this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
345 points (97.3% liked)

Palestine

1237 readers
737 users here now

A community to discuss everything Palestine.

Rules:

  1. Posts can be in Arabic or English.

  2. Please add a flair in the title of every post. Example: “[News] Israel annexes the West Bank ”, “[Culture] Musakhan is the nicest food in the world!”, “[Question] How many Palestinians live in Jordan?”

List of flairs: [News] [Culture] [Discussion] [Question] [Request] [Guide]

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Where is the outrage? Where have all the "humans" gone? Israel slaughtered over 300 innocent civilians in Gaza last night. Most of them women and children.

None of those with #Ukraine, #Canada, #Mexico and #EU flags on their profile raising their voice condemning this outrageous crime.

-----------
The sheikh wandered around the city with a lamp

I'm tired of all the devils and the death, and seeking one human

They said it cannot be found, we have searched, As we said before

That which cannot be found I desire

Rumi
دی شیخ با چراغ همی‌ گشت گرد شهر
کز دیو و دد ملولم و انسانم آرزوست

گفتند یافت می‌ نشود جسته‌ ایم ما گفت
آن که یافت می‌ نشود آنم آرزوست
#poetry #Rumi #Gaza #Inhumanity #Death #politics #Israel #Genocide #WarCrime
@palestine@lemmy.ml @palestine@a.gup.pe @israel @iran

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (2 children)

Has there been progress in the US since way back in Reagan's time?!

Because at so many levels, from inequality and the collapse of social mobility to widespread civil society surveillance and support for Genocide abroad, the US has been constantly regressing for decades both under Democrats and Republicans.

I mean, the last actual American President passing measures that one could call "progress" was JFK. Even Obama was the President that ordered the highest number of drone murders whilst in office of all and decided that the way to save the economy after the 2008 Crash was to protect asset owners and large financial institutions - the rich, not the rest - resulting in the steep increase in social inequality and final collapse of social mobility in the US of the last decade, and which created the fertile ground for the growth of support for the likes of Trump.

From my viewpoint as an European, you're just defending a slower regression, which is understandable but it ain't "progress" (last chance at that was Bernie Sanders and his primary was very overtly torpedoed by the DNC), and it's also understandable that others with strong moral convictions and even personal reasons connected to America's continued descent into evil aren't supporting any evil in America, even the "lesser" one that slows down the regression a bit.

You would have been absolutelly right if this election was indeed progress vs regression, but it wasn't, it was one Genocide-endorsing candidate who chose to try to attract far-right votes by getting cozier with the likes of the Cheney family versus a Genocide-endorsing candidate who is openly a far-right populist - two forms of evil differing mainly in delivery style and how fast do they want to go rightward - you blaming people for chosing "none of the above" is pure tribalism.

[–] whostosay@lemmy.world -1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

There's been both progress and regression. To try to paint it that black and white doesn't work. Even if we do agree that it is a slower regression, that is still the first step to progress here. That would be the same thing as saying that slowing damage of climate change would be meaningless.

Unless we start murdering billionaires in the streets, this is what we have.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm sorry but in over 2 decades of observing US politics from outside as I saw the country go from what I admired as a kid in the 80s into a shit show, I've seen a ton of "mild when it could've been heavy" regression being celebrated as "good" and a lot of one step forward and two steps back, but never any actual real, sustained progress.

Sure, you can claim that, for example, Clinton's economic boom after he tore down the Glass-Steagal Act was "progress", as long as you ignore the other consequences of it, namely the 2008 Crash, and the Recession after it and rise in inequality and collapse of social mobility.

If you use the traditional technique of sleazy politicians of claiming successes as theirs and failures as somebody else's, they're all making progress, but if you look at the trend line on things like inequality it's been consistently getting worse, just slower at times.

And no, that's not all you have: you can become politically active and along with other similarly minded people start trying to take back the Democrat Party at the local level - start supporting non-AIPAC bough candidates in the next Congressional and Senatorial Primaries, do leafleting campaigns reminding everybody of the evil-doing of many of the sitting Democrat Congressmen and Senators (their voting record is open and them receiving money from AIPAC is known for many). At a national level it's hard for non-billionaire individuals to move public opinion but at local level it's a lot easier.

After all, most polls seem to show that the actual Democrat voter mainly have good values, so it seems to me that it's the Democrat Political Leadership who are misaligned with the principles of the Democrat Party voters, no doubt because they can ran their campaigns on "vote lesser" evil and there will be an over-abundance of people spreading the message that "We must vote for so that the more evil candidate does not win, there is no other option" all the while the evil Democrat candidate won't move in the slightest to not be evil.

[–] whostosay@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

Although I agree with just about all of this, were talking about what happened this election. Local race influence is at minimum a decade out, if we're still even able to vote when those times come. the right has been actively kneecapping people's ability to vote for a long time. My argument is that it is not perfect, no where near it, but far easier to bounce back from than far right total control. That's the argument, and it's an easy one.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world -3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Obama was the President that ordered the highest number of drone murders

Drone murders was a right wing lie. Obama killed fewer than any modern President except Carter.

Drones were not yet available in mass production during Bush Jr so Bush killed hundreds of thousands with regular bombs. Obama killed only hundreds of civilians. So to twist Obama's record into something bad, right wing media talked endlessly about drones, while completely ignoring the drastically lower number of deaths. It would be like calling Bush Sr the Stealth bomber killer because Bush Sr was the first to really use Stealth fighters in the first Gulf War.

Trump killed more in his first year with drones than Obama did in 8 years.

https://airwars.org/research/civilian-deaths-by-us-president-in-iraq-and-syria/

But as Joseph Goebels proved, if you repeat a lie long enough people will believe the lie.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Your link is for something else altogether than the campaign of murder by predator drone that Obama conducted in Pakistan, which if remember it correctly included blowing up a whole wedding to get to 1 man.

Frankly I don't care if he was the worst, the 2nd worst or the 3rd worst: the problem is that he still signed the orders for quite a lot of outright murders (no due process involved) and since I'm not a member of his political tribe and thus don't have a special moral discount for the chiefs of the tribe, his campaign of murder by drone puts him in the "Evil" category right alongside the rest.

Then there is the whole part of how he chose to save the Finance Industry after the Crash (which, me being in the Industry in London at the time, observed with quite a lot of attention).

But hey, cheers for quoting Goebels to defend a guy who ordered a campaign of murders in Pakistan: it's always pretty special when an American Neoliberal quotes Nazis to the rest of us to defend their own tribe's murdering leaders.