I am not saying we shouldn’t vote for Biden, but acting like we shouldn’t be protesting the genocide of Palestinians is bullshit. I know Trump would be worse, but it doesn’t mean we should speak out against Biden sending weapons that directly aid in the death of children.
We can’t just pretend he isn’t complicit in war crimes just because the other option is worse. We should be able to speak out against the atrocities.
At least Biden allows the protests to happen. Under Trump, the first protest would be the last as he would immediately mobilize the National Guard and authorize the use of lethal force to suppress it.
As opposed to the police currently beating the shit out of protestors. I understand it would be worse under trump, but that’s a really low fucking bar. We should be asking for better, not settling for the regime which is only maiming protestors instead of killing them.
Is he, though? I know the president isn’t directing this stuff directly, but the harshest crackdowns have been in cities run by democrats, in democratically run states. As the leader of the party he could’ve told local administrators to respect free speech rights of protestors.
You know what? I don’t know he isn’t directing this stuff directly. All the crackdowns happened at the same time in all those Democratically controlled cities, almost like it was coordinated and that someone at the top ordered it.
But maybe it’s just a coincidence. 🤷♀️
I was trying to be charitable to Biden, but yeah, the whole thing of ‘Trump would’ve sent the national guard instead’ thing isn’t really functionally different.
On the other hand, there’s examples of administrators engaging the protestors and giving concessions up to a point where they voluntarily cleaned up their encampments.
Then I think this isn’t directed towards voters like you. It’s directed toward those who say you shouldn’t vote for Biden as a protest.
I am not sure this is effective against those voters. If anything it’s shaming, at best, which causes people to dig their heels in. Addressing those voters as petulant children is not the way to bring them on board.
Well of course. It’s directed towards them but just like almost everything on social media is meant to make those who agree feel better.
But the point isn’t to convince the voters who are being shamed, but to lessen the reach of their talking points to undecided or on-the-fence voters by pointing out the absurdity of the talking points being pushed.
If some clown is out there, trying to convince everyone clown makeup is the new style, the goal of mocking the clown is not to get the clown to take off their makeup, it’s to remind everyone that clown makeup being ‘the new style’ is fucking absurd no matter how many times or how loudly it’s repeated, and will make you look like a goddamn clown.
Their myopic crusade will doom the whole planet.
Really? A genocide is “myopic”?
The people who are on the streets organising and protesting for Palestine are the same people who are doing all kinds of organising: unionising workplaces, mutual aid, street medics, etc. to build up communities and create actual positive change in society.
Do-nothing liberals will do absolutely nothing but complain every day of the year. Democracy isn’t a matter of voting once every 4 years.
Besides, most of these people, despite being highly critical of Biden and will show up to vote on the day. They’re just not going to spend the rest of their time campaigning for a lost cause.
Why not put some of the blame on liberals who aren’t doing enough? Or maybe the reactionaries and fascists who do not give a fuck about what the vote says and will do everything in their power to obstruct, ignore, overturn and use violence to get the outcome they want. You’re delusional if you think fascists will just go away if Biden gets the vote.
You lack of concrete action will doom us.
How did you read that into what I wrote?
You know what I meant.
The comic is highly uncritical of any of the levers of power. In fact it entirely omits any imagery pertaining to politicians or legislators or any political party. So the only people it is directed at are those protesting the genocide in Gaza as though it came at the expense of other issues, while giving those in power who have actually ignored or even fought those issues a complete fucking pass.
Like it doesn’t even mention Biden or any sort of strategy or demands the protestors might have, even. Just shames people for protesting a genocide.
The implication is clear, the issues are all matters of voting including “save democracy”. It’s the statue of Liberty, a clear symbol of American democracy. It is clearly directed squarely at people saying protest by not voting for Biden.
I get the gravity of the situation, but Trump’s side has repeatedly made it clear they would go harder on Gaza.
You SHOULD vote for Joe, but fucking hell this is HIS fault. Voters are a swirling mass of people. It might as well be fluid dynamics. Bad policies and apathy WILL affect support. It’s going to. You can’t stop it. You can’t shame it back again either. You can’t win back tent guy’s vote by blaming him for Joe Biden’s failures.
The most recent weapon shipment is actually on Congress, Joe Biden didn’t want to send it and was forced by a congressional resolution led by Republicans because they know people won’t look into it and the president will take the fall out.
I left some resources to back up these claims in a previous comment .
That sounds like a classic Republican thing to do and I don’t doubt it. But it’s a small detail. Biden’s soft touch has allowed Netenyahu to commit war crimes without a second thought throughout this whole thing.
Write your congressman if they are one of the members that forced the weapon shipments to restart.
In this case Joe Biden did not want to restart shipments but was forced by a Congressional resolution.
Here is a Reuters article covering the resolution, here is the house press release, here is the Congressional voting record.
Saw this posted elsewhere and found it poignant
“If Nixon wins again, we’re in real trouble.” He picked up his drink, then saw it was empty and put it down again. “That’s the real issue this time,” he said. “Beating Nixon. It’s hard to even guess how much damage those bastards will do if they get in for another four years.”
I nodded. The argument was familiar. I had even made it myself, here and there, but I was beginning to sense something very depressing about it. How many more of these goddamn elections are we going to have to write off as lame but “regrettably necessary” holding actions? And how many more of these stinking, double-downer sideshows will we have to go through before we can get ourselves straight enough to put together some kind of national election that will give me and the at least 20 million people I tend to agree with a chance to vote for something, instead of always being faced with that old familiar choice between the lesser of two evils?
– Hunter Thompson, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72
Sure, but nobody was afraid of Nixon becoming a fascist dictator now were they
Lol, I mean I get why you feel this moment is unique, but i’m looking through NYT articles from 1972 and if you take out the dated references you could almost mistake them for articles written in 2024:
To the Editor: When a Democrat for Nixon says “I’ll vote holding my nose, but McGovern is not a big enough man to be President,” or “I don’t like him, but there is no viable alternative,” or an uncommitted Democrat says “McGovern doesn’t turn me on,” such remarks are liberalese for “I’m doing alright the way things are, and can’t take a risk of any change in the status quo.” - NYT Letter to the Editor 10/19/72
"Lawrence F. O’Brien, the na tional campaign chairman for the McGovern‐Shriver ticket, accused the Nixon Administra tion yesterday of sanctioning tactics of “political espionage” that bordered on those of “a fascist state.” - NYT O’Brien Charges ‘Political Espionage’" - 10/14/72
"Deceit, deceit, everywhere deceit—but especially on the political and cultural left, says Arnold Beichman, and most out rageously in the writings of the youth lovers (Marcuse, Slater, Sontag, Roszak, Reich and the rest). They say “America is al ready a fascist country or is on the road to fascism,” that the country “is guilty of genocide,” that “the Bomber Left … is a moral force” They claim the white “American worker … is a retrograde, decadent, self ish creature: a honky,” that “our political system is an ut ter fraud, particularly the two‐ party system,” that “American values are wholly materialistic,” that “America is insane,” and that our primary need is for “a violent revolution.” " - NYT, “Nine Lies About America”, 10/8/72
I’m having a great time reading through these actually, it’s interesting reading the op-eds from back then.
Uh… Nixon was terrible. He resigned in disgrace. Even Republicans shunned him after he left. It’s hard to put into words how much Nixon disappeared from modern society.
Without a second Nixon term, Watergate is probably not as big of a deal. Then Fox News is never created. You can see where I’m going with this.
The point is, yes every election is important. Be grateful you can vote, and that your vote counts. It hasn’t been the norm for most of human history.
Don’t worry, single issue voters are very rare. They’re being loud right now on Lemmy, but I honestly don’t see them anywhere else. I’m pretty sure at least a third are paid actors too, but I can’t prove that.
Basically “everyone I disagree with is a paid shill”
So does that mean you were paid to make this post?
Anyone who thinks that foreign or business interests wouldn’t try to fan the flames of unrest in order to influence the election hasn’t paid any attention to previous elections.
It doesn’t mean that the reason for the unrest isn’t valid. They found a weakness and they’re going for it.
I am disgusted with Biden. Punishing his behavior at the general election will result in an even worse situation for the people of Palestine.
Are you prepared to engage in accelerationism?
If being called out on supporting genocide is such a national security risk then maybe biden should stop supporting genocide. Then you get the benefit of removing that as an issue and, you know, not supporting genocide.
That’s why I called it a weakness.
The division on the left over Palestine has got to be the dumbest fucking shit I’ve ever seen. Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.
I’m sure if it wasn’t Palestine they would have picked some other hill to die on
Seriously, Palestinian American here and I feel actually violated for them to be using my kin’s corpses as fetish porn for their narrative.
I have family who are Nakba victims that I haven’t been able to meet because they put everything into giving my grandfather the chance to escape, people who actually experienced the genocide first hand, and all I can see in these people wielding it as a cudgel to declare they won’t vote and nobody else should either is the same white cynical “leftism” that made Nader and Stein become the perfect catastrophes for American democracy.
Here is the single Palestinian cause, Badna N3aesh! We want to live! We want to live, both in the homeland, and everywhere else we may go, and that means you have no right to use our dead to let the ones who would kill us here too into power.
Badna N3aesh!!!
Kinda hard for Palestinians living in Palestine to actually live when biden hands over billions of dollars in weapons for israel to bomb them. Why are you more mad at people opposed to genocide than the ones who full-throatedly support the bombing of Palestinians?
Stopping gun violence is what the Gaza protestor is trying to to do. Banning bigotry? Yep, same. Save democracy? How? By standing strong with genocide? Not very fucking likely, imo.
For all of the people who will inevitably show up to say “But you can’t criticize Biden, it’s an election year”: man, I can’t imagine offering such a bad take completely unprompted and free of charge. People are throwing tomatoes at you from the shores of history, you just don’t know it yet. Supporting genocide is wrong, period. If Biden doesn’t want to be criticized for it, maybe he should stop supporting it.
Stopping gun violence is what the Gaza protestor is trying to to do.
Because Palestinians don’t fucking shoot and kill people…? Way to jump the shark.
Hamas murdered more people in 1 day than every American school shooting combined.
Do you listen to yourself? What the fuck are you even talking about?Banning bigotry? Yep, same
Hamas is an Islamic terrorist group founded on an explicit call for genocide against Israeli Jews.
They aren’t flying rainbow flags or celebrating pride month this year, either.Save democracy? How?
By voting against a self-described “dictator” who happens to also be an authoritarian kleptocrat who calls every election he’s ever been in “rigged”, pressured Secretaries of States to just make up votes, coordinated false electors to overthrow the election, pressured his VP to call the certification process into question and who generally doesn’t believe in the peaceful transition of power.
I’m not gonna ask you to suck Biden’s cock or anything, feel free to dislike his handling of the Israeli-Palestinian war (a war he neither started nor wanted to happen in the first place) if you want. It’s my view that America’s actions so far have actually saved thousands of lives in the region, and it’s an objective fact that Biden has delivered more aide to Gazan civilians than anyone else. (Don’t let that stop you from being pissed off at the wrong guy.)
But, seeing everything we’ve seen over the last 10 years, are you seriously going to deny that Trump and the Republicans are an existential threat to American democracy?
Supporting genocide is wrong, period
The Palestinians aren’t innocent in this either–they (and the Arab League) threw the first punch back in 1948, and they (Hamas) threw the first punch on October 7th of last year. It takes 2 to tango. Both sides of this fight have been complicit in doing evil shit building up to the conflict we have today. When people say things like “Palestine should be free from the river to the sea”, how can you read that as anything other than a call for genocide against Israeli jews? Hamas surrendered any facade of legitimacy when they conducted a terrorist attack on Israel last year (intentionally killing more people in a single day than Israel has been killing in Gaza on average). Hamas has fired something like 10,000 rockets at Israel (and that’s not counting the attacks from Iran, Hezbollah, etc.), so how many thousands more people do you think would be dead today if Israel didn’t have the capability to defend against those kinds of attacks?
The only peaceful, non-genocidal solution to this ~80 year war is a two-state solution in which Israelis and Palestinians learn to put aside their mutual hatred, dis-empower the extremists who run their societies, and coexist. Neither Hamas nor Netenyahu are capable of delivering this. Hamas will soon pay the ultimate price for their cowardice and terrorism (as they should), and hopefully the Israeli people will see that Netenyahu has failed to protect them and democratically remove him from power.
No one I know who does serious work on Palestine is only working on that one issue, wasn’t doing anything before and won’t do anything after. Burnout is incredibly high among activist leaders right now. Cut us some slack please
They won’t cut you slack, because they actively support the genocide. “But Trump will do worse genocide” is concern trolling.
There’s a genocide? But those numbers were doubled
Cool talking point
Get involved with your local Ranked Choice Voting group.
The one for California is https://www.calrcv.org/
I’ll preface this by saying that near any voting system, ranked choice voting included, is better than FPTP. That being said, ranked choice voting does have some issues. Some that, arguably, can make it almost as bad as FPTP. To be more specific for this argument, I’ll focus on the IRV type. The main negative aspects of this voting system, imo, are that it doesn’t satisfy the monotonicity and Condorcet criterions. Regarding this topic, I highly recommend reading this article. It is very well written, and very informative.
Understood, but don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We just need to improve not perfect.
We just need to improve not perfect.
The one issue with this way of thinking is that since changing such a fundamental system is typically (and, imo, understandably) quite difficult, one doesn’t want to squander the opportunity with an arbitrary decision (I’m not accusing you of making an arbitrary decision, I’m just stating generally), as having another chance is unlikely. Furthermore, experimentation on a mass scale, i.e. country-wide, is generally not a wise idea. One should be firm in their convictions for the decision that they choose to support. It’s possible to cause considerable damage within the edge cases.
You’re right, best deliberate about which one is best instead.
Experimentation? New Zealand, Ireland and Australia already stage elections using forms of RCV.
You’re right, best deliberate about which one is best instead.
Aha, well, up to a point. Certainly worse to be stuck deliberating while society rots away under FPTP. There is certainly truth to your original point of not letting perfect be the enemy of good.
Experimentation? New Zealand, Ireland and Australia already stage elections using forms of RCV.
Interesting. I wonder how prevalent the issues were that I mentioned earlier. I also wonder what type of ranked ballot they use. I’ll have to look into this more. Would you have any good sources for studies looking at the outcomes of them using that voting system?
Minnesota’s group is approaching this a smart way, from the local up. They’re not spending much time in the high-profile positions; they’re tackling local elections. Gets people used to the idea, and they stack higher and higher positions as they’re going. It’ll take time, but starting at the top and working down is a lot harder.
Is this how CA is approaching it?
Is there one for every state? Better question: is there a page that I can link to literally everyone that lists every such group by state?
I’m deeply uncomfortable with the amount of people calling those wholly opposed to complicity in genocide as “single issue voters”. Sure, if genocide isn’t enough of a concern for you to oppose candidates that are complicit, then I guess you can call it “single issue”.
We’re talking genocide here, so I’m going to compare this to the most known genocide on the planet. Imagine if we knew about and could see the Holocaust occurring as it happened when it started, and FDR was funding the Reich including circumventing congress. Would you expect people to still vote for FDR, or would you expect people to oppose his candidacy? This caliber of rhetoric as well as this post has turned this leftist away from my plan to vote for Biden. Nice work folks. I’ll be voting for Cornel West and trying to keep the liberal trifecta in my state legislature this year.
If Trump wins, funding for Israel will increase, and even more Palestinians will die. So basically, you’re valuing your purity over human lives. Which is quite fascist, if you think about it.
No, it’s fucking not. Cornel West opposes funding to Israel, supports a 2 state solution, and supports the same issues strawmanned by lady liberty. I value the end of a genocide as well as a socialist economy. If neither of the mainstream candidates will stop the genocide, I’m going to vote for the only candidate that wants to stop the genocide as well as handle the other issues I care about, in a way I’d align with. My barely tepid patience with Biden and supporters like you has run out.
The reality is that either Trump or Biden will win and if you’re not voting for either of them then, practically speaking, you might as well not vote at all. Third party candidates only ever get a tiny fraction of the overall vote and that’s not going to change this time.
I’m not casting a protest vote. I’m voting honestly because there is no way to strategically vote for the less genocidal candidate.
Biden is the less genocide candidate. He’s been getting aid into Gaza, putting pressure on Israel, and directing funds towards humanitarian aid. All of that would cease immediately under trump.
Realistically, the best way to reduce genocide is through protest, donations, and activism. Electorally, the best option is to vote for Biden in the hopes we can keep trump from making thing unimaginably worse.
clearly my message went over your head. Either a candidate supports a genocide, or they don’t. Biden can wag his finger all he wants, he’s still complicit in genocide. The truth is that he’s handling Israel more conservatively than Ronald Fucking Reagan.
If you put things in such stark black and white terms then every president has supported genocide; they’ve been funding Israel since the beginning, and America itself is built on stolen, colonized, and occupied land.
In truth elections have consequences, and across the board things will be substantially worse under trump than Biden.
The “if Trump wins” folks are angry at the implication that their vote is tacit support of genocide, but are fine with the implication that not voting for Biden is tacit support for Trump
I don’t get this Schrödingers democracy thing here. The American people should save democracy by voting for Biden to stop Trump. But they can’t make demands against the pro-Israeli positions of Biden. You aren’t even in the real election phase, the election is in six months, and people can’t criticize or demand better action from their own elected president. Hell, I’ve seen these kinds of memes since the primaries, which are meaningless for Bidens candidacy except that you can send signals that you maybe have to change your course. But nothing has changed at all since then either, only empty words. How is this democratic then?
I’m not even saying that Biden has to do everything the most radical people on the pro-Palestine side demand. But Biden doesn’t even try to find a compromise. He could maybe leverage the power that the American government has over Israel to stop the bombing of Gaza. If he feels brave he could even demand the stop on more settlements.
It’s the Schrodingers democracy of the shrodingers “free” world we live in — Politics is pay to play, corporations are people and both can donate unlimited money, wealth equality is worse than the guilded age, but we totally have “democracy” bro. Also you should shut up and support a genocide because we’re fighting to prevent the fascists from taking power, which will surely lead to genocide… Only worse!
This is the kind of discourse you get with a 2 party system ruled by a corporatocracy masquarading as a democracy — the propagandized neoliberal drones are most of the comments you read. Ultimately vote for Biden, because the alternative is literal Christian fascist dictatorship, but give Biden and neoliberals hell; make them believe they’re gonna lose all the way to voting day.
give Biden and neoliberals hell; make them believe they’re gonna lose all the way to voting day
I agree with this, but people really need to stop qualifying every critique with their intent to vote for him anyway. Biden has already been saying he doesn’t believe his polling numbers are real (why liberals aren’t panicking about that indifference is beyond me), we really can’t be sending mixed signals here.
He risks losing if he doesn’t change course, full stop. He needs to know that risk is real.
How patronizing is this
Dunno. How patronizing is it?
Single-issue voters are one of the biggest challenges to a functioning democracy. Planks and balance provide depth; a willingness to compromise and work to the greater good.
But that’s gone now, isn’t it. And when a Palestinian advocate candidate is running for president, who supports pro-choice, affordable housing, and every other liberal plank except they object to green-colored libraries, then fuck them because I have to have my green-painted libraries!
deleted by creator
Single-issue voters are one of the biggest challenges to a functioning democracy.
You don’t have a functional democracy. You never have.
patronizing is exactly the right word holy shit :(
i am not a single issue voter and i’m highly critical of those telling me to utterly ditch the blue vote. but i am very uncomfortable with this portrayal of the pro-Palestine movement and i hope you, the reader, are too
the artist of this should feel some level of shame i think
You’re reading too much into it. The cartoon isn’t about those who support Palestine. It’s about those who make it their only issue. Ending up only hurting themselves and everyone else.
Under a cartoon representation of a quite standard-looking Palestine supporting protester.
“The cartoon isn’t about those who support Palestine.”
What textual or external evidence do you have for this? Genuinely what could I be missing here lmao? Open to correction but this sounds like you are gaslighting urself?
Edit to be very specific: The comic depicts what might be called a “generic” protester. And then puts words in their mouth that are not often heard: “I’m busy.” Not a popular slogan or anything.
There’s one protester, one speech bubble. That’s 100% of the protesters on the page, where the uncommon speech is inserted into the generic. Hence my interperetation that the artist is representing all pro-Palestine protesters here as single issue obstructionist bad actors, which is an obvious non-truth
It’s kind of a visual strawman, in other words.
It’s a political cartoon. They’re visual generally not textual. So there’s at least your first problem of many. Though I think your problems are all of your own design. That you think that represents all Palestinian supporters says more about you than it does about Palestinian supporters.
But let’s analyze your own claims using your own required proofs. Where does the textually say anything you’ve implied?
Hi there, just wanted to mention that visual texts are quite prevalent in rhetorical media (e: of which political cartoons are very much a part despite your strange assertion.) Thank you for considering this perspective. I would appreciate it if you could provide evidence from the visual text or another source to support any alternative interpretations.
An example of my perception: in a political cartoon, a white guy wearing a red MAGA hat might be perceived as representing Trump supporters. There would need to be considerable evidence for me to believe that such a symbol represented a specific subset of that group, of such a kind at least that I do not see here.
I may not engage in further answers to your questions until I receive a response addressing the evidence provided. Thank you for understanding, and I value your perspective.
Edit: I do see that you blocked me. So, that’s excellent :/
Your link has nothing to do with political cartoons. Could you be any more smarmy disingenuous or obvious. You can’t even defend what you said. Nor can you admit it. Worse you resort to lemmygrad posting and making shit up. Proving that you’re not engaging in good faith. The least you could do is make my name bigger on that image so people would know to laugh and ridicule you quicker.
Lemmy.world is pro genocide
