• jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        21 hours ago

        No, the goal post has always been that she’ll enforce America’s laws regarding weapon shipments until israel behaves. This is not that. This ‘ill continue the Biden policy of committing a genocide and periodically send sternly worded letters that do nothing.’.followed by ‘israel has a right to defend itself’ platitudes.

        Harris needs to commit. And this is not that. No goal posts have been moved. Shes trotted out some tokens and said the same thing shes said every time.

      • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        Empty rhetoric about “war” has never been a worthwhile “goalpost”. We’ve had more than a year of that already from genocide joe.

        It’s always been about ending the genocide and reversing zionism more generally.

      • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        28
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Debunking the strawman is not moving the goalpost.

        You do not get to set the demands for other voters. And then pretend they have been met when they are clearly not.

        • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Was she supposed to single-handedly end the war in Gaza as VP to earn your vote, or does she specifically need to declare war on Israel to satisfy you? You gotta know that isn’t a winning campaign promise.

          • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            20 hours ago

            Aren’t most polls against the genocide, so it would’ve helped? Even the goalposts you’re providing don’t acknowledge it as a genocide.

        • Soulg@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          29
          ·
          24 hours ago

          Why should they give a fuck about your “demands” when you change them immediately once met?

          • Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            15 hours ago

            The demands haven’t changed. They’ve always been, and this is really quite simple; stop sending weapons to Israel while it’s engaging in genocide. The goalposts have not shifted.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            23
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            22 hours ago

            Kamala already promised not to impose a weapons embargo on Israel. She still does not call it a genocide. No demands have been met.

            What does she mean by everything in her power? Nuking Gaza so the “war” ends? Send in the American military to fight in Gaza?

            • Ferrous@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              22 hours ago

              Liberals will see no problem choosing polite, handwringing genocide over rowdy, bombastic genocide. They fall so easily for style points and optics completely devoid of substance.

              20 years from now, when the only choices are between a dem who wants 20 genocide and a republican who wants 21, liberals will still be frothing at the mouths, blaming anti-genocide leftists for the country’s devoluton into fascism. This is the logical conclusion of liberal “pragmatic utilitarianism”

              In biology, one learns about a certain species of caterpillar that can only cross the threshold of metamorphosis by seeing its future butterfly. Proletarian subjectivity does not evolve by incremental steps but requires nonlinear leaps, especially by way of moral self-recognition through solidarity with the struggle of a distant people. Even when this contradicts short-term self-interest, as in the famous cases of Lancashire cotton workers’ enthusiasm for Lincoln and later for Gandhi, such efforts not only anticipate a world beyond capitalism, they concretely advance the working class’s march toward it.

              Socialism, in other words, requires nonutilitarian actors, whose ultimate motivations and values arise from structures of feeling that others would deem spiritual. Marx rightly scourged romantic humanism in the abstract, but his personal pantheon — Prometheus and Spartacus, Homer, Cervantes, and Shakespeare — affirmed a heroic vision of human possibility. But can that possibility be realized in today’s world, a world where the “old working class” has been demoted in agency?

              -Mike Davis