Democrats’ party platform doesn’t call for arms embargo on Israel
Democrats’ party platform doesn’t call for arms embargo on Israel
The 92-page document has to be voted on by delegates on Monday evening and was finalized by the party’s platform committee just before President Joe Biden stepped down from the race.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/18811470
The 92-page document will be voted on by delegates Monday evening.
Paywall removed https://archive.is/irAkp
You're viewing a single thread.
And I hate them for that... but funny enough I hate them less than the other idiots who want to dismantle my livelihood
6 downvotes, 0 replies. If you disagree with this person, why not explain why?
Haven't downvoted anyone. Though also replied to none, as the reply about dropping both parties is sadly a pipe dream and didn't need a reply, its essentially feeding whataboutism and just don't care to engage.
What would it take for you to reject both?
Much like everyone else who shares that opinion, a viable third option that doesn’t throw the election to the right wing when you vote for it
So, nothing. You may not like the status quo, but you'll continue to let genocide happen because you can't vote it out, got it.
Plus, the Democrats are also right-wing, just not as right-wing.
I don’t want genocide to happen. What the fuck makes you think I’m ok with what Israel is doing? You’ve got a terrorist organization and a right wing colonialist government using that terrorism as an excuse for ethnic cleansing
You may not prefer genocide to happen, but you aren't doing anything to stop it, either.
I feel like folks like you practically get off to making bad faith arguments about how regular ass voters are "letting genocide happen" and imply that by not voting, you're doing something effective to stop it.
I have to ask, hypothetically if the Palestinian death toll increased to 60,000 under a Harris presidency, and it increased to 150,000 under a Trump presidency, would you have any preference for one administration over the other if you could go back in time, or do you believe the 90,000+ death difference is meaningless? I'd genuinely like to know your answer to this question because to me it's like telling someone there's no difference between having one leg chopped off and both legs chopped off, and then hearing from some smug person in the back saying "how about we don't chop any legs off?" like it's the idea of the century that nobody has ever thought of before.
I feel like folks like you practically get off to making bad faith arguments about how regular ass voters are "letting genocide happen" and imply that by not voting, you're doing something effective to stop it.
Try listening to what I am actually saying then, instead of imagining it and going with your feelings. I haven't once said "not voting will stop genocide." I said "voting will not stop genocide."
I have to ask, hypothetically if the Palestinian death toll increased to 60,000 under a Harris presidency, and it increased to 150,000 under a Trump presidency, would you have any preference for one administration over the other if you could go back in time, or do you believe the 90,000+ death difference is meaningless? I'd genuinely like to know your answer to this question because to me it's like telling someone there's no difference between having one leg chopped off and both legs chopped off, and then hearing from some smug person in the back saying "how about we don't chop any legs off?" like it's the idea of the century that nobody has ever thought of before.
Neither option is acceptable and the genocidal US Empire needs to be torn down.
Secondly, please explain how there is a provable material difference in the ongoing genocide, beyond mere words. Congress is sending bombs and Israel is using them, and the DNC has affirmed their support for Israel.
Thirdly, the current death toll is already estimated to surpass 150,000 either way.
Try listening to what I am actually saying then, instead of imagining it and going with your feelings. I haven’t once said “not voting will stop genocide.”
I didn't accuse you of saying "not voting will stop genocide". I said it's absurd for folks like you to seriously put genocide on the average voter and claim they will "continue to let genocide happen" (your words, directly quoted).
I said “voting will not stop genocide.”
Okay, so not voting will not stop genocide either-- so why do believe those who vote Dems are "letting genocide happen" if you're simultaneously acknowledging that not voting won't stop genocide either? It's almost as if these people understand that genocide will happen regardless, but they also understand the death toll under a Trump administration would be higher than under a Harris administration.
Neither option is acceptable and the genocidal US Empire needs to be torn down.
Yeah that's great and all, but we're faced with essentially one of two options. Not voting or throwing your vote away simply aids a Republican win and it's exactly why folks like Jill Stein are adored by Trump and Putin.
Thirdly, the current death toll is already estimated to surpass 150,000 either way.
So you believe that if under a Trump administration there were say, 50% more deaths in Palestine, those lives are irrelevant or meaningless? Like come on, you completely dodged my question and it was a pretty simple question-- are you okay with a higher death toll under a Trump administrator, or do you seriously believe the death toll would remain the same or lower?
Frankly I'm sick and tired of folks like you jumping in discussions like this and then giving half-assed answers. It's a waste of everyone's time. This is purity politics from people who don't really care if another 400,000 Palestinians die under a Trump administration, just as long as they can smugly say "not my fault, I didn't vote for Trump". And if Harris wins and another 100,000 Palestinians die instead of 400,000, they'll say "not my fault, I didn't vote for Harris" and act like that's the highest moral high ground imaginable.
I didn't accuse you of saying "not voting will stop genocide". I said it's absurd for folks like you to seriously put genocide on the average voter and claim they will "continue to let genocide happen" (your words, directly quoted).
I put genocide on those justifying the current system and refusing to lift a finger to stop it.
Okay, so not voting will not stop genocide either-- so why do believe those who vote Dems are "letting genocide happen" if you're simultaneously acknowledging that not voting won't stop genocide either? It's almost as if these people understand that genocide will happen regardless, but they also understand the death toll under a Trump administration would be higher than under a Harris administration.
Genocide will happen regardless if libs do what libs do and go to brunch for 2 years until it's time to vote again.
Yeah that's great and all, but we're faced with essentially one of two options. Not voting or throwing your vote away simply aids a Republican win and it's exactly why folks like Jill Stein are adored by Trump and Putin.
Curious why you erase what I advocated for, ie organizing and building up pressure.
So you believe that if under a Trump administration there were say, 50% more deaths in Palestine, those lives are irrelevant or meaningless? Like come on, you completely dodged my question and it was a pretty simple question-- are you okay with a higher death toll under a Trump administrator, or do you seriously believe the death toll would remain the same or lower?
No, that's absolutely not what I said. I'll do you one better - are you okay with a higher death toll under the Kamala administration, or do you seriously believe the death toll would remain the same or lower? There, now you have an irrelevant bad-faith hypothetical to tangle with.
Frankly I'm sick and tired of folks like you jumping in discussions like this and then giving half-assed answers. It's a waste of everyone's time. This is purity politics from people who don't really care if another 400,000 Palestinians die under a Trump administration, just as long as they can smugly say "not my fault, I didn't vote for Trump". And if Harris wins and another 100,000 Palestinians die instead of 400,000, they'll say "not my fault, I didn't vote for Harris" and act like that's the highest moral high ground imaginable.
Nice, you're already trying to push 100,000 dead Palestinians as a "victory" instead of doing anything at all to stop it.
Nice, you’re already trying to push 100,000 dead Palestinians as a “victory” instead of doing anything at all to stop it.
Do you know how quotation marks work? You quote something that someone else said, and you don't quote something that a person didn't say. It's a very simple concept and yet you seem to heavily rely on putting words in peoples mouths and claiming stupid shit like "you're letting genocide happen by voting but also it's gonna happen whether you vote or not but also I have moral high ground for reasons". Men like you are so exhausting and heavily rely on strawman arguments because you're bad at listening.
What's your solution then? Sit around sniffing your own farts and let the fascists win?
nobody has the right answers; but we all know what the wrong ones are because we keep doing them and here we are.
we all know what the wrong ones are
You mean letting Trump/Bush/etc win because Biden/Obama/Clinton didn't give us everything we wanted fast enough? At least there's progress under Democrats.
Democrats aren't perfect by any means, but both sides aren't the same either and in our current system one or the other is going to win.
didn’t give us everything we wanted fast enough
it's more like didn't give us anything we needed.
Also 0.8 worth of good presidents out of 46 is worse odds than a broken clock but, atleast with a broken clock, you're guaranteed 2 good intervals on a regular bases.
and that's why they're not the right answers; it's a systems that intentionally setup to give you shittiest choices and forces you to abide by them to make sure that you never get a good president; merely a very slightly less worse one while simultaneously teaching you to despise anyone who tries to point this out.
meanwhile other places have much better voting systems and our system has so americanized you that you don't believe that those systems can also work here or, atleast, you've been conditioned to believe that we MUST select either a republican or a democrat.
You mean letting Trump/Bush/etc win because Biden/Obama/Clinton didn't give us everything we wanted fast enough? At least there's progress under Democrats.
Democrats are not giving us anything we wanted, there is no progress, just continued Capitalist decline.
No, that seems to be what you want to do, the fascists are already winning and you still cling to the endless right-wing slide.
I advocate for organizing. Join an org, be that a union, a party, a Mutual Aid center, whatever. Get organized and start building dual power. If all you do is vote once every four years, then you are part of the reason why the Democrats continue to slide to the right as the GOP pushes farther to the right.
You can do all of that and still vote for the blue team.
We all need to organize and work to strengthen unions. We need to do that. So the choice is just do we want to do that under a blue team presidency or a red team/MAGA presidency
Blue team seems much more currently amenable to unionization. So that seems like it would be the superior conditions for us to organize under.
You can do all of that and still vote for the blue team.
Sure, you can vote for the less extreme fascists. The problem that we run into is that liberals just vote and then go to brunch for 2 years before voting again. Leftist movements died down under Biden and the Democrats moved to the right, no longer is Medicare for All being pushed for, as an example.
We all need to organize and work to strengthen unions. We need to do that. So the choice is just do we want to do that under a blue team presidency or a red team/MAGA presidency
Sure. Unions would be a good start, though not even close to sufficent. The Nordics are very highly unionized, yet still see sliding worker protections and Capitalist decay.
Blue team seems much more currently amenable to unionization. So that seems like it would be the superior conditions for us to organize under.
Are they really? Some members of Blue team, sure, but it's important to recognize that unions come from force, not from government protections. The dems crack down on any worker movements just as quickly as the Reps.
Actual organization among the workers is far more important.
I agree. But the question is just do we want to organize under the blue team or under the red team/MAGA team.
I agree those are bad options. And I agree with the concern that many libs will just check out and go back to brunch if Kamala wins.
So it depends if you think Trump would be so bad that he would remove the little that is left of the ability of the working class to organize. We would become similar to Hungary under Orban in terms of centralized power with a deferential judiciary. That seems like it would be worse than 4 more years of Biden+'s blue team nonsense
I agree. But the question is just do we want to organize under the blue team or under the red team/MAGA team.
Neither team being in power will fundamentally change the dynamic of the labor struggle, states will continue to lean in the direction they are and class warfare will accelerate.
I agree those are bad options. And I agree with the concern that many libs will just check out and go back to brunch if Kamala wins.
Unfortunately, this has already happened under Biden, and some liberals are even pushing against leftism harder than fascism at this point.
So it depends if you think Trump would be so bad that he would remove the little that is left of the ability of the working class to organize. We would become similar to Hungary under Orban in terms of centralized power with a deferential judiciary. That seems like it would be worse than 4 more years of Biden+'s blue team nonsense
If Trump was that powerful, then the vote won't matter in the first place. The dynamics won't change. Conditions may falter a bit more, but the Dems and the Reps are still continuing the same trajectory.
You won’t be able to stop the genocide regardless of who you vote for. And, from what I understand, you propose people vote for some third party that will never win, but leech votes from democrats so the republicans can win, right?
Yeah, that’s a really smart choice right there
You won’t be able to stop the genocide regardless of who you vote for. And, from what I understand, you propose people vote for some third party that will never win, but leech votes from democrats so the republicans can win, right?
Wrong on both counts, sorry. We can stop genocide, voting won't do it though.
What do to think will?
Organizing and directly contesting. Build up dual power and risk upsetting the current system. The Black Panthers did it, John Brown did it, MLK Jr. did it.
Organizing and directly contesting. Build up dual power and risk upsetting the current system. The Black Panthers did it, John Brown did it, MLK Jr. did it.
Can you be more specific? The examples you have 1) operated on a far more localized scale and dealt with domestic politics compared to international conflict between Israel/Palestine and all the countries involved behind the scenes and 2) The Black Panthers accomplished a great deal, but their overall goals did not come to fruition in the end. Racism is still rampant in America, police brutality against black people is still largely ignored excluding the occasional major outrage (i.e. George Floyd), and the American system is about as capitalist as it gets so the BPs socialist agenda didn't take root at all.
Once Newton and Hampton were gone, so were the Black Panthers. Most leftist organizing I see is unfortunately centralized around a handful of leaders whose followers believe are irreplaceable, which IMO is not a desirable trait for anything involving continuity. Everyone dies, some earlier than others, and having no effective contingency plan is a blunder so many political movements have.
Beyond that, government surveillance is beyond what we've ever seen before. Organizing political action, especially radical political action, gets shut down faster than ever and we don't often talk about it in leftist spaces because usually all that happens is someone gets their door kicked in, arrested, charged, convicted, and basically told "we've put you through one horrible traumatic experience, think carefully if you want to go through this again". We can beat out chests and say "I'm not afraid of shit" but I think the vast majority of leftists a) haven't been in prison and b) haven't a clue about what it's like in there. Prison's no joke and frankly I completely understand why regular ass people, especially those with dependants like kids, are extremely reluctant to organize in any way that could impact their employment/ability to support their loved ones. We live in an age where cracking a joke about Trump can result in a bunch of freak Republicans doing everything they can to get you fired.
Can you be more specific? The examples you have 1) operated on a far more localized scale and dealt with domestic politics compared to international conflict between Israel/Palestine and all the countries involved behind the scenes and 2) The Black Panthers accomplished a great deal, but their overall goals did not come to fruition in the end. Racism is still rampant in America, police brutality against black people is still largely ignored excluding the occasional major outrage (i.e. George Floyd), and the American system is about as capitalist as it gets so the BPs socialist agenda didn't take root at all.
Join an org, like PSL or FRSO, whatever it takes. Learn from the past and don't repeat mistakes, but learn from successes as well.
Once Newton and Hampton were gone, so were the Black Panthers. Most leftist organizing I see is unfortunately centralized around a handful of leaders whose followers believe are irreplaceable, which IMO is not a desirable trait for anything involving continuity. Everyone dies, some earlier than others, and having no effective contingency plan is a blunder so many political movements have.
Can you be more specific?
Beyond that, government surveillance is beyond what we've ever seen before. Organizing political action, especially radical political action, gets shut down faster than ever and we don't often talk about it in leftist spaces because usually all that happens is someone gets their door kicked in, arrested, charged, convicted, and basically told "we've put you through one horrible traumatic experience, think carefully if you want to go through this again". We can beat out chests and say "I'm not afraid of shit" but I think the vast majority of leftists a) haven't been in prison and b) haven't a clue about what it's like in there. Prison's no joke and frankly I completely understand why regular ass people, especially those with dependants like kids, are extremely reluctant to organize in any way that could impact their employment/ability to support their loved ones. We live in an age where cracking a joke about Trump can result in a bunch of freak Republicans doing everything they can to get you fired.
You should read organizational and revolutionary theory. Capitalism and Imperialism are unsustainable, revolution will come whether leftists prepare for it or not.
Can you be more specific?
Are you familiar with the history of the Black Panthers and their demise? Because if not, I'm really not interested in giving you a history lesson. Their movement failed because it primarily revolved around two people/personalities that, once deceased, failed to be replaced by anyone viewed by supporters as adequate. So when you give the Black Panthers as an example of building up dual power to upset the system, I have a hard time taking that seriously when that's not at all what happened.
You should read organizational and revolutionary theory. Capitalism and Imperialism are unsustainable, revolution will come whether leftists prepare for it or not.
I've read plenty of theory and I'm tired of leftists who have their head stuck in theory instead of reality. Are you prepared to go to prison for your political action? If your answer is yes, I gotta ask-- have you ever actually been in prison? Because I think a lot of chest-beating leftists, especially the way they conduct themselves to people that disagree with them, would be in very a very harsh reality check if they went to prison. And I'm not talking about a holding cell.