this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2025
484 points (99.0% liked)

World News

46177 readers
4214 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hark@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

There is no genocide lite. It's just genocide with better marketing.

[–] spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 minutes ago* (last edited 1 minute ago)

How about calling it single genocide vs multi-genocide? Does that make the distinction any clearer between the choices that were available? Whether we like it or not (and I'm 100% in the latter group) 'no genocide' was not on the menu

Don't get me wrong, I'm disgusted by the state of politics in this country, and would not have voted for Kamala had there been any other person on the ballot that had a realistic choice of winning. But the choice was what we had, and we knew the outcome was going to be bad but workable or fucking awful naked fascism. And so many people chose fucking awful naked fascism in the face of not being able to hold up their moral purity, and now make arguments like she would have done all the awful shit that trump was telling us he was going to do.

That's why I said what I said. And if you actually read the article I linked above instead of taking what the other user cherry picked out, you'll see that even the staffer who left because of Gaza said we should have voted for her for basically the reason of what we're seeing happen.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

You're not wrong, by all means. Either way you also need to be doing anything you can like protesting in the streets, boycotting anything that supports Israel, and support organizations that help Palestine. But I'd rather buy time for there to still be a Gaza to fight for, personally.