217
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 02 Apr 2025
217 points (100.0% liked)
News
36018 readers
2430 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
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. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
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're right, I didn't read all of your comment. I skimmed it at best (which is why I didn't reply directly). The choice was not "civil rights at home" and "genocide abroad." it was "both suck with Gaza, but one is a blood thirsty dumbass, and the other is your run of the mill bullshit politician." i don't know who is spreading this narrative that everyone who voted was voting for genocide or voting with the idea of trade off. I have not met anyone (personally) who was like," man, I hate Harris' stance on Gaza, but as long as she gives me rights, I don't care." It was Nazi VS Shitty Politician. I don't know why the concept of not wanting to have a Nazi in charge is akin to saying "yes, please bomb Gaza. I'm totally okay with it." I wasn't okay with it when Biden did it, I wasn't okay when Harris said she supported Biden's actions, and I'm not okay with it now that Trump is making Ai videos of condos built on graves. I did oppose genocide and I still do.
Also, what option did I eliminate? You're acting like election day was the only time people tried anything. In November, yes, it was too late. We didn't rally behind a third candidate, we didn't even get to vote for Harris as our candidate. There were protests, but, by November, it wasn't enough. We failed. And as much as I would have wanted to say "fuck this" I knew that it wasn't going to make literally anything any better by not voting, but would make a shit ton worse because one candidate can do and appears to be doing more damage to the other.
TL;DR: I have and still do oppose genocide and I do not believe that on election night there was a realistic chance that we could get a candidate in office that aligned with everything I would have wanted, but there was a candidate that would have made the struggle a tiny bit easier. I do not believe that Americans that voted for Harris (or honestly didn't vote all all, regardless of my opinion) were doing it with the idea that Gaza was a worthy scarfice.
No I'm not; quite the opposite in fact. Some people did try something, but they were met with either inaction, ridicule or straight up derision. Again, my problem isn't with the people who said "it's too late" in October; I can sympathize with that view. My problem is for the people who kept saying some combination of "it's too late we can't do anything" and "lalala I can't hear you" when it was, in fact, not too late. Opposition to the Gaza genocide is almost as old as the genocide itself, and the Uncommitted/Listen to Michigan Movement got going before the Michigan primary in February. My problem with Americans is that, faced with this golden opportunity to catch the Democrats by the balls and demand real change, the best they could do was "hold your nose and vote for her". An anti-fascist movement that doesn't have it in it to effectively object to genocide isn't an anti-fascist movement; it's an anti-fascism-if-it-affects-me movement. For scale, the Spanish planned an honest to goodness general strike when their government didn't go as far as they wanted in its opposition to Israel.
I'm not being flippant or trying to be sarcastic (I know tone doesn't carry online), but wasn't the act of not voting/withholding votes supposed to be the opportunity for real change? Wasn't that the "threat" (couldn't think of a better term). Like, "Because you're not agreeing to xyz, I am withholding my vote." Isn't the current time line the result of that success, when it came to telling people to not vote as a form of protest anyway.
And if you sympathize with people in October who said "it's too late," what's the difference between that and "it's too late, we can't do anything (right now)?" I think those two groups are the same people in a way.
No. A success there would be for significant numbers of Democrat voters to form a united nationwide and loudly declare that they're not voting blue until XYZ (not necessarily only Gaza-related) demands are met. People just quietly not voting is the worst possible scenario, as it gives anti-fascist/anti-fascism-if-it-affects-me forces the illusion of victory only to hand fascists power.
The difference is that they could have done things then and simply chose not to because they didn't want to rock the boat. Also I'm sympathizing with positions here, not with people. If person A said "nope, can't do shit now" in August and also October then I have no sympathy for them even if I agree with them to an extent in the latter case.
I have no rebuttal. I'm in agreement with the idea that it should have been a movement. I was taking it as people saying "if you voted for Harris, you're okay with genocide." I get the "hold your nose a vote" thing now.
Nice talking with you and thank you for being cordial. 🤝🏾