The 92-page document has to be voted on by delegates on Monday evening and was finalized by the party’s platform committee just before President Joe Biden stepped down from the race.
  • Cowbee [he/they]
    33·
    4 months ago

    You may not prefer genocide to happen, but you aren’t doing anything to stop it, either.

    • MerchantsOfMisery
      32·
      4 months ago

      I feel like folks like you practically get off to making bad faith arguments about how regular ass voters are "letting genocide happen" and imply that by not voting, you’re doing something effective to stop it.

      I have to ask, hypothetically if the Palestinian death toll increased to 60,000 under a Harris presidency, and it increased to 150,000 under a Trump presidency, would you have any preference for one administration over the other if you could go back in time, or do you believe the 90,000+ death difference is meaningless? I’d genuinely like to know your answer to this question because to me it’s like telling someone there’s no difference between having one leg chopped off and both legs chopped off, and then hearing from some smug person in the back saying "how about we don’t chop any legs off?" like it’s the idea of the century that nobody has ever thought of before.

      • Cowbee [he/they]
        11·
        4 months ago

        I feel like folks like you practically get off to making bad faith arguments about how regular ass voters are "letting genocide happen" and imply that by not voting, you’re doing something effective to stop it.

        Try listening to what I am actually saying then, instead of imagining it and going with your feelings. I haven’t once said “not voting will stop genocide.” I said “voting will not stop genocide.”

        I have to ask, hypothetically if the Palestinian death toll increased to 60,000 under a Harris presidency, and it increased to 150,000 under a Trump presidency, would you have any preference for one administration over the other if you could go back in time, or do you believe the 90,000+ death difference is meaningless? I’d genuinely like to know your answer to this question because to me it’s like telling someone there’s no difference between having one leg chopped off and both legs chopped off, and then hearing from some smug person in the back saying "how about we don’t chop any legs off?" like it’s the idea of the century that nobody has ever thought of before.

        Neither option is acceptable and the genocidal US Empire needs to be torn down.

        Secondly, please explain how there is a provable material difference in the ongoing genocide, beyond mere words. Congress is sending bombs and Israel is using them, and the DNC has affirmed their support for Israel.

        Thirdly, the current death toll is already estimated to surpass 150,000 either way.

        • MerchantsOfMisery
          21·
          4 months ago

          Try listening to what I am actually saying then, instead of imagining it and going with your feelings. I haven’t once said “not voting will stop genocide.”

          I didn’t accuse you of saying "not voting will stop genocide". I said it’s absurd for folks like you to seriously put genocide on the average voter and claim they will "continue to let genocide happen" (your words, directly quoted).

          I said “voting will not stop genocide.”

          Okay, so not voting will not stop genocide either-- so why do believe those who vote Dems are "letting genocide happen" if you’re simultaneously acknowledging that not voting won’t stop genocide either? It’s almost as if these people understand that genocide will happen regardless, but they also understand the death toll under a Trump administration would be higher than under a Harris administration.

          Neither option is acceptable and the genocidal US Empire needs to be torn down.

          Yeah that’s great and all, but we’re faced with essentially one of two options. Not voting or throwing your vote away simply aids a Republican win and it’s exactly why folks like Jill Stein are adored by Trump and Putin.

          Thirdly, the current death toll is already estimated to surpass 150,000 either way.

          So you believe that if under a Trump administration there were say, 50% more deaths in Palestine, those lives are irrelevant or meaningless? Like come on, you completely dodged my question and it was a pretty simple question-- are you okay with a higher death toll under a Trump administrator, or do you seriously believe the death toll would remain the same or lower?

          Frankly I’m sick and tired of folks like you jumping in discussions like this and then giving half-assed answers. It’s a waste of everyone’s time. This is purity politics from people who don’t really care if another 400,000 Palestinians die under a Trump administration, just as long as they can smugly say "not my fault, I didn’t vote for Trump". And if Harris wins and another 100,000 Palestinians die instead of 400,000, they’ll say "not my fault, I didn’t vote for Harris" and act like that’s the highest moral high ground imaginable.

          • Cowbee [he/they]
            1·
            4 months ago

            I didn’t accuse you of saying "not voting will stop genocide". I said it’s absurd for folks like you to seriously put genocide on the average voter and claim they will "continue to let genocide happen" (your words, directly quoted).

            I put genocide on those justifying the current system and refusing to lift a finger to stop it.

            Okay, so not voting will not stop genocide either-- so why do believe those who vote Dems are "letting genocide happen" if you’re simultaneously acknowledging that not voting won’t stop genocide either? It’s almost as if these people understand that genocide will happen regardless, but they also understand the death toll under a Trump administration would be higher than under a Harris administration.

            Genocide will happen regardless if libs do what libs do and go to brunch for 2 years until it’s time to vote again.

            Yeah that’s great and all, but we’re faced with essentially one of two options. Not voting or throwing your vote away simply aids a Republican win and it’s exactly why folks like Jill Stein are adored by Trump and Putin.

            Curious why you erase what I advocated for, ie organizing and building up pressure.

            So you believe that if under a Trump administration there were say, 50% more deaths in Palestine, those lives are irrelevant or meaningless? Like come on, you completely dodged my question and it was a pretty simple question-- are you okay with a higher death toll under a Trump administrator, or do you seriously believe the death toll would remain the same or lower?

            No, that’s absolutely not what I said. I’ll do you one better - are you okay with a higher death toll under the Kamala administration, or do you seriously believe the death toll would remain the same or lower? There, now you have an irrelevant bad-faith hypothetical to tangle with.

            Frankly I’m sick and tired of folks like you jumping in discussions like this and then giving half-assed answers. It’s a waste of everyone’s time. This is purity politics from people who don’t really care if another 400,000 Palestinians die under a Trump administration, just as long as they can smugly say "not my fault, I didn’t vote for Trump". And if Harris wins and another 100,000 Palestinians die instead of 400,000, they’ll say "not my fault, I didn’t vote for Harris" and act like that’s the highest moral high ground imaginable.

            Nice, you’re already trying to push 100,000 dead Palestinians as a “victory” instead of doing anything at all to stop it.

            • MerchantsOfMisery
              2·
              4 months ago

              Nice, you’re already trying to push 100,000 dead Palestinians as a “victory” instead of doing anything at all to stop it.

              Do you know how quotation marks work? You quote something that someone else said, and you don’t quote something that a person didn’t say. It’s a very simple concept and yet you seem to heavily rely on putting words in peoples mouths and claiming stupid shit like “you’re letting genocide happen by voting but also it’s gonna happen whether you vote or not but also I have moral high ground for reasons”. Men like you are so exhausting and heavily rely on strawman arguments because you’re bad at listening.

              • Cowbee [he/they]
                1·
                4 months ago

                I understand quotations, don’t worry. Your entire argument is that we can’t do anything and that voting is the only way to show our voice, but we must support a genocidal choice. That’s not true in any capacity.

      • AntiOutsideAktionEnglish
        14·
        4 months ago

        I feel like folks like you practically get off to making bad faith arguments

        BAD FAITH ARGUMENTS LIKE SAYING YOU DON’T WANT A GENOCIDE TO HAPPEN AND THEN VALIDATING THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THAT GENOCIDE???

        • MerchantsOfMisery
          21·
          4 months ago

          Nah, bad faith arguments like playing dumb and putting blinders on to make a contrived, nonsensical point-- sort of like what you’re doing right now, minus the belligerence.

          • AntiOutsideAktionEnglish
            13·
            4 months ago

            Speaking of bad faith, what a vapid reply. Playing dumb where? What blinders? What the fuck does ‘contrived’ even mean in this context, you fucking intellectual poseur? Nonsensical? Can you justify ANY of your thoughtlessly assembled list of “You disagreed with me” synonyms?

            Saying you don’t want genocide to happen and then justifying the genocide is bad faith. Would any semi-intelligent person need that observation to be remediated to understand? I’m not willing to. The fact that you can put your blinders on and play dumb in the face of it demonstrates your bad faith.

            Your complaining about bad faith is in itself bad faith. And a very serious “FUCK YOU” for engaging in it, you fucking crypto nazi.