1
Opposing The Gaza Genocide While Supporting Biden Is A Dishonest, Nonsensical Position
(caitlinjohnstone.com.au)
this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Palestine
977 readers
7 users here now
A community for everything related to Palestine and the occupation currently underway by the occupying force known as Israel.
Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism. Existence is resistance for Palestinians.
Please refer to Israel as Occupied Palestine, or occupied territories. The IDF is a fascist and ethnonationalist occupying force. Israelis are settlers. We understand however that the imperial narrative (which tries to legitimise Israel) is internalised in the imperial core and slip-ups are naturally expected.
We always take the sides of Palestine and Palestinians and are unapologetic about it. Israel is an occupying power whose "defence force"'s (note the contradiction) sole purpose for existing is to push Palestinians out so they can resettle their rightful land. If you have anything positive to say about Israel we do not care.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I know this almost certainly going to go down like a lead balloon (on Lemmygrad of all places!), but as a politician you often have to make nice with people you disagree with, or are even revolted by, especially if they are the leader of your party.
It's like how you can't call out your boss at work every time he does something awful because you really want to stay in the organization because you see it as a way to do valuable work.
Sorry but "making nice" with genocide is not "pragmatism".
Are you supporting the very authoritarian doctrine that the Liberals, red fascist tankiejerkers, victims of Communism, Pax Americana, and Bretton Woods institutions support in their hypocrisy? As a child from the abusive ableist victim of Communist family, I know that the Liberals justify their hypocritical authoritarianism with their claim that democracy, rule of law, and freedom are unrealistic policies that only existed in the little fantasy world of "spoiled" kids despite the many allegation of victories of "democracy" domestically and internationally under racist Western European diaspora. The tricks to the Liberal's excuse for authoritarianism are that they brainwashed you to think that only the Western European approach to democracy are the only possible approach to democracy which negate all other realistic approaches to democracy and rule of law, that the alleged victories of democracy in Pax Americana are actually victories of Pax Americana authoritarianism, and that there are unreported victories of democracy under people of color and Communism.
I sure love my calling my boss out for something awful (genocide). That is so brave.
Did you actually think you'd somehow lessen or half-way justify FUCKING GENOCIDE because of the intricacies of realpolitik? Are you serious?!
Get increasingly and never-endingly fucked.
If the system forces you to "work with" people who have no problem wiping off certain ethnicities, or poor people, from the face of the earth, then that's a shit system and you should work to overthrow it. That system is called bourgeois democracy, and its nothing more than capitalist dictatorship, with capitalists standing above and controlling the political system to suit their selfish interests.
Its not those who oppose that system who are naive or "idealistic" in that scenario, its you.
Except your boss isn't directly contributing to a genocide. What kind of dumbfuck analogy is this?
It's a flawed analogy sure, but the point still stands. It's easy for non-politicians to have moral clarity and take principled stances, but if you're in government trying to actually effect positive changes to society, it's not that simple at all.
They are not "trying to actually effect positive changes to society". That is exactly what being liberal is all about - zero understanding of the material reality. What they are actually trying every day is upholding the interests of capital. And that means serving a specific economic group - the capitalists, or "the bourgeoisie". Whether by starting wars all over the globe, instigating coups, financing fascist death squads, supporting actual genocide, what have you. They don't give two shits about you, positive changes to society, anyone really but their donors and themselves.
And yet so many privileges that worker enjoy today were brought about through collective bargaining, trade unions, and pro-labor legislation (not to such a great extent in the US, but whatevs) introduced through principled politicians who weren't wholly under the boot of the ruling classes.
I know in this sub that sounds like a cop-out, but it's true. Not everyone has the stomach for yet another bloody revolution.
But seeing Palestinians die is fine? I don't think the lack of bloodlust is the issue at all.
Thing is, those things had to be fought for and paid in blood (Literally, look at the history labor conflicts which involved plenty of massacres and assasinations).
And these struggles were only successful because 1) WW2 had militarised the working population 2) the Soviet Union was a powerful threat to the bourgeoise. By the 1970s and 3) the profit rate was high
By the 1970s, all 3 conditions had started to disappear, and the oil shock gave the capitalist class the opportunity to pull a soft coup essentially and embark on their project of destroying the positions of the international working class movement. The crowning jewel of their achievements was the destruction of the soviet union and the opening of China, which allowed a recovering of the profit rate.
Today, we live in a world where the capitalist class won the battle of the 20th century. In these conditions, no "principled politician" or insider will be able to win you any rights. Only under changing conditions (the recent ascent of China, the fall of the empire, the profit rates falling again) will the political state of the world substantially change. And frighteningly enough, the changes in the conditions we are seeing will mostly likely lead to at worst, a new world war (the lead up conflicts are already underway) or at best, a new cold war.
The world the previous generations lived in has long vanished. 2024 America is not 1955 America. Nor is it Europe (where the bourgeoise has never had a racialised underclass to easily exploit and undermine worker bargaining power, although this is beginning to change). What might work in 1960s America or Europe won't work in America today.
Workers in the west only care about westerners they want a part of the imperial loot they are complicit in colonialism
Edit: ah the fuck you got mine ladder puller attitude
Ding ding ding. You win, the whole thing undergirding this is this. They just want a bigger cut.
You drank too much of Bernie "Zionazi apologist" Sanders. They did not do it because they were "principled". Even your precious socdems don't give a shit about you, though their rhetoric may suggest otherwise. And while yes, labor unionization can win you a few crumbs, you gotta remember that these are 1) crumbs that the capitalists 2) were willing to give them should the workers start to get annoying, and 3) these crumbs are only possible because of US/Western imperialism. There "principled politicians" do this to bribe the working class, to pacify it - because it is easier than the stick. Once you ask for too much, or once the empire starts to crumble - then you'll get the stick. And don't worry, the militarized police in the US get to have a VERY big stick nowadays.
Mon bon ami, democratic centralism applies to your close allies, not to those who would oppose ye, on both principle and ideology...
I'm sorry, I just can't...
Why bother Lemmygrad, out of all places?
It helps to spice things up with a contrary opinion from time to time, n'est-ce pas?
It's incredible how easy it is for liberals to justify participation in a literal genocide.
Yeah, I get it. Liberals, amirite? But hear me out.
As a politician you have to be pragmatic rather than idealistic. Support for Israel is pretty much baked into the US's political system, to the point where calling out the genocide for what it is is a one-way ticket to isolation and losing your seat at the table. So as a ethical person you have two options: 1) take a principled stance and be forced out of mainstream politics or 2) tow the party line to the minimum extent possible and try to effect positive changes where you can.
If your goal is to reform a system of genocide supporters, that is itself idealistic. How can you think working with people who are fine with genocide to be "practical"? Somehow I doubt you have thought this point through. It sounds, like most of the language from liberals surrounding this election, like a regurgitation of past talking points without any regard for the blatant and documented intensity of circumstances. You're telling others they are idealistic while stuck in a daydream where human society progresses on a linear path and if you just push the needle forward a little bit, it'll stay further forward. This after Roe V Wade got overturned, which flies in the face of the argument that once a precedent is set, it will stay that way.
When will you take political power seriously? You claim you are practical, but your only solution is to bow to power and plead with it.
First of all, what you are saying is that if you oppose genocide in earnest you will be forced out of the party and you are presenting this party, which has been genociding longer than your or my grandparents have lived, as conditionally acceptable, reformable and redeemable. To a normal person this sounds insane. What you want to say is that you don't care if people get genocided oceans away. You don't need to dress it up in west wing nonsense. That's just confusing for everyone.
Second, who is this politician you are talking about? It sounds you are talking about voting strategies but you say politician so you could be talking about Biden which is what I am gonna assume. Biden does not toe to the party line to the minimum extent possible. When you were a wee lad segregationist Uncle Joe was going on racist tirades in congress against bussing. He has supported every genocidal war that America has waged. He is also a hardcore Zionist. He wholeheartedly supports and enables the genocide of Palestinians.
Lolwut? No, I'm not talking about fucking Biden.
I was thinking about AOC, who I think is generally a principled person.
God, you are such a sucker... Every single time libs fall for this crying, weeping, bleeding-heart "oh, look at me, I'm a bartender, I'm a Latino, I care so much about immigrant cages! I'm not at all financed by two Zionist-connected companies". Hook, line, sinker - rinse, repeat.
It's funny how the "cage" situation got worse during the Biden admin.. And your precious AOC didn't spurt out a word. Or when she went "oh, we gotta protect the Naz... I mean, democracy in Ukraine!". Or when she went to support Palestinian Authority, the puppet entity that is currently supporting this genocide in Gaza.
You are an idiot
Imagine saying that supporting a literal genocide is just pragmatic politics. What is wrong with you?
Being a realist is a curse, let me tell you.
Realist would be WEIGHING the negatives vs the positives. What positives outweigh funding genocide in Gaza?
You are not a realist, you are a manifestation of cuckoldry within the liberal framework. A person saying "but what can one really do" while ignoring the systemic issue at the root of it all - capitalism, and the fact that no system that allows this sort of atrocity (around the world, not just in Gaza currently) should be allowed to exist in the first place. But that requires one to understand that the system must be torn down with a revolution, something liberals will never say - it is their system, after all.
Exactly! You've very eloquently supported my argument.
The choice posed to the realist in government is to either 1) play along or 2) quit and help overthrow the system.
What you're actually being is a fascist.
That's what American realism has been. Literal monsters like Zbig and Kissinger are labelled realist as if unfortunate realities forced their hands to commit mass murders.
But Kissinger is too intellectual for these types. Let's not forget, do we think our friend here thinks that the US made a mistake with Ukraine as a realist like Kissinger or Mearsheimer would and have argued? Does our friend here who supports real-politik oppose Biden's arming of Ukraine and infringing on Russia as any sensible, rational realist would?
Of course not. Even that label is not actually applicable to this person. They are an indoctrinated, cowardly person toeing the line and justifying everything. What they claim to hide behind does not represent their rationale or mode of thinking, it's just something they've ducked behind on this occasion and would be the first in line to throw apples at Mearsheimer and other realists and call them Russian agents or useful idiots.
Realists magically become able to see reason once they leave positions of power and authority and start stealing a living at a think thank. The same realists are unrepentant mass murders when they are in positions to directly influence foreign policy.
God you're such a fucking loser, you're replying with the most ancient meme to someone actually engaging you in good faith.
Go back to Reddit, or log off boomer.
Enlighten us, oh mighty lame.ee sage.
A fascist is someone who believes in dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, strong regimentation of society and the economy, This often involves the centralization of authority under a single leader or party, the suppression of dissenting voices, and the promotion of aggressive and expansionist policies under a nationalistic ideology.
Now write that down, all of you!
😂 so smug yet so incorrect
If you're interested in learning I could give you some links/literature (have you ever read communist political theory?). What you've just said is basically an Eli5 for nazi children. Absolute dumbassery
... forcible suppression of opposition. Got it.
So what is the Biden regime's position on the campus protests against the genocide? Oh, he's forcibly suppressing them, and he did the same for the movement to defund the police. Well, there you have it. Even by your definition, he is a fascist. You are supporting a fascist. Write that down, if you even care about that more than you care about being smug.
Lol "write it down". Gotta love the smugness of clueless libs. You ignored the most important aspect of it all - the material interests that fuel all of it. Fascism, to put it short, is capitalism in crisis. It is when the liberal facade breaks and the ruling class - the capitalists - feel threatened, they find a strongman and put him in power. Then you see a true face of capitalism - a fascist one, where the state crushes workers' rights, coerces everyone into wage slavery and extracts superprofits for the bourgeoisie. Your definition is plainly shallow because it does not address the material roots of the ideology.
material analysis to a liberal is like garlic to a vampire
you could've just stopped at you don't think and that would be an accurate description of you