Kamala might fund genocide in Israel. But Trump will fund genocide in Israel, and genocide here.
We can be ideologically pure when we don’t have fascists at the doorstep. Thousands of children just FUCKING VANISHED during Trumps term. What’s going to happen during his second? Texas was (is?) putting barbed wire in the river on the fucking border. Trump will give free rein to murderous politicians (Texas is also about to execute another innocent man btw). People are going to die here.
This is extremely misleading. Fuck Trump 10000 times and kamala is the only sane choice, but stop trying to paint over reality to try and make her look like she’s not just a lesser evil.
She didn’t just “not promise to solve 1000 year conflict” (which the genocide has been going on for the last 75 years),
she did promise to continue funding genocide with American taxpayer dollars. (Of which the US has been giving and average of $5 billion in tax dollars and weapons to Isreal per year for the last 75 years, since they first invaded Palestine).
We are voting for her because she is the lesser evil. We don’t have to be happy about it or stop criticizing her on her bad policies.
Basically: Vote for Harris, but also fuck her for vowing to continue funding genocide. Trump would also keep funding genocide, and he’d also destroy what’s left of the west, on top of every other obvious reason he should never be in power again (and never should have been).
Right wing morons and shills can’t exactly base their arguments on how much better Republicans are, so they come at it sideways with this bullshit.
Well, jokes on them because “the left” isn’t made up of complete morons like they have in the MAGA movement. Despite neoliberal whining to the contrary, the left has been consistently the most reliable voting demographic the Democrats have, and that’s despite the fact that the establishment shits on us at every opportunity.
The majority of people want an end to the Unconditional Military Support of Israel. That is the requirement for the US to abide by US and International Humanitarian Law as well. It’s not that complicated. You can’t say you want to support civilians on both sides when you provide one side with the weapons used to commit genocide against the other unconditionally.
The argument for people who are anti-genocide to vote Harris, is that Trump will not only be much worse than the current administration, but will not be able to be swayed by public pressure in the same way Harris might be. The harm reduction argument is true for domestic policies, but is meaningless for foreign policy when the current administration is assisting Genocide.
Harris is significantly more likely to be pressured to change course from public pressure than Trump, that is the right argument for getting people who are anti-genocide to vote Harris despite the current administration’s policy. Because the fight doesn’t end after the election, but the fight will be much more difficult under a Trump administration.
It’s the wrong reason, but Trump seems to dislike giving american money to anyone, and so does his base, so that is a possible point of pressure
The argument for people who are anti-genocide to vote Harris, is that Trump will not only be much worse than the current administration, but will not be able to be swayed by public pressure in the same way Harris might be.
It’s also the “current administration”. I’d imagine that despite all of the people pretending otherwise (and kind of buying the “She’s Biden”, weak-ass attack line from the Trump camp), a Harris-Walz administration will not be exactly the same as the current Biden-Harris one.
The vice presidency is largely a ceremonial role, and she has to walk a fine line while campaigning for the job of POTUS to not criticize the “current administration” that she’s nominally part of and therefore is not likely to break with it very much publicly, but I would find it utterly unsurprising if she charted a completely distinct course from Biden on many issues when she assumes the role.
The argument against that is that the best time to make a politician to promise something is when their job is on the line. The vote is really the only way normal Americans have to get their voice heard, and it, along with bribe money from lobbyists, is the only thing they listen to.
The other argument is that morally, many people can’t bring themselves to vote for someone enabling a genocide. Especially since Kamala is connecting herself so much to Biden saying she’d do all the same things, a vote for her is a stamp of approval for all of the current administration’s policies.
I’ve heard people say she has to support a genocide because so many Americans are pro-Israel, and she’ll lose the election if she doesn’t show unconditional support. That basically forces the anti-Zionist coalition to vote against her to show their numbers and prove they are to be listened to as well.
Why so much Occasional Capitalization of Random Words?
It’s the polite way to emphasize words. But also in ideological discussions there’s just so many nouns.
That’s…no? That’s not at all how to emphasize words. Only proper nouns are capitalized. Italics, bold, and underline are how to emphasize.
You’re thinking about academic writing. Informal, marketing, opinion pieces, and really most other forms of writing allow for capitalizing as a less intrusive way to emphasize. Heck the military goes full bore and capitalizes the entire word for key terms and names.
Because those are proper nouns. It has nothing to do with emphasis.
If US stopped sending billions in weapons for Israel to kill whoever their current target is, that would be a huge blow to the whole ‘conflict’ (as in, a colonial genocide). Neither of the candidates are willing to do anything of the sort though - Kamala has pledged to continue supporting Israel while Trump has pledged to give all the support Israel needs to ‘finish the job quickly’.
And while yes, there’s nuance to be found like with literally everything in the world, it’s not a reason to dismiss any criticisms thrown at your preferred candidate.
If they were good faith criticisms, sure. But they’re just propaganda. All this talk about Gaza will vanish like a fart in the wind after the election.
Can’t say I haven’t seen the conflict used as propaganda to encourage not voting - that does exist and it’s counterproductive assuming there’s no massive direct action campaigns going on at the same time (which would probably have to be something massive, something akin to a left’s version of January 6th).
That being said, how is criticizing Kamala about her stance on Israel a bad faith criticism? I genuinely do not understand - there’s a literal genocide going on there being committed by Israel, with Palestinians being deliberately starved, bombed and Gaza being mostly rubble by now. Aggression is being shown to their neighbors now as well with the conflict being escalated by Israel, and US directly supports both of these horrible events.
What’s happening right now in Gaza is akin to the holocaust, at least according to some historians specializing in the field, and just handwaving it as some non-issue that will be forgotten just to protect your preferred political candidate from any kind of criticism is just sad.
Genocides happen a lot, and rarely do American voters care. I’m not saying it’s objectively not important, I’m just saying the only reason people care now is election propaganda. If it weren’t for that, it would be just another “oh that’s horrible, change the channel I think the game is starting”.
Exactly. They’ll disappear and resurface as alt accounts that will play the victim of their own ignorance.
“Woe is me! How did we end up with Trump! Noooooooooo…….”
I was banned from r/LateStageCapitalism for politely supporting a post with this reasoning. I pointed out that Trump would make the conflict even worse for innocents, and voting third-party to make a statement against neoliberal Democrat rule (which is bad) is a position that, in this moment, only the least-vulnerable in America can take when there is a risk of outright christo-fascism threatening the least-enfranchised.
Banned. “This is a socialist sub.” Proceeded to see a post from a mod openly mocking anyone who entertained lesser-of-two-evils arguments; they sounded like a sneering teenager. Over there, it’s all theory and no parsing of theory with reality.
Thats probably true but is still a guess. Trumps infinite capacity to be bribed-- probably cheaply-- must conflict at some level with his overt antisemiticism. Once he gets enough of his little fingers on our taxpayer money he wont need AIPAC bribes, and then what will he do? His and Vance’s answer to “The Jewish Question” will be the same answer he gives to every other nonwhite subgroup. AIPAC must be thinking of how to deal with Vance and hasten Trumps demise along. Its the only plan that makes any sense for them.
We know Harris will 100% support Israeli demands and continue whatever Biden starts, which is bad enough.
And, obviously, Trump will end America one way or another, so thats a consideration too.
Yeah. I have all that garbage filtered from my feed and advise others to as well.
Nice to see r/LateStageCapitalism is still letting tankies run off allies.
Was it ever not a tankie sub?
They are the leftist version of r/thedonald
No think. Only jerk
Here’s the Socialist argument for Harris.
Ho Chi Minh would have know all about America’s long history of slavery and genocide.
Ho helped the American OSS run missions in Vietnam during WW2.
Your allies don’t have to be perfect.
IIRC he had actually originally appealed to the US for help, and there’s a good chance he’d have gotten it too if France didn’t threaten to leave NATO and join the Societ bloc if America took any course of action besides helping them continue to suppress the Vietnamese.
It’s amazing how history works.
At the time, the West ‘losing China’ was a political hurricane. Stalin and Mao were seen as unstoppable and nuclear war was on everyone’s minds. France was seen as a vital part of the West’s alliance, and even the threat of them leaving was disastrous.
Hindsight is always 20/20.
Your allies don’t have to be perfect.
You say her critics are haggling about being perfect? Progressives arent even asking for perfect, they are asking for the bare minimum to follow our existing laws: neutrality.
And your implicit minimalization of whats going on is pretty terrible. We arent talking about school vouchers, PETA, or something trivial and grey shaded here, its a much more black and white and life and death conversation. Therefore actively supporting a genocide in a far rightwing war with American weapons and now American boots on the ground and American interference in the UN VS being truly neutral and enabling peace are pretty darn far apart positions.
If Israel didnt have those weapons, they wouldnt be able to do so much killing, with so much impunity. This is illegal, unethical, and the cost to the western world order and our reputation is astronomical. So your characterizing it as strving for perfection doesnt seem right to me.
And you arent even considering the second order effects to the concept of democracy and sanctity of borders globally. We have neutered the UN, and that enables and encourages every militant thug in the world.
Ho Chi Minh would have know all about America’s long history of slavery and genocide.
He still wanted help against the greater threat.
Trump is literally talking about being a dictator and ending elections.
There’s a big difference between “not perfect” and “enabling a genocide, giving weapons to an ally that is starting a war with all the Middle-East and the UN, and burning children alive in hospital refugee camps”.
There were lynchings going on during the time Ho Chi Minh was hosting the American soldiers who were fighting the Japanese. And Ho tried to get American support before the US spurned him.
And how is getting Trump in going to stop the Israelis? He’d be giving them nukes on Inauguration Day.
People have already asked for Biden and Harris’s help in stopping this genocide and have been spurned. In this analogy, it’s already after they’ve been given the middle finger while bombs have been given to the people destroying their families. And it was barely applicable as it was.
And Israel already has nukes. But doubt they’ll use them, the whole point is to take the land they’re invading all over the place, not irradiate it. There’s not a lot Trump can give them that Biden and Harris aren’t already. They’ve even got boots on the ground now so we have an excuse to invade when some will inevitable die.
Israel has nukes. And I for one think it’s much more likely that they’ll decide to go out in a blaze of glory if they think that’s the only option, like if their main ally abandons them. Did you consider that possibility? That Israel might decide to start WW3?
I have a feeling Israel would rather just stop invading other countries and genociding Palestinians than instigate a nuclear holocaust and killing all of themselves. Seems like the smarter open, no? It’s not like they haven’t been slapped down by the US before. They always go too far. This has happened before and will happen again.
Hell, even Reagan and HW have withheld arms and money to Israel before for invading Lebanon or taking over Gaza or West Bank settlements, and that was after they had nukes. Biden is to the right if Republicans on this issue.
Just love how all of the sudden a fresh crop of.ml weeds are in my feed to be blocked because they realized all the old propaganda spreaders were blocked and refused to not be listened to about how letting even more genocide happen is the true anti-genocide position.
The comment section for this type of posts is always such a shit show.
This is essentially saying 2 things:
1 - It’s insane that some here seem to think that to remain “independent” of politics you can abstain or vote third party to show your discontent for how slowly the Dems deal with Natenyahu’s BS. Your abstain or 3rd party vote does nothing to “move the Dems to the left” when in reality you are removing them from power to give it to Trump, who has already promised to triple down on helping Netanyahu achieve whatever he wants.
The election is happening right now. There’s no time and space to negotiate new candidates or parties. It’s either the disappointing Dems, or the christo-fascist GOP. The time for standing on principle was 3 years ago, or next year at the start of the new cycle. Today is about pragmatism - how close we can get to the desired outcome, and which of these parties is more interested in listening to your position moving forward. It should be abundantly clear that Harris is by a huge margin the better choice for your desired outcomes.
2 - The Israel operation in Gaza, that we all want to stop, is not something that can be just ended with the click of a button. A bunch of actors in that region are hell bent on killing each other, like when Hamas did genocide on Israel last year, and now we have multiple state actors moving armies against each other. The brain-dead premise that somehow Democrats “want genocide” makes it impossible to have a serious conversation.
If you don’t vote for Harris over a mess in the Middle East that we didn’t directly create and are not directly responsible for, and that the Biden administration is trying to solve even if it’s too slow for your taste; and instead you act in favor of helping Trump who will absolutely empower Netanyahu to do whatever he wants, then not only are you directly voting against your own interests, but you are engaging in a level of dumb-fuckery of supreme proportions. And fucking all of us over hard while at it.
In short: By opposing Harris right at the finish line of the election cycle, you are going to inflict Trump’s dictator regime and the runaway christo-fascist GOP on the entire planet, because you are dissatisfied with how mediocre Dems have been at trying to stop Israel. You think this makes you virtuous. It does not.
Yeah this place is definitely just like, getting canvassed hardcore. big rip
When strawman versus just one person isn’t anywhere near enough
Must we endure this witless partisan frothing ?
We get it, you’re on the team, now make something funny or go away.
600 upvotes you reddit migrants must be proud
Who transcribed this? Seriously, people…
More like:
Will solve conflict in the Middle East by letting Israel kill whoever they want, and take any land they want, with full support from the US
vs.
Will solve conflict in the Middle East by letting Israel kill whoever they want, and take any land they want, with full support from the US
I’d tack on:
but explained in a more presidential, civil fashion.
to option 2
“Muh bothsidez!”
Removed by mod
If you’re tired of this kind of crap you can vote for the party for socialism and liberation. They’re running de la Cruz on a platform of Palestinian statehood and an end to arms shipments to israel.
“1000 year old conflict” is already Zionist propaganda.
It’s closer to 5000 years, the only time when the area was really peaceful for a long period of time was when romans destroyed the temple in 71 AD.
Yeah, sure. This specific conflict of Zionist settler-colonialism has been going on for 5000 years. /s 🙄
That is not what I’m saying. The greater Jerusalem area has been in conflict for millennia. It’s shrouded in a different veil over time, but the core conflict remains over control of the Middle East, specifically access to the Mediterranean and control of the trading routes between Africa, Asia and Europe. Over the years this has become entangled with religious fanatische, but at its core, it’s the same conflict that’s been going on since people first settled the region.
Stop overgeneralizing things. No one concerned about the genocide in Gaza draws connections to the fucking Crusades.
Historical continuances aren’t your thing aren’t they? History is nothing but connection and ideas. To give you some perspective:
Current German ownership disputes between the church and the government can be traced back to inheritance disputes that arose because of the fall of the Roman Empire.
Other places having different historical contexts that spills into different regions aren’t your thing, are they? (spare me your smug tone, please)
The whole idea of Zionism arose from problems jewish europeans had in the 20th century. The “jewish question” arose in Europe, pretty much unconcerned of how long Jerusalem was war-torn. (Unless you want to go so far back that historical chaos-theory is in full swing and you can’t make any concrete statements about causal interactions, like "roman ci-il law led directly to russian progroms in the 19th century.)
Seriously: why are you under the impression my initial comment or the message were only about Zionism?
BTW, Zionism as we know it today was coined in the 19th century by Theodor Herzl. Maybe you should open up a book for once instead of repeating easy summaries.
OP is a defender of Zionist positions, so that makes sense.
Who cares about snubbing Harris? That’s just nonsense. We vote because the policies matter, not because a human being we never met would feel bad if she lost.
