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?
When faced with two options that are both genocide why buy into a false dicthomy, also need I remind you abortion became a states right issue (something biden could have prevented) under bidens presidency?
The stupidest move is to play.
I prefer the dissolution of USA, if that is the case, with reparations paid to every country in total amounts of what genocide and destruction they have caused.
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?
I think he endorsed a ceasefire but then immediately expressed he didn’t think Hamas would respect a ceasefire.
So one step forward, one step back. Not much better. Not great. But I dont expect the over 70 crowd to navigate these waters very well.
Fetterman is the far more disappointing Senator on this topic.
I’m willing to bet that he’d navigate these waters just fine if Trump was president.
That’s what Trump does. He sharpens the contradictions and makes it obvious to everyone. Biden does everything possible to muddy the waters and make the issue seem more complicated than it actually is, but Trump never bothers masking his intentions like that.
Maybe so. Though the reality isn’t that Trump is president.
And I am not sure anyone knows for sure how a 2nd term Trump would be acting right now. I mean hell, Trump kind of criticized Israel and said Hezbollah was making a smart move recently, so hey, wild card factor would be without much masking.
Not sure I’d have much expection for the geriatric leaders regardless of president, still.
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
This is some bullshit. I don’t expect any better from Rs, but 22 Ds?
AIPAC has heavy stakes in the Democratic Party. They run primary challenges and fund conservatives against anyone who expresses anything close to Palestinian sympathy. (Summer Lee is a good recent/current example.)
Those 22 Ds likely exist at the behest of AIPAC money.
Fuck USA, death to Israel
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.
Bunch of genocidal racist fanatics.
No, she was censured for seemingly calling for the end of Israel. That is not the same as Palestinian freedom.
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?
This has nothing to do with me. I’m just stating a fact. She was censured for the river to the sea comment, not for calling to end the apartheid state.
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.
You’re arguing that to the wrong person. I understand nuance. Apparently House representatives do not.
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.
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.
Zionist scum
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.
With that statement coming out so deep into your argument, I believe you’re a liar and full of shit.
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.
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/
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
“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.
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?
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?
“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.
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?
It’s pretty much always meant kill all the jews there. Also once a slogan or symbol gets corrupted it’s not really usable anymore, see the swastika.
No it doesn’t. The only people who are guilty of genocide and ethnic cleansing are the Zionists, Palestinians just want to be free on their land, they want their land back
A significant portion of Palestinians want to be rid of jews. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard extraordinarily anti-semetic things from my family that escaped Palestine. And if that’s the case think about how the people who still live there feel. At the very least I was able to convince my dad that his problem was with the state of Israel and not Jewish people (all the Jews who spoke out were a big help in that), but for my family that lives a half a world a way that’s not something I can reasonably do.
To be clear fuck Israel and Palestinians should be free from their oppressors. But both of them want ethnic cleansing it’s just that only Israel has the power to do it (it also doesn’t help that Israel killed/black bagged all the major speakers/organizers who weren’t extremists throughout the 70s-90s)
Also from the river to the sea is not inherently anti-semetic
Imagine blaming a country currently being genocided and who’s had decades of aperthied/mass rape inflicted on them for then having extremist views about there oppressors.
How about take the boot off there neck then we can talk?
Hamas didn’t attack Jews anywhere in the world. They are solely focusing on freeing their land from Israeli occupation. Hamas is made up of orphans and refugees. I don’t blame Palestinians for mixing up Zionism with Judaism because that’s what Zionists have been doing for decades
There are zionist asshats in this very thread conflating zionism and Judaism. Those zionist assholes contribute to antisemitism, they are on the same team as the nazis.
Logic falls apart when you realize swastikas are still common in asian countries. Don’t let the terrorists win.
