“Political violence is unacceptable in america” proceeds to bomb the ever living shit out of the middle east
It’s the antigenocideS club. We’re allowed to have one.
Scratch a liberal and a facsist bleeds
Sure we don’t stop fascism, fascism lines my pockets so I have no reason to, and I actively hate any forms of socialism that could stop it. But I’m not a fascist! You’re the fascist for calling me out! We need you deported for not voting my favorite rich asshole!
Careful, you are called a tankie if the wrong person sees you say this. They are beyond lost.
Whoever taught the word Tankie to liberals is the worst person in the history of political commentary.
No, that dubious honor belongs to the person who came up with “purity test” to describe having any standards at all.
Also very true. The purity test of less murder and adopting polices people want was far too much to ask.
Ohh uhhh I mean all hail the glorious party, I will never question my corporate liberal overlords again and be an advertiser friendly transfem™.
wtf. I consider myself a liberal, and i have no problems with nazis dying. I wish the palestinians could live in peace too.
I consider myself a liberal, and i have no problems with nazis dying.
Careful… you might get yourself kicked out of the liberal club with that attitude.
Liberals are fascists now? What in the fuck is going on lol
The American and British political Liberals have always been fine with Fascism, as long as that the Fascists did their fascist things abroad - I mean, just look at the kind of politicians American Administrations - Democrats and Republicans alike - always supported in South America and the Middle East (the current government in Israel and its Genocide that’s turning into a New Holocaust being a painful present day example).
They were supposed to be against Fascism in the Homeland, but as we’re seeing now in the US and UK the top “Liberal” politicians when Fascism starts doing its thing in their country quickly bend the knee and even turn collaborationist, which if you think about it makes sense: their objection to Fascism was never Ethical or Moral - had it been so they would’ve been against it abroad too - it was really only about power and wealth, so if the Fascists become the gatekeepers to that, well, the Liberals will do what it takes to keep their access to it, similarly to how they courted the Moneyed Elites when they were the gatekeepers to power and wealth.
Notice how he didn’t respond to that but was comfortable with saying liberals defeated fascism.
When scratched, they bleed fascism.
Let me know when liberals stop fascism. They haven’t before.
Which political party stopped fascism historically? Don’t worry, I’ll wait for you to answer.
In America? The Democrats.
In the American-led European-Japanese theaters, both were Republicans.
In the European campaign, the Soviet Union and the English Conservative party. Along with various members of antifascist resistance.
In the Chinese theatre, by a mixture of the nationalist and communist forces.
So basically liberals were part of it. Just don’t ask who died the most in the war to save the world from fascism until Trump brought it back.
Liberals being fascists outside their borders is the entire colonial era.
When they start to become fascist domestically too that’s when you know shits about to get bad.
Nope, but Neoliberals sure are crying about the death of a fascist while ignoring the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. Which is what the meme illustrates.
Neoliberals
Yet another confusion of US liberal (which means progressive, social liberal) & neoliberal.
To quote from the House Resolution you’re rightly criticizing
Whereas Charlie Kirk, at 18 years old, founded Turning Point USA in 2012, a student movement with the mission to “identify, educate, train, and organize students to promote the principles of fiscal responsibility, free markets [emphasis added], and limited government”;
That is the proper definition of neoliberal.
Social liberalism, however, favors a social market economy. Free isn’t social: they’re mutually exclusive.
Even Supertramp from the UK back in 1979 understood liberal as socially liberating
I said, now, watch what you say, they’ll be calling you a radical
A liberal, oh, fanatical, criminalso the persistent confusion here is bizarre.
US liberal (which means progressive, social liberal)
False. The US dominant form of liberalism is Neoliberalism. It’s the ideology of the leadership and donor base of the major party that isn’t outright fascist, it’s the dominant philosophy of the media, and it’s the default state of government institutions.
Has been since 1980 if not sooner.
Whereas Charlie Kirk, at 18 years old, founded Turning Point USA in 2012, a student movement with the mission to “identify, educate, train, and organize students to promote the principles of fiscal responsibility, **free markets** *[emphasis added]*, and limited government”; \
That is the proper definition of neoliberal.
Nope, that’s a fascist masquerading as a right-libertarian aka an anarcho-capitalist.
Social liberalism, however, favors a social market economy.
You’re thinking of social democrats, a center left ideology that’s to the left of Neoliberalism and to the right of socialism. It’s basically what almost all American politicians who call themselves democratic socialists (yes, including Bernie Sanders) actually are.
Free isn’t social: they’re mutually exclusive.
That’s a misapprehension based on conservative gaslighting. You can be free to utilize public land. You can be free to roam wherever you please as long as you’re not hurting anyone. You can be free to associate and speak with people in whatever way you want that doesn’t unduly harm people.
All of those things, with the possible but not categorical exception of the roaming, are highly social expressions of freedom.
Just because the Republican party has rebranded freedom as “the freedom to do whatever I want with no consequences for me no matter how much others are harmed” doesn’t mean that you have to believe it.
Even Supertramp from the UK back in 1979 understood liberal as socially liberating
Well in the UK in 1979, the grandmother of Neoliberalism and wicked witch of the South Margaret Thatcher was known as a conservative. Corporations and the politicians they own had not convinced the UK people that liberty = greed and deregulation like in the US.
the persistent confusion here is bizarre
Well you’re right about that, but not about who’s confused.
False. The US dominant form of liberalism is Neoliberalism.
Nope: your false is false. Tankies keep regurgitating that nonsense nonstop here.
Neoliberalism is free market ideology
Neoliberalism is a political and economic ideology that advocates for free-market capitalism
that took hold during the Reagan administration until it began to wane with the Great Recession.
historical synopsis
Beginning in the early 1980s, the Reagan administration and Thatcher government implemented a series of neoliberal economic reforms to counter the chronic stagflation the United States and United Kingdom had each experienced throughout the 1970s. Neoliberal policies continued to dominate American and British politics until the Great Recession.
This trend continued into the 1980s under the Reagan administration, which included tax cuts, increased defense spending, financial deregulation and trade deficit expansion.
Democrats flirted with neoliberalism until the Great Recession. Even as they did, their “New Democrat” policies retained a mixed economy social market while stressing civil rights.
Arkansas governor Bill Clinton was one such figure, who was elected president in 1992 as the Democratic nominee. The Democratic Leadership Council was a campaign organization connected to Clinton that advocated a realignment and triangulation under the re-branded “New Democrat” label. The party adopted a synthesis of neoliberal economic policies with cultural liberalism, with the voter base after Reagan having shifted considerably to the right. In an effort to appeal both to liberals and to fiscal conservatives, Democrats began to advocate for a balanced budget and market economy tempered by government intervention (mixed economy), along with a continued emphasis on social justice and affirmative action.
It was a brief shift away from their relatively longer history of modern American liberalism tracing back from the New Deal through the New Frontier and Great Society.
Into the 21st century, the liberal faction represents the modern American liberalism that began with the New Deal in the 1930s and continued with both the New Frontier and Great Society in the 1960s. The moderate faction supports Third Way politics that includes center-left social policies and centrist fiscal policies, mostly associated with the New Democrats and Clintonism of the 1990s, while the left-wing faction (known as progressives) advocates for progressivism and social democracy.
That modern liberal faction remained through the dominance of the neoliberal-leaning New Democrats
While the resurgence of conservatism and the Third Way of Bill Clinton’s New Democrats briefly weakened the influence of modern liberalism, Barack Obama acted as an ideological bridge.
and neoliberal decline with the Great Recession and Obama administration.
Moderate Democrats, or New Democrats, are an ideologically centrist faction within the Democratic Party that emerged after the victory of Republican George H. W. Bush in the 1988 presidential election. Running as a New Democrat, Bill Clinton won the 1992 and 1996 presidential elections. They are an economically liberal and “Third Way” faction that dominated the party for around 20 years, until the beginning of Obama’s presidency.
Since then, neoliberalism has been waning as liberals & progressives restored market regulation with the Dodd–Frank financial reform act, intervened in healthcare & expanded medicaid with the Affordable Care Act, and led Democrats to adopt an increasingly progressive economic agenda during the Biden administration.
The liberal faction had always been there since the New Deal, they never leaned neoliberal. Even the neoliberal-leaning Democratic faction wasn’t hard neoliberal, and that faction has been waning for a while.
You’re thinking of social democrats
Nope, standard definition
Social liberalism: Social liberal parties stress civil and human rights and favour a social market economy.
and they overlap.
That’s a misapprehension based on conservative gaslighting.
Nope, a free market economy isn’t a social market economy or mixed economy, which is regulated with government intervention & public services. Free market means laissez-faire or minimal regulation. It doesn’t mean stronger regulation & government intervention. These are straightforward definitions.
Well in the UK in 1979, the grandmother of Neoliberalism and wicked witch of the South Margaret Thatcher was known as a conservative.
which Supertramp weren’t singing about. Listen to the goddamn song: it topped the charts across the west during the counterculture movements of the 70s, indicating a shared understanding at odds with yours that the word has to do with social liberation. Plus, this precedes the Reagan administration. The mental gymnastics of denying that generally understood meaning is tedious.
Well you’re right
Yes.
So that’s where you moved to, you tankie piece of shit.
You’re so nice and kind. No wonder why people like you here. ✨
I haven’t “moved to” anything, I’m just crossposting and explaining a meme illustrating a valid grievance with Neoliberal politicians.
95 of them voted to honor the fascist scumbag
In contrast, 27 voting to stop selling weapons to Israel is treated as a fucking miracle.
And not that it matters, but I’m nothing close to a tankie. Check the sidebar of the community you’re in, dumbass.
I also remember when they all stood for and applauded an actual Nazi in Parliament.
The “anti-tankie” people don’t talk about that very much do they?
Sitting on a fence is why we are where we are.
They are delusional.
Why would they? They love supporting their flavor of fascism. This time it’ll work!
Is it your impression that most of the Democrats are anything other than “conservative” in any normal political spectrum?
I objected to the meme but I actually think it’s completely accurate as applied to most Democrats in congress or groups of people who think generally like them. It honestly just didn’t even occur to me that by “liberals” you might mean that grouping though.
normal political spectrum
What does it matter where you are on an arbitrary spectrum if you’re still participating in genocide?
Me: “Oh, you’re right, yeah most of the Democrats in Washington are complicit in genocide. Looked at in that way I agree with your meme.”
You: NO NO NO I WANT TO ARGUE YOU MUST BE WRONG ABOUT SOMETHING
Idk how often it needs to be pointed out that Americans dont have some special definition of liberal that has shed itself of all the problems of their European progenitors - they’ve simply forgotten all the ways in which liberalism runs ideological cover for exploitation.
“I agree with this meme if I detach myself of the liberal label” seems like a moment of self-awareness to me. Im not trying to discourage it, but I think it’s important to look at how electoralism has broken people’s understanding of political discourse.
Removed by mod
In your addled mind, what is a tankie? Anyone to the left of Chuck Schumer? Anyone who isn’t a fascist but also doesn’t automatically support Hakeem Jeffries? Anyone who disagrees with your perspective and isn’t a fascist?
For the record, I abhor tankies and their authoritarian bullshit. You can “make note” of that if you will.
Removed by mod
Hmmm, you claim to want left unity for liberal love for fascists, but you call anyone to the left of Biden a Tankie. Curious.
break up unity on the left
You mean challenge Neoliberal supremacy of everything to the left of fascism. Neoliberalism isn’t even left of center ffs! It’s the ideology of Ronald Reagan, Joe Lieberman and Hakeem Jeffries.
make me fucking sick.
Nah, sounds like you were plenty fucking sick already 🤷
So do us both a favor and don’t fucking @me your bullshit again.
I wasn’t going to, but now that you’re asking, I’ll waste a few more sentences on your obtuse ass 😄
Fucking tankie bitch.
break up unity
Ooooh… when somebody starts whinging about “left unity” I smell liberal… is that what you are?
Bruh, I just read the whole thread. What’s ypur problem?
Oh also, I fucking hate tankies.
Who here is a Tankie? This is an anarchist space. For anarchists.
Yet again, anyone to the left of Biden is a Tankie.
Learn what it means then. Hint: The term was made by Marxist-Leninists.
Kindly, stay out of it if you don’t know about it. Please and thank you.
You can’t have fascism without liberalism. The hand that dangles the carrot cannot be seen to also wield the stick.
Fascist enablers may as well be fascist themselves.
scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds
Idk I think people are trying to pretend that not voting was the correct answer or something. Sorry non-voters, you caucus with the Trump voters.
Where does the meme say any of that?
There is a big contingent on Lemmy that has constructed an enemy category called “liberals.” They spend a lot of time talking to each other about what liberals believe and how liberals are, and almost all of it is just how stupid, weak, evil, and pointless liberals are. It’s actually exactly the same thing that MAGA people do about… well, about liberals.
You can actually see how it operates in this meme. Pretty much none of the “liberals” on Lemmy have anything other than horror for the killing that’s happening in Gaza, or are in any way upset about Charlie Kirk not being around anymore, but it’s real important to their worldview that they constantly gather around and tell each other about how evil the liberals are, and so none of them will bat an eye at a post like this. Even if they don’t really factually agree with it, it feels really good to experience the meme and talk to one another about how true it is.
Why they do this is deserves careful study. It’s not immediately obvious but if you keep tugging on the thread and looking carefully at how they perceive the political world and why, it carries some key insights.
Nah. Fuck liberalism.
Pretty much none of the “liberals” on Lemmy have anything other than horror for the killing that’s happening in Gaza
Feeling horror for the genocide isn’t mutually exclusive to attempting to drown out the sound of their suffering and your and your party’s complicity (which is what the liberals in the meme are doing, in case you’re unfamiliar). Acknowledging that the genocide is happening and incredibly sad 😔 isn’t very meaningful when you’re actively trying not to talk about it.
If youve complained about democrats being criticized for enabling Israel over the last year, then you’re in this picture.
You can ignore Phillip, he has repeatedly shown he is unwilling to learn and will lie and deflect any criticism of blue nationalism.
It should have been enough of an indication of the way that was going to go by the fact that he went out of his way to complain about liberal being used as a term of derision while also insisting that he definitely isnt one.
“You’re using the word liberal wrong. But I’m not a liberal, I just defend liberals, and the parties of liberals, like they personally care about me when they would eradicate me if it meant good polling.”
I absolutely have not been insisting that I’m not a liberal. You are fantasizing statements by me that I never said again. When did I say that I was not a liberal? This is probably the closest thing I said:
Okay, so you think I’m probably a liberal. Noted. … you’re using this label in a very particular way. So I can’t even really say anything about the application of the label being right or not. By some definitions, I am. By some definitions, I’m not. My argument is that the application of the label by a big contingent on Lemmy doesn’t even really have any factual definition, it’s more just a trigger word with a pretty fluid definition which changes around as needed to attack enemies or accuse them of things. Your reaction to me saying most Democrats in government are center-right conservatives for example is super telling to me, where if we were talking about some other topic I feel like it’s likely that you would instantly agree with that.
I just noticed also that a big chunk of my whole discussion with you is violating rule 7. I think it is a pretty stupid practice to mandate that only one side of certain ideological arguments is permitted (“It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.” -TJ), but sure, rule 7 I guess. I’ll probably make some response in some other community at some point down the road, if you want to continue this whole sprawling debate in a different location; I feel like there is maybe some useful common ground to be had.
Lmao, you are Schrodinger’s Liberal - both a liberal and not a liberal, until the moment you are observed
I don’t care if you are one or not. I care that your utilitarian perspective on ‘minimizing genocide’ heavily skews toward a desired electoral outcome irrespective of the actual platform. You can insist all you want that you believe genocide is a huge problem and that you agree that democrats are complicit, but if at the end of the day your interpretation of others’ behavior is being guided by the one action that quite literally can’t effect whether genocide happens or not, then to me you’re a liberal in the only way that really matters. You are standing in the way of liberation by gatekeeping acceptable forms of protest and criticism that fall outside or antagonize your preferred liberal institutions. God forbid someone be critical of democratic governance that falls short of the radical change that is required to avert catastrophe because they, themselves, have decided to preserve the liberal institutions that created the problems in the first place. You thought people were being uncharitable to Biden’s accomplishments because your judgement of him seems to reflect some arbitrary scale and you assume it’s what everyone else must be using.
The only other way of illuminating the problem with liberalism is to point out just how much the ‘liberal party’ resists changing their policy toward Israel, despite the majority of americans holding negative views on Israel, their war crimes in Gaza, and our continued blanket support for them. Even Sanders and AOC took more than a year and a half to recognize it as a genocide. The primary feature of liberalism that I’m concerned with is it’s prioritization of protecting liberal institutions over addressing the harm and exploitation those institutions are responsible for. Israel being our flagship ally for influence and control over the ME is why liberals (democrats, republicans, and even most progressives) are willing to overlook, ignore, justify, or outright defend the atrocities that happen in the name of preserving that geopolitical cornerstone. That includes people like yourself who care about it in abstract but limit your view on acceptable action to what does or does not work inside our electoral institutions. I don’t care about preserving Israel as an ally - my ideological framework prioritizes liberation politics, not the preservation of liberal institutions. If a liberal institution is responsible for supporting oppressive regimes and genocide, i think that institution should be dismantled, which means that how or if someone chooses to vote is less important to me in achieving that goal than what football team they follow. That is what informs my self image as a leftist. Complain all you want if you think that line of criticism is unfair or ignores what you think is more important, I don’t care.
The more you try justifying your perspective in utilitarian terms the clearer it becomes that any alignment you might think we have is paper thin.
I am not permitted by the community rules to respond to most of this.
All I will really say is this: I obviously know what I believe politically and why. This whole question “Is Philip a liberal to you or not?” hinges on how you define a liberal, so like I say I am asking you define the label by asking that. I am obviously not asking you to answer questions about my own politics for me. If you’re not sure about any element of my politics that you would need to know in order to answer, you are free to ask, but I think I’ve taken quite a bit of time to try to break it down for you.
You are the one introducing the Schrodinger element into it, and that was actually precisely the point that I was making by asking you to be specific. I actually think it’s pretty interesting that when talking with me, we were mostly going back and forth about facts even if I disagree with a lot of what you said (and you were sort of sensibly sticking with that you genuinely didn’t know if I am a liberal), but once you’re speaking to the echo chamber again you immediately revert to just backhandedly accusing me of being a “liberal” using it as a label meaning “enemy of the clique,” more or less. This intense discussion about whether or not you deem it appropriate to fix the label to me (presumably with the idea that it would be horribly damaging and you’re assuming I want to avoid it) is what I was talking about, too. It is how enemy labels like “communist” and “counterrevolutionary” have functioned in the past, and I don’t think you are realizing exactly how you’re using it when you do.
You’re also misrepresenting tons of stuff that I believe or have said. I won’t list the other examples even though there are a bunch and I spent (for whatever reason) a ton of time digging up old comments of mine to illustrate that you were wrong. Most are debatable in some way or another. All I will say is that it’s instantly objectively verifiable that I never repeatedly claimed I wasn’t a liberal, and now you said I did. You are lying so that you will get approval from your echo chamber. I have no doubt that it will work, probably you and the echo chamber will see it as a win and feel happy about the interaction. Like I said at the very beginning to other people, I would really highly recommend that you take time and reflect on why that is and what function that part of it is serving. In the meantime all the best and take care.
Here’s me trying to drown out the sound of their suffering:
- https://lemmy.world/post/24836211
- https://lemmy.world/post/24853409
- https://lemmy.world/post/24896259
- https://lemmy.world/post/24952318
- https://lemmy.world/post/25928525
- https://lemmy.world/post/26656107
- https://lemmy.world/post/27688087
- https://lemmy.world/post/27834034
- https://lemmy.world/post/28479345
- And so on, I just picked some random examples
Here’s me complaining about Democrats being criticized for enabling Israel:
Yes, I know what Palestine is like right now. I care a lot about it. I wrote my congresspeople, back when they were approving the aid, trying to tell them not to do it. I didn’t think it would do anything, and it didn’t. That’s why I didn’t want Trump to come, and make things quite a bit worse than even Biden’s already war-criminal level of performance.
Around 85% of the Palestinians in Gaza are still alive right now, as far as I know. How many once Trump is done with them?
50%?
80%? Will he solve the Middle East during his term, and bring an end to the killing? It seems unlikely.
Less than 10%, with a lot of it annexed to Israel?
That last one seems pretty probable to me. I think better than 50/50 odds. I don’t want to bet.
That was 8 months ago. I have nothing to add to it. It’s mostly come true now, and if you actively pushed in any way for people not to keep Trump out of power, you helped make it happen. Even if you don’t believe there is any difference between “sending weapons” and “sending even more weapons plus turning vague diplomatic complaining into excited diplomatic approval plus putting Americans on the ground to help make it happen,” you still helped usher in the situation where Palestinian protest leaders in the US are getting deported instead of being out there protesting. Good job.
I’m aware that you’re trying hard to reframe me saying “Trump is worse” as if it meant I was making excuses for Biden, or that I’m saying it for any reason other than concern for the Palestinians and all the other people Trump is current fucking up. I am not. Biden was very very bad on this issue, and Trump is worse. That’s what’s up. You can insult me or mischaracterize that any number of types of ways, but that’s what’s up. Tell me I’m wrong.
This is precisely what I’m talking about in my comment. You’re taking a point of view that you might or might not agree with, either of which is fine, and deciding to pretend that it is a horrifying caricature (that I’m so in love with Joe Biden of all the fucking people in the world that I am willing to overlook or downplay a genocide just to have a chance to distract people from talking about a bad thing he did). Because it’s easier than grappling with what’s really going on, you simply pretend that there’s a whole class of people out there running around who are just constantly stupid and wrong, and you comfortably assure one another that’s the explanation for why they sometimes come along and expose you to a critical viewpoint that isn’t what you want to hear.
Go on, continue with it, if you want.
Stop skirting around what the meme is talking about
“Look at this terrible tragedy” is not the same as “if we do not end our complicity in this active genocide, we risk losing everything”
Liberals act as if their only option is to vote or not vote, but that’s simply not the case. If your party is plugging their ears to the tragedy they are helping commit, your job isn’t to make sure everyone knows how bad the other candidate is, it’s to confront your party about why they’re complicating what should otherwise be an easy choice by doing something objectively evil.
2024 was nobody’s fault but the democrats’, for exactly the reason depicted in the meme. Instead of addressing the cries for acknowledgment in their base, they fucked us all.
And here we are again, dealing with their choice to revere and defend the life’s work of a neonazi while we are still waiting for them to acknowledge the genocide they helped commit and which continues a year later. I can’t blow smoke for a party that continuously runs cover for fascists while plugging their ears to their own base.
“Look at this terrible tragedy” is not the same as “if we do not end our complicity in this active genocide, we risk losing everything”
True, but that first one is directly what the meme is referencing. You actually accused me specifically I think of trying to distract from the terrible tragedy.
Liberals act as if their only option is to vote or not vote,
Well, but I don’t act that way. Am I a liberal? According to lots and lots of people on Lemmy, I am. Here’s a comment I made earlier tonight:
Real world non-electoral politics is going to be necessary to get us out of this mess (especially now), and it also leads to a good and fulfilling life. There’s something magic and human that happens with the people around you when you are fighting for something that’s actually worth fighting for, I’ve seen it.
You’d agree with that, right?
Or no?
This is what I’m talking about. Actually some of what you’re saying in this latest message, I agree with. But it has not a lot to do with the meme. My issue with the meme was this wild strawman, lumping congressional Democrats and people on Lemmy into the same ideological category “liberal” and then making a bunch of sweeping statements I guess about both, by which the whole thing can be motte-and-baileyed back around so that all of a sudden I’m an asshole who believes all these wild things and doesn’t care about genocide.
And here we are again, dealing with their choice to revere and defend the life’s work of a neonazi while we are still waiting for them to acknowledge the genocide they helped commit and which continues a year later.
Let’s try this. Who are some examples of who you are talking about here? Like who are 5 people who fit into this category who are revering Charlie Kirk and also won’t admit Gaza is a genocide? I am sure there are plenty of them (not sarcasm, I really do believe lots of those people exist, even some number of them on the American “left.”) Ideally out of government if you can, like I said I don’t think anyone in the US government is all that left (and if you’re only talking about congressional Democrats or something, then yes the meme makes sense.)
I can pretty much guarantee you that whoever those people are, they’re (a) a small subset of the people who the Lemmy consensus would describe as “a liberal” and (b) people I also despise pretty much as much as you do.
Right? Or do you believe that everyone the Lemmy consensus would describe as “liberal” also reveres Charlie Kirk, and also wants to silence any voices of Palestinian suffering?
True, but that first one is directly what the meme is referencing. You actually accused me specifically I think of trying to distract from the terrible tragedy.
No, and no. The meme is referencing liberals walking out of the Democratic National Convention last year literally plugging their ears to protestors who were kicked out for demanding democrats stop supporting Israel’s genocide against palestinians. Liberals then (and now) were refusing to address protestors demanding action against Israel’s genocidal campaign. They sometimes separately acknowledged it as a tragedy but refused to take action against Israel. “I think this is a tragedy, but unfortunately there’s nothing we can do until after the election”.
I haven’t actually accused you of anything, but it does kind of seem like i’m describing you. It’s not my fault you ascribe that label to yourself and hear that as a personal accusation.
Well, but I don’t act that way. Am I a liberal?
Don’t you? Could have fooled me. I could have sworn you were one of those people who place blame on voters for the 2024 election outcome, instead of recognizing the democrats torpedoing their own coalition by demonstrating complete contempt for their own base.
My issue with the meme was this wild strawman, lumping congressional Democrats and people on Lemmy into the same ideological category “liberal” and then making a bunch of sweeping statements I guess about both
-
They are talking about liberals, not a narrow group of congressional democrats
-
I don’t see any mention of lemmy in this meme.
I’d also point out that despite repeatedly agreeing that democrats are contributing to Israel’s genocide, you’ve also repeatedly taken offense at the suggestion that liberals are fascist collaborators.
the whole thing can be motte-and-baileyed back around so that all of a sudden I’m an asshole who believes all these wild things and doesn’t care about genocide
You can claim to care about genocide and also deny that democrats are defending and collaborating with the fascists committing it. The latter certainly casts doubt on the former.
Like who are 5 people who fit into this category who are revering Charlie Kirk and also won’t admit Gaza is a genocide?
There were 60 out of 212 democrats who voted against a resolution honoring Kirk and to my knowledge only 10 democrats have ever referred to it as a genocide. By my math that’s 193 democrats minimum who meet that description.
Or do you believe that everyone the Lemmy consensus would describe as “liberal” also reveres Charlie Kirk, and also wants to silence any voices of Palestinian suffering?
I believe those people would say something like, “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”. Liberals are usually more upset that protestors may have killed momentum for their candidate than for their candidate openly collaborating in a genocide and giving protestors a reason to oppose them in the first place.
I’d also point out that despite repeatedly agreeing that democrats are contributing to Israel’s genocide,
You can claim to care about genocide and also deny that democrats are defending and collaborating with the fascists committing it.
Well, that sure makes sense.
Am I a liberal?
-
Id also point out that many of us have been screaming about this genocide for far longer than 8 months, but were yelled down by liberals for bringing it up while democrats were trying to campaign. I’m not going to trudge through your history for evidence that you cared about it before trump was president elect, but it’s a little telling to me that 8 months ago is when you made that bold declaration.
but were yelled down by liberals for bringing it up while democrats were trying to campaign
You were not yelled down. The majority consensus on Lemmy was that Kamala Harris was responsible for the genocide, I got banned from a couple of places for trying to say any different.
You’re confusing “someone popped up and disagreed with me” for “I was yelled down.” I don’t think you’ll ever find me going into some comments section about Palestine and saying, “Ssh! Don’t talk about this before the election!” Definitely you won’t find me banning anyone for it. What you’ll find is me pushing back hard on people saying “Don’t vote for Democrats, they did genocide!” That there was plenty of, because I don’t think that strategy makes any sense, and because I care about the Palestinian people, I was pushing back on it hoping that the genocide that’s currently taken a massive acceleration would not do that.
If I thought the DNC consultants who make up their awful strategy read Lemmy, I probably honestly would have approached it very very differently than I did. However I do not. I do not think posting on Lemmy influences Democratic politicians. I do think it influences voters (in some pretty tiny way), and so my main input to it is going to be centered around “how can voters behave in a way which will minimize genocide.” Surely that makes sense?
Id also point out that many of us have been screaming about this genocide for far longer than 8 months
https://lemmy.world/search?q=gaza&type=Comments&listingType=All&creatorId=13369510&page=1&sort=Old
When were you screaming about it in a way that didn’t also lead to “don’t vote for Democrats”? Most of what I see here looks pretty electoral. That’s an honest question, I am genuinely asking.
You were not yelled down.
Go and check the political memes comm from early to mid 2024. Check the mod logs of the politics comm from the same time period. There were several struggle sessions about specific users, complaining that ‘all they do is post about Gaza’ and being super paranoid that they were intentionally trying to throw the election. Several were accused of being paid operatives.
I do not think posting on Lemmy influences Democratic politicians. I do think it influences voters
Whoomp, there it is.
Go take it up with MLK.
When were you screaming about it in a way that didn’t also lead to “don’t vote for Democrats”?
You’d have to go look at my previous accounts. I rotate accounts regularly and keep them as separated as possible.
There were several struggle sessions about specific users, complaining that ‘all they do is post about Gaza’
Which users?
I do not think posting on Lemmy influences Democratic politicians. I do think it influences voters
Whoomp, there it is.
Which part of this were you disagreeing with?
Or do you think me saying these two true things is a gotcha about something else? Tell me.
Spot on. I don’t think it’s limited to just them though. You toss out they as if other communities are immune to this group think.
I absolutely agree. I would say it is much more common than not and “immunity” to it is vanishingly rare.
Tribalism is built into humans, and it had good reasons back in the small settlement days, but now it’s really fucking things up for us in a bunch of different ways.
Just authoritarian propaganda. Ignore and go about your day.
This is an anarchist meme comm. How can we be authoritarians
We’re calling out genocide, that makes us the real evil authoritarian propagandists.
Now we must go watch MSNBC that was told to never criticize Charlie Kirk because the CEO liked him. That’s not propaganda at all.
The “authoritarian propaganda” of please have consistent morals?
Or the authoritarian propaganda of "Please care about genocide, not a Nazi.*
Like how is any of this authoritarian? If anything it says tell authoritarians to fuck off and follow their leader.
cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/6197747
^ This is what’s going on. This originated from Hexbear.
if you think the DNC is liberal, i got news for you, they arnt most are DINOs in reality with a veneer of a “left wing mask”
That’s a lot of words for liberal.
Liberal ≠ left wing. Modern American liberalism is Neoliberalism, the same ideology as Reagan and Thatcher.
Yeah you must care about ppl in another continent that got terrorist at the head of the gouvernement rather that ppl that get assassinated for not having the correct opinion in your country. Really smart as always
that got terrorist at the head of the gouvernement
That doesnt narrow the list down nearly as much as you think it does
Yeah cause it s very common to have gouvernement planify attack and sharing torture and rape of civilians online. Guess evryone is bad and nobody is worse than others
I hate to break this to you but Israel and the US have both killed, raped, and tortured civilians and had footage of those atrocities on record.
Nobody has asked you to rank the worst terror states and pick your favorite - that’s a burden you’ve placed on yourself.
True but they didn’t share those gladly on the internet in the name of a religious war. More the aspect related to their righteous conviction about commiting the worst atrocities. But dont get me wrong far from me us or israel are perfect
there is literally videos of israeli prison gaurds raping palestinians to death. and multiple accurate descriptive whitnesses testifying how Doctor Safiyah was raped to death in front of them.
That Israeli soldier, who rapes hostages to death, was promoted and paid extra by American people hard earned tax money. Thanks AOC and rest of DNC for funding the “defense” of a genocidal ethnostate that keep bombing and killing people from all neighboring “terrorist” countries with $billions of dollars.
See my next comment on the matter.
For hamas they broadcast video of their exaction with their watermark on them. Like I said in my next comment this apply less and less with time passing regarding israel but it s dishonest to say the us does the same
You are either ignorant and super desne and uneducated, or intentionally lying.
The US is paying, planning, aiding, defending, supporting, and covering all of Israel war crimes. The US even hires Nazi Americans who kill starving palestinians on video, and it’s all documented:
So are you here to spread bullshit lies or to know the truth which for some reason you refuse to face?? Who tortured and raped Iraqis in Abugureeb and Guantanamo? Under whose authorization and aiding and protection has Israel been killing people in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Qatar, Yemen, Tunisia, in the last year alone? The fuck are you talking about execusing the US from Gaza’s genocide?!?! Blatant nonesense
Sure they did, just not on western media.
Still though, I don’t think being marginally less public about committing atrocities makes the people doing them any less contemptible. That the western liberal heart is too soft and fragile to be exposed to the horrors being committed in their name makes their involvement in them more evil, not less.
I disagree on the fact that one of them take public proud in their exaction while the other tried to hide it. But tu be fair this doesn t really apply to israel anymore but at least the us. Also the fact the us did it not on the will of the population, which isnt the case for Hamas and how they parade their prisoner of war in the street
Least racist lib.
You people are on crack. This has been screeched every day for the past 6 months. A lot of people are pissed off and leadership chooses or isn’t in a position to make change. What do you expect them to do?
Edit: Oh good god, I see where I’ve landed. Tracks 💯.
Why would a small community online make federal politicians not do their job? Please tell me how a meme stops them from voting no one Trump’s policies.
Edit: Oh good god, I see where I’ve landed. Tracks 💯.
Go back to your weird echo chamber of fake dates and incomprehensible points.
👌👍
6 months
Sorry, what are you referring to that has only been screeched for 6 months?
Calling out their favorite political sports team.
