You must log in or # to comment.
Hey does Pepperidge farms remember all the fucking morons on Lemmy urging not to vote for Harris because she was allegedly complicit in genocide? I sure as shit do.
Know what’s gonna be objectively worse, 100% regardless of the veracity those allegations? The reality that they helped forge instead.
The point was to pressure the Dems into giving up on genocide. You wanna talk about “pepperidge farm remembers”, I got one for ya
Remember when the Dems thought they could win while actively telling people who were anti genocide to go fuck themselves?
Hey, what’s weirder? Not voting for someone committing genocide, or being unwilling to stop committing a genocide even if it costs you the election?
How does it feel that the only thing that Harris had to do was say “I will stop weapons to Israel” and she would of won?
You can’t keep blaming the voters when the strategy was at fault. They knew they would lose votes. They thought they could court the centrists and liberal Republicans to make up for it. They were so fucking wrong. And somehow it’s not their own fault for having the worst campaign strategy known to man.
Like, Christ. Y’all ain’t ever gonna stop trying to blame leftists. You’ll be up against the wall with leftists fighting for your life and you’ll still be like “can’t believe you didn’t vote Harris”. I can’t believe Harris threw away the election over the continued genocide of palastinians. That’s fucking crazy. Is that not crazy to you? You don’t find it fucking insane that the Dems would rather a fascist state than stop actively committing a genocide? Cause that’s the fucking Gambit they ran and look where we are.
Look. I’m pissed. Your pissed. But we are just people with no power. Same with all those voters you wanna complain about. All we have is the ability to yell and vote. And while I voted for Harris out of fucking fear, I cannot blame the people who yelled “I will not vote for you if you keep committing genocide” and were fucking CALLED ON THAT SHIT. What kind of monster gambles with their own base over a fucking genocide?
I mean she entirely was.
And considering the US blocked every ceasefire under her and Biden, and people pointed out even a year ago that the US and Israel want an alternative to the Suez canal, and people pointed out that Israel was moving Palestinians out with the US’s help in order to do this, all that happened. Pretty sure it was going exactly the same way. If you haven’t noticed, democrats aren’t exactly sitting up and saying this is ethnic cleansing or genocide even now. Or trying to fight it.
‘allegedly’
The mental gymnastics will only intensify as these fucking crypto-nazis get to distance themselves from their beliefs and actions of just a few months ago.
It’s also obvious that Trump and BB we’re coordinating during the election to ensure Biden couldn’t get a ceasefire deal in place in order to harm him politically. But as soon as Trump takes the office they just agree to a ceasefire no problem (as if that hadn’t been the plan all along) aaaaaaand then Trump goes off about finishing the job and annexing the whole west bank for the US. What a fucking surprise.
Harris was complicit in genocide.
Trump loudly talked about how he would make the genocide worse.
Why absolve Harris in an attempt to strengthen your argument?
nobody is absolving Harris. She was the lesser evil, and many people chose not to choose, resulting in the greater evil anyways.
I still can’t get over how they were essentially presented with a simplified version of the trolley problem and chose to not pull the lever.
By their own narrative that “the democrats are complicit in a genocide in Gaza”, they were aware that Palestinians were metaphorically tied to both tracks, yet decided to not pull the lever when America itself and every marginalized person living within was also on the track the trolley barreled towards.
I suspected that many of the accounts were Russian plants or Trump supporters trying to divide the Democrat vote. Most of the time when I checked account age they were made either that day or the day before.
I know that Lemmy is new and all but still was sus.
I haven’t gone back to accounts to see if they are still active. I suspect that they aren’t.
I suspect that what we saw here on lemmy were actual people who had been indoctrinated elsewhere.
Lemmy isn’t really big enough to be a target for bots and so on.
Bots are cheap to write. That’s naive to think there wasn’t a disinformation war going on with bots being on the forefront of it.
Calling it simplified does a disservice of the real world impacts of the “trolley” - especially since unlike a thought experiment - this trolley problem is physically constructed by people to achieve imperialistic goals - so expending energy blaming random lemmings for this - instead of figuring out who built, maintains and presents the trolley as the only option and how to dismantle it seems useless.
I believe we should avoid infighting and actually organize to do something so we don’t have to choose if we pull the lever or not every 4 years (if there even is another election…)
I find it scary how easily people where fine with having genocide on both sides of the ticket.
Not having a choice and being fine with with the choice you have are drastically different situations, and it’s concerning how many people are incapable of unwilling to tell the difference between the two.
No sane people were fine with it, but sane people have to live in the real world and not believe some fucking fantasy that there was another option at the time.
The democrats did have another option at the time.
The real world isn’t black and white, like in your morally superior fantasy. I hope your satisfaction lasts through the takeover of the nation, you shortsighted twat.
We are enjoying the fruits of constantly lowering our moral standards. We see more anger towards those who where critical of the genocide than those who needlessly insisted on perpetuating it.
That anger is deserved, did you read the image in this post?
Cool, we remember - now what? What do we materially do now to resist that isn’t just blaming non-voters online?
There aren’t many options… Which is probably why op is blaming non-voters, who are complicit in creating our current situation.
Which is probably why op is blaming non-voters
Should probably blame the people who actually voted for the guy and not an unrelated third party
Bunch of butthurt authoritarians whining about people they failed to engage and saying “but that’s the system we’re in” like that doesn’t apply equally to having to convince people to vote FOR you
I remember the BBC manufacturing consent for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris complicity genocide as well.
Interesting that such a fucked system exists that could allow the 50/50 chance that who wins an election could singlehandedly decide if everything is fascism and genocide or not, with what appears to be no real checks of power in place.
And you choose to blame those who have nearly no control over said system.
Lemmy is also a tiny community relative to other similar communities online. Lenmy is also not even just people in the US. You also don’t know how many of those posts were trolls or bots.
It sure seems to me that the larger system and set of choices are completely fucked to begin with and gives the “people” next to no options or say in much of anything.
But yes. If Lemmy people had not slammed Harris… then… something might have been… different?
That’s the thing American citizens/voters need to remember if/when we get past this term: Trump didn’t do this by himself. He was enabled and empowered by Republicans (and significant number of Democrats) members of legislation, as well as crooked judges across every level from state to Supreme. Trump will be kicked out and Republicans will sqy “Phew, that guy was a disaster! Right, guys? Good thing we all worked together and survived it.” And we can’t just let them do it; everyone currently serving in office from the GOP and 60% (if I’m being very generous to the remainder) of the Democrats should be barred from holding office again. Extend that to the judges too.
The GOP has worked hard to sew shite into every strand of the fabric that binds the nation together. And so insiduously that many idiots will stare at a shite-brown rag and say it’s still the same, ol’ Red, White, and Blue they remember.
The system is fucked but we exist within that system.
So, yes, if you were in front of the trolley lever, you’d remark “Wow, this system is fucked. Why do we even have trolleys? Shouldn’t they have brakes?”
…and then not pull the lever.
None of you crypto-nazis can be honest about this discussion. You keep lying and presenting the choice as between two unequally bad options. If anything the democrats have been objectively worse in hindsight. There would have been no ceasefire if you had your way.
Now that Trump is in office you want to put on your resistance hats again like we didn’t all just watch you rabidly support the genocide yourselves.
You keep lying and presenting the choice as between two unequally bad options.
This is why people disregard your opinions, because you lie and pretend that they weren’t unequally bad options.
They were both bad options, but saying they’re equal tells me you don’t pay attention or are intentionally lying.
Man I really wish you guys elected Harris or Joe Biden to sit back and watch this happen instead of talking about it openly, that would have been great for the Palestinians.
I’d rather have someone watch me fight a bear then have them help the bear by shooting me, and the rest of my family, repeatedly while I fight it. So yeah really would’ve been a lot better.
And by watch, I mean supply the bear with billions worth of bombs
I’m not the one that made the claim. I’m merely carrying on the anaolgy. Read what I replied to you jackwagon.
What the heck are you even on about? Did you reply to the wrong person?
Removed by mod
Man I really wish you guys elected Harris or Joe Biden to sit back and watch this happen…
This is you. You said this. You made the claim like mere minutes ago.
Watch this happen, as in: they wouldn’t have “managed” Gaza themselves, but helped Israel or something like the PA control it. Even if I actually claimed that, you are telling me you didn’t know the US was helping Israel when Biden was in office?
You made the claim. I continued by pointing out that the alternative is WAY worse using your same claim. Are you really this obtuse in real life? Or just on the internet?
Why are you quoting someone being objectively correct and dancing around like you won something? Have you spontaneously grown a brain and are now taking exception to the fact that the democrats are worse than ‘just watching’?
To clarify, I don’t think any of us are winning. They made the claim that Biden was just sitting and back and watching. I’m asserting, using their same claim, that the alternative is worse, while also making fun of the fact that watching someone fight a bear and not helping is objectively terrible. Do you really think this analogy makes Biden/the DNC out to be a great people?
It dishonestly presents them as being better people than they are
China really needs to start throwing their weight around on the global stage if they want to be anything more than a regional power.
China should be filling the vacuum on the global stage that the US is vacating.
China is just sitting back and letting the U.S. hang itself. They’ll step up and step in once America is well and truly down for the count.
edit: autocorrect
Can’t help but notice this. Turns out, the communist plot to destroy America was the billionaires we made along the way.
To be fair to the BBC, they’re ‘supposed’ to report the facts without judgement. How successful they are at that is debated endlessly, you can find anyone of any political flavour who will swear blind the BBC is ‘obviously’ biased against ‘them’. They can’t win no matter what they do.
Nah, I remember back when Corbyn was the leader of the Labour Party and the BBC gleefully participated in the campaign to slander him, including in a news program having as a background a large picture of him digitally altered to put a Soviet hood on his head.
I also remember countless “two side” discussions hosted by the BBC on things like worker rights or the Environment were they put a professional politician on the side against it facing a total amateur on the side for it.
The BBC’s “two sides” has always been a multi-layered propaganda format, starting by the small detail that any social and political subject which is not ridiculously simple has more than 2 options to interpret and tackle it - in other words, more than 2 sides - and going into the above mentioned point that their supposedly open “giving equal voice to both sides” is actually controlled by their choice of the subject matter, who represents each side and even the interviewer’s take on each side and accompanying materials (a typical example would be them reporting as event as “such and such happened” when the source is IDF versus “According to Hamas such and such happened” when the source is Hamas).
The BBC are very sophisticated in how they do it, but their output is heavily spinned and propagandistic.
It’s not factual reporting when one side refuses to interact with the truth
That this is a very poor excuse at propaganda because the BBC goes out of its way to use “loaded terms” when it comes to adversaries of the empire.
Here is an example from yesterday. https://youtu.be/34Ta0IcQi-E?t=85
Impartiality goes out of the window when the BBC needs to remind everyone that “the Palestinian health ministry is ran by Hamas which is designated as a terrorist organisation in America, the UK and Europe” every single time the death toll in Gaza is brought up as well.
“The unprecedented attack on October 7th.” is here to justify Israel slaughtering tens of thousands of starving civilians.
They had a bazillion complaints (and still get them) that they report the figures at all and that they don’t treat Hamas being a terrorist organisation as a statement of fact. For a couple of weeks after the October the 7th attack, the reporting was more neutral, and the whole rest of the British press was up in arms about the BBC being antisemitic, and the current situation was the compromise that calmed it down. In a world where Israel having done nothing wrong ever is somehow part of the Overton window, this is what counts as impartial. Impartiality is a bad thing when it’s forced to apply to viewpoints divorced from reality.
Watch the video I linked if you are not convinced. I considered the introduction to be rather long so I timestamped over it. But it sounds like you might need to watch it from the beginning. The video is not about Hamas by the way. That is only another example.
The problem for the BBC is that not all stories have equally valid opposing views but they are forced to treat both sides equally at all times… So as the world drifts further and further to insanity, their reporting makes crazy positions seem legitimate as they have to be aired alongside more mainstream views.
It worked OK when the world was fairly stable and political positions were close together. It doesn’t work when political positions are so polarised and extreme.
Case in point: Brexit. The BBC really struggled in challenging extreme positions and outright lies during the brexit campaign.
Unfortunately though I’m not sure there is much alternative. Its fat from perfect but provably the best a public service broadcaster can try to do. At least it tries to provide the facts so people can make up their own minds - that in itself remains laudable.
One of the newsreaders said after leaving that they could easily find 60 economists willing to say brexit would be disastrous, and 1 saying it would be good. Come the show, they’d present one of each to demonstrate balance, but it was very lopsided. Before he went mental, they had Graham Linehan and his wife on a current affairs show to tall about the stress of getting an abortion in Ireland. The producers were then lambasted for not having a pro-abortion person on.
Although, IIRC, the original director general in his diary wrote “the government know they can trust us not to be truly impartial.” You never get Anarchists or Communists on discussion shows.
hey maybe they did. any anarchist & communist with a brain understands that the majority of people will have a knee jerk reaction and shut down if you utter the various trigger phrases (such as “anarchism/communism has some good points”). so they’d probably water down their beliefs for easier digestion
but if you mean an outspoken anarchist who gets invited to talk about anarchism then yeah you’re right, this isn’t happening unless for a joke or to make them a scapegoat
Definitely agree with you there. In an effort to appear balanced they try and present different sides of an argument as if they’re both valid. I guess that’s how Farage got on so much.
I’m all for impartiality. But if a dude says “We should kill everyone who isn’t like me!” You don’t have to say “Before you judge, let’s hear his side.” You can start judging immediately.
They are not impartial on this one
If both ends of the spectrum are saying it, they’re probably threading the needle pretty well.
“Both the Palestinians and Israelis are saying they are being treated unfairly. This means we are treating both fairly”. - enlightened centrist after Biden refuses to send one shipment of 2000 pound bombs to Israel.
that is not sound logic
So much for “never again,” eh? More like “whenever we feel like it” if trends in global hegemony are any indication.
Still #Undecided?
We still litigating this?
The dems ran a deeply unpopular candidate on status quo in an election about how the status quo was hurting non-rich Americans. They shoved leftists out of the way in favor of more moderate and conservative leaning people trying to reach out to those that were already not going to vote for them.
I did vote, and I voted for Kamala; that vote wasn’t an excited vote, but one in the hopes that she could win and we could inch another 4 years to a hopefully better candidate set. The amount of emails sent to both Biden and Kamala, and the amount of shitty responses about how its totally OK was deeply disheartening, but I still voted, even though it felt like nothing would change.
Those that didn’t vote due to Gaza, which if memory serves was a small block, specifically stated they just wanted to be recognized. The campaign instead tried to go on Joe Rogan and “toured” with a Cheney.
There’s not some crazy reason people stayed home. They stayed home because either choice felt like doom, and probably felt they didn’t want to participate in either.
That’s all without even getting into the amount of actual voter suppression in general.
But yea, blame those voters.
They stayed home because either choice felt like doom, and probably felt they didn’t want to participate in either.
This is the false equivalency trap they were led into.
Neither side was supporting their cause, but one side was supporting Israel while trying to push for getting aid into the country, and the other side literally said Israel wasn’t killing Palestinians fast enough. You have to be a special kind of dumb to think those two things are the same.
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice. By not voting, they contributed to the win of the candidate who thinks Palestine shouldn’t exist.
Yes, I absolutely hold those people accountable, for this and every other action he takes. Sitting on the sidelines is immoral. Not participating because they couldn’t get exactly the outcome they wanted isn’t ethically defensible. The system is the way it is until we who are working to change it succeed (which may be never), and until then you pick the lesser of two evils, because not voting isn’t going to prevent the election.
Maybe they argue that by not voting they “sent a message.” Ok, maybe they did. As a consequence, the cost of their message is likely to be the extinction of Palestine.
Many of us tried to “send a message” in 2000, and it changed nothing; those of us who voted for a third party in protest are directly culpable for the war in Iraq and the continued expansion of the Republican agenda in courts and state legislature through two terms.
The protest voters, and protest non-voters, in 2024 participated in what’s to come.
The most infuriating thing about this is that it seems nobody learned anything from WWII. This is like Ghandi preaching passive resistance to German Jews; I have no respect for these people who refused to take a side knowing full well that one candidate was a worse outcome for Palestine.
they just wanted to be recognized
Well they got their wish. They are certainly recognized now.
What a takeaway lol.
Dude, I’m also super angry, but blaming people for wanting to be seen isn’t going to help. If anything, its just going to setup for further divisions, which is what this administration wants.
Do you imagine this wouldn’t have happened if the election had gone the other way? Yeah they’ve gone mask off, so it’s harder now to pretend it isn’t happening, but the results for people in Gaza are pretty much the same, since this was already Israel’s plan for decades and the US government continued to supply them with the weapons to carry it out. The only real difference is the republicans language saying it out loud and making it harder to ignore.
If we buy into the idea that the situation in Palestine would be exactly the same, that means not voting for Harris because of Palestine was choosing all of the other horrible shit Trump is doing for zero benefit to Palestine.
Really showed them Dems!
Sure, I didn’t make any comment about the internal situation in America, I’m not American. I do think it’s valid to have voted for the democrats for those reasons though, absolutely. But like, even now the democrats are enthusiastically cooperating with the current republican agenda and not really bothering to do anything against it, so I don’t think they care that much either way, even if they wouldn’t have advanced it as fast.
I also think that you have to speak to people’s concerns to win elections and they clearly did not do a good job of that. Of course you can to some extent blame voters for being uninformed, but they are not the ones with a billions dollars marketing budget to communicate what they will actually do to improve things, so I don’t think you can blame them the most.
Removed by mod
The last resort of someone who knows they have no valid argument…
But this was expected right? Is there anyone who genuinely thought this wouldn’t happen? I thought all the people calling out “Genocide Joe” were right-wing alts breaking up the left.
Sadly some of them were just single issue idiots with half a braincell
The BBC has been complicit in the last 16 months of genocide and for good reason.
Robbie Gibb, who is on the BBC’s Board of Trustees, is also Editor of the Jewish Chronicle, a fanatically Zionist rag whose funding is hidden but suspected to be tied to the Israeli embassy.
Raffi Berg, BBC News online editor, is a former state department employee, fan of Netanyahu and has been described by one journalists as "This guy’s entire job is to water down everything that’s too critical of Israel”
More here:
https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/bbc-civil-war-gaza-israel-biased-coverage
