Sanders and Trump were both populists. There is more than one dimension to political preference. I think there was more overlap between there voters than is usually assumed, but not because voters were opposed to “the middle”.
Populism and reactionary politics go hand in hand. But the point I was arguing against, as I recall, was that a victory on the right drags the left toward the middle rather than elicit a reaction. I think a reaction on the left is inevitable - but whether it carries the day comes down to the individual campaigns rather than some law of poli sci.
~Max
There will always be people pulling in both directions. But on average, my observation is that a victory by the right leads to the left moving towards the right. That’s certainly what I’ve seen over my lifetime. To the extent the race is right vs left, major candidates write off the extremists who vote for minor third parties, and try to get more of the middle.
But i also think it’s a mistake to just look at a right vs. left lens.
To be clear, we had been discussing American politics and particularly the office of President - no minor parties involved.
~Max
Uh, the green party is a minor party. In US presidential races.
Right, but we weren’t discussing the green party. Were we?
~Max
Yeah, we were. I googled Ralph Nader, the green party candidate in the Bush v Gore race, and this popped up:
Ralph Nader Gets the Blame https://www.wsj.com/articles/ralph-nader-gets-the-blame-2000-bc7f971c
We were absolutely talking about the green party, as an example.
I wanna know why pro Palestinian protestors keep saying its a genocide when it isn’t.
I also wanna know why, considering the amount if Islamic terrorism I’ve seen committed over the last 25 years, even in my home town, how would I ever be sympathetic to their cause especially since the organisations which represent them pretty much lump me and the Israelis with them irrespective of how we feel about whats going on and and how we know the way in which Hamas dealt with the people in Sderot etc
Because when you’re a right wing, reactionary, theocratic wannabe regime, but you need international aid to set up your Caliphate, it pays to use liberation language to appeal to left leaning people worldwide.
In the 1980s when the United States banned Hamas as a terrorist group, they consciously made the decision to appeal to the Western Left by couching their attempt to create a Caliphate (which is very publically exactly what Muslim Brotherhood aligned groups, including like Hamas, claim as an end goal) in liberation rhetoric.
I don’t comprehend people like Judith Butler, who believes that Hamas is a “part of the global left” simply because it fights the (according to her) Imperialist West.
To me, that is an absolutely braindead take.
You know who was the mother of all Imperialists? The British Empire, of course. And you know who fought them? Well, the Nazis, of course. So does that make the Nazis anti-Imperial?
No, you might say; the Nazis aren’t anti-Imperialist; they aren’t against the IDEA of empire, they just don’t like the fact that the British have an empire and they do not.
Right! That’s absolutely correct. You know who else is not opposed to the idea of empire in principle, but doesn’t like who is on top of the current global structure? That’s right - Hamas.
Hamas being anti-Imperialist is a braindead Tankie take, which is exactly why it has become so popular with TikTok Socialists.
:checks forum:
Fuck off @Ryan_Liam
On this otoh I probably differ from you.
I think “sympathy” is a red herring. Fuck sympathy. Sympathy isn’t needed to understand that it is in everyone’s best intersts - Israelis as well as Palestinians - to properly implement a two state solution.
That’s why I oppose people who tell the Palestinians to keep demanding maximalist things like a single state Palestine or a Right of Return to Israeli territory.
None of those things will ever happen. If the Palestinians accepted this, we could set up two states and move on with our lives.
The problem is that the Palestinians would have to be stupid to accept a two state deal when they think that they can just hold out a bit longer and get the whole pie. And since 1947, that’s what they have been told. First by the neighboring Arab states, who told them “just keep rejecting the partition plan and we will drive the Jews into the sea for you”; then after those countries made peace, Pro “Palestine” (really pro militant) groups in the West told them “don’t wprry, Israel is an evil genocidal apartheid regime, they are illegitimate and wrong! Just keep fighting and demanding everything you possibly can, and some day we will swoop in with UN Resolution #108474738393 against Israel and then the evil Zionists will be removed!”.
Not to mention Iran that sees Palestinians as a knife to shove into the heart of the Imperialist West.
What’s ironic is that neither Iran nor the 'anti Imperialist" people in the West actually give a fuck about the Palestinians; they just view iMpErIaLiSm as evil and the Palestinians as a weapon to use against it. If they values Palestinian lives as anything but anti “Imperialist” ammo, they would support a two state solution.
Perhaps this:
And I want to know why you’re too dumb an asshole to actually @ someone when they ask you to.
Nice ad hom to add to the collection
This coming from a person who thinks that because the Israelis supported the White minority government in SA, the Israelis must be doing the same in Gaza and the West Bank.
Here’s a simple guide;
Armenians = Carted out to the desert wasteland of Der E Zor in Syria and massacred/left to die by the Turks
Jewish people = Sent to the extermination camps by the Germans
People being bombed due to an Islamic extremist organisation using them as Human shields and moved around the Gaza Strip = Not genocide
This is like the Nazis bombing the UK and people protesting the Allies having the audacity to carpet bomb the Reich back.
That’s not why I think the Israelis are doing “the same”. I think it because it’s extremely well-documented. It’s not like the IOF hides what it does.
“The same” here would be - imprisoning and torturing dissidents, stealing land, requiring onerous travel documents, turning a blind eye to any murders your own civilians commit on the outgroup (even assisting them)…yep, checks out
That Israel was also willing to get in bed with racist fascists isn’t the reason I think Israel is an apartheid state (and so much worse, now), it just speaks to the general hypocrisy of that state, and is also why anyone clinging to any “Boo Hoo, Holocaust!” excuses for genocide just make me laugh, nowadays. “Never again” is a lie - Israel doesn’t give a shit about fascists, as long as the fascists are pointed elsewhere.
Grannies and 5-year olds being sniped, people being starved, hospitals destroyed - genocide.
And “human shields” only counts as an excuse, maybe, if the person is actually directly holding them between you and them. Bomb a house of 30 with kids and grannies, to get one guy, and you can fuck off with your “human shield” bullshit. It’s as much of a lie as “never again”, fascist-lover.
.
Per your simple guide,
If Hamas carpet bombs Israel and kills every Israeli that . . . isn’t genocide?!
You’re not a vampire crossing a threshold; if you have something to say, you can do it without an engraved invitation.
Pithiness aside, it doesn’t take a genius to tell that Gaza hasn’t been carpet bombed and every Gazan has not been killed. So I’m not sure how that is supposed to be a “gotcha”.
I did so.
I would have done it sooner if Ryan (or you) had the balls to @ me as asked, rather than tracking this thread.