LadyAutumn

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
mtf
[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago (9 children)

Correct. She is at fault in this situation for being an enthusiastic supporter of genocide. Not the Palestinian Americans who demanded better from the democratic party.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago (11 children)

Okay were going in circles but sure I will reiterate again, why not. Its incredible you can repeat it so many times and still not see how you're just punching down on Palestinian Americans at this point for literally no reason but western spite towards an ethnic minority group.

  1. The election is over. Your rage at them is based on a hypothetical alternate reality that does not and cannot exist.

  2. An equally possible hypothetical alternate reality is one where Kamala denounced Israel for committing the Palestinian genocide and committed to ending American involvement in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

  3. In that hypothetical reality the people who wouldn't vote for her due to her support of genocide would have instead voted for her.

It is therefore ludicrous that your best possible solution to this situation is for the genocide to persist but for Palestinian Americans to vote for it to continue. Instead of Kamala changing her stance of enthusiastic support for genocide. Which she could've done at any time. And which would've gotten all those people to vote for her. Your rage should be directed at her placing support for Zionism over the defeat of a fascist candidate. It was more important to her that the Palestinian genocide continued than it was for Donald Trump to lose the election.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 week ago (13 children)

And, again, the election is over. We could have had a "no genocide" candidate if Kamala Harris had chosen to do so. So ill ask again, why are you spitting at Palestinian Americans for refusing to support someone participating in the ethnic cleansing of their people, instead of the woman who refused to commit to ending American participation in the Palestinian genocide? If she had done that, those people would have voted for her.

We're talking about hypotheticals in either case. Your rage is fixated solely on people who wouldn't vote for her because of her support for the Palestinian genocide, instead of at her for supporting it in the first place. It doesn't make any sense. The end outcome wouldve been those people voting for her in either hypothetical scenario, so why are you so angry at them and not her when she had just as much of a say in this situation?

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I mean I'm not really referring to the specifics of her station presiding over the senate but she was the second most powerful political figure in the Biden administration. Directly involved in the national security council (which would have definitely meant her involvement in decision making with regards to the Palestinian genocide). The Vice President also often provides ideological support to the president in functions of state. She more than had a platform to speak out if she thought what Israel was doing was wrong. She couldn't his overrule his executive authority, but she was not under an obligation to support and agree with his actions in participating in the Palestinian genocide.

Nor was she obligated to campaign on continuing that genocide.

Giving money and arms to a genocidal state, yes, i would define as participating in genocide. Much like I would say companies who manufactured weapons used in past genocides did commit acts of genocide, even if they are not personally pulling the trigger.

The extent to which her direct involvement happened is debatable. Ill agree it is somewhat ceremonial but it isnt entirely and theres no way over the course of a year she was never at any point involved in the politics surrounding the genocide in Gaza. Providing ideological support for genocide can also be argued to be participating in it. "Israel has a right to defend itself." Is a simple statement made by a citizen, an endorsement of zionism and of genocide. On the scale of a powerful political figure (vp of the US is more powerful in terms of direct political power than the leaders of many nations) it is actively participating in genocide, or committing it. I don't draw a major distinction between the Nazis who wrote Der Stürmer and the SS. They were both pieces of an industry of genocide. In the same way I would argue the administration of Joe Biden was a major component of the industry of Palestinian genocide.

You can argue the nuances of this, sure. She also outright stated her intention to support the genocide going forward. If she hadn't already participated in genocide (doubtful) then unless you believe she had a secret hidden agenda of Palestinian liberation she would certainly have participated in it after being elected.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (17 children)

You are really tieing yourself up in knots to justify why its fine for you to continue to support a woman who committed genocide.

Again, why is so much of your ire and criticism directed at people criticizing her and not Kamala herself? You realize that if she had stopped passionately endorsing genocide and had chosen to stand with the Palestinians then those same people would have voted for her? So in one case youre demanding that many people vote for someone committing genocide against their people, and in the other we are demanding that a political party stop committing genocide. Why, in this situation, is the focus of this vitriol you feel directed at the former and not the latter?

No one here has been talking about voting for Trump, least of all me.

No seriously I want to know why your beef is with people protesting genocide and not the people committing it. Explain it. Election is over, I'm not talking about this from the perspective of voting. Election was over an eternity ago at this point. Why are you presently spitting at Palestinian Americans who refused to vote for Kamala and not Kamala herself for participating in genocide against Palestinians?

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yes my 2 year old account with a long, long history of criticizing the democratic party and more broadly western liberalism is a bot account. 🙄

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 1 week ago (25 children)

Mhm yeah and the whole year when Kamala and Joe could've stopped the genocide they did... sorry remind me what Joe Biden did while he was president and Israel was like "hey were gonna start massacring children and starving entire populations to death" ? Was it that he spreads their propaganda and hoaxes on an international stage for them? Was it that he continuously interfered with the ICC and the UN from doing ANYTHING to stop the genocide? Was it that he gave them all the money and guns and bombs they could ever dream of? Was it that he forced American universities to Crack down on anti zionist protests? Was it that he advocated essentially the same position as Donald Trump and was also very close personal friends with one of the most vile racists who's ever lived Netanyahu?

Remind me, did they stop the Palestinian genocide when they had the presidency? Or did it not literally start and flourish under them, while they kept it safe from any interference and fed the genocidal militias.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone -4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I am not an American citizen. So, no, I had no vote begin with.

The majority of people refusing to vote for Kamala due to her direct involvement in genocide were Palestinian Americans. They continued to fund and arm Israel as they continued to commit genocide. That absolutely makes them complicit in genocide, otherwise referred to as people committing genocide. If America had defied them in any substantial way then Israel would not have been able to continue committing genocide.

Kamala is a zionist, like Joe. There was no slim chance. Youre acting like its IMPOSSIBLE that she could've just said "I will stop American complicity in the Palestinian genocide and join the rest of the UN in demanding the arrest of war criminals in Israel". She could've done that 🙃 she could've done that at any time and yet youre seemingly more upset at a very small minority of people who wouldn't vote for her instead of her for not making a very basic decision to end American involvement in murdering Palestinian children?

Why isn't she, who was directly complicit in horrific acts of ethnic cleansing, the subject of your ire??

Its NEVER "If only Kamala had promised to end American involvement in the genocide of Palestinians we might not have had Trump, hope she's happy with herself." Instead its always "Wow fuck the Palestinian Americans who objected to voting for someone actively supplying and protecting the people murdering their entire culture. How dare they!!"

Its all just punching down. Thats all it is. Never demand anything from the democratic party, Kamala and Joe are so fragile they might just cry if you held them accountable for anything they do. Its the fault of those evil people who are anti genocide and demanded American stop committing acts of genocide. Giving the Nazis Zyklon B would be direct involvement in what they used it for, giving the IDF missiles as you watch them throw them at preschools makes you a direct part of their industry of genocide. And she could've ended that. She could've been like "nope fuck that fuck Israel fuck Zionism my administration will end American involvement in the Palestinian genocide and join the world in calling for the arrest of war criminals and the end of Israeli colonialism". Why is that not the desired outcome for you??

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We're talking about a very minor amount of priviledged people who have the spare property to rent. Even a room. Most impoverished people live in apartments. We do not own them, none of the income taken from us for rent is returned to us (unlike property ownership via a mortgage in which case value is literally returned to you), and we are only able to roomshare or sublet. Neither of which is what youre describing.

Not dismissing that middle class property owning families cant fall on hard times and have to fight to maintain the class position they occupy, just pointing out that the majority of us would do anything to have a home with a spare room to rent out. Thats a dream that many many people in my generation will never come close to achieving.

We shouldn't have to appeal to the class anxieties of middle class people. The fact that we suffer is a rallying cause enough. There are enough poor people to tear the system down if we all worked together. Its appealing to our shared suffering. Class consciousness and solidarity. Its recognizing our collective struggle and fighting back against power. It doesn't happen by making concessions to land owners. The threat of having to downsize is nothing compared with the threat of being homeless if you have to go to the hospital. The threat of losing everything if you get an injury. The impoverished and the marginalized live with guns aimed at every one of their vital organs. From birth to death under duress at the hands of the state. I dont really give a fuck what land owners are going through. We'd kill to have to downsize.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Its not the concept of ownership its the concept of private property. Of owning property that you do not occupy. Of housing belonging to anyone other than who presently lives there.

view more: ‹ prev next ›