Leopards Ate My Face

Are you reading any of these and actually not noticing the difference between what's being said before and after the election?

From the article:

In the past year, about 4,555 Palestinians have been displaced in the West Bank after Israeli forces demolished their homes.

Now, I'm no mathematician but surely you understand that's orders of magnitude fewer than have been displaced in Gaza, right? Please?

You are arguing with absolute liars. It's like people only thinking this mess accelerated under Biden (who is the most paid politician by AIPAC) is just a coincidence. As if Israel hasn't been expanding into some of the most important Palestinian cities while the world focuses on Gaza.

It's the same people who say what can Biden possibly do while funding their military operations. Trump sees the praise Biden is getting from Congress and actually thinks Biden must have been doing something right. Yet, somehow there was a good choice for people who want to see Palestine prosper (Those who pretend that Harris would do better because she doesn't shout her plans out like some cliché comic book villain).

But let's call Trump a huge liar and let's take his word at face value when it's convenient for us. I'm sure the Democrats who never learn a thing will be excited to lose the next election as well. Obviously, Trump won't be a good president but Democrats lost because they were seen as slightly less evil but with no charisma.

It's not us, everyone else is just stupid. - Democrats

With all respect, I had to chuckle at this as it reminded myself of me, a quarter century-ish ago, when after having watched Colin Powell give his speech to the UN about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, I confidently supported it. Then, a kind socials studies teacher pointed out the retrospectively obvious, just because a government says it, doesn't make it true. But he did so without making me feel belittled or dumb so I'll try to pass on the favour.

I'd think of it though like when trump as President says there was massive electoral fraud, when Hungary/Belarus argues for denazifying Ukraine etc. Just because a government is saying something does not make it true.

In the case of South Africa, context is huge, so let me share that with you.

Since actual Apartheid, South Africa's been ruled for 30 uninterrupted years by the ANC, which wins largely on the basis of being A) Mandela's party and B) the symbol of anti-colonialism etc. In the last 15 or so years though, progress has pretty much stopped (the stats on indoor plumbing, electricity, youth unemployment etc are heart breaking) and they've started bleeding support especially to harder, more populist, vehemently anti white parties (the two main rivals argue for seizing any white farms) on the one side and the technocratic but "whitey" party, the DA on the other side. Coming into this year, the polls and election results were the worst that the ANC has ever suffered, leading to a humiliating, first ever, coalition government with the ANC and the DA.

Amidst this backdrop, Gaza happened. I cannot imagine an easier symbol of the ANC's anti-colonial roots than lobbying a very anti colonial case at the ICJ. All the benefits of identity politics and symbolism with almost zero cost. Especially when you consider the ANC almost certainly expected they were going to have to form an unpopular coalition government and to avoid burning the country down, would do so with whitey's colonial party. (And yes, Ramaphosa absolutely touted and campaigned on his government's cases at the ICJ.)

Edit: Sorry, Ramaphosa is the president of South Africa and leader of the ANC. Also, even without the domestic backdrop, you might consider their BRICS membership and what that entails.