Mastodawn

Verdant Banana Aug 24, 2024

Democrats Tuned Out Gaza Protests at the DNC. History Won’t Forget.

https://lemmy.world/post/19000239

Democrats Tuned Out Gaza Protests at the DNC. History Won’t Forget. - Lemmy.World

As Vice President Kamala Harris received the presidential nomination at the 2024 Democratic National Convention (DNC), thousands of people marched near the convention demanding an end to U.S. arms shipments to Israel and the war on Gaza. The protesters, led by Palestinian and Jewish activists, represented a diverse coalition including anti-war veterans, climate justice activists, and labor organizers. Despite efforts by Democrats to keep the Palestine issue sidelined, the marchers made their voices heard, declaring Harris and President Joe Biden complicit in the genocide in Gaza. The protesters came from communities and movements that are often considered part of the Democratic coalition, warning that their votes could not be taken for granted unless the party takes concrete action to end the occupation and devastation in Palestine. Organizers estimate around 30,000 people demonstrated in Chicago over the course of the week, making Palestine impossible to ignore during the convention. The activists drew connections between the struggle for Palestinian liberation and the fight against racist violence and state repression in the U.S., challenging the Democratic Party’s complicity in both. The protests encountered a heavy police presence, with hundreds of riot police surrounding the march at all times. Despite the tension, the demonstration remained largely peaceful as the protesters demanded justice for Palestine. As Kamala Harris prepared to take the stage, the marchers continued their chants and songs, determined to keep the spotlight on the ongoing catastrophe in Gaza and the Democratic Party’s failure to address it.

Boddhisatva Aug 24, 2024

These protests make little sense to me. I fully support the goals of the protesters. I am opposed to Israel’s actions in Gaza that are clearly aimed at a Palestinian genocide. However, I don’t see how these protests are supposed to help achieve the goal of ending the violence and suffering of the Palestinian people. In fact, if they do anything at all, they will only help Trump get elected.

These protesters should be going after every member of congress that has supported the continued shipment of weapons to Israel, republican and democrat alike, but where have they been? They should have been out supporting democrats like Jamaal Bowman who lost his primary to a moderate, pro-Israel democrat because of AIPAC. AIPAC who has spent more than $15 million dollars this season to try and unseat progressive democrats who have supported their cause. These protesters should have been out protesting AIPAC but haven’t heard a peep from them.

Now, here they are harassing the only presidential candidate on the ballot that might possibly support them if she wins, but who cannot say that now because if she does, AIPAC will drop $10s of millions of dollars to oppose her and potentially cost her the election. And that is the only thing these protests can accomplish. If protesters succeed in turning voters against Harris, where are those votes going to go? Either to a man who has stated that he fully supports Israel’s actions and that he just wants them to hurry up and get it done, or to a third party candidate who cannot possibly win but could siphon enough votes from Harris so that Trump could win anyway.

I can’t help but think that these well meaning protesters are being manipulated by the powers that be to undermine their own goals. Stop attacking democrats in general and start supporting progressives who support your cause.

Tiefling IRL Aug 24, 2024

My question to the people withholding their vote because of Gaza is: what is your plan to support the Palestinian people when Trump gets in?

AfricanExpansionist Aug 25, 2024

I’ll stand proud that I didn’t vote for the people who were already complicit in genocide

agamemnonymous Aug 25, 2024

Fat load of good that’ll do for the remaining Palestinians after Trump helps Netenyahu finish the job. Why would you be proud of such a monstrous thing?

AfricanExpansionist Aug 25, 2024

Yes, I’m “monstrous”, but not the Democrats who have happily supplied Israel with weapons to commit their genocide.

Your moral compass is broken.

Never said they weren’t, but you’re helping the even more monstrous Republicans nuke Palestine. Your moral compass is missing.

AfricanExpansionist Aug 25, 2024

Who is going to nuke Palestine? That’s pure speculation.

Meanwhile, the current administration is ACTUALLY actively helping Israel starve, maim, and kill children

agamemnonymous Aug 25, 2024

www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna145752

GOP Rep. Tim Walberg suggests Gaza should be handled 'like Nagasaki and Hiroshima'

Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Mich., said this week that the conflict in Gaza should be over quickly "like Nagasaki and Hiroshima."

NBC News

AfricanExpansionist Aug 26, 2024

OK again, it’s pure speculation. First, that’s a Senator, who doesn’t even have the authority to use nuclear weapons. Second, the Democrats have shown that they love Netanyahu and will do whatever he wants. If he calls for nukes, maybe a Harris administration will consider it. After all, the party all enthusiastically clapped for the genocide

agamemnonymous Aug 26, 2024

Sounds like speculation to me. On the other hand, Trump said Netenyahu to finish the job, and called him as a private citizen to tell him not to agree to the Democrats ceasefire because it would help the Harris campaign.

You need to consider actually learning about what’s going on instead of clutching your pearls over politically impotent purity tests. Gaza is a wildly complicated geopolitical situation, as the top comment pointed out. You just come across as naive and uninformed.

AfricanExpansionist Aug 26, 2024

I’m sorry what’s speculation on my part???

Second, Trump said that? Oh yeah, he means whatever he says all the time. He never lies, he never talks out of his ass, he ever makes promises he won’t keep

Meanwhile, the current administration has failed to act at every “red line” crossed by Israel and continues to ACTUALLY SUPPLY Israel with weapons to continue its genocide.

Sorry that my “purity test” is “no complicity in killing children”.

And I’m sorry to see you feel that killing children is “a complicated situation”.

agamemnonymous Aug 26, 2024

the Democrats have shown that they love Netanyahu and will do whatever he wants. If he calls for nukes, maybe a Harris administration will consider it.

Speculation.

Second, Trump said that? Oh yeah, he means whatever he says all the time. He never lies, he never talks out of his ass, he ever makes promises he won’t keep

The mental gymnastics here is too much for me to believe you’re sincerely suggesting this excuse. The Republicans are far more favorable to Netenyahu. To suggest otherwise is laughably out of touch.

Meanwhile, the current administration has failed to act at every “red line” crossed by Israel and continues to ACTUALLY SUPPLY Israel with weapons to continue its genocide.

Say you didn’t read the to comment without saying it. 1, that stuff is appropriated by Congress, the administration legally cannot deny supplying what was voted on. Legally, Israel is our ally, and our actions are limited, unless you prefer that American hegemony was entirely unchecked and the President could just do whatever they want regardless of how Congress votes? Maybe if leftists voted lesser evil instead of clutching their pearls, we’d have a Congress that would change things by now, but at least you get to be proud of inaction as the world passes you by. 2, as noted above, AIPAC is a powerful force in our elections, and there are more Zionists in this country than you think; this should be the case, it’s terrible, but it’s true and pretending it isn’t relevant does not achieve useful goals. A hard-line stance at this point will mobilize them and possibly cost Dems the election. 3, as noted above, Republicans would be objectively worse for Gaza, they’re open about that fact. The administration has been trying to broker a ceasefire for months, Trump has personally taken action to sabotage that same ceasefire.

Long term, the best strategy is voting Dem and applying pressure immediately after the election, when they can safely take action. Voting Republican is the worst strategy if you care about Palestinians; not voting is the second worst strategy, and ultimately achieves the same thing. When you can understand why careful deliberate action is necessary in complex and delicate political situations, you will be mature enough to have a potentially valuable opinion on geopolitics. If you think abstention is ever an effective strategy, then you are not yet mature.

knightly the Sneptaur Aug 26, 2024

Long term, the best strategy is voting Dem and applying pressure immediately after the election, when they can safely take action.

Actually, the best strategy is to tell people you won’t vote for genocide before the election. Whether you do end up voting or not is immaterial to the pressure that can be applied when the party is at its most influencable, but telling people to wait until after the election to try and move the party is telling them to wait until their influence is at its minimum.

agamemnonymous Aug 26, 2024

Nope. That validates progressives not voting, which can convince the progressive you’re talking to to not vote, which results in a Republican victory and more support for Netenyahu. That strategy hurts Gaza, we’ve been over this. It’s like you totally ignored all the logic in favor of repeating the same geopolitically ignorant taking points you’ve been fed by right-wing stooges trying to sabotage the neoliberal party in favor of the fascists.

knightly the Sneptaur Aug 27, 2024

Sorry I don’t feel represented by a political party that aids and abets genocide. Democrats have a chance to earn my vote and continue to squander it.

The logic is that if the party doesn’t have an incentive to change then it won’t.

agamemnonymous Aug 27, 2024

Totally irrational. It’s not about who represents you most, they aren’t on the ballot. It’s about which of the two represents you more than the other. What incentive does the party have to sabotage their races (AIPAC influence is real) to court an uninformed bloc that’s unlikely to vote in the first place? Your abstinence is not incentive, no logic whatsoever.

knightly the Sneptaur Aug 27, 2024

It’s not about who represents you most, they aren’t on the ballot.

I already know America is not a democracy, that’s why I don’t feel the need to vote in support of a corrupt system.

What incentive does the party have to sabotage their races (AIPAC influence is real) to court an uninformed bloc that’s unlikely to vote in the first place?

Depends, do they need our votes to win the election or not?

If they need our votes, they should start acting like they’re trying to earn them.

If they don’t think they need our votes, then they don’t have to represent us. And since they don’t represent us, we shouldn’t vote for them.

Totally irrational. Your abstinence is not incentive, no logic whatsoever.

It’s perfectly logical, you just don’t like the conclusion that the logic points towards, because it betrays the party leadership as being self-interested, cynical, and willing to aid and abett genocide.

agamemnonymous Aug 27, 2024

I don’t feel the need to vote in support of a corrupt system.

Do you… do you think that if enough people don’t vote that the government will say “Shucks, guess we have to redo the election with better candidates”? If only one person in the whole country does, they decide the winner. You gain absolutely nothing by not voting, all you’re doing is shifting power to those who disagree with you the most. This is just plain idiotic.

If they need our votes, they should start acting like they’re trying to earn them.

They need enough votes. If they think pandering to your demographic will cost them other demographics, they will not pander to you. Despite your claims, America is a democratic republic, granted with it’s own peculiarities in determining electrical votes. The candidate who wins the most votes wins the state. You will be left in the dust as irrelevant noise in the flood of people who know how to use their vote, and you will get zero representation. Congratulations.

It’s perfectly logical, you just don’t like the conclusion that the logic points towards, because it betrays the party leadership as being self-interested, cynical, and willing to aid and abet genocide to preserve their bloody campaign funding.

Nope, there is no logic. It’s based on nonsense feelings with no correspondence to the functional mechanism of our elections. Abstinence has no effect, and in fact will probably push the party farther right to scoop moderates because they actually vote. Congratulations.

knightly the Sneptaur Aug 28, 2024

do you think that if enough people don’t vote that the government will say “Shucks, guess we have to redo the election with better candidates”?

I wish. A sane electoral system would declare a redo if the abstains win. No, I simply don’t consider how other people will be voting to be a factor. I’ll base my decision not on the promises they make, but the ones they have already fulfilled.

You gain absolutely nothing by not voting, all you’re doing is shifting power to those who disagree with you the most.

What I gain from not-voting is a clear conscience.

And if I’m the deciding vote in my solid-blue state then power has already shifted so far that my one vote won’t hold it back for long.

This is just plain idiotic.

The only idiotic part is how much time you’re wasting trying to convince a disillusioned old anarchist to pick between the negative peace that is a false promise of a “reasonable” politician and an increasingly demented madman who stands out as the greatest living example for why the management of our lives can’t be trusted to a political party.

They need enough votes. If they think pandering to your demographic will cost them other demographics, they will not pander to you.

Then they should stop pretending I’m on their side. Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.

Despite your claims, America is a democratic republic, granted with it’s own peculiarities in determining electoral votes. The candidate who wins the most votes wins the state. You will be left in the dust as irrelevant noise in the flood of people who know how to use their vote, and you will get zero representation. Congratulations.

Make up your mind, is it “democratic” or does everyone’s vote not count?

Abstinence has no effect, and in fact will probably push the party farther right to scoop moderates because they actually vote. Congratulations.

Of course, they were going to do that anyway, especially if we live in the good timeline where the Republican party collapses under the weight of its impending electoral failure. Democrats keep triangulating towards the right to pick up the mythical “moderate” and become the new right-wing party while some new party starts to push them from the left. Probably the greens since they’ve already got a decent following.

agamemnonymous Aug 28, 2024

I’ll base my decision not on the promises they make, but the ones they have already fulfilled.

Not sure what promises the Harris administration have fulfilled, since it hasn’t existed yet.

how much time you’re wasting trying to convince a disillusioned old anarchist

That might be a point if I was trying to convince a disillusioned old anarchist. What I’m actually doing is publicly debunking your public nonsense so that impressionable onlookers in swing states don’t try to emulate that nonsense.

Make up your mind, is it “democratic” or does everyone’s vote not count?

Votes count. Non-votes don’t. There is no conflict in logic here.

Democrats will keep triangulating towards the right to pick up the mythical “moderate” and become the new right-wing party while some new group starts to pick up the pieces on the Left. Probably the greens.

All the more reason to entice them further left now so that the future landscape, in the good timeline, rests further left. I’m all for that future, and want it to start off as far left as possible.

knightly the Sneptaur Aug 28, 2024

All the more reason to entice them further left now so that the future landscape, in the good timeline, rests further left. I’m all for that future, and want it to start off as far left as possible.

And how, precisely, is a promise that they don’t have to move further left to earn your vote supposed to entice them into anything?

agamemnonymous Aug 28, 2024

A party with a comfortable margin can embrace less centrist policies when their voters ask for them (write to your representatives everyone). A party with an uncertain margin has to calculate their platform to target the largest demographics. Using your vote + using your voice = representation.

How, precisely, does a promise that you won’t vote for them unless they alienate a larger demographic entice them into anything?

knightly the Sneptaur Aug 29, 2024

A party with a comfortable margin can embrace less centrist policies when their voters ask for them (write to your representatives everyone). A party with an uncertain margin has to calculate their platform to target the largest demographics.

They must have a very comfortable margin if they can ignore the majority of Americans and instead embrace less centrist policies like helping Israel bomb schools and hospitals.

Using your vote + using your voice = representation.

You should be happy, you can safely ignore my vote and my voice because the Democrats will be winning this election regardless.

How, precisely, does a promise that you won’t vote for them unless they alienate a larger demographic entice them into anything?

The segment of Americans that oppose genocide are the majority, the smaller group that the Democrats are trying not to alienate is AIPAC. The only things that could entice them to change are an even larger quantity of campaign financing, or electoral consequences.

agamemnonymous Aug 29, 2024

They must have a very comfortable margin if they can ignore the majority of Americans

Unfortunately, I don’t think that’s the majority. I think the majority either support Israel without really thinking about it, or don’t care.

you can safely ignore my vote and my voice

Your vote I can ignore, your voice muddying the water for other impressionable voters I cannot

knightly the Sneptaur Aug 29, 2024

Unfortunately, I don’t think that’s the majority. I think the majority either support Israel without really thinking about it, or don’t care.

Unfortunately, I don’t think you know what you’re talking about. Polls show an overwhelming majority of Democrats disapprove of Israel’s military adventurism in Gaza:

news.gallup.com/…/majority-disapprove-israeli-act…

It’s not just the Gallup polling about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but also surveys that ask about what’s going on in Gaza today showing this sea change. In a May Data for Progress survey, 83 percent of Democrats supported a “permanent cease-fire and de-escalation of violence” in Gaza. A March Gallup poll found that a clear majority of all respondents, as well as 75 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of independents, now oppose Israeli military action in Gaza, although those numbers were a little bit lower in the most recent survey. Gallup polling also found that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s net favorability among all respondents in July was down 10 points, with just 12 percent of Democrats saying they support him. And in a March Pew study, 44 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents opposed U.S. military aid for Israel, with just 25 percent in favor.

slate.com/…/kamala-harris-dnc-israel-palestine-po…

agamemnonymous Aug 29, 2024

Of poll respondents. There’s a large overlap between people who don’t care, and people who don’t answer polls. And oh yeah, Harris has been calling for a ceasefire

And disregarding AIPAC is stupid. Picking up the single issue voters by overtly pissing off AIPAC during the election will unleash a multimillion dollar ad campaign. Look at what happened to the squad.

There’s no good reason to do that now. A smart candidate would stay relatively quiet until the election, and then go full bore on the offensive. Especially since, y’know, the vice president doesn’t even have authority here so it’s stupid to blame it on her. Especially when the other candidate is actively sabotaging ceasefire negotiations.

There’s just no logic here.

Socialist Mormon Satanist Aug 31, 2024

Agreed!