On one hand we have people chilling with espresso and the other is exploding.

As Israel has clearly demonstrated, chilling with espresso is not mutually exclusive with exploding. Also you’re a sick fuck.

I was going to say “Israel for the great good?” but then realized that yes they do in fact believe that. Got me.

Good thing you had that alt text; I thought it was 609 and was like what?

Literal parallel reality material. Arabs overwhelmingly support Iran’s antagonization of Israel and wish their own governments would do the same. Source: am Arab.

Because America successfully turned most of the Middle East into US puppet states. There’s a reason most of the region is ruled by autocratic regimes. The only Arabic-speaking country whose government is materially opposed to Israel now is Yemen.

That would be a pretty messed up way to tax people. Like, a place becomes more desirable and suddenly all original inhabitants have to leave because they can’t afford to pay their “income” taxes? What?

Huh? Okay I’m not a native speaker so I’m not exactly an authority here but I’m 99.999% sure this is either a dialect, extremely local slang or something equally weird. Can someone confirm or deny this? A quick google didn’t turn out anything either.

Goodbye, my dude

PS: I have literally never seen anyone complain about this before. Is this not normal internet English?

That is the most blatant hypocrisy I’ve seen in ages.

Clinton did it with Trump so… yes? Fascists are notoriously fucking stupid.

Well obviously if you define your “original idea” early enough there’ll be nothing to criticize because they’ll have done nothing yet. But fine. Is plain antisemitic propaganda in 1904 early enough for you? What about “a land without a people for a people without a land” in 1898?

“A Jew brought up among Germans may assume German custom, German words. He may be wholly imbued with that German fluid but the nucleus of his spiritual structure will always remain Jewish, because his blood, his body, his physical-racial type are Jewish. … It is impossible for a man to become assimilated with people whose blood is different from his own. In order to become assimilated, he must change his body, he must become one of them, in blood. … There can be no assimilation as long as there is no mixed marriage. … An increase in the number of mixed marriages is the only sure and infallible means for the destruction of nationality as such. … A preservation of national integrity is impossible except by a preservation of racial purity, and for that purpose we are in need of a territory of our own where our people will constitute the overwhelming majority.”

-Ze’ev Jabotinsky (né Vladimir Yevgenyevich Zhabotinsky), Revisionist Zionist leader who co-founded the Jewish Legion of the British Army in World War I, on June 06, 1904

‘National Judaism’ will make the ancient soil fertile. It seems miraculous. Everything natural is miraculous. Once the nation which we Zionists are arousing is fully awakened, things will happen swiftly and dynamically. Then the nation will behold its ancient land beautifully situated on the Mediterranean, with regions of cold, moderate and warm climate – a land suited for any kind of cultivation, with long-dormant natural resources.”

-Literally Theodor Herzl, 1896.

Ben Gurion’s is 1937.

It’s really easy to cherry pick similar statements from people and compare them and make a whole website.

My dude non-fascists don’t say “when we settle [region], [group] will have no choice but to scurry like drugged cockroaches” (dated 1983 btw). Also the site has dates and sources for the quotes; most Zionist quotes are recent but a few are from the 20th century with two from before WWI. They even have one by Herzl himself. Zionism was and continues to use and be predicated on downright Nazi antisemitic propaganda about how Jews can never live with non-Jews and how diaspora Jews are sickly and weak and all that shit. That’s why they shit on Holocaust victims, for instance.

Anyone could argue that “my people deserve this” is a similar ideology.

“My people deserve this land at the expense of its current inhabitants” is fascism, or at least the underpinning thereof, so you’re not wrong there. Nazism, Zionism, Manifest Destiny, it is literally the same thing manifesting in different ways. Look up “blood and soil” and “Lebensraum”. Ben Gurion is literally on record saying “we must remove the Arabs and take their place”. The Nakba started before the founding of Israel. If you have an argument for how the Nakba was anything but fascism, let’s hear it, but so far you’re not saying anything of substance.

But to claim in started out with that intent is just angry jaw flapping.

Okay let’s try this. Try this online quiz and see if you can get more than 15/21.

If we see a religion-backed school, we’re to think “genocide! You’re attempting to subvert the student’s cultural religion and norms under the guise of teaching people to read and write! Their traditional culture doesn’t have reading or writing, you’re genociding their oral traditions too!!”;

If you’re talking about residential schools, I think the mass graves part was more genocidal than the reading and writing part.

The Jewish people began by buying the land legally in the late 1800s as a way to escape persecution.

This is completely ignoring the boycott and parallel society angle. What Zionists did in pre-mandate Palestine was also forced expulsion of Palestinians; the forcing part was simply delegated to the state. Had they simply wanted to settle in Palestine nobody would’ve minded, but that was fundamentally not what the Zionist project was.

According to Israeli historian Benny Morris, Zionism was inherently expansionist and always had the goal of turning the entirety of Palestine into a Jewish state. In addition, Morris describes the Zionists as intent on politically and physically dispossessing the Arabs.

The World Zionist Organization established the Jewish National Fund (JNF) in 1901, with the stated goal “to redeem the land of Palestine as the inalienable possession of the Jewish people.” The notion of land “redemption” entailed that the land could not be sold and could not be leased to a non-Jew nor should the land be worked by Arabs.[145] The land purchased was primarily from absentee landlords, and upon purchase of the land, the tenant farmers who traditionally had rights of usufruct were often expelled.

-Wikipedia

Nazis had nothing to do with the Jewish people establishing a homeland in Palestine.

Nazism had a lot to do with the German people expanding their homeland to Eastern Europe and Russia and murdering the inhabitants. Starting to see the similarities now? Nazism and Zionism are sister ideologies, both fruits from the same rotten tree that is European settler colonialism.

Do not the table.

Fuck both of these guys, but Russia accidentally did a good thing here, because the sanctions are only helping tighten the Taliban grip on power.

Time for @FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone.

This isn’t going anywhere, so I’ll clarify my position one final time before I disengage.

Your entire fucking point is predicated on the idea that fascism is inevitable because change wasn’t happening fast enough, so harm reduction was functional worthless to pursue.

Harm reduction alone was functionally worthless to pursue, yes. Harm reduction is fine, desirable even, but not at the expense of antagonistic action. Prioritizing harm reduction over the antagonistic action that’s supposed to be facilitated by that harm reduction is putting the cart before the horse and self-defeating. By antagonistic action I’m mostly thinking of protests, civil disobedience, strikes and whatever Uncommitted was here, but for an easy example I’ll use the early to mid-2024 calls for Biden to step down. Doubling down on hard reduction entailed shutting down calls for Biden to step down to not jeopardize the anti-fascist united front, but I believe that to have been a mistake. The play was to jump on and amplify these calls so that Biden would step down sooner and open the way for a real primary, because it’s these sort of actions that give harm reduction meaning, otherwise it becomes simply kicking the can down the road. Harm reduction is necessary but not sufficient for fighting fascism, so it cannot happen at the expense of other necessary actions, such as coercing the Democrats into providing a viable unity platform. That’s why I called it farcical (which, yeah, I still stand by that characterization); it’s like filling a bowl with eggs and trying to make cake.

That… is fair enough.