1043
“Extreme Danger”: Harris Earns a Stunning Endorsement Over Trump
(www.yahoo.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2024
1043 points (100.0% liked)
News
23655 readers
3362 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
You should not normalize genocide by voting for any genocider candidate, nor publicly rationalizing doing so.
It is extremely effective to not vote! The republicans have been pushing this shit for years and I trust them.
I would like you and others to stop normalizing the genocide of Palestine. If you stop announcing your unconditional support for the people genociding Palestine to any degree then it has been effective.
In terms of being more generally politically effective, it is important to take a step away from the dictates of your political class faction. I think that having a simple red line of not supporting genocide should be enough for any moral person to do so.
Yes, let’s let a fascist who wants to kill the Palestinians even faster into power. It will be super effective to protest against him when he is using military force to suppress us. It’s not like he hasn’t already used BOTAC to kill leftists during the George Floyd uprisings. Surely all the guardrails will allow us to stop the genocide with him in power!
“After Trump, Our Turn” comrades! Don’t vote!
Israel already has unconditional material support from the Biden-Harris administration on which the genocide is entirely dependent.
However, you can help prevent the normalization of genocide by saying it is your red line that you will not cross.
The Biden-Harris regime recently issued an EO, prompting a corresponding memo from the Pentagon, to authorize domestic military use, including lethal force against citizens in the US. Harris' running mate mobilized the national guard against George Floyd protesters. Harris is a prosecutor known for harsh and unfair treatment of the accused.
They are not oppositional forces in this matter.
The people that killed leftists were cops and right wing stochastic terrorists. The cops are funded and defended and overseen and protected by Dems at all levels of government. And it is a rabbit hole, but the fates of Ferguson organizers are something to follow as well.
There are no guardrails. The question is whether you will take the first step in opposition of genocide by refusing to support it. There is much more work to be done.
Please center Palestine in your thoughts.
I’m aware of literally everything you are talking about but I have historical context that you apparently lack. Look up what happened to socialists in nazi germany. We need to stop the fascists before they take power or everything gets worse. Things can fucking get worse.
My inclination is damage limitation not some bullshit ideal. There are two options on the table, and I voted for Harris because I love my trans brothers and sisters, my many migrant friends, my wife who is a disabled immigrant. I hate Harris and Biden for what they are doing to migrants and Palestinians. Trump would make literally everyone worse off. So I will take my meager power at the ballot box to oppose fascism. Outside of the ballot box I will oppose the democrats for the genocidaires they are.
We should protest and take action, but vote for those who will make things less bad. Our system is fucked, but making yourself effectively invisible doesn't help. If your vote doesn't got for one of the two parties you are worth as much as someone who doesn't exist.
The Biden-Harris administration is committing this genocide. "Less bad", friend, they are doing the worst thing.
Given the extent to which Dem voters rely on personal moralism, I think that "don't vote for genocidera" should be enough. You are complicit if you vote for a person doing genocide.
But if you prefer to think this is about strategy, what do you think makes your interests more relevant? Being a loudly guaranteed lever pull for the party even when you acknowledge they are doing a genocide, or someone that will, at least some of the time, actually withhold their vote on a stated principal?
It is actually your logic that leads to irrelevancy. It is logic handed down by party PR ghouls and they repeat it because it works: it means they don't need to listen to you, they can just convince you to disempower yourself!
I disagree, but even if I didn't, a vote complicit in genocide is worse than not voting at all.
They're not doing the worst thing. Doing Genocide AND the 2025 Trump agenda is worse.
Genocide is the worst thing and should be a red line. Please do your best to not help erase that red line.
Question: Is genocide in Xinjiang a red line for you?
I already know what your answer's going to be, I'm just asking to highlight what your real goal here is.
I do not live in China and cannot do any advocacy related to Xinjiang. Though I will point out that there is not a genocide there. By now you should be able to recognize the differences. The mass killings, the videos, the diaspora, the intense censorship. We could discuss the ridiculous think tank and fake university apparatus that sold that lie with the US State Department, but to be frank, it is disgusting to distract from opposition to the genocide of Palestinians with this lazy attempt at a gotcha. Personally, I think you should apologize.
My real goal is to advocate against normalization of genocide in the US. I have organized actions and protests to this effect for over a year.
Do your best to at least not believe your own bullshitting.
Okay, so you're okay with genocide in Xinjiang, just not in Gaza. And your strategy for solving the genocide in Gaza is to let someone come into power who's even more pro-genocide that the tepid pro-genocide stance of the current Democrats. Dooming millions of innocent people who can't fight back to a catastrophe beyond even their present catastrophe.
So you're okay with certain genocides. And you don't want strategies that will avoid a huge escalation of the existing genocide in Gaza.
It honestly doesn't sound like you're very anti-genocide.
Fucking 🤡
Go away.
Please do your best to engage in good faith and avoid namecalling.
Yes. BadA + BadB < BadA
I understand your stated idealist position, "I won't vote for someone engaged in genocide".
... but the reality is that Trump win, which is likely without every possible Dem vote, will cause the worst possible genocide.
So by withholding your vote you're not complicit in Harris-supported genocide, but you're complicit in Trump supported genocide, which everyone understands to be worse.
As I often say in these threads, withholding your vote is precisely what the republicans want you to do.
Seriously, will your ideals be much comfort when Trump supported Netanyahu is grinding Gaza to dost?
Who should I vote for?
Anyone that is not a genocider. Even not voting is better. If you would like to communicate that genocide is unacceptable, then the camdidates with anti-genkxise messages are de la Cruz and Stein.
I will not vote for those people.
I'm so fucking sick of this ridiculous argument. You've identified the problem, what's your genius solution?
The solution requires commitment to building power, i.e. leverage and numbers, gaining a political education, and engaging in action.
What I am suggesting is just the absolute bare minimum, and you all know it: genocide should be a red line and you are complicit if you vote for someone doing a genocide.
Your vote isn't strategic, either. You are just demonstrating that you will put up with anything and will be ignorable for the indefinite future for them to do these and greater crimes. And by justifying it to yourself, you will fail to take the necessary steps to, in your words, "solve the problem".
Great intro to philosophy lesson. In the real world, we have the choice between Harris and Trump. You can forget anyone else exists because our election system is broken. If I don't vote, one of them will still win. Now, without philosophizing, what do we do to stop the violence?
I did not describe anything particularly philosophical.
Oh, so you just mean you are trying to be condescending and pretend I am not being reakistic. Unfortunately for this excuse for why you will vote for someone doing a genocide, I am pragmatic. I criticize your ideas of "strategy", which are just bog standard lesser evil vote shaming trotted out to discipline Democrats' empathetic voters every 4 years and suggest you take the first steps towards empowerment by doing the same. My hope would be that them asking you to support genocide would be enough to take that srep., that you could accept that there is not a greater evil than genocide, and that as a good person, you would be an opponent of genocide rather than complicit.
If you want to talk more specifically on being pragmatic when it cones to political power,I would be happy to do so. It is mostly about building leverage, which is basically the exact opposite of your rhetoric.
The system is working as intended.
But in your terminology, would you say it is more broken or less broken than when the Whigs dissolved and an abolitionist party took its place over the issue of slavery? In this scenario, you would be someone saying that you must always vote for the pro-slavers.
Yes, that is true. But are you going to orient yourself in opposition to genociders or are you going to decide on which one to support? I think it should be a red line.
Never again means never again for anyone. What do you think that phrase means?
"The violence" is far too vague for me to give you any real answer. If you mean US support for genocide, then you will need to join groups opposed to the genocide, participate in political education, and build those organizations so that they can make demands and enact material change, such as blockading weapons manufacturers. Or, if you can only understand politics through elections, you can spend your time organizing a principled anti-genocide voting bloc, ideally tied to some material interest. You have no leverage as a voter unless you can credibly threaten to withhold your vote. And your leverage is dramatically decreased when you act as an individual rather than an organized bloc.
Is that practical enough for you?
That was a lot of words that, in no way, answered my question.
It's possible to vote Dem and still do all the other things you listed.
They solution is to I've the country to trump and not have elections anymore. They are not too bright.