocidal dictator.
It’s easy to say that when you’re not the one who’s going to have to rip their entire life apart just to survive.
It’s easy to say that when you’re not the one who’s family is going to be split up as a result.
Like, feel free to criticize the Democrats as much as you want, I hate them too. But I don’t have the privilege to just sit around and wait for Mr(s) Perfect to arrive. I may have a matter of months, if not weeks before I have to flee the country.
So fuck you and your “both sides” bullshit. It takes some serious privilege, or at the very least, the mindset of a bucket of crabs to say something like that.
I’m trans and so fucking sick of people here using my existence as an excuse to support/ignore genocide. My rights are not more important than those of Palestinians and anyone saying that they support me while killing brown muslim people abroad will not get my support. The interesting part is that Harris won’t even plainly say she supports trans peoples rights, she has to dance around it and say it in the most vague meaningless terms. You know that trans people are the next in line to be thrown in front of the bus by the dems.
I’m trans. I live in Texas. What do you want me to say?
Nothing, just don’t assume that everyone refusing to vote for a genocide supporter is privileged and don’t speak for me.
I stopped reading that screed after you accused me of privilege. Again, another lemmy illiterate. I am voting for Harris. I’m angry at those with privilege who’ve made this the only choice I have.
Yeah? But all you said was “fuck the democrats”. There are enough people on here who say “fuck the democrats” but mean “vote for someone else” that you can’t leave that ambiguity.
I didn’t, you just can’t read well.
Alright, since you’re confused, let me try to break this down for you.
Here’s your original message:
Okay, so
Okay, this could mean two things: you agree, or you are acknowledging someone’s position
Alright, so, now we know that if you agree, then you have a disagreement on how it’s presented. Alternatively, you have acknowledged their position and are disagreeing with it.
Again, this doesn’t tell me whether or not you agree, this just says you have something to say in addition to a prior statement (“I mean…yeah…but”). It still doesn’t indicate whether or not you actually agree or if you’re just acknowledging their position.
Alright, so here’s an actual position. Not unreasonable imo; however, it is a very hostile statement.
I agree with this too, absolutely a reasonable position to take. However, you’ve yet to clarify if you actually agree with OP, or if you’re taking an opposing side. If you think that it should be obvious by this point, you’re right.
In a sane environment this statement shouldn’t be ambiguous.
In a sane environment someone would read this and think that you’re describing the Dems (making an assumption here) as being the lesser of two evils.
However, this statement also indicates disapproval of the Democrats, which, again, is a reasonable position to take in a sane world. However, there are enough people who say this as a way to put people back on the fence (or even get them to vote for a different party) that I still can’t rule anything out at this point.
Now you’re reducing the idea of Palestinians being genocided vs Palestinians, LGBT, PoC, women seeking abortions, etc being genocided to “po-tay-toe/po-tah-toe”. That’s what splitting hairs usually refers to. It’s needlessly debating something considered trivial or mundane. I think that is what is getting you into trouble.
Implying that the difference between one group and many groups being subjected to genocide is not a trivial thing, and it casts doubt on the rest of your statement. Personally it makes me think you’re trying to argue for voting 3rd party during this election.
So, I can see how you thought your statement was clear, but unfortunately there are enough bad actors on Lemmy that it wasn’t as clear as you thought it was.
Edit: if you want to clarify your position, you could say something like, “fuck the Dems, I hate that Harris is our only option” or “I hate that I feel like I have to vote for Harris”. This way you have clarified that you intend to vote for Harris, or that you agree that Harris is better than Trump, while also voicing your distaste for the Democrats.
Youre stuck in this position and it sure as shit isnt the fault of “democrats”.
Have them change the voting system then, because not voting/voting 3rd party isn’t going to get you there either, and will make it far worse. Having this attitude in 2016 already made it far worse.
Youre also going to have to come to the reality that genocide is an American tradition, in the very foundation of its economy. That’s why Americans still have military weapon reveals lmao, and y’all love it
or as the great prophet George Carlin, may peace be upon him, said “Garbage in, Garbage out”
anyone still participating in this broken system believes genocide is an acceptable choice. The only responsible choice is to burn it all to the ground and start again.
what is your plan when it’s all burned down and now you have to fight MAGA for control of the country?
Sweet plan, where do we meet up for the “burn it to the ground” option?
And while we are planning, do you think you could consider voting for Kamala, you know, so more of our potential comrades aren’t locked up? Best to shore up our numbers right? Sic semper tyrannis!
People who refuse to participate in the democratic process and then complain that it doesn’t work for them are hilarious.
“After Hitler, Our Turn”
Nice of you to sacrifice all the lives that it will cost to “burn it all down”. The corpses of everyone who isn’t a straight white male will thank you
Huh, funny. Last i heard to achieve this you want to insert someone that have the exact believe that will change the system, and there’s two way to do this: one is to vote in a democratic process, slowly and surely move toward that future one vote at the time; and two is to cause a civil war. People that’s jaded but comfortable in their situation usually want to pick the latter, which mean killing people that’s not on your side and sending young people to die for your cause. Sounds familiar? That’s because it’s what Trump tried last time. Does that sounds responsible to you?
I doubt that’s happening, disparate groups acting in an unconcerted manner aren’t likely to achieve much. They already kill us sleeping in our beds.