And I’m being serious. I feel like there might be an argument there, I just don’t understand it. Can someone please “steelman” that argument for me?
Naïve/entitled people fail to grasp the concept of compromise.
Exactly whatbwas the compromise? The entire genocide/atrocity has occured om herself and Biden’s watch. She then failed to disance herself from the policy and did not take a position that aligned with people concerned about supporting a genocide.
Is Trump worse on this topic? Almost certainly.
Entitled people are the ones that felt they could speak over the valid concerns of the public because “I am the lesser of two evils so you have to vote for me.” Turned out well, the US continues its fownward trajectory and to be an embarrassment all because of…supporting a genocide. It wasnt even a difficult one, a remedial foreign policy issue fucked Kamala and she can have her shame for it.
The entitled people are those who insist the conscientious objectors should have put their concerns aside.
Is genocide not too far to compromise on? Or is it less of an issue because it’s a genocide of Arabs?
Which do you choose: genocide or WORSE genocide? You have to pick one. Not picking either gets you the latter by default. Make a choice.
Turns out there are stupid questions.
It’s a stupid question. But that’s the reality. So genocide or worse genocide? If you say neither, it’s probably going to be worse genocide.
To quote a user from another thread:
Theyre not the ones that need to learn. Voters need to learn DNC is a bunch of wealthy moderates grifting voters.
It starts with fury. Everything is beyond messed up over there.
Add in: anger funnels focus. Tunnel vision. It almost feels morally wrong to think of another thing. Anger helps you in a physical fight, so this makes sense. Also, ordering lunch while your neighbor’s house burns down is kinda dickish.
Add in: first past the post voting. This is the big clincher. It forces two party systems mathematically, and most people understandably haven’t heard why.
Factoring in the information in that video, you realize your choice really is Harris or Trump. Third choices get transformed into a vote for the candidate you dislike the most. So you take the best option.
Take away the knowledge of first past the post, and you have every reason to think that third parties will work if you all just had some spine and imagination, god damnit. You resolve not to let yourself be one of the ones who sat by silently while horrible things happen!
Cast protest vote thinking it makes you one of the people who actually helped, not realizing first past the post transforms that vote into a vote for trump, and everybody keeps fighting instead of watching that video and letting the facts it points out inform what they do.
because americans see voting the same as buying and endorsing a thing which is objectively wrong.
Not buying a product hurts the manufacturer.
Not voting does jack shit. Thanks for coming to my ted talk.
America has powerful Karen/Kyle energy where people overreact to a slight flaw in service and this argument is the Karen/Kyle Tantrum argument over genuinely bad policies supported by Harris. They think if they take a fit this election they will be in a better spot next election. The reality is that more poeple will be homeless and out of reach. The media will be in worse shape.
Voting is always a trolley problem.
But overall I don’t think that’s the biggest group of people. The majority of people that didn’t vote I think were tuned out of the election because of ongoing failures.
The arguments are as stupid as you guessed.
These are naive emotional people who are dumb as fuck. I know so many in my life and it’s like arguying with a brick wall.
Children still believe we live in a black and white world, democrats are in power now, genocide is happening, they will not vote for them. The concept that both will finance the genocide but another will be much worse is not something they can understand.
You have others that want to intentionally punish democrats for not doing anything. Great in the meantime, Trump will provide a full carte blanche to Nettanyahu in the middle east, he will continue what he’s doing, annex everything without any limits. They were partying in Israel after Trump won.
A third group wants the system to break down because they think if you’re a post collapse society, they will be able to build their utopia.
Yes as dumb idiots living in la la land.
They would rather accelerate genocide than admit they’re wrong. It’s disgusting
Because the standard for Democrats is perfectionism, but the standard for Republicans is “That’s just Trump being Trump.”
In other words, they didn’t think it through, they got suckered by propaganda.
Imagine thinking “stop committing a genocide” is perfection.
Liberals are amazing creatures.
trump will be 100x worse.
To start, we have to understand that the genocide of Palestine started before the October 7th attacks. Israel’s rampant illegal settlements in the Gaza strip may have been the final straw that provoked Hamas to make a move, but Palestinians have been abused, forced into ghettos, and murdered by private citizens for decades. All of this, and nobody in the West ever really batted an eye at the suffering except for a handful of informed leftists.
If Harris had won, the most likely outcome is that the immediate conflict would eventually be paused, just like it paused after the second intifadas. No land would be returned, no settlements removed, but Hamas’ forces would be decimated to the point they could not fight back and Israel would return to their quiet slow genocide until the stars align to renew their attack once more.
Now that Trump has won, the most likely outcome is…that the immediate conflict will eventually pause, just like it paused after the second intifadas. Israel isn’t an island, if they ramp up their aggression ever further, eventually other parts of the world will push for sanctions on Israel. A Trump win doesn’t suddenly give Israel carte blanch to build the gas chambers, they still have to pay lip service to international law. Israel will inflict a grievous wound on Hamas, deep enough that it will take another generation before conflict resumes, and go back to expanding their settlements.
This genocide has been happening since before I was born, and multiple Democrat presidents have had an opportunity to say something or work towards curbing Israeli aggression. They’ve all vaguely promised to work towards a two-state solution, knowing that the current two states are what they want. If Kamala Harris couldn’t even call it a genocide, then she was no different, and it would be foolish to think she would actually take any steps towards meaningfully stopping Israel.
So, you’re counting on Trump, known for racist, anti-Muslim rhetoric, will do no different than Harris? Ridiculous. Trump doesn’t care, and it’s clear Bibi doesn’t care.
Also, that doesn’t tell me how that protest vote does anything. If the result is the same, then at least go for the person that won’t destroy even more lives.
I’m not counting on Trump for anything. I’m expecting other member states of the UN and especially the EU to act as the actual hard line for Israel, as they have for the past five decades. It’s already starting to happen, and once sanctions are in place Bibi will finally start to become unpopular and can finally be replaced.
It’d be very nice if those sanctions started with the U.S., but it was never going to happen under either party. The number of lives lost will be the same. The U.S. has never been what has stopped Israel, it has always been global perception.
Well, iirc, trump mentioned something about wiping the Palestinians out himself (or something along those lines, I halfway forgot as trump says a lot of shit) so let’s just say that whatever the result it, it won’t be good for the Palestinians.
Also remember that trump is now surrounded by a religious extremists cult who is betting on Jesus coming back in Jerusalem, and they’ve been working for 4 years to prepare for Trump’s return and ehat they can do with a king with nukes
Talking about nukes, so this extremists cult is also betting on the world ending to make Jesus return sooo, yeah, nothing to see here.
Let’s see, what other ways will this destroy the world? Oh yeah, Ukraine will be fucked too, trump will just force it to surrender either now, or negotiate “peace” after which Russia either just goes on or zelenski falls out of a window. with that done, the Baltics will be next for putin, don’t doubt it. Poland and Czech Republic may follow. What else? Taiwan will be fucked now too so wars all over, yeeeiii.
What other fin can we expect? Climate change is a hoax too, right? Multiple point of no return came and went and shits about to get a lot worse a lot faster
Fuck America, and fuck the majority of Americans, you have ended the world. That basically includes anyone who didn’t vote for Harris.
Israel will inflict a grievous wound on Hamas, deep enough that it will take another generation before conflict resumes, and go back to expanding their settlements.
Expanding settlements is continuing the violent conflict, just not as open warfare.
Don’t worry. Trump won. You’ll hear a whole lot less about Gaza and genocide now.
Removed by mod
its funny, because literally the next post after yours was this: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/07/trump-blank-check-netanyahu-war-iran-panetta
Late but here’s my model of the situation. Sort of a WIP and very new but a /gen effortpost, so I welcome thoughts:
It’s individualism versus collectivism. The collectivist understands intimately the function of working together for the protection and future of the group. There is no doubt in her mind about the practical nature of her actions because she can see them play out in her community. The individualist, by contrast, operates solo; everything for him is about your vote, your candidate. This leads to a divide between the individualist and the material outcomes of his actions. This gap—this absence of practicality, we might call it—leaves a vacuum where symbolism can enter. This becomes a problem not when symbolism is simply encountered by the individualist, but when the symbol becomes the act, when the vote becomes a kind of personal expression, and any thought for collective consequences falls by the wayside.
“Ordinarily,” if we imagine such a thing exists, these two identities intermix and act in a complex and altogether non-problematic way; I don’t wish to imply that individualism is simply “bad” while collective action is “good.” For example, concepts of individualism are fundamental to advancing human rights to consent and bodily autonomy.
However, the setting and background of your question is the USA, a country with deep, deep historical ties to white supremacist, capitalist, colonialist, even fascist values, all of which hold the individual as intrinsic over the collective. The result is that hyperindividualism is catastrophically rooted in the heart of U.S. society—even in progressive and leftist spaces!
So, when you see a pro-Palestinian proclaim abstention or that they voted third party, you are witnessing the complex outcome of genuine compassion intermingled with the values instilled by white supremacy and individualism. And so you hear the phrase, “I just can’t in good conscience vote for XYZ.” To degrees varying between people, the vote loses its material value and becomes nothing more than a symbolic moral statement.
This doesn’t mean the leftist non-voter is a white supremacist, of course! Rather, it’s that they have been deeply affected by the presence of those values in their cultural context and have not yet had the opportunity or experience with group frameworks to question their assumptions and reassert the significant importance of collectivism.
So, in conclusion, the unnuanced TLDR is “because America is a racist capitalist hellhole.” The good news I conclude from this, though, is that collectivism can be learned and promoted. Cultural values are definitely not static, and perhaps with education, support, and time, mindsets among leftists can be shifted to better support the whole of the community.
when you are laser focused on a single thing, anything else just slides past you. making life changing decisions with limited information is a uniquely american trait
Because if it wasn’t Gaza, it would have been another excuse to not lift a lazy goddamned finger and still delude themselves into feeling "morally superior"while sitting on their fat mediocre asses at home.
Before Harris, they also leaned heavily on the “Sleepy Joe” bullshit and “two old white men up for election, who cares”. Once the old “Sleepy Joe” element was removed from the equation, they had to find a way to keep their goddamned stubbornly lazy and ignorant narrative intact.
Now that the election is over, most of these “concerned and outraged” deadweight assholes will never think about Gaza and the plight of its’ people again. And they will keep on feeling smug about themselves.
I’m not American, and I don’t agree with these people either, but I don’t think that calling them lazy and ignorant makes any sense. In the fucked up democracy of the US it’s clear that the only way to get what you want for the coming 4 years is to vote for the least bad candidate. At the same time I can definitely understand that if you view both candidates was horrible, though one way more horrible than the other, you would feel conflicted about voting for either of them.
Let’s do a thought experiment. Assuming both candidates are still roughly equally “popular”. If both candidates wanted to start a genocide, but one would want to kill only 50% of the amount of innocents that the other would kill, how would you vote? Would you vote for the one who is overall the less bad option, which will in turn make you give your vote for something horrible. Or would you abstain and signal that the democracy as it currently stands has lost your confidence entirely, even if it means that on the short term the consequences might be way worse?
Not voting actually costs the democrats something, and should (if they want to win next time) force them to think how to better represent you next time.
It’s fucked up that your democracy came to this. It has become an annoying game theory dilemma instead of voting for the candidate that you actually believe in. Our system here in the Netherlands is certainly also not perfect, since we have too many parties and too long coalition negotiations, but at least I feel like it represents people way better. Anyone can start a party and capture seat if they represent a large enough niche.
I know one of those people. they are now angry the left lost… 🙄
I said the same thing about people like you before the election, and I’ll repeat it again. The laser focus on single issue voters was and will always be mostly an excuse to blame someone else.
To look at it another way, if this one issue actually decided the election, why didn’t Harris change her strategy two months ago? … Maybe it’s because this wasn’t the determining issue. Or it was, and her staff was incompetent. Take your pick.
OP asked for a steelman but good try
It is rich to criticize the Democrats for claiming moral superiority while doing nothing, as a justification for not voting for the candidate who would at least try to put a leash on what Israel is doing to Gaza.
If you want what’s best for a suffering people, you should vote for the candidate not trying to give their oppressors a blank check. All of America is responsible for what the president we chose does next.
This is all that needs to be said on the subject.
Removed by mod
As a foreigner, if you voted for a genocider (there was two in this race), I do not think you are human.
I feel like that’s such an idealistic way of viewing things. Hypothetically, if you had a choice between indirectly supporting genocide or throwing your entire life into chaos you’d rather ruin your own life? If you’re actually willing to ruin your own life for it you’re more passionate about this issue than 99% of the population. For example I don’t have an issue supporting Ukraine, I’ve donated to support packages going to Ukraine. But you won’t find me on the battlefield because there’s a limit to my support and that limit is at not throwing away my life. I guess that makes me inhuman because I could do more and I’m choosing to not to.
If the table turns sometime, if I have to pick between genocide in the US and fascism here, well, I hope you have a place to hide lmao
How hypocritical and vindictive. I won’t do what I consider humane because you deserve it.
They don’t care about the outcomes of their actions, they care about their feelings as they make the actions. That’s it. Stop wasting your time arguing with children 🤷♂️
I think they still need to be called out for their BS. The response wasn’t just for him, it was also for others who might read it and think that’s somehow an acceptable opinion to have.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
The arguments against voting in the USA sound similar to the trolley problem
Some people wouldnt choose to be the reason of the death of one person even if doing nothing causes the death of multiple people
This is very american - these Gaza supporters protest the suffering of people thousands of miles away and yet think it is okay to bring suffering to everyone in his/her own street
That just means you value your own ability to evade blame over the lives of real people.
Yeah but also they all die anyway. Nobody is “saved” in this situation. In fact, it’s way worse now.
What’s going to happen in Gaza is going to be horrifying.
Yes, this is how I felt. I would rather not choose to vote for the ‘lesser of two evils’ and pretend that’s good. It’s not just Gaza though, it’s corporatism, war profiteering, and terrible policy.
I would rather see the system collapse and possibly die in the process than support another shitty government even if it’s the less shitty one.
That’s a horrible outlook, and I’m sorry you’ve been driven to that point. I understand, as I have been there before.
Now that I’m older, I realize that pulling the lever is the right thing to do as much as it hurts. I don’t think letting apathy win and watching the government go full Fash was the correct choice, but I don’t blame you, or others who decided the same. The system isn’t going to collapse, though, it’s just going to get a lot shittier for awhile.
