Current politicians can and should be criticized, all of them. Biden most of all, being the President. When American weapons are used to kill innocents, even moreso.
My criticism is how on much of Lemmy this has been extended to “vote for Biden = personally and enthusiastically approve genocide.” You even managed to reach this conclusion in your reply. And that’s how it tends to come up in discussions. People reaching pragmatic conclusions about how best to direct this country with our little meager votes, including reducing genocide and other harm, get met with cries of genocide support. It’s not productive and it shuts down reasonable discussion. And it’s always cries of genocide, not genocide mixed in with another hundred issues. I hope you can see how that makes it seem like a disingenuous talking point. It reminds me of “think of the children” how it uses a very obvious moral stance (genocide bad, or children good) to steamroll any nuance or complexity in the situation.
I agree with the rest of your points though. Like I said, of course he should be criticized. He’s probably the most criticized person on earth, and that’s what he signed up for.
I didn’t say you enthusiastically support genocide, but I did say I feel like you are accepting it. Or rather that the argument that I see constantly on Lemmy “do you think Trump would be better on genocide?” contains in itself an acceptance of genocide. To be clear, I haven’t (and won’t) tell anyone how/whether to vote. I will absolutely represent my own point of view and convictions, including commenting when I see stupid memes like this one.
Current politicians can and should be criticized, all of them. Biden most of all, being the President. When American weapons are used to kill innocents, even moreso.
My criticism is how on much of Lemmy this has been extended to “vote for Biden = personally and enthusiastically approve genocide.” You even managed to reach this conclusion in your reply. And that’s how it tends to come up in discussions. People reaching pragmatic conclusions about how best to direct this country with our little meager votes, including reducing genocide and other harm, get met with cries of genocide support. It’s not productive and it shuts down reasonable discussion. And it’s always cries of genocide, not genocide mixed in with another hundred issues. I hope you can see how that makes it seem like a disingenuous talking point. It reminds me of “think of the children” how it uses a very obvious moral stance (genocide bad, or children good) to steamroll any nuance or complexity in the situation.
I agree with the rest of your points though. Like I said, of course he should be criticized. He’s probably the most criticized person on earth, and that’s what he signed up for.
I didn’t say you enthusiastically support genocide, but I did say I feel like you are accepting it. Or rather that the argument that I see constantly on Lemmy “do you think Trump would be better on genocide?” contains in itself an acceptance of genocide. To be clear, I haven’t (and won’t) tell anyone how/whether to vote. I will absolutely represent my own point of view and convictions, including commenting when I see stupid memes like this one.