Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Can’t see this user’s post history on hexbear but they have a bunch of posts defending Kamala and Biden and NATO. “If I can’t have no genocide, I’d rather some genocide than more genocide. Is this really that controversial?” They seem to think that Gaza is the trolley problem. I’m not sure how someone types “I’d rather some genocide” without feeling shame.
There is no “less vs more” genocide in this equation. The US supplies the arms, Israel does the genocide. If the US keeps sending the necessary arms for the genocide, then the genocide is still there. The “less vs more” narrative is a lie liberals tell themselves to morally justify siding with genocide, rather than abandoning the establishment and going third-party and/or joining revolutionary worker organizations.
As for NATO, it’s a terrorist alliance of Imperialist countries. The only reason it exists is to cement the process by which the Global North extracts and subjugates the Global South. It’s a “defensive alliance” in the same way the Mafia provides “protection” for itself. Without NATO, Imperialism would be weakened, and countries in the Global South would not be terrorized for trying to develop and establish sovereignty over their own resources and industry, like what the Sahel States are doing right now in kicking out France.
It’s all said and done now, but less vs more genocide is a false concept to begin with. Genocide is a binary concept. There’s either a genocide or not a genocide.
I agree. My point was more for the liberals that believe there is literally a lever between “X killed” and “X + 1 killed” and that they are therefore doing harm reduction by picking “X killed” as a binary option. The lie doesn’t really start at saying the choice is binary, ie third party voting and revolutionary organization exist too. The lie starts at the premise of those choices even being on the table, as both parties do their damndest to provide “Israel” with as much as it needs to continue the genocide.
At a moral and technical level, the scale of genocide doesn’t change if it’s genocide or not, correct, but even using the logic of liberalism it falls under its own contradictions.
Mr. Whatchamacallit
https://lemmy.ml/u/vincentmario@feddit.uk
Can’t see this user’s post history on hexbear but they have a bunch of posts defending Kamala and Biden and NATO. “If I can’t have no genocide, I’d rather some genocide than more genocide. Is this really that controversial?” They seem to think that Gaza is the trolley problem. I’m not sure how someone types “I’d rather some genocide” without feeling shame.
I can excuse a little genocide, but not a lot of genocide
You can excuse genocide?
“If I can’t have no genocide…”
“Actually here’s the “no genocide” candidate, you’d just have to vote for somebody other than the dems.”
“I’m not going to do that and here’s why that actually makes you the real genocide supporter.”
They’re on the exact same level as the “actually you pointing out racism is the real racism” magats
lol of course an anglo genocidal dweeb also looks up to disgusting shitstain like mr. fettucini/sexpestiny.
There is no such thing as ‘some genocide’. Genocide doesn’t exist on a fucking gradient. It’s a binary concept.
Removed by mod
There is no “less vs more” genocide in this equation. The US supplies the arms, Israel does the genocide. If the US keeps sending the necessary arms for the genocide, then the genocide is still there. The “less vs more” narrative is a lie liberals tell themselves to morally justify siding with genocide, rather than abandoning the establishment and going third-party and/or joining revolutionary worker organizations.
As for NATO, it’s a terrorist alliance of Imperialist countries. The only reason it exists is to cement the process by which the Global North extracts and subjugates the Global South. It’s a “defensive alliance” in the same way the Mafia provides “protection” for itself. Without NATO, Imperialism would be weakened, and countries in the Global South would not be terrorized for trying to develop and establish sovereignty over their own resources and industry, like what the Sahel States are doing right now in kicking out France.
It’s all said and done now, but less vs more genocide is a false concept to begin with. Genocide is a binary concept. There’s either a genocide or not a genocide.
I agree. My point was more for the liberals that believe there is literally a lever between “X killed” and “X + 1 killed” and that they are therefore doing harm reduction by picking “X killed” as a binary option. The lie doesn’t really start at saying the choice is binary, ie third party voting and revolutionary organization exist too. The lie starts at the premise of those choices even being on the table, as both parties do their damndest to provide “Israel” with as much as it needs to continue the genocide.
At a moral and technical level, the scale of genocide doesn’t change if it’s genocide or not, correct, but even using the logic of liberalism it falls under its own contradictions.
I agree