Kamala’s flip from lovey dovey ‘I was that little girl’ stuff into hardcore imperialist rhetoric really has me thinking about just how insane Dem’s are. I mean they are arguably more logically incoherent than republicans.
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
216 points (98.6% liked)
politics
22175 readers
169 users here now
Protests, dual power, and even electoralism.
Labour and union posts go to [email protected].
Take the dunks to /c/strugglesession or [email protected].
[email protected] is good for shitposting.
Do not post direct links to reactionary sites.
Off topic posts will be removed.
Follow the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember we're all comrades here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Republicans and MAGA legitimately display more ideological malleability than the Dems.
Like, they’re going in another horrifying direction but it’s nonetheless true that the GOP are discarding the Neocons and Romney neoliberals while the Dems have decided imperialist genocide and war is the hill they will die on. There is an ideological rigidity to it.
yeah if there was any part of me that could have been convinced that maybe kamala winning might represent some kind of possibility of improving the situation of anyone, it was snuffed out by that fascist pageant
Kamala Harris: "It was just a debate!" awkward and uncomfortable laughter
This is an onion headline, right? 
Bombs don’t kill children, we do!
Did not expect that based of a headline from yahoo
edit oh it was originally Reason Magazine, makes more sense
Reason is a libertarian rag, if they're ever right it's by accident. Funded by Koch and other right-wing ghouls.
They are usually reliably anti-imperialist, but only because it's expensive to run an empire
”Warmongering is bad” is definitely one they stumble upon, see also: Ron Paul in the 2000s.
I know but they will take the contrarian, anti-war stance much of the time. Hell of a lot more often than a mainstream lib paper. Pretty sure American Conservative is the same way, ie was anti intervention in Syria. So yeah it does make more sense that they would hold this stance, plus it is an excuse to be smug for them
At this point a headline like this is intended to make fun of the anti-genocide contingent, not the hypocritical politicians...
Same energy
At least she condemned it.
I have to confess, some of us are a little bit slow to learn. When Aron Bushnell immolated himself in protest, I thought it was an overreaction.
But now I know, and I am happy Elizabeth Warren is speaking out, because we need more people with power to see the reality and make it stop.
She only said anything for optics/cover her own ass.
There's two possibilities here: either she really is this stupid and doesn't realize voting to send weapons to a country like Israel means killing people, in which case she's unfit to lead, or she knows and this is pure cynical optics, in which case she's unfit to lead.
Stop caping for these people, at the very least they don't deserve your fucking brownie points for clearing a bar that's in hell at this point.
When have politicians ever done something that wasn't for optics?
To get change requires positive reinforcement. Next time, she might go a step further. Every time she says something, some in her audience get the chance to realize that it's not anti-semitic to condemn the killing of children.
This is why AIPAC didn't want any Palestinian speaking at the DNC and why they spent millions against Bowman and Bush. Because they don't want to normalize criticism of Israel.
That's the current door that needs to be opened wide in the mainstream.
To get change, critical mass is needed.
I even applaud Candace Owens and Dan Bilzerian for speaking out, even though I don't agree with them on anything else.
When have politicians ever done something that wasn't for optics?
Do you have any idea how much realpolitik is done with total disregard for optics, public opinion and the common good? Politics is driven by the interests of the ruling class, which in our society is the class that owns capital. Optics are the PR you tack on it afterwards when it's convenient.
When have politicians ever done something that wasn't for optics?
I'm Spanish. A party called "Podemos" (relatively leftist) didn't ever condemn Maduro and didn't support the state police intervening in Catalonia during the referendum, knowing full well it was bad optics when it concerns the majority of Spanish population. Not everything is optics, there are principles.
If I continue being a doormat and giving them all of my body and soul despite their constant abuse, eventually they’ll realize that they love me.
I knew it! Can't wait to help my friend canvas then be told we need to focus on the (((north))) county and that we need Republicans(?) to support war. Can't believe my local Dems could be so cunning and LIBERAL(Derogatory).
I even applaud Candace Owens and Dan Bilzerian for speaking out
"Positive reinforcement"???? Motherfucker, who gives a fuck if you have everyonr congratulating you for the right take or not if you have the "positive reinforcement" of bookoo bucks in campaign funds? Being anti Israel IS ALREADY MAINSTREAM. That's the whole reason for the optics, they know its popular, but their financial interests or ideological beliefs prevent them from actually enacting any change. They will dangle these keys in front of your face until every last Palestinian is dead for all they care.
You strike me as one of those people we'd call "deeply unserious".
It's been so long since ops politicians did anything other than wring their hands and tweet positioning statements, so long since the news covering them has reported anything other than politicians/citizen feefeez/their own opinions, i wouldn't be surprised if op thought that was all politics actually fucking were.
The absolute cynicism of this pennymatinee we sit thru like clockwork Orange breaks one's goddamn mind
absolutely brainless diarrhea being typed by your hands, never post again 
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
To get change requires positive reinforcement.
lmfao she's not a dog hahahaha what is this shit?
Hey, everyone else is already clowning on you. Deservedly, I might add, but I won't add to the pile. Instead, I'll add some theory that might help if you ever want to learn.
This section right here gives away your primary logical confusion:
But now I know, and I am happy Elizabeth Warren is speaking out, because we need more people with power to see the reality and make it stop.
Politicians do not do what is "right" systemically. It isn't about simply "convincing" them. The Marketplace of Ideas is a sham. Politicians are guided by their donors. Pro-Israel rhetoric is still popular among donors, because it's profitable for them. Warren is trying to predict the optical shift and play for reelection, but as we've shown she already sent the bombs and fulfilled her donor's request.
I recommend reading Socialism: Utopian and Scientific by Engels. He goes over the failures of Utopian Socialists who thought Socialism could be achieved by "convincing" Capitalists and the politicians who serve them.
You’re right, she should have set herself on fire.
Come now, she could at least do something more practical like suicide bombing the senate floor.
But now I know, and I am happy Elizabeth Warren is speaking out, because we need more people with power to see the reality and make it stop.
Is this a bit?
If not: she still voted in favor of giving Israel billions of dollars. It's not like it's ever been a secret that Israel kills civilians and doesn't care about committing war crimes.
Do we need to tell you the parable of the scorpion and the frog?
some of us are a little bit slow to learn
You still are, judging by this shitlib of a comment.
I agree with you about some of us being slow on the uptake. I was only thrust to the left when I saw moderates voting for Trump in 2016. At the time I considered myself a lib. A couple presidents before that, I was a "Reagan conservative", which, blegh, makes me want to vomit to think about. We should be open to growth in ourselves, while also allowing space for growth in others.
I fully agree.
The only way to get more people to support Palestine is if people who currently support Israel change.
And that was and is true for every improvement in the world.
Not saying Elizabeth Warren should be free of criticism, but at least give her the tiniest amount of credit when she does take a step in the right direction.
I don't know why I should give her any credit for ”speaking out” when she's a US senator and didn't even do the bare minimum of voting against giving Israel billions in military aid. Warren has been both alive and active in politics long enough that she didn't suddenly realize in May 2024 that Israel kills civilians.
None of them should be given any credit because all American politicians are ghouls.
Their "optics" are just what is given to them by the interests of the ruling class; not the people. The ruling class is worried about losing money..so they're cooling off the literal genocide rhetoric to recoup some stamina before dangling the keys in front of your face again to make you really believe that she or any other democratic senator is doing anything before their proposal, bill, etc gets nuked by the undemocratic Supreme Court and another 15 billion is sent to Israel or Ukraine.
"Meet me in the middle," says the unjust man. You take a step towards him, he takes a step back. "Meet me in the middle," says the unjust man.
It's actually a struggle for me to remain objective on Warren as ive made my decision on her... But objectively wouldn't it be better to withhold that credit until she proves she isn't just doing what's politically expedient for her future as a politician?
Like objectively makes sense to withhold all credit after what she did to Bernie during his campaign and for Biden on super Tuesday?
Thinking about that will inform her motives now. There is no "step in the right direction" when the only thing moving is their mouths
The way you (and others in this sub) approach it is very all-or-nothing and very ineffective.
We should say, "thanks Lizzy for speaking up, we appreciate you and we would ask you to support an arms embargo so that our tax money doesn't go towards killing innocent children".
This is exactly what the more effective anti-genocide activists are doing.
You are utterly deranged.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Elizabeth_Warren#Israeli-Palestinian_Conflict
Look at her record as a senator, not her worthless words. She's done less than nothing to rein in Israel or to help the Palestinian cause. Keep sucking on Lizzy's toes and maybe you will earn enough goodboy points to get her to call Netanyahu a jackass or something. Very moving!
If this is a bit, it’s seriously a really good one.
sub
Yeah i can't wait for them to find this. I don't think this is a high energy enough lib to really get a shamethread cooking tho
Me: brings verifiable information to the subject at hand
You: pivots to personal attacks
If you were an objective observer of this discussion, which of these two parties would you say failed to avoid logical fallacies/engage in effective activism of their cause?
The way you're approaching genocide is very "nothing is all." Look at her voting record. Expressing vocally and actually voting are different subjects.
We should say, "thanks Lizzy for speaking up, we appreciate you and we would ask you to support an arms embargo so that our tax money doesn't go towards killing innocent children".
Why? It's not bad to speak up, but if nothing is materially changing, it's nothing but vibes.
This is exactly what the more effective anti-genocide activists are doing.
Wrong. The more effective anti-genocide activists are Palestine Action, and they are directly sabotaging the tools used to facilitate genocide, not standing and clapping for someone who has voted for genocide for decades.
Ngl I don't think you live in reality, when has this approach ever caused change?
Scenario...
A cop walks into somebody's house and shoots them in the head.
Cop doing a public apology tour: I'm very sorry that I shot that person in the head. I find it deeply troubling that I voluntarily walked into a person's house, didn't announce myself, and immediately shot the person who lives there in the head while they were sitting on their own couch watching their own TV eating a bowl of ice cream. I deeply regret my actions, those that it hurt, and will try do better in the future.
Crowd: That cop is so brave! It must be very hard for them to live with that trauma.
The problem with "giving them credit" in this way for this subject is that is forgets that nothing that is happening now is new. Israel has been genociding Palestinians for 70+ years now. There's literally thousands of "yesterdays" to look back on to see what was being done, who it was being to and by whom, and how they were justifying their actions. And yet, all the people who actually get the power in the USA to do things just ... keep doing the bad thing with that power while saying "Oh shucks, that sucks that this bad thing keeps happening, SOMEBODY should do something about it." Warren isn't some nobody who just has an opinion but no seat at the table of power. Warren is literally the "SOMEBODY" who is supposed to be doing something about the bad thing.
At some point, the words need to stop mattering because what they say and what they do are completely opposite of each other.
To add onto cowbee: Write or email your federal reps and request a response in writing. They're constitutionally required to respond, and you can complain to the Deputy Chief of Staff if they don't.
99% of the time you'll be blown off with a boiler-plate non-answer, and 1% of the time you'll be directed to a staffer who will listen to you, and then throw everything you said into the trash.
Depending on the issue, there is a non-zero chance they'll pull strings, a buddy got his medical debt waived months after he had like half a million dollars of surgery.
But the point of this exercise is to show that you are entirely disconnected from the policy-making process.