|
small butter posted:We've heard this argument back in 2016 from people who didn't want to vote for Clinton. What did we get? Voting for genocide because you believe its the lesser-evil just means you are a Nazi who believes in pragmatism. A system which forces you to support the mass murder of civilians and children as the best possible outcome is a system that should not exist. socialsecurity posted:"Tearing down the system and trying again" will lead to way more than 1.1 Million dead kids, this sounds incredibly callous to human life in general. How many other genocidal governments have had the argument made that "We can't dismantle the regime, too many people will be hurt in the process."? None, and with good reason. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2024 18:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:No one here has argued in favour of "voting for genocide" more than you have by any metric I can identify. The argument has been made that Trump voters are directly responsible for the things he does, something I agree with; you are responsible for the actions of the people you put in power. If that is true, why doesn't the same extend to Biden voters, especially if they are doubling down this November? I don't believe there is any debate about Biden's role in the genocide. He has gone around congress to rearm Israel, he has pushed for funding, he has defunded aid agencies and pressured our allies to do the same, he attacked Yemen to protect Israel from the Houthis, he recently sold Israel more jets, and his administration has denied Israeli wrongdoing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2024 19:53
|
|
|
H.R. Hufflepuff posted:"First they came for the Gazans, and I voted for that poo poo because the other guy was on record promising to come for the Gazans harder and also for me personally." Trump is a notorious liar so I don't know why you would take him seriously on this when you should not take him seriously on anything else. Regardless, the argument is not "We should let Trump win", it is "We should be forcibly dismantling any system where the best possible outcome is genocide." Lesser evil voting brought us to the point where the lesser evil is a genocidaire and I don't see how lesser evil voting one more time will bring different results. The best possible spin on that argument is that you are willing to pay for your own safety with the deaths of tens of thousands of innocents, possibly hundreds of thousands by this November.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2024 20:29
|
|
|
volts5000 posted:Then what's the plan? What is the outline that will get us to this glorious genocide-free outcome? (by the way, when I said "genocide-free", do you mean the genocide stops or it keeps going, we're just not supplying it?) Are you hoping for a 10 point plan on how to dismantle and replace the two party system? There's no roadmap. There are plenty of theories ranging from elevating 3rd parties to mass sustained protests to general strikes. This is a problem which will need to be confronted eventually, because the Democrat plan for stopping Republicans is: "Never ever lose an election." The plan for regaining the courts is: "Wait decades until SCOTUS justices die and pray they're in power when it happens." Given that Democrats rarely undo any institutional changes Republicans put in place, this is not sustainable, so even if Biden wins (a long shot), all that you've accomplished is normalizing genocide and kicking the can four years down the road. I can tell you what won't result in a genocide-free outcome, and that is voting for the people carrying out the genocide.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2024 22:52
|
|
|
Bodyholes posted:Voting for liberals to stop fascists is fascism. Voting for fascists on the other hand, totally not fascist at all. Cool and good actually. I did not advocate voting for fascists, quite the opposite actually. Voting for liberals does not stop fascists, which should be painfully clear after the last three years, and I have extremely bad news if you think that Democrats are free from the fascism label considering what has transpired with Israel. Or the border. Or how they have enabled Republicans through direct action or inaction.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2024 05:31
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Is this election only about a single issue? I would think that Trump winning would be a nightmare for everyone, not just Gazans, but for them too. This election should be about having a line we don't cross. Mendrian posted:The answer to this is quite clear: we don't vote our way out of fascism. The vote has nothing at all to do with signaling your allegiances or changing the country. You pick whichever candidate is the most pragmatic. Then you go back to doing the real work. I agree that we don't vote our way out of fascism, I disagree that you can be pragmatic about genocide. At least not without being a willing participant in it and trivializing it as the cost of doing business. The real work is convincing others to join us in doing everything in our power to upset a system where we're told the base outcome is ethnic cleansing. Genocide is on the ballot, there are leftist candidates that would stop Israel. If they don't win then this government should be forcibly replaced. To those who make the "I'm voting for my safety" argument, I would say you have a moral imperative to put your safety at risk to send a message that we won't tolerate this, we cannot pay for safety with the lives of innocent people. Can anyone be safe if a government that is rapidly falling into fascism makes mass murder a tool in their arsenal? When Trump first got elected I remember seeing an opinion piece where the take-away was "don't let this become the new normal, don't become numb to this" and I think about that often. We all just spent the last 7 years watching our friends and family on social media sharing variations the same message "Whatever you would be doing in 1930s Germany is what you're doing now". Now that we're all watching a genocide happen on our phones, none of those stated convictions are bearing fruit. I can't overstate how depressing this is.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2024 15:00
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:You are willing to sacrifice my safety in an effort that will do nothing to help your cause, and potentially will actually make the situation worse, so that you personally feel more morally righteous. Everyone's safety at risk if this continues. The Democratic Party are not only normalizing ethnic cleansing, they are contributing to the rise in global fascism. Allies are people who want to build a government that won't see your rights as a chip to be traded away to build bipartisanship with fascists. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/06/us/transgender-athletes-title-ix-biden-adminstration.html Rookersh posted:It'll also make their cause worse! So will offering zero push-back to the supposed good guys outflanking Republicans on mass murder. Biden had made many promises that he hasn't even attempted to fulfill. Why should I believe that when he concludes this genocide that he'll help the scant few that survived? Also how is this even a positive? That's like saying Hitler plans a nice vacation home for the Jews who escaped from Auschwitz. Xiahou Dun posted:And the fact that they have no plan for how their lack of voting will lead to any change. I can say the exact same thing to the people who believe in lesser-evil voting. It has made things steadily worse for decades, and now people are insisting we must repeat the definition of insanity. I have not heard a single compelling argument how voting Dem in 2024 will bring about the end of our slide into fascism or even stop the party from sliding to the right.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2024 16:20
|
|
|
Kagrenak posted:What are you talking about, the forcible overthrow of the US government they suggested is definitely a solid and realistic plan that if successful would definitely result in a leftist government being installed. The alternative is a guaranteed fascist government backed by 250 years of tradition and precedent.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2024 16:26
|
|
|
Bodyholes posted:You never see the far right argue against electoralism. You never see the far right sit back and let their opponents win as a 4d chess play. They are committed to probing every avenue they can to further their goals and the last 40 years are a testament to the effectiveness of their tenacity. Why would the conservatives argue against electoralism? Both parties are sprinting to the right. Turning Palestinian children into pink mist, locking brown people in cages, and Reaganite economics are wholly bipartisan.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2024 17:11
|
|
|
zoux posted:Such as? Also challenge mode: it has to adhere to the rule of law and the principles of liberal democracy. The only non-violent way fascists can reliably be defeated: Abandoning the neoliberalism that creates the conditions for fascism. If material conditions are rising instead of declining, fascists lose their ability to recruit by scapegoating. Its harder to get people to rock the boat when things are consistently breaking their way. The law question is trickier because our systems and legal framework were built to empower the capitalist class and prevent this exact thing from happening. Democrats cannot create a system where their voters and donors both win, one has to lose.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2024 17:58
|
|
|
koolkal posted:It's essentially the same bill as before with some minor tweaks like giving Tiktok 1 year instead of 6 months to sell. In my opinion, this is one of the most glaring red flags that Democrats are not serious about combating fascism. They are locking arms with Republicans in attacking a platform because its a hub of leftist thought/advocacy while shooting their foot off with the under-40 demographic for potentially decades. Its completely antithetical to the sales pitch that Democrats are a firewall to a right-wing takeover.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2024 18:08
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Yeah thats right they aren't serious because this reason you just imagined. Please explain how Democrats can act as a firewall to fascism if they can't win because they burned their support with gen-z and millennials. I don't think we need to debate why leftist advocacy would combat fascism.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2024 18:17
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:They aren't attacking Tiktok because its the hub of leftism or whatever conspiracy theory nonsense you have come up with. Also if leftist success is dependent on a random app it's doomed anyway. Right, they're attacking Tiktok because its a hub of leftism AND its eating American companies' lunch. Edit: I don't think leftist success is dependent on one app, but can we really afford to be throwing away tools? 
Neat Bee fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Apr 19, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2024 18:27
|
|
|
Riptor posted:it's gonna be sold to an american company and will likely not substantively change and everyone will forget a week later that it even changed hands This is a pretty bold claim considering we just witnessed a radical transformation in Twitter from a sale which wasn't even outside the US.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2024 18:33
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:We absolutely do and should debate this at every juncture, you have active leftists on youtube like Keemstar who are self-described "Maga Communists" and Fascists with Socialist Characteristics like Luna Oi who are just as bad on trans and lbgtq+ issues as any fascist; if leftist advocacy results in a Soviet Russia situation where you had the Bolsheviks taking power away from other leftists like the Mensheviks and then after that Stalin replacing Lenin and cracking down on LBGTQ rights, that's basically just as bad as fascists taking power if these people get anywhere near to power they will seize it and attempt to remake society according to bigoted whims; so we absolutely need to be vigorous and closely scrutinize such claims about leftist advocacy being taken for granted as being "good" at combating fascism when nearly every practical example has turned de facto fascist. We don't need to take influencers at their word that they are leftists, especially when they're behaving in a manner that is mutually exclusive to leftism, such as attacking marginalized groups. Sorry, are we talking about modern leftism or leftism from a century past?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2024 19:36
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Even if TikTok gets banned or whatever, what's stopping someone from setting up TokTik and continuing on I would say the wording of the legislation being used to ban it, which is rather far reaching and absolutely a power we would not want to fall into Republicans' hands. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10942
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2024 19:41
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:You can always blame people for believing conspiracy theories without credible evidence Wealthy, powerful people having whistleblowers murdered is not conspiracy. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/16/malta-car-bomb-kills-panama-papers-journalist
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 00:57
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:This is not at all relevant to the conversation unless your you're arguing that some wealthy, powerful people have whistleblowers murdered implies that all whistleblower deaths are murder. Not all are murder, or even deaths! Some are prison sentences with extreme periods of isolation because apparently the Biden administration has an axe to grind against whistleblowers who complain about war crimes. https://theintercept.com/2021/11/04/drone-attack-kabul-pentagon-report-whistleblowers/
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 01:20
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:This his not relevant to the discussion Boeing is essential to the US MIC and this administration has previously attacked whistleblowers who threaten the MIC.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 01:24
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:That article is about a person who was prosecuted for leaking documents under the Trump administration and bad American strategy choices don't threaten the MIC at all. Unless you think the air force is going to stop buying planes entirely because American generals made bad calls in Afghanistan in 2013 and were exposed. That article is about a person who was prosecuted under Trump and then the Biden DOJ went out of its way to make his sentence much more cruel. Nobody mentioned the air force ceasing plane purchases, we are discussing is a history of severe consequences befalling whistleblowers who mess with the MIC. Its related because Boeing is part of the MIC. We have two cases where MIC whistleblowers were targeted.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 01:40
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I don't think you actually know what you were referencing. He was moved to a different prison for two weeks because he asked for mental health treatment and his request was approved. But they didn't have a bed at the facility he requested. He was there for two weeks before he was moved to out of prison into a mental health ward at the hospital he requested. The Intercept paints it as some random retribution that they inflicted on him for no reason several years later without mentioning that he requested the transfer that prompted it and he was only there for two weeks. One of the links in that article has the following quote: Jesselyn Radack, who represented Hale as one of his lawyers, told the Dissenter, “It can only be seen as punitive that Daniel Hale, who has no criminal history and pled guilty to a nonviolent crime, got put in a secret, Kafkaesque, and isolated ‘terrorist unit’ with virtually no access to outsiders—or even other prisoners.” “It’s another draconian move by the government to silence and punish whistleblowers,” Radack added.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 01:57
|
|
|
Kchama posted:A secret, Kafkaesque, isolated 'terrorist unit' with virtually no access to outsiders except for the fact that it's on Wikipedia and notably is not an isolation cell. They still get to communicate with the outside world, it's just lessened and more restricted. They can still interact with other inmates, they just can't get together in groups (which is a problem for Muslims who must pray together). But if he was only there for two weeks then the communication restrictions (mostly less time for it) would only really effect his letter-receiving, since all of them are investigated first and thus he might not even be there long enough to get his letters before they're done being investigated. Two weeks? He spent 33 months in the CMU. https://thedissenter.org/drone-whistleblower-cmu-finally-released-from-prison/
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 02:21
|
|
|
Kchama posted:Didja notice my 'if' there? Because I was going off Leon Trotsky saying he was only there for two weeks. Ah, my mistake! Apologies!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 02:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:He was imprisoned for 33 months total. The time he was actually fully cut off from visitors/other prisoners was from October 6th through October 19th. He was in the CMU from October 2021 until his release in February 2024. The degree to which he was cut off is in the quote below. quote:However, prisoners in CMUs only interact with prisoners in the CMU, if they are permitted to interact with any prisoners. "All avenues of communication with the outside world are restricted and monitored. All CMU social visits are live-monitored by BOP staff and must occur in English, unless previously scheduled for simultaneous translation.”
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 03:30
|
|