689
submitted 3 months ago by pete_link@lemmy.ml to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago

I only started using the term after the election, I wish I was paid. It's crazy how I'm expected to shut up about it for the next 4 years. Apparently, asking the dems to change their stance on genocide of everything is too much and everyone would rather stick their head in the sand. The moment someone enables it just a bit more then them, they get none of the blame and we get to wait through 4 years of shit just for them to give us literally the same stance.

Both parties enable it and are complicit. Defending either on the subject is clear bootlicking imo.

[-] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 58 points 3 months ago

No one is defending either on the subject. We are simply stating that one is WORSE than the other by an order of magnitude. Honestly, how can you not see that?

[-] GreatBlueHeron@lemmy.ca 26 points 3 months ago

It's not just that he's much worse it's that some people somehow expected him to be better?!?

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 18 points 3 months ago

Not only that, but if you took them at their word, that donvict and Kamala would have been the eXaCtSaMe on Gaza, then that issue is cancelled out and you have to weigh all the other policy positions, and even then, it is clear that donvict is a TERRIBLE choice compared to Kamala.

They have no excuse. None.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

His comment implies anyone speaking disfavorably about the dems stance on genocide is somehow a paid shill.

Read the rest of the comments. It's always the same thing. The dems lost because the voters got manipulated into thinking genocide was something to draw a line over. Well it fucking was. I still think not voting and voting for Trump of all people is massively stupid but I hate the message we are sending.

Trump isn't worse, he's the same on it. We shouldn't be calling them anything other then Genocide Joe and Genocide Trump. Biden did a lot of good but his whole legacy is not breaking with genocide.

We have 4 years to exert pressure and make sure the next candidate isn't a mossad and wallstreet plant. Instead we are infighting like peasants and trying are hardest to not hold the politicians who are suppose to represent us accountable.

[-] TheLowestStone@lemmy.world 36 points 3 months ago

Biden did a lot of good but his whole legacy is not breaking with genocide.

Now Trump has already undone most of that good, has 4 more years to cause damage, and the genocide that you "drew a line over" hasn't stopped. Nice job.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

I voted strategically but I shouldnt have to do it while gritting my teeth. They offered nothing because they thought they had an easy win. If we keep pointing at scapegoats and refuse to lay the blame with the ones actually in charge, we get the same exact choice in 4 years and we will lose again.

Ya, drawing the line was dumb but so is blaming the ones that drew it instead of the driver that's sending a train straight into a group of children.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago

They offered nothing because they thought they had an easy win.

Remember, nothing was...

A woman's bodily autonomy. A Trans person's right to comfort in their body. The separation between church and state. A birthright citizens right to live in their country. An employee's right to a safe job.

And so much more... And it's only been 7 days. Fuck anyone who said the Dems brought nothing to the table. You ignored what they were fighting to keep a hold of in order to parrot some bullshit Russian disinfo false equivalency about a genocide being committed by a different fucking leader in a different fucking country.

[-] Iceman@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

Why are you ignoring all the funds and arms sent to this entire different country? Do you think all that military aid is Russian disinfo?

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

Any president put in power in the US was going to provide aid to Israel one way or another. As abhorrent as Israel's actions are, they are a US ally, and they did suffer major terrorist attack in October, and they are surrounded by other nations that would love to chop them up. Full stop, any aid sent to Israel should have been conditional, but it's foolish to think that they would not have continued without US support. The situation is not black and white and our best chance of changing Israel's actions were to elect Kamala, and put Democrats in Congress that are for conditional aid to Israel.

What was Russian disinfo was pushing the narrative that Kamala was a genocide supporter to Democrats, and not pushing the fact that if trump won, he was going to back Israel completely eradicating Palestinians from the Gaza strip.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Full stop, any aid sent to Israel should have been conditional, but it’s foolish to think that they would not have continued without US support.

Then they could have continued without US support. If anyone in the biden white house or anyone in his wing of the party had wanted to withdraw it.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Exactly! So why throw away your own damn country because of a genocide being done by a different leader in a different country that was going to continue no matter what?

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

You may have loved it, but I resent being manipulated into voting in such a way that made me complicit in every centrist's favorite activity.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 months ago

You ignored what they were fighting to keep a hold of in order to parrot some bullshit Russian disinfo false equivalency about a genocide being committed by a different fucking leader in a different fucking country.

I would find the lesser evil argument more convincing if the people advocating it didn't always turn out to be genocide denying conspiracy theorists who will ignore reality to defend unspeakable acts

Seems like you're not actually capable of pragmatically choosing the lesser evil while still condeming it. Seems like you always end up defending evil.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] makyo@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

I hope you're right about four years because that's a return to normalcy that I can barely imagine right now

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Nunar@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

Trump immediately authorized 2000 lb bombs for Israel. That wasn't a thing before. He's worse and you suck for enabling him.

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 months ago

Biden authorized sending 2000lb bombs.

Then it came out that such bombs were being sent and under pressure he paused the sending of those bombs.

Trump resumed it.

You're whitewashing Biden's part in the willful mass murder of civilians (the US Military itself refuses to use 2000lb bombs exactly because of their massive collateral damage and Israel was using them in an urban area thus maximizing the killing from said collateral damage) for political point scoring.

While you're claiming the other poster "sucks" for being critical of Biden's stance on this you might want to look at yourself in a mirror.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

His comment implies anyone speaking disfavorably about the dems stance on genocide is somehow a paid shill.

We're easy to dismiss that way. Then they don't have to think about how monstrous they have been to support genocide all this time.

[-] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Did you say you voted for Kamala?

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

She was the only viable option other than trump, as pro-genocide centrists were so fond of gloating. I voted for her. You gonna gloat that I voted for your genocide now?

[-] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Yep! You voted for genocide. Thanks for admitting that.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Gloat more. Trump is implementing the only thing you support.

[-] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

That’s pretty hypocritical considering you support it too.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Would you prefer that I stayed home?

[-] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

I suppose I’d prefer that you didn’t support genocide. But I guess you did what you felt you had to do to lessen the damage overall, even though knowing it wasn’t going to end probably broke your heart.

It’s just a shame that all the obnoxious trolls that seems to enjoy calling others “genocide supporters” can’t ever seem to understand that like you and I do….

Right?

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Well, I suppose I did tell you to gloat more.

That would be the first time a centrist listened to anyone to their left.

[-] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Who’s gloating? I’m simply stating the fact that according to you- voting democrat is supporting genocide. And since you voted democrat…

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

I’m simply stating the fact that according to you- voting democrat is supporting genocide.

Now where did I say that? I thought that someone could vote for a candidate even if they don't agree with 100% of everything they say. Or was that just something centrists say when they get everything they want out of a candidate and they want people to their left to shut up?

If you want to call me a hypocrite for voting for someone who supports your genocide, fine. I'll admit there's a case to be made. I hate myself for voting for your shit candidate, and you just love twisting the knife. You got your genocide.

Your support for genocide is consistent with your vote.

[-] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I’m simply stating the fact that according to you- voting democrat is supporting genocide.

Now where did I say that?

Let’s start with here:

Your support for genocide is consistent with your vote.

then this:

Gloat more. Trump is implementing the only thing you support.

and this was you talking about democrats:

 …how monstrous they have been to support genocide all this time.

and this gem:

I also voted for Harris, despite her support for your genocide.

(I especially love the part where you hypocritically admit that as set by your own terms- you support genocide)

Oh! This one made me laugh a little:

You got what you wanted. Stop gloating.

as did this:

Luckily, all you have to do is point to anyone who doesn't love your genocide and scream that they're a russian.

and lastly, this:

they're just screaming at the left because they hate them and not genocide.

I know your first instinct is going to be to move the goalposts around to redefine the intended points of these comments, but at the end of the day- it’s still just you ignorantly accusing people you don’t know of something that your accusations prove you don’t understand.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Oh, I see. Every time someone says "genocide," you read it as "Biden/Harris."

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The paid shills were running a con. If you weren't on payroll, then you're the mark.

Seeing how most of the conmen have cut and run now that the job is done, it really only leaves one option for you.

[-] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 months ago

I see a lot of people actively defending Biden in this very thread

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago

There are a disturbing number of people in this thread who feel that condemning Democrats is more important than worrying about what is about to happen to Palestinians.

As if you folks were using genocide as a tool. And it's pretty hard to read.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

When you dismiss people condemning the democrats, you essentially send the message that enabling genocide is okay.

I see attacking the voters as a zionist dog whistle, to desensitize on the subject and low key make genocide something that can be overlooked for the "right" reasons.

Insulting to be said I'm using it as a tool. Every thread about it, there's multiple comments talking about the voters and using them as a scapegoat. I'm just responding to them. If I'm using it as a tool, so are you. And you are a lot more vocal about it then me.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

I am dismissing people continuing to talk about the election when it's over as if it matters when people are fucking dying.

But you don't care because American politics.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Seems like you're dismissing only the people responding to the behavior negatively and not the ones actually doing the behavior. I find it convenient that you are constantly silent on the genocide in general. I only see you commenting when it comes to pointing the finger at scapegoats. It's easy to notice with the amount you post (not an insult, just an observation, I don't mind high engagement).

It doesn't seem like you are arguing in good faith, since you accuse me of something I'm clearly trying to curtail.

Yes it's annoying when every thread about the genocide has people screaming at the top of their lungs trying to blame voters.

I have more to say on the subject but I was too harsh and got my comment removed so I will leave it at that.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

No, I'm dismissing anyone who doesn't give enough of a shit about Palestinians to bother talking to them.

How often have you done it?

load more comments (62 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2025
689 points (100.0% liked)

News

29418 readers
2694 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. 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