120
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

No, I'm just calling you a liar. You are literally saying that person you're referring to said they are happy about genocide, and that others should be happy about genocide, which never happened. You are making up the words that were never said to emotionally support your view.

But I will also say, if you think that not voting for Harris in November will in any will help end the genocide, you're grossly mistaken, and such an action would be in direct support of Trump's presidential election. Interpret those facts how you will.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -4 points 3 weeks ago

But I will also say, if you think that not voting for Harris in November will in any will help end the genocide

I'm still voting for Harris, despite the constant accusations of pro-genocide centrists to the contrary.

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Oh, so you're going to go around and telling anyone that's voting for Harris and supports her over Trump, that they are happy and complacent with genocide, and then you're still going to vote for her like somehow you're different? Holy shit is that the most hypocritical thing I've read in a long time. That's quite the high pedestal you've put yourself on there.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Oh, so you’re going to go around and telling anyone that’s voting for Harris and supports her over Trump, that they are happy and complacent with genocide

It's almost as though there's some other reason I say that people who accuse anyone who objects to genocide of being a Trump supporter are supporting genocide.

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I didn't do that, you made that up too.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I didn't say you did. Would you like me to start calling you a liar about things you haven't said? Because that's kinda your whole thing. Well, your whole thing when you're talking to people who aren't 100% in favor of genocide.

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Your comments were directed at me, clearly. If you can point to any times that I claimed something not true, you can certainly call me a liar. Instead, you keep claiming falsehoods about people supporting genocide. I have seen exactly 0 comments that are pro genocide. You are making claims that are verifiably false. That's why I'm calling you a liar, because you have made no factual statements.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago

Your comments were directed at me, clearly.

Persecution complex much?

I was referring to the people on this thread who accuse genocide opponents of being trump supporters. If that's you, it wouldn't surprise me, but I wasn't referring to you.

I have seen exactly 0 comments that are pro genocide.

Here's one:

The number of “left” voters in this community that are doing their damnedest to get Trump elected never ceases to disturb me.

It's accusing anyone who has any objections to the genocide of being Trump supporters pretending to be leftists. You don't have to feign illiteracy whenever someone you agree with says the only part out loud.

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

"I trust that you'll also be calling all the people who accuse anyone who is even slightly unhappy about genocide of being trump supporters liars too, *right*?"

That was a reply from you to me. It's not a persecution complex when you literally did that I said you did.

Where in your example of a pro genocide comment, does it suggest that anyone against genocide is a Trump supporter? Nowhere, because it didn't happen. You are just making up more shit.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago

That was a reply from you to me. It’s not a persecution complex when you literally did that I said you did.

You called me a liar. You didn't call the "you don't support genocide so you're a trumpist" people liars.

Where in your example of a pro genocide comment, does it suggest that anyone against genocide is a Trump supporter?

You're pretending it isn't what they said? Gaslight someone else.

Do you believe that genocide is wrong? I have to ask because I haven't seen any indication at all that you do, and you've made it clear that you really don't like it when centrists are called out on the only argument they have for their continued support for genocide.

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

I think genocide is bad. I think Israel is committing genocide against Palestine. It's absolutely disgusting and I would love if the USA could/would somehow cut the cord on support until they stop permanently. I say "could" because when talking about geopolitics, the world is extremely complicated, and I know that I, and probably every person here, don't know everything the US government does regarding relations with Israel and the implications of cutting off support. I'm not putting on a tin foil hat or anything, I just know that I don't know everything, so it would be disingenuous to say that it's as easy as just saying no to Israel.

The problem I have, is that comments like yours saying that Harris is 100% pro genocide, which is an emotionally charged statement to complex situation. Those types of comments infer information, pass it as facts, and then use that to attack her. I don't think there is anything wrong with being critical of the situation, and i believe discourse is healthy for growth and betterment, but these are just brute force attacks that don't help the situation. They don't leave room for an open dialogue, and are more likely to hurt Harris's chances of winning in November. I do believe that at the root of of these statements, the intent is to pressure the admin for change, but I think that it has the adverse effect due to the way the argument is presented, especially because currently as VP, she doesn't have the power to change anything anyway.

I feel like a broken record saying this in Lemmy, but when November comes, there will be two candidates with a chance to be POTUS. Until then, Harris's #1 goal is to get elected, because if that doesn't happen then she can't do anything anyways. Attacking that and turning off voters can end the most important part of change. After the election is complete and if she wins, go to town on the hard protesting when she actually can enact change and Trump is no longer a legitimate threat to the future of the US and likely a much worse situation for Palestine.

To reiterate, I hope Netanyahu faces punishment for the atrocities that he has ordered. I hope that there is a Nuremberg Trials type situation once all of this is resolved, and that people face consequence. I hope that I'm wrong and it's super easy, and that Harris sees the light and says "no".

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The problem I have, is that comments like yours saying that Harris is 100% pro genocide

I never said that, but you have no issue at all with lying, do you? Just when you take personal offense on behalf of genocide supporters.

I don’t think there is anything wrong with being critical of the situation

Coulda fooled me.

I do believe that at the root of of these statements, the intent is to pressure the admin for change, but I think that it has the adverse effect due to the way the argument is presented, especially because currently as VP, she doesn’t have the power to change anything anyway.

That doesn't mean there can't be daylight between her and Biden. She's not the Secretary of State. She can differ from the president on foreign policy.

After the election is complete and if she wins, go to town on the hard protesting

You'll find some other excuse to demand silence about genocide at that point.

If you really thing genocide is wrong, you should say something without prompting instead of demanding silence on the flimsy notion that griping about genocide on a tiny fledgling platform is somehow going to make all the dug-in pro-genocide centrists here suddenly drop their support for Harris.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 0 points 2 weeks ago

It isn't just that libs will find another reason to complain about protests after the election, it's that libs won't care anymore because they already got what they wanted.

You protest during election cycles because that's when policy is being negotiated. You don't go on a labor strike after the union has signed the contract, you go on strike to get them to agree to concessions while the contract is being negotiated

this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2024
120 points (73.4% liked)

politics

18901 readers
3779 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS