General Politics Discussion (XI) [ARCHIVED] World • Page 1338

What word would you use for someone knowingly lying about a genocidal party's platform to try to get people to believe they are not genocidal

 

At some point, y’all are gonna have to figure something out in here because we’re in Godwin’s Law/Reductio ad Hitlerum territory at this point and this entire discourse is going nowhere good.

 

I disagree with a lot of what David says, but I feel like some times, his reasoning for things is clearly just trying to take the psychology and sociology of many humans in the US in general into account, and sometimes others in this thread seem to ignore that and think that it means he himself supports what those types of people believe. Idk. Maybe I'm overthinking things. It's been a long day and I haven't read everything super thoroughly.

 

I think saying it is okay to be excited over a party committing genocide is Hitlerian. Would it have been okay to be excited for the Autobahn? It's a good thing for Germany!

 

Also, again, if you think the democratic party is more likely to pursue an equitable ceasfire than the republican party I have a great big bridge in Brooklyn to sell you

 

I was gonna make a smart ass comment about it but I’ll just stick to ignoring it like I did when he said it lol. People say dumb or fucked up shit sometimes. It is what it is, as they say.

 

yeah it's kinda fucked up how the ongoing genocide isn't the top issue for people, especially since y'all live in the country abetting and actively supporting/funding it.

I guess "never again" only applies when the people being killed aren't brown.

 

Isn't this everyday?

 

You are a German in 1939 talking about Hitler's infrastructure programs

 

It’s easy to say anything from behind a keyboard, if you didn’t know.

 

people really need to stop talking about the genocide like they're in debate club. it's very real.

 

david you know we haven't had a bad (or to be fair much of any) interaction, so I don't have some weird axe to grind with you, but you literally are.

 

Do you want to talk to the Palestinian family with 8 children that my friends and I speak to at least weekly and got real in person threats over trying to fundraise for them this weekend? Do you want to see the creepshot a zionist took of my friends from 5 feet behind them and sent anonymously as a threat? Behind a keyboard, fuck off

 

David: die Audubon!!

 

Do you believe the Democratic Party is committing genocide? Do you believe that's something it's okay to overlook because of other, good policies of the Democratic Party? If the answer to both questions is yes, everything I've said is correct. If the answer to either of them is no, none of your posts here are coherent

 

Listen, David will talk about how we need to punch neo-zionists in the face 30 years from now.

Just gotta accept that.

 

You know where it's really easy to say anything from? Your home in America where you get to enjoy the benefits of the genocide in Gaza

 

I shouldn't have said Hitler but only because it gave you people an out to not engage and continue with your genocidaire cheerleading

 

please think of how the genocide impacts the polls instead of the real human costs and lives lost

 

The point I'm getting at is how the fuck do you people live with yourselves watching a speech at a rally where the ONLY PEOPLE THERE against genocide got assaulted and kicked out, and there were no consequences for the assaulters. You say "yeah they probably shouldn't have let that happen oh well, AOC kicked ass!" and that doesn't make you fucking vomit?

 

I disagree. Pointing out that millions of people tend to be selfish and self-centered in their priorities and care first and foremost about policy directly impacting them isn’t an endorsement or saying that’s “right”. Saying I believe shitting on those people being happy about anything good happening on the issues they care about, whether it’s abortion rights, women’s rights, health care, environmentalism, etc etc etc is, at the very least, an easy way to drive away people who otherwise agree with the stance that our govt should be doing something different, but aren’t prioritizing it in whatever their form of activism or engagement is, because people naturally retreat and get defensive when they feel attacked, is just my own observation of people and political behavior. And saying I think that’s a problem because I think we’d be able to get more pressure on electeds with more people instead of less being engaged on the issue is just based on historic successes of movements. None of that sounds very Hitlerian to me, I don’t think he was known for pragmatism on any issue, or cared very much about using anything but force and propaganda to recruit people to his ideas. I tend to think those are bad to use, though readily admit sometimes violence and propaganda are necessary and have been at least partially responsible for big jumps in progress in our history before.