Asklemmy

43681 readers

2195 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

249

Why are so many Pro-Palestine (I am pro-Palestine and anti-genocide) Americans refusing to vote for Harris due to her stance on Israel? (discuss.tchncs.de)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

490 comments fedilink hide all child comments

As the title states I am confused on this matter. The way I see it, the USA has a two party system and in the next few weeks they’re either going to have Trump or Harris as president, come inauguration day. With this in mind doesn’t it make sense to vote for the person least likely to escalate the situation even more.

Giving your vote to an independent or worse not voting at all, just gives more of a chance for Trump to win the election and then who knows what crazy stuff he will allow, or encourage, Israel to get away with.

I really don’t get the logic. As sure nobody wants to vote for a party allowing these heinous crimes to be committed, but given you’re getting one of them shouldn’t you be voting for the one that will be the least horrible of the two.

Please don’t come at me with pro-Israeli rhetoric as this isn’t the post for that, I’m asking about why people would make such choices and I’m not up for debate on the Middle East, on this post, you can DM me for that.

Edit: Bedtime here now so will respond to incoming comments in the morning, love starting the day with an inbox full 😊.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I think is actually kind of nice.

I mean of all species living on earth, human is the only species that would consider genocide a bad thing. Some random plant on prehistoric ages would just produce oxygen an cause a mass extinction without sweating it.

And for most human history Humans would actually try to genocide others.

At least now there is people who is anti-genocide. And it's probably a growing stance.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Humpback whales have been seen interfering with killer whales that are attacking seals or dolphins. Maybe they don't see it as "genocide" as they don't have a concept of the idea, but there is at least some evidence of another species upset at, and willing to stop, the killing of another. I think by that logic, if they could understand the concept of genocide, they would consider it a bad thing.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 20 hours ago

I certainly doubt it. They would probably just be protecting themselves and their own kind.

If a humpback whale have experiences of killing whales attacking them or their offspring probably thought it was a good idea to do as possible to interfere with them. Probably would carry a genocide on orcas giving the chance.

I don't think it is out of mercy. Mercy is something that is learning growing in a better environment that any animal growing in the brutal natural world.