• electric_nan
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s not that I don’t believe in harm reduction as a concept, I just think it is cynically misapplied to genocide. There is no reducing the harm of genocide. There is zero reason to think that the democrats won’t see it through to its conclusion.

    • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Why doesn’t it apply to genocide? What’s the defining line?

      Trump has not only supported the actions of the US in relation to Israel, but he’s very clearly heavily racist, an ethnostatist, and would like nothing more than to increase Israel’s power as a US ally by letting them genocide the Palestinian population completely regardless of any complaints by his constituents.

      Genuinely, which side do you think is more likely to stop if pressured enough by the American people, or by international orgs? Trump, or Kamala? Because, at least personally, I doubt Trump would be more likely to stop it, let alone even just give it less support in general.

      If we only have these two candidates to pick between, I’d rather go for the one that we at least have a chance of convincing to stop, rather than one that we know will likely just ignore the American people in favor of his own ideals.