Solution

samokosik , 28 days ago

Rather than “Democrats” you should put “US no matter what”

ShinkanTrain , 1 month ago

2 state solution? Why do we need two Palestines?

Agent641 , 1 month ago

RAID 1 backup.

dessalines , 1 month ago

About 1/4th of the downvotes on this post are from zero-content accounts. Likely some US democratic-party astroturfing going on like they did on reddit.

Linkerbaan OP , 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

Thank you for pointing out the astroturfing. Would it be possible to implement a filter which diminishes or ignores the vote count of astroturfing accounts?

dessalines , 1 month ago

There’s a few proposals in the github issues, such as making all votes transparent, and an option to block federated downvotes.

Skedule , 1 month ago

And how may of the upvotes are from “zero-content accounts”?

psvrh , 1 month ago

If you want to fix this, your path is easy:

• Vote Democratic in the general election because there’s never going to be a anti-genocide Republican. Ever.
• Take a page out of the Republican playbook and campaign against AIPAC-backed Democratic candidates in primaries.

Complaining about candidates in the general election is too late and actually depresses Democratic turnout. You need to dot he hard work of signing up registered voters and getting good candidates at every level.

Democratic voters have a big problem with not showing up in off-cycle and local elections, and that abdication of responsibility is largely why the corporate wing of the party has the influence that it does. Republican voters show up to every single election, even the primary for town dog catcher.

Cowbee , 1 month ago

If you want to fix this, your path is easy:

• Vote Democratic in the general election because there’s never going to be a anti-genocide Republican. Ever.
• Take a page out of the Republican playbook and campaign against AIPAC-backed Democratic candidates in primaries.

1. Why do you think there will be anti-genocide democrats? There don’t seem to be any that approach any position of power. Why do you think genocide is supported in the first place?
2. Why do you think “vote harder” is the answer? What financial interests would support anti-genocide? Why does AIPAC exist and why does it have power?

Complaining about candidates in the general election is too late and actually depresses Democratic turnout. You need to dot he hard work of signing up registered voters and getting good candidates at every level.

Complaints come from the very real fact that the Democrats are actively supporting genocide. The blame for depressed turnout is not on the people unhappy with genocide, but on the ones supporting genocide. Voting for genocide even harder isn’t going to work against genocide.

Democratic voters have a big problem with not showing up in off-cycle and local elections, and that abdication of responsibility is largely why the corporate wing of the party has the influence that it does. Republican voters show up to every single election, even the primary for town dog catcher.

Wrong order of operations. The corporate wing has the most power because they are the reason the Democrats have any power, by sucking up to their donors. The progressives are kept on a leash and allowed to bark so that the working class thinks they have a real voice, despite the reality that Capitalists will remain in control. This drives away voters, yes, but keeps funding up.

4oreman , 1 month ago

Gotta defeat Vlad first.

orca , 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

Republicans: “we’re going to keep giving weapons to Israel so they can get the job done.” The Nazi party is straight up telling us what they’re going to do.

Democrats: the same thing as above but couched in complacent, obscure language about “reducing casualties”.

It’s time we simply be honest about the reality and stop making this a D vs R, working class vs working class thing. At the core of the Gaza genocide, the message is essentially the same.

Kamala has stated that she won’t place a weapons embargo on Israel because they have a “right to defend themselves”. She may have a full ceasefire mindset personally, no one will ever know, but the US government collective won’t allow it. That’s just the way the war machine works. As soon as they pull the plug on funding Israel, Israel becomes an enemy they are suddenly matched with due to the mass amount of our own weapons we’ve been sending them for decades. Our government has painted itself into a corner, and a continued alliance with Israel ensures that we have a control point in the Middle East.

It should also be noted that Kamala has taken something like $200k+ worth of AIPAC money, but Walz hasn’t taken any as far as I can tell. Not personally a fan of Kamala, but I have cautious optimism with Walz.

HubertManne , 1 month ago

Thing is that trump still has close to 50% support along with the rest of the republicans and that support is not going to falter due to whats happening in israel. The rebulicans need to lose every time and go away so the dems can split into a proper left and right. They are also the best chance at election reform that might make the us system more multi party. We can only move left if the right is not a winning strategy.

orca , 1 month ago

We’ve pretty much been forced into a “don’t let the Nazis take control again” position.

HubertManne , 1 month ago

Yeah its gotten ridiculously bad. Honestly I wish I could like push my current brain into my teenage brain as while I was always environmentally conscious and USliberal/left. I wish I was more cognizant of just how much republicans did not care about it and were just going to get worse and worse. Now that they are just full mask off (or just not trying honestly with the whopper type lies you would have to be a fool to believe). I did not vote republican at the national level but had voted third party a few times but luckily not in one were the republican one but that was really just happenstance.

Cowbee , 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

The rebulicans need to lose every time and go away so the dems can split into a proper left and right.

This is ahistorical. The republicans don’t have support because they exist, they exist because their ideas are popular. Fascism is rooted in Capitalist decay, there will not be a proper left and right ever. Not that there can be a “proper right.” They will only go away if Capitalism also goes away.

Not only that, but a Left Party cannot gain the donors necessary to maintain power within a Capitalist democracy, the ones with the money and power to influence the government will not work against their own interests.

HubertManne , 1 month ago

They have not always been like this and capitalism is simply not going to go away as folks like myself do not want to see it go. Just curbed greatly. Now granted it depends on what you mean by capitalism. But basically Im fine with a monetary system where folks can buy and sell for profit in order to determine how to allot resources of relative value (ie I will pay more for a south facing even if everything is the same or for a first floor or for a top floor or I don't care and will grab the lowest priced one)

Cowbee , 1 month ago

They have not always been like this and capitalism is simply not going to go away as folks like myself do not want to see it go.

Capitalism is declining. Fascism is rising as a response to this, as disparity grows, and the Rate of Profit falls, the middle and upper classes (small and large business owners, essentially) unite against the lower classes, ie wage laborers. Capitalism will go away regardless of your wishes, it is unsustainable in the long run.

Just curbed greatly.

What’s your plan to get this to happen? Without a plan, there’s nothing separating ideals from fantasy.

Now granted it depends on what you mean by capitalism.

Production of commodities for the sake of profit among individual Capital owners competing in a market, via wage laborers.

But basically Im fine with a monetary system where folks can buy and sell for profit in order to determine how to allot resources of relative value (ie I will pay more for a south facing even if everything is the same or for a first floor or for a top floor or I don’t care and will grab the lowest priced one)

What are you arguing against here, where you don’t believe you can present your individual interests?

HubertManne , 1 month ago

If capitalism goes away I don't see it being followed up with a working society that would be preferable to live in. So while I don't think its innevitable I agree in its current form it is declining. My plan to get it to happen is democracy. We have to use the leverage we have currently to maximize equal say in government and work towards it. Im not arguing against anything im arguing for the buying and selling of property as an individual to determine what property I will own for things that make sense for an individual to own (so like not education or healthcare) but we have to prevent accumulation of to much property/weatlh/power via regulation like I said before.

Cowbee , 1 month ago

If capitalism goes away I don’t see it being followed up with a working society that would be preferable to live in.

Why not? Socialism solves the contradictions within Capitalism.

So while I don’t think its innevitable I agree in its current form it is declining.

Do you have a reason to believe the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall can be eliminated entirely, not just temporarily avoided by, say, outsourcing production to countries with lower cost of living? That’s already been done.

My plan to get it to happen is democracy. We have to use the leverage we have currently to maximize equal say in government and work towards it.

That has never worked in the long run, in history. The ones with the power to influence government are the ones with the money, this problem is getting far worse. What is your actual, practicible plan?

Im not arguing against anything im arguing for the buying and selling of property as an individual to determine what property I will own for things that make sense for an individual to own (so like not education or healthcare) but we have to prevent accumulation of to much property/weatlh/power via regulation like I said before.

You can do that under systems other than Capitalism, why are you tied to it? That’s why I asked what you’re arguing against, that’s like saying you want Capitalism because you want the sun to rise.

How do you take away power from the people who make the laws? Convincing them it’s the right thing to do?

HubertManne , 1 month ago

This goes back to a small part of my statement a few replies back. "Now granted it depends on what you mean by capitalism." If everything I wrote about personal property and profit are fine in your socialism and its a democracy then im fine with it but I would call your socialism a blend of socialism and capitalism which in my view is actually regulated capitalist system.

Cowbee , 1 month ago

What do you think Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism are?

The profit motive is bad, accumulation of Capital results in enshittification, increased exploitation, increased disparity, and Imperialism, and should be moved away from.

Socialism doesn’t mean you can’t own your house, or that you can’t express preference, and neither does Communism.

What, specifically, is the advantage of the profit motive, in your eyes?

Additionally, we have shown that we cannot simply regulate Capitalism out of its own destruction, that cannot happen structurally, so why stick with it?

HubertManne , 1 month ago

profit comes from pricing. I mean I gave an example. when an apartment complex is built there are different floors and different facings. None of that is part of the cost of building the units. The units cost to build is all the same but depending on personal preference some will want something more than another be it floor or facing. That preference will need to be "fought" over by price which will result in profit or loss. If most folks don't want a particular facing or floor then those might be sold at loss and made up for with profit from the more wanted units. Even before that construction is determined by cost of materials which is determined by how difficult it is to source them which mostly comes about because of the labor that is needed to do it. Also regulation has shown to result in better capitalism. limiting media ownership is an example. breaking up monopolies, limiting levels of profit, and taxing itself. taxing is the ultimate form of regulation really when done progressively. The more profit you make the harder it is to make more profit if all profit is taxed on a progressive scale.

Cowbee , 1 month ago

profit comes from pricing.

Profit comes from selling Commodities at their Value.

I mean I gave an example. when an apartment complex is built there are different floors and different facings. None of that is part of the cost of building the units. The units cost to build is all the same but depending on personal preference some will want something more than another be it floor or facing.

Cool, this doesn’t contradict anything.

That preference will need to be “fought” over by price which will result in profit or loss.

No it does not, there are methods to distribute by preference without price. Additionally, you can sell commodities without doing so for profit.

If most folks don’t want a particular facing or floor then those might be sold at loss and made up for with profit from the more wanted units.

Again, don’t see what this has to do with anything.

Even before that construction is determined by cost of materials which is determined by how difficult it is to source them which mostly comes about because of the labor that is needed to do it.

Sure.

Also regulation has shown to result in better capitalism. limiting media ownership is an example. breaking up monopolies, limiting levels of profit, and taxing itself. taxing is the ultimate form of regulation really when done progressively. The more profit you make the harder it is to make more profit if all profit is taxed on a progressive scale.

I didn’t say regulation was bad, I said it can’t fix, only delay. Are you actually reading what I’m saying, or talking past me?

HubertManne , 1 month ago

Im not trying to talk past you but either we have a different definition of capitalism which means we agree but to me you want capitalism and just not call it capitalism or we just don't see things the same. Right now I see the big difference here "" distribute by preference without price". You see in most cases that implies a lack of private property. Private property means I chose what I wanted and the distribution is by how much I will give up for it. If someone or something is making the decision then im not really owning what I want to own. I honestly think this is something you and I are not going to come to terms with. You say you want currency and ownership but seem to claim you don't want profit to be a thing and im trying to explain why profit (and loss) would have to be a thing. You say "Profit comes from selling Commodities at their Value." well yeah. That is what folks competing with their currency for what they want or taking something they want less to save currency to use on something they care about more is all about.

Cowbee , 1 month ago

Im not trying to talk past you but either we have a different definition of capitalism which means we agree but to me you want capitalism and just not call it capitalism or we just don’t see things the same.

For clarity, I am a Communist. I want to move towards Socialism, and then Communism, over time. Capitalism necessitates production for profit, it doesn’t mean any system with a market.

Right now I see the big difference here “” distribute by preference without price". You see in most cases that implies a lack of private property.

Yes, I disagree with the concept of Private Property along Marxist lines.

Private property means I chose what I wanted and the distribution is by how much I will give up for it.

No, it does not, at all. Private Property refers to individual ownership of the Means of Production.

If someone or something is making the decision then im not really owning what I want to own.

You can make these decisions without Capitalism and without the profit motive, at different points in the transition between Capitalism to Socialism to Communism.

I honestly think this is something you and I are not going to come to terms with. You say you want currency and ownership but seem to claim you don’t want profit to be a thing and im trying to explain why profit (and loss) would have to be a thing.

I do not want currency in the long run, no, but in the short run it can be a useful tool. I do not want individual ownership of the Means of Production, no, but I do want personal ownership of goods and public ownership of Capital. Producing commodities and selling them for their cost of production via central planning is not Capitalism.

You say “Profit comes from selling Commodities at their Value.” well yeah. That is what folks competing with their currency for what they want or taking something they want less to save currency to use on something they care about more is all about.

Not necessarily. Value and Price are not the same thing. Commodities can be sold above and below their Value.

HubertManne , 1 month ago

yeah so since I want ownership and specifically a currency to buy and sell with, we just fundamentally disagree as you do not want it in the long run and I do.

Cowbee , 1 month ago

You want ownwship of what? Why do you specifically need a currency? What are your goals, and why do you need Capitalism to achieve them?

Additionally, you haven’t explained why you believe you even can have Capitalism in the long-run, you just kind of stopped answering those critical sections.

HubertManne , 1 month ago

Because when I and another person are vying for the same thing of which there is only one I do not want a third party deciding. I want our relative decision on how much we want to to decide which currency acts as that weight. Who will spend more of the property they own (currency is property virtualized) will determine who gets it. I don't need to explain why capitalism will be around in the long run as it is a belief for both me and you. I would ask why you care about my opinion as you seem to believe the following. 1) Capitalism cannot be regulated by us as a society, which if true means capitalism cannot be removed by us as a society since removal is effectively 100% regulation. 2) capitalism will die on its own and is inevitable. So by that reasoning it does not matter what anyone thinks about it.

Cowbee , 1 month ago

Because when I and another person are vying for the same thing of which there is only one I do not want a third party deciding.

You don’t need Capitalism for that, nor do I understand why having a third party mediator for disagreements is a bad thing.

I want our relative decision on how much we want to to decide which currency acts as that weight.

Why do you want this? You are describing what you want, not why you want it. Additionally, you keep pretending Markets are Capitalism, Capitalism itself is only a few hundred years old.

Who will spend more of the property they own (currency is property virtualized) will determine who gets it.

Markets, not Capitalism.

I don’t need to explain why capitalism will be around in the long run as it is a belief for both me and you.

I have provided mechanical evidence, you provided vibes and acknowledged my evidence, then brushed it under the rug. You do need to explain, your entire argument hinges on it.

I would ask why you care about my opinion as you seem to believe the following. 1) Capitalism cannot be regulated by us as a society, which if true means capitalism cannot be removed by us as a society since removal is effectively 100% regulation. 2) capitalism will die on its own and is inevitable. So by that reasoning it does not matter what anyone thinks about it.

1. Capitalism can be regulated, yes, but it cannot be fixed. Issues can be delayed or lowered, but as long as the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall exists, disparity will continue to rise until it snaps. Removal of Capitalism is not “100% regulation,” that’s nonsense.
2. Correct, mostly. Your personal feelings on the matter don’t change the material conditions of Capitalism, nor its inevitable decline, but the more leftists there are that understand it and fight against fascism, the more likely we can organize and transition beyond Capitalism to Socialism, the next phase in the development of Human Mode of Production, and evetually Communism after that. If leftists do not organize, fascists win and a lot of people die to protect Capitalists.

HubertManne , 1 month ago

Whats your favorite color. Blue. Why is it your favorite. Because I find it pretty. yeah but why do you find it pretty..... My answers are the why but you just ask why again. There is no point repeating agnosium. So much of what you say seems to be lets just not call it capitalism but I can tell there are small parts which I have already pointed out I want. If you want what I see as capitalism but not call it that. Well I don't care. but I really don't think you want it like I think of it. but its a guess because you keep on saying all the earmarks of capitalism is not capitalism and then also making remarks confirming this like my exchange examples. I have no idea what you see as mechanical evidence as I did not see that in our exchange.

Cowbee , 1 month ago

Whats your favorite color. Blue. Why is it your favorite. Because I find it pretty. yeah but why do you find it pretty… My answers are the why but you just ask why again.

It does reveal a lot that you’d compare how you decide your political opinions to how you pick your favorite color, vibes and aesthetics over logic.

So much of what you say seems to be lets just not call it capitalism but I can tell there are small parts which I have already pointed out I want.

You can pick houses and buy them in Socialism, just like people did in Feudalism before Capitalism.

but its a guess because you keep on saying all the earmarks of capitalism is not capitalism and then also making remarks confirming this like my exchange examples.

The earmarks of Capitalism are individual owners of the Means of Production competing in markets to sell commodities made by wage labor for profit. Markets themselves do not need Capitalism, exchange isn’t unique to Capitalism.

I have no idea what you see as mechanical evidence as I did not see that in our exchange.

You said you understood the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall, is that not actually true?

HubertManne , 1 month ago

strike1 on your first reply. I certainly do not want to live like a typical person under feudalism and far prefer capitalism. You need to bring down to exactly what you think makes up capitalism based on "The earmarks of Capitalism are individual owners of the Means of Production competing in markets to sell commodities made by wage labor for profit. Markets themselves do not need Capitalism, exchange isn't unique to Capitalism." and your other things it seems like profit. I exchange things for profit now and do not see not doing that. I did a ctrl f and the only time I see "Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall" is from your comments.

Cowbee , 1 month ago

strike1 on your first reply. I certainly do not want to live like a typical person under feudalism and far prefer capitalism.

But why? What are your goals? What makes a system good, or bad? I can tell you exactly what issues Capitalism has and how Socialism fixes them.

You need to bring down to exactly what you think makes up capitalism based on “The earmarks of Capitalism are individual owners of the Means of Production competing in markets to sell commodities made by wage labor for profit. Markets themselves do not need Capitalism, exchange isn’t unique to Capitalism.” and your other things it seems like profit.

You quoted exactly what makes up Capitalism. Is there something you wish for me to elaborate on?

I exchange things for profit now and do not see not doing that.

Markets, not Capitalism. Unless you own a factory and sell what your workers make, of course.

I did a ctrl f and the only time I see “Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall” is from your comments.

So then you were talking past me. I already explained it, but if you want me to do it again I can.

HubertManne , 1 month ago

I did not read this past the part where dismissed my issue with your part1 of "It does reveal a lot that you'd compare how you decide your political opinions to how you pick your favorite color, vibes and aesthetics over logic." im done

Cowbee , 1 month ago

Gotcha, glad we could establish that you were never interested in having a conversation in the first place.

psvrh , 1 month ago

As opposed to the Republican’s Final Solution?

Cowbee , 1 month ago

It’s only a Final Solution if it comes from the GOP, otherwise it’s “sparkling genocide.”

Linkerbaan OP , 1 month ago

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/ce40f3de-82be-4cbc-bb74-bd045a094d50.png

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

I can’t wait to see the leopards ate my face memes when Trump gets voted in and sends US troops in to help Israel.

Absolute nonsense

wildbus8979 , 1 month ago

As opposed to now, when Biden actually US troops in to help Israel?

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

citation please

wildbus8979 , 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

OSINT Shows U.S. Deploying More Arms and Troops to Israel, Cyprus and Jordan

Close to 80 U.S. military planes and dozens of leased civilian aircraft are hauling equipment, with massive arms airlift to Israel and Cyprus and fighter squadrons and special forces in Jordan

haaretz.com/…/0000018b-5cbf-d307-adbb-7dbf1aa8000…

See also the fake aid bullshit that serves no one but Israeli interests:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_floating_pier

And also:

declassifieduk.org/u-s-military-is-secretly-suppl…

Over the past year, numerous outlets have reported that US and UK military aircraft have increasingly arrived at Britain’s RAF Akrotiri base in Cyprus last year, in an effort to reportedly assist Israeli forces in their offensive on Gaza by supplying arms and ammunition and conducting surveillance to collect and provide intelligence.

middleeastmonitor.com/20240626-turkiye-reveals-in…

Or you know, even before Oct 7th, when Israel was already and still an apartheid ethno state practicing ethnic cleansin: army.mil/…/u_s_army_convoy_operation_to_israel

Sure the US troops aren’t firing the bullets. But they are supplying them, supplying targeting intelligence, etc etc. That’s pretty much just as bad.

Fuck this thing veneer of respectability.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

Those troops were sent to Jordan, not Israel.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

And because you editted: Intel is not ‘just as bad’ as actually shooting bullets. It probably even helps as actual intel of terrorist movements might prevent innocent deaths

Linkerbaan OP , 1 month ago

Biden Admin Deployed Air Force Team to Israel to Assist With Targets, Document Suggests

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

“I’ve directed my team to share intelligence and deploy additional experts from across the United States government to consult with and advise the Israeli counterparts on hostage recovery efforts,”

not fighting.

Linkerbaan OP , 1 month ago

Biden’s Illegal Bombing of Yemen Intensifies the Risk of Regional War

U.S., Not Israel, Shot Down Most Iran Drones and Missiles

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

One is defending international civilian shipping, not Israel. The other is shooting down drones which is not the problem ya’ll are talking about right?

It’s not even to the point. A Trump (the guy who had a private personal meeting behind the closed doors of his owned home with Netanyahu, and came out wiping his chin) presidency would see all of your gripes and far more committed to Israel. You are cutting off your nose to spite your face bitching about the lesser of 2 evils.

Linkerbaan OP , 1 month ago

Read the second link too.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

Read my comment. I did.

Linkerbaan OP , 1 month ago

You mean defending the Nazis against retaliation while they are committing Genocide, using American with boots on the ground, is not complicity?

Aside from the guy in the F35 pressing the red fire button everything about the Genocide is American.

Actually scratch that there’s a probably some American colonists flying those bombers as well.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

I’ll repeat this in the hopes it snaps you out of you rabid hate-rant:

You are cutting off your nose to spite your face bitching about the lesser of 2 evils.

Linkerbaan OP , 1 month ago

Joe Biden is already out mate. Your argument is completely invalid.

Enough pressure on the Democrats and the Genocide stops.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

Still speaking nonsense. Well, I tried.

Linkerbaan OP , 1 month ago

Enough voting pressure in the polls will make Democrats change their policy and force a ceasefire.

Supporting Democrats despite the Genocide will only boost the chance Democrats lose because they dont change policy.

Joe Biden dropping out is all the evidence you need that they won’t continue with a policy or candidate that will make them lose.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

Biden dropping out is all the proof you need that he doesn’t care at all anymore about voting pressure.

You are cutting off your nose to spite your face bitching about the lesser of 2 evils.

ExotiqueMatter , 1 month ago

All that is only valid if you assume that there is a lesser evil between the two. That’s your problem, you’re left all confused at our stubborn refusal of voting for the democrats because you assume that we agree with you that the Democrats are less evil than the republicans. we don’t (those I know at least don’t).

I’m telling you that honestly, I haven’t seen any evidence that the Democrats would be any less bad, nor any evidence that they have been any less bad until now, on the contrary. I haven’t seen any of the peoples who keep telling us to vote blue give any evidence than the Democrats are less bad, you just take it as an axiom that they are, never try to actually demonstrate it and build your entire argument on this very much unfounded basis.

Your claim here that the Republican could do worst implicitly assume that the Democrats are holding back and not giving as much to Israel as they could, except 1) the Democrats are way too rabidly Zionist and full of AIPAC money for that to be true and 2) the US, right now under a democrat president, is already sending Israel everything they can afford to send without risking to escalate into a war with Iran and Lebanon against whom they know them and Israel would lose (they did war-games to simulate a war against Iran, they lost badly. Sources: How the U.S. Military Lost a War to Iran (In a Simulation, That Is) - Mackenzie institute A $250 Million War Game and Its Shocking Outcome - The National Interest Millennium Challenge 2002 - wikipedia)

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

“This is how the Republican Party became so strongly pro-Israel”

ExotiqueMatter , 1 month ago

All this article is saying is that the Republicans openly boast about the evil things they do and their voters are openly pro-Israel, both of which I already know, and neither of which contradict what I said.

Yes, the Democrats don’t give speeches in which they shamelessly talk about what they’ll do to all the peoples they hate the way the Republicans do, and pretend to care about minorities instead. But that doesn’t matter what they say, it’s too easy to say shit you don’t mean, what matter is what they do, and what the Democrats are doing is, as I’ve said, sending every weapons they can afford to Israel so that they can continue to slaughter Palestinians.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

Meanwhile… back in reality

ExotiqueMatter , 1 month ago

I see where you’re coming from, but once again, this is mostly the Democrat parties saying stuff and not doing anything meaningful.

This article is talking about the Republican wanting to pass a bill forbidding withholding weapons from Israel over Biden saying (as in, not doing) that he might withhold weapons shipments.

Digging a little in the links off your article, the only instance of Biden actually doing something is this. Which to be fair, sound convincing at a glance.

But let’s examine closer: First of all, as is clearly written, the shipment is merely paused meaning they will still deliver it eventually. So already I can tell they don’t actually intend to hold back on the weapons and are just trying to calm the peoples angry at them for what they’re doing. If they’re elected again, as soon as they get to office they will resume giving every single bit of armament they can afford to Israel.

Now let’s talk even more concrete, how much does this pause in the weapon shipments really affect the genocide. As anyone who was following the events since October 7 can tell, the genocide continued completely unbothered, and of course it did:

A US official told CNN on Tuesday that the shipment, which was held back last week, includes 1,800 bombs weighing 2,000 pounds and 1,700 bombs weighing 500 pounds.

This is the article’s description of the paused shipment, 1,800 + 1,700 = 3,500 bombs in total.

Israel has dropped 45,000 bombs on Gaza since October 7 alone (so not counting the ones dropped before), This report dates back from Mars so the actual current number is probably much much higher. Sources: Bombings in populated areas: a new extreme reached in Gaza

3,500/45,000 = 0.07 = 7%

This shipment represent a mere 7% of the bombs dropped on Gaza, for the record the bombs the Israelis uses have a failure rate of 9% ~ 14%. In other words, this paused shipment bothered the ongoing genocide less that the small chance the bombs they do have might malfunction and fail to explode.

I should also mention the fact that they paused the shipment of just 2 types of bombs out off all the weapons the US delivers to Israel, that’s essentially nothing. Source: Which US-made weaponry does Israel, which stands …. It’s all just lip service, good optics so that their convinced voters (you) can come at us all smug and go “see? they’re not that bad”, but when you look closely, there is nothing, it’s just a show to make themselves look good, there is nothing actually meaningful going on.

And beside, let’s be honest, the reason they even did this inconsequential stunt of pausing this shipment is above all because the Democrat’s handlers knew that if Israel want into Rafah, they would just get their asses handed to them by Hamas and put the whole country in an even worst situation that they already were, which is exactly what happened. Source: Hamas Prepare Traps for IDF in MAJOR Counteroffensive.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

Here is just a taste of the people you are naively putting your hopes in. I already said the Dems are the lesser evil. Beating your chest and pointing it out isn’t moving the argument forward. The evidence is overwhelmingly clear the Reps are not simply just unsympathetic but hostile to anti-zionists.

You are holding a shitty hand and everyone knows it. Threatening to go all in on the Reps is going to get called every time. All you can do now is fold, hope your chips go to the almost sympathetic Dems, and start playing the next hand dealt.

ExotiqueMatter , 1 month ago

I’m not putting my hopes in the republicans, that’s a strawman and I’m sure you know that.

I already said the Dems are the lesser evil.

You still didn’t give any evidence that they are. You just assert that they are and retreat to pretending like I’m supporting the Republicans when I didn’t buy the Democrat’s “good optics” as proof that they are less evil.

The evidence is overwhelmingly clear the Reps are not simply just unsympathetic but hostile to anti-zionists.

So are the Democrats, have you not seen what kind of things they say about the anti-genocide protests? Have you not seen Kamala’s statement about the protests when Netanyahu was visiting? Or all the violent police crackdown that happened under the Democrat’s watch since October 7?

You are holding a shitty hand and everyone knows it. Threatening to go all in on the Reps is going to get called every time.

You know what else will get called out? You blatantly lying about what I said because you ran out of counterarguments. I don’t support the Republicans, they’re horrible too. It’s your unproven assumption that the Democrats are better that I’m criticizing here.

All you can do now is fold, hope your chips go to the almost sympathetic Dems, and start playing the next hand dealt.

the almost sympathetic Demshttps://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/75048dc3-dbbc-4e31-a08b-0b258625d9ab.png

Ha, yes. The genociders who are almost sympathetic to the peoples they’re genociding. Again, no evidence, just faith. “The Democrats are the lesser evil, no I won’t prove it, you must accept it in your soul that they are the good guys, reject the evidence of your eyes and your ears telling you that they keep doing the things they used to criticize Trump for less than 5 years ago, just believe in the holy blue party!!!”

The more time passes the more Blue MAGA becomes a fitting title for the convinced Democrats crowd.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

Saying something doesn’t make it true. I’ve done nothing but provide evidence the Republicans are worse, in their own words, if you’d read it. I notice you didn’t address that at all. The very fact you say ‘no, the Dems are worse’ proves you support republicans because at this point it is one or the other. There is no plausible 3rd choice. That is the crux of American politics you fail to grasp and try to conceal by calling me a liar.

Throwing a tantrum because the Dems are technically the ones in power and so you place all the blame on them is weak tea. It’s not even close. The House vote Republicans initiated to force the Dems to stop delaying the release of weapon shipments had 16 Dems vote for it, versus 208 Reps. Press releases by Republican Senators calling the Dems “weak Palestinians” in a blatantly racist attempt to belittle their hesitation. What the Fuck more do you need? Them to get into power and start invading Palestine with American troops? Get a clue, come on.

ExotiqueMatter , 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

I’ve done nothing but provide evidence the Republicans are worse, in their own words, if you’d read it.

No, you didn’t. Once again you’re focusing on what the parties and their voters are saying and ignoring what they are doing.

I’ve already addressed why the article you linked don’t prove that the Democrats are less bad 👈 This is what I’ve requested evidence for, in case you forgot. I don’t need you to tell me the Republicans are bad, I already know that.

The very fact you say ‘no, the Dems are worse’ proves you support republicans because at this point it is one or the other.

An other strawman. When did I say that the Dems were worst? I said they were both bad. That’s my whole point since the beginning: that there isn’t any lesser evil between the two. They are both equally bad, only the optics, the presentation, the aesthetic is different.

Throwing a tantrum because the Dems are technically the ones in power and so you place all the blame on them is weak tea.

It does put the blame on them though. As president, Biden is the chief of the entire US military, he could literally send one e-mail and end all shipment to Israel immediately, he has that power right now he just chose not to use it.

And that’s just what the president alone has the power to do. Let alone the entire Democrat party with all the senators and governors that have.

The House vote Republicans initiated to force the Dems to stop delaying the release of weapon shipments had 16 Dems vote for it, versus 208 Reps.

That’s meaningless lip-service once again.

If the bill don’t pass, they’ll maybe do one or two more bullshit pause in the shipments and boast that they’re so fucking great and progressive for it even though it doesn’t even bother the ongoing genocide in any meaningful capacity for the reasons I explained.

If the bill do pass, they’ll get a free excuse to continue to unconditionally support Israel while getting to pose as great progressives for the even cheaper price of simply crying crocodile tears on TV and social medias about the bill, while not actually doing anything against said bill.

In both cases they get their voters (you) to berate everyone about the Democrats just because they didn’t vote for a Republican bill they at best feel neutral toward.

Press releases by Republican Senators calling the Dems “weak Palestinians” in a blatantly racist attempt to belittle their hesitation.

Yes, the Republican don’t care if you see them for what they are while the Democrats are scrambling to convince their voter base that their evil actions somehow don’t makes them the ‘bad guys’. Again, nothing new, and nothing that contradict my position.

If you have two racist KKK members uncles coming to Christmas eve, would you say that the one who at least shut up during dinner is better than the one who vomit racism on the table, or that it doesn’t matter because at the end of the day they are still both KKK members and you should kick out both? I say the second option.

What the Fuck more do you need? Them to get into power and start invading Palestine with American troops? Get a clue, come on.

They won’t do that. The American military know they would lose an open war in the region and that if they lose it would be the end of Israel. I know that Trump is a dumb fuck, but he’s not alone, there are corporations, handlers and generals behind him who won’t let Trump wreck Israel by his stupidity.

The only way the US would send the army is if Iran, Hezbollah and Yemen attack Israel first, in which case the Democrats would sent the army too.

Your argument sits on what ifs with no basis in reality.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

Your argument sits on what ifs with no basis in reality.

Okay you are clearly refusing to face facts. Whatever the Dems do, the Reps say ‘they should have done more’. You are fixated on the Dems being the ones signing solely because they are in power when the Reps ENTIRE FUCKING PLATFORM is that Israel needs more support. You aren’t arguing in good faith and just repeating the same tired ‘Dems did bad stuff tho’ instead of acknowledging that the Reps would absolutely do worse, in their own words, supported by their own actions, happily. This unwillingness to get beyond past wrongs to see how you’re own myopic actions only make things worse is a running theme with the Anti-Zionists so I guess in a way this is my fault for trying to educate the unwilling.

Don’t listen. Keep sawing away at that nose. You aren’t worth arguing with at this point unless you agree the Reps outright say they want to do more for Israel than the Dems have and admit the only reason they haven’t is solely because they aren’t in power. We’ll just have to wait for the Rep leopards to be voted in and start eating your faces. At which point the metaphorical screams of pain will be little consolation.

ExotiqueMatter , 1 month ago

Okay you are clearly refusing to face facts. Whatever the Dems do, the Reps say ‘they should have done more’. You are fixated on the Dems being the ones signing solely because they are in power when the Reps ENTIRE FUCKING PLATFORM is that Israel needs more support.

None of the facts you presented show that the Republicans would do worse.

Of course they’re saying the Dems aren’t supporting Israel enough, the Reps’ whole electoral strategy is to whine about the Democrats and blame them for everything they think is wrong. Just because they say the Democrats support Israel less than them doesn’t make it true.

Again, the Democrat’s actions show clearly that they are unconditionally supporting the genocide with every resource they have.

You aren’t arguing in good faith

I am though.

I go through every argument you made point by point, and explain point by point in detail why they don’t convince me, the problems I have with them, my perspective, so that you can come with better more convincing arguments.

That’s arguing in good faith.

But instead crafting better arguments to counter the points I raised you just keep repeating over and over that the Dems are better without ever demonstrating it. So far you’ve given just 2 sources, of which only the second was relevant to my main point, and no actual argument of your own as far as the subject matter is concerned.

I dare suppose that this is because you don’t actually have any answers to the many points I raised, or if you do you’re certainly not showing it.

and just repeating the same tired ‘Dems did bad stuff tho’ instead of acknowledging that the Reps would absolutely do worse, in their own words, supported by their own actions, happily.

'Course they say they would do worst. Complaining about the Dems posturing as progressive is their all thing. Doesn’t make it true. See first point.

This unwillingness to get beyond past wrongs to see how you’re own myopic actions only make things worse is a running theme with the Anti-Zionists so I guess in a way this is my fault for trying to educate the unwilling.

This is not just past wrongs, this is above all current wrongs, the genocide is going on right now, and the Democrats are supporting it right now.

Again, this point is only valid if you believe that the Democrats are less bad than the Republicans, which I don’t believe and which is what I’ve asked you to provide evidence of, which you didn’t do.

Also, your smug attitude since the beginning certainly isn’t isn’t a sign of good faith on your part.

Don’t listen. Keep sawing away at that nose. You aren’t worth arguing with at this point unless you agree the Reps outright say they want to do more for Israel than the Dems have and admit the only reason they haven’t is solely because they aren’t in power. We’ll just have to wait for the Rep leopards to be voted in and start eating your faces. At which point the metaphorical screams of pain will be little consolation.

I’ve listened, I’ve read the things you linked and responded to the points you tried to make with them.

To me, it’s you who don’t seem worth arguing with or willing to hear a different perspective.

I doubt you even opened any of the many links I gave, or again, if you did, you sure aren’t showing you did.

I mean, look at this line:

You aren’t worth arguing with at this point unless you agree the Reps outright say they want to do more for Israel than the Dems

That’s the whole thing we are arguing about tough. You’re basically saying that I’m not worth arguing with if I don’t already agree with you on the thing we’re arguing about. If that isn’t bad faith, I don’t know what is.

And again with that smug attitude, as well as wishing harm on me for not wanting to support your favorite genocider club to top it all, how very blue MAGA of you.

Weather or not you respond, I’m done here.

Cephalotrocity , 1 month ago

Just because they say the Democrats support Israel less than them doesn’t make it true

This, this right here. When someone tells you who they are… believe them.

Like, in what world can you say “just because they say they will be worse, have a huge religio-fascist base they are catering too, and have demonstrated with their declared policies and voting behaviour that they would… doesn’t mean they will ahktuallllly be worse”. Like, WTF are you even arguing here at this point?

You’re basically saying that I’m not worth arguing with if I don’t already agree with you on the thing we’re arguing about. If that isn’t bad faith, I don’t know what is.

That wasn’t what I was saying. I was saying you aren’t worth arguing with because you wouldn’t even admit they said they would be worse. Now that you have (see previous point), the ridiculousness of your stance is obvious.

smug attitude, as well as wishing harm on me

Now who’s lying hmm?

Weather or not you respond, I’m done here.

We agree. You are done like dinner here.

666 , 1 month ago

dems are gonna lose and it’s gonna be absolutely hilarious

Cowbee , 1 month ago

I can’t wait to see the leopards ate my face memes when Kamala gets voted in and sends US troops in to help Israel.

Absolute nonsense.

Diabolo96 , 1 month ago

They’re sending drones and bombs and the only casualties are mostly Palestinians families. US troops would literally be useless, or worse, a hindrance to isrealis troops, because they wouldn’t be able to randomly shoot at any neighborhood to cause maximum casualties anymore.

Fidel_Cashflow , 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

you should read “Kill Anything That Moves” by Nick Turse. American troops would absolutely revel in causing maximum casualties, there would be no conflict between US troops and the IDF.