cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/21396125
Stephen Starr in Hamtramck, Michigan
Mon 14 Oct 2024 11.00 EDT
This group is the single greatest gift to the 2024 trump presidency and he doesn’t know it yet!
Harris? I agree, she’s torpedoing a very easy campaign.
At least trump will be a great ally to Palestinians!
Course not, the genocidal US Empire needs to be overthrown. Join an org like FRSO or PSL.
You know, one of the big third party candidates is Jill Stein. If you are one of those pro Palestine supporters who hates Israel… Stein is Jewish. She might be one of those Jews who hates Israel, but she’s still Jewish. I don’t mind her being Jewish, but I do mind her being vaccine skeptical, a Kremlin devotee, among other things.
Hamtramck is run by a bigoted shit stain mayor. As welcoming as I want to be to immigrants, don’t bring that sexist, homophobic shit into my neighborhood. Go ahead and vote against Harris, but don’t come complaining when Trump deports your family.
This is the kind of meme that talks past you, degrades you, and then will complain when not responded to.
The meme is not abusive but it does describe a cruel and illogical behavior rife in this thread.
A behavior in support of genocide, no less.
Interesting, this was exactly my mindset on voting at age 10 or so. Guess some people never gets out of that phase?
Cant blame them, Biden\Harris are literally sending Israel the bombs.
And Trump will just skip the middleman and bomb Gaza and Palestine himself. You’re talking about the guy who moved the embassy to Jerusalem, after all.
Dumb fucks. I hope the leopard fucking devours their faces.
You love genocide so much you hope another one happens here.
What are you talking about? You’re completely missing the point. These people are acting as though they’re not going to be the target of racist assholes if the orange menace wins as a result of them not voting for Harris. Israel is now a terrorist organization as far as I’m concerned, but these dumb shits will only come out worse for wear if Dump wins.
So, I hope their righteousness bites them in the ass for not seeing the bigger picture.
They’re the target of racist assholes now and their families are being murdered now. What you hope for is that it gets worse so that they are punished for not being obedient.
No, what I hope for is that they learn a hard lesson from their stupidity. Throwing baby fits right before an election that could very well decide whether we remain (somewhat) democratic is ignorant. I’m no fan of Israel nor of what crimes they’re perpetrating. But I’m also not a fan of people pretending like this isn’t one of the biggest elections in history that could very well be decided due to their fit.
I feel for their people and their families. But I also have family whose lives are at stake with this election. I don’t agree with ANY politician completely. But I also know clearly which one is on the right side of history a whole fuck ton more than the other.
Their families are being butchered, infantilizing them as being too stupid to know what’s good for them is actually kinda racist.
I think you just want them to be punished for not bending the knee. It’s a revenge fantasy.
Angry with the Biden administration – and, by extension, Kamala Harris – for its support for Israel, Arab Americans may be willing to overlook Trump’s history of closeness with Israel’s hard-right leaders.
So, these individuals could be described as the common clay of the new West?
You see no difference between people put off by settler-colonial genocide and… settler colonists? What?
You often try to win arguments by blaming one person with no say in the situation for the actions that were taken by others?
How was that rational?
I don’t know what you’re referring to.
Does feigning ignorance often work for you as a debate strategy?
I’m not feigning. I don’t know what point you were making. Perhaps you could expound using more descriptive terms?
It seems that you are currently so agitated that my honest statement of not knowing what you mean must actually be a sneaky bad faith strategem.
Oh, so is it amnesia then? Because you seemed pretty clear on the topic of discussion until I cornered you. Then, magically - or just conveniently - you have forgotten what we’re talking about.
And pretending to be psychic and read my mind (or, perhaps, hallucinating) via the internet doesn’t make you right. How is that even rational?
Why should anyone believe what you say when it’s clearly either a bad-faith argument full of disinformation or evidence of your ignorance and inability to comment intelligently on this topic?
Oh, so is it amnesia then? Because you seemed pretty clear on the topic of discussion until I cornered you. Then, magically - or just conveniently - you have forgotten what we’re talking about.
Feel free to rephrase and expound on what you said. I do not see how it applied to what we were talking about, and therefore don’t see its meaning.
And pretending to be psychic and read my mind (or, perhaps, hallucinating) via the internet doesn’t make you right. How is that even rational?
As I said, I recognize behaviors and clichés. And you have not yet contradicted a single prediction and have accidentally confirmed a few.
Why should anyone believe what you say when it’s clearly either a bad-faith argument full of disinformation or evidence of your ignorance and inability to comment intelligently on this topic?
I have made no bad faith arguments nor presented any disinformation. Please do your best to not make things up and to address what I have actually said.
And, of course, you should be against genocide and act accordingly.
You sure they’re feigning?
Given how often they post on this issue and the sometimes verbose spread of bad-faith arguments and disinformation…
Yes I am
It’s a movie reference. You should watch Blazing Saddles, it’s very funny.
It’s a great movie, I always tell people to watch it!
In the movie, this is a reference to the racist townspeople in the “Western”. It’s poking fun at the Westerns that romanticized allegedly good and pure settlers (colonizers) and to sympathoze with them. You weren’t supposed to think of them as, in Wilder’s terms, “morons”.
Parent was just trying to call people morons. It’s not a clever reference, I got it. But those people are, specifically, Muslims so put off by the genocide of Palestinians that they’d vote against the administration supporting that grmocide. I would say their political acumen is more developed than the genocidal sheepdogging that we see in this thread, people that can’t even say the word genocide trying to imply they’re the adults in the room. At least they can understand basic leverage and independent action.
But I was making note that the “morons” reference in Blazing Saddles is about settler-colonists whereas the people parent wanted to call morons are literally people that are reacting against settler colonists and their supporters. I think that is an oversight that can only be made through chauvinism, personally. The person wants to feel better than those moved by genocide, they want it to be as narrow as “those people are stupid”. They can’t contend with the content.
yeah man, denigrate them more, that’ll surely get them on your side! maybe a touch more smug condescension? anything except engaging with their concerns, of course.
I call conservatives dumb too.
These people aren’t special. Just a different kind of dumb.
Similar in the way they vote against their own interests.
personally, I think ignoring the concerns of voters in a historically very important swing state months before the election is a recipe for a disastrous rerun of 2016, and should be avoided if you’re actually concerned with winning, protecting democracy, etc. but I guess we’ll see if the strategy of “fuck you, vote for me” works out this time 🤷
I don’t want them on my side. I’m not running for office, and they’re shitty, stupid people.
(your mask is slipping)
Trump supporters? Yeah, I stand by it.
Single issue voters, or is this even a single issue because Trump and Harris don’t really have much different on this particular topic? People really have me scratching my head sometimes.
There is no difference because Harris knows her good little gooses steppers will vote for her no matter what she does or who she kills.
single issue voters
the single issue is the eradication of their families and friends
yeah man I wonder why they don’t support that
Do you consider war crimes, mass murderand sending in our troops to assist in a far right wing colonial war – all done with our tax dollars to be a “single issue” like… school vouchers or Amtrak funding? It seems a very dishonest or at best an inaccurate method to weigh issues against each other.
The single issue: genocide
Why are you sheepdogging for genociders? You have always had the option of saying nothing and educating yourself instead.
Just because you’re oversimplifying a complex issue doesn’t make you correct or your choice any better than the alternative.
Unless you’d like to explain how it does…
It is not a complex issue. There is a genocide and there are increasing calls to support those genociders electorally. Instead of supporting genociders, you should oppose them.
Liberals call “issues” complex in order to speak euphemistically about the horrible things they support. They do not actually have an understanding of the alleged complexity, it is just a lazy thought-terminating cliché. When you do understand something, you can discuss it directly. At the moment, you are apparently more afraid of using the word genocide than actually being complicut in it yourself. Is this the “complexity” you are referring to? Your personal discomfort? I suspect so.
Unless you’d like to explain how it does…
Being consistently against genocide is the first step towards actually fighting against it. I have set the bar very low. Can you clear it?
A 1000 year Middle East conflict “isn’t a complex issue”?
Either you’re obviously too ignorant to hold intelligent opinions on this matter, or you’re clearly arguing in bad faith by stating obvious falsehoods.
Why should anyone take you seriously?
A 1000 year Middle East conflict “isn’t a complex issue”?
I already stated what is not complex. It is that there is an ongoing genocide and that you and others are sheepdogging for the perpetrators. I stated it directly and your response continues this pattern of avoiding even mentioning the term genocide even though it is the topic of this thread and the points I have made.
Re: “1000 year middle east conflict”, this is itself an ahistorical, chauvinist absurdity that papers over the real modern history of colonialism and Zionism and usually has a few dashes of Islamophobia thrown in as well, though yo be honest I would not be surprised if the people sheepdogging for genociders were not particularly familiar with the details of that reference.
More realistically, the “it’s complex” line serves as a way to avoid thinking about or interrogating the topic, it is a way for the ignorant to feel secure despite knowledgeable troublemakers telling them specific but inconvenient things. Like, say, that you should oppose genocide.
Either you’re obviously too ignorant to hold intelligent opinions on this matter, or you’re clearly arguing in bad faith by stating obvious falsehoods.
At the moment I’m trying to navigate middle schooler level chauvinist talking points and asking you to address what I say rather than what you make up. Oh, and to remind you of my main and original point, the one you are afraid to even mention!
Why should anyone take you seriously?
This is Lemmy, there is a limit to which anyone should take anonymous forum comments seriously.
But you should take genocide seriously. If you are not knee-jerk advocating against it, and are instead trying to support its perpetrators, you had better have the very best knowledge and justifications, better than I can even imagine, to make a case for why you support those carrying out the greatest crime.
Everyone should take genocide seriously and that is what people should listen to in my messages. They should also recognize that the responses to my advocacy require dishonest behaviors.
Naturally, as the election approaches, liberals will increasingly panic and try to shut down anything that disagrees with their (pro-genocidal) party line. But I have and will continue to peel those with empathy and honesty off of that track.
Cherry picking a single detail out of a complex situation doesn’t suddenly make it a simple situation. That is logically fallacious. As is the rest of your argument, which is based on that logical fallacy.
And blaming me using disinformation, because I pointed out the fact that your argument is both fallacious and nonsensical, does not make you right either.
Cherry picking a single detail out of a complex situation doesn’t suddenly make it a simple situation.
Is it a “detail” that fails to include very important context (none of which you can seemingly specify) or is it genocide, something with so much weight that you are afraid to even mention it despite my repeated reminders that it is the topic here?
One of the challenges of evasive and bad faith behavior is that the little quips and pretenses can easily become inconsistent.
Anyways, the actual topic is pretty straightforward. There is a genocide. You should not support those perpetrating it and should instead work against them. So far, you have offered no rebuttal to this outside of straw men and vagaries and posturing.
That is logically fallacious. As is the rest of your argument, which is based on that logical fallacy.
Parrots can repeat many phrases they hear, but they don’t understand their meaning.
Logical fallacies are a set of ways a person can make errors in thinking. The whole point of them is that some nerds thought they were common or important enough to deserve a name. Reflexively accusing me of logical fallacies without naming any, right after I explained how you were using one? Obviously schoolyard “I’m rubber you’re gkue” pantomiming. No understanding, no applicability, just defensive posturing.
And blaming me using disinformation
What disinformation? What did I blame you for?
because I pointed out the fact that your argument is both fallacious and nonsensical, does not make you right either.
Can you tell me when I said or implied, “when I use disinformation against you it means I’m right”? I think you are very confused in both thought and language at this point. You’re relying on quips and phrases that simply do not apply.
Calling it a thousand year conflict is Zionist propaganda. Plain and simple.
Considering that I never said that the Zionist were right, I certainly don’t see how that’s anything but something you just made up to feel better about your lack of position In this argument.
Yeah sure you’re not saying you agree with them, you’re just repeating their racist propaganda that’s all. Totally different.
This isn’t a 1,000 year Middle east conflict, it’s a modern-day Western settler-colonialist project. It’s an ~80 year ethnic cleansing project.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism_as_settler_colonialismIts not 1000 years old. Zionists lie about that to make it seem intractable. Arabs and Jews got along fine for the entire 800 year period of the Ottoman empire which ended in the early 1900s. Learn some history so you dont embarass yourself. its 80 years old, since the land theft, murder, and terrorism of the Nakba, done by Israelis.
A 1000 year Middle East conflict “isn’t a complex issue”?
Israel as a settler colonial entity is around 100 years old. Before that, Christians, Muslims, and Jews lived in the same area with very little sectarian violence for around 800 years.
Thank you for admitting that. I’m correct, however, the rest is completely irrelevant. We’re not talking about those 800 years.
You’d say “its nuanced” about colonizers killing indigenous tribes and the indigenous tribes fighting back.
No, it’s been a little over a 100 years of Settler Colonialist Zionism. Zionism has not existed for 1000 years.
‘Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History’ by Nur Masalha gives a detailed account of it’s history before British Occupation and ‘A History of Modern Palestine’ by Ilan Pappe gives a detailed account of it’s history since the British Occupation.
Origins of Zionism
Zionism is a settler colonialism project that was able to really start with the support of British Imperialism. Zionism as a political movement started with Theodore Herzl in the 1880s as a ‘modern’ way to ‘solve’ the ‘Jewish Question’ of Europe.
Since at least the 1860’s, Europe was increasingly antisemitic and hostile to Jewish people. Zionism was explicitly a Setter Colonialist movement and the native Palestinians were not considered People but Savages by the Europeans. While Zionist Colonization began before it, the Balfor Declaration is when Britain gave it’s backing of the movement in order to ‘solve’ the ‘Jewish Question’ while also creating a Colony in the newly conquered Middle East after WWI in order to exhibit military force in the region and extract natural resources.
That’s when Zionist immigration started to pick up, out of necessity for most as Europe became more hostile and antisemitic. That continued into and during WWII, European countries and even the US refused to expand immigration quotas for Jewish people seeking asylum. The idea that the creation of Israel is a reparation for Jewish people is an after-the-fact justification. While most Jewish immigrants had no choice and just wanted a place to live in peace, it was the Zionist Leadership that developed and implemented the forced transfer, ethnic cleansing, of the native population, Palestinians. Without any Occupation, Apartheid, and ethnic cleansing, there would not be any Palestinian resistance to it.
Herzl himself explicitly considered Zionism a Settler Colonialist project, Setter Colonialism is always violent. The difficulty in creating a democratic Jewish state in an area inhabited by people who are not Jewish, is that enough Palestinian people need to be ‘Transferred’ to have a demographic majority that is Jewish. Ben-Gurion explicitly rejected Secular Bi-national state solutions in favor of partition.
Quote
Zionism’s aims in Palestine, its deeply-held conviction that the Land of Israel belonged exclusively to the Jewish people as a whole, and the idea of Palestine’s “civilizational barrenness" or “emptiness” against the background of European imperialist ideologies all converged in the logical conclusion that the native population should make way for thenewcomers.
The idea that the Palestinian Arabs must find a place for themselves elsewhere was articulated early on. Indeed, the founder of the movement, Theodor Herzl, provided an early reference to transfer even before he formally outlined his theory of Zionist rebirth in his Judenstat.
An 1895 entry in his diary provides in embryonic form many of the elements that were to be demonstrated repeatedly in the Zionist quest for solutions to the “Arab problem ”-the idea of dealing with state governments over the heads of the indigenous population, Jewish acquisition of property that would be inalienable, “Hebrew Land" and “Hebrew Labor,” and the removal of the native population.
Visualizing the Ethnic Cleansing
Peace Process and Solution
Both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
Historian Works on the History
-
Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History - Nur Masalha
-
The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948 - Nur Masalha
-
A History of Modern Palestine - Ilan Pappe
-
The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine - Rashid Khalidi
-
The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine - Ilan Pappe
-
The 1967 Arab-Israeli War: Origins and Consequences - Avi Shlaim
-
The Biggest Prison on Earth: A History of the Occupied Territories - Ilan Pappe
-
The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of De-development - Sara Roy
-
10 Myths About Israel - Ilan Pappe (summery)
No, it’s been a little over a 100 years of Settler Colonialist Zionism. Zionism has not existed for 1000 years.
I never claimed Zionism existed for 1000 years. That’s a strawman argument, and you wasted an awful lot of time typing all that out.
Do you often find that using logical fallacies and disinformation and mischaracterizing what people said to be an effective debate tactic?
A 1000 year Middle East conflict “isn’t a complex issue”?
This is what you said in the context of the current conflict, which is Israel engaging in Genocide of Palestinians. That is a result of Zionism, which is fundamentally a Settler Colonialist Ideology that has only been around for a little over a hundred years, not a thousand.
🏆
-
I am not a single issue voter and I don’t think that way. There are many important issues on the line and I will vote for the candidate that addresses the most. I am not saying that genocide is unimportant, just that I can’t impact it with my selection.
What is more important than supporting and normalizing genocide?
Preventing someone from gaining power who will continue genocide, find new targets for genocide, and turn the country into a dictatorship? Choosing the lesser of two evils is the way it works. If you want the greater of two evils then it’s your choice to not participate.
Preventing someone from gaining power who will continue genocide
There could not be a candidate this describes more than Harris. You know, from the Biden-Harris administration behind the genocide happening right now. The one supplying bombs to burn refugee children alive. Have you heard their screams?
I am told Democratic voters are empathetic and strategic. But all I see is racist normalization of genocide and toeing the party line.
find new targets for genocide
That’s a Dem specialty! They have a knack for stoking and supporting genocides. Heck, Obama got one started in Yemen. Even NGOs were saying a vhikd was killed every minute for years by this. Why do you think they are so resilient and steadfast against this genocide and Western attempts to free up Zionist shipping lanes? Did you even know what was done to Yemen?
and turn the country into a dictatorship?
Given that the current “system” has you shilling for genocide you should already question whether you live in a democracy.
Though all of this lesser evilism is also premised on nobody remembering that Trump was already president for 4 years and it was basically the same shot as under Biden. In fact, Biden came in from the right, normalizing the pandemic and slashing benefits for the public, then did the usual, “I’m just a widdle president I can’t do nothin’” act when the SC overturned Roe v. Wade. Ah, but now that there is a genocide to support, unlimited billions for Israel, don’t worry he can bypass Congress. Do you see how the system functions? Do you feel enfranchised? How much less enfranchised were you under Trump?
They’re on the same team. Why do you think Harris’ team is celebrate endorsements from Republican war criminals? A human that cared would spit in their faces and announce charges. You are not provided with such an option for your mainstream party “choices”. They laugh at their committed voters, I’ve seen it in person.
Choosing the lesser of two evils is the way it works. If you want the greater of two evils then it’s your choice to not participate.
No, that’s the way you are told it works by your masters so that you work for them instead of against them. You’ll notice that I am not voting for any genociders. Did I break reality!? Or just deviate from a focus group-tested party talking point?
It’s like you’re mentally incapable of reading a comment and responding to the words in it.
I responded directly to what they said re: there being multiple issues they want to weigh. That was their response up me challenging complicity in genocide and asking why the person I was responding to was sheepdogging for genociders. They are trying yo be euphemistic and retreat to the thought-terminsting clichés that reinforce complicity in genocide, which also means avoiding even using the word. So I recontextualized their attempt to decontextualize while still directly addressing it.
Please feel free to tell me which specific parts you would like to see addressed or responded to. I certainly already replied to the first sentence, which was the main point of deflection.
So, you admit to intentionally mischaracterizing what they said and then creating a straw man argument based on that, just so you could win an online argument.
Not that you haven’t been doing that this whole time, but it’s nice for you to admit it.
So, you admit to intentionally mischaracterizing what they said
No? Please do your best to engage with what I say rather than making things up.
sorry, Russian plants, people know Trump will not only give Israel MORE weapons and NOT call for cease fires but will probably also send US troops. nobody’s dumb enough to think they’re “the same”
https://www.kktv.com/video/2024/03/01/biden-calls-immediate-cease-fire-gaza/
and
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/03/07/world/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news
And now
President Biden told the Israeli leader that airstrikes that killed aid workers were “unacceptable” and appeared to condition future support on how Israel changes course. https://archive.ph/t5tIi
Meanwhile the alternative
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-israel-finish-problem-gaza-1234981038/
The whole “Kamala is bad because Israel” line is so absurd compared to Trump that it really must be Russian propaganda.
Super weird that your reaction to an article about how Kamala Harris is losing crucial Muslim support in Michigan is, “Nice try , Russians!” How brain-poisoned have you become that you’re rejecting inconvenient information?
I don’t get this. 3rd party will never win. Ever. There are two real options. Vote for the one that offers the best outcome for you. Not doing that is accepting that you are ok with the worst of the two, because you had a chance to keep them out of office and choose not to.
I don’t get this. 3rd party will never win. Ever. There are two real options.
People are voting third party because you believe there are only 2 real options.
Vote for the one that offers the best outcome for you.
Gotcha, we should vote for Claudia De La Crúz.
Not doing that is accepting that you are ok with the worst of the two, because you had a chance to keep them out of office and choose not to.
Both Trump and Harris are the worst options, that’s why we are going against them.
“Everyone I disagree with is a Russian bot,” what a classic zinger
How is voting for her the best option. Literally all she can do is benefit the Republicans by pulling votes from the Dems. Hell, in Georgia they’ve literally ruled that votes for her won’t be counted even though she’s on the ballot.
Her winning the US Presidential election is less-likely than winning the power all 25 consecutive times by finding the winning ticket on the ground at random truck stops in Malaysia.
For a few reasons.
-
If you have no red line in the sand, then that gives the Dems free reign to do whatever they please.
-
It helps boost PSL’s platform, which is revolutionary, and therefore important to get new members
-
If she gets more than 5% of the vote, then PSL gets better ballot access and public funding
-
It helps delegitimize the electoral system.
-
This is going to be such a leopard ate my face moment. Do they really think the Republicans are going to do anything? They’re just going to drop some bombs and call it a day. At least with the Democrats there’s a slight chance.
They are voting third party, usually for Stein, or Crúz.
Correct, but they’re doing so because they believe it ensure Harris won’t win. They aren’t considering the fact that if Harris loses, Trump wins. It’s a stupid and not only pointless but dangerous decision.
Third party voters 100% understand that Trump wins if Harris loses. Their solidarity with Palestinians and refusal to support the Democrats unconditionally when they are committing genocide is driving them to third party, not a hope that third party will win.
Why would they even vote ?
To show the votes she lost by going in on genocide, instead of leaving it to minimization by the media.
I know, I was asking why are they even participating when both of them are against Palestinians and will make the genocide even worse … also it will be useless if she won
They are voting for Stein and Crúz.
Okay, but, abandon her for whom exactly? Just not vote? Vote 3rd party? I am not going to say Harris is perfect, but this is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Third Party, tyically, that’s what most anti-genocide groups are advocating for.
What third party? David Duke just endorsed Jill Stein.
Is there a top down order of bad-faith Democrat talking points distributed every day?
Nope just people out here trying to keep conversations in the realm of reality.
David Duke supports Jill Stein for one single reason: because Jill Stein does not support Israel and Trump does.
Duke even reluctantly endorsed Stein because she is Jewish.
And Stein called him trash and disavowed him.
If you call Jill Stein a white nationalist because of Duke you call every single person who does not support Israel a white nationalist
It is nice to hear she disavowed him. But no it’s not like his attempt to associate with her makes her racist too. It’s just a reminder that she has less chance of winning this election than you do. And citing morals to vote for the party that has transparently turned itself into nothing more than a spoiler is just ridiculous. It’s like rooting for the outfield fans in the home run zone in baseball. (If they lean over and catch it, it’s a home run.)
Funny enough, that’s exactly who they’re planning on voting for, too! The way they put it, voting for Stein is their way of not voting for Trump but ensuring he beats Harris.
Shut the fuck up with this
Any anti-genocide candidate, Claudia De La Crúz is best but Jill Stein is often pushed as an alternative.
You mean the same Jill Stein that was endorsed by former KKK leader, seems like a solid choice…
I’m not a Jill Stein voter, but I dont think she can control who endorses her so it doesnt make a lot of sense holding that particular thing against her.
You were just so excited to use this talking point that you couldn’t be bothered to note that he was responding to it in the very comment you used it on.
Wasn’t called out as the former KKK leader though. So excited to call me out you didn’t check.
You formulated it as though you were bringing up something new: “you mean the same X who Y” is for introducing something new into the conversation in relation to X, with X here being Jill Stein. If you had just used David Duke as X and “who lead the KKK” as Y, it wouldn’t have been an absurd contribution.
Though it would still be a silly one, since people know who David Duke is, it’s not some obscure fact. He’s the single most recognizable name in connection with the KKK, perhaps along with the long-dead D.W. Griffith (but probably not).
I understand, you asked me who the anti-genocide groups were supporting, not a vetted list of everyone who has come out in favor of each third party.
Didn’t ask you anything actually lol.
Ah, you were a different user jumping in, my bad. Either way, that’s what was asked originally.
My personal opinion? Claudia De La Crúz all the way.
Dick Cheney endorsed Kamala.
Neither of these facts alone necessarily implicate the candidates. You really have to consider the context. Being endorsed by someone hardly means you keep their company.
Its like lemmy world is just democrat bots that respond with these canned attack responses any time Jill stein is mentioned
He hopes that Trump, on the other hand, uses his business acumen to bring down the cost of the products he sells in his store, many of which are imported from overseas. “Trump is not perfect, but we have no choice,” he says.
Hashim’s other major concern is Gaza, where more than 42,000 people have been killed by Israeli attacks. “The No 1 reason [to not vote for Harris] is that she is supporting Israel 100%,” he said.
I don’t understand how someone this stupid is able to run a successful business. The high price of goods now is completely due to republican policies that have taken the brakes off of corporate price gouging and Trump has stated that not only is he 100% supportive of Israel but he will happily supercharge their genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza.
Good!
legit question, if arabs love Palestine so fucking much, why don’t they open up their countries’ lands for the creation of a Palestinian state?
What do you mean? Israel exists on stolen land, it’s a settler-colonial project, ergo the Palestinian land is already there.
That’s what I mean. The people who exiled a certain people they didn’t like because of their favorite fantasy book are now crying genocide because they don’t think a nation those people established should exist. Stolen from who, the rightful owners of a land claimed by exiling undesirables? So only one part of the goatherder nations dementia is valid?
The Palestinians were there less than a century ago and the Zionists murdered them and locked them in open-air prisons. It’s Palestinian land.
You’re right, the ‘I’d rather fill this land with blood than share it’ people are so oppressed. Funny how all the other experimental arab borders seem to be ok, it’s those pesky jewish borders that are the problem. seems a little cherry-picked to me. all land is occupied and when the claim to legitimacy is religious all claims are equally illegitimate
Read To Stop Marx, They Made Zion, do some self-crit, and stop batting for fascist Zionists.
I honestly don’t care what the sectarian tribes of the middle east do to each other. they’re all backwards savages to me
Lemmy.world and extreme, open-faced racist Zionism, what a surprise.
Does telling a lib to self-crit ever work? For starters they don’t know what that is. They’re likely to take it as nothing but an insult.
