As it should be. FUCKING VOTE! And remember, by not voting for Biden, you are voting for Trump whether or not you actually cast a vote. ALL of the Trump supporters WILL show up on the day.
Either way you’re voting for a Palestinian genocide and the continuation of neoliberal imperialism.
Edit: the future is bleak either way, Biden has explicitly shown support for the continuation of support for Israel as well as the bombing campaign in Yemen and Syria. All this is to say that there is genuinely nothing we can do to help the middle east in this election.
But sure, we can get a better minimum wage or whatever.
Biden is awful, but I would take him over orange Hitler any day of the week. Heck, I would take DC’s Joker over Trump… that will put a smile on everyone’s faces.
Yeah I feel like people misunderstand what I’m saying as though I’m considering voting for trump. I’m not at all. I’m just trying to figure out how well voting for Biden sits on my conscience, or if id rather write in daffy duck this year.
Trump is not on the menu for me, and I feel like I’ve made that fairly clear but not once talking about voting for him.
Of course, no one here is seriously accusing you of voting for Trump; the thing I’m trying to say is that there are a lot of magadiots who will do everything in their power to get Trump back in the White House. There is also a lot of voter suppression in poorer neighborhoods with minorities who tend to vote blue in hopes they give up and go home, which gives republicans an advantage.
There is a very real chance Trump will win in the coming elections, so everyone who opposes Trump and what he stands for should absolutely vote for Biden even if he is awful, because if Trump is back in the White House, there is a real possibility this will be the last election.
I’m saying this as someone who was very cynical about politics for years and didn’t always vote during my life, and have come to regret not voting immensely.
I understand where you’re coming from, but I still don’t think it’s anyone’s right to tell me or anyone else that they are obligated to vote for any president.
Vote for everything else, vote in your local elections. That’s what changes things. But I don’t believe it’s my duty to vote for one of two pieces of shit every election just because of some screeching fucking retards on the Internet.
I’m not telling you you are obligated to do anything, I’m just asking you to reconsider because I’ve been there and deeply regretted not having voted in the past.
Yes, voting in local elections is probably going to make an immediate and tangible difference to your community, and should be encouraged for everyone to participate, but it’s still really important to vote in the presidential elections to keep Trump out of the White House. There is a real risk that if Trump wins in 2024, there won’t be a 2028 election at all…
No, there is no concern that the term limit will be removed or expanded. It hasn’t happened since the amendment was ratified, even after multiple attempts from politicians of various rank and from each party.
There are plenty of things to be concerned about, but the “trump will become the life long leader of the United States in his presidency” rhetoric is stupid and unfounded.
Nixon couldn’t do it, truman couldn’t do it, trump is not as competent or capable as either of these presidents. It will not happen. This is literally the same shit republicans used to say about Obama and it didn’t happen then.
He would have to convince 3/4s of the states in both the house of representatives and Congress to ratify, and there is no way he could do that.
I truly don’t think that matters. If Biden wins trump is just going to claim that the election was falsified again. We’re looking at a boiling point situation with no real answer.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m probably still going to vote for Biden unfortunately. But people acting like the choice is so clear are not reading the writing on the wall.
Edit: people down voting this forgot that trump and his supporters literally have stated that if he is not in office this year, they will do more than they did on January 6th. Many of them will call for an all out civil war. The problem isn’t the end of the next term, it’s the inauguration.
If they try again to do another January 6, or if they had tried to go further last time, they would have been met with force of the US military and they would be absolutely crushed.
Also, the Civil War was organized and planned in secret, long before the NSA and FBI existed, predator drone and hellfire missiles. I don’t think another one could get far enough along to pose an existential threat.
The capital insurrection ended exactly how a 3%'r civil war would end: they’d smear a bunch of shit on the walls until one of them fucks around and finds out, and then they’ll hide their faces as they scurry away out the back door, back into their mom’s basements and motor homes.
No. You don’t get to tell me that I have to vote for Biden when he’s not doing anything to earn my vote. He’s allowing Israel to carry out a genocide. So he’s not actually less evil than Trump. You’re just upset because Trump’s shitty policies will impact you more than Biden’s shitty policies. Biden has the lower approval ratings than Trump did at this point. He has not earned a second term.
How about the Dems run a candidate who isn’t dog shit? I vote for Dems as a form of harm reduction, but they aren’t reducing harm anymore. So what’s in it for me? Dems haven’t not done anything about the supreme court, student loans, or threats to democracy and they are largely supporting the actions of Israel. If I’m right, and this is a genocide (I am), then voting for anyone who supports it would be an evil act. They’re going to have to make some changes if they want to earn the votes of people who don’t want to see a genocide carried out on our watch with our bombs.
That said, it would be a real problem if Trump won. So if that happens, I hope you’ll be willing to place the blame where it belongs: with the Democrats. They are the ones doing nothing to earn our votes. Biden isn’t even campaigning.
okay, then welcome your next dictator Donald Trump and all that implies (Gilead like conditions, rescending civil and gender rights, requiring Christian worship or prison/execution, an end to all journalism and only Trumpian little red books where you pledge allegiance to him every day or get reported to the police)
You responded to my comment about American politics calling me a bot because I have the nerve to not suck biden’s dick. Why would I assume you were not in the US?
I don’t comment on UK politics, despite the fact that I watch a British alternative media news source daily. I’m sorry, I just genuinely didn’t expect someone to be calling me a bot (I may not have many comments, but they’re fairly varied) and have them be from another country. You caught me off guard.
But I think its shitty that you think my account is suspicious. Sorry I couldn’t transfer my Reddit account over so that you can see every comment I’ve made going back to 2010.
I have 3 comments from before that “copypasta worthy political rant.” You realize copypastas have to be copied from somewhere right? So all copypastas were at some point posted by a real person. Maybe think about that.
I get that US politics affects other countries. But why should you be attacking me as a bot off of one comment against a politician who isn’t in your country? Like… You were an asshole. I’m sorry that I connected your behavior with my own country. You just act so much like one of us.
I have 3 comments from before that “copypasta worthy political rant.” You realize copypastas have to be copied from somewhere right? So all copypastas were at some point posted by a real person. Maybe think about that.
Interesting I don’t see the other comments but they appear in the count. Might be from instances feddit does not fedderelise with or some bug.
You realize copypastas have to be copied from somewhere right? So all copypastas were at some point posted by a real person. Maybe think about that.
Sure, that’s right - but there is also something in that initial text that makes people think, hey that’s a copypasta lets spread it. Maybe think about this.
I get that US politics affects other countries. But why should you be attacking me as a bot off of one comment against a politician who isn’t in your country?
Again, I just found your initial comment funny - it sounded like a typical political copy pasta and my response was in no means targeted at specific politics. The bot assumption came after you answered and I looked at your comments and was even more of a joking manner.
Like… You were an asshole.
Pretty sure sometimes I am, like everyone else. Not sure it was this time. But I will agree that I jumped to conclusions and didn’t engage you in a serious but rather attacked you based on my assumptions. Sorry about that, if you are not a bot and you expressed a genuine opinion that just sounded to me like a copy pasta - that would have been a bit of an asshole move on my side.
You just act so much like one of us.
Now I’m offended. /s But I also kind of deserve it.
Okay. But Palestine still gonna be fucked. I get that you don’t care if Palestinians die. But I do. So I get to not vote for the guy currently enabling their genocide. “Trump would do it too” so you admit it’s bad? Demand better from your politicians you weakling.
Bro I don’t care about Palestine that much right now, nothing we can do there, that’s on Israel, Iran and the middle east, you better look in your own fkn back yard because dictatorship is just around the corner while everyone is worried about the next marvel movie and causes they don’t really have any power to effect.
We’ve been selling Israel weapons while they declare exactly what they want to do. What the fuck are you talking about? Biden has gone around Congress twice to sell weapons to Israel. But sure. Nothing we can do. Get fucked.
Vote for the candidate whose election will result in the least amount of genocide. Millions of people dying under Trump is worse than the thousands of people who have died under Biden. If you cared this about the Palestinians, saving millions of lives would be a straightforward math problem.
For human beings? When Trump was in office all he did was pander to dictators. I don’t see why he wouldn’t do exactly the same again. Trump is going to let Netanyahu ethnically cleanse the Gaza Strip, let Putin invade Europe, let Xi invade Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific, and let Kim invade South Korea. Not to mention Trump is going to ethnically cleanse immigrants from the US. He’s going to round them up into camps first. Trump is going to be bad for all of us.
Maybe wake up and realize the fascists tricked you into thinking a genocide is taking place when really only 25,000 people have died and the daily death tolls have halved in the last month and have been dropping since after the first two weeks of the war. If it’s a genocide the killing apparatus should become more efficient over time, not less, and certainly not less by half, not with 99% of the alleged target people still alive.
That’s the proportionate equivalent of as starting to limp and fall down when you’re 450 feet into a 26.2 mile marathon.
Fascists didn’t convince me of anything. I watch news from socialists. Maybe wake up and realize that you have accepted Israeli propaganda. Only 25,000 dead? ONLY? You’re a psychopath.
If you think Palestine is still fucked either way then choosing to empowerer Trump makes even less sense. I think it’s a fact that Trump will be far worse for Palestinians than Biden, but even if we assume they will both be just as terrible on this issue, Trump is also terrible on every issue. If your choice is terrible and completely terrible, logically you should go with terrible. The other choice is even worse.
How could trump be worse?what is worse than arming the Israelies while they engage in genocide? Unless you don’t believe that’s what is happening. In which case,you have been misinformed. Genocide is genocide. Why am I the asshole here for not wanting to vote for someone who is enabling a genocide? Why isn’t Biden the asshole for enabling the genocide or not stepping down?
ah, so the single-issue voter. actually it’s not even single-issue, that’s just giving up status quo in order to effectively vote for worse than status quo. that’s called having a narrow view on the world, you know the middle east isn’t the only thing that exists in american politics right? there are still other things to improve on rather than just saying “oh israel-palestine conflict is going to shit either way therefore why even bother, might as well fuck up every other political issue, it’s useless if we can’t have this one win”.
grow up, you’re effectively casting all your friends and loved ones into the flames with your stubbornness, and casting palestinians into the flames considering trump is going to rail way harder against palestine than biden does. it’s not like not voting means no palestinians die, why do you have this delusion that you have blood on your hands if you vote but no blood on your hands if you don’t. it helps nobody and improves nothing except your own ego because you get to say “oh well i didn’t vote for genocide!” even though you practically voted for more genocide.
It’s not my only issue with Biden, but it is my biggest and the fact that it doesn’t even seem to register as a problem for you is very telling. You don’t care about anything that’s happening to anyone outside of the US huh? Your world is that small? Get a grip. We all draw our lines in the sand somewhere and when the line is crossed, that’s usually the thing we’re going to yell about. I think “I can work with you on anything other than genocide related crimes” is pretty fucking lenient, don’t you?
alright then my guy, what does trump do better than biden that makes you want him to win instead? because you seem so happy to give trump an extra vote. what would trump do better outside of the US since that seems to be where your concern lies? how will not voting for biden achieve your goals and make the situation in palestine any better?
you seem to think that voting for biden is “working with him”, which is just plain delusional. that’s completely outside of the scope of general elections. you’re not relevant to biden, or any politicians, he doesn’t know you exist, don’t think of yourself as so important that you think you’re working with them. what you’re doing is casting a vote to lessen future pain.
if biden were the only candidate, if it were a 1 party state and the only person able to run was biden, then yeah i’d agree with you. voting means nothing. but that’s simply not the case. you are genuinely either stupid or evil if you’d rather give your vote for trump rather than swallow your pride and at least vote to maintain some semblance of liberty (at least what’s left of it). a world where democrats lose the election is a world where you won’t even have the right to criticize your president, nor your government’s genocide.
bottom line is by not participating in the 2 party system in the presidential election, you’re not somehow making a morally correct decision that means you have no blood on your hands. you WILL have blood on your hands if republicans win, no matter how much you try to convince yourself that you totally owned those genociders by basically voting for the worse genocider. your view is extremely short-sighted and you care about your own pride more than the rights of LGBT people, black & hispanic people, etc.
I don’t think trump does anything better than Biden and I’m not reading the rest of your shitty comment because you started out by putting words in my mouth. I never said that Trump did anything better than Biden. I don’t want Biden to be president. His actions have been disqualifying.
Not arming the Israeli’s and letting Iran try to start a war it cannot win, which would result in a domino effect of failed middle eastern states, tens of millions of deaths, and tens of millions of war refugees.
Oh but by all means burn the fucking planet down and destroy democracy for 350,000,000 Americans because you want everyone to know how super sad you are over 25,000 avoidable deaths.
And then they bombed the safe areas. Look it up. You’re wrong about this. The ICJ has agreed to continue the case. They are clearly convinced that there is a plausibility that Israel has committed genocide. Do you think you’re smarter than the 17 judges sitting on the ICJ for this case?
I will read it and see where my prediction of how the case would be disposed of on the pleadings was flawed.
In light of the high casualties, a preliminary injunction probably makes sense. I bet Israel is already in compliance with it. I’ll comment again after I read it this weekend.
The issuing of preliminary orders means that they have deemed the risk of genocide in Gaza at the hands of the Israeli government to be plausible. The judges voted overwhelming in agreement with that ruling. One judge voted for the provisional measures based solely on the question of intent and the quotes by Israeli leaders.
That’s true, plausible. That’s taking the allegations as true, and resolving all reasonable doubt in the applicant’s favor, and the allegations in the complaints in my view, while stating a plausible case for genocide, are a bunch of bullshit, half truths, and exaggerations.
Nobody disputes that 25,000 people have been horribly killed. The dispute is why. Israel is going to on in evidence that virtually everyone was warned multiple times to leave, and it’s going to put on evidence that for virtual every bombing there was a legit military target.
Let’s see if Hamas complies with the order, and let’s the hostages go. What do you think they will do?
Well, Hamas is not a state, nor is it a signatory to the genocide charter, so this ruling really doesn’t apply to them. However, you’re right, they’ll probably continue holding the hostages as negotiating chips. To be clear, I condemn Hamas and the Israeli government. However, the 25,000 people killed weren’t all Hamas. Israel doesn’t even claim they were mostly Hamas. And of course Israel will provide evidence in an attempt to defend themselves, otherwise they wouldn’t have bothered showing up.
You might be interested to know that Israel’s national security ministry, Itamar Ben-Gvir, tweeted “Hague Schmague” after the ICJ ruling. Does that sound like the sentiment of someone who intends to comply?
Please explain to me, without relying on evidence from Israel, the claims in South Africa’s complaints are bullshit. You have made a similar statement before but I don’t know what you think is bullshit, half-truths, or exaggerations. They use facts from independent sources or from Israel themselves when they can. They use quotes to show intent (it is rare to see this much evidence of intent). They showed video of soldiers echoing the genocidal rhetoric of the president and the prime minister. So which parts did they misrepresent?
Just read South Africa’s complaint. The most sensational claims are attributed to “reports” and fail to to include enough detail to fact to check the claims.
It’s a house of cards built on exaggerations and half truths. It also includes none of Israel’s side of the story, which includes two undeniable truths: they are warning people before air strikes and they are striking legit targets.
Literally three quarters of South Africa’s complaint is going to be simply ignored because Israel is going to be able to show a valid military target.
So you’re just accepting what Israel says at face value. I disagree that they can show a “valid military target”. They claim that they can show it, but that doesn’t mean we have to just accept their claim. Or do you buy the whole “most moral army” propaganda. CNN filmed caught Israeli’s shooting Palestinians walking under a white flag. Israel killed three of its own hostages who were walking shirtless, unarmed, with a makeshift white flag, and asking for help in Hebrew. Show the legitimate military targets that justify the destruction of their entire health system. There are no hospitals left in Gaza.
You need to look at some noncorporate news sources. Ask yourself if you’re just repeating the words of Mark Regev or Eylon Levy, they people they pay to push propaganda. Do you honestly believe that Israel has done nothing wrong? Can do no wrong? They’re dropping 2,000 lb bombs. There is evidence of them using white phosphorus as a weapon. I’m sure you’ll just parrot their propaganda without offering any evidence to back it up.
You’re stringing a bunch of unrelated things together into a web of conspiratorial nonsense and calling it evidence.
The tunnels are well documented. They spread throughout virtually all of Gaza City and there are huge tunnel networks in Gaza’s other two cities as well.
Are the tunnels just corporate media propaganda?
They’ve done plenty of wrong, and Israel has also prosecuted and continues to prosecute its own people for incitement to genocide and for war crimes, as noted in the ICJ opinion.
My opinions are my own and are open to being proven wrong. I’m calling it as I see it.
Show me where Israel has bombed civilians with no warning; the date and location, then we can look up what warnings the IDF gave and their stated justification.
Neither you or I can go there and inspect to see if there really is tunnels under the buildings, or see if the people wearing civilian clothing are actually members of Hamas.
On one side you have a group who has never admitted the death of a Hamas soldier, who says every casualty is a civilian casualty and complains about indiscriminate targeting of civilians while at the same time actually indiscriminately targeting civilians. And on the other, the army of a democratic nation that is currently right now prosecuting dozens of its own citizens for exactly the things people are accusing it of doing nothing to prevent. One side is obviously lying.
You can hear the recordings of the warnings and see videos of them and press accounts for yourself, and you can have faith in the coalition of democratic nations who are supporting Israel over the coalition of authoritarian theocratic shitholes that are state sponsors of terrorism which supports Israel. For a full list see paragraph 12 of South Africa’s complaint.
You believe North Korea and Iran, but not Canada and Japan. That should raise alarm bells in your mind that maybe you got tricked. It’s okay. I’ve been tricked too. It happens. Denial doesn’t help you in any way, though.
If you acknowledge that you can’t go there yourself to confirm what’s happening, then you’re acknowledging that you’re accepting the word of someone else. The Israeli government, run by the Likud party and Netanyahu, is a far right government. Do you expect them to just admit that genocide is their plan so that the world will rush in to try to stop them? Leaders in the Likud party have made it clear that under their control, there will be no two state solution. That Palestinians cannot be allowed the right of self determination. Ignore all of the quotes in the South African complaint, look at Netanyahu’s recent “from the river to the sea” comments or Tzippi Hotovely’s “absolutely not” when asked about the possibility of two states. That mindset is not one that will make Israelies less safe as is it is one that is based in the oppression of Palestinians. As such, Palestinians will continue to rise up against Israel as long as there are Palestinians left to rise up. Israel is now trying to get other countries to accept the Gazan population, because ethnic cleansing is a more palatable war crime. However, it should be noted that Germany tried something similar with its Jewish population, before deciding that if no one would take them, they would need to be removed somehow.
Regardless of whether or not you think this is a genocide, the only route to safety in the region is a ceasefire and a negotiation with the representatives of the Palestinians, which at this time is Hamas. Israel’s campaign has only raised support for Hamas in the region, because Israel is acting as an oppressor and Hamas are the only ones standing up to them.
If what Israel is doing is good, then why don’t Gazan children have enough food? Or enough medicine? Do you think it is Hamas that are not allowing enough supply trucks through Israeli controlled border crossings? Why did Israel allow babies in incubators to die? Why did they kill people walking under white flags? Why are so many reporters being killed? Oh, well, you probably don’t care about them since the only reports that matter are the ones that fit your narrative and anything Israel says.
Wake up buddy. “Western world can do no wrong” is a fucking dream created by colonizers. Which makes it a great fit for Israel, but not so much for reality. Or do you believe that there is something intrinsic in Palestinian DNA that makes them more susceptible to being killed by bombs?
You’re not telling me anything I don’t already know. You’re just oblivious to the overall context and gullible enough to believe everything you hear.
Every report of “bombing civilians in safe zone” that I’ve seen was a lie. The individuals in the buildings had received warnings before bombs fell.
The only reason this story is unique is because everyone heeded the evacuation; when Hamas spread rumors that the evacuation calls were a hoax, the IDF proved it was real with warning shots. The calls are routine.
You find me a claim of civilians being blown up without a warning where the building and location can be verified, and then you have some credibility to your bogus genocide claims. A warning is sufficient under any legal or moral standard of warfare.
Okay sis, again. Believe what you want. Believe if you want that its somehow moral for an occupying government to call oppressed civilians to let them know that their homes will be destroyed wether or not they stay in the building. Convince yourself that that’s not just further terrorism of an already traumatized population. But we’re not getting anywhere here because you’re not willing to accept anything. You just make more and more excuses for Israel. I’m done. Good bye.
Someone put instrumentalities of terrorism under their buildings. Probably should have stopped them at some point before October 7. Suicide bombings weren’t enough to turn Palestinians against Hamas, why would October 7 or having their homes destroyed?
Should probably give South Africa’s case a read as well. 84 pages of facts that are pretty damning for Israel that were convincing enough for these judges. Maybe your bias presented you from believing the facts before your eyes?
Yeah, like I said. Try it again with the understanding that you’re point of view is not one held by experts who reviewed the same material. See if that changes anything.
I am an expert who has reviewed the material and there are many experts who also agree with me.
The countries with experts who agree with you: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Malaysia, Qatar, North Korea, Russia, Brazil, Algeria, and a few others I’m not remembering right now.
Here are the countries with experts who agree with me: USA, UK, the EU, NATO, France, Germany, Australia, Norway, Poland, and Canada.
You are siding with Iran over Canada. Does that change anything for you?
The order, aside from jurisdiction and standing, makes two significant findings: that the humanitarian condition may likely deteriorate before there is a finding on the merits, leading to irreparable harm of the rights South Africa seeks to vitiate; and the second is that some of the allegations of proven could plausibly meet the definition of genocide or related crimes. That’s Paragraphs 54 and 72. That’s good enough for a preliminary injunctive order in any court.
Obviously you disagree but I think Israel is already in compliance with the order. Humanitarian corridors are open. Food is rolling in. Medicine rolling in. Bombings have slowed down. Civilian casualties have dropped off. Whether Israel is in compliance is not a factor in ordering the provisional measures. It only adopted a few of the numerous measures South Africa sought.
One major fact noted is that Israel is investigating and prosecuting its own citizens who have called for “extermination of Palestinians” and the like, for the crime of incitement. The Court commends Israel for doing so.
On the other hand, in Paragraph 82 they call on Hamas to release all hostages unconditionally. Obviously, Hamas will not comply.
Lol it’s really funny this imaginary scenario in that person’s head… Thinking that Israel killing tens of thousands today will somehow prevent future deaths that are impossible for us to predict. If I didn’t know any better, I’d call that IDF bootlicking.
Trump (to black Americans) in 2016: What do you have to lose?
You’re basically just spouting Trump talking points.
Trump would obviously not only support Israel’s position he would sell them more weapons…wouldn’t care at all about the Palestinian human rights angle and he would allow Russia to walk into Ukraine and that’s just the “foreign relations” plan…domestically, he’s planning on setting up concentration camps for the homeless and undocumented.
Okay. Gaza isn’t my only issue with Biden. And no Trump doesn’t align with me on those issues either, but if Trump doesn’t get my vote by default just because I dislike Biden, then the same should follow for Biden. I’m sorry that you don’t like how I, one person that you do not know, am planning to vote. However, I will not change my plans because you say I have to. You have not given me a reason to vote for Biden. Just reasons not to vote for Trump. And that’s not only not a winning strategy forever, but its getting fucking annoying at this point. Not a single person here has said been able to point to any actual thing that makes Trump better on this issue. Biden didn’t do anything to fix the issues with the court with the first two years that he had. He dropped the ball on student loan debt relief. I could give you other examples of my frustrations with Biden. But I’m not going to waste my time. Because you’ll just say “Trump will be worse, if you want change, vote for Dems.” But dems don’t make changes because they want to hold onto power. That is how they always operate in my opinion. You are free to feel differently, but I have based that opinion on 36 years of life and watching them operate. You won’t get the change you want out of democrats. You’ll get more of the same.
So please, stop telling people what they have to do with their votes. We don’t all agree that things are going so super, duper well right now. Dems don’t listen to progressives, there aren’t any parties on the actual left who can win, i have no one to vote for. And yes, I’m mad at democrats about it because they lie about being progressives. And I mean literally. Jon Fetterman ran a progressive campaign and now openly states that he’s not progressive and drapes himself in the Israeli flag so that he can get those sweet, sweet AIPAC dollars. But by all means, keep voting blue no matter who and tell yourself that your not like MAGA Republicans, because at least you have the illusion of choice.
But dems don’t make changes because they want to hold onto power. That is how they always operate in my opinion. You are free to feel differently, but I have based that opinion on 36 years of life and watching them operate. You won’t get the change you want out of democrats. You’ll get more of the same.
The reason they don’t make much change happen is much more complex than that, but you’re entitled to your opinion.
Other people have also lived for 30+ years and don’t have the same reductionist take, so like, that’s just like your opinion man.
So please, stop telling people what they have to do with their votes.
I don’t give a shit what you do with your vote, but if you want to be regarded as anything approaching reasonable, it makes no sense at all to say “oh it doesn’t matter at all which party I vote for because my exact preferences are not represented in this election”.
You have the freedom to be unreasonable, and I have the freedom to tell you that that’s exactly what you’re being.
Ultimately no politician alone will be able to change the things that need changing, but a couple of choice politicians in the right offices will go a long way toward making things markedly worse.
And dems will never give that to you. If they wanted to, they would have done so by now. But you’re entitled to you’re belief that I have simply thrown my hands up instead of wrestling with this question for months. Voting for Biden will just make life hell for different people. Not fewer, in my view.
So if you’re cool with me telling you that you’re acting like an asshole, then go ahead and tell me what to do But don’t act surprised when people get pissed at you.
I think this reply got lost. It’s likely difficult to manage your inbox because you’re typing out walls of text to a dozen different accounts right now.
Also, if you can’t regard me as a reasonable person for not wanting to vote against my own beliefs and interests, then you absolutely do give a whole lot of shits about what I do with my vote. You give so many shits, that some people might even call it unreasonable that you can’t let a grown person make up their own mind.
You give so many shits, that some people might even call it unreasonable that you can’t let a grown person make up their own mind.
I really don’t give a shit as stated before. There is a reason why people like yourself get so absolutely blown in half by a simple meme like the one that started this shit fest of a thread…I personally think that it’s because there’s still a little part of you that still knows you’re behaving petulantly, and you think by typing out walls of text to strangers on the Internet in response, you’ll somehow be able to convince that part of you that you’re right.
EDIT: Yeah if the walls of text don’t do it, meaningless down votes definitely will. 😉
If you can’t see how Trump is worse than Biden I don’t know what to say. It should be self evident at this point that a second Trump presidency will be a disaster for the world. As far as Palestine goes, Biden has pissed off Netanyahu and there’s a whole diplomatic row unfolding right now because Biden said there has to be a two state solution and Netanyahu says no. I guess you’re unfamiliar with Trump somehow but based off his previous behavior he would be more likely to help Netanyahu and encourage him to do even worse things. Trump certainly wouldn’t be getting into a public spat where he’s insisting on a Palestinian state, he’s definitely not going to do anything to stop what Israel is doing, or even to discourage them.
I don’t believe this “row” with Netanyahu will amount to anything, which I am basing on Biden’s record of always backing Israel every single time. You and I agree about Trump. We’ve clearly come to different conclusions about Biden. I don’t think we are going to get any further in this conversation.
Also, the idea that Trump “certainly” wouldn’t get in a public spat when he is, in fact, Donald Trump and public spats are exactly his MO is fucking laughable.
I’m not saying Trump doesn’t get in public spats, just that he wouldn’t get into one with Netanyahu over Palestinian statehood. The idea of Trump arguing with Netanyahu in defense of the rights of Palestinians is absurd on its face.
More Palestinians will die under Trump. All he does is kiss dictator ass. Trump is going to let Netanyahu ethnically cleanse the entire Gaza Strip.
I get that you don’t care if Palestinians die. But I do.
You’re a liar. Since this is all you seem to care about, know this, you’re going to have blood on your hands if you refuse to vote. I refuse to let you have your bullshit moral high ground. I’m voting for democracy in this next election. There will be nothing but genocide from here on out if America becomes a fascist dictatorship, both at home and abroad. Millions more people will die if Trump becomes president. If millions of Palestinians dying doesn’t matter to you, then you don’t care about the Palestinians.
Biden won in New Hampshire and he wasn’t even on the ballot. Sounds like he’s going to do fine. I think people will come to their senses about this. Genocide doesn’t justify allowing fascists to take power and do more genocide.
Because its against two people have no name recognition. Its not hard to figure out why no one went out to vote for Williamson or Phillips when most people don’t even know who they are.
Palestinians don’t care if Palestinians die. They huddle up around Hamas members and tunnel entrances to die as proud martyrs, human shields for their terrorist captor’s absolutely deranged anti-social and religious beliefs.
It’s very sad that 600,000 to 800,000 people in Gaza ignored the evacuation warnings or were held as voluntary and involuntary human shields by a terrorist organization. The terrorists and their patron state Iran are absolutely psyched that Kentifer got tricked into openly supporting terrorism by these otherwise easily avoidable deaths. Really, it’s very sad that Hamas has no regard for the lives of the people it falsely claims to serve.
The hard right authoritarians of the world support Hamas and call these deaths genocide; Iran, Malaysia, Brazil, Iraq, Syria, etc.
The liberal world order supports Iarael’s right to self defense; America, the EU, NATO, UK, France, Australia, Norway, Austria, Poland, Germany…even Canada.
Think about that and consider whether it not maybe you really have been tricked, why you’re siding with Iran over Canada?
I think it’s pretty obvious where the blame would be if Trump wins: the stupid folks who refused to vote out of principle. If it was possible that neither could win then your strategy could make sense. But there are ONLY 2 OUTCOMES. Requiring dems to earn your vote is unfortunately meaningless when the only other option is FAR WORSE YOU CRETIN OF INANE CONCLUSIONS.
That’s simply not true. Biden has the option to step down and let a Democrat who isn’t dog shit run in his place. He and the DNC are choosing not to do so. The election is months away. He can still back out if he wants. It is not Trump or Biden unless Dems refuse to listen to voters.
You’re inability to imagine a scenario does not make it impossible. You gave me a false dichotomy, I gave you an explanation of why it was false. You don’t have to like it. Nobody does. But they would have months to campaign. The primaries aren’t even over yet, so it wouldn’t theoretically cost then anything. Dems just need to do it. They’ve had since October. They’re the ones making the choice here. They could make a different one.
But they won’t. Because they care more about making sure the “right people” have power than representing their constituents or even doing what’s right. This isn’t the first time and it won’t be the last.
It’s called being realistic my dude. If you want further left politicians and policies, organize and turn out the vote. If you don’t you get the most milquetoast people-pleasing centrist democrat ever because the DNC is trying to placate as many people as they can.
Have you seen what the right wing has done over the last decade or so with the Tea Party morphing into the Freedom Caucus? There are right wing groups showing up to school board meetings and running for city councils all across the country. They’ve mobilized and are going out and taking what they want and now the formerly “mainstream” Republicans are completely beholden to them and afraid of being primaried in the next off-year election.
The left needs to do the same thing over the next decade or two (or three), that’s the only way we can actually win long term.
Yeah I remember. I remember a lot of steam for Bernie and then a disappointing turn out as well.
Fuck Hillary but lets not pretend he was riding an overwhelming wave of support and a bunch of primaries were stolen from him. He consistently trailed her by like 30 points. I went to a couple of his rallies and donated so I remember, the fervor was nowhere near what MAGA has become right?
Also, that info was leaked by “Guccifer,” a Russian asset, so I’d be wary basing too much on that.
Isn’t it funny how you dismiss every thing that reflects poorly on the party you support? Despite the fact that the DNC did not dispute the contents? They sued over the release of the emails because they believe it interfered with the election. Maybe it did, maybe it didn’t. But they don’t deny the contents of the leaked emails themselves. I guess anything so that you can vote blue no matter who, huh?
I mean, fuck the DNC but there’s no viable 3rd party I can support this cycle.
The left doesn’t even exist in the U.S. How many active leftwing PACs or direct action groups can you name? Now how many rightwing ones? I gave and worked phones for Bernie. We need serious election reform, I agree.
I’m not some accelerationist who’s hoping for a Trump win that might spur on some collapse and eventual revolution. I’d prefer the non-violent revolution please and for now that means voting for Biden.
I don’t want Trump to be elected. But I won’t have my vote held hostage by a party that does not represent me and actively works against progressive candidates from making any headway. If they want my vote, they have to come get it from me.
Then vote for Biden. Trump is a Republican. Republicans historically win with low voter turn out.
There can be another election with a more progressive candidate in four years if Biden wins this election. There cannot be any future elections in a fascist dictatorship.
He has gone around Congress to sell weapons to Israel twice. Once on the same day that South Africa took Israel to the Hague for exactly what I’m mad about. If being a troll means pointing out truths that make you uncomfortable, then I gues I’m a troll.
Trump does what strongmen tell him to do. Millions of people are going to die under Trump.
No one will be able to give anyone a better choice if the fascists overthrow our democracy. If you want a better choice then vote for the candidate who will preserve our democracy long enough so we can replace him with someone better.
That said, it would be a real problem if Trump won. So if that happens, I hope you’ll be willing to place the blame where it belongs: with the Democrats. They are the ones doing nothing to earn our votes. Biden isn’t even campaigning.
Biden is governing. He’s doing the job he was elected to do. Perhaps that’s enough to earn some votes? Or are votes only earnt by rallies and advertisements?
In any case, it’s completely silly to blame the Democrats for losing if you don’t vote for them yourself. If you prefer Democrats over republicans, then you have to vote for them. Even though they aren’t perfect. If you don’t vote, then it is totally unreasonable to blame anyone else for getting an undesired outcome. Not voting implies that you have no preference.
(And yet again, this is another case where ‘ranked choice’ voting / preferential / instant-runoff would make this whole situation a lot easier. USA could really use some serious electoral reform.)
I don’t currently prefer democrats over Republicans. I think they are equally harmful in different ways. What do I do? I agree that Republicans are wrong on everything, but Dems are wrong on enough things, and majorly so, that I don’t think that they can be reformed. RCV is a pipe dream for the US at large. Especially with dems in positions of power. They haven’t historically been willing to give up power once they have it.
Vote however you want. It’s your choice. If you prefer Republicans, then vote for them. I’m just saying that if you choose not to vote for Democrats, it’s silly to then go on to blame the Democrats for Trump being in power. ‘Blame’ implies that you are unhappy with the outcome, but it is effectively an outcome that you yourself chose with your vote.
If you don’t want Trump to win, then you should choose to vote against him. If you don’t, you yourself are the one to blame. (That said, if you are happy to have that demented tyrant as your president, then go ahead and vote for him. It’s your choice.)
If Dems need my vote to win, then they need to run a candidate that doesn’t support genocide in Palestine. If they can’t or won’t do that, then they are forfeiting my vote. If they do that and lose, then they are the one’s “at fault” for losing.
Trump will green light Netanyahu to fully ethnically cleanse the Gaza Strip. Trump does whatever strongmen tell him to do. It is illogical to allow a candidate whose election will result in more Palestinian deaths to be elected through inaction. Especially when Trump will prevent future elections and thus deny us the ability to elect more progressive candidates in the future.
The ICJ disagrees. They believe it is plausible that Israel is committing genocide right now and they have issued preliminary orders to prevent further deaths. Do you think you know more about Israel’s responsibilities under international law to prevent genocide than 17 judges sitting on the the ICJ? Do you believe that you know more than them? Or do you just take Israel at they’re word.
Israel is committing genocide now under Biden. They will still be committing genocide under Trump. The difference is the number of people who will be killed.
Currently 26453 Palestinians have been killed. The Gaza Strip being completely ethnically cleansed would result in over 2 million deaths.
Although both are genocide. Allowing Trump to create a fascist dictatorship and green light the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians would a worse outcome. Netanyahu’s cabinet members have made it clear his administration wants to remove all Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. It is in the interests of the Palestinians to prevent a fascist like Trump from taking office who will allow Israel to ethnically cleanse the Gaza Strip. edit: typo
Biden has shown himself to be either unwilling or unable to reign in or stop Israel. They don’t believe the US will do anything to stop them, and so far, they have been proven correct. The rhetoric under Biden will be different than under Trump. But the outcome will be the same. Sorry that I’m not appeased by a milquetoast centrist urging Israel to take it easy.
The change to a fascist dictatorship is not simply a shift in rhetoric. Millions more people dying under Trump is not the same outcome.
If the Republicans complete their fascist takeover in 2025, that’s it. There won’t be another election. There won’t be any opportunities to get progressive candidates. Without democracy the public will have no peaceful recourse to improve anything anywhere. Throwing our democracy away by not voting doesn’t help anyone. If we want better candidates in election years then we need to be politically active in the four years leading up to the election.
So if Dems wanted to avoid that future, don’t you think it would be smart of them to run someone that people actually want to vote for? Like if they cared about actually preventing that, wouldn’t they choose someone who isn’t this controversial. They have had since October to bring someone else up. They have 9 more months to run someone right now with Biden’s endorsement. They won’t, because they don’t care about representing what the people want (to avoid dictatorship) they just want to keep power in the hands of the people they’ve chosen for you.
I don’t currently prefer democrats over Republicans. I think they are equally harmful in different ways. What do I do? I agree that Republicans are wrong on everything, but Dems are wrong on enough things, and majorly so, that I don’t think that they can be reformed.
Honestly? You grow up and read some books. Start with any of Bernie’s books. As you read, try and answer why Bernie, the most popular and longest serving third party politician in history, ran for president by seeking the Democratic nomination instead of running as an independent.
The answer is that the DNC can be changed and has shifted significantly to the left in the last eight years, and will continue to do so. However if you idiotically allow Trump to win the presidency, it will likely be the last presidential election you ever get to vote. The DNC might be made illegal.
The choice is hope for the future or no hope for the future.
And Bernie failed to make any headway because the private club shut him out. How about you grow up and stop making excuses for voting for an old man who aids and abets genocide?
Of course nobody can tell you who you have to vote for.
But regardless of your choice and your reasons, the math of the votes in our stupid system does mean that voting for anybody but Biden, including voting for nobody, helps Trump or his Republican replacement.
If you don’t care about that, that’s fine. Some might argue that you SHOULD care, but that’s a different conversation. The voting decision is a private one that’s yours alone, but understanding how the choices affect the outcome is good for everybody.
I do care about those things. But I also care about Biden not being president for different, equally valid, equally moral, reasons. Also for pettiness sake, he fucking said he’d be a one term president before he ran in 2020 and we should fucking hold him to that but no one fucking remembers it. I cannot bring myself to vote for a man who has said and done the things he had said and done. So if I care about those things as I “should” and if I also care about doing something about the runaway supreme court and not arming a genocidal right wing government (just to name a couple of my objections to Biden’s presidency), who do I vote for? Do I just give Biden another 4 years because the other guy sucks? Even though I know that it means that he will allow a genocide to be carried out and join wars to defend that genocide which will lead to untold deaths?
Like, even in your comment, while you tell me it’s a personal decision, you’re still laying it on a bit thick and its clear what you think I should do with my vote.
Since we’re talking about the general election, I’m looking at it in a pragmatic cause and effect way. We ARE going to get either the R or D nominee at the end of the election. If you literally do not care who gets elected, and you morally can’t throw support behind either, then a third party or non-vote is the right choice for you.
And while I’m not really trying to hide that I would 100% vote against Trump if he’s the nominee, I’m trying to phrase this all in a way that is very neutral. I’ve gone out of my way to not say you’re a fool or that you’re throwing away your vote. Like I said above, if they are literally the same to you, then voting for neither is the correct choice to represent your views.
When it comes to my personal views and voting decision, I’m not a Biden fan, but the difference between the conservative status quo Democrats we’ve been offered lately, and the MAGA controlled Republican Party, is so great in my eyes that I have no question about voting against Trump regardless of how exciting or lame the Democrat is. This isn’t how I want it to be. The two party death grip is the result of how our elections are structured. Changing that system is the dream, but we need the two parties to implement it, so yeah.
I feel like the folks in the good timeline got Bernie in 2016 and saw some of the benefits people in other developed countries enjoy.
Do I just give Biden another 4 years because the other guy sucks?
Yes. The choice is one or the other so you pick the least bad option. You’re not voting on whether or not to do a genocide, that’s not what this election is deciding. If you genuinely care about the Supreme Court, it’s fucked up because of Trump and if he wins he will stack it even further. And do you really think Trump is going to sell fewer weapons to murderous right wing governments than Biden will? Again, the choice is one or the other so you either vote for Biden or you are serving to empower Trump. You don’t have to love Biden or feel good about voting for him, but please recognize that an even worse scenario will unfold if Trump wins.
No. That is a false dichotomy, as I have said to literally everyone else who has tried to use that argument. There are other options here. The DNC’s and/or Joe Biden’s unwillingness to explore those options doesn’t make them not options. It just means we need to push them harder. Your unwillingness to do so does not mean that the options don’t exist. I am not required to subscribe to your way of viewing politics.
We live in a two party system. There are two candidates who have a real chance to win the presidential election. This has been true for the entire history of US politics. This is not a way of viewing politics, it’s historical fact. Alternate facts aren’t an opinion, they’re lies.
There is no lawful mechanism right now while Joe Biden is still alive to go with a different candidate unless Biden steps down. In which case Trump will absolutely win.
Unfortunately, it’s a bit too late to switch candidates now. It’s an election year. Withholding our votes won’t result in better candidates in the next election. In fact in this case there won’t be a next election if Trump wins. We need to politically engaged for the next four years if we want a better candidate in 2028. Which I do. So I’m going to vote for Biden since he isn’t going to destroy democracy for personal gain.
Biden has already won the Idaho and New Hampshire primaries. It would take a major upset or him dying to get someone else the Democratic nomination at this point.
I was hoping Biden would honor his promise to be one term president. It’s clear he’s not going to do that. Trump will definitely endorse genocides that will kill many more people than have died so far.
Man it’s crazy how these people think they can instill some false duty onto any leftist to “do the right thing” without actually weighing each of the choices carefully. They just see a D next to someone’s name and think they must be the good guy, regardless of what they say.
Did we all forget about the kids in cages on the border? Or the lack of free healthcare/college? Did we forget about the union busting? Biden is not a good guy, he’s just barely better than Trump. He’s certainly better at hiding the heinous shit from everyone.
But yeah man, were all bad people and unamerican for wanting a better choice and hating our hand I guess?
Explain to me how being reluctant to vote for one of two presidential candidates due to their policies and global politics is immature. Am I supposed to just say “well millions will die either way but at least sleepy Joe relieved some student debt?”
What’s impractical is running a country off of the lesser of two evils vote.
In Canada, we get mail in voting, advanced voting and voting stations are everywhere. I’ve never had to wait more than 5 mins to vote and the closet voting station is a 2 min drive from my house. They’re also open late and most employers give us time off to vote. Not sure if there’s a law for that but voting here is easy af yet some people still don’t bother.
Which, while a good idea, still screws over the working class that don’t get federal holidays off. In fact in many industries they are mandatory work days because of the increased business.
State and federal opt-out mail ballots for all I say.
if you think both parties are the same you’re living in a fkn alternate reality. Only one part is seeking to end democracy in America and set up reeducation camps
So help them vote. Volunteer with efforts to get out the youth vote. Push for universal mail in voting where you are, or at least early voting. Help get politicians and initiatives on the ballot that they actually care about.
Shaming and complaining about the demographic you want to reach accomplishes nothing.
It doesn’t work. Every swiss citizen older than 18 receives them at home. The younger generation doesn’t vote.
I’m older now and the older I’m the more people of my age around me vote. It’s depressing. I try each time to make the younger vote but it’s not working. And, I didn’t miss one. Next one is the 3rd March. I will try again.
Don’t take me wrong if I convince if just one younger person, it’s a win.
I’ve been helping my fellow zoomers by figuring out what their townships/town wards/city districts are, then what their local/state/federal legislative/executive/judicial districts are, then who’s running for what position, then where to vote and (primaries and generals).
I hope things will change, but we still have abysmal turnout. TX started allowing early voting over 40 years ago and we still struggle to get people to the polls. Early voting is a span of 2 weeks, where in the 1st week, polls are required to be open for at least 9 hours and can be open from 6 AM to 10 PM on the weekday and shortened hours on the weekend, and in the 2nd week, polls are required to be open at least 12 hours a day and typically have the same hours as election day. Yet we still have virtually no lines through all early voting and a massive line on election day.
It doesn’t help that the news only bangs the final day of voting into peoples’ heads.
That explains a few people, but doesn’t explain why everyone else hasn’t been utilizing the early voting system for the 40 years prior to 2020. TX cities are pretty blue and their early voting lines are always very short.
If you are a legal resident of Wisconsin, and are not currently serving time or on paper, you can register to vote entirely online if you want, and you can request absentee ballots for all elections for the entire year (no reason needed, but necessary annual renewal, it’s my New Year’s resolution every year because it’s so easy to accomplish. entirely free of charge ofc.).
Just go to www.myvote.wi.gov to register, request absentee ballots, check your registration, or find your polling place. If you have any difficulty with your registration, you can find your local rep and contact them directly.
Please vote. Please vote for your own wellbeing. Please.
This is why I love Washington. Everyone has an OPT OUT absentee ballot. Everyone gets one at your address. Every election. All the time. The same address that’s on your ID. It’s amazing.
you typed [www.myvote.wi.gov](www.myvote.wi.gov) in your comment’s source. for it to register as a URL you have to put https before the link inside the parentheses: [www.myvote.wi.gov](https://www.myvote.wi.gov).
in your comment’s source it is written www.myvote.wi.gov, which shouldn’t behave like this. looks like a lemmy bug maybe?
i have two theories:
the bug is related to typing a link directly, as in pasting a link in the comment, like example.com (i typed it without brackets for a name or parentheses for a URL)
or
it’s related to links explicitly starting with www, such as what you linked.
you can report lemmy issues at https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues. i searched on there to see if it was already reported but couldn’t find anything, though if you want to i’d recommend searching.
Yes, but political engagement can't revolve around voting.
It's shit. You have to navigate a beurocracy and don't even always have choices down the ballot. And when you do, you often have no idea who the candidates are beyond some half baked Facebook page. It's also a huge burnout pit. Put months of stress into a binary outcome you can barely control. And even that is if you're engaged in canvassing and etc, otherwise it's just a chore.
Youth need to be mobilized in long term action projects. Something like Encode Justice for example, where they make civic engagement a part of their daily life, is far superior. It's also harder, but that comes with doing something actually impactful.
Things can change, though. California voted for an open primary in 1996 (think that was the year) and now you can participate in either one. Prior to that, you could only vote in the primary for the party you registered with.
Open primaries invite strategic voters to sabotage the party they want to lose rather than supporting the candidate they want to win.
Of course you can still do that with closed primaries—you just have to register as the party you want to vote for in the primaries, ignoring your own preferences. Nothing forces you to vote for your registered party in the general election. It’s slightly more involved this way since you would need to change your registration more frequently, and commit to it earlier, but that isn’t much of a hurdle.
Once the hateful boomers die out, the republican party will be finished. They know this and is why they have been focusing on voter suppression so much.
Hopefully the Democrats. No seriously, I hope the Dems become our more conservative party and we get a more progressive party. But… I’m not holding my breath, honestly. Feels like wishful thinking.
A new party will pop up. The Federalist Party died out after Hamilton was shot and also the War of 1812. They fielded their last Presidential candidate in 1816 with 30.9% of the vote.
Then the National Republican Party (different from the current Republican party) evolved out of the Democratic-Republican Party.
Personally, I’d love it if Democrats became the right-most party by staying exactly as they are, and a new party breaks off of them or evolves out to their left.
Personally, I’d love it if Democrats became the right-most party by staying exactly as they are, and a new party breaks off of them or evolves out to their left.
I’d say it’s more likely to go the other way, with the more moderate or right-leaning Democrats breaking off to form their own party and perhaps steal away the more moderate Republican voters. There are a lot of voters who would naturally align more closely with traditional Republican political views voting Democrat only because the Republican party has been taken over by a radical faction. Having laissez-faire fiscal conservatives and outright socialists in the same party isn’t really sustainable long-term; there are too many critical points of disagreement.
Democrats aren’t exactly a healthy representation of moderation. They’re too authoritarian for me to want the other party to be the actually-socialist party. Socialist and libertarian would be a balance, but it requires a big chunk of the Democrat platform to burn alongside MAGA. Honestly actually-socialist and actually-libertarian would be the two parties we really need today.
They’re more powerful and influential than you think - they’re not going anywhere. They might change their policies to suit the times (remember Lincoln was a Republican) but the so-called “Grand Old Party” ain’t going nowhere unfortunately.
If they pull a reverse Southern strategy and jump over and their become more left then the Democrats, I would be willing to vote for them. Also, hell freezing over might help with global warming.
It’s not the name that’s the issue. Whether they’re called “Democrat” or “Republican” doesn’t matter.
It’s their backwards-ass, regressive, hateful policies that I don’t vote for.
If they start saying they’re going to force companies to take accountability for their impact on the climate, pledge to give the country a UBI, and socialized healthcare, I’d vote for a “Republican” so fast that I’d need new tires.
If they start saying they’re going to force companies to take accountability for their impact on the climate, pledge to give the country a UBI, and socialized healthcare, I’d vote for a “Republican” so fast that I’d need new tires.
I’m willing to go along with that, but with the recognition that between now and when we both die of old age we’ve got a greater chance of seeing absolute proof of intelligent extraterrestrial life than we do of seeing this happen believably enough for either of us to actually pull that lever.
As terrible as Biden’s stance on the Israel/Palestine conflict is, he’s still the lesser of two evils. Another Trump presidency would not spell good things for Palestinian civilians.
And that’s my point. Trump CERTAINLY will be worse, but people have decided that they will let the greater of two evils in by default rather than work to bring in the lesser of the two.
People who think that Biden is genocidal have seen nothing yet compared to Trump being in that role agian.
It’s like they forgot all of the pro-Israel moments of Donald Trump’s 4 years in office. But since October 7th 2023, people have actually started to receive an education in Israeli/Palestinian relations. Most people thought it started on October 7th 2023 and not, you know, 75 years before that.
The fact that crowd exists is a scary reminder of the power of propaganda, advertising, and manipulation. It’s a clear and devastating example of using people’s values against them. It’s an entirely artificially created demographic. To people who didn’t get caught on that particular baited hook, it looks insane.
And yet those who did are passionately angry at you for not agreeing with them. Like insulting your dead grandma and saying you should never have been born kind of angry. It’s so weird.
The fundamentals of how to wage information/cognitive warfare should be part of public schools’ curriculum so our kids will recognize when its happening.
They nearly overrode the vote last time around. They faced no consequences and they’re very close to being in a position to do it again and make lasting changes to seize power forever. Nothing good is guaranteed.
And they’re rewriting education including made up history to ensure that more kids are conservative in future generations. Things aren’t looking good.
Ues. The pawns were convicted and the people with actual power faced no consequences. The ringleader could very well be elected president where he ignored the law consistently. His trials keep getting delayed and the corrupt judge he appointed keeps helping him. It’s very scary times.
There are still plenty of ignorant and angry Gen X and Millenials. I agree that the GOP is finished, and it’s only a matter of time. There will always be stupid people to pick up their mantle, however.
Plenty ignorant Gen Z while we’re on the top, ain’t nothing special about y’all. Vote democrat or you’re just helping Trump turn America fascists and then the reeducation camps will start
Yeah this has been a thing forever. DeSantis was the strong culture war candidate too and… yeah. Trump has a clear role in culture war but he doesn’t seem to care personally, he flip flops all the time on many culture war issues depending on what is convenient or funny to say in the moment.
To be fair, he didn’t win his first election by getting the most votes, and neither did Trump.
The Republicans realized during the Reagan administration that they would soon be unable to win the presidency with a majority of votes and took many steps to undermine the Democratic process. Voter suppression, purges, intimidation, voter ID laws, all of that began with Reagan.
Bush the elder was the last to win a “democratic” victory. If it weren’t for 9/11, Bush wouldn’t have been able to win his second election either. That fact always blows my mind. Like people rallied around the incompetent fool who managed to ignore warnings and let a terrorist strike happen only to then go on and invade the wrong country multiple times and spend trillions of dollars on nothing.
That was so dumb. We literally had a President die in office during the biggest war humanity has ever seen, and we still won. Not only that, but Truman was kept out of the loop on a lot of things (“What’s the Manhattan Project all about?”).
I don’t disagree. I’m just calling out the whole “things will change when conservatives start dying off” trope because people have been banking on that for 20 years.
If the US president got elected by getting the most votes, there wouldn’t have been a Republican since Bush senior. I really don’t understand why electoral reform is not higher on the political agenda in the US.
This was the deal with the devil that people in the North made with people in the South to convince people in the South to join them in a government specifically set up to defy the British. The US as a democracy has always failed because it was designed to give ultimate executive power to the states rather than to the people.
Lol. No. Only the politically ignorant think that the DNC is anything but a power hungry juggernaut, set on choosing candidates based on their own agenda regardless of the will of the people. They don’t even really seem to care if their candidate gets elected.
I really don’t understand how more of a fuss wasn’t made when they cheated Bernie out of a fair shot, were sued by donors and used the defense “We were so blatantly favoring our favorite that anyone who thought we were being impartial wasn’t paying attention and deserved to be swindled out of their money! Yes, we broke rules to get Sanders out of the running, but we were very obvious about it and they were our own rules and we can break them if we want, so get fucked.” And the court was like… “Yeah… sounds good.”
Or because it would take a constitutional amendment. The only way around that would be making the electoral college irrelevant via the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact which has largely only been signed by democratic leaning states. In fact, of the states that have passed it, zero have been right leaning.
There are certainly shitty corporate democrats that do fall into your category but to say the party as a whole is that way is ignorant.
The DNC would actually benefit here because the popular vote would always bring in a Democrat. It’s the small, red states that will never let change happen because Wyoming enjoys having more direct representation than California.
The PEOPLE would benefit since they are the ones doing the voting, not the states. It is just as ridiculous that Republicans in California have little say in the presidency as Democrats in Wyoming.
It is just as ridiculous that Republicans in California have little say in the presidency as Democrats in Wyoming.
The Republicans in California have a better chance of seeing a Republican president with the electoral college than they would with a national popular vote, even if their particular votes carry less weight. In a sense that gives them more representation in the end, not less—their voices are ignored but they get what they wanted anyway.
Having it based purely on a popular vote will still wind up with a 2 party system. Ranked voting needs to be implemented. All of the benefits of a popular vote, with actual checks and balances to elevate 3rd parties.
It’s important to remember that collapse doesn’t happen overnight, and then suddenly it does. It takes a great deal of times for cracks to form and a structure to fall, but once it goes, it goes.
Unless all these Gen Z kids actually fucking VOTE it won’t matter, because Boomers fucking do.
Oh, you think the choices are trash? Well fucking vote in the primaries then. Get involved at a local level, and start promoting candidates that represent you. Don’t just bitch and moan that the choice is between a codger and senile draft-dodger.
Believing that nothing has changed is the most privileged form of cynicism in these threads. At ever conceivable time scale, there is plenty of progress.
There will never be a utopia. There will always be something to improve.
RIght, people just need to pick up a book and look at statistics on racism, sexism, etc and realize it’s better than it ever has been but the MAGAs are on the rise, panicking, and trying to set up a dictatorship with Trump, so go vote or lose it all.
Vote. Seriously. (If practical: get involved, too). The U.S. is currently in the middle of a large shift of generational power.
Many of these changes are fairly recent:
2020 was the first federal election where the Baby Boomers didn’t make up the largest voting generation.
It was only in 2016 that the number Gen X and younger voting numbers grew larger than the boomer and older numbers.
Those numbers had been possible since 2010. Despite having more eligible voters (135M vs 93M), the “GenXers and younger” only had ~36M actual voters, compared to ~57M older ones.
Looking forward, the numbers only get better for younger voters. There hasn’t been a demographic shift like this in the U.S. in a long time (ever?). The current power structures can not be maintained for much longer. It is still possible for that shift to be peaceful. Please encourage the peaceful transfer: vote. Vote in the primaries. Maybe even vote for better voting systems. This time is unique, but change takes time. Don’t let them fool you otherwise: that’s just them trying to hold on to their power.
2020 had very flexible early voting and absentee voting and many people weren’t going to work in person anyway.
Every prior year, being retired was a huge advantage for ability to go to the polling places and actually vote. It’s easy to see how retirees would be represented disproportionately given that reality.
Nothing changes because the people that say they want real, significant change never show up in enough numbers to get shit done. If gen Z really gives a shit, then they need to all get out and fucking work for it. I’ve voted in every election and every primary I’ve been eligible to, since turned 22. If 100% of the gen Z kids that are eligible to vote showed up to the primaries, they could get any candidate through that they wanted. Primaries typically attract far, far fewer voters than the general election does; in some states, primary participation is as low as 3% or eligible voters.
I think that one thing that would help is if your employer was required to give you paid time-off to vote in primary, local, state, and national elections, say, four hours of time, but only if you actually voted. I’ll bet voting rates woudl skyrocket.
Bud, that’s politics. Our hope is to get these young kids engaged and then send them off to a law school that focuses on public interest law and restorative justice, instead of churning out more corporate defenders.
Growing up I’d here this phrase that I thought was some lawyer joke, “first thing we do, is kill all the lawyers.”
I realize now it’s not a joke, but part of a fascist’s plan to legalize atrocity.
If enough young people are showing up in the primaries, then the DNC can’t easily silence them without also alienating all of their other constituents. And while the DNC wants and needs large corporate donors and PACs, they need people voting for them even more. That’s why Sanders was so dangerous to them; if he had won the 2016 or 2020 primaries, despite the DNC openly hobbling him, he would have upended their internal power structure. (And the 2020 primaries were relatively fair; Biden was seen as a safe and moderate candidate by a large number of moderates who were more worried about beating Trump than getting a more liberal Democratic candidate.)
Even addressing ethics misses the point. The only effective vote is for the frontrunner you’d prefer - no matter how you feel about it.
Nonparticipation is literally not an option. You will get a president, whether you like it or not.
Voting to stop fascism isn’t a loyalty oath to whatever the fuck else was offered. You can hate both options. But if you hate one option more, then for the love of god, stop them.
The reason nobody young is ever is involved with primaries is because it’s driven by corporate lobbyists. How are the youth supposed to get involved with that when they are competing against billions of dollars? The choices will always be trash until we end the lobbying. It doesn’t work with just promoting candidates that represent you. It involves massive sums of money that 99.9 percent of Americans will never touch.
Lobbyists are a crucial part of the political process as far as educating legislators and their staff. Legislators cannot possibly know the workings, let alone the body of statutory and case law at play, with every activity and industry legislatures have to regulate and facilitate.
Seems like you realize the money they spread around is the problem: bundlers, megadonors, super PACs, dark money, financial and agency disclosure laws, etc., that’s where we need to start reforms.
It’s unpopular, but yeah. Also, people forget that lobbying is, at it’s core, a group of citizens with a particular interest in a specific area banding together to try and convince a politician that what they want is the best course of action. If BLM started lobbying seriously like the NAACP does (or did; I don’t know how active they are now), they’d still be working for the same cause, and likely more effectively. Yeha, you need your ground game and people in the streets engaging in protests and demonstrations, but you also need people that will directly engage with lawmakers to get shit done.
People think of the NRA as nothing but a national organization working at the federal level, but for a long time–before they really started to suck under Wayne LaPierre–they did a ton of work with lobbying at the local level, and actively worked for what their membership wanted.
When I was young, I participated in the primaries for Obama’s first election (Texas…). I was more or less put in my damn place by the older members and not allowed to have an opinion. It was Hillary this or that and racist comments otherwise. Seriously, Gen Y & Z need to participate, vote, and get involved at the primary and electoral college level or nothing is ever going to change. Don’t let those assholes decide who gets to run. I really really wonder what kind of impact those votes, in the areas that have true primaries, will have if we step up early.
Sanders came very close to winning the Democratic nomination two election cycles in a row, and his funding was largely individual donors, while Clinton and Biden were being funded by corporate interests. Sanders probably lost in 2016 because the DNC put it’s thumb on the scale; he lost in 2020 because many primary voters didn’t believe that he could win against Trump, and wanted a candidate that could peel away moderate Republicans. And that’s a national level.
At a local level, there’s a lot less money, so fucking start there, where it’s not being driven by greed.
Sanders came very close to winning the Democratic nomination two election cycles in a row,
That is some revisionist history, because he did not. He did better than any openly socialist candidate has in 100 years, but because of the rules of the DNC was not actually in contention at any point.
I live in the rural south. TBQH, I’d rather that most of the people around me didn’t vote, since I’m pretty sure I know which way they’re going to vote, and their votes will largely be to take away my rights.
I agree there’s a history of young people not voting, but every presidential election year there’s a whole group of kids who were 14 at the time of the last election but are 18 for the current one.
Every four years since I can remember, that group of kids has been increasingly engaged politically, I think recent YouGov polls on this have been like very high, like 75% intend to vote and of those like 85% intend to vote more liberal candidates.
Trump was so bad, for everyone. Everyone remembers Trump’s wanton child separation policy, his partisan Supreme Court picks, his COVID failures, and his constant lies and vitriol. Even small children can see Trump for what he is, maybe even with more clarity than most adults. Point, people who were ten years to seventeen years old at the beginning of Trump’s presidency are eligible voters now. The Republicans see this tsunami coming at them. TV news has been calling it a blue wave to scare up red voters, but it’s really a youth wave.
At the same time, older conservative voters are dying off. Republicans know they will never fairly win another popular presidential election. Their plan is to steal the White House with lawfare or outright terrorism.
Just be warned, not everyone thinks Trump was bad. A lot of people look at their economic situation prior to the pandemic, and think that it was pretty good, and so Trump must be okay. Sure, he raised taxes on the middle and lower class, but that was sold as a tax cut (…except that it was very, very temporary), and the hike went into effect under Biden.
But if you want to win elections, that’s what you have to contend with. You have to accept that no everyone is going to see things the way you do, and you need to convince them. If you aren’t trying, then you lose.
Isn’t everyone in The France republican? Do you have monarchist French that want to resurrect King Louis? Or do they want to crown Macarone the new King?
Almost everyone is Republican, but we also have a Republican Party, which isn’t more Republican than the others, this name makes zero sense. It’s the successor of the party of De Gaulle, but I’m quite sure De Gaulle wouldn’t like what this party became.
There are a few monarchist movements, generally far-right-leaning, like the French Action. But they are very small and divided (there are two candidates for the throne, and different kinds of monarchies), so nobody takes them seriously.
He really hated the English - which is a bit rich considering we sheltered him during the war. He was proven right on the EU though. We did nothing but cause trouble while in, then left. Precisely what he predicted. :(
PS: croissants are good; snails aren’t.
A civilised French! A rare, but welcome, breed. I forgive you for Patay, Formigny, and Castillon. Joan of Arc was obviously suffering the Snail Madness and didn’t realise English rule was superior.
I don’t think De Gaulle hated the English, but he surely despised them. He despised almost everyone though, and maybe he despised the French more than anyone else, calling us “calves” or mocking our love for cheese, for example. Yeah, he was an asshole.
The similarities between sexual freedom and religious freedom is striking. Sexual attraction and identification is important to be free and open, just like religious freedom. Free from persecution, equal rights and oppertunities.
But I don’t like when people forcefully spread their belief system and their values to others. Let it be organic, don’t try to force change. People are free to pursue their lifestyle and i’m free to pursue mine. In today’s society, it feels like the ownerclass are running pro lgbtq advertisements. Is it another divide and conquer technique? The whole thing feels forced…
Please don’t downvote just because it’s an unpopular opinion, rather lets discuss the issue 👍
Please read other parts of this thread (at least my posts). I try to argue in good faith and better understand this complex issue close to the heart of so many.
Pinkwashing has become a common way for brands to co-opt the LGBTQ movement and benefit from its positive image.
To be clear, pinkwashing is not a good thing. It benefits brands and not LGBTQ+ people.
The similarities between sexual freedom and religious freedom is striking…But I don’t like when people forcefully spread their belief system and their values to others.
This is a false equivalence. My existence as a trans woman is not a belief or a value. I’m a real person.
👋 =|
I’m not sure how to be more organic than asserting I exist in an internet post. And I’ll happily force change by voting blue.
I’ve read a bit about pinkwashing, I might mash the corporations and people too much together. I will try my best to keep them separate, when I’m talking about them.
“But I don’t like when people forcefully spread their belief system and their values to others.”
My quote here, is probably better to use corporations, not people. Sorry.
“The similarities between sexual freedom and religious freedom is striking…” Your answer being: “This is a false equivalence. My existence as a trans woman is not a belief or a value.”
I’m not saying they are equal, but the similarities are striking, and might run deeper than at first glance. My quotes from different sub threads:
“I cannot help but make the comparison to religion, yet again. Even though I’m an atheist or agnostic, not really sure. Religion is different because they are on both the giving and the recieving end of persecution.They use religion as a base for their persecution of other people of a different religion (or sexual identification, sexual attraction, even something as trivial as dress code). Expressions that are clearly protected within the law. Whenever freedom of expression is challenged, there should be huge crowds to support the FoE”
“I’m not sure how to be more organic than asserting I exist in an internet post.”
Also from previous, same, sub-thread. “Corporations hammer the message for the same reason they hammer any ad, it works. If ads didn’t work, it wouldn’t be a billion dollar industry. My point is, every corporation hammering the “we are inclusive” message feels inorganic. I might confuse this feeling with it just being “in” or trendy atm.”
I’m not holding any answers, I just like the discusdion, and it’s even more fun when people have other life experiences than me. Echo chaimers are boring.
It is kinda counter productive to downvote a comment of someone that tries to engange in a meaningful conversation. Divisive topics should be more discussed, not less, and definately not discouraged/punished…
I posted this two hours before your comment “I’m not religious and I’m not lgbtq either, but I will fight for either’s right and freedom to practise their beliefs.” Freedom of Expression is the most precious thing we have. I cannot understate how important this is. I feel like you might have misunderstood me, I should have tried to word myself better in my original, first post. I don’t want to edit it, let history be a judge. It’s difficult to thread lightly in this subject. It’s a subject close to the heart of many people.
Except one thing is real and the other is not. There is no god, but there is definitely sexual attraction in forms beyond heterosexuality and gender expressions outside the heteronormative form. So there is a difference between spreading misinformation in form of religion or quite useful information on gender and sex.
I’m not religious and I’m not lgbtq either, but I will fight for either’s right and freedom to practise their beliefs. I’d be more careful in calling one side “misinformation”, when you have just spent decades being on the receiving end of that cruelty.
Telling people that your make believe fantasy story is true, is fundamental different from acknowledging existence or expression of non heterosexual sex and non heteronormative gender expression/identity. Especially since people tent to create moral norms for others, based on the particular fantasy story they happen to believe in.
Saying God isn’t real is kinda like saying santa claus isn’t real, and to those kids that desperately needs a santa, Santa is real to them, and that’s all that matters…
“people tent to create moral norms for others” As long as those norms are not forcefully applied, it’s fine.
“based on the particular fantasy story they happen to believe in.” I would hope you were more self aware because not too long ago lgbtq’s were dismissed as “fantasy” or some kind of medical diagnose. Just please be more considerate before throwing those types of accusations around.
Saying God isn’t real is kinda like saying santa claus isn’t real, and to those kids that desperately needs a santa, Santa is real to them, and that’s all that matters…
So, what you are saying is - we should treat religious people like children? Not sure, that is what you intended - but for sure an interesting example to chose, to make your point. Also at no point did I argue for people not be able to practice their religion, in fact I have no problems with peoples personal spirituality as long as it does not negatively effect people around them.
“people tent to create moral norms for others” As long as those norms are not forcefully applied, it’s fine.
But the forceful part is kind of what organized religion tends to be all about. Religious majorities tend to demand conformism even from people not following their religion.
“based on the particular fantasy story they happen to believe in.” I would hope you were more self aware because not too long ago lgbtq’s were dismissed as “fantasy” or some kind of medical diagnose. Just please be more considerate before throwing those types of accusations around.
Except LGBTQ people are real, you can go outside and talk to them, they will talk back at you. If god is talking back at you, I have bad news for you my friend. What are we even talking about?
Are we not all just children stuck in adult bodies. /end cringe philosophy. I wrote it in this context because I hoped it would be easier to relate to for someone, clearly, not religious. Religious freedom is not a blanket “do whatever you like” free-card. I believe RF is covered under Freedom of Expression, at least in most European Contries. It’s limited to not infringe on other people’s freedom of expression.
Your next paragraph is also best answered with; their freedom of expression is limited to not infringe on other people’s freedom of expression. And this is what makes this so hard.
“Except LGBTQ people are real, you can go outside and talk to them, they will talk back at you.”
Again, I know lgbtq is real, if god is real or not doesn’t matter, that’s not relevant, the actions of those convinced he is real, those actions are real.
“What are we even talking about” I was trying to have a discussion about that, in my view sexual freedom and religious freedom are very similar. They are both the fight for freedom of extression.
And my other thought (not so popular thought, so you better not air it) was that recently this fight for lgbtq feels inorganically amplified by legacy media. It makes me suspicious about if there might be a divide and conquer agenda behind it.
It’s fun to discuss with you, you seem like you argue in good faith. Managed to slip in a semi-dad joke too.
Are we not all just children stuck in adult bodies. /end cringe philosophy.
You got me there. Can’t ague with that - and my point was unnecessary provokative. Sorry.
if god is real or not doesn’t matter, that’s not relevant, the actions of those convinced he is real, those actions are real.
It kind of matters a lot, since people justify their action by the fact that god is real and therefore their morals are absolute.
I was trying to have a discussion about that, in my view sexual freedom and religious freedom are very similar. They are both the fight for freedom of extression.
I think, I can see your argument - maybe on a philosophical level I even agree with you. But I just realize it’s something I have to think about for my self for some time.
And my other thought (not so popular thought, so you better not air it) was that recently this fight for lgbtq feels inorganically amplified by legacy media. It makes me suspicious about if there might be a divide and conquer agenda behind it.
I don’t consume legacy media, so I can’t really argue on that one.
t’s fun to discuss with you, you seem like you argue in good faith. Managed to slip in a semi-dad joke too.
Dang, I don’t even have kids, it’s just getting old.
Thanks, you gave me an argument to think about - I’m just a slow thinker. If I reach something that sounds reasonable but contradicts with my view on a topic, I need first to unwind my own argument and how I arrived there, takes some times - but helped me extremely to take heat out of conversations.
The way I see it, Religion and Gender are both social constructs that exist to make life easier for people who need it (or, at least that’s what the original purpose of religion was).
There’s no definite, set-in-stone proof for either being true (as far as I know, do correct me if I’m wrong), but as long as they make someone’s life better without making others’ life worse, I see no issue with either existing.
It’s not really a fair comparison to say “God doesn’t exist, LGBTQ people do”, when one is a concept and the other is people. Religious people do exist, and the concept of “Gender” is just as vague and undefined as the one for “God”.
The reason why LGBTQ people are (rightfully) seen better than religious people is that they don’t force people to “join” them and don’t treat different people as the scum of the earth.
Religious people will easily tell you God can be empirically studied. The creation of the world, the forming of consciousness, and so on. They’re not proof in any way but imo it’s not much far off from “some (but not all) trans people have different brain waves than cis people” (at least that’s the most common thing I’ve heard about “objectivity” in gender).
To me the comparison was kinda fair, if not for the underlying conspiracy theory that “the ownerclass” is trying to turn people gay for some reason.
Religious people will easily tell you God can be empirically studied.
But that does not make it true. And by the way the whole point of believing is that you don’t need actual proof - if you have evidence you don’t need to believe, you know.
The creation of the world, the forming of consciousness,
Yes and when we study those empirical we come op with rather different explanations than offered by religion. The “God of Gaps” is getting smaller.
They’re not proof in any way but imo it’s not much far off from “some (but not all) trans people have different brain waves than cis people” (at least that’s the most common thing I’ve heard about “objectivity” in gender).
But again. I can go outside an meet trans people. You can have different explanation to why there is such phenomenon as trans people and come up with different explanations and mechanisms. You can’t do quite the same thing with god. But sure you are welcome to propose an empirical experiment on nature of god.
And by the way the whole point of believing is that you don’t need actual proof - if you have evidence you don’t need to believe, you know.
Isn’t a major talking point in LGBTQ culture also that asking for “proof” of being trans is rude and you only have to “feel” like one to be one? I’m not that informed in the culture but I know there’s a subset of “Transmedicalists” that are usually shunned because of that.
Yes and when we study those empirical we come op with rather different explanations than offered by religion. The “God of Gaps” is getting smaller.
Afaik we still didn’t find any possible explanation for either that doesn’t just bring up more questions. It got smaller for a long time but we’re at a point where we’re probably not ever going further unless someone does the biggest scientific breakthrough of history.
But again. I can go outside an meet trans people. You can have different explanation to why there is such phenomenon as trans people and come up with different explanations and mechanisms. You can’t do quite the same thing with god. But sure you are welcome to propose an empirical experiment on nature of god.
Again, you can meet with trans people just like you can meet with religious people. And both have (usually) no objective, biological way to discern them from cis people or atheists. If you want to go further, there’s also people who claim they talked with God or whatever. It’s all claims, as far as I know, on both sides. You can’t empirically test well something that, by definition, can’t have an objective tell.
Isn’t a major talking point in LGBTQ culture also that asking for “proof” of being trans is rude and you only have to “feel” like one to be one? I’m not that informed in the culture but I know there’s a subset of “Transmedicalists” that are usually shunned because of that.
I’m talking about religion. Also asking people to prove their gender in general is considered rude. If someone says she is a women, you don’t normally ask them to prove it - would kind of border on sexual harassment(joke). Not sure why it would be different for trans folk.
Afaik we still didn’t find any possible explanation for either that doesn’t just bring up more questions. It got smaller for a long time but we’re at a point where we’re probably not ever going further unless someone does the biggest scientific breakthrough of history.
What do you mean, we have hypothesis for both. Again the difference is we can actually study those things, we can’t study god in the same sense.
Again, you can meet with trans people just like you can meet with religious people.
You are keep switching between god an religious people. Wich is a bit annoying and makes the conversation less fun. You were saying:
Religious people will easily tell you God can be empirically studied. The creation of the world, the forming of consciousness, and so on. They’re not proof in any way but imo it’s not much far off from “some (but not all) trans people have different brain waves than cis people” (at least that’s the most common thing I’ve heard about “objectivity” in gender).
So comparing existence of god and trans people. So which one is it?
To be clear I’m not doubting that Religions people exists, I doubt that god exists in the capacity they claim it to exist. As a psychological ans sociological construct god is real - and I might join the first religion than will come down with such definition of god. But that is far from what religions claim to be.
Also asking people to prove their gender in general is considered rude. If someone says she is a women, you don’t normally ask them to prove it - would kind of border on sexual harassment(joke). Not sure why it would be different for trans folk.
That’s Sex, not Gender, though. Gender is unrelated to physical appearance, as far as I know (and is thus impossible to prove).
What do you mean, we have hypothesis for both.
Not definite ones that don’t bring more questions, is what I’m saying. We have the Big Bang, but how did it happen? What caused it? That’s a gap that will probably never be filled.
You are keep switching between god an religious people. Wich is a bit annoying and makes the conversation less fun. You were (…) comparing existence of god and trans people. So which one is it?
To be clear I’m not doubting that Religions people exists, I doubt that god exists in the capacity they claim it to exist.
And I don’t doubt Trans people exist, I doubt “Gender” exists as more than a concept. I’m comparing a “concrete” God with a “concrete” Gender, and Religious people with Trans people.
Just like Religious people can exist without proof of God existing, Trans people can exist without Gender actually being a biological, provable and irrefutable thing. You’re saying “one is real and the other is not” because you’re conflating the two.
That’s Sex, not Gender, though. Gender is unrelated to physical appearance, as far as I know (and is thus impossible to prove).
So you don’t even know what gender is, but you chime in anyway - internet discussion at it best.
Not definite ones that don’t bring more questions, is what I’m saying. We have the Big Bang, but how did it happen? What caused it? That’s a gap that will probably never be filled.
There are books on knowledge more complex than what we learned in school. If you fit in physics you can make a rather deep dive into all the questions you just asked - it’s far more interesting than god just did it for the fun of it.
And I don’t doubt Trans people exist, I doubt “Gender” exists as more than a concept. I’m comparing a “concrete” God with a “concrete” Gender, and Religious people with Trans people.
So by this comparison you think that trans people believe to be trans in the same way religious people believe that god exists? Just need to clarify that I got you correct.
Just like Religious people can exist without proof of God existing, Trans people can exist without Gender actually being a biological, provable and irrefutable thing. You’re saying “one is real and the other is not” because you’re conflating the two.
Again, I don’t doubt that religious people exist. Not sure why you keep bringing it up.
So you don’t even know what gender is, but you chime in anyway - internet discussion at it best.
I’m plastering this discussion with “I think”, “as far as I know” and the likes exactly because I’m not fully knowledgeable on the matter. If I’m getting stuff wrong you could correct me instead of simply telling me I’m wrong.
Again, I don’t doubt that religious people exist. Not sure why you keep bringing it up.
I’m not. I’m saying “one is real and the other isn’t” works only if you compare God to Trans people instead of the concept of Gender.
So by this comparison you think that trans people believe to be trans in the same way religious people believe that god exists? Just need to clarify that I got you correct.
I’m not Trans and I’m not Religious so I have no actual way to tell. Only someone who is both could actually have a meaningful say in this discussion, and even then it’s just the opinion of one person and it wouldn’t represent the whole group(s). What I personally think (and again, this might be entirely wrong as I have no direct knowledge of it), is that they’re people who felt something wrong with their life and gave it an explanation that lets them live better. That explanation might be true or not, but as long as it makes them live better and doesn’t hurt others (and this is where unfortunately most Religious people fail), it doesn’t really matter for it to work and be accepted as a natural part of society.
I personally know no Trans person and it’s genuinely hard to talk about this online without being mistaken as one of the thousand different camps who hate Trans people for one dumb reason or another, so my knowledge about the subject is limited to this, unfortunately. If you know/think it’s different I’d be glad to hear why.
I’m plastering this discussion with “I think”, “as far as I know” and the likes exactly because I’m not fully knowledgeable on the matter. If I’m getting stuff wrong you could correct me instead of simply telling me I’m wrong.
That is a fair point. I’m just always surprise how confident people discuss matter they (sometimes they even admit) know little about. So what do you think gender is?
I’m not Trans and I’m not Religious so I have no actual way to tell. Only someone who is both could actually have a meaningful say in this discussion, and even then it’s just the opinion of one person and it wouldn’t represent the whole group(s). What I personally think (and again, this might be entirely wrong as I have no direct knowledge of it), is that they’re people who felt something wrong with their life and gave it an explanation that lets them live better. That explanation might be true or not, but as long as it makes them live better and doesn’t hurt others (and this is where unfortunately most Religious people fail), it doesn’t really matter for it to work and be accepted as a natural part of society.
Ok, so you making a more broader almost philosophical point, that religious experience and gender identity different than hetero are both results of people feeling something wrong (in a complex sense) with their life and come up with an explanation (difficult to find the right words), acceptance of which made them feel better. Did I get your point this time?
personally know no Trans person and it’s genuinely hard to talk about this online without being mistaken as one of the thousand different camps who hate Trans people for one dumb reason or another, so my knowledge about the subject is limited to this, unfortunately. If you know/think it’s different I’d be glad to hear why.
I’m not trans, but one of my best friends is. I would think that the best way to understand would be to just meet trans folks and talk. You sound like you come from a genuine point of being curious and not understanding something that you don’t know which is always ok, and I’m sorry to hear that you had bad experience talking about it online. But that is a nature of a sensitive topic. You can ask me, I might help to clarify some things. But keep in mind, I’m not an expert so verify the things I say and also I don’t speak from my own experience.
The idea I got so far is that it’s kind of a social construct of “ways to be perceived by yourself and the world” that is, so far, typical of people born (or at least, raised) with a specific sex. If your preferred way of expressing yourself is mostly conforming with what “the world” expects from your biological sex you’re cis, otherwise you’re trans. That’s roughly how I thought of it until now, tell me if I misunderstood something.
Ok, so you making a more broader almost philosophical point, that religious experience and gender identity different than hetero are both results of people feeling something wrong (in a complex sense) with their life and come up with an explanation (difficult to find the right words), acceptance of which made them feel better. Did I get your point this time?
Kinda, I guess? It’s still not there because I know there’s people who don’t feel Gender Dysphoria for their current sex but only Euphoria for another, but you could say feeling like something “could be better” is still feeling “something wrong”, in a sense.
I’m not trans, but one of my best friends is. I would think that the best way to understand would be to just meet trans folks and talk. You sound like you come from a genuine point of being curious and not understanding something that you don’t know which is always ok, and I’m sorry to hear that you had bad experience talking about it online. But that is a nature of a sensitive topic. You can ask me, I might help to clarify some things. But keep in mind, I’m not an expert so verify the things I say and also I don’t speak from my own experience.
Yeah, it’s definitely the best way, but I don’t really know any trans person and I don’t think there’s any in my area, or at least none who came out. And even if there was one I wouldn’t really want to ask them delicate questions like this unless I’m very close to them. I know it’s a very delicate subject even to touch online, I imagine irl people would feel even more pressure.
Your concept of gender sounds alright. I would just disagree with the term prefer, if you think about yourself and your gender - there is just a way you express your gender that is no really conscious. So I personally would say: that if your gender expression and identification is closer to your biological sex you that is called cis and if your gender expression and identification is closer to the opposite biological sex that’s called trans.
Kinda, I guess? It’s still not there because I know there’s people who don’t feel Gender Dysphoria for their current sex but only Euphoria for another, but you could say feeling like something “could be better” is still feeling “something wrong”, in a sense.
Interesting view. I feel like I’m the wrong person to discuss this with, since I’m also neither trans or religious - so we kind of like two fish talking about the desert in this regard. But from my talks with trans people that is not how they experience their existence. But I might have something to bring the concept of being trans more closer to you - in your thoughts you projection of yourself aligns with your biological sex - imagine it would not. Imagine in your thoughts and dreams you have different gender than the one your biology suggest.
Yeah, it’s definitely the best way, but I don’t really know any trans person and I don’t think there’s any in my area, or at least none who came out.
I can recommend contrapoints, she has also a video on trangsgender ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdvM_pRfuFM ) and there are interviews out there were she talks more about her personal experience. She is rather philosophical so you might like it.
For me personally, I had no strong opinion on trans people - besides that I didn’t really understood it from personal experience point of view, since my gender seems not that important to me - I experience myself mostly just as my self, but I guess that’s the cis experience and that everyone should do what they want as long as they are not hurting others. Than I worked together with a trans girl on a few projects and we became friends and the interesting part for me was, that from the beginning I had the vibe with her I have around women. Which helped me to put my thoughts around that topic into places.
Your concept of gender sounds alright. I would just disagree with the term prefer, if you think about yourself and your gender - there is just a way you express your gender that is no really conscious. So I personally would say: that if your gender expression and identification is closer to your biological sex you that is called cis and if your gender expression and identification is closer to the opposite biological sex that’s called trans.
I used “prefer” because I figured it’s also a matter of preference in how would you like to be treated (as a male, a female or whatever), but yes, I don’t really “think” about how I want to express myself so I guess that’s mostly subconscious.
But I might have something to bring the concept of being trans more closer to you - in your thoughts you projection of yourself aligns with your biological sex - imagine it would not. Imagine in your thoughts and dreams you have different gender than the one your biology suggest.
I’ve heard about it and tried thinking that way, but I really can’t imagine it from an outside perspective. As you said, I don’t really feel like my gender is that important either, so I guess that’s common for cis people. Like, I’m a male, but if I was born female I think my biggest “annoyances” would be the expectations society would have on me, and it would just be (probably much) harder to go against them. I imagine I would’ve just turned out tomboyish. …or at least that’s what I thought before I learned there’s a lot of trans people who don’t experience Body Dysphoria and/or aren’t interested in surgery, then I got really confused and figured I’ll probably never know for sure unless I meet an alternate universe version of myself or something.
I can recommend contrapoints, she has also a video on trangsgender ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdvM_pRfuFM ) and there are interviews out there were she talks more about her personal experience. She is rather philosophical so you might like it.
I’ll have a look at it, thanks!
Than I worked together with a trans girl on a few projects and we became friends and the interesting part for me was, that from the beginning I had the vibe with her I have around women. Which helped me to put my thoughts around that topic into places.
The vibe, you say… that’s interesting, I’d be curious to see if I ever experience something like that.
Like, I’m a male, but if I was born female I think my biggest “annoyances” would be the expectations society would have on me, and it would just be (probably much) harder to go against them.
More or less what I told my friend word for word when we talked about it. There are people out there making a completely different experience in regard of the relation between their biological sex and their gender identity.
The vibe, you say… that’s interesting, I’d be curious to see if I ever experience something like that.
An example would be, I’m not very good at making close male friendships since I find it difficult to be open with other dudes and it was really easy to connect with her. But also just the general feeling - at least with me, I have a different one in a purely guys setting, in mixed one or just with women.
“To me the comparison was kinda fair, if not for the underlying conspiracy theory that “the ownerclass” is trying to turn people gay for some reason.”
I might be a poor word smith, I don’t believe that this is a conspiracy to turn people gay, I feel like it’s more of an over-arching agenda to amplify a divisive issue.
It is a very important message, but since legacy media is so enveloped in this, makes me suspicious, and by extension suspisious about legacy media owners’ agenda. Hence my suspicion of the owner class, or even better, the exploitation class.
Talking in broad strokes all about balancing “freedom of identity/attraction” and “religious freedom” makes for a decent-sounding empathetic viewpoint prioritizing individual liberty. I understand where this is coming from, I don’t disagree myself, but then again who would?
And that’s why we have to get into the specifics of “forcefully spreading their belief system and values to others” because that’s what happens to queer people as status quo. We’re legally and socially discriminated out of a lot of aspects of public life and often carry deep trauma from wrath and abuse incurred on the way. Conversion therapy is still legal in many places for fucks sake! The hell is that if not forcefully spreading a belief system?
Often times, the term this is justified under is “freedom of religion” - but really it’s freedom to control and abuse others due to religious justification. The two freedoms are not equatable, therefore the balanced center between is not a neutral position.
Corporate pride advertising is super forced and very few queer people are actually on board with it. The term is “rainbow capitalism” and it’s pretty derisive. Unfortunately that’s all of what some people know of us - they don’t know us as people, as communities, just like them; they know us as a rainbow flag on a TV screen and as a Tucker/LWT/[whoever’s got opinions about us today] talk show segment, and so that’s all they think we are. Nobody likes this, queer people least of all.
I went just once in Capitol Hill, Seattle. If I was more of an extroverted type it probably could have been cool - it was a concert venue featuring a bunch of queer artists, and a lot of tents for queer community organizations - mutual aid, healthcare, counseling, etc. There’s definitely a way to make Pride useful for the community. But it’s really just bringing together a community that always existed regardless - and imo no reason to wait til June to start getting involved and organized 😁
Presuming Seattle based on response, but know there are other places named Capitol Hill.
The only Pride worth going to is the small parade that happens on like a Thursday before the big one. It’s really the event of the locals and those who have been part of the community. For whatever reason, the City of Seattle will no longer permit the big parade through the actual gay neighborhood, pushing it through downtown and on to Seattle Center instead. I am fairly certain that this is specifically done for capitalist reasons so they have more room for people to sell overpriced food.
In any case, never go to the BIG event, go to the smaller neighborhood one in whichever city you’re in.
“Conversion therapy is still legal in many places for fucks sake!” This is a blatant form of persecution and everyone shoult protest and shut shit down until it’s fixed. Conversion therapy is, in my book, not protected by religious freedom, at all.
This remids me about the meme, two bomb-planes D and R, were one just bombs, and the other bombs too, but with rainbow colors, blm and every other “current” coopted flag.
You take an awful coropration and put lipstick on it to make it better…
I try to take a few steps back and, to me, it looks like the exploitation-class has coopted this issue, enlarging it, to make it more divisive than it actually is. I would think most people have a “can we not just live our lives in peace” attitude, whether you are lgbtq, straight, religious or atheist.
I point conversion therapy out as an egregious example of persecution, but there’s plenty more, through a variety of avenues. Many fly under the radar as things that sound less intense - schools notifying parents if kids go by a nickname or change how they present is one that’s come up a lot lately.
From experience - lots of people thankfully have a “live our lives in peace” attitude - but unfortunately even a minority of bigots can make our lives pretty difficult and divisive. Especially if they’re allowed to do so by other people who don’t agree themselves, but also don’t fight it when they see it.
And so sure, the message has been coopted for mainstream audiences by corporations running ads like “[sterile uplifting music] at CitiBank, we think you’re people! [stock rainbow flags waving]” If you know anyone who’s queer, you know there’s real difficulty that comes with it, but also a resilient community takes care of each other the best they can. Pride ads are how most people know of us, but they’re not even close to representing us or the stakes we face. They’re pretty much entirely irrelevant to us - we never asked for them, and they certainly don’t help.
I cannot help but make the comparison to religion, yet again. Even though I’m an atheist or agnostic, not really sure. Religion is different because they are on both the giving and the recieving end of persecution.They use religion as a base for their persecution of other people of a different religion (or sexual identification, sexual attraction, even something as trivial as dress code). Expressions that are clearly protected within the law. Whenever freedom of expression is challenged, there should be huge crowds to support the FoE, and I think that is also relevant in context of your next paragraph too.
Regarding your last paragraph. Corporations hammer the message for the same reason they hammer any ad, it works. If ads didn’t work, it wouldn’t be a billion dollar industry. My point is, every corporation hammering the “we are inclusive” message feels inorganic. I might confuse this feeling with it just being “in” or trendy atm.
it feels like the ownerclass are running pro lgbtq advertisements
Corporations make inclusive advertisement when it makes them more money than not doing so. You can easily see the same movie studios making fairly different advertisement in EU/USA than in China/Saudi Arabia. This is virtue signalling, but I’m fine with it, because when good values get virtue signalled in public, the opposite values are less likely to transmit. They don’t have good intentions, but good results come out of it.
There are also less common cases where they purposefully make over the top stunts because it will make far right nutjobs angry, which they count as free advertisement.
“This is virtue signalling, but I’m fine with it, because when good values get virtue signalled in public, the opposite values are less likely to transmit. They don’t have good intentions, but good results come out of it.”
US Supreme Court has upheld the ban on religious ads, and my initial comparison between religion and sexual freedom runs deeper. They are very comparable. Both have been persecuted heavily up in history. A big difference is what I posted in a different sub-thread
“Even though I’m an atheist or agnostic, not really sure. Religion is different because they are on both the giving and the recieving end of persecution.They use religion as a base for their persecution of other people of a different religion (or sexual identification, sexual attraction, even something as trivial as dress code). Expressions that are clearly protected within the law.”
Religion within ads are not protected by freedom of expression (acc. to US SC), and a sexual expression as an ad has not, to my knowledge, been challenged in the courts (yet). Correct me if I’m wrong.
“There are also less common cases where they purposefully make over the top stunts because it will make far right nutjobs angry, which they count as free advertisement.”
It’s like burning books or flags, it’s a protected form of expression. Even though these actions are very divisive. I will fight for even these, and the ones you put as examples’ right to express themselves. It’s very much like Noam Chomsky says: “If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.”
so you like creating (and when corps create) echo-chambers when they fit the concepts that you want? with all respect possible to give, your logic is therefore not sound
In some states, you have to identify to a party to vote for someone in the primary. I was registered independent then had to switch to vote in the primaries
Because we may have separated from the other great apes several million years ago, but the great ape predilection for tribalism sure hasn’t separated from us
It’s weird. As a millennial in college I would always hear the grief from gen x hearing me complain and respond with “well get out an vote then.” I guess it is now my turn to tell that to a younger generation, watch them get upset, and then eat my popcorn in 20 years while I watch gen lecture the next generation on the importance of voting.
But I do think this is alarming:
Before the 2020 election, 57% of Americans ages 18 to 29 said they were planning to vote. The number is now 49%, a figure many analysts say reflects disinterest in the likelihood of a Biden-Trump rematch.
I think the US would be a better place if we had compulsory voting laws similar to Australia that gets like 90 percent turnout. As a citizen of a democracy I think voting should be an obligation. And as a member of a democracy I wish the majority vote actually was a number that is a majority of Americans, not just Americans that voted, so we could have more faith in the outcomes actually reflecting the will of the people.
I’m voting for Biden unless there’s another nominee that will be the predominant choice against Trump. I don’t like either of them but the choice is easy. Biden can’t win my state, but I’m still going to vote for him literally just because he is running against Trump. I might cow about how I ate the Dems won’t run on much else, but the contrast is big this time. It’s always been really though, the Dems should be our new right wing party and a new farther left party like the Green party ought to be the more leftist faction. Dems to me already are neolibs with a neocon leaning. Leftist Populism must be embraced by the neolibs long term. Either way something has to give. Too much wealth to go around (even globally). The greedy old ideologies of constant growth at the expense of the poorest people in the world can’t go forever. Growth economics can’t go forever either. I have hope. Just go vote because that’s what we can do easily as a minimum effort.
The neoliberals won’t embrace anything unless there’s profit in it.
Preferential voting is the only chance of a progressive gaining the power they need to make desperately overdue changes to healthcare, worker rights, housing, cost of living, etc.
A neoliberal government that occasionally panders to progressives is better than a neoliberal government that gets horny at the idea of spitting in poor peoples faces, which is better than fascists.
But we need to do so much more than “not making things worse”.
cool post, but political party affiliation means nothing when both sides of the “political spectrum” are actually the same side which are in the pockets of the same individuals who wish to putrify society, the results of which lead to this exact news article :)
Wow, a news story that makes me think my kid could actually live in a better political climate than me in a few decades. I forgot what this feeling was like.
Bro, I’ll tell you the same thing I was told as a young guy in my career. I’m in my 40’s now and this was about 20 years ago. An older guy about to retire said something like ‘ya know, everyone always says that the younger generation is lazy, or dumb, but from what I noticed you guys are doing it smarter and you’ll be better than us.’ I kinda thought that, but it was nice to hear.
Now I’ll say about 10 years ago, I was recruiting in high school and those kids were leaps and bounds ahead of where my generation was. It was crazy how much they could socialize across cliques and it not matter. Now that I am in my 40’s I have some family members in high school, and I just see them being better. I don’t know how this will translate into the work force or a fight for a labor reform, but I think we need to be more open to their ideas than our elder generations were to us.
Yeah, I think the generation currently entering adulthood is seeing enough bullshit that they might do a great job leading this country, as long as they get a chance.
Exactly! Even if it makes us uncomfortable. I can’t relate to gen z, but I’m sure anyone from any other time in history would be unable to relate to me.
That doesn’t matter. It isn’t my world. I’m only here for a time. It’s our world.
Whatever direction society takes has my support as long as they aren’t imposing themselves on other people.
Freedom is beautiful even when I can’t understand or relate the ways people use their freedoms. I’ll vote for freedom no matter how I feel about things or how much I long for the comfortable world of my youth. I don’t matter. Civilization matters. Freedom matters.
I am right there with you. I didn’t understand Vine, I don’t get all these Tiktok challenges. The short repetitive nature is bothersome to me which is funny when I think about the number of times I replayed old Atari and NES games growing up. The point, though, is I don’t need to understand it. Just accept that it’s something they like to do and move on.
Why do you think the GQP is panicing. Demographics are changing and they can’t rely on old white male voters to shift the tide because they’re all dying. Covid put a dent in them too.
It is very common for young people on every generation to be part of the left-wing movements. But I think they are focalizing in a superficial problem, instead to find solutions to more critic challenges. Do non-straight people suffer discrimination, etc?. Yes, but there are other more dramatic problems such as: homelessness, fentanyl epidemics, public health, etc.
Common but not universal - as recently as the 80s young people tended to be more conservative than average. The giant age gap we see today with young people way to the left of the rest of society is pretty unusual.
Good thing you can have the right economic politics at the same time as being queer. Young people identifying as LGBT does nothing to detract from their other left-wing views.
I think people are feeling more inclined to label themselves as LGBTQ when they’re heteroflexible as well as young people better recognizing things like the asexuality spectrum.
The B part of LGBTQIA+ is doing some heavy lifting in this stat. And as usual there’s probably a lot of women who are straight but think they’re Bi because “Margot Robbie could probably get it if that was an option” kinda like a lot of guys who think admitting a guy looks good makes them gay
With the exception of millennials, who were born between 1981 and 1996, Gen Z adults are notably less likely than those in other generations to identify as conservative.
Or in simpler terms, both Millennials and Gen Z are equally less likely than those in other generations to identify as conservative.
My experience mirrors yours. Those who are after material wealth in any context tend to be conservative and define themselves by their perceived successes more than by their personalities. Such people will fill that void with religion.
I'm starting to move up my career ladder somehow, and I feel this. It's very easy to be selfish and vote for less tax, taking advantage of the young and poor etc. Well, I mean, people other than me grab easy money, around my circle. (And when they justify themselves, I feel they show anger in order to warn me from questioning the morality further.
What's making me insist to be on the progressive (?) or socialist side (which I believe is the right thing to do) is maybe I've had enough anger towards the ruling class while I was younger. Or I read enough reddit / fediverse posts from the working class.
What’s more important than the absolute number of your taxes is what they’re being spent on.
I personally like having a nice community to live in, my shit not being stolen, my family not getting mugged, etc. And that means investing in communities so they can be better, so then the people living there will get better jobs, and we all grow our economy and have nice places to live.
If one party is promising slightly lower taxes, but they want to spend those on militarizing the police and book banning committees, you’re not really getting much in return for your tax investment.
Get on board GenX. We’re the future and the soon to be majority, so you might as well join the club. We promise we’ll treat you better than the boomers treated you.
The issue is that if Republicans win they will make sure they will win every election from now on. They already started doing it (vote suppression for the black and Latinos for example).
Because people are already jumping to conclusions without reading the article. Here is the core of the survey data. Identifying as Republican went from 32% in the Boomer Generation to 21% in Gen Z. Identifying as LGBTQ+ went from 4% with Boomers to 28% with Gen Z.
The conclusion I would have jumped to is that the percentage of Gen Z who identified as LGBTQ+ would be greater than that who identified as Republican. So it seems I don’t actually need to read it. 😜
Add comment