[flagged]
All of this is out weighed by the "didn't vote" but democrat didn't vote was larger than before. If this issue stimulated a vote boycott it could have affected democrat voters more.
I suspect that whole thing was driven by some clever folks trying to get Trump into power.
I never got a rationale when asked, which still perplexes me considering these people weren’t fans of the republicans in this past race.
https://www.npr.org/2025/03/03/nx-s1-5249686/arab-muslim-vot...
Trump was an isolationist in his first term, and his campaign used this to convince muslim voters that he'd continue this in his second term and withdraw support for Israel.
Instead, he announced a US funded ethnic cleansing campaign in the region, and the cornerstone of his budget is funding to illegally deploy the US Military in the US. One of their main goals is rounding up "anti-semetics" which seems to mean anyone that's against genocide, especially this exact group of Trump voters.
My suspicion is that they fell for it because they're less familiar with US politics, either due to a language barrier or due to being 1st and 2nd generation immigrants without grandparents that remember the McCarthy trials, or the US deporting jews back to Nazi Germany.
I mean, the whole thing went down under the Biden Presidency. If he thought getting those votes was important he couldve shut it down, it wouldnt even be the first time a president did that. Reagan reigned them in all the way in the 80s.
It was also funny to see democrats suddenly realizing that Arab Americans vote republican. They always have and they always will. Just like how Latino Americans, and generally most immigrants, will always vote republican too. Arab Americans are very culturally conservative. They would rather see a 100 Gazas than accepting that 2 gay men can get married.
I went to eat out at a Guatemalan restaurant the other day and they had a poster for a right-wing ultranationalist paramilitary group.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mano_Blanca
Is it shocking? Not at all. I have heard the same violent rhetoric from petit bourgeois in Colombia and in the USA because the exact same forces of reaction in the USA have been at work globally for decades.
> Its almost funny to watch when a leftist realises that immigrants are right-leaning
The claim that all immigrants are right-leaning is a generalization.
Yes, agreed. I probably saved a few words too much on that sentence. I should have thrown a "some" or "many" in there. OTOH, as a non-native speaker, I will loose every argument that ends up in native-speaker pedantery, so I am kind of unimpressed.
In wealthy urban areas there are a lot of liberals who don't have a materialist basis for their views and are hypocritical, so the more reactionary on this site think that these pearl-clutching libs are the end all be all of left-wing politics. Meanwhile actual leftists dont really differentiate between ethnic supremacists and YIMBY liberals because they both ultimately support the same outcomes.
I am also from a petit bourgeois background but being younger I think it was very clear that the direction we were heading in was not sustainable. There is no path that allows for me to have stable finances (enough money to buy a house and pay for my parents retirement) and also be spiritually fulfilled. The only way I can save up the money to take care of the people around me is to sell my mind, body, and soul to the machine (even then who says the current administration wont tank the stock market and erase all my savings). I think even for Gen X'ers this was the case, it was just easier to keep their heads down since the polycrisis was still a few decades out and would not yet seem "real".
Even as a relatively successful zoomer I have to walk a fine line of grinding away at my day job, and doing the community-oriented work that fulfills me spiritually. The market signals that stuff like home ownership and having a family is not "efficient", so I don't bother.
Anyways, there's a real disconnect and I'm not sure what it would take for the older and wealthier folks on here to open their eyes. If history is anything to go by they most likely never will.
I think there are plenty of wealthy folks who understand the benfits of living in a more equal society, and that would gladly pay their fair share to live in such a society. The problem is they are not enough, and worse yet the middle class and what remains of the working class are actively pushing propaganda that goes directly against their own interests (perhaps because they think that one day they will too be millionaires).
But the material interests of the wealthy align with the status quo that allowed them to acquire their wealth. This becomes less true as the "polycrisis" of climate change intensifies, since at some point there will be no future to enjoy, regardless of how much money you have.
Also I will argue that the reactionary propaganda comes from the top-down, not the bottom-up.
The reactionary propaganda does come from the top. Case in point: Elons “X the everything app” and him promoting afd - one has to wonder why he cares so much about immigrants. The answer seems simple, if they are not the target, he is.
I agree with everything you said, of course there are factions among the wealthy. Some want to keep doing business as usual liberalism, I think others anticipate climate change and want to pivot to a more violent system that allows them to horde even more wealth.
At the end of the day though, all factions of the wealthy have solidarity with each other when it matters.
If you're not happy about those things, stop telling everyone who disagree with you how stupid they are and how they're literal Nazis. Then at least some of those who disagree with you on some issues will be less driven to vote for the people whose positions appall you.
Depending on where you are from, this could absolutely be true, as "elitist" and insulting as it might be. Well, fascist is more appropriate than Nazi because Nazi is superset of fascism with a heavy anti-semitic element, and I'm not aware of many rabidly anti-semitic parties in the mainstream in many countries.
Their methods and their positions make them fascist, not their support or lack thereof for opposing positions.
Say, a coup attempt. Or someone in power talking about ignoring term limits. Or getting bribes and favouritism for corporations (corporatism is a heavy component of fascism). Or silencing opposition with brutal and illegal methods (such as kidnapping in the middle of the night by unmarked and masked men). Those all scream fascism, regardless of the fact that e.g. the person in charge of healthcare is an antivaxxer.
Scratch a little deeper on the things popular Republican politicians and members of the current administration have been saying and promoting for the last few years.
Conspiratorial movements almost always end up at "it's The Jews", and so do theirs.
If you see talk about their opponents engaging in dark "rituals" involving child murder or abuse, you can be 100% sure you've found one that'll get you there. It's just blood libel, keeping reading and listening and you'll see that they're fully at that point before you've had to do much work. It's tedious.
So for now, I'm billing them as fascist.
Many say it works because liberals now represent the professional-managerial class, who often come across to workers/poor as infuriatingly patronizing, slick and humiliating. Whereas many don't know who owns their big corporation, so they don't inspire such visceral feelings.
While some may argue that liberals aren't leftists (but are rather good-cop), nevertheless many leftists do this too. The dynamics are explained in Thomas Frank's book "Listen, Liberal", David Graeber's essay "Army of Altruists: On the alienated right to do good", and Participatory Economics's coverage of the coordinator class.
Thanks for the pointer, that was a very interesting read.
"Vibes" and populism drive voter behavior. Cheap populist messages will always resonate at least as well as even an ultra-simplified "it's all of us versus the owners of capital". Us vs. Them is what populism is, but getting the right Them according to class consciousness is really hard (and it'll constantly be at risk of someone subverting it to something else, probably "the Jews and other child-sacrificing Evil Cultists in their sway" because it's usually that for some stupid fucking reason).
Even Bernie had to settle for the shitty and inaccurate "the 1%" to get even a little traction with class consciousness on a mass scale.
Right now outright conspiratorial thinkers are ascendant and doing the usual thing of being some of the elites (the capitalists) we should all be against, while painting everything as the fault of other elites (how are they differently elite? Well, follow their stupid threads of "evidence" and you always end up at blood libel, truly, it's so consistent that it's boring)
well yea, and Marx is a taboo, nothing new there. Those ideas can be repackaged though, in a way that won't make people foam at the mouth because of the "communist sounding words" (thinking of gary's economics for example). I agree with what you said, it's easier to package an "Anti-something" message, as we see with all the anti-immigrant messaging in the US and Europe, the Anti-Billionaire movement still has not gained even a fraction of the traction though.
Given that context, do you really not understand that you shouldn't bite the hand that might feed you?
Immigrants are never going to feed the poor and disadvantaged.
The oh-so-bad-and-evil rich people might at least sometimes.
I never said rich people are bad and evil, just that they should pay their fair share. For their own good too, to live in a more harmonious society, but maybe this is better.
Here's a quote from the poll: 以下是民意调查中的一段引述：
When Biden 2020 voters cast a ballot for someone besides Harris in 2024 were asked “Which one of the following issues was MOST important in deciding your vote?” they selected:
29% - [■■■■■■■■■■]
24% - The economy
12% - Medicare and Social Security
11% - Immigration and border security
10% - Healthcare
9% - Abortion policy
5% - Don’t knowAs if the US were responsible for the whole world. Hey Megalomania, nice to meet you.
I think most people who are complaining about this are not expecting the US to be responsible for anything and would be pretty happy if the US just sat out.
The size of the Gaza conflict in absolute terms is entirely irrelevant, it easily could've been only 1 person, dominating the media.
Looking at those graphs I think one sees a war started by the weaker force and losing badly. A genocide in the same way as a bully being smacked in his face is bullying.
Strange statement. Facts have everything to do with graphs. If you ignore facts, then your statements are empty of all meaning.
This is something I noticed a long time ago.
for example, here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42790465
The author collected the reasons why Americans did not vote and analyzed all the not-about-genocide reasons, topics deemed inappropriate for discussion were self-censored by the author
that's a very interesting phenomenon, in Westworld, the hosts defensively disregard any evidence that challenges their true existence to prevent their worldview from collapsing:
"doesn't look like anything to me"
truly a great series
the Palestinian genocide is a fake genocide, it is propaganda pushed by Chinese and Russian to make Israel and the US looks bad
Russia has a tentative, informal truce with Israel on this issue, a 'you get atrocities in Palestine and we get atrocities elsewhere' kind of deal, and China aims to look neutral while supporting Israel for profit, e.g. in the Haifa harbour.
3% of israeli jews would consider it immoral to ethnically cleanse the Gaza strip according to recent polls. It's a thoroughly genocidal society, as is obvious to anyone looking at israeli press and television. The israeli state is also very, very aggressive towards its neighbours, occupying parts of several of them, acting in breach of a peace agreement with another, participating in military exercises as a threat to yet another, and so on. It can do this due to US bullying of allies and enemies alike.
Soldiers in the IDF publicly admit to and document atrocities they're committing, voluntarily, which is well known and easy to confirm. I usually recommend looking through material collected by ytirawi and ireallyhateyou on xcancel.com, because it only takes a few seconds to start seeing photos of inexcusable acts and rhetoric.
Only because folks who refused to vote for Kamala said they could not stand her support of Israel policies :-) Like poor voters in the Midwest, you can always count on a certain electorate, to vote against their own interests and what they care about...
Remind me again: how many black parties had representation in apartheid South Africa?
You are confused because Israel HAS A apartheid state: the settlements (a small part of Israel in total). But that's not the same as Israel IS A apartheid state.
If you can't separate HAS A from IS A you will fail your Object Oriented Programming 101 course, but no one seems to notice it when talking politics :P
>20% of the population of Israel are Palestinians with full rights. full rights to be evicted and have their homes demolished. https://www.newarab.com/news/land-ours-bedouins-fight-explus...
> full rights to be evicted and have their homes demolished
That case is being tried in courts. Such an action against blacks in South Africa would never have been in a court. Your sources prove my point.
"Resistance" oh please. Hamas is a genocidal terrorist organization. DESPITE this Israel gave them Gaza to rule over themselves. What did they do? Steal from their own people, fire missiles weekly. And STILL Israel showed patience. There was a one-sided cease fire before 7/10, Hamas kept firing. Then after 7/10 the patience with Gaza came to an end.
https://omalley.nelsonmandela.org/cis/omalley/OMalleyWeb/03l...
As was suffrage, the bantustans were in large part a solution to the risk that voting would change the balance in the national parliament. What you could vote for and what the dominant group could do to your candidates was used to reproduce and reinvent apartheid, similar to how it is used in Israel.
Another similarity is that the dominant groups in both societies are propped up by protestant christians. Yet another is using colonial practices in other countries to fund the local economy, like emerald mines in Zambia in the case of South Africa and diamonds being a main export of Israel.
Legally Israel is engaged in apartheid, which is a crime. I'd argue this in itself makes the state of Israel illegitimate, i.e. armed and other resistance towards it is either a moral obligation or at least permissible, that is, the mainstream position of early liberalism.
He didn't even go as far as condemn the radical parties that you mentioned. Absolutely no red line, or anything. Just complete carte blanche. Again, even Bush or Reagan didn't let Israel do whatever they want with no political repercussions. Israel knew back then that some lines couldn't be crossed without losing American support. With Biden, they did whatever they wanted, said whatever they wanted and took advantage of that.
80% of israeli jews in Israel approve of genocidal treatment of palestinians in the Gaza strip in the form of ethnic cleansing, while 14% believe the public statements about this from world leaders to be a distraction and 3% consider it immoral.
The broad israeli opposition, i.e. the large demonstrations in Tel Aviv and elsewhere and the politicians that support them, disagree with the government in which order to do things, not on whether the palestinians should be treated genocidally. They want to make the palestinians 'freyer', suckers, by signing any deal that brings israeli prisoners and hostages back and then continuing the genocidal process anyway. Meanwhile the government considers the prisoners and hostages better positioned in captivity, hence why they have been refusing negotiations, and then broke the ceasefire deal they went into earlier this year.
Well that made no sense. Genocide is killing people. Ethnic cleansing is moving people. Those are extremely different things. The entire Muslim world has already done a 99% ethnic cleansing of Jews, and where is the outrage? That's 10x the number of people that live in Gaza.
The state of Israel systematically destroys educational institutions, libraries, archives, historical monuments and buildings, cemeteries, homes, hospitals, agrarian land, and more, according to leading politicians and pundits with the explicit intent to erase the palestinians from the land they're indigenous to. Israeli palestinians are called "arab" as part of this policy.
The ambition to establish a zionist colony and move the region's jews there caused a lot of outrage at the time, in part because the zionist movement had engaged in terrorism and other atrocities for decades already and wasn't exactly received as a welcome innovation in western antisemitism. It also came right after the influence of the previous innovation had subsided, i.e. nazi antisemitism.
US and british planes moved most of the jews from Iraq, Yemen and so on, so claiming that is was done by "the entire Muslim world" is blatantly false. In Indonesia the plight and flight of the jews was mainly caused by imperial Japan, who put pretty much the entire jewish community in labour camps. Today indonesian antisemitism is strongly connected to israeli atrocities and the antisemitic conflation of judaism and the state of Israel that zionists insist on.
But according to you the ethnic cleansing of the Jews was okay because it somehow wasn't a genocide right? Otherwise why would you be okay with what Israel is doing right now after saying that what israel is doing is just like the cleansing of the Jews?
And going back to the original point, are you saying that voting against the administration that enabled the gen- I mean ethnic cleansing of your population is somehow voting against your self interests? Talk about complete partisan blindsidedness.
Morocco in particular didn't have an explicit state policy of ethnically cleansing Jews, but "treated badly" is a bit of an understatement, considering the pogroms and the government policy of essentially holding Jews for ransom.
So yeah, I agree that Jews were basically pushed to leave, and at some point were just directly kicked out and cleansed out of a lot of Muslim countries.
I just find it weird to justify Israel's actions by saying that what they are doing is "just ethnic cleansing" which is basically what the comment I was replying was doing. Not only is it super weird, but it's also telling to only apply that logic to Muslims. Can Jews just go and massacre Germans and Europeans because of the Holocaust? Then why justify the wholesale destruction of a Muslim city with that?
But since you refuse to explain why you want to make this distinction and how it applies to the treatment of the palestinians it doesn't seem like care, it seems more like you want to bikeshed.
The jews in Egypt didn't have much problems with their neighbours until nazism and zionism arrived.
'The bad muslims mistreated the jews when they came under influence of german thought, typical muslims, a european would never'.
Jews lived in Morocco since the first century AD, with the exception of the Fez massacre in 1033, mainly in peace. It's where jews could find immediate refuge when the christians drove them out of al-Andalus. 1948 onwards there were anti-jewish riots in Morocco, in response to jews leaving to presumably take part in the zionist atrocities in Palestine and the state of Israel.
Today anti-jewish and anti-zionist sentiment in Morocco is typically tied into anti-monarchist views, the king is perceived to be a traitor and possibly controlled by some supposed jewish conspiracy. You'll find a rather clear expression of this in e.g. Ahmed Rami, the infamous exiled antisemite, who combines distinctly nazi antisemitism with a moroccan muslim nationalism.
noun
the mass expulsion or killing of members of one ethnic or religious group in an area by those of another
You realize that the deaths that happened in Gaza are probably more important than whatever grievances you have against Trump for some people? We are talking about tens of thousands of deaths, directly enabled by the previous administration (not only politically but with direct military shipments of the bombs that killed said people). But Muslim lives are typically completely worthless for a large part of the American population so your comment doesn't really surprise me.
And I'm not sure what you mean by doubling down. Biden was basically letting Israel do whatever it wanted to do. Absolutely did nothing for more than a year of bloodshed. Doing anything (like direct discussions with Hamas, bypassing israel) is better than just doing nothing. Even if Trump is a drooling, die hard supporter of Israel.
Like if Trump did what Biden let Israel do, I don't think the Muslim population would've been surprised. But even the reddest/war hawks of presidents(Reagan, Bush) never let Israel just have a complete carte blanche. Yet Biden, a supposed ally of the community, did.
Again, this complete disregard for Muslim life could've been expected from Bush or whatever. But even he wouldn't have let Israel go this far without some sort of faint condemnation or call for restraints. Biden didn't. Especially since Biden wasn't some sort of toothless president, we saw how he reacted to the Russian invasion, and how firm he was against Russia. I guess it showed how Ukrainian lives seemed to be worth much more for his administration, whereas the lives of Gaza civilians wasn't even worth a stern condemnation.
No conflict of interests there.
Hmm..
Is any politician that supports Israel to gain support from Jewish voters pushing for Judaism or Jewish (religious) values? Do you think that Judaism, the actual religion, is any more progressive with say, feminism, than Islam?
And I don't know if women have it particularly worse in Turkey than in Israel. Same goes for gay people, though I'd agree that I'd rather be gay in Israel that in Turkey or any other Muslim country. Not sure why that matters in the context of comparing the religions themselves though.
Biden is a self-described Zionist, so his politics in that regard are crystal clear.
Biden was in charge the entire time if he wanted people to think his party was better on Gaza he shouldve been better on Gaza. They dealt with a massive protest wave in blue staes and they told everyone who cared about Gazans to get fucked, then they lost. Its not hard to understand.