415
Dilemma (thelemmy.club)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.ca
219 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

Yes they should. But it's not as simple as that. If they swing against Israel in their platform, how many votes will they lose from Israeli supporters? how many will they lose because Israeli money will campaign hard against them? And there's some psycho Israeli supporters in the upper echelons of the Democratic Party - if the party kicks them out, how much damage will it do? It's naive to say they should just do what's right, because if that means they lose votes and lose the election, then they can't do any good pushing back on Israel. Above all, most of the politicians just want power and they have access to a lot of polling data - the reason most of them support Isreal is not for some higher Jewish calling, but because the data tells them they will get more votes that way. Hopefully that changes this cycle and they come up with some sort of better balance - but they probably can't go completely against Israel - look for balanced statements, including statements about restraint and holding Israel accountable. These are like dog whistles for the left - indicating they plan to push back against Israel without burning their bridges. Of course this whole Iran fiasco complicates things more as the U.S. is now even more directly complicit in unnecessary carnage in the ME. So the Dems have to figure out a way to walk that back without seeming weak (Americans don't vote for weak).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    I mean it sounds like you think they're in an impossible place...if they arm a genocide, they'll lose because us crazy leftists won't vote for them. But if they don't arm a genocide they'll lose because those crazy zionists won't vote for them. I think you're wrong about that, that they would win if they kicked the zionists out, but that's speculation on my part. They could make the election a referendum on genocide and I really think that would be a winning position. They might actually have to pick between decent people and zionists. I like to think there are more of us than them, but hey, maybe I'm just an optimist.

    But say you're right, and they really are stuck between impossible choices...if each choice is impossible, how in the hell can it be so bad for me to make one of those choices?

    I also absolutely don't trust "dog whistles for the left," Obama wasn't sending a dog whistle when he said "I'll close guantanamo bay" or "I'll create a public option for healthcare." Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me. I was so STOKED for Obama; he talked progressive but practical. I didn't like everything he said but if he had followed through on the big progressive promises, the world would be a different place (and the democrats would be a different party). If they don't burn the bridges, they're not serious.

    I hope you're right man. I hope they win, I hope they change, I hope things get better. But I aint holding my breath. I expect when they win they'll be pleased to keep most of the fascist powers trump has given precedent for. I expect they'll roll a few things back and put a more polite face on it and get back to rounding up immigrants and funding the genocide of Palestinians. And frankly, that's not good enough; I'd rather not even give my worthless token support to that.

    Like I said, I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for the absolute minimum. 1% towards decency. If they did the only thing they could do in respect of Palestine that is not absolutely monstrous (i.e. stop military aid to israel), I'd be out working my ass off to get them elected, despite all my many other deep problems with them. And if they announced it and alienated their zionist donors I'd know they were serious about it. None of this "well we have some concerns" while continuing to ship them more guns than they can reasonably find people to shoot.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    I agree on most of what you say. The critical part though is that you 'hope they win' but you won't help that happen. With too may people like you, we get Republican hard core fascist dictatorship with much more death and destruction in the ME. And that pisses me off. We're on the same side, but you're voting against us, and so we will likely lose and so many people will suffer because of it.
    You seem to think your vote for the Dems would mean you agree with everything the Dems would do. It's not like that. Either the Dems or the repubs will win. You choose which to make more likely.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    I don't think voting for the democrats means I agree with them, I think it means the bad parts are a trade-off I'm willing to make for the good parts. And right now it's not.

    My non-vote can also make it a shade less likely the democrats will win without changing. If that makes it a shade more likely they'll change, great, because my vote for them wouldn't make it a shade more likely they'd win (again, living in a state where my vote doesn't count). What my vote does is rob them of an infinitesimal piece of legitimacy, and voting for them would grant them that infinitesimal piece of legitimacy. If you want to make a difference, it's not me you should be talking to, it's only folks in swing states you should be worried about. If my vote counted I might find your points more compelling. And before you say "well that's very nuanced and you shouldn't be telling people not to vote for democrats" I'm not saying that; it's you people calling us out! Saying we're bad people for not acquiescing to this trade off of "if you say yes to arming a genocide, maybe we can have a little less fascism at home."

    As it is, I hope the democrats win, but importantly if they win without changing, I hope they win with the lowest turnout in history. I hope it's a near thing. I hope they're scared they'll lose again next time if they keep up this bullshit of chasing the republicans into more and more extreme right wing politics (hell, while we're hoping, I hope they start nationalizing the necessities of life and guillotining billionaires starting with the pedophiles).

    Or else I hope grassroots organizing outside the party is integral to their success, and the democrats become beholden to organizations that represent the people. That'd be neat. Anyway, voting for the democrats works against those goals. The democrats winning in a landslide with a clear mandate to get back to "business as usual," where business as usual is rounding up immigrants and murdering Palestinians is still very bad.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent