I don't think including other semitic people is "taking it away" from Jews. Also i don't think think that bigots are well differentiated in who they target. Mostly it boils down to "looks brown" or "looks asian". So Arabs are targeted in Anti-Jewish attacks too, as well as Jews are targeted in Anti-Muslim attacks too.
- Posts
- 34
- Comments
- 584
- Joined
- 2 yr. ago
- Posts
- 34
- Comments
- 584
- Joined
- 2 yr. ago
Are you familiar with the concept of reclaiming and reshaping terms?
Why should the term stay the way it was coined
by the mid to late 1800s, mostly by german and prussian nationalists describing their own hatred of jews as antisemitism.
Especially as it is clearly an euphemism to sound more sophisticated and give it some sort of "scientific" sound. Also nowadays fascists and other far-right arseholes have shifted their target on mostly Arab Muslims (or anyone looking "brown" really) even instrumentalizing the term and "support for Israel" as they cheer on the killing of Arabs. Of course that does not stop them from also hating Jews, but they are very happy with focusing that on "leftist" Jews for now, which Jewish pro Israeli lobbies are often also happy with.
It is long overdue to seize the control of the term from the fascists.
Engineering formulas be like
"So there was this guy in 1896 and he did a bunch of trials and he figured out that a+b*x/c² is close enough to the real results, with values for a in range 1-2 and b in range 3-4. We still don't understand why, or how he got there, but it worked ever since."
Biden is not trying to get a ceasefire deal from Netanyahu. If you are a parent and your kid is stabbing people, the way to go about it is not to say "please stop" and then hand them another knife.
Biden wants this to continue. The rest is rhetoric to make it look different. But every single supposed red line was crossed by Israel. Every time Biden said something bad about Netanyahu, he continued the arms shipments and reiterated how Israel is just defending itself hurr durr.
Now the US stationed some more soldiers in Israel to create a probable reason to escalate to war with Iran. Harris has reiterated that she stands by the side of Israel.
Meanwhile US law prohibits sending weapons to countries that hinder US aid, which is evident with Israel. The Biden admin is breaking US law. They could have stopped the weapons deliveries and they could have went on to let the legal system go rampage on the Reps still pushing for it.
They could have created the political situation to have decided the election in their favor many months ago. But they would rather have Trump take presidency again, than to stop Israel murdering more Arabs.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Because you still had to watch things from poor quality VHS tapes on CRT monitors. Of course it looked different.
If he wanted Trump to win, then why wouldnt he endorse Trump? This way he would bring normal Trump/Rep voters, to what, what they usually vote for.
Also it is not plausible that the followers of a literal Nazi leader from an organization that wants to exterminate all brown people would prefer voting for a mixed race women over voting for another Nazi.
And there are a lot of right-of center voters that are on the fence that would back him over Trump- and therefore will support Shill
So he is taking votes away from Trump, helping Harris.
I said he wants to help Harris by harming Stein.
This is painstakenly obvios.
You said Steins goal is to take votes from Harris. So the target audience is potential Harris voters. So the target audience of the "endorsement" would be potential Harris voters. But the guy is a Nazi so he is alienating potential Harris voters from Stein, bringing them back to Harris.
If his target audience would be Trump voters he would also be helping Harris by moving Trump voters from Trump.
Either way Harris wins by this endorsement and this is his intended goal.
You just kept insulting me and making accusations instead of addressing the logical inconsistency in your contradicting claims
So your argument is that any basic logic is a strawman, because you dont want to face the logical contradictions in your statements?
Lets go back to the start:
What do you think he wants to achieve?
Who do you think is his target audience for the endorsement?
What do you think are the goals of Steins campaign?
So you think that he beliefs his target audience to be Democrat voters?
Or do you think he wants to siphon off votes of Trump?
Because that would also help Harris, but contradict your statement regarding Stein being there to damage Harris and help Trump.
So you agree that the nazi guy is helping Harris by him alienating progressive voters from Stein.
Then you have to conclude that he is just very very dumb, or you have to agree with my statement, that he wants to harm Stein and help Harris. Which brings the important question, what does the nazi guy gain from helping Harris?
As the guy was leading a large organization, him being dumb is unlikely. Him being good at scheming and manipulating on the other hand is very much on brand.
So you claim Steins goal is to siphon votes away from Harris in order to help Trump.
So the target audience of Stein under that premise are center/progressive voters. The target audience clearly is not Trump voters.
So even if Steins goal is solely to siphon votes from the Dems, any vote that goes to her is a "win" for her. And the opposite, any voter deciding to go back to Harris is a "loss" for her.
Him endorsing Stein is clearly aimed at achieving the latter. You said it yourself,
Stein’s campaign exists solely to harm the democratic nominee
So her target audience are solely potential dem voters. And these are alienated by that endorsement, as is also very clear in this thread.
So there is two options:
A - the guy is a total moronB - he is achieving exactly what he wants
A seems unlikely to me, as nazi leaders are despicable and evil, but smart and scheming.
Given that more Iraqis were killed by the Clinton era sanctions, crippling food and medicine access for Iraq, as well as the general hawkishness of the Dems, as evident again with Israel today, it wouldn't have made a difference.
When it comes to invading and murdering brown people, both parties are pretty similar. Heck Hillary Clinton always got a hard on for escalating to war with Iran.
Why do you think a literal Nazi would be honest in his public endorsements and not just doing it for tactical reasons?
Think about it. Trump supporters gonna Trump. This "endorsement" is aimed at harming Steins campaign with moderate and progressive voters, as is evident with the reaction here.
Now the question is, why he wants to do that, as it helps the Harris campaign. What does he think he gains from helping Harris?
Problem is that without giving smaller states a bit more weight than their population, you risk loosing them, because they have no means to weigh in. Thats why in the EU smaller countries also have more representatives relative to their population.
For the US, if only the coasts would have political power in the federal level, the mid would have a lot of motivation to fuck things up for them.
- JumpLocked
Hope you like socialism
If the people interested in a platform that is based on equal access with ownership by many people rather than being subject to one corporate overlord tend to be more socialist, that should not surprise anyone.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historian
Systematic historical thought emerged in ancient Greece, a development that became an important influence on the writing of history elsewhere around the Mediterranean region. The earliest known critical historical works were The Histories, composed by Herodotus of Halicarnassus (484 – c. 425 BCE) who later became known as the "father of history" (Cicero).
Now how many people had access to this knowledge is another matter, but studying history and learning from it was an important aspect in the education and training of leaders to be since more than a thousand years at the very least.
If we look at Moses and the Pharaoh as well as ancient Greek democracies, we can conclude that the principles of politics have not changed all that much in the past 3000-4000 years of human history. The knowledge was always there and the same mistakes are always repeated, with some very incremental progresses and regressions in between.
Let me clarify. I am skeptical that the picture presented "Trump wins = Democracy ends vs. Harris wins = Democracy prevails" is accurate.
We were told voting Biden would solve things in 2020. It did not.
Democrats had 4 years, or rather 8 years including Trumps first presidency to acknowledge the threat to democracy and prepare to counter it. However what we saw under Biden and to a lesser extent Harris, was to go for business as usual and choose paddling to neoliberal donors over making fundamental policy changes to "progressive" economic, social and foreign policies. "progressive" because what would be revolutionary by US standards is conservative by the standards of most other developed nations, e.g. access to healthcare, workers rights, prevention of child labour...
And we need to understand that Biden stepped down under heavy pressure and Harris was set to continue, because she is the defacto continuation of his administration. There is nothing past some rhetorical differences that truly puts her apart. she became VP because she was a reliable technocrat, not because she had particular popularity among the people like for instance Bernie Sanders had.
So there is no indication that the Democrats have any motivation and plans to address the issues threatening American democracy. Meanwhile they have shown to crack down on peoples initiatives to address these issues. Be it Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter or now the protests on US campuses against the genocide in Gaza.
The way i see it, the US is headed for another civil war, and it will come regardless of Democrats or Republicans being in power at the time. Also what we saw is the Democrats becoming increasingly authoritarian in the way they conducted themselves in the election process so far. The discussion about Bidens mental health was shunned and it was doubled down on him as the candidate, until it was impossible to hold. Harris was declared successor, without opening up to properly discuss where the party should head and who would be the best candidate.
I am not talking about democracy. I am talking about the relative convenience of a middle class life in the US under a Dem administration compared to under a Trump administration.
In regards to Trump win = End of democracy i am skeptical. If the Democracy is that frail, it means the institutions are deeply rotten and weakened already. Trump could deal the finishing blow, but it could also be dealt by someone else. When it comes to making crucial reforms to strengthen Democracy it seems both Reps and Dems are not interested in that, because it would weaken their power base. So we are back to square one that the US Democracy cannot be safed through just voting for one of these two parties.
With that i'd like to stress that things are not just done with going to the ballot. It requires much more effort, in particular demonstrations and disruptions, which often are equally beaten down by the cops under Rep and Dem state governments.
So will the return of the flag conclude the adventures of ressource usage in computers?