i can’t even guess as to why they went quiet. not one guess at all. we will never know.
edit: well they’re not quiet now once they get called out
i can’t even guess as to why they went quiet. not one guess at all. we will never know.
edit: well they’re not quiet now once they get called out
I’d rather keep up the blame game, ngl. Arguments didn’t work on the disingenuous pricks who helped get us here. I don’t care if they personally made a difference or not, I care that they were utterly unreasonable, and the change in circumstances won’t change that.
Speaking to anyone who could’ve voted for Kamala but didn’t: I don’t care about solidarity anymore; you didn’t have solidarity with us when we needed you. Y’all are fucking stupid and I don’t want to deal with that. I realize that’s not the moral choice, but RN for the first time in over a decade I don’t care about that. I’m angry. Maybe in a few more days or weeks or months that will change, maybe not. Right now I’m focusing on making sure all my remaining friends are able to get somewhere safe if the need arises and keep hope kindled in their hearts. Maybe that means other people who need my help more will suffer, die, or fall victim to their own despair, but I just don’t have the wherewithal to make that my priority.
Behold: a scratched liberal.
> decides to not ally with a group
> person part of the group says they’re not going to go out of their way to help them, because they refused to help the person’s group.
> Assumes person is a liberal
> thinks not putting in effort to help them is evidence that the person is a fascist.
> “Obviously this is proof every liberal is a secret fascist.”
You’re fucking insane. Blocked.
Lotta usage of the word solidarity when you were reliant on a people that the Democratic candidate campaigned on continuing the genocide of.
Kinda seems like your definition of solidarity is ‘support me no matter what.’
>Lemmy.ml
> Projecting
No surprises.
Look at that, a jackass fine with genocide falling back to ad hominem, because their screed of “I’m done with solidarity” when they had none in the first place gets pointed out for the bullshit it was.
I’ll be sure to tell my trans friends it’s okay that they’re getting thrown under the bus next because Leate_Wonceslace is done with solidarity. The Dems are already explicitly blaming them for the loss.
> lemmy.ml
> gets called out for projecting
> more projection
No surprises.
Blocked.
Never did. Solidarity means you aren’t willing to sacrifice marginalized groups to get ahead or save your own skin. If you accept sacrificing Palestinians, you’d accept sacrificing any other group by the exact same “lesser-evilist” logic. What value does that kind of “solidarity” have?
To be fair, for many the choice to save or sacrifice Palestine never felt like it was on the table. For those people, the choice was between making a deal with the devil to save as many marginalized groups as possible, or sacrificing said marginalized groups to keep their “hands clean”.
I believe both sides of this argument felt like they were pushing for solidarity the best way they knew how. And due to the emotionally charged nature of this choice, we wound up losing all solidarity ironically.
If you truly believe in solidarity, then try to see the human on the other side of the screen and be the first to reach out and mend the cracks.
Here’s the thing. I’m trans. On our own, we represent a tiny sliver of the voting public, not worth considering from a strategic standpoint. But there are plenty of other groups of people in the same boat. Together, we are worth considering - but only together. “What force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one?” If we try to build a coalition in which we abandon any group that the democratic politicians deem too much of a liability to be worth protecting, that is no coalition at all, and I well understand that after Palestinians, I will be next. The very same logic that these people were willing to deploy against them can and will be deployed to justify abandoning me and mine.
What advantage do I gain from joining together in a “coalition” in “solidarity” with these fair-weather friends who will drop us at the first sign of trouble? Honestly, they are more of a liability than an asset, because if I’m buddying up with them, it damages my credibility among potentially more reliable people who have good reason not to trust them. I would rather do it the right way and build trust even if it means building from the ground up.
I appreciate what you’re trying to do, but these disagreements are meaningful and important. This election may be over, but the question remains of what the appropriate strategy is going forward, whether to build a coalition that will treat an offense against one as an offense against all, and ensure that anyone who comes for any part of it is unelectable, or whether to “vote blue no matter who” as we are picked off one-by-one, in exchange for temporary, short term security for some.
I get your points and they are well taken. Just be careful not to swing at ghosts so hard that you hit those who would have made great allies.
Not every one who voted Blue is a “fair-weather friend”. Frankly, I bet you would be surprised with how many would be willing to push for something better if given the opportunity.
And sometimes, people just need to be given the chance. The disagreements are meaningful, but the shit slinging is not. And I’m afraid we have traded in meaningful discussion for pure shit slinging.
Hey look it’s one of the problems.
Please explain how Trump will bring in peace and stop Israel from hurting anymore Palestinians, since that’s the only way your dumbass argument would even be coherent
Sounds like you have your hands full dealing with getting you and yours to safety. Good luck, I wish you all the best in that endeavor!
I can’t blame you for being angry, but just try not to let that anger turn you into the thing you are angry at. Someone who stands idly by when someone needs help you could provide.