this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
159 points (67.5% liked)

Political Memes

5483 readers
2423 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Pfft.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Every time I see IDF officials talk I get big-time Kremlin rhetoric vibes. Now I'm not here defending Hamas in any capacity, but I just tire of IDF being elevated as "the good guys." If they're the good guys, then their standards should have been higher. Instead, just bomb a densely-populated building, killing scores of innocents and just say (without proof), "Oh well there was a high-value Hamas target so it's all good." They pulled the trigger and said that one target was more valuable than the dead children they knew they would kill.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I despise Hamas and won't mourn the passing of the shitheads, but Israel's conduct in murdering Palestinian civilians has been nothing short of abominable.

And unlikely to end Hamas, for that matter.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

And unlikely to end Hamas, for that matter.

This is what I don't get. Even if we take them at their word that they're finishing this for good, did they not learn a goddamned thing from 20 years of failed US military intervention attempting the same thing? Like... here I am just a Palestinian living in a slum exacerbated by blockades just trying to raise a family and unfortunately for me Hamas now controls the neighborhood I live in and I can't do shit about it because they're also being supported by outside nation-states no less. On the flip-side, it seems they're the only marginal deterrent from IDF simply annexing and bulldozing my house... Then Hamas does something stupid; but then Israel claiming to be the good guys levels my apartment and kills my mother, wife, and kids...

Yeah, you bet I would radicalize after that.

So ultimately, the IDF is further destabilizing the region, not even addressing the root causes of extremism, and sowing further October 7ths down the road when all these orphans grow up.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Worst part is, US attempts at counter-insurgency were largely destroyed by outside factors (namely, the fact that we managed to piss off half the world, and the world was right in being pissed, in invading Iraq after having acquired near-infinite goodwill simply by suffering 9/11). We developed fairly effective COIN strategies - and what's more, we offered experienced advisers in urban COIN specifically to Israel in the immediate aftermath of October 7th.

Our advisers left, frustrated, inside of a fucking week. Because the IDF had no interest in pursuing a counter-insurgency strategy. They were interested in pursuing their fucking old world blood feud.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's like being handed a fucking cheat sheet of what not to do and gleefully and knowingly doing everything listed and more. It's insane.

Or it would be insane if one was operating on the premise that the Israeli government was interested in anything other than genocide as a final solution to the Palestine issue. What Israel has done is great for continuing to lock both sides into an insane war of annihilation that will not end well for either party.

If you account for the fact that Netanyahu is basically Israel's Donald Trump, it makes a lot more sense.

[–] cybervseas@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

The hard-right government there wants there to always be chaos so they can remain in power indefinitely.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Most moral people would let 9 guilty men walk to avoid harming a single innocent

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world -5 points 2 months ago

Exactly!!

This is the foundation for which all Western Judicial systems are built on: Justice Blackstone's, "Better that 10 guilty persons escape than 1 innocent suffer."

... And also the reason why these Prisoner Swaps with Russia make complete moral sense.

[–] Communist_Synthesizer@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

They are absolutely NOT the good guys. Israel is having a smaller scale preview of what we'd see if we had the same scenario happen under a Trump presidency. We should try to curb their worst instincts, but you have to win the bloody election first to do it, and somehow account for the fact that the majority of Americans do not give a shit about Palestine.

The last poll I saw on the issue, is that ranking issues from most important to least, Palestine ranked around #9. Behind everything from Immigration, Economy, Women's rights etc. And opposing them is one of the most well connected, well funded special interest groups that exist in the US today, in a country that loves money in politics so much that we legalized bribery.

It's not an accident that some of the most vocal Pro-Palestinian voices in congress were primaried.

In that political climate, the best you can do is to do harm mitigation and make sure Republicans aren't in the driver's seat come 2025.

Yes, I'm being pragmatic. And I'd fucking hope you would be too, when millions of lives are at stake. I donated to Palestine for 20 years. Even back when I was living on a shoestring budget while I was in college. Do the feel good shit AFTER 11/20. I'll be right there with you.

And for the love of god, vote.

Nobody gives a shit about nonvoters in this country. If you wanted to actually affect policy, a half a dozen congressmen that are willing to throw a wrench in things to get their way goes a LOT further than useless yammering about how you're not going to vote because 'both sides are bad'.

A couple of Blue Dogs managed to derail single payer healthcare. We could absolutely do the same for the Palestinian issue, if you could be bothered to get off your ass and vote.

[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Since being primarily concerned about the genocide is that unpopular of a position then why are you so concerned? If Harris made the decision that those voters are not as important to her then that's that. You can't have it both ways no matter how many self-righteous posts you make online.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Since being primarily concerned about the genocide is that unpopular of a position then why are you so concerned?

Because elections in this country are often decided on fractions of a percentage point.

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's exactly why pivoting left on Gaza is critical if Harris wants to secure a Victory. Hundreds of thousands of likely voters all over swing states would be gained of Harris makes Israel a partisan issue

An April 2024 poll of likely voters across the U.S. found that 30% strongly supported withholding military funds to Israel until the attacks on Gaza stop; another 25% somewhat supported that conditional aid policy.

Below we asked all respondents what minimum combination of policies would secure (for non-Biden voters) or solidify (for Biden voters) a vote for Biden for President. A third or more voters in every state except Minnesota said a lasting ceasefire was among the minimum policies that would be needed to secure solidify their votes

Although voters are split on whether they approve or disapprove of Biden’s handling of the war, the vast majority (≥ ~75%) across all states still support an immediate and permanent ceasefire. Only a small minority of voters, from 11.2% to 16.1% in Minnesota and Pennsylvania, respectively, strongly approve of the President’s approach on Gaza. Of those, the vast majority in each state (≥64%) strongly support an immediate and permanent ceasefire. That is to say, a change in approach would not lose those votes, but staying on the current path risks doing so.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Many of the broad suggestions ("Ceasefire now, condition aid") end up polling poorly when specifics are brought up ("Pressuring Israel, removing aid until conditions are met"). People are generally not informed on foreign policy issues and vote on 'gut instinct', which makes propaganda, such as that peddled by AIPAC, very potent.

She's probably going to do her damndest to be "everything to everyone", not say anything that would upset Israel supporters whilst still trying to tack a more dovish position than the current Israeli position of "total genocide", as that's the old politician's trick on base-splitting issues.

I agree that Harris SHOULD pivot leftwards on the issue, both morally and because I see it as more likely to be beneficial to the campaign. But it's not a clear-cut issue in terms of electoral calculus. Whatever position she takes, including the aforementioned hedging bets option, it's going to be a gamble, and a big one.

Same poll I believe, but some different looks at the data

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Over 55% support at least conditional aid, which is necessary to secure a ceasefire, which that yougov poll shows 64%/13% approval for US Citizens. Even a 50%/25% approval for Republicans according to that poll.

We agree that it's the right move morally and politically. Ultimately Harris needs to calculate whether AIPAC money or gaining all those votes and grassroots momentum is more important to win the campaign

[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Either it makes political sense for her to adopt her current position or it doesn't. You can't get voters on both sides of an issue but you can mark where you stand on it and have people vote accordingly.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Either it makes political sense for her to adopt her current position or it doesn’t. You can’t get voters on both sides of an issue but you can mark where you stand on it have people will vote accordingly.

What an astounding way to say absolutely nothing.

[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago

If they are decided by a fraction and you made the correct the political choice then you win. Hope this helps.

[–] Communist_Synthesizer@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Sounds like you don't actually care about what happens and just want to feel self righteous and make some noise. So... the exact kind of person I had in mind making this.

You couldn't argue on the merits, so you went with, "Haha, sure, I'm doing bad things, but it won't matter so why do you care?"

Do you need me to spell it out for you to make it really obvious how dumb that argument is? Or were you just trying to be facetious?

[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Not voting for a candidate who is tacitly supporting a genocide on that basis is not "doing bad things" no matter how much bad faith spin you try to add. The candidate has to earn the vote and that applies to non-voters too. Some people care about certain issues enough to abstain from voting on that basis and others vote strategically because its not a team sport. You just want validation for your own voting decision by implying those abstaining from voting are directly or indirectly responsible for your candidate's opponent winning which they are not. If Harris wins or loses it will be based on her and her party's policy and campaign decisions.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

the candidate has to earn your vote.

If "She's not Trump" isn't all you need to know about how you should act in this election, I already know everything I need to know about how much of an actual ally you are as opposed to a willing collaborator who just doesn't want the stink of being an out fascist.

The other side are fascists running on doing fascism.

That is the entire discussion.

If that is not enough for you then you're just a fucking fascist, and you'll be regarded as such when the revolution you probably cream your jorts fantasizing about leading starts among the people your self glorifying behavior actually endanger.

[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago

Keep projecting

[–] Communist_Synthesizer@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Did typing that feel good? I mean, if you're going to be playing 'fuck around and find out' with millions of lives, at least you should be getting something out of it, right?

[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Keep projecting your own insecurities

[–] Communist_Synthesizer@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yes, that was a great comeback. What would have been useful is a logical explanation of how your stance does anything to help Palestinians in the current political climate, but I guess that's a little too much intellectual labor for you. Turns out, I actually want the same thing you do. Which you would know if you actually bothered to read half of my comments. I'm just not being an idiot about it and ignoring reality.

If I didn't actually want to help Palestinians, do you think I'd be sitting here giving folks advice on how to ACTUALLY lock up the government to force them to deal with the Pro-Palestine lobby? The next debt ceiling negotiation is in 1/2025. You know, that thing we do every two years that we use to determine FUNDING? For things like sending money to Israel?

Just a couple of Pro-Palestinian congressmen in office, enough to keep the Democrats from obtaining outright majority (assuming they even win it back in the first place) could have been a game changer. But no, the few voices we had in congress lost their primaries.

Tell me more about how you shouldn't have to vote if you don't want to.

You're doing great, with whatever the hell you're doing. Keep up the good work.