ik that Biden isn’t re-running, but Kamala is basically the same from the macro pov

  • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    The high horse you’ve chosen to mount will get us more genocide and a whole host of new issues for queer people and people of color. Nobody will be giving you moral brownie points for allowing that to happen.

    Is your moral grandstanding worth the lives it’ll cost?

    • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Is your moral grandstanding worth the lives it’ll cost?

      You’re the one supporting a situation where innocent people are dying, right now. Is this the mythical ‘projection’ I hear people talk about?

      whole host of new issues for queer people and people of color

      This isn’t an either/or situation. We don’t have to sacrifice Palestinians (and Lebanese, and any other groups of civilians who become involved because Israel decides to do so) - including queer and of colour members of those communities - for our own safety.

      And, if we do: fuck it. I don’t deserve to be safe more than them. Take my safety and kill me. The human world is not one I want to live in any longer, if we must sacrifice innocents in one country just because of the accident of their birth.

       

      As you said elsewhere:

      Like when I asked one of my friends how he reconciled the idea that everyone who commits suicide goes to hell with the fact that our mutual friend committed suicide… He said God is omnibenevolent so logically him being in hell for eternity is a good thing.

      You clearly can’t reconcile the equivalent idea that people have to be killed just because of where they are. People should not be targeted with violence because they are queer, because they are of colour, or because they are in Palestine, Lebanon, or a similar country. Right?

      • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Because of how First Past The Post voting works, it is an either/or situation. It’s just how the math works out. Democrats splitting their votes across multiple candidates means their influence is divided by the same amount. Republicans effectively have zero division in their party, so Democrats can’t afford to not vote for Kamala if they don’t want Trump to get more people killed.

        I understand being disgusted by the lack of options, but the fact of the matter is you can prevent Trump from making it worse. Or you can sit on your ass while Trump gets more people killed.

          • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            Then stand by and watch him increase the death toll you claim to care about.

            I’ll vote for the candidate who wants a cease-fire, rather than let the one who wants Israel to “win” get into office.

            • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              15 hours ago

              I’ll vote for the candidate who wants a cease-fire

              I would definitely vote for a candidate who committed to pushing through a cease-fire, if I could vote. And if that person wasn’t Trump, because he’d be lying. And he wouldn’t say that anyway, because it’s not macho enough.

    • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      If you don’t like Trump then you should be begging Harris to act like she wants to get elected. Chastising voters because they don’t like your candidate is only going to make them dig in their heels.

      • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Thanks for saying this. All she has to do is say that it is illegal and immoral to kill innocents, and she will work to reign Israel in on this.

        If Israel can’t get rid of Hamas without committing state terrorism, they they just have to fucking stop.

    • zaza [she/they/her]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Is your relative safety worth the lives of thousands of Palestinians? You seem to think so. But always remember - “pragmatic” support for the “lesser evil” isn’t going to result in less genocide - it just teaches them exactly how many atrocities you’re willing to accept.

      When you tell politicians they can bomb any country, support any ethnic cleansing, and expand any war while still getting your vote as long as they wave a rainbow flag - you’re not preventing fascism, you’re just giving it a differently colored stamp of approval.

      The fact that you think “moral brownie points” are even part of the discussion only shows you view the lives of people as nothing more than a political tool.

      And look, if your moral framework tells you to vote blue - vote blue - but don’t let that be the end of it - go out and risk losing your freedom before there’s no-one left to risk theirs to save yours.

      • Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        Which of the two choices in the US presidential election aren’t supporting a genocide?

        Does your not voting for Harris end the genocide?

        • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Which of the two choices in the US presidential election aren’t supporting a genocide?

          This is my take. The U.S. government has already decided that it is going to support genocide. This topic is not up for a vote in 2024, the American public (i.e. voters) do not have the option of voting “no genocide please.”

          We really need some reform to our election system, because when the 2 parties both decide they want something we are railroaded. We need to get rid of the Electoral College and have ranked-choice or some other form of voting that makes 3rd party candidates viable.

      • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        I’m not just talking about our safety, I’m talking about the lives of Palestinians.

        Nobody on the left likes FPTP or anything else about our voting system, and we all know it’s bullshit, but this is what we have to work with. The moral brownie points you seem to be after won’t be found by crossing your arms and allowing Republicans to pour gasoline on the fire, and no amount of Democrats doing the same will outweigh the political BS that influenced the party to fund a genocide in the first place.

        Is your moral grandstanding worth risking more lives in Palestine (in addition to all of the issues it’ll introduce for our own marginalized citizens)?

        • zaza [she/they/her]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Again, vote for the lesser evil - just don’t forget they’re evil and even after the election cycle is over continue to employ direct action to force the complicit ruling class into actually doing something - instead of being able to rely on “vote blue no matter who” voters to get elected year after year while they’re slowing sliding to the right trying to win over conservatives.