GarbageShootAlt2

joined 1 year ago
[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That would be irrelevant because it's not SK's "free press," it's their government agents issuing this warning.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Seoul is right in the headline.

And in the article (right at the top, repeatedly) it's not SK press, it's SK intelligence agents saying this. The headline wouldn't say "Seoul" and then have it be a private entity; "Seoul" is a metonym for the SK government. People only conflate individual institutions with the government when it's China and some Chinese business does something stupid but not illegal.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago

That's a silly argument. Biden (aside from being an unrepentant segregationist!) acted as an active agent of white supremacy, and Kamala would have too, just like every President has.

As an aside, it wasn't the majority of the population. It wasn't even the majority of the voting-eligible population. It was like a little over a quarter, I think.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago

Rights are not handed to us by God or by Nature, they are legal constructs, created by people. They are not immaculate or immune to criticism or alteration on the basis of what we think would be better for human society. White supremacy must be smashed to its very core, and part of accomplishing that task is making sure it's as difficult for white supremacists to recruit and congregate as we can possibly make it.

It's bizarre idealism to think that opposition to white supremacy will be overcome with no loss of enthusiasm or membership, that any interference actually has zero effect and we're just better off letting them do what they want.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It was still a white supremacist country under Biden and all previous Presidents and it would have been so under Kamala. This isn't something that gets changed by elections.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago

Bernie is a bastard, but I think it's backwards thinking to blame voters rather than candidates. In a nominal democracy, it's the job of the candidates to appeal to people to get votes. If there is any merit to this idea, we must conclude that the failure was the Harris campaign for not generating the confidence needed to vote for her -- which is a very expected outcome when you're running as reactionary a campaign as she did, calling the wall a "good idea" and so on.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

So long as you have an excuse not to read, any pretext is fine

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

In most lemmy instances, the default feed is a mix of that instance's and popular threads from other instances. Participating in such a thread that you find spontaneously is therefore not anything resembling "brigading," even if other people on your instance also see it spontaneously and participate.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

(I am excluding illegal settler communities here)

Israel isn't, you fucking idiot. There can be no removal of settlers unless we have the destruction of the state of Israel. That doesn't mean pushing Jews into the sea, that means the former Israelis who don't flee (as many will) are now living in a restored, non-ethnonational Palestine.

Palestinians don’t want people’s apartments!

Those in diaspora don’t want someone’s garden!

Broadly speaking, assuming they don't need to live under siege conditions, they want their land back. That's what movements like the March of Return were about. If it was your family's house, then whatever mockery of the human condition was built on it by settlers is logically also yours. Talking about stealing gardens is especially goofy since it's materially just a pile of fertilizer and dirt.

The fight is more about freedom than land.

This is such a convenient story because it lets you ignore all the historical injustice and Israel's role as a settler-colonizer and look only at what is happening right now -- Palestinians being penned in and bombed, where of course their first concern is not being bombed -- and make that the whole issue. Remove siege conditions and suddenly they aren't as concerned with their ability to migrate to Egypt, what a funny thing!

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

My comment was entirely drawing a line of distinction between the two. I don't know how I can make it more clear.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Shit, I thought I deleted it in time after I realized that I misunderstood your implication. I read the insinuation in the opposite direction, that if this is reasonable then Israel's evacuation orders are reasonable, because I've been so submerged in zionist bullshit lately. My apologies.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 24 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

Except for that one part where Israel gives you less than 10 minutes to grab your cat and daughter.

And then also bombs you in the designated safe zones, so really it's nothing alike and minimizing civilian casualties is the correct way to prosecute a war, right?

 

Since it is sort of a popular topic on this board, though that popularity has waned. I don't always agree with Hakim's choice of wording, but I broadly agree.

view more: next ›