Genocide doesn’t matter because Trump bad? Pro-Palestine protesters disrupted a campaign rally by US Vice President Kamala Harris with chants like “We won’t vote for genocide.” The seemingly pressed Kamala found few sympathetic words for Gaza in response, answering, “If you want Donald Trump to win, just say that.” Her apparently equally ignorant voter base cheered her genocide-pleasing “clapback.”
Politics is often a binary choice. You try to get the less worse option elected, then you try to push it the direction you want. Sabotaging the less worse option because it’s not better to begin with, will make the worse option win.
It’s not a binary choice. That’s what a bunch of rich and powerful people want you to think so that they can ensure their needs are met.
That said, while I think that what she did was shitty. I would assume everyone can see that she will refuse to take a stance on this for as long as possible. If Americans want her to publicly condemn Israel, they need to show that they’re worth more votes than the group that supports Israel and by a scale of at least two.
It is a binary choice when it is a binary choice. If you don’t want a binary choice, then first fight to change the system. Without that, you have a binary choice.
How’s that been working for you? 😂
For me? You mean for everybody on this planet?🤣
Well, the binary choice thing is almost solely a US problem. Pretty much all other democracies have a number of viable political parties to choose from. That’s kinda part of the reason why the US political system is in such a mess. But I digress …
And unfortunately that’s where this argument completely falls apart – The US is a more of an oligarchy than a democracy. There have even been academic studies that show that the general public in the US has virtually no influence on government policy whatsoever, given the overwhelming influence of lobbyists and billionaire/corporate donors.
Unless the elites would allow an arms embargo on Israel (and, surprise surprise, they wouldn’t), the likelihood of progressives pushing Kamala to the left on this issue is basically zero.
The run up to an important election is the best opportunity for citizen groups to apply pressure on candidates because it’s practically the only time that they can muster enough leverage to outweigh the interests of the billionaire class and the military-industrial complex.
Well actually, while the binary choice is almost the norm in US, it quite often happens everywhere else in the world on all levels of governance.
To your second point: the apathy you are feeling is normal when staring into a big machinery of a huge party systems in such a huge country. Lobbyists are strong, but defeatist attitude is the only reason they have the strength they do. Big changes can happen when participation is high.
In normal circumstances I would agree with you about applying pressure during the elections. But in the current situation when the candidates are so far apart on the subject, but so very close in the polls, I don’t see logic in undermining the chances of the only candidate who might be considering a change of politics.
Although a protest here and there isn’t a big issue.
But not nearly to the same extent. Even in countries like the UK, which have historically been dominated by two main parties, members of smaller parties still win elections and hold seats in the national legislature. When was the last time a member of Congress represented a party that was not either Democrat or Republican?
Uh no. The actual reason is money and political capital.
Such as?
Except she isn’t. Her strategy is to appear sympathetic in public but maintain the status quo regarding Israel in terms of policy.
I disagree on many of your points, I think your perspective is very…binary. Politics is mainly shades of grey.
You don’t know if kamala wants to appear sympathetic or actually is. If you think there is no difference why protest at all, or why not protest at trumps rally. I think there is a big difference worth fighting for, or at least worth not sabotaging.
I have no idea how this relates to my previous comments, and as you don’t seem inclined to elaborate I guess we’ll move on.
The issue isn’t whether Kamala is genuinely sympathetic or not; it’s whether or not she has the will and political capital to take action on a view that is so politically controversial. Not only would she have to stand up to the entire Republican party in the House and the Senate , she would have to deal with backlash from Pro-Israel Democrats and from military and pro-Israel lobbyists. Kamala is a pretty typical corporate Democrat and has done nothing to suggest that she is willing to deviate from Biden’s policy except in terms of PR. If you want to argue that she is, you’ll need something amazing to back it up.
I didn’t say that protests don’t make a difference – they certainly can, given the right circumstances. The key is the public applying pressure at the right place and the right time – when is typically when politicians are seeking election, as Kamala is now.
And what would be the point in that? Trump certainly doesn’t care, nor has he a vested in interest in paying attention to pro-Palestine protesters, unlike Kamala.
My point was that there is a significant difference worth something. When you are dissecting text like your are, you miss all of the points.
Well you haven’t provided any solid evidence or reasons to believe that, so your arguments come across as pretty empty.
Ah, sorry, I’m not looking for a competition, I’m more interested in taking to people in good faith.