Disgusting. The problem is the torture and murder of people who don’t deserve it. If “their family” only consists of WP provider’s cousins who condone the business then fine, good riddence. But you’re saying their 3 year old niece who knows nothing about any of this should be killed by slowly burning to death from chemical weapons? Nah, fuck off with the “children are valid targets” bait.
If we’re just talking hypotheticals here, why is it so hard for you to say that it would be bad, hypothetically, to kill a 3 year old with white phosphorus?
What you’re apparently trying to say is that your comments advocating for killing entire families based on the crimes of one of their members is that you’re posing this hypothetical situation to people here on lemmy who are in a position to target/profit from/earn a living from white phosphorus. And that doing so will perhaps get them to imagine the horrors and change their ways. Really? K. Keep fighting that good fight then. As a final note, believe me, those who deserve my indignation aren’t getting any less of it just because I took a moment to call out a chuddy comment.
I appreciate that comment. I may have been too reactive and harsh in my response, and apologize for that. It is admittedly one of my “peeves” when someone I’d otherwise consider a comrade seems to advocate specifically for killing innocents and children as a means to punish the people who do deserve the pit and worse.
I absolutely share your anger, even rage for the demon shitstains supplying WP to aid a genocide. And to be clear, it’s not that they don’t deserve to see their own family killed in the same way they are facilitating the unimaginably painful murder of other families, I just personally think it’s important for us as leftists to draw a line against targeting innocent people especially for the sake of vindictiveness. In other words, if we could somehow make the guilty fascists think that was happening to their own family without actually doing that to the innocent members of their family, I’d have zero problem with that, in fact I’d be all for it. Since we were discussing hypotheticals, I actually rather like that one.
Well wishes to you, I should probably log off for a bit too.
Go ask the NATO bloc and their supporters. The obvious and surface answer is that it has to do with making for an easy “us-vs-them” identifier. “Of course they’re bad, they aren’t white like us good wholesome folk are, who are inherently good and wholesome because we’re white, and being good and wholesome makes us right and correct in what we do and you can tell because we’re white. The ones who are bad clearly aren’t like us. They’re not white!” Yes, it is circular reasoning and garbage logic. But I don’t know why you’re getting pissy at us for that instead of the dipshits white people who keep moving the goalposts on the meaning of whiteness, as they always have done to suit their agenda. Take it up with them.
You were asking about the shifting nature of the meaning of the term whiteness. Go up and read your own comment to see how you related that to authoritarianism. If you can’t follow your own train of thought, then I can’t help you because it makes it apparent you’re not asking in good faith.
You’re saying “authoritarianism = non-whiteness = opposition to the NATO bloc”
What I’m trying to explain to you is that “we” are not saying that. The people who use whiteness to justify their actions and otherize their enemies are saying that. This isn’t difficult.
Well, you have to follow Rinox’s entire plan. Creating a “well-defined border” will ensure that any animosity between the two ethnostates won’t ever become a problem. Also they all have to stop having religions altogether. Easy peasy.
Well I’ve been trying to educate them with as much good faith response as I can muster. I considered just posting PPB, but I guess because I’m medicated, I felt compelled to press on. Anyway, I heavily quoted from this excellent site: DecolonizePalestine & their myth database. I would recommend it to anyone else, especially if you plan to argue with zionists or their dipshit water-carriers like the one in the image.
Removing the Israeli state “from the river to the sea” as you say, would mean another genocide.
No it fucking wouldn’t. Completely dismantling the STATE of Israel, a terroristic settler-colonizer project, would not necessitate a genocide in any way and by pretending it does, you’re doing the propaganda work for the actual genocidaires.
I guess at the end of the day, it’s always ok to commit a genocide, but only if it’s your side committing it, eh?
Stfu with your false equivalency bullshit. Let’s use the stolen house analogy that was used elsewhere in this thread because it is apt. If a group of armed assholes comes into your house and starts killing off your family, claiming your house as their own, your doing everything within your power to get them back out of your house is not committing a crime at all, let alone one that is equivalent to the crime they are currently perpetrating against you.
The real solution is to create two states, one for the Jews, one for the Palestinians, create a well-defined border
Consider again the analogy above and ask yourself if the real solution is letting those who came in your house and killed your family have their own kitchenette, bathrooms, and bedrooms in your house, just with new walls. When they’ve been saying the whole time (as they were killing your family) that that’s all they actually wanted to do.
Is the two-state solution the only viable solution?
Viable for whom and for what?
The two-state solution is inadequate to right historical wrongs, as it focuses on the pre-1967 borders as a starting point, which are in themselves a product of the colonization of Palestine, and not the root cause of it. It is thus preoccupied with finding solutions to symptoms, rather than dare address the root cause, which is Zionist settler colonialism and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
This automatically means that Palestinians must relinquish any rights or hopes for their millions of refugees, and it also means that Palestinians must relinquish their rights to live in over 80% of the land they were ethnically cleansed from. Consequently, resource distribution, from water to fertile land, will be heavily stacked in Israel’s favor.
Shortly put, the two-state solution is more interested in maintaining Israel’s colonial gains and artificial demographic aspirations, and lending them legitimacy, rather than seeking justice for the Palestinians in any form.
You should really go ahead and read the other myths discussed there too.
stop it with the holy wars, stop it with the persecutions, stop it with the genocides, stop it with the forced resettlement, stop it with terror attacks, stop it with the bombings
Only one “side” is doing all that and is the only one that has the power to immediately stop doing all of that. Instead, it keeps doing all of that. I wonder why it hasn’t stopped. thonk
and stop it with religions altogether.
Seriously? You are a clown. And I say that as an atheist myself.
Everyone has the right to live, so just live and let live
Oh, just give peace a chance, right? My god liberals are so fucking vapid. This is not a situation with two sides of equivalent means and committing equivalent atrocities with an equivalent power to stop the violence. It is extremely asymmetric in every sense, including the fact that one side is currently conducting an open genocide against the other which is disproportionately made up of children. I would guarantee that most of the Palestinian people would do just about anything to be able to live and let live but Israel will not have that - they never have and they never will, which is the nature of all settler-colonial projects which you clearly don’t understand.
As I already said, you have no understanding of what settler-colonialism is, and your disgusting (and actually racist) insistence that the Palestinians (who we agree are being genocided right now) will simply genocide everyone living on their stolen land is testament to your ignorance. You know how space_comrade pointing out you were telling on yourself by spouting a Zionist delusional fear, and that it is pure projection? Well it really is both those things: delusional and projection.
Most of what you said I already addressed, and you seemed to have missed it, so it doesn’t make me very keen to respond to it again. But this part:
you should be looking for a solution that doesn’t involve destroying a nation and its people.
is very revealing. Destroying a STATE is not the same thing as destroying a people and it’s very sneaky to pretend that it’s the same thing.
The site I already linked has a FAQ, and here is one entry from it:
Does Israel have a right to exist?
People have a right to self-determination, but no state in the world has a right to exist. This ‘right’ simply has no foundation, and Israel is not special in this regard. More here
Since I don’t expect people to always read when something is linked, even when they absolutely should do so if they have even a passing interest in actually understanding the situation they are talking about (let alone talking as if they have the solution, lol) I am going to paste another piece from the write-up that I linked and suggested you read in my last comment. It puts the lie to your insistence that a Palestinian state (which is the only way forward that is congruent with both justice and long-term peace) would also necessitate another genocide.
These anxieties are not unique to Jewish Israelis, settlers in many different colonies throughout history have echoed these same sentiments. If we were to take a look at the narrative surrounding anti-Apartheid South Africa activism and boycotts, we would find eerily similar projections and arguments.
For example, In an article for the Globe and Mail under the title “The good side of white South Africa” Kenneth Walker argued that ending the Apartheid system and giving everyone an equal vote would be a “a recipe for slaughter in South Africa”. Others, such as Shingler, echoed similar claims, saying that anti-racist activists were actually not interested in ending Apartheid as a policy, but in South Africa as a society. Others came out to claim these activists were actually motivated by “anti-white racism”, fueled by “Black imperialism”. Political comics displayed a giant soviet bear, bearing down on South Africa declaring “We shall drive South Africa into the Sea!”
Sound familiar?
Yet even when it is rarely acknowledged that Palestinian refugees were wronged, and deserve to return home, the refrain is that while it is tragic, it is the only way to keep the Jewish people safe. Once again, this pretense is hardly unique to Jewish Israelis, as a matter of fact, similar arguments were used against the abolition of slavery in the United States. For example, Thomas Jefferson likened slavery to a wolf:
<span style="color:#323232;">“we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.”
</span>
How utterly ridiculous this all sounds now.
While the first approach is crude and vile propaganda, designed to instigate fear and panic, it is par for the course for settler societies. Perhaps the second approach stands out a little bit more for its brazen attempt at manipulation. In a final endeavor to center their experiences and erase their victims, settlers frame themselves as the stars of their own tragedy, in the end they were the tragic victims of fate, forced to wield injustice for the sake of self-preservation.
Underlying the logic of both of these approaches are racist assumptions that the colonized are barbaric, bloodthirsty and ruthless. It is a deeply dehumanizing logic, steeped in every colonial and Orientalist trope. The idea that a decolonized, free Palestine would inevitably lead to genocide comes from this same logic. As a matter of fact, for all the claims of the Palestinians wanting to push Israelis into the sea, only the opposite has occurred in reality.
Regardless of your ideological leanings, the reality is that we are already living under a de facto one-state reality. Israeli politicians proudly boast about never allowing a Palestinian state to materialize. Israeli school books already erase the green line. Israel already rules the lives of everyone there. Palestinians calling for the dissolution of this naked colonialism is legitimate and just. The fact that Palestinians are even asked to guarantee the well-being and welfare of their oppressors as they are killed, imprisoned and brutally repressed daily is a testament to their utter dehumanization.
Oh really? This ban won’t effect people who use (for example) F-Droid to get the app?? That’s great to hear tbh. Hopefully this stupid ass decision will have the effect of turning more people on to FOSS stuff more than it will actually prevent people from using TikTok.
ok, thanks for the info. I don’t know a lot about how this kind of thing works (clearly), I just try to use and support FOSS and “piracy” whenever possible.
I’ve been debating to myself whether or not voting for a third party candidate (Either PSL’s de la Cruz or Green’s West, regardless of my criticisms for both) would be the most “effective” use of my time in election season this year. The argument for “not” is that maybe voting at all is bad because it legitimizes...
If you think there will be a meaningful difference in the extent to which minorities are targeted depending on which flavor of fash is in the white house, you are an idiot. Sorry.
Most of these supposedly “bad” posts make me laugh. Like, they’re funny. That’s not very bad at all. Most of you are just hopelessly funny, unlike myself who can never make anyone laugh, only cringe at best. Some of these “bad” posts even overwhelm me with emotion to the point that I’m trying to cry again,...
The Owner of a Mine in Yorkshire is Supplying White Phosphorus to Israel (www.thecanary.co)
Why are socialist and communist countries usually considered more authoritarian than capitalist countries?
Lemmitor Radlib has a solution: 'Really guys, BOTH the Palestinians and Zionists just need to give peace a chance. But decolonization would be genocide.' (hexbear.net)
Link: hexbear.net/comment/4767245...
VWOOM (lemmy.ml)
AOC says a genocide is unfolding in Gaza. (hexbear.net)
Tweet
Thank you American software (lemmy.today)
Americans: Are you going to vote third party or refuse to vote at all?
I’ve been debating to myself whether or not voting for a third party candidate (Either PSL’s de la Cruz or Green’s West, regardless of my criticisms for both) would be the most “effective” use of my time in election season this year. The argument for “not” is that maybe voting at all is bad because it legitimizes...
I'm better at this than most of you. Probably better than everyone here. (hexbear.net)
Most of these supposedly “bad” posts make me laugh. Like, they’re funny. That’s not very bad at all. Most of you are just hopelessly funny, unlike myself who can never make anyone laugh, only cringe at best. Some of these “bad” posts even overwhelm me with emotion to the point that I’m trying to cry again,...