This is the country that thinks it is qualified to police other countries on human rights and freedom of speech 🤡 what a clown country
Progressives need to leave this dog shit party.
What we need to do is get rid of FPTP, because so long as that’s how the system works breaking away will only guarantee that the fascists win permanently.
Genocide is happening under the non-fascist party. What’s the fucking point?
I think the sad fact is many people in the US are okay with financing genocide as long as they don’t have to hear Trump’s name or suffer any consequences personally. As long as some kind of right wing boogeymany exists, you can convince most democratic voters that genocide is permissable enough to not disqualify a candidate.
I think the sad thing is people thinking that if it were Trump instead of Biden right now, there wouldn’t be any genocide. When in fact trump would be supporting genocide both in Gaza and in Ukraine.
So how much genocide in your opinion is okay to vote for under the suspicion that someone else might also do a genocide?
Because either you’re admitting theres no way to vote ourselves out of genocide or that joes genocides is okay because someone else MAY also preside over genocide. Thats a new one, this genocide is acceptable because if it wasn’t this, it would just be another genocide, do I have that right?
Im of the opinion that I cannot materially support genocide. Call it single issue voterism if you want but to me never again means never again, not never again unless maybe the someone else would also finance genocide. Having boundaries is healthy and just, and if genocide is only a soft boundary for someone then I place no value in what they have to say.
Is your intent to refuse to vote in the next election?
I dont believe voting does much, but I know refusing to vote doesn’t do anything, I don’t see why I wouldn’t show up.
We’d still get genocide regardless of who the president is. The killing machine operates the same no matter who pulls the levers.
I won’t vote for genocide.
Well yeah but that’s a lot different than what the guy I replied to said
No it’s not.
Their point was that liberals are okay with genocide under Democrats, but if Trump was president they’d be against it. No one thinks that, if Trump were president, there wouldn’t be a genocide. The genocide is non negotiable.
Do you prefer
- Genocide, drone strikes, mass deportations, legal abortion, Supreme Court judges who aren’t having massive ethics scandals, regulations, etc
or
- Genocide, drone strikes, mass deportation, abortion bans, Supreme Court judges with giant ethics scandals, deregulation, tax cuts for billionaires, etc?
Both parties are similarly shitty on some things, but are pretty different on other issues. Are you really indifferent to all the issues they differ on?
Removed by mod
You’re oversimplifying.
Under Trump, Democrats would oppose genocide. I guarantee if Trump was president the Democrats would be fighting against him.
Under Biden, even Bernie is falling in line. It’s disgusting.
But would you rather have the bad guys do genocide or the good guys do genocide?
🤔
They’re there to sheepdog the voters into believing progressive candidates a valued part of the democratic party despite the fact that more than most of the good things progressives have accomplished are entirely outside of the chambers of congress. The democrats refuse to work with progressives unless they are forced too, like that time the progressives asked Pelosi to consider stock trading bans and she denied them until it was clear that was horrible PR, then decided to come around to vocally supporting it later, once the political will to pass the bill was dying down. Progressives are there for show.
Yeah, Bernie is demonstrating this by refusing to endorse a ceasefire.
That’s not even remotely accurate and you know it lol
Where’s the lie?
They already did. Though they absolutely 100% need to stop voting for that dogshit party as well.
Ah yes, insurrectionist part II electric boogaloo.
The choices on the table are dogshit or arsonic, but if you don’t choose you’re still going to have to eat one of them.
In order to avoid eating either, we should probably focus on getting the one off the table that will fucking kill you.
Just don’t eat either of them? It’s not hard. You simply go eat something else and ridicule people who are eating the dogshit.
The fuck are you going to do? Buy a submarine and live like captain goddamn nemo?
That would be cool. But no I’m just not going to eat dog shit. Millions of other foods, and hundreds of other candidates, I don’t get any bonus points by voting for the winner. It’s literally the least you can do.
Biden is the president whether or not you individually voted for him. You’re figuratively eating dogshit right now. Be glad it isn’t arsonic.
This is the type of message needed to inspire good democrat turnout
Bunch of genocidal racist fanatics.
Removed by mod
If your response to seeing Jewish antizionism is to downvote congrats you’re an antisemitic piece of shit.
Death to israel is an anti semitic slogan. End the war and fuck the israel government but death to a nation of people is just crazy
A nation founded on settler colonialism, ethnic cleansing and mass murder should probably not exist imo.
So death to America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc.
Got it
In all honesty if there’s a G-d he done fucked up when he made us lol
Yee! You got it. All those nations should not exist, theyre all settler colonialist projects.
Removed by mod
She only called for the end of the apartheid state that systematically tortures the Palestinians under its brutal occupation. She called for equal rights for all Palestinian people so that they are no longer second class citizens.
It was wrong when America, Britain, South Africa, and countless other colonialist countries did it in the past, and it is wrong for Israel to do it now. Apartheid is a disgusting system that brutalizes millions of innocent civilians. The average age in Gaza is like 19 years old. They are mostly children.
Do you condemn Israel for the murder of over 4000 children?
Removed by mod
What do you think the statement from the river to the sea means? It means that in all lands of current day Israel/Palestine, the Palestinian people should exist as first class, free citizens of the state. Not as second class citizens of an apartheid government.
It’s not calling for the genocide of Jews. It’s calling for the end of Israel’s brutal occupation and for the peaceful coexistence of all people, like they lived before the region was carved up by European colonial governments.
It refers to a one-state solution. A legitimately possible solution with a lot of support. And no, it’s not anti-semitism and it’s not about killing or getting rid of anyone. It’s bad faith to frame it as such.
Removed by mod
Yeah this headline lacks nuance imo
NO, she was censured because she posted a video using a slogan popular with anti semitics, let’s get that right. I understand she’s trying to appeal to her people but you can’t just come out and support hatred from the other side.
“On May 3, 2022 the ADL website referred to the slogan as, ‘a slogan commonly featured in pro-Palestinian campaigns and chanted at demonstrations.'” he writes. “Nowhere in the 2022 description is there a mention of antisemitism…On October 26, 2023, the position on the website was changed to include, ‘is an antisemitic slogan’.”
Note the date. The slogan wasn’t considered antisemitic before October. Don’t fall for their bs. Pro-palestine does not mean antisemitic regardless of what these people want you to think.
Don’t fall… For the Antidefamation Leagues bullshit regarding what qualifies as hate speech?
They’re the defacto people who describe it in America lol.
Nah sorry I meant “their bs” in a more general sense. “They” as in anyone equating Israel criticism to antisemitism.
You’re being antisemitic by equating anti-zionism with antisemitism.
-someone who’s Jewish side of the family was directly affected by the holocaust
Oh fuck off with that argument. The slogan is about slaughtering Jews of Israel to push them to the sea. Someone using a slogan that is bigoted is just bigoted. Fuck your dissemble attempts.
You’re continuing to equate being Jewish with an jewish apartheid state, which, as I said before, is antisemitic.
Destroying Israel doesn’t actually mean killing Jewish people there, that’s some settler-ass logic. Can you name a single time that an apartheid state was destroyed that resulted in all the settlers being killed? Destroying apartheid states is much less violent than apartheid.
Go to a pro Palestine reality and see Jewish people lead “from the river to the sea” chants if you want a visceral illustration of how silly the propaganda you’ve bought into is.
I’m Jewish, you don’t get to speak for me. You don’t get to tell me what is and what isn’t antisemitism.
With that statement coming out so deep into your argument, I believe you’re a liar and full of shit.
The word has a specific definition and you’re not using it right. They definitely get to tell you what is and isn’t because you surely don’t know.
Yes and no. If a terrorist group co-opts and reinterprets my national slogan, whose slogan is it? Which interpretation is right? Which interpretation was she using?
Palestine will be free from the river to the sea
You know the traditional Palestinian border, but sure anti semitic…
Because “Death to Israel” doesn’t rhyme.
It’s the literal pre mandatory Palestine border.
There was no “literal pre mandatory Palestine border.” Under the Ottomans it was multiple sanjaks under the vilayet of Damascus.
What you call “from the river to the sea” did not exist as an administrative boundary until Winston Churchill created it in 1922 by splitting Mandate Palestine into Transjordan and a new, smaller Mandate Palestine.
Does nobody study history before spouting off?
Yes there was, it was administered under the same borders as before the ottoman invaded just subdivided to three sub states because that’s how the ottoman maintained control.
Does nobody study history before spouting off?
Do they indeed.
“Just subdivided into three states”.
Thank you. Like I said, those administrative borders never existed. It’s a British colonial construct.
Three states that make up the same border and we’re referenced to as a whole as Palestine, you’re not making the point you think you’re making. The United States is quite a bit more than 3 states, are you implying the US doesn’t exist?
Whenever a flag does genocide it’s time for that flag to go.
RIP American flag
Rest in piss
“Death to Israel” isn’t antisemitic. A racist genocidal state must die for everyone in Palestine [Jews, Christians, Muslims, atheists and pagans] to be free. https://www.threads.net/@torahjudaism/post/CzbmCTzuYRt/
Even if
A racist genocidal state must die…
is true, it doesn’t make this true:
“Death to Israel” isn’t antisemitic.
You’re wishing death upon Israel. What group of people predominantly live in Israel? Jews. Semites. Thus, antisemitic.
And if your solution is for Israel’s government to just disappear, you’ll be surprised to find that Hamas will treat the
Jews, Christians, Muslims, atheists and pagans
no better. Don’t act like Hamas is offering the pinnacle of freedom from religious persecution. Let’s not forget that this is the same Hamas that has endorsed jihad against Jews.
You do realize a state can dissolve without literally everyone dying right? When East Germany and West Germany reunified the entire population of both countries didn’t die. When apartheid collapsed in South Africa all the settlers didn’t die.
How exactly do you read “death to Israel” as “the peaceful dissolution of the Israeli government and end of its apartheid conditions”?
When North Korea says “death to America,” surely they just mean a peaceful change of power, right?
And again, let’s not ignore that the power vacuum would quickly be filled by… Hamas, a terrorist group with a violent track record. Your Germany and South Africa examples are not like Israel.
“death to america” does refer to an end to the US empire- not the American people. I’ve talked with a fair number of Iranians who dislike their own government and Americas reign of terror around the world.
From “the river to the sea” means an end to the apartheid government in occupied Palestine. It’s projection from the murderous settlers that a unified non-apartheid state would mean their own extermination- because that’s what they do to the undesirables in their unified state.
The government isn’t the people.
Marg bar Amrika
Oh of fucking course it is going to be violent, unless the settler state caves. That is how anticolonial movements always go. But it is a lesser violence vs the continued violence its existence is predicated on.
Please pick up wretched of the earth by Fanon at your local library, it is a very necessary read for westerners.
I never said anything was antisemitic. I said that what you are saying is “Death to Israel”. And it seems that you agree.
Yes, death to Israel
So here’s my honest question, why are the Jewish people relatively singled out as excluded from being allowed to desire a state/homeland? Is there an argument that the Jewish people did not originate from that area of the world, and if so, where is the actual Jewish homeland? Did the Jewish people spring forth fully developed from Zeus’s forehead? The argument seems to be that all indigenous peoples should have at least parts of their lands and autonomy restored to them all over the world; except for the Jews, because fuck them they don’t deserve a country for non-antisemetic reasons and they should have integrated into a new Arabic country of Palestine instead of splitting the land.
Ignoring the history of Jewish treatment in other countries around the globe for centuries, I don’t understand how, for a land that is the historical birthplace of several peoples, it is considered good for one of those peoples to fight for it and bad for another of those peoples to do the same. It all seems to come down to where anyone’s specific biases fall, while everyone claims to not have any biases.
You’re premise is nonsense, there are anti-apartheid movements whereever apartheid states exist. There was an anti-apartheid movement in South Africa way before now.
That literally isn’t antisemitic, conflating antizionism and antisemitism is antisemitic
-someone who’s Jewish side of the family was directly affected by the holocaust
Who said anything about antisemitic? The fact that multiple people replied to me about antisemitism is telling that YOU think it is antisemitic and need to defend yourself.
You’re talking about the original phrase that had Rashida accused of antisemitism, and given the context it seems like you think “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free” is antisemitic.
Correct me if I’m wrong. I’m just very tired of dealing with zionist antisemites and may have jumped the gun.
telling that YOU think it is antisemitic and need to defend yourself.
The one thing you know about me is that I’ve said the Jewish side of my family was directly affected by the holocaust. Do you think this is appropriate to say to me? If this was a real life interaction, would you say this outloud?
We all know what they meant, they can hedge if they’d like but I don’t think anyone is buying what they’re selling.
Conflating Israel with Jewish people is anti-semetic
You’re just too deep in the sauce to realize that, anti-semite.
Where did I conflate Jews and Israel? Where did I say anything about antisemitism?
Nice strawman, bro.
Do you have a problem with the elimination of a genocidal fascist state? If you’re not conflating Jews and Israel then I don’t see why you’d have an issue with the words “death to Israel” unless you support their fascism or their genocide.
lol. “Genocidal”. I’ve been loving reading all the international law analysis from people who couldn’t even get into law school.
So tell me, what do you call the bombardment, forced displacement, limiting of Water, removal of communication for everyone in the area, bombing of refugee came, hospitals, ambulances sent by red cross, etc etc Israel has been doing in Gaza?
