• ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    18 hours ago

    It is not useful for Harris to call the genocide a genocide because it would hurt her chances of being elected. If Trump is elected instead of Harris, the genocide will continue until all Palestinians are dead.

    Since we want the genocide to end before all Palestinians are dead it is not useful to demand that Harris calls the genocide a genocide because that hurts the chances of the genocide ending while Palestinians are still alive.

    • Juice@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I understand how politics works, and I can understand some of the many complications and consequences involved, but words have meaning, and meaning conveys truth.

      So if you want to represent the nuanced, complex (one sided) world of real politik, then that is certainly a good exercise. “in my power” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here, especially since she’s committed to, let’s say, bend the truth quite a bit with this sentence.

      But skepticism alone isn’t analysis. I think by saying this she is trying to lure over “Uncommitted” conscientious objectors who are on the fence and may withhold their vote. But by not speaking strongly enough, she will never reach the vast majority of those people. This assurance feels empty to me. She’s not an ardent supporter of Palestinians, but who can see the future? Events are rapid and things change, "We exist in a context, all that.

      But there are disadvantages to people only taking political action by way of their votes, and maybe this is one of them.

      I hope she wins. But if she doesn’t the dems will blame those same voters, along with Greens (which, whatever) and any other third party voters instead of coming to grips with their many many failings over the last 8 - 10 years.

      • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        So if you want to represent the nuanced, complex (one sided) world of real politik, then that is certainly a good exercise.

        No, unlike your argument, I’m not arguing we split hairs over semantics.

        she will never reach the vast majority of those people.

        Unless.

        She committed to ending the war in Gaza. If the war ends, the genocide ends. Tell people.

        • Juice@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          No she committed to do everything in her power to end the war. Very different. Sometimes “splitting hairs” isn’t just semantically, especially when it is political. Tell People.

          • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Your argument is splitting hairs. If you care about the Palestinian people then tell people the truth. Harris wants to end the war in Gaza. Trump wants Israel to finish the job. Tomorrow is election day. It’s time to help the Palestinian people in the most useful way we can. By getting Kamala Harris and Tim Walz elected. Splitting hairs over Harris’ words is not useful.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Since we want the genocide to end before all Palestinians are dead it is not useful to demand that Harris calls the genocide a genocide

      Fucking liberalism in a nutshell.