this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

Slop.

538 readers
208 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/gossip

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Yay, a small win. Time to punch left.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

to be clear i didnt say it was reactionary to say that oct 7th was a war crime, it was the “right to exist” part i had an issue with. i dont believe oct 7th to have been a war crime but i understand why someone running for mayor would say that and i understand how they could even interpret international law to come to that conclusion, if their analysis was lacking a lot of material and historical context (ie, if you occupy a people for 80yrs and ethnically cleanse them then lock them all in a concentration camp, and hold a music festival right next to that concentration camp, i dont really see how in that context you can call what happened a war crime)

but again the actual issue i had was, he could have said that and not said israel has a right to exist, even if he claims “as a secular state”, which even that is a liberal delusion. the entire point of israel is contradictory to any claim that it could ever be secular

[–] [email protected] 0 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

a secular "israel" without genocide or apartheid would be a completely different country so maybe that's the politically correct to say the modern state of israel doesn't have the right to exist

[–] [email protected] 0 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

saying israel can exist as a secular state with equal rights is like saying water can exist as a dry liquid. i think your reading of it being a politically correct way of saying it has no right to exist is a lot more charitable than i'm willing to be as someone who knows nothing about this dude and can only look at his words.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 19 hours ago

it would just be Palestine. maybe some nagano accords will happen and it'll still be called israel by some losers idk.