Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A
Posts
2
Comments
202
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • There clearly are people who claim Israel (and Jews in general) as a shared identity and cultural group have no right to exist. These people are traditionally called Nazis.

    Yup, and those Nazis largely supported the Zionist mission of a Jewish state, both because they wanted the Jews to emigrate out of Europe and because they hated Arabs almost as much as they hated Jews. Nazis and Zionists share a strictly defined understanding of cultural and ethnic boundaries, and a belief that geographical boundaries are a reflection of those boundaries (or ought to). It's only really tricky if your understanding of Zionism and Israel is limited to the specific group that is doing the cleansing.

    The Israelis aren’t simply a group of Ashkenazi Jews who moved to the Middle East during the Holocaust. They’re a people who have lived in the area for thousands of years and maintained a distinct culture throughout occupation by other empires.

    The jewish diaspora is almost as defined by their shared cultural heritage with their middle eastern neighbors as it is by their origin. You can't draw a clean ethnic or cultural boundary around Israel that's separate from their arabic brothers and sisters. That's exactly the problem with zionism - it attempts to forcefully separate the cultural inheritance of its arabic history and expel it from both the geographical and cultural boundaries of Israel.

    People who oppose Israel as a Jewish state do so because they see Zionism as a mission of ethnic and cultural purification, not because it's a symbolic representation of Jews as an entire people. That's what makes the conflation of anti-zionism and antisemitism so nefarious.

  • A nation is a group of people with a shared, named identity, such as Hawaiian or Palestinian

    Hmm, I dont think this is true in the most common usage, but it's also not what is meant when people challenge the notion of Israel's 'right to exist'.

    Nobody contends that the "shared identity" of Israel has no right to exist, only that Israel as a capital-J Jewish State has no unique or exclusive right to self-determination in Historic Palestine. No state or nationality has a right to deny the self-determination of another group on the basis of ethnic identity.

  • argue amongst themselves instead of realizing the bigger picture which is to win power and do good things with it

    Almost as if people have contradicting ideas about what 'good things' need doing.

    But you understand “donors” are just rich fucks

    Lmao, idk I don't really think there's anything "just" about being a billionare political donor

    Until the NYC/NY Democrat party says “don’t vote for him” then it’s really irrelevant

    Unrelated - I have a bridge to sell you

  • Ok now go look at what the donors are saying.

  • Mamdani has the majority opinion, that Israel has a right to exist as a state with equal rights. Zionists have a hard time accepting that as an answer but it's a morally unobjectionable one.

  • They're not mad because they lost money, they're terrified because Mamdani is a socialist.

  • It's indicative of a deep, irreversible rift in the party. Either democrats adapt or they split in half.

  • Either they listen to their voters and become a 'new' democratic party, or they'll continue bleeding numbers and die. Either way, it's still the beginning of the end.

  • They are going to gamble that they can stay the same because people are/will be so mad about… well everything.

    They will 100% try to do this, but they'll end up losing and then blame the voters they're maligning. Mamdani is a case-in-point difference between status quo candidate turnouts and progressive candidate turnout. The 7% delta over Cuomo is the 7% they'll lose if they try it again.

  • Fun fact - uneven eye dilation can sometimes be a symptom of stroke or aneurysm

  • Not that I'm aware of, no

  • Would have been expedient doing that back in February when polls were showing him at 1% and nobody knew who he was

  • Say whatever you want about him, that man has the best comedic timing

  • Once you've finished this project, you're only a hop and skip away from this 3D printed Machining Mill. He uses the 3d printed pieces as a mold for reinforced concrete, so that it's heavy enough to resist the vibrations so that you can mill solid metal stock.

    The single most impressive 3D printed DIY tool i've ever seen.

  • Just a helpful reminder that class relations are real, and that most legacy news outlets have a shared class-interest in de-emphasizing class and income as important electoral issues.

    There's a really good reason why democrats will seemingly do just about anything to avoid platforming socialist policies - and it isn't because they aren't popular. They see them as an existential threat to their party, because not only would they lose their primary funding sources if they were to stop protecting donors from wealth re-distributive policies, but they'd also lose their network of private sector allies that enable them to govern at all.

    Once you understand the scope of the problem, it's really hard to see the two party system as anything other than good-cop bad-cop neoliberal theater.

  • But railing against them well before that is warranted.

  • If Newsome ran on Bernie’s platform it’s probably a landslide.

    If Newsom had Sanders' platform, not only would he not be Newsom, he wouldn't be the democratic darling.

    AOC is supremely charismatic, and so is Sanders. Democrats keep them on short leashes because they're popular, and because they'd completely ruin the democratic fundraising platform. That's it. That's the whole thing.

  • It’s called pragmatism.

    I've always found this word/idea funny because there's a famous American psychologist by the name of William James that coined a branch of philosophy by that name, that was basically intended as a way of rationalizing religious belief by observing how it effected someone's behavior.

    People (including James) think that using that word evokes a type of self-evident common sense, when in reality it has always been a word that rationalizes commonly held but indeterminate and often irrational beliefs.

    Idk man. You do what's best for your kids, but I think it's irrational to abandon your convictions because you have greater faith in the superficiality of american voters than you do in your own political ideals. Maybe it's true, but it's just as likely that you are making that the case by undercutting your own values in favor of vanity.

    I think it's far more likely that democrats are mistaking a lack of charisma for a lack of popular policy. Maybe it isn't because they lack charisma, but because they are in denial about there being something they're leaving unaddressed with their middling technocratic ideas.