this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2024
13 points (60.3% liked)

Socialism

5109 readers
43 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FrowingFostek@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Hopefully Harris's meeting with Uncommitted in Chicago will bring about some positive news for Palestinians. At the very least I would personally like to see an arms embargo.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Harris is currently second in command in the executive branch of the US government. Trump is a weird old guy convinced it’s still the 1980s.

I think that’s enough to answer the question?

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

In that case why not just keep protesting Joe Biden then since oh is the president?

Out of both candidates though I only see people protesting her about this and it's weird because Trump just wants to let Gaza be wiped off the map. At least Kamala Harris has called for peace.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Do you think protesting Trump would do any good? Protesting Biden?

Harris is the only one where protests might actually make a difference.

If you’re just upset, sure, protest all of them. But if the goal is positive change, protesting Harris is the only option that will work.

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

But she already agrees with you and she's not currently in a position to do anything. Why not let her get elected then give her a chance?

Joe Biden on the other hand is currently the president he can still do all kinds of things.

This really only seems to hurt Harris politically even though she can't do anything but talk right now. I know the right is also pushing some of this to try to make people not vote for her which is why I am wondering where it's coming from. The same thing they were doing with Biden when he was the candidate. Just seems odd considering she doesn't have any power over this yet really.

[–] loaExMachina@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

She already agrees with you

Does she tho? She hasn't really taken a strong stance on the subject, spouting both-sideisms while supporting Joe's genocidal policies. This is precisely why she appears swayable, but not swayed yet.

[–] freshcow@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Did you even read the post?

The more pressure there is to change course, the more likely it is Biden or Harris will have to do something or risk losing to Trump.

If they won't do or commit to do the things their voters are demanding of them, they deserve to be "hurt politically". What use is a politician who disregards the will of the people? If we can't draw a line at genocide, then what is the point of "lesser evil" voting?

Also I have seen zero evidence of anyone on the right speaking out against this administration's handling of Gaza.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

But she already agrees with you

If she agreed with me she would be calling Israel a fascist ethno-state that must be torn down and a new, single secular state built to represent both Palestinians and Israelis. She would call Biden a genocidal monster and cease all arms transfers.

She doesn't agree, because she is a Zionist.

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Calling for peace then sending a shit ton more weapons and money negates the first claim. They can't be trusted because we hear what they say then watch what they do

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

She didn't send shit. She's not in charge of that yet

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

She's part of the administration, it's her shit show too. And there is no indication she will change direction

[–] gramathy@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

Also because trump wont give a single fuck unless there’s money in it for him