US Response to Gaza
August 20, 2024 10:05 PM Subscribe
US officials say Gaza deal on edge of collapse. Reportedly Donald Trump is advising Netanyahu to avoid a ceasefire, fearing that it would help Kamala Harris' election chances; if true, this would also violate the Logan Act. The DNC held the first-ever panel on Palestinian human rights. Multiple pro-Palestinian protesters were arrested after clashing with police during a protest that started in front of the Israeli consulate and on the second night of the DNC. Uncommitted movement delegates are asking delegates pledged to Harris to sign on to a Ceasefire Delegate letter, and so far have netted 240 delegates. The current Democratic party platform features an extensive section on US support for Israel, and does not mention support for an arms embargo or permanent ceasefire. The University of California is imposing encampment and mask bans on campus.
Critics of the Biden admin's Gaza policies speak out: We should have a policy change because it is the right and moral thing to do, and war is not a popular policy. We are sending an unconditional check to the state of Israel while so many of us here at home can’t even afford basic necessities. This is not just a one-issue vote for many folks — this is a multi-issue vote, as we are watching over the last 10-15 years [as] our communities, especially our communities of color, deteriorate. It’s harder for families and everyday Americans to survive and thrive in dignity while our tax dollars are continuously being sent to fund the mass killing of men, women and children.
Hari Kunzru writes about PEN America and its failure towards Palestinian writers: The substitution of “Israel” and “Palestine” for “Russia” and “Ukraine” is the most succinct way I can find to demonstrate the question that has arisen about PEN America’s commitments. Whatever your opinions about the causes or conduct of the war, one has to ask why, if the right to freedom of expression is universal, one national culture should be worthy of such a passionate defense while another is not.
Jamil Smith and Kiese Laymon think that the best offense is defense, this election and every election.
Chicago protesters explain their views on voting: All of them struck me as people who fundamentally believe in voting as a civic duty but have been pushed to their breaking points since Israel began bombing Gaza last fall. “I want to vote,” Athena, a 26-year-old who hails from Urbana-Champaign, told me. “I would actually very much like to campaign, door-knock, and all this other stuff. But my, I don’t know, my conscience tells me not to until something changes, until [there’s an] arms embargo [on] Israel.”
Attorneys for the Golden Gate Bridge protesters who stopped traffic demand the DA's recusal, alleging pro-Israel bias.
150 people in the entertainment industry, including Selma Blair and Debra Messing, requested that NATAS rescind the Emmy nomination for Bisan Atef Owda, and her work It’s Bisan From Gaza and I’m Still Alive, which chronicles her family's plight in Gaza as they flee their home amidst bombardment. NATAS has considered, and rejected the request.
The Hollow Man And still, with his calcified commitment to Israel as an emotional beacon rather than a nation-state, his reflexive rejection of all differing perspectives, and his permanent deference to Israeli leadership, Biden was uniquely unsuited for the moment. Even if the differences between him and a more agile median Democrat would have amounted to a slightly longer pause in bomb shipments, or more vocal determination to keep aid flowing, many thousands of lives might have been spared. Not that this would have been anywhere near enough.
The most recent Gaza thread is here. This post is specifically focused on the US - policies, reactions, elections, etc.
Critics of the Biden admin's Gaza policies speak out: We should have a policy change because it is the right and moral thing to do, and war is not a popular policy. We are sending an unconditional check to the state of Israel while so many of us here at home can’t even afford basic necessities. This is not just a one-issue vote for many folks — this is a multi-issue vote, as we are watching over the last 10-15 years [as] our communities, especially our communities of color, deteriorate. It’s harder for families and everyday Americans to survive and thrive in dignity while our tax dollars are continuously being sent to fund the mass killing of men, women and children.
Hari Kunzru writes about PEN America and its failure towards Palestinian writers: The substitution of “Israel” and “Palestine” for “Russia” and “Ukraine” is the most succinct way I can find to demonstrate the question that has arisen about PEN America’s commitments. Whatever your opinions about the causes or conduct of the war, one has to ask why, if the right to freedom of expression is universal, one national culture should be worthy of such a passionate defense while another is not.
Jamil Smith and Kiese Laymon think that the best offense is defense, this election and every election.
Chicago protesters explain their views on voting: All of them struck me as people who fundamentally believe in voting as a civic duty but have been pushed to their breaking points since Israel began bombing Gaza last fall. “I want to vote,” Athena, a 26-year-old who hails from Urbana-Champaign, told me. “I would actually very much like to campaign, door-knock, and all this other stuff. But my, I don’t know, my conscience tells me not to until something changes, until [there’s an] arms embargo [on] Israel.”
Attorneys for the Golden Gate Bridge protesters who stopped traffic demand the DA's recusal, alleging pro-Israel bias.
150 people in the entertainment industry, including Selma Blair and Debra Messing, requested that NATAS rescind the Emmy nomination for Bisan Atef Owda, and her work It’s Bisan From Gaza and I’m Still Alive, which chronicles her family's plight in Gaza as they flee their home amidst bombardment. NATAS has considered, and rejected the request.
The Hollow Man And still, with his calcified commitment to Israel as an emotional beacon rather than a nation-state, his reflexive rejection of all differing perspectives, and his permanent deference to Israeli leadership, Biden was uniquely unsuited for the moment. Even if the differences between him and a more agile median Democrat would have amounted to a slightly longer pause in bomb shipments, or more vocal determination to keep aid flowing, many thousands of lives might have been spared. Not that this would have been anywhere near enough.
The most recent Gaza thread is here. This post is specifically focused on the US - policies, reactions, elections, etc.
Trump’s Latest Scheme to Beat Harris May Have Crossed Legal Lines
Supreme Court ruled that Biden is immune from prosecution for all Presidential Acts, so I'm hoping he is just looking for an excuse at this point.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:31 PM on August 20 [12 favorites]
Supreme Court ruled that Biden is immune from prosecution for all Presidential Acts, so I'm hoping he is just looking for an excuse at this point.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:31 PM on August 20 [12 favorites]
It’s probably time for me to send some emails to my local and state officials (the ones who are not on the dark side with the orange fascist) and firstly pledge my vote this election, and then let them know I have higher expectations following the election. We just cannot do the same things the same way anymore. I’ll probably stay in touch, too. I want them to know how I feel and why. This is simply awful to watch and know my taxes go toward enabling this anti human enterprise the Israeli government seems hell bent on. I’m not the least bit anti semitic and never will be. I support them right of Israel to exist - peacefully. Problem is they have been really trying to force things with the settlements and they are basically acting like those who oppressed them in some pretty basic ways. Their government does not enjoy the support of their citizens in many ways. We should not be supporting them in making the horrors in Gaza manifest.
posted by cybrcamper at 11:32 PM on August 20 [10 favorites]
posted by cybrcamper at 11:32 PM on August 20 [10 favorites]
The US does not have a history of enforcing the Logan Act against candidates, for Nixon or Reagan.
posted by rubatan at 11:49 PM on August 20 [15 favorites]
posted by rubatan at 11:49 PM on August 20 [15 favorites]
Thank you very much for setting up the thread!
Guardian exclusive: Countries fueling Israel’s Gaza war may be complicit in war crimes, experts warn - Exclusive: research tracks dozens of oil and fuel shipments that could have aided Israel’s war on Gaza
Four tankers of American jet fuel primarily used for military aircraft have been shipped to Israel since the start of its aerial bombardment of Gaza in October.
Three shipments departed from Texas after the landmark international court of justice (ICJ) ruling on 26 January ordered Israel to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza. The ruling reminded states that under the genocide convention they have a “common interest to ensure the prevention, suppression and punishment of genocide”.
Overall, almost 80% of the jet fuel, diesel and other refined petroleum products supplied to Israel by the US over the past nine months was shipped after the January ruling, according to the new research commissioned by the non-profit Oil Change International and shared exclusively with the Guardian.
(Luckily it's non-US nations that hold the top tiers for crude oil exports. For the US, it's the refined stuff, an honour they share with Russia.)
“The case for the US’s complicity in genocide is very strong,” aid Dr Shahd Hammouri, lecturer in international law at the University of Kent and the author of Shipments of Death. “It’s providing material support, without which the genocide and other illegalities are not possible. The question of complicity for the other countries will rely on assessment of how substantial their material support has been.”
Apparently this is notable that this is commissioned and published by the New Yorker: Gaza Is the Defining Moral Issue of Our Time
Every day the situation in Gaza degrades, and every day the American political class looks away, with few exceptions. The Biden administration’s relationship with Israel goes beyond mere complicity in genocide; under Biden’s leadership, America has become an active participant in horror. The situation is only getting worse. On Friday, days after the killing of Mohammed Abu al-Qumsan’s twin children, the Gaza Health Ministry reported a confirmed case of polio. The contagious disease could spread widely if there is no ceasefire; the United Nations wants to coordinate two mass-vaccination campaigns to protect Palestinians in Gaza from additional risk. Harris may not want to break with Biden publicly now, but from a moral perspective he has left her little choice.
This BBC news just posted perked me up, but it's still at anonymous: US criticises Israeli PM's 'maximalist' ceasefire stance
The context ICYMI is the one-two punch of (inside Israel) the now-widespread understanding that there won't be a ceasefire (a family member of a hostage being reportedly told so by the head of Mossad; members of his own negotiations team) and the just-retrieved bodies of six hostages, who were dead thanks to an IDF operations. What's left of liberal and anti-war commentators are now becoming louder that the US is being irresponsible, or punked.
Eg: (Haaretz analysis last night) Duped Again: The U.S. Somehow Heard Netanyahu Say 'Yes' to A Gaza Deal. He Didn't -
The Americans are pushing for a deal with new urgency, trying to avert a regional conflagration before November's presidential election. But the next few days will indicate whether the U.S. is ready to use levers of influence it chose not to in the last 10 months
What is clear is that there is a new urgency and intensity in the American approach. After months of being manipulated, conned and taken for long rides by Netanyahu on a host of issues and aspects of the war, it now seems that a confluence of timing considerations and recent events led the U.S. to adopt a more proactive stance, at least on the issue of a cease-fire and hostage deal. It all begins and ends with the daunting potential for regional escalation in the absence of a deal.
The U.S. dilemma is clearly bound up in American considerations. The country cannot just announce dejectedly that it is pulling out of active intermediation because "we can't want this more than the parties involved," a favorite and valid argument on previous occasions. Unlike the last two major American involvements in the region – the 2014 attempt by then-Secretary of State John Kerry to mediate and relaunch a renewed Israeli-Palestinian peace process and the 2021 effort by the Biden administration to revive the Iran nuclear deal (the JCPOA) from which the U.S. unilaterally withdrew in May 2018 – this time the ominous specter of a wider escalation looms over the talks.
In some very conceivable scenarios, this escalation would involve the U.S., which is why it cannot simply disengage while citing the unfeasibility of an agreement. This explains the urgency of the American approach in the last few weeks, combined with the upcoming U.S. presidential election, in just 76 days.
(...) This brings us back to the American dilemma. Saying "we did our best but it was just unattainable" is irrelevant. America has levers of power, influence and pressure it chose not to use in the last 10 months. The next few days will indicate whether it is now ready to use them. No one in the Biden administration wants this war to go on and the crisis to escalate come November. They may find out that some in the Middle East think differently.
(I had to struggle getting through to this piece, 403 errors for me but hopefully the link works fine for the rest of you)
Palestinians have been at this position for a while now, but maybe someone tell Biden that the Israelis most in agreement about the cessation of (some) active violence also think he's either a moron or a conspirator. Take those hostages' mentions out of his mouth, it's just disrespectful.
Still! That said, apparently even his DNC address is not well-appreciated by Mark Penn (who ran/runs Harris's polls):
'Biden’s midnight speech so caved to the anti-Israel lobby that he did not even use the word ‘Israel’ and spoke only of ceasefires and hostages adding that there are good people on both sides…No talk of the 1200 raped and murdered on October 7th. No condemnation of Hamas or Iran. No mention of the right of Israel to defend itself from attacks on 3 fronts.
This is how far this almost former president will go to bow down even in disgrace to the anti-Israel left rather than be a true leader.'
People who are trying to be sensible supporters of Israel, you have your work cut out for you.
----
Americans and other foreigners may support the Municipality of Gaza through their donations page.
posted by cendawanita at 12:09 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
Guardian exclusive: Countries fueling Israel’s Gaza war may be complicit in war crimes, experts warn - Exclusive: research tracks dozens of oil and fuel shipments that could have aided Israel’s war on Gaza
Four tankers of American jet fuel primarily used for military aircraft have been shipped to Israel since the start of its aerial bombardment of Gaza in October.
Three shipments departed from Texas after the landmark international court of justice (ICJ) ruling on 26 January ordered Israel to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza. The ruling reminded states that under the genocide convention they have a “common interest to ensure the prevention, suppression and punishment of genocide”.
Overall, almost 80% of the jet fuel, diesel and other refined petroleum products supplied to Israel by the US over the past nine months was shipped after the January ruling, according to the new research commissioned by the non-profit Oil Change International and shared exclusively with the Guardian.
(Luckily it's non-US nations that hold the top tiers for crude oil exports. For the US, it's the refined stuff, an honour they share with Russia.)
“The case for the US’s complicity in genocide is very strong,” aid Dr Shahd Hammouri, lecturer in international law at the University of Kent and the author of Shipments of Death. “It’s providing material support, without which the genocide and other illegalities are not possible. The question of complicity for the other countries will rely on assessment of how substantial their material support has been.”
Apparently this is notable that this is commissioned and published by the New Yorker: Gaza Is the Defining Moral Issue of Our Time
Every day the situation in Gaza degrades, and every day the American political class looks away, with few exceptions. The Biden administration’s relationship with Israel goes beyond mere complicity in genocide; under Biden’s leadership, America has become an active participant in horror. The situation is only getting worse. On Friday, days after the killing of Mohammed Abu al-Qumsan’s twin children, the Gaza Health Ministry reported a confirmed case of polio. The contagious disease could spread widely if there is no ceasefire; the United Nations wants to coordinate two mass-vaccination campaigns to protect Palestinians in Gaza from additional risk. Harris may not want to break with Biden publicly now, but from a moral perspective he has left her little choice.
This BBC news just posted perked me up, but it's still at anonymous: US criticises Israeli PM's 'maximalist' ceasefire stance
The context ICYMI is the one-two punch of (inside Israel) the now-widespread understanding that there won't be a ceasefire (a family member of a hostage being reportedly told so by the head of Mossad; members of his own negotiations team) and the just-retrieved bodies of six hostages, who were dead thanks to an IDF operations. What's left of liberal and anti-war commentators are now becoming louder that the US is being irresponsible, or punked.
Eg: (Haaretz analysis last night) Duped Again: The U.S. Somehow Heard Netanyahu Say 'Yes' to A Gaza Deal. He Didn't -
The Americans are pushing for a deal with new urgency, trying to avert a regional conflagration before November's presidential election. But the next few days will indicate whether the U.S. is ready to use levers of influence it chose not to in the last 10 months
What is clear is that there is a new urgency and intensity in the American approach. After months of being manipulated, conned and taken for long rides by Netanyahu on a host of issues and aspects of the war, it now seems that a confluence of timing considerations and recent events led the U.S. to adopt a more proactive stance, at least on the issue of a cease-fire and hostage deal. It all begins and ends with the daunting potential for regional escalation in the absence of a deal.
The U.S. dilemma is clearly bound up in American considerations. The country cannot just announce dejectedly that it is pulling out of active intermediation because "we can't want this more than the parties involved," a favorite and valid argument on previous occasions. Unlike the last two major American involvements in the region – the 2014 attempt by then-Secretary of State John Kerry to mediate and relaunch a renewed Israeli-Palestinian peace process and the 2021 effort by the Biden administration to revive the Iran nuclear deal (the JCPOA) from which the U.S. unilaterally withdrew in May 2018 – this time the ominous specter of a wider escalation looms over the talks.
In some very conceivable scenarios, this escalation would involve the U.S., which is why it cannot simply disengage while citing the unfeasibility of an agreement. This explains the urgency of the American approach in the last few weeks, combined with the upcoming U.S. presidential election, in just 76 days.
(...) This brings us back to the American dilemma. Saying "we did our best but it was just unattainable" is irrelevant. America has levers of power, influence and pressure it chose not to use in the last 10 months. The next few days will indicate whether it is now ready to use them. No one in the Biden administration wants this war to go on and the crisis to escalate come November. They may find out that some in the Middle East think differently.
(I had to struggle getting through to this piece, 403 errors for me but hopefully the link works fine for the rest of you)
Palestinians have been at this position for a while now, but maybe someone tell Biden that the Israelis most in agreement about the cessation of (some) active violence also think he's either a moron or a conspirator. Take those hostages' mentions out of his mouth, it's just disrespectful.
Still! That said, apparently even his DNC address is not well-appreciated by Mark Penn (who ran/runs Harris's polls):
'Biden’s midnight speech so caved to the anti-Israel lobby that he did not even use the word ‘Israel’ and spoke only of ceasefires and hostages adding that there are good people on both sides…No talk of the 1200 raped and murdered on October 7th. No condemnation of Hamas or Iran. No mention of the right of Israel to defend itself from attacks on 3 fronts.
This is how far this almost former president will go to bow down even in disgrace to the anti-Israel left rather than be a true leader.'
People who are trying to be sensible supporters of Israel, you have your work cut out for you.
----
Americans and other foreigners may support the Municipality of Gaza through their donations page.
posted by cendawanita at 12:09 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
Americans and other foreigners may support the Municipality of Gaza through their donations page.Not at all sure this would be legal.
posted by kickingtheground at 12:14 AM on August 21 [1 favorite]
Haven't heard yet that this is under political donations or other disqualifying reasons . But there's also the perennial drive for esims too, this one is hosted on Chuffed.
posted by cendawanita at 12:22 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 12:22 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Heavens, we wouldn't want to do anything illegal. Only the White House and Congress are allowed to violate the law whenever it suts them!
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:24 AM on August 21 [21 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:24 AM on August 21 [21 favorites]
There is no "Gaza deal." Adam Johnson has been pretty good on chronicling this nonsense.
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 12:24 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 12:24 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
I implore anyone who buys the line that the Biden administration is working to support a ceasefire look at the volume of weapons (and as mentioned above, fuel) the US is sending to Israel. These are our bombs paid for with our taxes. We send money which they are required to spend on US made bombs. Their genocide is our weapons industry subsidy. Seems to require real mental knots to buy evidence-free press releases on this.
posted by latkes at 12:53 AM on August 21 [28 favorites]
posted by latkes at 12:53 AM on August 21 [28 favorites]
"but Trump would be worse"
posted by cendawanita at 1:12 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 1:12 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
this comment was deleted from a different thread yesterday and i was encouraged to repost it here; i hope it's not too out of context; the context was the smoke and mirrors ceasefire talk and the matter of a US weapons embargo:
---
"Regardless, Israel DOES exist, and the amount of violence and displacement which would be required to change that at this point is not okay with me."
again, this violence and displacement is currently hypothetical, irrespective of evidence about its likelihood in various future scenarios. the ongoing genocide is concretely real. the victims are individual people with the same moral status as the individual people who would experience violence and displacement in the hypothetical scenario you mention, which nobody here has advocated.
it seems fairly clear that the israeli government (with pretty broad public support in israel; inarguably, at least, pretty widespread indifference to the fate of palestinians and pretty widespread deeply-ingrained racism) will continue to pursue a genocidal agenda in gaza (and pursue increasingly aggressive encroachment in the west bank, backed by increasingly violent repression) until either some extremely catastrophic goal is reached, or until someone makes it impossible for them to continue pursuing that agenda, or raises the cost of continuing to pursue that agenda above what the government and people will tolerate. yes?
so like any sane person, i don't want to see an insane escalation of war. but i also don't think it's reasonable to tell more than two million people that their lives and families and homes and ability to exist as human beings and as a collective society are going to be sacrificed as the price of our desire to maintain "peace", that the price of mitigating the risk of larger conflict is utter destruction of their society, mass murder, torture, starvation, etc. that a utilitarian computation has been made and it has been determined, by external powers acting for their own reasons, that "peace" and careful restrained management of conflict justify turning their home into, like, the least peaceful scenario imaginable.
if american claims to be brokering an end to the slaughter or sufficiently reining netanyahu in were actually credible, it would have happened by now (and the US wouldn't be undermining international efforts to halt a genocide); instead it's pretty clear that netanyahu is being allowed to do basically as he likes as long as he keeps it mostly in the OPT, and even when he transgresses those bounds by provoking iran, there are no real consequences. "real consequences" mean things that actually forces the israeli government to prioritise --- in the most basic way, by not committing genocide! --- human lives/dignity/etc. over its political goals.
either you think the genocide should be stopped, in which case you have to support robust actions to stop it, or you don't. you can prioritise actual current victims of actually occurring atrocities over hypothetical victims of atrocities that will occur under certain circumstances if not carefully avoided, or you can prioritise mitigation of a risk over amelioration of a current catastrophic reality.
i don't think it actually has to be a trade-off, but i have no idea. it probably does involve some parties other than israel taking responsibility for israel's security until some more genuinely just arrangement can be reached, which seems unlikely.
but it's obvious that a well-armed israel not held in check by the prospect of abandonment by allies and military defeat is going to continue on the present path until the palestinian nation is destroyed via frank obliteration in gaza and creeping strangulation in the west bank. this is to some significant degree the responsibility of the US.
i don't know an actual solution but it's not acceptable that the palestinians have to bear the cost of, among other things, american dysfunctionality. it's outrageous.
it's also something that's maybe not survivable by the US as a political entity in its current form if dealt with poorly, and americans should pay attention and act like it's outrageous for at least that reason.
no justice, no peace.
------
also: thanks for this fantastic post, toastyk.
posted by busted_crayons at 1:29 AM on August 21 [42 favorites]
---
"Regardless, Israel DOES exist, and the amount of violence and displacement which would be required to change that at this point is not okay with me."
again, this violence and displacement is currently hypothetical, irrespective of evidence about its likelihood in various future scenarios. the ongoing genocide is concretely real. the victims are individual people with the same moral status as the individual people who would experience violence and displacement in the hypothetical scenario you mention, which nobody here has advocated.
it seems fairly clear that the israeli government (with pretty broad public support in israel; inarguably, at least, pretty widespread indifference to the fate of palestinians and pretty widespread deeply-ingrained racism) will continue to pursue a genocidal agenda in gaza (and pursue increasingly aggressive encroachment in the west bank, backed by increasingly violent repression) until either some extremely catastrophic goal is reached, or until someone makes it impossible for them to continue pursuing that agenda, or raises the cost of continuing to pursue that agenda above what the government and people will tolerate. yes?
so like any sane person, i don't want to see an insane escalation of war. but i also don't think it's reasonable to tell more than two million people that their lives and families and homes and ability to exist as human beings and as a collective society are going to be sacrificed as the price of our desire to maintain "peace", that the price of mitigating the risk of larger conflict is utter destruction of their society, mass murder, torture, starvation, etc. that a utilitarian computation has been made and it has been determined, by external powers acting for their own reasons, that "peace" and careful restrained management of conflict justify turning their home into, like, the least peaceful scenario imaginable.
if american claims to be brokering an end to the slaughter or sufficiently reining netanyahu in were actually credible, it would have happened by now (and the US wouldn't be undermining international efforts to halt a genocide); instead it's pretty clear that netanyahu is being allowed to do basically as he likes as long as he keeps it mostly in the OPT, and even when he transgresses those bounds by provoking iran, there are no real consequences. "real consequences" mean things that actually forces the israeli government to prioritise --- in the most basic way, by not committing genocide! --- human lives/dignity/etc. over its political goals.
either you think the genocide should be stopped, in which case you have to support robust actions to stop it, or you don't. you can prioritise actual current victims of actually occurring atrocities over hypothetical victims of atrocities that will occur under certain circumstances if not carefully avoided, or you can prioritise mitigation of a risk over amelioration of a current catastrophic reality.
i don't think it actually has to be a trade-off, but i have no idea. it probably does involve some parties other than israel taking responsibility for israel's security until some more genuinely just arrangement can be reached, which seems unlikely.
but it's obvious that a well-armed israel not held in check by the prospect of abandonment by allies and military defeat is going to continue on the present path until the palestinian nation is destroyed via frank obliteration in gaza and creeping strangulation in the west bank. this is to some significant degree the responsibility of the US.
i don't know an actual solution but it's not acceptable that the palestinians have to bear the cost of, among other things, american dysfunctionality. it's outrageous.
it's also something that's maybe not survivable by the US as a political entity in its current form if dealt with poorly, and americans should pay attention and act like it's outrageous for at least that reason.
no justice, no peace.
------
also: thanks for this fantastic post, toastyk.
posted by busted_crayons at 1:29 AM on August 21 [42 favorites]
Democracy Now!:
Props to Amy Goodman for conducting that interview in exactly the way that reporters should but so often don't: no bullshit, no facile gotchas, just prompts that let the subject reveal his own agenda.
posted by flabdablet at 2:36 AM on August 21 [68 favorites]
A few minutes into President Biden's remarks, three delegates - part of Delegates Against Genocide - dropped a banner that read "Stop arming Israel". We were inside the convention floor right next to the Florida delegation where it happened. While some delegates snatched the banner away, many others of the Florida delegation quickly raised Joe Biden placards that said "Thank you Joe" and "We love Joe" to block any view of the banner. The protesting delegates who dropped the banner were quickly escorted from the convention floor by security. We're going to go to that moment inside the convention on opening night.That the immediate response on the convention floor was to suppress that protest is a pretty clear demonstration that what is actually happening in Palestine right now is not correctly understood by the general public, which is why explanations such as this one need much wider exposure than they currently get.
Amy Goodman: What's your name, sir? Sir, what's your name?
Liano Sharon: My name is Liano Sharon. I'm a DNC delegate from Michigan.
AG: And what did you do today?
LS: Today we held up a sign protesting the murder of children in Gaza and the continuing genocide.
Security: Watch the step, watch the step
Reporter: What did the sign say?
LS: It said "Stop arming Israel".
Security: All right thank you, let's keep it going, let's get to the tunnel.
AG: And what happened then?
Security: You can interview him in the tunnel, okay.
AG: What happened then?
Security: I just don't want you to break your ankles.
LS: Then the people behind us grabbed ahold of the sign and tried to rip it out of our hand several times. Eventually they succeeded.
Security: Interview in the hall, okay? Let's get him down. Come on. All right, thanks for being cooperative sir.
AG: And why did you do it?
LS: I did that because we are currently funding a genocide and we need to stop. And also I want to make it clear to the Harris campaign that this is actually in their interest. Netanyahu is trying to instigate a larger war so he can remain in power and avoid going to prison. In order to move Netanyahu off of his current position of trying to expand the war in order to stay in power and remain out of jail, we believe that that the US needs to stop arming Israel, needs to have an embargo against against their genocide. Otherwise Netanyahu doesn't have the incentive to stop the genocide, to stop the mass murder.
AG: Why does this matter to you so much?
LS: It matters to me so much because I'm a Jew, and I was always brought up to believe that Never Again means never again for anyone, ever, anywhere, ever, period. And that's not what's happening right now. What's happening right now is that we are we are continuing to fund and support an ongoing genocide, the mass murder of children, and it needs to stop.
Props to Amy Goodman for conducting that interview in exactly the way that reporters should but so often don't: no bullshit, no facile gotchas, just prompts that let the subject reveal his own agenda.
posted by flabdablet at 2:36 AM on August 21 [68 favorites]
Also true
I can't unsee some remark I saw months ago, that if this was under a Republican administration the Dem-affiliated groups wouldn't be as defanged as they've been now. But that does assume some oasis of institutional politics that's not tainted by reflexive anti-Palestinian racism. Still, if Fairey were to come up with pithy posters in that scenario I would be persuaded to find it inspiring.
posted by cendawanita at 2:47 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
I can't unsee some remark I saw months ago, that if this was under a Republican administration the Dem-affiliated groups wouldn't be as defanged as they've been now. But that does assume some oasis of institutional politics that's not tainted by reflexive anti-Palestinian racism. Still, if Fairey were to come up with pithy posters in that scenario I would be persuaded to find it inspiring.
posted by cendawanita at 2:47 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
The argument for Biden-versus-Trump is typically that "Biden is better than Trump on x, y, and z other issues; don't be a single-issue voter." This limits the discussion to electoral politics, effectively avoiding the question of the Palestinian genocide.
In reality, it's unclear whether a Trump presidency would result in more Gazans dying. In addition to resistance within the US party system, as cendawanita mentioned, other countries may also be more willing to resist a Trump-led US.
In the absence of knowledge, smugly declaring that Trump is worse on the issue of Gaza as if it's completely obvious only serves to further alienate those of us who care enough about this issue to discuss it.
posted by ftrtts at 4:06 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
In reality, it's unclear whether a Trump presidency would result in more Gazans dying. In addition to resistance within the US party system, as cendawanita mentioned, other countries may also be more willing to resist a Trump-led US.
In the absence of knowledge, smugly declaring that Trump is worse on the issue of Gaza as if it's completely obvious only serves to further alienate those of us who care enough about this issue to discuss it.
posted by ftrtts at 4:06 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
War is a Racket, same as it ever was.
posted by Smedly, Butlerian jihadi at 4:29 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
posted by Smedly, Butlerian jihadi at 4:29 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
eponysterocal?… eoponyppropriate?
posted by Jon_Evil at 4:43 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
posted by Jon_Evil at 4:43 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
Since we're talking about US politics, I'll keep my thoughts on that.
1. It's one of those issues (gun rights is similar, in this respect if no other) where a single-digit percentage cares passionately, that group is roughly equally divided, and a supermajority... well, not "doesn't really care" so much as "doesn't put it in their top 10 issues". Way more people regard it as NOT asymmetrical: whether through propaganda or not, they view it as Yet Another Phase in an intractable, decades-long conflict between two odious theocracies, and about the best you're going to get is an acknowledgement that this phase is more asymmetrical than most or that those theocracies don't represent the people they govern. So if you're passionate on the Palestinian side, you've got huge barriers in between the current situation and what you want. Because:
2. Israel has been a US ally for literally 80 years now. And I know that most of the people here are like "they're a shitty ally" or "that has to change", (and personally, I don't disagree) but extracting ourselves from that alliance is a) something many people and the leadership of both parties firmly oppose in general, and b) has to be done slowly, and carefully, lest the web of international relations be catastrophically destabilized. Many people want action now, but alliances shift slowly for what most people involved in diplomacy think of as very good reasons, even if those reasons may not be persuasive to you.
3. If you're Team Harris, nothing happens unless you win the election, and while I don't think the election will be very close in the end, you reeeaallly don't want to fuck it up. Taking some kind of firm stand on either side of the conflict isn't likely to gain you large numbers of net votes, and has a good chance of losing you net votes in critical places. So talking out of both sides of your mouth on the issue is, like it or don't, the best step tactically for them. I think that once Harris is elected, she's going to be increasingly more on the side of at least not full-throated support for Israel, gradually, but as a candidate it really is in her best interest to dance around the issue.
I'm not trying to mock anyone who views this as primarily a moral issue; it's just that most voters vastly prioritize kitchen-table issues. I mean, I get it: you're like "this horrible thing is happening and we're complicit", and it's got to be incredibly frustrating that so many others just nod and fake-smile and go on talking about consumer prices.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 4:48 AM on August 21 [62 favorites]
1. It's one of those issues (gun rights is similar, in this respect if no other) where a single-digit percentage cares passionately, that group is roughly equally divided, and a supermajority... well, not "doesn't really care" so much as "doesn't put it in their top 10 issues". Way more people regard it as NOT asymmetrical: whether through propaganda or not, they view it as Yet Another Phase in an intractable, decades-long conflict between two odious theocracies, and about the best you're going to get is an acknowledgement that this phase is more asymmetrical than most or that those theocracies don't represent the people they govern. So if you're passionate on the Palestinian side, you've got huge barriers in between the current situation and what you want. Because:
2. Israel has been a US ally for literally 80 years now. And I know that most of the people here are like "they're a shitty ally" or "that has to change", (and personally, I don't disagree) but extracting ourselves from that alliance is a) something many people and the leadership of both parties firmly oppose in general, and b) has to be done slowly, and carefully, lest the web of international relations be catastrophically destabilized. Many people want action now, but alliances shift slowly for what most people involved in diplomacy think of as very good reasons, even if those reasons may not be persuasive to you.
3. If you're Team Harris, nothing happens unless you win the election, and while I don't think the election will be very close in the end, you reeeaallly don't want to fuck it up. Taking some kind of firm stand on either side of the conflict isn't likely to gain you large numbers of net votes, and has a good chance of losing you net votes in critical places. So talking out of both sides of your mouth on the issue is, like it or don't, the best step tactically for them. I think that once Harris is elected, she's going to be increasingly more on the side of at least not full-throated support for Israel, gradually, but as a candidate it really is in her best interest to dance around the issue.
I'm not trying to mock anyone who views this as primarily a moral issue; it's just that most voters vastly prioritize kitchen-table issues. I mean, I get it: you're like "this horrible thing is happening and we're complicit", and it's got to be incredibly frustrating that so many others just nod and fake-smile and go on talking about consumer prices.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 4:48 AM on August 21 [62 favorites]
"But my, I don’t know, my conscience tells me not to until something changes, until [there’s an] arms embargo [on] Israel."
These people don't understand politics. We don't all have the luxury of voting our conscious if we want to get things done in the real world.
Like when Hillary Clinton voted for the invasion of Iraq so that it wouldn't hurt her future presidential run.
posted by AlSweigart at 4:50 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
These people don't understand politics. We don't all have the luxury of voting our conscious if we want to get things done in the real world.
Like when Hillary Clinton voted for the invasion of Iraq so that it wouldn't hurt her future presidential run.
posted by AlSweigart at 4:50 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
The election is a strawman though. Very few are advocating not voting for Harris. (For me in California that would be an utterly useless strategy). Our conception of democracy is so narrow we can hardly imagine anything except voting as a means to impact policy, but voting is one of the least impactful things we can do. I'm not arguing against voting, I'm saying it's totally insufficient to winning specific policies. Politicians respond to pressure and social movements. Even if you're a founding member of the K-Hive and your life from now till November is about getting her elected, don't you care how she actually governs? Now as vice president and in the future as president?
The argument seems to be that any effort to impact this administration or the Harris campaign on Israel is benefitting Trump. Is that the argument?
posted by latkes at 5:11 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
The argument seems to be that any effort to impact this administration or the Harris campaign on Israel is benefitting Trump. Is that the argument?
posted by latkes at 5:11 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
The argument seems to be that any effort to impact this administration or the Harris campaign on Israel is benefitting Trump. Is that the argument?
Mmmm more like "any effort to impact the future administration has to be carefully thought out with respect to the fact that most people aren't that passionate about the issue, lest it redound to the benefit of Trump, who will destroy us all, including the Palestinians".
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:25 AM on August 21 [14 favorites]
Mmmm more like "any effort to impact the future administration has to be carefully thought out with respect to the fact that most people aren't that passionate about the issue, lest it redound to the benefit of Trump, who will destroy us all, including the Palestinians".
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:25 AM on August 21 [14 favorites]
Reportedly Donald Trump is advising Netanyahu to avoid a ceasefire, fearing that it would help Kamala Harris' election chances
Reminiscent of the supposed attempt by Reagan in 1980 at making a deal with Iran to only release the US hostages until after the election.
posted by gwint at 5:38 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
Reminiscent of the supposed attempt by Reagan in 1980 at making a deal with Iran to only release the US hostages until after the election.
posted by gwint at 5:38 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
.
posted by constraint at 5:50 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
posted by constraint at 5:50 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
These people don't understand politics. We don't all have the luxury of voting our conscious if we want to get things done in the real world.
The crux here is that we don't have ranked voting or any of the (objectively, mathematically) superior voting methods for multi-candidate races ,that have been known since the French Revolution. That's the "voting technology" we need most urgently, that will enable people to vote for Perot or Stein or Nader first without letting the country fall to fascists when their candidate loses and splits the vote for decency.
Anyway, FairVote.org is doing good work here. We do have good sensible voting in many municipalities and a few states now, but it needs to be nationwide if we really want a truly representative democracy. (Tim Walz has been a supporter of ranked voting for some time).
posted by SaltySalticid at 5:51 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
The crux here is that we don't have ranked voting or any of the (objectively, mathematically) superior voting methods for multi-candidate races ,that have been known since the French Revolution. That's the "voting technology" we need most urgently, that will enable people to vote for Perot or Stein or Nader first without letting the country fall to fascists when their candidate loses and splits the vote for decency.
Anyway, FairVote.org is doing good work here. We do have good sensible voting in many municipalities and a few states now, but it needs to be nationwide if we really want a truly representative democracy. (Tim Walz has been a supporter of ranked voting for some time).
posted by SaltySalticid at 5:51 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
The argument seems to be that any effort to impact this administration or the Harris campaign on Israel is benefitting Trump. Is that the argument?
Because elections in this era are about turnout and turnout is about vibes. People say it's about policy but Trump has fucking shitty policies and he won in 2016 because he had a vibe and his people turned out in the right places. Enthusiasm may be an intangible thing but it swings elections.
The time to fight is the primary and that fight is in all 435 House seats and 33 Senate seats. Then everything down to the dog catcher. After the primary? Get on board or get out of the way.
I don't disagree with the movement. I agree with most of them anyway. I'd love to see more bruised noses of centrist Democratic candidates in primaries. The only thing I disagree with them on is them wanting to be contrarian asses at the biggest, most important race because fighting lots of little ones is a damn hard thing. Especially since, given the stakes involved with Project 2025, deontological thinking might as well be an extension of white privilege at this point.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:51 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
Because elections in this era are about turnout and turnout is about vibes. People say it's about policy but Trump has fucking shitty policies and he won in 2016 because he had a vibe and his people turned out in the right places. Enthusiasm may be an intangible thing but it swings elections.
The time to fight is the primary and that fight is in all 435 House seats and 33 Senate seats. Then everything down to the dog catcher. After the primary? Get on board or get out of the way.
I don't disagree with the movement. I agree with most of them anyway. I'd love to see more bruised noses of centrist Democratic candidates in primaries. The only thing I disagree with them on is them wanting to be contrarian asses at the biggest, most important race because fighting lots of little ones is a damn hard thing. Especially since, given the stakes involved with Project 2025, deontological thinking might as well be an extension of white privilege at this point.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:51 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
The Defeat-Harris, Get-Trump Politics of Protest (David Frum, The Atlantic; archive.is)
Not all pro-Palestinian demonstrators are thinking about the election. Many seem driven by moral outrage or ideological passion. But for those who are thinking strategically, the answer is obvious: Yes, they want to elect Trump. Of course they want to elect Trump. Electing Trump is their best—and maybe only—hope.posted by april of time at 5:52 AM on August 21
[...]
If Harris loses, [...] pro-Palestinian protesters can claim that they were responsible for her defeat. That claim might not be true—in fact it probably would not be true—but try disproving it. The pro-Palestinian movement would have at least some basis to argue: You lost because you alienated us.
mr "axis of evil" himself!
posted by sagc at 5:58 AM on August 21 [12 favorites]
posted by sagc at 5:58 AM on August 21 [12 favorites]
The crux here is that we don't have ranked voting
Plurality voting is what naturally gives us the two-party system, so it's the one thing that both parties absolutely agree on.
Heck, I'd be satisfied if we could get rid of the electoral college. It's already cost the Democrats two presidencies and five Supreme Court Justices in living memory, so you'd think they'd make it a higher priority. I feel like such a dope putting on my fake smile and telling others "Remember to vote!" even though my presidential vote hasn't mattered once in my safely-Republican or safely-Democrat state.
(Yes, yes, other races, local elections etc etc.)
posted by AlSweigart at 6:00 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
Plurality voting is what naturally gives us the two-party system, so it's the one thing that both parties absolutely agree on.
Heck, I'd be satisfied if we could get rid of the electoral college. It's already cost the Democrats two presidencies and five Supreme Court Justices in living memory, so you'd think they'd make it a higher priority. I feel like such a dope putting on my fake smile and telling others "Remember to vote!" even though my presidential vote hasn't mattered once in my safely-Republican or safely-Democrat state.
(Yes, yes, other races, local elections etc etc.)
posted by AlSweigart at 6:00 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
Remember to vote!
posted by AlSweigart at 6:00 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
posted by AlSweigart at 6:00 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
like, why would anyone not over-committed to centrism/bipartisanship/reaching across the aisle think David Frum is the person to turn to for a nuanced understanding of the issue?
posted by sagc at 6:02 AM on August 21 [33 favorites]
posted by sagc at 6:02 AM on August 21 [33 favorites]
David Frum in case not known to all is a pro-Israel Republican and was famously Bush's speech writer.
posted by latkes at 6:03 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
posted by latkes at 6:03 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
It's not like the arms industry has a lull at the moment. We can still make bombs, transfer taxpayer cash to raytheon et al, send them to Ukraine. The military industrial complex can keep churning, for some nominal value of good.
Like if someone could pressure fucking rich donors to the american project to be less "support-israel's-daily-warcrimes-or-else" that would be swell.
posted by lalochezia at 6:04 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Like if someone could pressure fucking rich donors to the american project to be less "support-israel's-daily-warcrimes-or-else" that would be swell.
posted by lalochezia at 6:04 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Plurality voting is what naturally gives us the two-party system, so it's the one thing that both parties absolutely agree on.
I've used that exact same line. At the same time, most people readily support ranked voting once they understand it. Nobody likes the idea of 'wasting' their vote. And the scene is a lot better today than it was twenty five years ago when I first realized how important it was. So I'm still happy to spread awareness and donate to the cause, because it is gaining ground, and it's relevant to this and almost every other contentious political issue.
posted by SaltySalticid at 6:05 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
I've used that exact same line. At the same time, most people readily support ranked voting once they understand it. Nobody likes the idea of 'wasting' their vote. And the scene is a lot better today than it was twenty five years ago when I first realized how important it was. So I'm still happy to spread awareness and donate to the cause, because it is gaining ground, and it's relevant to this and almost every other contentious political issue.
posted by SaltySalticid at 6:05 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
May I sum up our foreign policy in the Middle East?
We urge Palestinians and anti-colonialists to be patient. America will stop sending munitions used to kill you as soon as poll numbers indicate it will be in the best interests of the party to do so. Be patient. Change doesn't happen overnight.
After removing my tongue from my cheek, I am at a loss for words but left with mind-numbing outrage.
posted by mule98J at 6:06 AM on August 21 [14 favorites]
We urge Palestinians and anti-colonialists to be patient. America will stop sending munitions used to kill you as soon as poll numbers indicate it will be in the best interests of the party to do so. Be patient. Change doesn't happen overnight.
After removing my tongue from my cheek, I am at a loss for words but left with mind-numbing outrage.
posted by mule98J at 6:06 AM on August 21 [14 favorites]
> "but Trump would be worse"
Putting it in quotes like that doesn't make it any less true, or you any wiser.
There are a whole bunch of people who don't understand that you don't ever get to vote for anything other than "the lesser of evils," unless you write in the name of your favorite moral paragon who's been dead for 2-3000 years.
Do you want to make the world a better place or a worse one? That's your choice, and no you don't deserve a better one.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 6:09 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
Putting it in quotes like that doesn't make it any less true, or you any wiser.
There are a whole bunch of people who don't understand that you don't ever get to vote for anything other than "the lesser of evils," unless you write in the name of your favorite moral paragon who's been dead for 2-3000 years.
Do you want to make the world a better place or a worse one? That's your choice, and no you don't deserve a better one.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 6:09 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
deontological thinking might as well be an extension of white privilege at this point
good thing a robust position on complicity in genocide needn't rely on deontological thinking, then. it suffices to make utilitarian computations that actually account for people equally, irrespective of ethnicity, nationality, and perceived cultural ties, and, crucially, giving due weight to (1) the vastly different magnitudes of various terrible outcomes and (2) the difference between future hypotheticals and current facts.
posted by busted_crayons at 6:14 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
good thing a robust position on complicity in genocide needn't rely on deontological thinking, then. it suffices to make utilitarian computations that actually account for people equally, irrespective of ethnicity, nationality, and perceived cultural ties, and, crucially, giving due weight to (1) the vastly different magnitudes of various terrible outcomes and (2) the difference between future hypotheticals and current facts.
posted by busted_crayons at 6:14 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
any effort to impact the future administration has to be carefully thought out with respect to the fact that most people aren't that passionate about the issue, lest it redound to the benefit of Trump, who will destroy us all, including the Palestinians
Cool. So what do you specifically recommend that people in the US hoping to stop a genocide should do?
posted by latkes at 6:14 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
Cool. So what do you specifically recommend that people in the US hoping to stop a genocide should do?
posted by latkes at 6:14 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
Maybe we could place a moratorium on "get on board or get out of the way" and the idea that literally any criticism of Harris is somehow the worst, most evil act someone could do? It doesn't actually make you look any wiser, either.
People have explained that they're still voting for Harris; people have explained why their personal votes don't matter; people have attempted to explain that complicity in genocide is, actually, a step too far for them.
If all you've got to say is "all that matters is votong for Harris", we have a whole thread for that sort of cheerleading where criticism of American I/P policy is not allowed. Perhaps take it over there, rather than derailing this thread by making it all about how we're failing in our loyalty to the Democratic Party?
posted by sagc at 6:14 AM on August 21 [27 favorites]
People have explained that they're still voting for Harris; people have explained why their personal votes don't matter; people have attempted to explain that complicity in genocide is, actually, a step too far for them.
If all you've got to say is "all that matters is votong for Harris", we have a whole thread for that sort of cheerleading where criticism of American I/P policy is not allowed. Perhaps take it over there, rather than derailing this thread by making it all about how we're failing in our loyalty to the Democratic Party?
posted by sagc at 6:14 AM on August 21 [27 favorites]
Do you want to make the world a better place or a worse one? That's your choice, and no you don't deserve a better one.
Yeah, no, I think we do.
posted by Krazor at 6:16 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Yeah, no, I think we do.
posted by Krazor at 6:16 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
For many people, it appears that "what we can do to stop the genocide" is shut up about the genocide. That seems to be the main demand; merely bringing it up is effectively uncouth and an obvious sign that you might be a secret Republican or something other than a centrist Democrat (so get ready for accusations that you don't understand the world/foreign policy/US elections/your own desires, regardless of how many citations you provide).
posted by sagc at 6:20 AM on August 21 [24 favorites]
posted by sagc at 6:20 AM on August 21 [24 favorites]
So I'm still happy to spread awareness and donate to the cause
True that, and same for me. I'm going to bounce off this thread. I'm just grumpy and scared at how ridiculous this election is. Nobody wanted Biden in 2020, we just needed a tall white guy with name recognition to make Trump lose. As soon as Biden withdrew, we threw a party and I think people have forgotten that he's still President. We love Harris for vibes more than anything real, and I get that elections are won based on vibes/gas prices rather than dead Palestinian kids in rubble. I'm going to line up in November and try kicking Lucy's football like the good Democrat I am. But for all the celebration and talk of making history, Harris has a polling lead of... 3 points. It's just big 2016 energy for me.
Even if this plan works, we're still going to kill those kids.
posted by AlSweigart at 6:22 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
True that, and same for me. I'm going to bounce off this thread. I'm just grumpy and scared at how ridiculous this election is. Nobody wanted Biden in 2020, we just needed a tall white guy with name recognition to make Trump lose. As soon as Biden withdrew, we threw a party and I think people have forgotten that he's still President. We love Harris for vibes more than anything real, and I get that elections are won based on vibes/gas prices rather than dead Palestinian kids in rubble. I'm going to line up in November and try kicking Lucy's football like the good Democrat I am. But for all the celebration and talk of making history, Harris has a polling lead of... 3 points. It's just big 2016 energy for me.
Even if this plan works, we're still going to kill those kids.
posted by AlSweigart at 6:22 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
good thing a robust position on complicity in genocide needn't rely on deontological thinking, then. it suffices to make utilitarian computations that actually account for people equally, irrespective of ethnicity, nationality, and perceived cultural ties, and, crucially, giving due weight to (1) the vastly different magnitudes of various terrible outcomes and (2) the difference between future hypotheticals and current facts.
Like I can understand why people don't want to affirm a genocide. It's a hell of a thing to swallow. And I won't judge people for coming to that decision and acting out on that privately. Actively trying to convince others? That can just fuck right off. Because the choices on offer, to be perfectly blunt, are if you want your genocide Palestinian but with a chance to improve or Palestinian with Trans people on top along with a side of the resubjugation of Black people. It's a fucking shit sandwich but sometimes life just hands you a shit fucking sandwich.
If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice. If you can live with that, fine. More power to you. If you want to convince others to make the same choice? Electoral math says you're helping Trump and fuck that noise.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:22 AM on August 21 [11 favorites]
Like I can understand why people don't want to affirm a genocide. It's a hell of a thing to swallow. And I won't judge people for coming to that decision and acting out on that privately. Actively trying to convince others? That can just fuck right off. Because the choices on offer, to be perfectly blunt, are if you want your genocide Palestinian but with a chance to improve or Palestinian with Trans people on top along with a side of the resubjugation of Black people. It's a fucking shit sandwich but sometimes life just hands you a shit fucking sandwich.
If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice. If you can live with that, fine. More power to you. If you want to convince others to make the same choice? Electoral math says you're helping Trump and fuck that noise.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:22 AM on August 21 [11 favorites]
In the absence of knowledge, smugly declaring that Trump is worse on the issue of Gaza as if it's completely obvious only serves to further alienate those of us who care enough about this issue to discuss it.
it is wild to me that people think of Trump's position on Gaza as a mysterious unpredictable unknown, the guy has spoken and acted on Gaza, and everything he's said and done is a fuck you to Palestine & a gift to (especially right-wing fundamentalist!) Israel
his proposed "peace plan" from 2020 was a glorified annexation that would've moved the Palestinians into enclaves with no access to the River Jordan -- that's his PEACE plan
he went against DECADES of US policy by recognizing Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights & Netanyahu named a settlement there after him
see also recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel
he's pledged to set back the pro-Palestinian protest movement 25 or 30 years, saying, among other things, “One thing I do is, any student that protests, I throw them out of the country."
he cut more than $200 million in aid to Palestine, plus he ended all US funding to UNRWA and attempted to change the very definition of "Palestinian refugee" so that it only applied to 10 percent of Palestinian refugees (source for both those)
this isn't an exhaustive list, I haven't even gotten into him saying Biden should let Israel "finish the job" in Gaza
or Jared Kushner salivating over waterfront property in Gaza & suggesting Israel should move Palestinians into a bulldozed area in the desert
do people genuinely think that a demonstrably very pro-Israel guy who did not care about killing his own voters by the thousands is going to blink at giving a strongman dictator of the type he most admires absolute carte blanche to wipe out a group of people he could not give a shit about?
also like idk maybe it's enough of a sign that Trump is the guy Netanyahu wants to get elected, so he can keep killing Gazans??
one of my biggest hopes & dreams for the world right now is that no one living in it ever finds out exactly how bad a second Trump term would be
posted by taquito sunrise at 6:24 AM on August 21 [83 favorites]
it is wild to me that people think of Trump's position on Gaza as a mysterious unpredictable unknown, the guy has spoken and acted on Gaza, and everything he's said and done is a fuck you to Palestine & a gift to (especially right-wing fundamentalist!) Israel
his proposed "peace plan" from 2020 was a glorified annexation that would've moved the Palestinians into enclaves with no access to the River Jordan -- that's his PEACE plan
he went against DECADES of US policy by recognizing Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights & Netanyahu named a settlement there after him
see also recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel
he's pledged to set back the pro-Palestinian protest movement 25 or 30 years, saying, among other things, “One thing I do is, any student that protests, I throw them out of the country."
he cut more than $200 million in aid to Palestine, plus he ended all US funding to UNRWA and attempted to change the very definition of "Palestinian refugee" so that it only applied to 10 percent of Palestinian refugees (source for both those)
this isn't an exhaustive list, I haven't even gotten into him saying Biden should let Israel "finish the job" in Gaza
or Jared Kushner salivating over waterfront property in Gaza & suggesting Israel should move Palestinians into a bulldozed area in the desert
do people genuinely think that a demonstrably very pro-Israel guy who did not care about killing his own voters by the thousands is going to blink at giving a strongman dictator of the type he most admires absolute carte blanche to wipe out a group of people he could not give a shit about?
also like idk maybe it's enough of a sign that Trump is the guy Netanyahu wants to get elected, so he can keep killing Gazans??
one of my biggest hopes & dreams for the world right now is that no one living in it ever finds out exactly how bad a second Trump term would be
posted by taquito sunrise at 6:24 AM on August 21 [83 favorites]
What you can do about the genocide is get AIPAC to change their tune. They're the actual roadblock here: they spent piles of money to defeat Jamelle bouie and Cori Bush in their primaries, specifically because of their stance on Gaza. Until you get AIPAC on sides, it's a no-win situation politically, trading off the money and votes of one side against the other.
posted by kaibutsu at 6:24 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
posted by kaibutsu at 6:24 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
very curious about the people who think there are somehow enough, say, Californians complaining about Biden's policies toward Palestine that it will throw their electoral votes to trump. Or is the idea that literally any display of disagreement with Harris at this point cannot be tolerated? Because that seems to be the vibe getting.
And if it's so scary to hear people's reasonable criticisms, maybe the administration could try... listening to them? A bit? Otherwise we keep coming to a point where pro-Palestinian protesters are both so small that they can be ignored, but so powerful that they must be shut down at every opportunity. It seems like you can't have it both ways to this extent.
posted by sagc at 6:29 AM on August 21 [21 favorites]
And if it's so scary to hear people's reasonable criticisms, maybe the administration could try... listening to them? A bit? Otherwise we keep coming to a point where pro-Palestinian protesters are both so small that they can be ignored, but so powerful that they must be shut down at every opportunity. It seems like you can't have it both ways to this extent.
posted by sagc at 6:29 AM on August 21 [21 favorites]
I am not voting for Harris unless I see a ceasefire and Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. I live in CA and as this is a deep blue state, it doesn't "matter". But they lost me, someone who's been voting Democratic since I was 18 for over 2 decades. It is in deep blue CA that they are instituting encampment and mask bans. It is in deep blue CA that politicians continue to declare their loyalty to a whole other country that is committing genocide for fear of coming across as "anti-Semitic". So no, I cannot stomach it.
As Layla Sabila writes: I voted for Joe Biden in 2020. Last October, he authorized the weapons transfers necessary to bomb my family members, some of the last Palestinian Christians in Gaza, and then cast doubt on the death toll that same week.
But Palestinian Americans like me are discovering something this year: the Democratic Party will bomb your homeland, kill your family, use your own money to do it, and still expect your vote. More than that, Democrats will curse you and shame you if you push back.
Anyway, if anyone wants to take on some action items, this is what I posted in the other thread:
Go down Uncommitted's linktree and sign all the things and call your reps.
Tell the SF DA to drop the charges against the Golden Gate 26 protesters.
If you live in New York, support the "Not On Our Dime!" bill which focuses on ending NY charities that fund settlements and violence in the West Bank.
If you live in CA, tell your reps to drop the work on SB 1287, which is going to be pushed to impose restrictions on the free rights speech of university students speaking up about genocide. See Intercept story here.
And for everyone castigating people for taking action now to pressure Harris, you should remember that Obama was also pressured by Dreamers as detailed by Ali Veshi. Mehdi Hasan makes the case that the current Biden admin's Gaza policy is a disaster. If you want the protests to end, end the genocide. If the Biden-Harris-Walz wants to show daylight between themselves and Trump on Gaza, they should just do it.
posted by toastyk at 6:34 AM on August 21 [35 favorites]
As Layla Sabila writes: I voted for Joe Biden in 2020. Last October, he authorized the weapons transfers necessary to bomb my family members, some of the last Palestinian Christians in Gaza, and then cast doubt on the death toll that same week.
But Palestinian Americans like me are discovering something this year: the Democratic Party will bomb your homeland, kill your family, use your own money to do it, and still expect your vote. More than that, Democrats will curse you and shame you if you push back.
Anyway, if anyone wants to take on some action items, this is what I posted in the other thread:
Go down Uncommitted's linktree and sign all the things and call your reps.
Tell the SF DA to drop the charges against the Golden Gate 26 protesters.
If you live in New York, support the "Not On Our Dime!" bill which focuses on ending NY charities that fund settlements and violence in the West Bank.
If you live in CA, tell your reps to drop the work on SB 1287, which is going to be pushed to impose restrictions on the free rights speech of university students speaking up about genocide. See Intercept story here.
And for everyone castigating people for taking action now to pressure Harris, you should remember that Obama was also pressured by Dreamers as detailed by Ali Veshi. Mehdi Hasan makes the case that the current Biden admin's Gaza policy is a disaster. If you want the protests to end, end the genocide. If the Biden-Harris-Walz wants to show daylight between themselves and Trump on Gaza, they should just do it.
posted by toastyk at 6:34 AM on August 21 [35 favorites]
What you can do about the genocide is get AIPAC to change their tune.
Cool. And how would you recommend we do that?
posted by latkes at 6:34 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Cool. And how would you recommend we do that?
posted by latkes at 6:34 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Cool. So what do you specifically recommend that people in the US hoping to stop a genocide should do?
honestly i'm mostly unconvinced that large parts of the american electorate who claim to be opposed to genocide are actually genuinely opposed in this instance. part of the problem seems to be a situation where we are encouraged to think in such a way that we conflate verbal expressions of support or condemnation with actual support or condemnation. actually opposed to genocide does not mean the same thing as saying one is opposed to genocide, but also opposing attempts to stop it.
like, i remember standing on a picket line once and a more senior, union-eligible colleague said, while crossing the picket line, that he supported us. and he said this without irony, like his words somehow erased the concrete thing he was literally in the middle of doing to undermine our power. i am reminded a lot of that lately. it seems to me like some collection of cultural and socioeconomic factors prevalent among, like, very online americans and europeans (especially americans) predisposes a lot of them to a contradictory mindset where, on one hand, they think in preferences, wishes, aspirations, and stories, and take everything personally, while on the other hand, they think they are very smart and well-informed and pragmatic. the second thing means that they are vulnerable to correctly-targeted propaganda that flatters their sense of superiority in order to sell them atrocities as unavoidable, while the first means that they get real indignant when you tell them that saying they oppose something but objecting to any serious actions taken to oppose it is functionally indistinguishable from either doing and saying nothing, or (depending on how meaningful their objection to serious action is) actually supporting the thing.
posted by busted_crayons at 6:34 AM on August 21 [28 favorites]
honestly i'm mostly unconvinced that large parts of the american electorate who claim to be opposed to genocide are actually genuinely opposed in this instance. part of the problem seems to be a situation where we are encouraged to think in such a way that we conflate verbal expressions of support or condemnation with actual support or condemnation. actually opposed to genocide does not mean the same thing as saying one is opposed to genocide, but also opposing attempts to stop it.
like, i remember standing on a picket line once and a more senior, union-eligible colleague said, while crossing the picket line, that he supported us. and he said this without irony, like his words somehow erased the concrete thing he was literally in the middle of doing to undermine our power. i am reminded a lot of that lately. it seems to me like some collection of cultural and socioeconomic factors prevalent among, like, very online americans and europeans (especially americans) predisposes a lot of them to a contradictory mindset where, on one hand, they think in preferences, wishes, aspirations, and stories, and take everything personally, while on the other hand, they think they are very smart and well-informed and pragmatic. the second thing means that they are vulnerable to correctly-targeted propaganda that flatters their sense of superiority in order to sell them atrocities as unavoidable, while the first means that they get real indignant when you tell them that saying they oppose something but objecting to any serious actions taken to oppose it is functionally indistinguishable from either doing and saying nothing, or (depending on how meaningful their objection to serious action is) actually supporting the thing.
posted by busted_crayons at 6:34 AM on August 21 [28 favorites]
If talking is so pointless then what's another thread?
Associating anti-abortion with being republican or being pro-Israel to the exclusion of everything else took time and effort - but one of the tactics is a consistent testing to gain inches on the rhetorical ground (shifting the Overton window is a documented fact for the anti-abortion movement, which required naive or complicit media institutions) or consistent pushback to any attempt to cede the rhetorical ground (the various dismissals, firings, freezing out, petitions at anyone not toeing the line).
There seems to be a recognition this would be a work of years - which isn't very satisfying or just in the face of active genocide but that's also because the genocide is the culmination to the systemic racism which helps serve a foreign policy position. Politics isn't just electoral politics but we're definitely experiencing an effort to constrict the understanding to only that.
Metafilter's attitude to I/P or tolerance rather is case in point. The only reason why we're even able to have this thread (and multiple threads in fact) isn't just because Israel is uniquely murderous in this point in history - similar circumstances (ie "operations") usually saw some attempts to discuss them in FPPs but "resisting rhetorical concession" was a very useful emergent tactic coupled with mod/admin concession to just shelve the matter, lacking any other means to control the crying, the buttoning, the bad-faith arguing, the blithe racisting. What changed was the world outside - within the very limited bounds of norms we have here couldn't repress constant attempts to bring this up because it remained timely, newsworthy and despite the institutional shunning, entire ecosystems of alternatives could somewhat exist. Previously we could dismiss or slow-roll this or that reporting - how angering it must be that Israeli media continues to practice journalism and being accessible thru the same digital tech that also enabled Palestinian testimonies (but those are "boring", we're used to dismissing those. And can you trust Arabs anyway? Let's just let them all fight, it's just been centuries at this ☝🏽 bla bla bla).
So that's one example of the type of everyday politics you can do.
posted by cendawanita at 6:56 AM on August 21 [14 favorites]
Associating anti-abortion with being republican or being pro-Israel to the exclusion of everything else took time and effort - but one of the tactics is a consistent testing to gain inches on the rhetorical ground (shifting the Overton window is a documented fact for the anti-abortion movement, which required naive or complicit media institutions) or consistent pushback to any attempt to cede the rhetorical ground (the various dismissals, firings, freezing out, petitions at anyone not toeing the line).
There seems to be a recognition this would be a work of years - which isn't very satisfying or just in the face of active genocide but that's also because the genocide is the culmination to the systemic racism which helps serve a foreign policy position. Politics isn't just electoral politics but we're definitely experiencing an effort to constrict the understanding to only that.
Metafilter's attitude to I/P or tolerance rather is case in point. The only reason why we're even able to have this thread (and multiple threads in fact) isn't just because Israel is uniquely murderous in this point in history - similar circumstances (ie "operations") usually saw some attempts to discuss them in FPPs but "resisting rhetorical concession" was a very useful emergent tactic coupled with mod/admin concession to just shelve the matter, lacking any other means to control the crying, the buttoning, the bad-faith arguing, the blithe racisting. What changed was the world outside - within the very limited bounds of norms we have here couldn't repress constant attempts to bring this up because it remained timely, newsworthy and despite the institutional shunning, entire ecosystems of alternatives could somewhat exist. Previously we could dismiss or slow-roll this or that reporting - how angering it must be that Israeli media continues to practice journalism and being accessible thru the same digital tech that also enabled Palestinian testimonies (but those are "boring", we're used to dismissing those. And can you trust Arabs anyway? Let's just let them all fight, it's just been centuries at this ☝🏽 bla bla bla).
So that's one example of the type of everyday politics you can do.
posted by cendawanita at 6:56 AM on August 21 [14 favorites]
Cool. And how would you recommend we do that?
Call people. Organize. Protest. Do a power mapping exercise, figure out who you need to convince, and talk to them.
The higher-ups in the democratic party are not doing what they are doing because they hate Palestinians, or because they don't care about genocide. You don't get people on your side by saying they're monsters unless they do what you want. You get people to your side by figuring out what's keeping them from being on your side, and removing the obstacle.
It's the same principle for commenters on metafilter, dem politicians, and AIPAC.
My guess is that most American Jews, especially those that count themselves as dems, would support a ceasefire. And I would guess that many of them are fearful that an arms embargo would ultimately lead to an Iranian attack, which would kill a lot of their loved ones. Meanwhile, Netanyahu doesn't want a ceasefire and wants to play brinksman with Iran to ensure that things stay as they are. This is the circle which needs squaring.
AIPAC is the weak point in the structure, because the dems aren't moving without them, no matter how much sound and fury you can muster in protests. It's just a losing game.
posted by kaibutsu at 6:59 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Call people. Organize. Protest. Do a power mapping exercise, figure out who you need to convince, and talk to them.
The higher-ups in the democratic party are not doing what they are doing because they hate Palestinians, or because they don't care about genocide. You don't get people on your side by saying they're monsters unless they do what you want. You get people to your side by figuring out what's keeping them from being on your side, and removing the obstacle.
It's the same principle for commenters on metafilter, dem politicians, and AIPAC.
My guess is that most American Jews, especially those that count themselves as dems, would support a ceasefire. And I would guess that many of them are fearful that an arms embargo would ultimately lead to an Iranian attack, which would kill a lot of their loved ones. Meanwhile, Netanyahu doesn't want a ceasefire and wants to play brinksman with Iran to ensure that things stay as they are. This is the circle which needs squaring.
AIPAC is the weak point in the structure, because the dems aren't moving without them, no matter how much sound and fury you can muster in protests. It's just a losing game.
posted by kaibutsu at 6:59 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
I need to push back on the idea that Harris must stick to weak and non-committal messaging on the Gaza genocide in order to win. Arms embargo and protecting human rights poll well in battleground states. If she needs to triangulate, it should be done between where she is now and issuing arrest warrants for Gaza war criminals. An expert political communications team should be able to take the values of human rights, peace, not killing children, not starving civilians, not using rape as a weapon of war, etc. and spin that into a message palatable to swing state voters who are already predisposed to support an arms embargo.
Weak messaging on Gaza seems to follow the same political logic that led Democrats to shy away from supporting things like universal free school lunches or calling Trump and his supporters weird. It's a fear of offensive confrontation with political enemies who have forceful but unjust views. I don't want a candidate or a President to give in to that fear, especially when they have a path to gain popularity by taking a more just position.
posted by Hume at 7:02 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
Weak messaging on Gaza seems to follow the same political logic that led Democrats to shy away from supporting things like universal free school lunches or calling Trump and his supporters weird. It's a fear of offensive confrontation with political enemies who have forceful but unjust views. I don't want a candidate or a President to give in to that fear, especially when they have a path to gain popularity by taking a more just position.
posted by Hume at 7:02 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
taquito sunrise: it is wild to me that people think of Trump's position on Gaza as a mysterious unpredictable unknown
That is not what I said.
posted by ftrtts at 7:04 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
That is not what I said.
posted by ftrtts at 7:04 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
Not sure “AIPAC” can be “on side” - they’re an advocacy group for a far right government, they are absolutely going to be in favor of it doing far right things, that is their entire job.
posted by Artw at 7:05 AM on August 21 [20 favorites]
posted by Artw at 7:05 AM on August 21 [20 favorites]
AIPAC is the weak point in the structure, because the dems aren't moving without them
is this actually true, though? or is the call in the US actually coming from inside the house, as it were? do AIPAC mostly function as a bogeyman to be used as an excuse to divert from the real problem afflicting the Democrats, which is
a fear of offensive confrontation with political enemies who have forceful but unjust views.
posted by busted_crayons at 7:07 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
is this actually true, though? or is the call in the US actually coming from inside the house, as it were? do AIPAC mostly function as a bogeyman to be used as an excuse to divert from the real problem afflicting the Democrats, which is
a fear of offensive confrontation with political enemies who have forceful but unjust views.
posted by busted_crayons at 7:07 AM on August 21 [9 favorites]
They did a pretty effective job in primaries this year, something that’s probably going to be a problem for Democrats whenever they have a close vote. And as far as I can tell the reaction to that from the Dems was to stand back and do precisely nothing.
posted by Artw at 7:10 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
posted by Artw at 7:10 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
Well, the pro-Israel event at the DNC was astoundingly sparsely attended. Between that and Biden’s comment that the protesters have a point, the cracks are showing.
Does anyone have an over/under on Fetterman switching to the Republican Party immediately after the convention (on the argument that the Dems are not sufficiently pro-Israel)? Not a non-sequitir. He has turned his back on progressivism since he was elected, refused to attend the convention and has called support for Israel a core issue. That last item I would imagine has some effect on policy.
posted by rednikki at 7:20 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
Does anyone have an over/under on Fetterman switching to the Republican Party immediately after the convention (on the argument that the Dems are not sufficiently pro-Israel)? Not a non-sequitir. He has turned his back on progressivism since he was elected, refused to attend the convention and has called support for Israel a core issue. That last item I would imagine has some effect on policy.
posted by rednikki at 7:20 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
is this actually true, though? or is the call in the US actually coming from inside the house, as it were? [...] the real problem afflicting the Democrats, which is a fear of offensive confrontation with political enemies who have forceful but unjust views.
Which political enemies, and why are they afraid? Be direct.
posted by kaibutsu at 7:26 AM on August 21
Which political enemies, and why are they afraid? Be direct.
posted by kaibutsu at 7:26 AM on August 21
It's a fear of offensive confrontation with political enemies who have forceful but unjust views.
To be fair, the 'forceful' part isn't just rhetorical temperature but they know how to make it materially hurt, but in a nice polite and formal way (eg losing your seat, losing your scholarship, your sinecure, never being hired at all). The fact that protests are still ongoing is hurting the normalization strategy, what more when we're seeing even now at the DNC, mainstream political concessions is possible, as you noted. This makes the drive to shun, discredit, and failing that, resort to appeals of victimhood even more pressing.
How unlucky it is that decades of American foreign policy both in war and in economic sanctions have caused multiple populations to be displaced and settle in the West, causing them to be rightly enveloped amongst people who deserve rights, which shouldn't be an issue because they should have learned to share the same "cultural fit" (I opted for quotes in the end but this whole thing is with my tongue firmly in cheek), and you definitely see that in populations who are displaced due to political differences (Vietnamese-, Cuban-, and Iranian-Americans are known to be just as rightwing as the median white republican voter) versus those who had no time to develop such positions before having to be made to leave (the Hmong, Black Americans descended from slavery, the Palestinians).
posted by cendawanita at 7:26 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
To be fair, the 'forceful' part isn't just rhetorical temperature but they know how to make it materially hurt, but in a nice polite and formal way (eg losing your seat, losing your scholarship, your sinecure, never being hired at all). The fact that protests are still ongoing is hurting the normalization strategy, what more when we're seeing even now at the DNC, mainstream political concessions is possible, as you noted. This makes the drive to shun, discredit, and failing that, resort to appeals of victimhood even more pressing.
How unlucky it is that decades of American foreign policy both in war and in economic sanctions have caused multiple populations to be displaced and settle in the West, causing them to be rightly enveloped amongst people who deserve rights, which shouldn't be an issue because they should have learned to share the same "cultural fit" (I opted for quotes in the end but this whole thing is with my tongue firmly in cheek), and you definitely see that in populations who are displaced due to political differences (Vietnamese-, Cuban-, and Iranian-Americans are known to be just as rightwing as the median white republican voter) versus those who had no time to develop such positions before having to be made to leave (the Hmong, Black Americans descended from slavery, the Palestinians).
posted by cendawanita at 7:26 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
What specific things would I suggest doing if you want to stop the conflict?
Well, to start with, recognize that the vast, overwhelming majority of people who aren’t supporting you aren’t directly opposing you, so much as they believe with what they feel is evidence and good faith that it’s an intractable conflict and/or not a top ten issue. And that among those who are passionate, half of them believe Israel is under existential threat from barbarians. Recognize that most people approach US politics from a practical, not moral perspective: their response to your outrage is “what does this have to do with rent and food prices?” And they’re not stupid nor evil for thinking that.
So if you want sufficient numbers to move the needle, you’ve got a real uphill battle, and that doesn’t even take into account the vast propaganda apparatus that is firmly on the other side. I mean JFC just listen to NPR for an hour. You’ve got to persuade people that a) the moral dimension of the conflict is at least as important TO THEM as domestic economic issues, b) that the way the conflict is presented to them is totally misleading, c) that there is an action they can take without exposing them to a significant risk (eg, of being called “anti-Semitic”) that will actually improve things.
Once you take all this into account, you can start developing strategy and tactics. Disruptive protests are right out: you’ve nothing like the critical mass of passive supporters for such protests to be anything other than counterproductive. Like it or not, and you probably don’t, the vast majority of people are going to react with at best “whut?”, if not “oh gods shut up”. IMHO you’re probably better off focusing on the financial rather than moral issues: why are we spending this much money making the rubble in Gaza bounce when we could be funding the Ukrainians, who are the victims not the oppressors? It might also be productive to break the link between “ordinary Palestinian” and “Hamas supporter”, though that’s working uphill against that vast propaganda apparatus.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 7:31 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
Well, to start with, recognize that the vast, overwhelming majority of people who aren’t supporting you aren’t directly opposing you, so much as they believe with what they feel is evidence and good faith that it’s an intractable conflict and/or not a top ten issue. And that among those who are passionate, half of them believe Israel is under existential threat from barbarians. Recognize that most people approach US politics from a practical, not moral perspective: their response to your outrage is “what does this have to do with rent and food prices?” And they’re not stupid nor evil for thinking that.
So if you want sufficient numbers to move the needle, you’ve got a real uphill battle, and that doesn’t even take into account the vast propaganda apparatus that is firmly on the other side. I mean JFC just listen to NPR for an hour. You’ve got to persuade people that a) the moral dimension of the conflict is at least as important TO THEM as domestic economic issues, b) that the way the conflict is presented to them is totally misleading, c) that there is an action they can take without exposing them to a significant risk (eg, of being called “anti-Semitic”) that will actually improve things.
Once you take all this into account, you can start developing strategy and tactics. Disruptive protests are right out: you’ve nothing like the critical mass of passive supporters for such protests to be anything other than counterproductive. Like it or not, and you probably don’t, the vast majority of people are going to react with at best “whut?”, if not “oh gods shut up”. IMHO you’re probably better off focusing on the financial rather than moral issues: why are we spending this much money making the rubble in Gaza bounce when we could be funding the Ukrainians, who are the victims not the oppressors? It might also be productive to break the link between “ordinary Palestinian” and “Hamas supporter”, though that’s working uphill against that vast propaganda apparatus.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 7:31 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
What Harris has got to be hoping for is that Iran and Hezbollah stay on the sidelines through the election. She's getting to have her cake and eat it now - lip-service to ceasefire and wouldn't-it-be-nice-if-Likud-lost-office, while also fully backing Israel in material terms - but if a broader conflict breaks out, she's has to make a real choice. Israeli tanks in Lebanon and area bombing in Tehran isn't as easy have it both ways on.
posted by MattD at 7:31 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
posted by MattD at 7:31 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
Reportedly Donald Trump is advising Netanyahu to avoid a ceasefire, fearing that it would help Kamala Harris' election chances
I believe this. It's consistent with what he did to sink the bi-partisan immigration bill.
posted by bluesky43 at 7:34 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
I believe this. It's consistent with what he did to sink the bi-partisan immigration bill.
posted by bluesky43 at 7:34 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
That’s putting excessive faith in any kind of deal as a real thing in the first place TBH.
posted by Artw at 7:45 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
posted by Artw at 7:45 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
Recognize that most people approach US politics from a practical, not moral perspective: their response to your outrage is “what does this have to do with rent and food prices?” And they’re not stupid nor evil for thinking that.
how many times do we have to say that opposing genocide is a practical matter (not a moral one, if one insists that morality and practicality are divorced, which is actually insane, like where if not from our practical problems do moral considerations even spring)? moreover, is the contention that people being vocal on the genocide are not also concerned with those very same practical matters? like is the contention that uncommitted voters etc. are uniformly a bunch of rich assholes unmoved by the issues of rent and food prices? normal working class people are incapable of what you call a moral perspective, in this analysis? 'cause I'm not in the US but i am in a country whose position in the matter overlaps materially, and it looks to me like the demonstrations, with their trade union blocs and whatnot, are pretty well-moored to class-conscious politics and it's instead the professional-managerial quarters from which the most dithering emanates. but maybe the UK and US are wildly different in this respect.
posted by busted_crayons at 7:46 AM on August 21 [11 favorites]
how many times do we have to say that opposing genocide is a practical matter (not a moral one, if one insists that morality and practicality are divorced, which is actually insane, like where if not from our practical problems do moral considerations even spring)? moreover, is the contention that people being vocal on the genocide are not also concerned with those very same practical matters? like is the contention that uncommitted voters etc. are uniformly a bunch of rich assholes unmoved by the issues of rent and food prices? normal working class people are incapable of what you call a moral perspective, in this analysis? 'cause I'm not in the US but i am in a country whose position in the matter overlaps materially, and it looks to me like the demonstrations, with their trade union blocs and whatnot, are pretty well-moored to class-conscious politics and it's instead the professional-managerial quarters from which the most dithering emanates. but maybe the UK and US are wildly different in this respect.
posted by busted_crayons at 7:46 AM on August 21 [11 favorites]
America will stop sending munitions used to kill you as soon as poll numbers indicate it will be in the best interests of the party to do so.
Although this is a (justified) condemnation of the Democrats, it's also, ironically, one of the reasons that I'm going to be voting this fall. A Trump administration can and will crack down on protest even harder and faster. Demonization, criminalization, and marginalization of protest - that is something that they are already working hard on right now, and they will work harder and faster on it with every ounce of power they're given.
And I think that the protests actually matter, because they've done a lot to normalize opposition to the genocide as a mainstream political position in the US. I think we will see the fruits of it, if it's not pushed back into the margins. I don't want to speak like I'm all optimistic and "it will be okay!!!" about it, I'm not, I'm in a fucking pit of despair, but seeing the awareness and opposition spread, seeing the polling among Democratic voters, is one of the few glimmers of light down here.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 7:49 AM on August 21 [11 favorites]
Although this is a (justified) condemnation of the Democrats, it's also, ironically, one of the reasons that I'm going to be voting this fall. A Trump administration can and will crack down on protest even harder and faster. Demonization, criminalization, and marginalization of protest - that is something that they are already working hard on right now, and they will work harder and faster on it with every ounce of power they're given.
And I think that the protests actually matter, because they've done a lot to normalize opposition to the genocide as a mainstream political position in the US. I think we will see the fruits of it, if it's not pushed back into the margins. I don't want to speak like I'm all optimistic and "it will be okay!!!" about it, I'm not, I'm in a fucking pit of despair, but seeing the awareness and opposition spread, seeing the polling among Democratic voters, is one of the few glimmers of light down here.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 7:49 AM on August 21 [11 favorites]
OTOH Democrats will support demonstrations under Trump but won’t under a Democrat. And I haven’t forgotten all the calls to Kent State a bunch of students.
posted by Artw at 7:54 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
posted by Artw at 7:54 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
Whites both North and South, moderate and conservative, continued to denounce advocates of civil rights as “un-American” and destructive throughout the 1960s. Agonized moderates argued that mass protest was counterproductive. It would alienate potential white allies and set the goal of racial equality back years, if not decades.
posted by latkes at 7:57 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
posted by latkes at 7:57 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
Right now it’s
Trump - enthusiastically pro genocide, uses nasty language about it
Biden - enthusiastically pro genocide, will sometimes seem slightly sad about it
Harris - ????, probably just Biden again but has created some ambiguity that allows people to support her without feeling as bad about it.
posted by Artw at 7:58 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
Trump - enthusiastically pro genocide, uses nasty language about it
Biden - enthusiastically pro genocide, will sometimes seem slightly sad about it
Harris - ????, probably just Biden again but has created some ambiguity that allows people to support her without feeling as bad about it.
posted by Artw at 7:58 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
What you can do about the genocide is get AIPAC to change their tune. They're the actual roadblock here: they spent piles of money to defeat Jamelle bouie and Cori Bush in their primaries, specifically because of their stance on Gaza.
While I suspect AIPAC would be happy enough to be rid of Jamelle Bouie, NYT columnists don't usually have primaries. Jamaal Bowman, however, is continuing to try to influence Harris on the issue:"If she’s going to say ‘arms embargo’ on Thursday it would break the internet. I don’t think she’s going to say that, personally,” Bowman said. “Maybe at some point she does, because I’m very concerned with how we look on a global scale. The entire international community, a majority of it, are opposed to what Israel is doing in Gaza. And we keep sending them tens of billions of dollars to continue to do it.”
(I know you just mistyped kaibutsu, sorry to be unable to resist a little joke about it)
I think foreign policy is one of the main issues we should consider when evaluating a potential president. Their control over that sphere is far from absolute, but the executive role is much greater in foreign policy than domestic policy. Even with our current skewed executive power role, brought about by years of a completely dysfunctional legislative branch and increased by bad SCOTUS decisions, the president can still do a great deal more to shape foreign policy without legislative approval than domestic. (I'm not saying Congress has zero role, so no need to tell me all the things Congress does have control over - but, of course, if you have thoughts on those items, you should add them to the discussion)
I'm voting for Harris, and I support the protestors and Uncommitted delegates. I hope the genocide can be stopped before she ever has the powers of the presidency.
posted by the primroses were over at 8:01 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
While I suspect AIPAC would be happy enough to be rid of Jamelle Bouie, NYT columnists don't usually have primaries. Jamaal Bowman, however, is continuing to try to influence Harris on the issue:
(I know you just mistyped kaibutsu, sorry to be unable to resist a little joke about it)
I think foreign policy is one of the main issues we should consider when evaluating a potential president. Their control over that sphere is far from absolute, but the executive role is much greater in foreign policy than domestic policy. Even with our current skewed executive power role, brought about by years of a completely dysfunctional legislative branch and increased by bad SCOTUS decisions, the president can still do a great deal more to shape foreign policy without legislative approval than domestic. (I'm not saying Congress has zero role, so no need to tell me all the things Congress does have control over - but, of course, if you have thoughts on those items, you should add them to the discussion)
I'm voting for Harris, and I support the protestors and Uncommitted delegates. I hope the genocide can be stopped before she ever has the powers of the presidency.
posted by the primroses were over at 8:01 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
ok, fine. people decent democracts should regard as political enemies if they want to be taken at their word on their more inspiring rhetoric: arms manufacturers. anyone rich enough to make electorally significant donations. the "security" hawk think-tank-iverse. media outlets whose business model incentivises terrible journalism that systematically favours the right even while pretending not to. right-wing voting blocs that they're never going to make inroads with. reactionary elements within their own ranks. etc.
posted by busted_crayons at 8:03 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
posted by busted_crayons at 8:03 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
For myself, thanks to this Los Angeles Review of Books article on their correspondence, I just learned of June Jordan, and her falling out with Audre Lorde, over Palestine. Later in life Lorde became more critical of Israel's policies, but apparently these two activists found themselves on separate sides of canyon following the invasion of Lebanon, and never made up.
Jordan is lesser known nationally and internationally than Lorde, and it seems to me that her decades of unwavering support for the Palestinian people is partly responsible. Jordan’s vocal anti-Zionism hamstrung her career for nearly a decade, resulting in death threats, a loss of writing opportunities, and social ostracization within multiracial feminist circles. Even in the time since her death, Jordan’s pro-Palestine stance has made her less co-optable into a neoliberal diversity narrative in which Palestinian liberation has been taboo for decades. Lorde is famous for the maxim “Your silence will not protect you,” but in this case, Lorde’s initial silence on Palestine did protect her career and her flourishing afterlife as a patron saint of the oppressed. Meanwhile, Jordan’s decades of writing and advocacy on behalf of the Palestinian people have been woefully underappreciated. Jordan once wrote, “I say we need a rising up, an Intifada, USA,” and for her, intifada was not a metaphor. Unlike Lorde, Jordan intended her writing to be a weapon, a public act in the service of Palestinian liberation. Despite their biographical similarities, Jordan and Lorde had differing practices of solidarity. How can we add nuance to the historical narrative of Black feminist solidarity with Palestine? After all, even 40 years later, US-based solidarity movements are still threatened by the same fault lines that felled Lorde and Jordan’s friendship.
The article contrasts that with Jordan's relationship with Adrienne Rich, which did manage to recover, in part because Rich didn't seem to spend too long in moral quandary.
Because Rich does not take responsibility, Jordan models it for her. This is perhaps the most important rhetorical turn in Jordan’s letter, though it goes unacknowledged in subsequent responses from other readers. Jordan recognizes that being part of an ethnonationalist state, whether born or chosen, carries the obligation to critique its violence. The fact that a Black woman born in this nation can make this statement, with far more humility than Rich’s selective, cherry-picked identification with Israeli statehood, is a testament to the transformative possibilities of Jordan’s identity politics.
Jordan’s open letter was never published, due to the intervention of a group of Black and Jewish feminists, including Lorde; it exists only (as far as I have seen) in the unpublished archive of Lorde’s correspondence. Based on her cover letter to the editors of WomanNews, Jordan had sent copies to other Black women writers whom she viewed as friends or interlocutors, including Alice Walker, Toni Cade Bambara, and Barbara Smith. Some of these women might have provided support for Jordan through phone calls or other ephemeral forms of communication, but there are no letters from any of them in Jordan’s correspondence archives from the fall of 1982. Far from supportive, Smith forwarded a copy to Lorde, who agreed to join Smith and eight other women in writing a letter to the editors of WomanNews to block the publication of Jordan’s response on the grounds that it “contributes to an atmosphere of increased polarization between Jewish and Black women.”
I think people like me need more stories like this because one thing that's been successful is being made to think protesting this is unnatural.
posted by cendawanita at 8:07 AM on August 21 [15 favorites]
Jordan is lesser known nationally and internationally than Lorde, and it seems to me that her decades of unwavering support for the Palestinian people is partly responsible. Jordan’s vocal anti-Zionism hamstrung her career for nearly a decade, resulting in death threats, a loss of writing opportunities, and social ostracization within multiracial feminist circles. Even in the time since her death, Jordan’s pro-Palestine stance has made her less co-optable into a neoliberal diversity narrative in which Palestinian liberation has been taboo for decades. Lorde is famous for the maxim “Your silence will not protect you,” but in this case, Lorde’s initial silence on Palestine did protect her career and her flourishing afterlife as a patron saint of the oppressed. Meanwhile, Jordan’s decades of writing and advocacy on behalf of the Palestinian people have been woefully underappreciated. Jordan once wrote, “I say we need a rising up, an Intifada, USA,” and for her, intifada was not a metaphor. Unlike Lorde, Jordan intended her writing to be a weapon, a public act in the service of Palestinian liberation. Despite their biographical similarities, Jordan and Lorde had differing practices of solidarity. How can we add nuance to the historical narrative of Black feminist solidarity with Palestine? After all, even 40 years later, US-based solidarity movements are still threatened by the same fault lines that felled Lorde and Jordan’s friendship.
The article contrasts that with Jordan's relationship with Adrienne Rich, which did manage to recover, in part because Rich didn't seem to spend too long in moral quandary.
Because Rich does not take responsibility, Jordan models it for her. This is perhaps the most important rhetorical turn in Jordan’s letter, though it goes unacknowledged in subsequent responses from other readers. Jordan recognizes that being part of an ethnonationalist state, whether born or chosen, carries the obligation to critique its violence. The fact that a Black woman born in this nation can make this statement, with far more humility than Rich’s selective, cherry-picked identification with Israeli statehood, is a testament to the transformative possibilities of Jordan’s identity politics.
Jordan’s open letter was never published, due to the intervention of a group of Black and Jewish feminists, including Lorde; it exists only (as far as I have seen) in the unpublished archive of Lorde’s correspondence. Based on her cover letter to the editors of WomanNews, Jordan had sent copies to other Black women writers whom she viewed as friends or interlocutors, including Alice Walker, Toni Cade Bambara, and Barbara Smith. Some of these women might have provided support for Jordan through phone calls or other ephemeral forms of communication, but there are no letters from any of them in Jordan’s correspondence archives from the fall of 1982. Far from supportive, Smith forwarded a copy to Lorde, who agreed to join Smith and eight other women in writing a letter to the editors of WomanNews to block the publication of Jordan’s response on the grounds that it “contributes to an atmosphere of increased polarization between Jewish and Black women.”
I think people like me need more stories like this because one thing that's been successful is being made to think protesting this is unnatural.
posted by cendawanita at 8:07 AM on August 21 [15 favorites]
There is no chance of changing AIPAC's tune. They are a fully right-wing, anti-D/democratic, genocidal hate group. They don't represent the average Jewish American or their views, and have made it clear that the Bad Jews Who Hate Bibi are exempt from any sentiments of "Never Again."
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 8:10 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 8:10 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
There'd be too much :WhatAbout"-ism to punish Trump for violating the Logan Act.
Or he'll just delay until he's either elected, a Republican congress forgives him or everyone just gets tired and gives up. Then he'll claim a win.
I have very little hope that he will see the inside of a jail cell in a more than sideshow "look how much of a martyr I am" or "they punished C****, too!" way.
posted by JustSayNoDawg at 8:10 AM on August 21 [1 favorite]
Or he'll just delay until he's either elected, a Republican congress forgives him or everyone just gets tired and gives up. Then he'll claim a win.
I have very little hope that he will see the inside of a jail cell in a more than sideshow "look how much of a martyr I am" or "they punished C****, too!" way.
posted by JustSayNoDawg at 8:10 AM on August 21 [1 favorite]
I forgot to mention another action item: Boycott, Divest, Sanction (BDS) - which is technically illegal in multiple US states, but hopefully the ground is shifting there, and is the reason for all the university protests.
Personal boycotts are not illegal, and after stopping visits to McDonald's and then inadvertently kind of dropping all fast food from our household, we're healthier now anyway. We are also weaning ourselves off of soda in general. My local Middle Eastern grocer has boycotted with a vengeance, dropping both Coke and Pepsi from his adjacent restaurant, and going so far as to drop Sadaf spices from his shelves. He replaced it with Greenland Food items, which I can personally vouch are higher quality anyway. There are boycott apps you can download and BDS' own campaigns page.
The American Association of University Professors has decided, after 2 decades of opposition, that boycotts "can be considered legitimate tactical responses". Writers are continuing to boycott PEN America. Labor unions in the US have endorsed a ceasefire and set up the National Labor Network for Ceasefire.
posted by toastyk at 8:11 AM on August 21 [17 favorites]
Personal boycotts are not illegal, and after stopping visits to McDonald's and then inadvertently kind of dropping all fast food from our household, we're healthier now anyway. We are also weaning ourselves off of soda in general. My local Middle Eastern grocer has boycotted with a vengeance, dropping both Coke and Pepsi from his adjacent restaurant, and going so far as to drop Sadaf spices from his shelves. He replaced it with Greenland Food items, which I can personally vouch are higher quality anyway. There are boycott apps you can download and BDS' own campaigns page.
The American Association of University Professors has decided, after 2 decades of opposition, that boycotts "can be considered legitimate tactical responses". Writers are continuing to boycott PEN America. Labor unions in the US have endorsed a ceasefire and set up the National Labor Network for Ceasefire.
posted by toastyk at 8:11 AM on August 21 [17 favorites]
Months ago, I said on That Bird Place (which I now only visit for one person and to post ads for my book as marketing) that wanting the Gaza genocide and the illegal settlements to stop does not make a person antisemitic, that Israel has a right to exist as a state, but not to engage in the same kind of mass murder that spawned the movement to create Israel in the first place. I said that keeping people down and in poverty breeds the kind of anger that caused the attacks by Hamas in the first place, just so that they can be heard.
My block list tripled that day with people trying to dogpile me calling me a Nazi, stating that anyone who doesn't denounce Hamas and the people of Gaza was innately antisemitic in their views, because I obviously didn't understand how Hamas was an existential threat to Israel's very existence and thus to the existence of Jews worldwide.
A number of those people had tweets from AIPAC in their likes and retweets.
This view of Israel being somehow synonymous with Judaisim is one that needs to be changed, and then other things might be able to be shifted.
posted by mephron at 8:38 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
My block list tripled that day with people trying to dogpile me calling me a Nazi, stating that anyone who doesn't denounce Hamas and the people of Gaza was innately antisemitic in their views, because I obviously didn't understand how Hamas was an existential threat to Israel's very existence and thus to the existence of Jews worldwide.
A number of those people had tweets from AIPAC in their likes and retweets.
This view of Israel being somehow synonymous with Judaisim is one that needs to be changed, and then other things might be able to be shifted.
posted by mephron at 8:38 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
OTOH Democrats will support demonstrations under Trump but won’t under a Democrat.
There's a wide spectrum between "supporting protestors" and "criminalizing and killing protestors." I don't think that either the Democrats or the Republicans will support protestors, but I do believe, as someone who has been paying attention to the rhetoric, that the Republicans are willing to go much farther when it comes to criminalizing and killing them.
For the most part, Democrats are still stuck rhetorically in the phase where they acknowledge the right to protest while condemning specific actions by specific individuals (antisemitism, trespasss, etc) to appease donors and constituents who oppose the protests. They're trying to walk a line. Whereas Republicans are pretty openly calling all protestors criminals, traitors, calling for deportation - and in policy terms, passing laws in red states that make organizing protests something you'll do time for.
Obviously there are exceptions to this generalization but on balance, I have a lot more hope for protests to keep up their momentum and to have an influence on future policy under a Democratic administration than a Republican one.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 8:48 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
There's a wide spectrum between "supporting protestors" and "criminalizing and killing protestors." I don't think that either the Democrats or the Republicans will support protestors, but I do believe, as someone who has been paying attention to the rhetoric, that the Republicans are willing to go much farther when it comes to criminalizing and killing them.
For the most part, Democrats are still stuck rhetorically in the phase where they acknowledge the right to protest while condemning specific actions by specific individuals (antisemitism, trespasss, etc) to appease donors and constituents who oppose the protests. They're trying to walk a line. Whereas Republicans are pretty openly calling all protestors criminals, traitors, calling for deportation - and in policy terms, passing laws in red states that make organizing protests something you'll do time for.
Obviously there are exceptions to this generalization but on balance, I have a lot more hope for protests to keep up their momentum and to have an influence on future policy under a Democratic administration than a Republican one.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 8:48 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
They've definitely been condemning these protests extremely aggressively, up to and including using state violence against them, so YMMV regarding just how different the two parties are in this particular scenario. Democrat disdain for protesters is different in degree, but not kind, from Republicans when it comes to Palestine.
posted by sagc at 8:55 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
posted by sagc at 8:55 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
What I’ve learned post 2020 is that blue state governors and mayors fucking hate protestors like they are the homeless or something and will support any level of police violence against them, but under a Republican presidency you can expect some statements of solidarity to go alongside that and under a Democratic one they shut up and get to funding more cops.
posted by Artw at 8:56 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
posted by Artw at 8:56 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
Also, honestly, I don’t think we need to make up extra bad things about Trump. He’s pretty bad, we all know it, no point doing also doing a whataboutism to make Biden seem better than he is.
posted by Artw at 8:58 AM on August 21 [6 favorites]
posted by Artw at 8:58 AM on August 21 [6 favorites]
“There is no chance of changing AIPAC's tune. ”
Yes, that’s probably true. So how can we support Dems whom they attack (Jamaal Bowman, Cori Bush)? House primaries are small money. I am so mad at how much AIPAC was able to pour into those races, and I’m also a little mad that the focus on national politics left Bowman and Bush insufficiently supported, so now we won’t have their voices in the House. Their losses also mean the D’s in general are now slightly more pro-genocide.
Trying to push Harris seems unlikely to work. But trying to support primary candidates? It’s not the season, now, but that can actually work. It’s how we change who the D’s are.
(And, what should we do for the voices like Bush and Bowman that got pushed out of house seats? I honestly have no suggestions but I’d love to hear some)
posted by nat at 9:00 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
Yes, that’s probably true. So how can we support Dems whom they attack (Jamaal Bowman, Cori Bush)? House primaries are small money. I am so mad at how much AIPAC was able to pour into those races, and I’m also a little mad that the focus on national politics left Bowman and Bush insufficiently supported, so now we won’t have their voices in the House. Their losses also mean the D’s in general are now slightly more pro-genocide.
Trying to push Harris seems unlikely to work. But trying to support primary candidates? It’s not the season, now, but that can actually work. It’s how we change who the D’s are.
(And, what should we do for the voices like Bush and Bowman that got pushed out of house seats? I honestly have no suggestions but I’d love to hear some)
posted by nat at 9:00 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
Israel has a right to exist as a state
I don't know why so many people cling to this idea, being against a rogue state does not imply any ill will for the people unfortunate enough to live there.
Israel deserves to have a true democracy, not the sham they currently have.
posted by Lanark at 9:04 AM on August 21 [12 favorites]
I don't know why so many people cling to this idea, being against a rogue state does not imply any ill will for the people unfortunate enough to live there.
Israel deserves to have a true democracy, not the sham they currently have.
posted by Lanark at 9:04 AM on August 21 [12 favorites]
Whereas Republicans are pretty openly calling all protestors criminals, traitors, calling for deportation - and in policy terms, passing laws in red states that make organizing protests something you'll do time for.
I can't think of any Dems who have called for amnesty laws that would allow drivers to run down protestors with impunity. A fairly brazen thing for Republicans to call for, especially after Charlottesville. It shouldn't be reduced to a what-aboutism to note that there are important differences and it's worth keeping a rational perspective in mind.
The biggest thing for the world to do, not just presidential candidates, is to call for immediate free and fair elections in Israel, which might hold out hope for removing Netanyahu from office. He is deliberately in the way of peace, only so that he does not have to face prison time. Israel has the right to exist, but it also has a responsibility to hold its leader accountable and have him face justice for his crimes, and that's up to Israelis to do and for the rest of us to remind them.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 9:12 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
I can't think of any Dems who have called for amnesty laws that would allow drivers to run down protestors with impunity. A fairly brazen thing for Republicans to call for, especially after Charlottesville. It shouldn't be reduced to a what-aboutism to note that there are important differences and it's worth keeping a rational perspective in mind.
The biggest thing for the world to do, not just presidential candidates, is to call for immediate free and fair elections in Israel, which might hold out hope for removing Netanyahu from office. He is deliberately in the way of peace, only so that he does not have to face prison time. Israel has the right to exist, but it also has a responsibility to hold its leader accountable and have him face justice for his crimes, and that's up to Israelis to do and for the rest of us to remind them.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 9:12 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
"In reality, it's unclear whether a Trump presidency would result in more Gazans dying"
Beg pardon? Is that that take Trump seriously but not literally thing? We have an ENTIRE TRUMP PRESIDENCY that says he will, in fact, be worse. Biden is terrible. Biden is arming the genociders. Biden is failing his human and moral duties. I understand that it's hard to vote Democrat because they are enabling a literal genocide. Though I'm going to vote Blue, like always, because it's the least evil option available.
Trump gives zero shits about human lives. Trump loves strongmen, and war, and making money off human suffering. If the Palestinians could give him more money than Israel, he'd be instantly pro Palestinian. Kushner is investing in Israel. Trumps weird fundamentalist base sees a strong Israel as some sort of Biblical prophecy leading to the Promised Land, or something.
taquito sunrise more than amply provided the links that prove, yes, we know full well Trump will be worse for the Palestinian lives, freedom, and having good and shelter. Plus Ukraine, The USA, LGBT, women everywhere, democracies, world stability.... Like....... Trump is obviously a vile human of the highest order. How is there possibly the slightest ambiguity that Trump wouldn't kill some 'undesirables' his buddies wanted gone? Pay him a dollar per person and he'd probably do it himself!
posted by Jacen at 9:16 AM on August 21 [20 favorites]
Beg pardon? Is that that take Trump seriously but not literally thing? We have an ENTIRE TRUMP PRESIDENCY that says he will, in fact, be worse. Biden is terrible. Biden is arming the genociders. Biden is failing his human and moral duties. I understand that it's hard to vote Democrat because they are enabling a literal genocide. Though I'm going to vote Blue, like always, because it's the least evil option available.
Trump gives zero shits about human lives. Trump loves strongmen, and war, and making money off human suffering. If the Palestinians could give him more money than Israel, he'd be instantly pro Palestinian. Kushner is investing in Israel. Trumps weird fundamentalist base sees a strong Israel as some sort of Biblical prophecy leading to the Promised Land, or something.
taquito sunrise more than amply provided the links that prove, yes, we know full well Trump will be worse for the Palestinian lives, freedom, and having good and shelter. Plus Ukraine, The USA, LGBT, women everywhere, democracies, world stability.... Like....... Trump is obviously a vile human of the highest order. How is there possibly the slightest ambiguity that Trump wouldn't kill some 'undesirables' his buddies wanted gone? Pay him a dollar per person and he'd probably do it himself!
posted by Jacen at 9:16 AM on August 21 [20 favorites]
So you mention "free and fair" elections. I am not well-versed in Israeli politics. Are/have there been issues with Israeli elections?
posted by Windopaene at 9:17 AM on August 21 [1 favorite]
posted by Windopaene at 9:17 AM on August 21 [1 favorite]
Assides from genuine questions of if an apartheid state can be truly considered democratic It’s been sliding into non Democratic status of late.
posted by Artw at 9:23 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
posted by Artw at 9:23 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Chanda Prescod-Weinstein - "The Mathematics of Solidarity"
The alternative is worse. The other guy wants to do what will amount to many genocides, including one that targets queers, not just one or a couple like the current guy. A terrible calculation, one we’ve all been turning over in our minds.posted by audi alteram partem at 9:23 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
A calculation that will not matter to the Palestinians who are killed tomorrow. They will already be dead. The worst has already happened to over 40,000 people. Some of them are my colleagues, fellow physicists. But their level of education, the fact of their intellectual curiosity, is immaterial. Whoever they are, the worst case scenario for them is already unrelentingly underway.
“There is no chance of changing AIPAC's tune. ”
But ... isn't there a chance of changing Biden's?
Why not ask/demand/BEG Biden to STOP all arms shipments to Israel NOW?
Biden has nothing to lose and everything to gain:
- his 'historic statesman' legacy is severely tarnished by this US-funded genocide
- he is on his way out; nothing can hurt him now
- he NEEDS Harris to win and knows she can't make any bold moves about Israel before the election
- his staff and State Dept appointees have been jumping ship over this issue
- he KNOWS how much Netanyahu has lied and used him
- time is running out (for his life and legacy)
* Biden is centered in his 'man of faith' identity ... a faith that is not, in any way, aligned with his support of Israel's horrific carnage and depravity. He must be suffering deep inner conflicts.
Biden needs a barrage of constant, fervent, sincere messages telling him to Live His Faith.
posted by Surfurrus at 9:24 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
But ... isn't there a chance of changing Biden's?
Why not ask/demand/BEG Biden to STOP all arms shipments to Israel NOW?
Biden has nothing to lose and everything to gain:
- his 'historic statesman' legacy is severely tarnished by this US-funded genocide
- he is on his way out; nothing can hurt him now
- he NEEDS Harris to win and knows she can't make any bold moves about Israel before the election
- his staff and State Dept appointees have been jumping ship over this issue
- he KNOWS how much Netanyahu has lied and used him
- time is running out (for his life and legacy)
* Biden is centered in his 'man of faith' identity ... a faith that is not, in any way, aligned with his support of Israel's horrific carnage and depravity. He must be suffering deep inner conflicts.
Biden needs a barrage of constant, fervent, sincere messages telling him to Live His Faith.
posted by Surfurrus at 9:24 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Why not ask/demand/BEG Biden to STOP all arms shipments to Israel NOW?
Anything big Biden does is immediately attached to Harris.
posted by tzikeh at 9:26 AM on August 21
Anything big Biden does is immediately attached to Harris.
posted by tzikeh at 9:26 AM on August 21
>>Israel has a right to exist as a state
I don't know why so many people cling to this idea
depends on who's saying it, of course, but at this point it's probably okay to set one's priors on it being more or less the same reason as the reason for the other well-known use of the phrase "states' rights".
posted by busted_crayons at 9:26 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
I don't know why so many people cling to this idea
depends on who's saying it, of course, but at this point it's probably okay to set one's priors on it being more or less the same reason as the reason for the other well-known use of the phrase "states' rights".
posted by busted_crayons at 9:26 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
He must be suffering deep inner conflicts.
Oh, man, on this issue he almost certainly is not.
posted by Gadarene at 9:27 AM on August 21 [12 favorites]
Oh, man, on this issue he almost certainly is not.
posted by Gadarene at 9:27 AM on August 21 [12 favorites]
So you mention "free and fair" elections. I am not well-versed in Israeli politics. Are/have there been issues with Israeli elections?
There has been censorship and persecution of Israelis who oppose the war and who oppose the sitting government, as well as voter intimidation by Likud and other right-wing political parties. I personally don't see how one can have a fair electoral system when a government uses its tools of office to curtail or in some cases criminalize nonviolent expression of opposition, notwithstanding systemic separation of civil rights and maintenance of separate classes of people based on ethnicity and religion (i.e., apartheid, in all but name), but I admit I am not a political scientist.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 9:28 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
There has been censorship and persecution of Israelis who oppose the war and who oppose the sitting government, as well as voter intimidation by Likud and other right-wing political parties. I personally don't see how one can have a fair electoral system when a government uses its tools of office to curtail or in some cases criminalize nonviolent expression of opposition, notwithstanding systemic separation of civil rights and maintenance of separate classes of people based on ethnicity and religion (i.e., apartheid, in all but name), but I admit I am not a political scientist.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 9:28 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
Democrat disdain for protesters is different in degree, but not kind, from Republicans when it comes to Palestine.
Yes, and I've come to the personal conclusion that the difference in degree is significant enough to matter for the future of the protest movement. We've seenstate crackdowns on protest even under blue state governments, but haven't seen "any level of police violence" used against protestors yet. I don't think that statement reckons with how dark it could get under a fascist administration whose only worry about optics with its base is appearing too soft on protestors.
Trump wants to be Putin, to be Viktor Orban, to be Kim Jong-Il. People in Trump's party are currently calling for protestors to be deported, jailed, and even killed. People in Trump's party are currently passing (or working to pass) laws that criminalize organizing protest and using bail funds for protestors.
I can't think of any Dems who have called for amnesty laws that would allow drivers to run down protestors with impunity.
This is one of several examples in my mind.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 9:28 AM on August 21 [6 favorites]
Yes, and I've come to the personal conclusion that the difference in degree is significant enough to matter for the future of the protest movement. We've seenstate crackdowns on protest even under blue state governments, but haven't seen "any level of police violence" used against protestors yet. I don't think that statement reckons with how dark it could get under a fascist administration whose only worry about optics with its base is appearing too soft on protestors.
Trump wants to be Putin, to be Viktor Orban, to be Kim Jong-Il. People in Trump's party are currently calling for protestors to be deported, jailed, and even killed. People in Trump's party are currently passing (or working to pass) laws that criminalize organizing protest and using bail funds for protestors.
I can't think of any Dems who have called for amnesty laws that would allow drivers to run down protestors with impunity.
This is one of several examples in my mind.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 9:28 AM on August 21 [6 favorites]
Anything big Biden does is immediately attached to Harris.
That includes his facilitation of genocide. It isn't like the status quo is some neutral choice without costs.
posted by pattern juggler at 9:46 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
That includes his facilitation of genocide. It isn't like the status quo is some neutral choice without costs.
posted by pattern juggler at 9:46 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
>>Israel has a right to exist as a state
Do Palestinians have a right to life? They are currently being denied that - and because of Israeli actions and bombardment, they are being killed, bombed, even as we speak, and if they are lucky enough to survive, they are contending with starvation, amputations, polio and hepatitis.
posted by toastyk at 10:01 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
Do Palestinians have a right to life? They are currently being denied that - and because of Israeli actions and bombardment, they are being killed, bombed, even as we speak, and if they are lucky enough to survive, they are contending with starvation, amputations, polio and hepatitis.
posted by toastyk at 10:01 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
“Israel can only exist if it’s continuously doing war crimes” would be a hell of an assumption to make about it.
posted by Artw at 10:06 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
posted by Artw at 10:06 AM on August 21 [13 favorites]
So what do you specifically recommend that people in the US hoping to stop a genocide should do?
Speaking as someone who has wanted an arms embargo on Israel for more than 30 years, and wants not a ceasefire, but a complete and permanent end to the appalling treatment of Palestinians by Israel, and Palestinian statehood, I'll say that one of the saddest things about this (apart from the actual human suffering which is the actual saddest thing) is that a workable solution that can be implemented quickly enough that it can put a stop to the human suffering soon is not forthcoming. Nobody is presenting such a solution. An arms embargo would not do it; Israel already has bombs and other weapons, including nukes and if the U.S. stopped, someone else would fill the gap, or Israel could very well move quickly to "fuck it, let's use the nukes," which is a position some in the current government hold. For those of us who want pragmatic solutions that will actually achieve the desired goal, things look grim, and an arms embargo might make us feel better, but it is no guarantee of stopping the human suffering and could make things worse in the short term. Yes, these are hypothetical concerns, but a responsible government must take the most likely hypotheticals into account when making decisions that affect millions of people.
What the students were doing on university campuses seemed to be persuasive and get the issue into the national consciousness, but since then the movement seems to be unsure of an effective strategy. That in turn seems to have manifested in protests just becoming emotive rather than strategic.
It took years for protests to turn the public opinion on Vietnam, years for public opinion to change on Civil Rights, marriage equality, etc. That's probably the pace of protest-driven change. That's frustrating in a situation like this where the slaughter is moving at a much faster rate. But as folks have suggested above, it might be time for other tactics, financial ones, maybe or dreaming up something new. I don't know what the something new might be, which, see above, re: sadness.
posted by A Most Curious Rabbit at 10:16 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
Speaking as someone who has wanted an arms embargo on Israel for more than 30 years, and wants not a ceasefire, but a complete and permanent end to the appalling treatment of Palestinians by Israel, and Palestinian statehood, I'll say that one of the saddest things about this (apart from the actual human suffering which is the actual saddest thing) is that a workable solution that can be implemented quickly enough that it can put a stop to the human suffering soon is not forthcoming. Nobody is presenting such a solution. An arms embargo would not do it; Israel already has bombs and other weapons, including nukes and if the U.S. stopped, someone else would fill the gap, or Israel could very well move quickly to "fuck it, let's use the nukes," which is a position some in the current government hold. For those of us who want pragmatic solutions that will actually achieve the desired goal, things look grim, and an arms embargo might make us feel better, but it is no guarantee of stopping the human suffering and could make things worse in the short term. Yes, these are hypothetical concerns, but a responsible government must take the most likely hypotheticals into account when making decisions that affect millions of people.
What the students were doing on university campuses seemed to be persuasive and get the issue into the national consciousness, but since then the movement seems to be unsure of an effective strategy. That in turn seems to have manifested in protests just becoming emotive rather than strategic.
It took years for protests to turn the public opinion on Vietnam, years for public opinion to change on Civil Rights, marriage equality, etc. That's probably the pace of protest-driven change. That's frustrating in a situation like this where the slaughter is moving at a much faster rate. But as folks have suggested above, it might be time for other tactics, financial ones, maybe or dreaming up something new. I don't know what the something new might be, which, see above, re: sadness.
posted by A Most Curious Rabbit at 10:16 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
Israel is not going to nuke its own territory.
posted by Artw at 10:20 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
posted by Artw at 10:20 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
And it's not like those other successful protests got to be successful by just giving up because people said they were wrong.
posted by sagc at 10:25 AM on August 21 [6 favorites]
posted by sagc at 10:25 AM on August 21 [6 favorites]
And it's not like those other successful protests got to be successful by just giving up because people said they were wrong.
I don't feel like I said the protestors were wrong, but if that somehow came across in my post, then let me clarify that I do not think the protestors are wrong.
posted by A Most Curious Rabbit at 10:28 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
I don't feel like I said the protestors were wrong, but if that somehow came across in my post, then let me clarify that I do not think the protestors are wrong.
posted by A Most Curious Rabbit at 10:28 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
Other advantages to stopping sending Israeli bombs and money, as well as not being complicit in genocide, is that the bombs and money could be sent elsewhere, for instance Ukraine, who need them to stop Russia from commiting a genocide on them.
posted by Artw at 10:32 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
posted by Artw at 10:32 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
"free and fair" elections
In 2022 Israel’s parliament passed a law denying naturalisation to Palestinians from the occupied West Bank or Gaza married to Israeli citizens, forcing thousands of Palestinian families to either emigrate or live apart.
Not a million miles away from the Reich Citizenship Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor of September 15, 1935
posted by Lanark at 10:41 AM on August 21 [20 favorites]
In 2022 Israel’s parliament passed a law denying naturalisation to Palestinians from the occupied West Bank or Gaza married to Israeli citizens, forcing thousands of Palestinian families to either emigrate or live apart.
Not a million miles away from the Reich Citizenship Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor of September 15, 1935
posted by Lanark at 10:41 AM on August 21 [20 favorites]
Thanks Lanark.
Didn't know that. Seems pretty much bullshit.
posted by Windopaene at 10:48 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
Didn't know that. Seems pretty much bullshit.
posted by Windopaene at 10:48 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
“Israel can only exist if it’s continuously doing war crimes” would be a hell of an assumption to make about it.
I mean, given that it's been continuously doing war crimes since it was founded, i don't think that's so much an "assumption" as an "observation of reality".
The biggest thing for the world to do, not just presidential candidates, is to call for immediate free and fair elections in Israel, which might hold out hope for removing Netanyahu from office. He is deliberately in the way of peace, only so that he does not have to face prison time.
lmao. Netanyahu is a problem but he's not the problem. Most of the rest of the Knesset is worse than he is, and Israeli society is top-to-bottom rotten. 65% of Jewish Israelis oppose prosecuting the soldiers who raped a Palestinian prisoner to death.
Israel has a right to exist as a state
States don't have rights. People have rights.
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:49 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
I mean, given that it's been continuously doing war crimes since it was founded, i don't think that's so much an "assumption" as an "observation of reality".
The biggest thing for the world to do, not just presidential candidates, is to call for immediate free and fair elections in Israel, which might hold out hope for removing Netanyahu from office. He is deliberately in the way of peace, only so that he does not have to face prison time.
lmao. Netanyahu is a problem but he's not the problem. Most of the rest of the Knesset is worse than he is, and Israeli society is top-to-bottom rotten. 65% of Jewish Israelis oppose prosecuting the soldiers who raped a Palestinian prisoner to death.
Israel has a right to exist as a state
States don't have rights. People have rights.
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:49 AM on August 21 [18 favorites]
Also, I find it deeply and bitterly amusing that when people talk about Palestinian genocide in the Harris/Walz campaign threads, we get told to shut up and vote for Democrats. And then when toastyk kindly creates a new thread for us to talk about the US response to Palestinian genocide, a heavily overlapping group of folks comes here to tell us to shut up and vote for Democrats. It's pretty clear that the goal is to marginalize any discussion of Palestinian genocide as it relates to the US to the point of driving it off the site, at least until after the election, and i think that's proof positive that we're not all "on the same side" on this issue.
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:53 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:53 AM on August 21 [19 favorites]
Do you have suggestions for how we can effectively counter AIPAC?
I can’t say I’m on the same side as you, unless that side is just broadly anti-genocide, but I do think we’re both against the actions AIPAC has taken to primary Dems that support Palestine.
So, what can we do about that?
posted by nat at 11:01 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
I can’t say I’m on the same side as you, unless that side is just broadly anti-genocide, but I do think we’re both against the actions AIPAC has taken to primary Dems that support Palestine.
So, what can we do about that?
posted by nat at 11:01 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Heck, I'd be satisfied if we could get rid of the electoral college. It's already cost the Democrats two presidencies and five Supreme Court Justices in living memory, so you'd think they'd make it a higher priority.
That would require a constitutional amendment -- an amendment that will never pass, because of the number of states that would see such an amendment decrease their electoral power. So there's not much point in advocating for it, unless you like spending energy on performative support for lost causes. Most Democratic politicians have other things to focus on.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 11:02 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
That would require a constitutional amendment -- an amendment that will never pass, because of the number of states that would see such an amendment decrease their electoral power. So there's not much point in advocating for it, unless you like spending energy on performative support for lost causes. Most Democratic politicians have other things to focus on.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 11:02 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
......Gaza is not (yet) Israeli territory. Neither is the West Bank. Killing all the inhabitants and stealing their land does not a country make.... (Ok, ignore all the times and countries where that's exactly how it worked! I'm trying to be anti genocide here)
posted by Jacen at 11:03 AM on August 21 [1 favorite]
posted by Jacen at 11:03 AM on August 21 [1 favorite]
Kinda. Maybe. It’s territory under Israeli control that lacks meaningful independence and is in the process of being assimilated into Israel. Same difference.
posted by Artw at 11:10 AM on August 21 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 11:10 AM on August 21 [1 favorite]
Yes, this is why a single state with full civil rights and right of return for all Palestinian refugees is actually the only just and realistic solution. But Israel will try to burn the whole world before it allows that to happen—and the US will, if not forcibly pressured, let them do it.
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:13 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:13 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Do you have suggestions for how we can effectively counter AIPAC?
Forcing them to register under FARA would probably help a lot; they're absolutely desperate to avoid it.
However, again, AIPAC is a problem but they are not the problem. A lot of rich donors and a lot of Christofascists are, for all sorts of bad reasons, extremely personally invested in Israel existing.
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:18 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
Forcing them to register under FARA would probably help a lot; they're absolutely desperate to avoid it.
However, again, AIPAC is a problem but they are not the problem. A lot of rich donors and a lot of Christofascists are, for all sorts of bad reasons, extremely personally invested in Israel existing.
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:18 AM on August 21 [8 favorites]
Their spending was certainly a problem this electoral cycle, better organization and heads up around that should probably be a priority. Pushback against institutional acceptance probably also worthwhile - if some other far right group sought to place their candidates on a Dem ticket there would be some kind of ruckus, here there was barely a squeak.
posted by Artw at 11:28 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 11:28 AM on August 21 [2 favorites]
If Democratic politicians decided to actually fucking lead instead of pandering to the Christofascists, that would help a lot. If some useful campaign finance reform got passed, that would help a lot.
Unfortunately, none of that is useful to the Palestinians dying now. An arms embargo from the US is the only thing that will actually make that stop. If Joe Biden would decide that the US should follow its own fucking laws, we would have that already.
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:29 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
Unfortunately, none of that is useful to the Palestinians dying now. An arms embargo from the US is the only thing that will actually make that stop. If Joe Biden would decide that the US should follow its own fucking laws, we would have that already.
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:29 AM on August 21 [5 favorites]
But as folks have suggested above, it might be time for other tactics, financial ones, maybe or dreaming up something new. I don't know what the something new might be, which, see above, re: sadness.
for people currently subject to genocide (or, i suppose, for institutions/organisations whose claims to govern those people create a responsibility to defend them), or for governments of other countries (or not-exactly-state-actor armed groups) who perceive a duty to intervene in a genocide (or have their own political goals that are include intervening in a genocide for self-interested reasons), what are the right tactics? which tactics are acceptable?
none of us controls any of the above, as far as i know, but i suspect, if we're interested in teasing out the differences in viewpoint present in this discussion, it would be informative to see who's a pragmatist (i.e. someone who thinks that, say, military intervention to stop a genocide is a valid last resort, if necessary and other less dangerous solutions are not forthcoming on the required timescale, even if it's done by forces with whom we differ politically, even in fundamental ways) and who's an idealist (i.e. someone taking a position along the lines that people suffering a genocide must suffer until the "good" forces see fit to exert the necessary leverage; more immediate intervention/self-defence by "bad" forces is illegitimate even if it has the potential to end the slaughter more quickly).
what's the MeFi-approved take on, say, the vietnamese invasion of cambodia in 1978?
what's an appropriate tactic for someone in Gaza, at the moment? wait for the americans to pull heads out of arses? just wait to die?
posted by busted_crayons at 11:31 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
for people currently subject to genocide (or, i suppose, for institutions/organisations whose claims to govern those people create a responsibility to defend them), or for governments of other countries (or not-exactly-state-actor armed groups) who perceive a duty to intervene in a genocide (or have their own political goals that are include intervening in a genocide for self-interested reasons), what are the right tactics? which tactics are acceptable?
none of us controls any of the above, as far as i know, but i suspect, if we're interested in teasing out the differences in viewpoint present in this discussion, it would be informative to see who's a pragmatist (i.e. someone who thinks that, say, military intervention to stop a genocide is a valid last resort, if necessary and other less dangerous solutions are not forthcoming on the required timescale, even if it's done by forces with whom we differ politically, even in fundamental ways) and who's an idealist (i.e. someone taking a position along the lines that people suffering a genocide must suffer until the "good" forces see fit to exert the necessary leverage; more immediate intervention/self-defence by "bad" forces is illegitimate even if it has the potential to end the slaughter more quickly).
what's the MeFi-approved take on, say, the vietnamese invasion of cambodia in 1978?
what's an appropriate tactic for someone in Gaza, at the moment? wait for the americans to pull heads out of arses? just wait to die?
posted by busted_crayons at 11:31 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Also the more people voting down ballot and in non national elections the harder pulling something like that off is. So I keep beating that drum.
posted by Artw at 11:32 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
posted by Artw at 11:32 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
who's a pragmatist (i.e. someone who thinks that, say, military intervention to stop a genocide is a valid last resort, if necessary and other less dangerous solutions are not forthcoming on the required timescale, even if it's done by forces with whom we differ politically, even in fundamental ways)
It me. I'm currently at "critical support for Iranian intervention", frankly.
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:40 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
It me. I'm currently at "critical support for Iranian intervention", frankly.
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:40 AM on August 21 [4 favorites]
Meanwhile, in the actual topic of the thread:
Ilhan Omar and Cori Bush gave a press conference this morning in collaboration with the Uncommitted delegates. (Reporting by Akela Lacy on Twitter)
Rep. Omar: it’s been unconscionable “to witness my colleagues in this administration refusing to recognize the genocidal war that is taking place in Gaza … working tirelessly for a ceasefire is really not a thing and they should be ashamed of themselves”
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:44 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
Ilhan Omar and Cori Bush gave a press conference this morning in collaboration with the Uncommitted delegates. (Reporting by Akela Lacy on Twitter)
Rep. Omar: it’s been unconscionable “to witness my colleagues in this administration refusing to recognize the genocidal war that is taking place in Gaza … working tirelessly for a ceasefire is really not a thing and they should be ashamed of themselves”
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:44 AM on August 21 [10 favorites]
Also:
Democrats attacked a Muslim woman for protesting Biden’s speech. She’s a Harris delegate. (Akela Lacy at The Intercept)
FBI investigates maggot incident at DNC breakfast in Chicago (WGN9 news, a local Chicago source)
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:46 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Democrats attacked a Muslim woman for protesting Biden’s speech. She’s a Harris delegate. (Akela Lacy at The Intercept)
FBI investigates maggot incident at DNC breakfast in Chicago (WGN9 news, a local Chicago source)
posted by adrienneleigh at 11:46 AM on August 21 [3 favorites]
I'm not trying to mock anyone who views this as primarily a moral issue; it's just that most voters vastly prioritize kitchen-table issues
Most voters care about themselves above others, sure. But there an idea in progressive values that you don’t leave people behind. And let’s be straight, that’s exactly what enthusiastic Harris voters are doing.
posted by iamck at 11:52 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Most voters care about themselves above others, sure. But there an idea in progressive values that you don’t leave people behind. And let’s be straight, that’s exactly what enthusiastic Harris voters are doing.
posted by iamck at 11:52 AM on August 21 [7 favorites]
what's an appropriate tactic for someone in Gaza, at the moment? wait for the americans to pull heads out of arses? just wait to die?
I'm sure you didn't intend this, but you're responding to me expressing frustration at the fact that nobody seems to have a workable solution that will stop the suffering soon and then seeming to recast it as being concerned with what's "appropriate" or "acceptable." Maybe you're just using my post as a jumping-off point to address points raised by other folks? Personally, I'm unconcerned with "appropriate" and more concerned with something that will work, and my post was not about tone-policing the movement but instead expressing sorrow and frustration that nobody has presented a workable solution, and hope that someone comes up with something soon.
posted by A Most Curious Rabbit at 12:01 PM on August 21 [5 favorites]
I'm sure you didn't intend this, but you're responding to me expressing frustration at the fact that nobody seems to have a workable solution that will stop the suffering soon and then seeming to recast it as being concerned with what's "appropriate" or "acceptable." Maybe you're just using my post as a jumping-off point to address points raised by other folks? Personally, I'm unconcerned with "appropriate" and more concerned with something that will work, and my post was not about tone-policing the movement but instead expressing sorrow and frustration that nobody has presented a workable solution, and hope that someone comes up with something soon.
posted by A Most Curious Rabbit at 12:01 PM on August 21 [5 favorites]
Why is an arms embargo not a "workable solution"?
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:04 PM on August 21 [9 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:04 PM on August 21 [9 favorites]
Because nobody in a position of power is deeply interested in that, many people in positions of power are deeply invested in NOT that, and there’s nothing remotely like the percentage of ordinary people who think it a top ten issue to overcome that. Ordinary Dem voters believe they have more important issues to devote their limited energy to.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 12:09 PM on August 21 [1 favorite]
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 12:09 PM on August 21 [1 favorite]
You're saying the people in power don't like it. That's not the same thing as saying it's not "workable".
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:12 PM on August 21 [9 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:12 PM on August 21 [9 favorites]
What happens if a 100% arms embargo goes in effect today. What happens next? (honest question)
posted by mazola at 12:16 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
posted by mazola at 12:16 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
U.S. Doctors Back From Gaza Say the DNC Speeches, Rhetoric Feel Like an Alternate Reality (Jezebel)
Dr. Tanya Haj-Hassan, who treated patients in Gaza earlier this year, says she’s “personally held the hands of children taking their last final gasps with no family alive.” Now, she and other doctors are watching crowds chant “We love Joe!”
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:17 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
Dr. Tanya Haj-Hassan, who treated patients in Gaza earlier this year, says she’s “personally held the hands of children taking their last final gasps with no family alive.” Now, she and other doctors are watching crowds chant “We love Joe!”
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:17 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
(That link really belongs in the DNC thread, but i know if i put it there i'll just get shit on)
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:17 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:17 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
It’s not “workable” if it doesn’t happen. And absent some kind of sea change in ordinary voters, who by and large are not going to be moved by disruptive protests, it’s not going to happen.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 12:20 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 12:20 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
What happens if a 100% arms embargo goes in effect today. What happens next?
Israel has indicated that they need the continual supply of US arms, so I presume they would become more strategic about their targets instead of blowing up schools indiscriminately, and then stop once they run out completely. They would probably also be less likely to aggro other countries since they no longer have the weaponry to fight a multi-front war.
posted by tofu_crouton at 12:20 PM on August 21 [17 favorites]
Israel has indicated that they need the continual supply of US arms, so I presume they would become more strategic about their targets instead of blowing up schools indiscriminately, and then stop once they run out completely. They would probably also be less likely to aggro other countries since they no longer have the weaponry to fight a multi-front war.
posted by tofu_crouton at 12:20 PM on August 21 [17 favorites]
I implore anyone who buys the line that the Biden administration is working to support a ceasefire look at the volume of weapons (and as mentioned above, fuel) the US is sending to Israel.
Not a single state department rep will go on record as saying they recognize the Geneva Convention with respect to Israel-Palestine. That didn't stop that dipshit Anthony Blinken from celebrating the convention's anniversary in the most sardonic post I've ever seen on Twitter.
The US is simply running cover for Israel's genocide. I don't care how many times Biden calls Netanyahu an asshole behind closed doors, he's sent billions and billions of weapons which the admin knows full well are being used on civilians. There is no justification for using precision guided ordinance on a school turned shelter right as prayers start.
I could not care less what Trump would hypothetically do as president, Biden and Harris are party to a holocaust and I will loathe them with every fiber of my being for as long as I live, in the same manner as I do George W Bush.
The lesser evil is still indisputably evil. If you choose to rationalize that then I can only assume you have no soul.
posted by Dark Messiah at 12:21 PM on August 21 [14 favorites]
Not a single state department rep will go on record as saying they recognize the Geneva Convention with respect to Israel-Palestine. That didn't stop that dipshit Anthony Blinken from celebrating the convention's anniversary in the most sardonic post I've ever seen on Twitter.
The US is simply running cover for Israel's genocide. I don't care how many times Biden calls Netanyahu an asshole behind closed doors, he's sent billions and billions of weapons which the admin knows full well are being used on civilians. There is no justification for using precision guided ordinance on a school turned shelter right as prayers start.
I could not care less what Trump would hypothetically do as president, Biden and Harris are party to a holocaust and I will loathe them with every fiber of my being for as long as I live, in the same manner as I do George W Bush.
The lesser evil is still indisputably evil. If you choose to rationalize that then I can only assume you have no soul.
posted by Dark Messiah at 12:21 PM on August 21 [14 favorites]
Because nobody in a position of power is deeply interested in that
I mean, that's simply not true as to people of positions in power in numerous other countries, and what a shameful, shameful indictment of our leaders if it's true here
Children. Are. Being. Deliberately. Murdered. With. Our. Knowledge. And. Assistance.
posted by Gadarene at 12:38 PM on August 21 [12 favorites]
I mean, that's simply not true as to people of positions in power in numerous other countries, and what a shameful, shameful indictment of our leaders if it's true here
Children. Are. Being. Deliberately. Murdered. With. Our. Knowledge. And. Assistance.
posted by Gadarene at 12:38 PM on August 21 [12 favorites]
Because nobody in a position of power is deeply interested in that, many people in positions of power are deeply invested in NOT that, and there’s nothing remotely like the percentage of ordinary people who think it a top ten issue to overcome that. Ordinary Dem voters believe they have more important issues to devote their limited energy to.
I have heard lots of people express horror and outrage over what is being done to the people of Palestine. Not just young activist, older people and people who aren't especially into politics.
Very often, the message that nobody but some leftist fringe cares about an issue is expressed by people who themselves don't care, and wish everyone else would stop making it a priority.
So perhaps you have been hearing from a lot of people in that cohort.
posted by pattern juggler at 12:38 PM on August 21 [19 favorites]
I have heard lots of people express horror and outrage over what is being done to the people of Palestine. Not just young activist, older people and people who aren't especially into politics.
Very often, the message that nobody but some leftist fringe cares about an issue is expressed by people who themselves don't care, and wish everyone else would stop making it a priority.
So perhaps you have been hearing from a lot of people in that cohort.
posted by pattern juggler at 12:38 PM on August 21 [19 favorites]
Forcing them to register under FARA would probably help a lot; they're absolutely desperate to avoid it.
Good idea. Here's a Guardian article about that issue.
posted by nat at 12:40 PM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Good idea. Here's a Guardian article about that issue.
posted by nat at 12:40 PM on August 21 [7 favorites]
The mental gymnastics people are going through to persuade themselves that a dictator who has said what he wanted to do (send more weapons, and is in the meantime breaking the law to continue it) might offer a better hope on the one issue they dislike the other guy on. For, fucks, sake, people. Disgusting.
You'll be dying on a hill that kills a lot more people in the long run (at home and abroad)
posted by opsin at 12:45 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
You'll be dying on a hill that kills a lot more people in the long run (at home and abroad)
posted by opsin at 12:45 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
The mental gymnastics people are going through to persuade themselves that a dictator who has said what he wanted to do (send more weapons, and is in the meantime breaking the law to continue it) might offer a better hope on the one issue they dislike the other guy on. For, fucks, sake, people. Disgusting.
Literally nobody in this thread has said that Trump would be better. The closest thing to that is cendawanita saying that it's unclear that he would, in practice, be worse. And she's not an American citizen and will not be voting in the US election!
For fuck's sake, you people have your Good Vibes threads that you can go yell at us in; some of us want to actually talk about policy.
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:48 PM on August 21 [14 favorites]
Literally nobody in this thread has said that Trump would be better. The closest thing to that is cendawanita saying that it's unclear that he would, in practice, be worse. And she's not an American citizen and will not be voting in the US election!
For fuck's sake, you people have your Good Vibes threads that you can go yell at us in; some of us want to actually talk about policy.
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:48 PM on August 21 [14 favorites]
The mental gymnastics people are going through to persuade themselves that a dictator who has said what he wanted to do (send more weapons, and is in the meantime breaking the law to continue it) might offer a better hope on the one issue they dislike the other guy on. For, fucks, sake, people. Disgusting.
How is that different than Biden, who is also sending weapons whenever requested and breaking the law to continue the conflict?
Trump won't be better, but other than not hiding his glee, it is hard to see how he can be worse.
posted by pattern juggler at 12:48 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
How is that different than Biden, who is also sending weapons whenever requested and breaking the law to continue the conflict?
Trump won't be better, but other than not hiding his glee, it is hard to see how he can be worse.
posted by pattern juggler at 12:48 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
For fuck's sake, you people have your Good Vibes threads that you can go yell at us in; some of us want to actually talk about policy.
Great, but meantime a whole bunch of people are talking about how they just can't with Biden or Harris because of this - despite Harris and Walz wanting to debate about it - they being not Biden. This is a trolley problem, but I'm seeing a lot of people treating it as zero sum.
posted by opsin at 12:52 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Gosh what original insight.
posted by Artw at 12:55 PM on August 21 [7 favorites]
posted by Artw at 12:55 PM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Harris and Walz have made very clear, so far, that they don't plan to break from Biden's policy.
Harris and Walz are also a very small part of "the US response to Gaza", which is the actual topic of this thread.
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:57 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
Harris and Walz are also a very small part of "the US response to Gaza", which is the actual topic of this thread.
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:57 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
Great, but meantime a whole bunch of people are talking about how they just can't with Biden or Harris because of this - despite Harris and Walz wanting to debate about it - they being not Biden. This is a trolley problem, but I'm seeing a lot of people treating it as zero sum.
The point of the Trolley problem is twofold. One, systems that let us pretend we are not active agents make it easoer for us to permit atrocity, and two, that pure utilitarian numbers games are insufficient to capture the kind of morality we generally feel entitled to. Namely that there are fundamental rights which cannot be violated for the greater good.
Both of which would actually seem critical of the "lesser evil" approach. It is the one I feel obligated to take, but Dr. Foot probably isn't on our side.
Right, but Trump will be a whole hell of a lot worse at home
Yes. But the point is that no one is having to engage in mental gymnastics to say Biden is as bad as Trump would be on this issue, which was the claim I was objecting to.
posted by pattern juggler at 12:58 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
The point of the Trolley problem is twofold. One, systems that let us pretend we are not active agents make it easoer for us to permit atrocity, and two, that pure utilitarian numbers games are insufficient to capture the kind of morality we generally feel entitled to. Namely that there are fundamental rights which cannot be violated for the greater good.
Both of which would actually seem critical of the "lesser evil" approach. It is the one I feel obligated to take, but Dr. Foot probably isn't on our side.
Right, but Trump will be a whole hell of a lot worse at home
Yes. But the point is that no one is having to engage in mental gymnastics to say Biden is as bad as Trump would be on this issue, which was the claim I was objecting to.
posted by pattern juggler at 12:58 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Welp better just accept genocide no matter what and never complain so everyone stays happy is the official position of this other thread if you want a place to hang out and just bask in that.
posted by Artw at 1:00 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
posted by Artw at 1:00 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
Trump will always find a way to make things worse, I don't know if that will be helping Israel to setup torture camps like Abu ghraib or sending american planes to actually drop the bombs, but there is always room to do worse.
posted by Lanark at 1:01 PM on August 21 [6 favorites]
posted by Lanark at 1:01 PM on August 21 [6 favorites]
I was not defending anyone. This is the kind of snarky bullshit that does not, fucking, help.
There are too many comments treating this as a zero sum issue of support one or the other, on this one issue. People getting defensive about a comment aimed at those people - also not helpful.
posted by opsin at 1:02 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
There are too many comments treating this as a zero sum issue of support one or the other, on this one issue. People getting defensive about a comment aimed at those people - also not helpful.
posted by opsin at 1:02 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
Israel already set up torture camps like Abu Ghraib, there’s an extremly distressing thread about it.
posted by Artw at 1:04 PM on August 21 [10 favorites]
posted by Artw at 1:04 PM on August 21 [10 favorites]
Trump will always find a way to make things worse, I don't know if that will be helping Israel to setup torture camps like Abu ghraib or sending american planes to actually drop the bombs, but there is always room to do worse.
"I bet ol' Trump is cooking up something worse" seems like a poor response to the actual, currently ongoing crimes the US is complicity in.
I was not defending anyone. This is the kind of snarky bullshit that does not, fucking, help.
I was making an effort not to be snarky. (You should have seen the first draft.) I will point out you referred to people you disagreed with as "disgusting", so perhaps a strong reaction should have been expected.
posted by pattern juggler at 1:05 PM on August 21 [6 favorites]
"I bet ol' Trump is cooking up something worse" seems like a poor response to the actual, currently ongoing crimes the US is complicity in.
I was not defending anyone. This is the kind of snarky bullshit that does not, fucking, help.
I was making an effort not to be snarky. (You should have seen the first draft.) I will point out you referred to people you disagreed with as "disgusting", so perhaps a strong reaction should have been expected.
posted by pattern juggler at 1:05 PM on August 21 [6 favorites]
Right, but Trump will be a whole hell of a lot worse at home. And with other countries. More people will die if Trump wins, they just won't all be Palestinian.
I'm reminded of the recurring observation from the old politics threads about asymmetry in agency, & who's expected to bend to 'be reasonable' vs. who gets to be treated as an immutable force we must all work around. It's taken as given that there's an immutable bloc of AIPAC & AIPAC-responsive voters (much as there's the NRA and an NRA-responsive voting bloc) that can freely threaten the election to get their way, & so it's easier to put all of this anxiety and pressure elsewhere. And so we get, per above,
If the prospect of Trump & Project 2025 is as dire as stated (it is), shouldn't that be as threatening to other wings of the "not-Trump" pseudo-coalition, & shouldn't everybody else be as enthusiastic about the necessity of sacrificing their *own* important values in the name of electoral success? If "not taking action to at least slow the rate of material support of genocide" is really an electoral risk, then perhaps we should do something about that.
After all, it's democracy on the line we're all told, so surely people making full-throated support of the current Israeli government their key issue should be *happy* to fall in line. Vote Blue No Matter Who, right?
posted by CrystalDave at 1:10 PM on August 21 [19 favorites]
I'm reminded of the recurring observation from the old politics threads about asymmetry in agency, & who's expected to bend to 'be reasonable' vs. who gets to be treated as an immutable force we must all work around. It's taken as given that there's an immutable bloc of AIPAC & AIPAC-responsive voters (much as there's the NRA and an NRA-responsive voting bloc) that can freely threaten the election to get their way, & so it's easier to put all of this anxiety and pressure elsewhere. And so we get, per above,
But Palestinian Americans like me are discovering something this year: the Democratic Party will bomb your homeland, kill your family, use your own money to do it, and still expect your vote. More than that, Democrats will curse you and shame you if you push back.It's not surprising that in response to that you'll get people going "Ok, so the only way to have my perspective respected is to be seen as equally inflexible". What sort of behavior are you/we rewarding by treating the opposition's perspective as immutable & dumping on our ostensible allies instead?
If the prospect of Trump & Project 2025 is as dire as stated (it is), shouldn't that be as threatening to other wings of the "not-Trump" pseudo-coalition, & shouldn't everybody else be as enthusiastic about the necessity of sacrificing their *own* important values in the name of electoral success? If "not taking action to at least slow the rate of material support of genocide" is really an electoral risk, then perhaps we should do something about that.
After all, it's democracy on the line we're all told, so surely people making full-throated support of the current Israeli government their key issue should be *happy* to fall in line. Vote Blue No Matter Who, right?
posted by CrystalDave at 1:10 PM on August 21 [19 favorites]
Mod note: A few comments deleted. Please try to keep this thread focused on the subject and avoid making light jokes in a serious discussion.
posted by loup (staff) at 1:13 PM on August 21 [1 favorite]
posted by loup (staff) at 1:13 PM on August 21 [1 favorite]
Welp, threads over.
posted by Artw at 1:19 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 1:19 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
If it was unclear, I was not joking. I really thought the deleted post was an intensely insensitive thing to say in this context, and reflected a lack of earnest concern over the situation.
posted by pattern juggler at 1:20 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
posted by pattern juggler at 1:20 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
It wasn't intended as that, it was an edit response in despair at ArtW responding to a repkly to someone else with a snarky and annoying post. I didn't appreciate it would seem tasteless and apologise.
Should just delete me all and I'll go.
posted by opsin at 1:22 PM on August 21 [1 favorite]
Should just delete me all and I'll go.
posted by opsin at 1:22 PM on August 21 [1 favorite]
No problem. Tone is hard to convey online. :)
It is easy to get heated in situations like this. We are all trying to figure out how to do the right thing.
posted by pattern juggler at 1:23 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
It is easy to get heated in situations like this. We are all trying to figure out how to do the right thing.
posted by pattern juggler at 1:23 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Trump will be a whole hell of a lot worse at home
The only reason I care about any Americans is because some of them are people i know and care about (like my entire family). American lives aren't worth more than Palestinian lives. I'd argue they're worth less, really.
posted by adrienneleigh at 1:27 PM on August 21 [6 favorites]
The only reason I care about any Americans is because some of them are people i know and care about (like my entire family). American lives aren't worth more than Palestinian lives. I'd argue they're worth less, really.
posted by adrienneleigh at 1:27 PM on August 21 [6 favorites]
Regarding the convention, I have to say, I am surprised by how effective the uncommitted movement has been. Especially for something written off as meaningless theatre during the primaries. And I have to admit, I am surprised the lack of open opposition from the DNC. I hope that translates to a larger shift, in time to help the people of Gaza, but it is already more than I expected.
posted by pattern juggler at 1:29 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
posted by pattern juggler at 1:29 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
There’s been some, a banner torn down etc, but yes, that is suprising. I think the conversation is incrementally shifting, but I think that’s also why there’s now such a rush to finish the job.
posted by Artw at 1:31 PM on August 21 [5 favorites]
posted by Artw at 1:31 PM on August 21 [5 favorites]
ah, yes, Press Butt.on to Check - thanks for that reminder of who else is on Metafilter.
Please, tell us just how many people on this site you think are "pro-hamas". Just how many Palestinians are "pro-hamas". Just how many of the uncommitted movement are "pro-hamas". How many babies killed have been "pro-hamas" babies. How many children with amputated limbs are "pro-hamas".
If there *isn't* a metatalk thread about this, there should be a thread ban. Or a timeout. Or just a ban.
posted by sagc at 1:34 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
Please, tell us just how many people on this site you think are "pro-hamas". Just how many Palestinians are "pro-hamas". Just how many of the uncommitted movement are "pro-hamas". How many babies killed have been "pro-hamas" babies. How many children with amputated limbs are "pro-hamas".
If there *isn't* a metatalk thread about this, there should be a thread ban. Or a timeout. Or just a ban.
posted by sagc at 1:34 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
America, regardless of its domestic dirty laundry and parochial insular mindset, has lost whatever moral capital or global power status it had due to this ongoing eradication of a human population. American leaders standing in global public spaces trying to utter words on human rights, democracy, values, whatever the fuck dude we see you we brown you fund and support an insane unhealthy "nation" acting out weird ass trauma on the bodies of helpless vulnerable peoples. We see you colonizer. We won't forget what we saw. Go on, launch a new bullshit campaign with a palatable brown woman in the lead, but you still killing us with your mighty might guns and your insane "allies"...
posted by infini at 1:35 PM on August 21 [9 favorites]
posted by infini at 1:35 PM on August 21 [9 favorites]
And people wonder why the pro-hamas crowd isn't more popular
Who do you see as the "pro-hamas" crowd? And why are you crediting them with this when it is not clear if it was even a deliberate action?
posted by pattern juggler at 1:36 PM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Who do you see as the "pro-hamas" crowd? And why are you crediting them with this when it is not clear if it was even a deliberate action?
posted by pattern juggler at 1:36 PM on August 21 [7 favorites]
Same fucking guy that tried to shut down Jewish people talking about Albert Einstein and Hannah Arendt (correctly) pointing out Irgun/Likud were the Jewish inheritors of Nazi ideology.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 1:38 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 1:38 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
It used to be every I/P thread had a half dozen of those guys throwing false claims around and usually getting them shut down or rendered worthless. I’d give that as an example of how things are shifting.
posted by Artw at 1:45 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
posted by Artw at 1:45 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
Please, tell us just how many people on this site you think are "pro-hamas".
Are you suggesting that I'm suggesting a mefite put maggots in people's food? I'm not
posted by Press Butt.on to Check at 1:45 PM on August 21
Are you suggesting that I'm suggesting a mefite put maggots in people's food? I'm not
posted by Press Butt.on to Check at 1:45 PM on August 21
I mean, no, I'm implying that you seem to think that there's such a thing as a "pro-hamas" movement; I'm asking you to expand on who exactly constitutes that movement. Or did you see some reports that that the maggots were each wearing a t-shirt that said "I love Hamas"?
posted by sagc at 1:48 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
posted by sagc at 1:48 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
Responding only makes it worse.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 1:52 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 1:52 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
lol, i think putting maggots in people's food was hilarious if it was deliberate, tbh, although i definitely see why it can't be endorsed officially. I personally want every politician who isn't actively pro-embargo to be made uncomfortable and miserable every single minute of their miserable lives until they change their minds. I want waiters to fuck up their food orders; i want grocery store cashiers to refuse to check them out; I want their houses to be the scenes of peaceful but loud protestors from 11pm to 7am every single night. Our system is set up so that individuals can't offer politicians the only carrot they care about, which is money, so the alternative is for us to be the stick.
posted by adrienneleigh at 1:56 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 1:56 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
Mod note: A couple more comments deleted. Please do not mischaracterize other fellow members because they think differently. Also, if you have any questions regarding MetaTalk posts, please contact us.
posted by loup (staff) at 2:02 PM on August 21 [1 favorite]
posted by loup (staff) at 2:02 PM on August 21 [1 favorite]
I just want to say that literally no one here (or possibly anywhere) thinks Trump would be better than Biden on Israel. Though he's such an unpredictable chaos force that who fucking knows he might want to pull arms funding to Israel to invade Mexico. But yeah, there are literally no Trump supporters here.
I do also want to say though that although I feel very strongly Pro Palestine and anti Zionist, I don't think my 'side' owns this thread (nor do Democratic cheerleaders own the DNC thread). I doubt I'll convince anyone, or impact policy, by getting progressively more shouty. I feel like there's a value in sharing our positions, sometimes forcefully and emotionally, but ultimately this site is politically heterogeneous and i think it's beneficial to the site to at some level accept that 🤷♀️
posted by latkes at 2:10 PM on August 21 [10 favorites]
I do also want to say though that although I feel very strongly Pro Palestine and anti Zionist, I don't think my 'side' owns this thread (nor do Democratic cheerleaders own the DNC thread). I doubt I'll convince anyone, or impact policy, by getting progressively more shouty. I feel like there's a value in sharing our positions, sometimes forcefully and emotionally, but ultimately this site is politically heterogeneous and i think it's beneficial to the site to at some level accept that 🤷♀️
posted by latkes at 2:10 PM on August 21 [10 favorites]
latkes: That's totally fair and reasonable. It's just that the anti-genocide posters aren't the ones who've been telling other people to shut the hell up.
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:11 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:11 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
It was suggested I be banned
posted by Press Butt.on to Check at 2:14 PM on August 21
posted by Press Butt.on to Check at 2:14 PM on August 21
No soul? Ouch. Yeah, that's pretty harsh, dude. What are the choices?
Vote Democrat even though they suck
Vote Trump who sucks worse and will happily turn the guns on me and mine?
Don't vote, ???? Profit!
Immigration to.... ???? Profit!
Die of sadness and existential despair? Working on it!
But thanks for judging my soul based on the reality of shitty politics. Means a lot to me.
posted by Jacen at 2:17 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Vote Democrat even though they suck
Vote Trump who sucks worse and will happily turn the guns on me and mine?
Don't vote, ???? Profit!
Immigration to.... ???? Profit!
Die of sadness and existential despair? Working on it!
But thanks for judging my soul based on the reality of shitty politics. Means a lot to me.
posted by Jacen at 2:17 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Given this thread has asked about policy rather than us go in circles again about who said what, some recent analysis :
Harris Can Change Biden’s Policy on Israel Just by Upholding the Law commentary in the nyt
Lawyers seeking arms export ban submit claims of Israeli war crimes to UK court guardian
Since this thread is ostensibly about the US response to Gaza, I'd like to see analyses of the effectiveness of proposed embargoes on reducing the warcrimefest; the most recent I could find is from Haaretz in March. Like, I remember some blowhard right-wing provocateur in the knesset a few months ago saying "If you stop sending us smart bombs, we have plenty of less accurate ones to use".
posted by lalochezia at 2:23 PM on August 21 [13 favorites]
Harris Can Change Biden’s Policy on Israel Just by Upholding the Law commentary in the nyt
Lawyers seeking arms export ban submit claims of Israeli war crimes to UK court guardian
Since this thread is ostensibly about the US response to Gaza, I'd like to see analyses of the effectiveness of proposed embargoes on reducing the warcrimefest; the most recent I could find is from Haaretz in March. Like, I remember some blowhard right-wing provocateur in the knesset a few months ago saying "If you stop sending us smart bombs, we have plenty of less accurate ones to use".
posted by lalochezia at 2:23 PM on August 21 [13 favorites]
Are you suggesting that I'm suggesting a mefite put maggots in people's food? I'm not
But why assume it is someone pro-Hamas? If it was a deliberate act (I won't say "attack" despite the FBI's response. Maggots are unappetizing, not poisonous) why assume it was someone in support of Hamas rather than say, Republicans, or opponents of Biden's support for the Israeli genocide? Is there a meaningful pro-Hamas movement in the US?
posted by pattern juggler at 2:35 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
But why assume it is someone pro-Hamas? If it was a deliberate act (I won't say "attack" despite the FBI's response. Maggots are unappetizing, not poisonous) why assume it was someone in support of Hamas rather than say, Republicans, or opponents of Biden's support for the Israeli genocide? Is there a meaningful pro-Hamas movement in the US?
posted by pattern juggler at 2:35 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
If you really want to go on about a deleted comment: I used the word "crowd". Whether they are a "meaningful movement" is not something I'm interested in debating. Yes, people who spray-paint "hamas is coming" are pro hamas. The threat was painted in DC near my home when Netanyhu spoke to Congress. There was a maggot "accident" then too.
posted by Press Butt.on to Check at 2:48 PM on August 21
posted by Press Butt.on to Check at 2:48 PM on August 21
Didn't realize the comment was deleted. I'll let it drop.
I will suggest not letting graffiti dictate your idea of the popularity of political movements. If it did indicate it accurately, my town would be huge fans of Kropotkin and Anton LaVey, which discussion with the residents has not borne out.
posted by pattern juggler at 2:50 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
I will suggest not letting graffiti dictate your idea of the popularity of political movements. If it did indicate it accurately, my town would be huge fans of Kropotkin and Anton LaVey, which discussion with the residents has not borne out.
posted by pattern juggler at 2:50 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
There were plenty of Jews that marched in DC against Netanyahu, too.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 2:54 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 2:54 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
Which is not a reminder that I should need to drop into every single thread about protests, but here we are.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 2:57 PM on August 21 [6 favorites]
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 2:57 PM on August 21 [6 favorites]
re: the maggot incident
In the midst of everything else, this bugs me* . . . probably because it's manageable and contained, tbh.
The people who were affected weren't politicians. These were delegates, regular people for the most part.
It's about the same as putting maggots in the food of poll workers.
It's juvenile and counter-productive.
That is the opposite of the work, the opposite of good trouble.
whatever . . . ~sigh~
(*unintentional pun, but there it is . . . )
posted by pt68 at 3:24 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
In the midst of everything else, this bugs me* . . . probably because it's manageable and contained, tbh.
The people who were affected weren't politicians. These were delegates, regular people for the most part.
It's about the same as putting maggots in the food of poll workers.
It's juvenile and counter-productive.
That is the opposite of the work, the opposite of good trouble.
whatever . . . ~sigh~
(*unintentional pun, but there it is . . . )
posted by pt68 at 3:24 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
News report
This does not seem particularly significant or interesting.
posted by Artw at 3:34 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
This does not seem particularly significant or interesting.
posted by Artw at 3:34 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
If Harris took a position on Gaza that is in line with almost all Democratic voters and the vast majority of the country as a whole, it would improve her chances of winning the election.
So if we want to defeat Trump, isn't it important for her to do so? Even if we take the obvious moral catastrophe of Biden's position and purely look at it through the lens of defeating Trump.
posted by chaz at 3:42 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
So if we want to defeat Trump, isn't it important for her to do so? Even if we take the obvious moral catastrophe of Biden's position and purely look at it through the lens of defeating Trump.
posted by chaz at 3:42 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
I can't prove it, but I got the sense that uncommitted and the Palestinian protests were a part of the reason that Biden had to step down. The genocide was used at the time as possible evidence of his poor decision making. I really believe that if Harris decides to go down the same road it will hurt her chances, and I want her to beat Trump.
I say all this just to point out how silly it is that we can't discuss that when discussing electing Harris.
posted by tofu_crouton at 4:49 PM on August 21 [12 favorites]
I say all this just to point out how silly it is that we can't discuss that when discussing electing Harris.
posted by tofu_crouton at 4:49 PM on August 21 [12 favorites]
Worth remembering that Nixon personally destroyed the peace talks in Vietnam by promising the South Vietnamese leadership that if they abandoned the talks it'd assure his election and then he could get them a better deal.
So Trump trying to sabotage a ceasefire in Israel to hurt Harris' electoral chances is 100% in keeping with the history and traditions of the Republican Party.
posted by sotonohito at 4:57 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
So Trump trying to sabotage a ceasefire in Israel to hurt Harris' electoral chances is 100% in keeping with the history and traditions of the Republican Party.
posted by sotonohito at 4:57 PM on August 21 [11 favorites]
Delegates cheering as they thought police tear-gassed protestors. American doctors begging Democrats to see the horror they saw in Gaza. "We love Joe" chants & attacks in response to a Jewish man & Muslim woman holding an anti-war sign.
48 hours at the DNC
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 5:30 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
48 hours at the DNC
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 5:30 PM on August 21 [8 favorites]
(warning: I'm not giving direct links in this comment)
There is talk in Israel that should there be a cutoff in arms, they'd be fine. This talk, if I remember the timing, was just before their assassination strike into that Iranian embassy in Syria (so I know there should be relevant links in the Palestinian genocide thread of that month), and finally after negotiations, the US signalled to Iran that something "small" was acceptable, hence the drone attacks. What was notable was in the first 3-5 days the reporting was very much indicating the strength of the Iron Dome and how Israel is self-sufficient. Then it later was shown that the ID only figured as part of the counterstrike and even then in proportion not even a major part - it was the deployment of allied air forces across the region (coordinated in major part by the US) that brought down most of it, with still a couple of successful ones making it through (based on public reports it's still unclear if they were downed or actually made their target).
What I haven't seen shared here from around then on is multiple small cases of successful incursions of Iran or Yemeni or Hezb drones well into Tel Aviv or unsuccessful ID deployment - that last was actually being discussed in their country as the actual inciting event that caused the strike in that village that became the casus belli to follow up with Iran directly.
In other actually-Hamas news, there's been news post-appointment of Yahya Sinwar that he's been cleaning house re: informants, as well as independent reports that Hamas has recuperated about 80% (?) of its military strength. Just last week iirc, the first suicide bombing in Tel Aviv took place in 10+++ years.
Northern Israel (...well...) settlers who are internally displaced are still such.
Those are the facts as I can objectively present them. I think for the same reasons the US knows it needs to continue its commitment to the US, anti-war activism knows the arms embargo would go a long way in starving Israeli inventory (In fact, shared much earlier than that, and to loop back to Artw's position, the US is depleting its stockpile that was meant for Ukraine so Israeli soldiers can shoot children out of boredom. And yet, one of those countries are making headway into the country that invaded them, and no, it's not the one running torture and rape camps.) and mitigate the effects of the siege. I'm catching up on the Sudanese war and it's striking that as horrible as that one is, the physical environment doesn't resemble hell on earth where physicians can barely function to serve people because hospitals and tents are being bombed, and isn't it rancid to think that that's a "normal" genocide?
In any case, I'm learning a little bit about the USS Liberty incident so I guess sacrificing Americans for Israel is also something the US has made a policy for decades, because if the killing of US naval servicemen on a boat with its flag up didn't result in any diplomatic cooling then what's a couple of decimals of the electorate with families back in Palestine.
(Uh, I'm not "pro-Hamas". I am a third worlder (see if you catch my political drift). Also, I have a lot of personal sympathy for anti-zionist Jews esp those with Israeli family because as fate so has it I have fam in another regional country who's a US ally that's made a habit to... *trying to select an example* terraform the dessert in a straight line. My birthright trip is actually part of my religious obligations - I guess I'll just have to die incomplete.)
posted by cendawanita at 6:53 PM on August 21 [14 favorites]
There is talk in Israel that should there be a cutoff in arms, they'd be fine. This talk, if I remember the timing, was just before their assassination strike into that Iranian embassy in Syria (so I know there should be relevant links in the Palestinian genocide thread of that month), and finally after negotiations, the US signalled to Iran that something "small" was acceptable, hence the drone attacks. What was notable was in the first 3-5 days the reporting was very much indicating the strength of the Iron Dome and how Israel is self-sufficient. Then it later was shown that the ID only figured as part of the counterstrike and even then in proportion not even a major part - it was the deployment of allied air forces across the region (coordinated in major part by the US) that brought down most of it, with still a couple of successful ones making it through (based on public reports it's still unclear if they were downed or actually made their target).
What I haven't seen shared here from around then on is multiple small cases of successful incursions of Iran or Yemeni or Hezb drones well into Tel Aviv or unsuccessful ID deployment - that last was actually being discussed in their country as the actual inciting event that caused the strike in that village that became the casus belli to follow up with Iran directly.
In other actually-Hamas news, there's been news post-appointment of Yahya Sinwar that he's been cleaning house re: informants, as well as independent reports that Hamas has recuperated about 80% (?) of its military strength. Just last week iirc, the first suicide bombing in Tel Aviv took place in 10+++ years.
Northern Israel (...well...) settlers who are internally displaced are still such.
Those are the facts as I can objectively present them. I think for the same reasons the US knows it needs to continue its commitment to the US, anti-war activism knows the arms embargo would go a long way in starving Israeli inventory (In fact, shared much earlier than that, and to loop back to Artw's position, the US is depleting its stockpile that was meant for Ukraine so Israeli soldiers can shoot children out of boredom. And yet, one of those countries are making headway into the country that invaded them, and no, it's not the one running torture and rape camps.) and mitigate the effects of the siege. I'm catching up on the Sudanese war and it's striking that as horrible as that one is, the physical environment doesn't resemble hell on earth where physicians can barely function to serve people because hospitals and tents are being bombed, and isn't it rancid to think that that's a "normal" genocide?
In any case, I'm learning a little bit about the USS Liberty incident so I guess sacrificing Americans for Israel is also something the US has made a policy for decades, because if the killing of US naval servicemen on a boat with its flag up didn't result in any diplomatic cooling then what's a couple of decimals of the electorate with families back in Palestine.
(Uh, I'm not "pro-Hamas". I am a third worlder (see if you catch my political drift). Also, I have a lot of personal sympathy for anti-zionist Jews esp those with Israeli family because as fate so has it I have fam in another regional country who's a US ally that's made a habit to... *trying to select an example* terraform the dessert in a straight line. My birthright trip is actually part of my religious obligations - I guess I'll just have to die incomplete.)
posted by cendawanita at 6:53 PM on August 21 [14 favorites]
Eep: . I think for the same reasons the US knows it needs to continue its commitment to the US
I mean: I think for the same reasons the US knows it needs to continue its commitment to Israel
What I also forgot to say: so, I don't personally find it particularly convincing that Israel can run a regional war on its own. It barely can keep its colonies together. I think that Israel's eyes (wanting a war/keeping Palestine) is bigger than its stomach (the material reality that includes my observation that they're probably the worst military the US has had the misfortune to support, operationally. ETA: this may expose my lack of knowledge of South American history)
posted by cendawanita at 7:08 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
I mean: I think for the same reasons the US knows it needs to continue its commitment to Israel
What I also forgot to say: so, I don't personally find it particularly convincing that Israel can run a regional war on its own. It barely can keep its colonies together. I think that Israel's eyes (wanting a war/keeping Palestine) is bigger than its stomach (the material reality that includes my observation that they're probably the worst military the US has had the misfortune to support, operationally. ETA: this may expose my lack of knowledge of South American history)
posted by cendawanita at 7:08 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
The people who were affected weren't politicians. These were delegates, regular people for the most part.
Delegates aren't "regular people". I mean, some of them are, but even the "regular" people involved are folks who deliberately chose to participate in the DNC shenanigans. They don't just pick them by drawing straws. And a lot of them are party elites and up-and-comers.
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:24 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
Delegates aren't "regular people". I mean, some of them are, but even the "regular" people involved are folks who deliberately chose to participate in the DNC shenanigans. They don't just pick them by drawing straws. And a lot of them are party elites and up-and-comers.
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:24 PM on August 21 [3 favorites]
This does not seem particularly significant or interesting.
Yep, no shit. And yet some celebrate this kind of childish behavior and treat it like it has some positive effect, that it will, through the lols, move people toward ending the genocide. They, in fact, seem to play politics with this spirit in general. So, kinda my point . . .
The same lols that come from disregarding or disrespecting the sincerity that drives some people to want to change things by participating in flawed systems, by treating those people as the enemy rather than potential allies.
Some of those delegates, by the way, are the uncommitted movement and the ceasefire delegates.
posted by pt68 at 7:53 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
Yep, no shit. And yet some celebrate this kind of childish behavior and treat it like it has some positive effect, that it will, through the lols, move people toward ending the genocide. They, in fact, seem to play politics with this spirit in general. So, kinda my point . . .
The same lols that come from disregarding or disrespecting the sincerity that drives some people to want to change things by participating in flawed systems, by treating those people as the enemy rather than potential allies.
Some of those delegates, by the way, are the uncommitted movement and the ceasefire delegates.
posted by pt68 at 7:53 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
The parents of Hersh Goldberg-Polin, who is being held hostage by Hamas, were given a chance to speak at the DNC, made appeals for a ceasefire in Gaza, and to stop the "despair in Gaza".
Uncommitted has been denied a chance to speak at the DNC by the Vice President's team. As of right now, Uncommitted leader Abbas Alaweieh is sitting outside the DNC with other delegates, stating "We're not going anywhere. We're movement people. We're not going anywhere before November, or in 4 years, or in 8 years. We are in it for the long haul. When the system tries to suppress us to the point that it's unbearable, and when I ask what do we need? We need the bombs to stop." I'm quoting from the X live feed, sorry I don't know how to link it. Anyway, they're waiting outside until they hear from the Vice President.
In the meantime, Ta-Nehisi Coates has a piece in Vanity Fair titled: A Palestinian American’s Place Under the Democrats’ Big Tent?
Maybe more than in any other year, this DNC has urged its various constituencies to highlight their identities and the collective pain that animates them. Racism, forced birth, land theft. It has been an exhibition of what the Palestinian scholar Edward Said called “the permission to narrate,” and it is that permission that Palestinian Americans have been denied. They have heard their names mentioned fleetingly by a handful of speakers but have not been granted the right to speak their names themselves. Perhaps that is for fear of what else a Palestinian American speaker might name. I cannot say that fear is unwarranted.
posted by toastyk at 7:56 PM on August 21 [27 favorites]
Uncommitted has been denied a chance to speak at the DNC by the Vice President's team. As of right now, Uncommitted leader Abbas Alaweieh is sitting outside the DNC with other delegates, stating "We're not going anywhere. We're movement people. We're not going anywhere before November, or in 4 years, or in 8 years. We are in it for the long haul. When the system tries to suppress us to the point that it's unbearable, and when I ask what do we need? We need the bombs to stop." I'm quoting from the X live feed, sorry I don't know how to link it. Anyway, they're waiting outside until they hear from the Vice President.
In the meantime, Ta-Nehisi Coates has a piece in Vanity Fair titled: A Palestinian American’s Place Under the Democrats’ Big Tent?
Maybe more than in any other year, this DNC has urged its various constituencies to highlight their identities and the collective pain that animates them. Racism, forced birth, land theft. It has been an exhibition of what the Palestinian scholar Edward Said called “the permission to narrate,” and it is that permission that Palestinian Americans have been denied. They have heard their names mentioned fleetingly by a handful of speakers but have not been granted the right to speak their names themselves. Perhaps that is for fear of what else a Palestinian American speaker might name. I cannot say that fear is unwarranted.
posted by toastyk at 7:56 PM on August 21 [27 favorites]
Apparently the best the Harris campaign can offer them is a private meeting.
The Democrats truly do not give a fuck about Palestinian lives.
posted by toastyk at 8:27 PM on August 21 [10 favorites]
The Democrats truly do not give a fuck about Palestinian lives.
posted by toastyk at 8:27 PM on August 21 [10 favorites]
G Supreme Court ruled that Biden is immune from prosecution for all Presidential Acts, so I'm hoping he is just looking for an excuse at this point.
I think what they actually ruled is that they have the authority to decide what acts are protected. I cynically believe that none of Biden’s or Harris’s would qualify.
posted by Warren Terra at 9:22 PM on August 21 [5 favorites]
I think what they actually ruled is that they have the authority to decide what acts are protected. I cynically believe that none of Biden’s or Harris’s would qualify.
posted by Warren Terra at 9:22 PM on August 21 [5 favorites]
Some of those delegates, by the way, are the uncommitted movement and the ceasefire delegates.
Does that not make the attribution of this to a deliberate act by anti-genocide activists substantially less likely, then?
posted by pattern juggler at 9:47 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
Does that not make the attribution of this to a deliberate act by anti-genocide activists substantially less likely, then?
posted by pattern juggler at 9:47 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
Sorry, just reread and realized you were talking about the delegates in general, not the ones that had their breakfast tampered with. feel free to ignore.
posted by pattern juggler at 10:03 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
posted by pattern juggler at 10:03 PM on August 21 [2 favorites]
Via the Uncommitted twt, a statement from Muslim Women for Harris-Walz:
We cannot in good conscience, continue Muslim Women for Harris- Walz, in light of this new information from the Uncommitted movement, that VP Harris' team declined their request to have a Palestinian American speaker take the stage at the DNC.
The family of the Israeli Hostage that was on the stage tonight, has shown more empathy towards Palestinian Americans and Palestinians, than our candidate or the DNC has.
This is a terrible message to send to Democrats. Palestinians have the right to speak about Palestine.
We pray that the DNC and VP Harris' team makes the right decision before this convention is over. For the sake of each of us.
(I'm serious about what I said earlier about and to Biden, but I guess it goes for every American politician who has any pull with this WH: take the mentions of the hostages out of your mouths. The disrespect. Maybe they'd like them to die because blood goes so well on their hands. Well, keep a couple alive so you can parade them and they have to take it because who's gonna be listening to them otherwise.)
(Maybe that goes for those in diaspora who loves riding on those hostages when it's their families who are chaining themselves to Israeli govt buildings begging for a ceasefire.)
posted by cendawanita at 10:12 PM on August 21 [12 favorites]
We cannot in good conscience, continue Muslim Women for Harris- Walz, in light of this new information from the Uncommitted movement, that VP Harris' team declined their request to have a Palestinian American speaker take the stage at the DNC.
The family of the Israeli Hostage that was on the stage tonight, has shown more empathy towards Palestinian Americans and Palestinians, than our candidate or the DNC has.
This is a terrible message to send to Democrats. Palestinians have the right to speak about Palestine.
We pray that the DNC and VP Harris' team makes the right decision before this convention is over. For the sake of each of us.
(I'm serious about what I said earlier about and to Biden, but I guess it goes for every American politician who has any pull with this WH: take the mentions of the hostages out of your mouths. The disrespect. Maybe they'd like them to die because blood goes so well on their hands. Well, keep a couple alive so you can parade them and they have to take it because who's gonna be listening to them otherwise.)
(Maybe that goes for those in diaspora who loves riding on those hostages when it's their families who are chaining themselves to Israeli govt buildings begging for a ceasefire.)
posted by cendawanita at 10:12 PM on August 21 [12 favorites]
Well, keep a couple alive so you can parade them
Eg, what Bibi did with Noa Argamani and bringing her along to DC for a photo op (since barely any Democrats dared to take a public photocall - why that discomfort, hmmm?) and for all that, when no one would show up, the Israelis had to their own photo ops and that's when: Tearful Noa Argamani tells Netanyahu his vow of long war broke her in captivity -
Separately, brother of US-Israeli hostage says PM skirted questions from families about specifics of deal, and the urgency of captives’ plight ‘didn’t seem to resonate with him’
posted by cendawanita at 10:17 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
Eg, what Bibi did with Noa Argamani and bringing her along to DC for a photo op (since barely any Democrats dared to take a public photocall - why that discomfort, hmmm?) and for all that, when no one would show up, the Israelis had to their own photo ops and that's when: Tearful Noa Argamani tells Netanyahu his vow of long war broke her in captivity -
Separately, brother of US-Israeli hostage says PM skirted questions from families about specifics of deal, and the urgency of captives’ plight ‘didn’t seem to resonate with him’
posted by cendawanita at 10:17 PM on August 21 [4 favorites]
The family of the Israeli Hostage that was on the stage tonight, has shown more empathy towards Palestinian Americans and Palestinians, than our candidate or the DNC has.
At the core of it all is a deep bigotry and hatred against Muslims. The stuff that's permissible to say about Islam would never be permitted to say against any other religion. America has an anti-Muslim problem, certainly stoked post 9/11, when all the good liberals lined up with the fascists to act out their revenge in the blood of millions of innocents in two unrelated countries.
It's the reason that we see commentators bring up hostages, or the lives lost on October 7th, in an effort to silence calling out an ongoing genocide. "But what about the hostages" is just another way to say "All lives matter", or that simply put, they don't believe brown Muslim lives don't, certainly not as much as Israeli ones do.
It's truly a failure of the Democrats, and I can only hope that the party crumbles away, its faux progressivism that not only leaves people behind, but is gratuitously embracing the war machine that devours humans.
posted by iamck at 11:29 PM on August 21 [17 favorites]
At the core of it all is a deep bigotry and hatred against Muslims. The stuff that's permissible to say about Islam would never be permitted to say against any other religion. America has an anti-Muslim problem, certainly stoked post 9/11, when all the good liberals lined up with the fascists to act out their revenge in the blood of millions of innocents in two unrelated countries.
It's the reason that we see commentators bring up hostages, or the lives lost on October 7th, in an effort to silence calling out an ongoing genocide. "But what about the hostages" is just another way to say "All lives matter", or that simply put, they don't believe brown Muslim lives don't, certainly not as much as Israeli ones do.
It's truly a failure of the Democrats, and I can only hope that the party crumbles away, its faux progressivism that not only leaves people behind, but is gratuitously embracing the war machine that devours humans.
posted by iamck at 11:29 PM on August 21 [17 favorites]
i remember standing on a picket line once and a more senior, union-eligible colleague said, while crossing the picket line, that he supported us. and he said this without irony, like his words somehow erased the concrete thing he was literally in the middle of doing to undermine our power. i am reminded a lot of that lately.
Fucking this, really.
posted by corb at 12:00 AM on August 22 [10 favorites]
Fucking this, really.
posted by corb at 12:00 AM on August 22 [10 favorites]
(fyi I've been having 403 troubles even with VPN to access Haaretz so I'm not sure if I can keep track of their articles so maybe peace will come to troubled vibing hearts and there's no need to spawn more meta.)
posted by cendawanita at 2:46 AM on August 22 [2 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 2:46 AM on August 22 [2 favorites]
cendawanita: You might try archive.is if you can access that from where you are? It is a quite useful way to access many things, including Ha'aretz articles.
Failing that, you know how to find me off MeFi and i'm always happy to help.
posted by adrienneleigh at 3:27 AM on August 22 [3 favorites]
Failing that, you know how to find me off MeFi and i'm always happy to help.
posted by adrienneleigh at 3:27 AM on August 22 [3 favorites]
Yeah I might try that as well, thanks for the offer!
posted by cendawanita at 3:37 AM on August 22 [2 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 3:37 AM on August 22 [2 favorites]
You do realize that Uncommitted wants to support Kamala Harris, right? They offered over a dozen speakers for the campaign to choose from, and for the speech to be vetted. Their primary goal is to persuade the administration to enforce US laws. And all they wanted was 5 min.
The proPalestinian movement is not a monolith. Uncommitted is made up of Democratic delegates who want a voice in the party that they voted for and participate in. They organized and agitated the way they were advised to by Democrats. They are not the people outside marching protesting or doing pranks. You can find out this info from their public statements and their twitter/x feeds.
posted by toastyk at 5:45 AM on August 22 [25 favorites]
The proPalestinian movement is not a monolith. Uncommitted is made up of Democratic delegates who want a voice in the party that they voted for and participate in. They organized and agitated the way they were advised to by Democrats. They are not the people outside marching protesting or doing pranks. You can find out this info from their public statements and their twitter/x feeds.
posted by toastyk at 5:45 AM on August 22 [25 favorites]
Pics of DNC attendees sticking their fingers in their ears as Uncommitted read out the names of dead Palestinian kids.
posted by toastyk at 6:09 AM on August 22 [17 favorites]
posted by toastyk at 6:09 AM on August 22 [17 favorites]
Pics of DNC attendees sticking their fingers in their ears as Uncommitted read out the names of dead Palestinian kids.
Well, I guess it's good that they're honest - better than walking by all solemn-like only to totally move into party mode indoors. They are people who don't want to be bothered, who are serenely untroubled by sending US bombs and US money so that the IDF can blow up and snipe helpless refugees in tents.
Perhaps you sometimes think to yourself, "how exactly was it that white Americans could have actual human beings as slaves right in front of their eyes and keep them in suffering and misery and think that was just fine", and this is how, willfully hardening your heart.
US support for Israel in the face of genocide is the outgrowth of our history of slavery and Native genocide. When white Americans did those things, we taught ourselves to harden our hearts, and passed those hard hearts down to our children. We willfully taught ourselves indifference to human suffering, so we could go down the years causing it and profiting from it. It is a kind of self-damnation. If there are devils at work in the world, it's us because we chose to become devils.
posted by Frowner at 6:57 AM on August 22 [26 favorites]
Mod note: Couple of comments and a response removed. Please recognize that this thread is about the US response to Gaza. Drive by comments saying protesters are "entirely impotent" inflame an already inflamed topic and may be considered a derail.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:14 AM on August 22 [6 favorites]
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:14 AM on August 22 [6 favorites]
Online in general, I notice a lot of people who seem to take actual pleasure in saying "you can't do anything about it, your protests are useless, suck it up" while still seemingly being socially liberal. The fact that protests have done nothing to stop American money and arms shipments as the violence and cruelty have literally and very publicly gotten worse is bad, it's a terrible indictment of American society and our political system. If you find yourself feeling compelled to say, basically, "ha ha there is nothing you can do hippies", you really need to look in your heart.
If your point is that peaceful/peaceful-adjacent protests have done nothing and you want people to step it up, you need to keep that off the internet and work with a small number of like-minded individuals.
posted by Frowner at 7:33 AM on August 22 [31 favorites]
If your point is that peaceful/peaceful-adjacent protests have done nothing and you want people to step it up, you need to keep that off the internet and work with a small number of like-minded individuals.
posted by Frowner at 7:33 AM on August 22 [31 favorites]
Apparently two days ago and buried deep in an NYT live update (so uh, technically American media is covering it): The lack of progress in talks has also tortured relatives of the roughly 109 hostages still held in Gaza. Some have asked why the Biden administration has not put more pressure on Mr. Netanyahu, whose nickname is Bibi, to compromise.
“He’s hiding behind the Americans,” said Gilad Korngold, 63, whose son Tal Shoham is one of the hostages. “I don’t understand the Americans. They really need to tell Bibi: Look, we’re your friends and protectors, but you’re going to go free the hostages. This is the time.”
NPR radio bit yesterday: THAER AHMAD: I think all of us are struggling with the fact that there's this sort of celebratory atmosphere around the DNC.
DIRKS: That's Thaer Ahmad. He says his community is trapped in perpetual mourning. He's a doctor who volunteered in Gaza earlier this year. It was devastating, he says.
AHMAD: This community, when we say it's mourning and grieving, it's because we are so locked into what's happening that we know the names of the families that have been killed. We know the stories. We know about the twins that were three days old and killed in an airstrike.
DIRKS: The Biden administration says Israel has a right to defend itself. Vice President Harris has echoed that. She's also said she won't be silent about the rising Palestinian death toll. But critical care nurse Hamza AbdulQader says words don't stop bombs. He points to the 3.5 billion more in military aid the U.S. is set to release to Israel.
HAMZA ABDULQADER: Until a candidate comes out and actually says, you know what, enough is enough; we're no longer going to fund this genocide, this ethnic cleansing, this absolute destruction, these war crimes, these human rights violations, it doesn't matter.
The Nation: As Democrats Party, Doctors Beg the World to Listen to Gaza -
“The reason we cry tears isn’t sadness anymore. It’s the feeling that we have no ability to get the most powerful country in the world to stop the bombs.”
(ICYMI, and you might have because it was so buried, other than the panel Uncommitted also held a press conference for these doctors)
But the spectacle of the DNC is difficult to penetrate. Political conventions are well-choreographed events designed to put on a show, not to have difficult conversations. This DNC convention also has an extra jolt of energy from Harris’s replacement of the sluggish Biden at the top of the ticket. It has been filled with themes of joy, unity, and “Brat” memes, and high-level party speakers met with thunderous applause (though President Biden did face one disruption from DNC members urging the US to stop arming Israel). To the extent that Gaza has flickered across the event’s mainstage, it is relatively brief, and it does not disrupt the atmosphere of celebration and festivity.
This does not mean that no one in the Democratic Party’s base cares about Gaza. Polling shows that an overwhelming majority of Democrats want a ceasefire. Seven major labor unions, representing nearly half of all unionized workers, are calling for an arms embargo pursuant to a permanent ceasefire, and the number of unions and labor organizations that are urging a ceasefire is even greater. Asma Mohammed, an uncommitted delegate from Minnesota, told the room that conversations with other delegates “have been really positive.” More than 200 delegates have signed onto the Uncommitted National Movement’s letter calling for an arms embargo, she said.
There is a clear gulf between this base and the party’s leaders. Vice President Harris has refused to agree to stop sending bombs to Israel. And while the uncommitted movement was granted a panel at the daytime off-site McCormick Place, and a vigil space, they are being kept far away from the main stage, despite their demands to feature a Palestinian-American speaker. “What we need urgently is for the bombs to stop,” said Abbas Alawieh, an uncommitted delegate from Dearborn, Michigan.
(...) To communicate these stakes, advocates are often compelled to rehash their trauma over and over again. Throughout the event, speakers broke into tears. Uncommitted delegates turned their backs to the crowd and held their faces in their hands while they cried. Tissues were passed around multiple times. One doctor could be seen silently mouthing to another, “Are you OK?” This group of doctors has formed an ad hoc community around their shared experience of working in Gaza, and one, Yousaf, had flown all the way to Arkansas just for this event, to speak to the handful of press outlets who will listen.
Zeteo: 'Blue-pilled': Democratic Enthusiasm Insulates DNC Attendees From the Horrors of Gaza -
Prem Thakker shares his sober realizations after two days at the DNC.
My second day at the Democratic National Convention led to a realization. For all the talk about mass protests and heightened security, about disruption and the pro-Palestinian movement overtaking events, things have not materialized in a way that's taken any kind of spotlight away from the DNC. If anything, the DNC – its delegates, the headline speeches, the whole vibe – seems so insulated that one could assume there isn't a genocidal war, with more than 40,000 Palestinians killed, that the Biden-Harris administration is currently fueling. Based on how attendees have behaved, one could assume Gaza is no big deal really, a now-rote nuisance some have to merely account for in their daily motions.
“When they [the police] had ‘controlled’ the protest, everyone was watching it live on the CNN live feed in the bus,… [and] everyone started clapping and applauding,” a Democratic delegate told me in describing what happened on Monday as convention attendees passed time in a long line of delayed shuttles to the United Center. That’s worth repeating: DNC attendees cheered as the police “controlled” those protesting against what human rights groups worldwide call a genocide (a US-funded one). One murmur traveling across the bus, sparking much excitement, was that the police even used tear gas (something that did not, in fact, seem to happen).
FT: (opinion piece from Edward Luce) ‘Gaza’ is the word Democrats dare not whisper in Chicago -
Silence is the wisest option for Kamala Harris on a divisive election issue that is harming the global image of the US
The downside to Harris saying nothing is that each side has scope to imagine the worst of her. As Democrats celebrate the vibes around their new standard-bearer, America’s global reputation is suffering untold damage. Visual tours of Gaza are redolent of Warsaw 1945 or Grozny 1999. No one surveying the levelled territory could believe that Israel has practised anything like precision bombing. “Indiscriminate” is not quite right. Israel’s razing of Gaza looks more like a deliberate policy to teach Palestinians a collective lesson, chiefly with American weapons.
That Biden is being celebrated as a great president in Chicago is partly a function of Democratic guilt. The party forced him to quit with uncharacteristic ruthlessness. Praising him on the way out is one way to salve its conscience. Yet the encomia for Biden risk straying into hyperbole. His poor record on the Middle East dates back to before the Hamas slaughter on October 7 last year.
He failed to redeem his promise to rejoin the Iran nuclear deal. Trump pulled America out in 2018. Biden’s hyper-caution was motivated by fear of the pro-Netanyahu Israeli lobby, which always saw the Iran deal as appeasement. That set the template for his response to October 7. Every time Netanyahu has called Biden’s bluff, he has caved. A Martian observing the relationship between the US and Israel might conclude that Israel was calling the shots. On the few occasions that Biden has hinted he might use America’s power to restrain Israel, he has felt obliged to climb down.
(Don't worry he described the 'anti-zionist left' as infantile)
Jacobin but useful for this is an interview with a legal scholar: Reminder to Democrats: Israel’s Occupation of Palestine Is Illegal
Heidi Matthews
The main takeaway is that the court found Israel’s prolonged military occupation of the Palestinian territory to be unlawful and said that Israel is under an obligation “to bring to an end its unlawful presence” in the territory “as rapidly as possible.” That is on the basis of a number of extremely serious violations of basic rules of international law caused by Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Territory. This is the first time that the court has made such a clear finding of illegality around the occupation itself.
In 2004, the court had the opportunity in its advisory opinion on the legality of the wall that surrounds, transects, and fragments the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In that case, the particular policy and practice of building the wall basically to protect the settlements was found to breach Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law. Now we have this much broader finding that is about the occupation in its totality.
It’s really a sweeping finding. The headlines have focused on Israel’s settlement policy, which has long been established as illegal in international law. That in and of itself is nothing new. But the broader occupation being unlawful is. The court also clearly indicated that Israel retains obligations to the population of Gaza under the law of occupation, to the extent that Gaza remains under its effective control. Also striking is the court’s finding that Israel’s policies and practices violate the human rights law prohibition on “racial segregation and apartheid.”
(...) I’m not expecting there to be any positive impact on the ground within Israel. Since this opinion came out, there has actually been an intensification of violence in Gaza. We saw that in the aftermath of each of the decisions ordering provisional orders in the genocide case as well.
What I’m looking at in terms of impact is not so much Israel (although we should be concerned with the way in which the Israeli government claims victimhood based on these decisions of the ICJ and then further supports its right to do whatever it wants to in Gaza), but really for every other state who is a member of the United Nations. This is one area where the work of the ICJ is quite different from the work of the International Criminal Court [ICC], which also has proceedings separately underway.
The ICJ is often referred to as the “world court” because it is the highest judicial body in the UN system, which is the central infrastructure of international law after World War II. In this opinion we see the court clarifying its legal position on some of the most important obligations that states can owe toward one another. These obligations — referred to as “erga omnes” — concern rights that are so fundamental that all states are understood to have an interest, and a role, in their protection. These sorts of obligations are actually owed by each state to every other state.
As such, Israel’s violations of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and its unlawful annexation of large portions of Palestinian territory create obligations for all states not to recognize the occupation as lawful and to bring these violations to an end using lawful means.
This opinion clarifies the obligations for every other state in the world vis-á-vis Israel’s continued presence in the occupied territory. So not only has the occupation been found to be illegal, but the court says that Israel is under an obligation to bring it to an end as rapidly as possible, which entails not only evacuating settlements but removing its presence entirely from the occupied Palestinian territory.
All these other states — the US, Canada, the UK, Germany, who are the main states propping up and giving financial and material aid and assistance, but also moral support and encouragement to the Israeli government, not just in its war in Gaza, but with respect to the occupation in its entirety — are now under an obligation to not render that aid or assistance, and to not recognize as legal the continued unlawful presence of Israel in the territory, or any other unlawful effects created by the occupation.
From a concrete policy perspective, that can take a lot of different forms. This really clarifies international legal obligations around the arms trade, around preferential free trade agreements with Israel, and around corporate or university investments, pension fund investments, etc., not only in companies that provide arms to Israel, but that in any way support the occupation.
America has never found itself in a custom or habit (unlike other western countries) of using international law as the final arbiter or precedent for domestic legal positions, but there's enough for lawsuits to continue being filed, I reckon (thinking about state-level anti-BDS laws), to really drive home the cost of being tax paying war criminals.
posted by cendawanita at 7:54 AM on August 22 [18 favorites]
“He’s hiding behind the Americans,” said Gilad Korngold, 63, whose son Tal Shoham is one of the hostages. “I don’t understand the Americans. They really need to tell Bibi: Look, we’re your friends and protectors, but you’re going to go free the hostages. This is the time.”
NPR radio bit yesterday: THAER AHMAD: I think all of us are struggling with the fact that there's this sort of celebratory atmosphere around the DNC.
DIRKS: That's Thaer Ahmad. He says his community is trapped in perpetual mourning. He's a doctor who volunteered in Gaza earlier this year. It was devastating, he says.
AHMAD: This community, when we say it's mourning and grieving, it's because we are so locked into what's happening that we know the names of the families that have been killed. We know the stories. We know about the twins that were three days old and killed in an airstrike.
DIRKS: The Biden administration says Israel has a right to defend itself. Vice President Harris has echoed that. She's also said she won't be silent about the rising Palestinian death toll. But critical care nurse Hamza AbdulQader says words don't stop bombs. He points to the 3.5 billion more in military aid the U.S. is set to release to Israel.
HAMZA ABDULQADER: Until a candidate comes out and actually says, you know what, enough is enough; we're no longer going to fund this genocide, this ethnic cleansing, this absolute destruction, these war crimes, these human rights violations, it doesn't matter.
The Nation: As Democrats Party, Doctors Beg the World to Listen to Gaza -
“The reason we cry tears isn’t sadness anymore. It’s the feeling that we have no ability to get the most powerful country in the world to stop the bombs.”
(ICYMI, and you might have because it was so buried, other than the panel Uncommitted also held a press conference for these doctors)
But the spectacle of the DNC is difficult to penetrate. Political conventions are well-choreographed events designed to put on a show, not to have difficult conversations. This DNC convention also has an extra jolt of energy from Harris’s replacement of the sluggish Biden at the top of the ticket. It has been filled with themes of joy, unity, and “Brat” memes, and high-level party speakers met with thunderous applause (though President Biden did face one disruption from DNC members urging the US to stop arming Israel). To the extent that Gaza has flickered across the event’s mainstage, it is relatively brief, and it does not disrupt the atmosphere of celebration and festivity.
This does not mean that no one in the Democratic Party’s base cares about Gaza. Polling shows that an overwhelming majority of Democrats want a ceasefire. Seven major labor unions, representing nearly half of all unionized workers, are calling for an arms embargo pursuant to a permanent ceasefire, and the number of unions and labor organizations that are urging a ceasefire is even greater. Asma Mohammed, an uncommitted delegate from Minnesota, told the room that conversations with other delegates “have been really positive.” More than 200 delegates have signed onto the Uncommitted National Movement’s letter calling for an arms embargo, she said.
There is a clear gulf between this base and the party’s leaders. Vice President Harris has refused to agree to stop sending bombs to Israel. And while the uncommitted movement was granted a panel at the daytime off-site McCormick Place, and a vigil space, they are being kept far away from the main stage, despite their demands to feature a Palestinian-American speaker. “What we need urgently is for the bombs to stop,” said Abbas Alawieh, an uncommitted delegate from Dearborn, Michigan.
(...) To communicate these stakes, advocates are often compelled to rehash their trauma over and over again. Throughout the event, speakers broke into tears. Uncommitted delegates turned their backs to the crowd and held their faces in their hands while they cried. Tissues were passed around multiple times. One doctor could be seen silently mouthing to another, “Are you OK?” This group of doctors has formed an ad hoc community around their shared experience of working in Gaza, and one, Yousaf, had flown all the way to Arkansas just for this event, to speak to the handful of press outlets who will listen.
Zeteo: 'Blue-pilled': Democratic Enthusiasm Insulates DNC Attendees From the Horrors of Gaza -
Prem Thakker shares his sober realizations after two days at the DNC.
My second day at the Democratic National Convention led to a realization. For all the talk about mass protests and heightened security, about disruption and the pro-Palestinian movement overtaking events, things have not materialized in a way that's taken any kind of spotlight away from the DNC. If anything, the DNC – its delegates, the headline speeches, the whole vibe – seems so insulated that one could assume there isn't a genocidal war, with more than 40,000 Palestinians killed, that the Biden-Harris administration is currently fueling. Based on how attendees have behaved, one could assume Gaza is no big deal really, a now-rote nuisance some have to merely account for in their daily motions.
“When they [the police] had ‘controlled’ the protest, everyone was watching it live on the CNN live feed in the bus,… [and] everyone started clapping and applauding,” a Democratic delegate told me in describing what happened on Monday as convention attendees passed time in a long line of delayed shuttles to the United Center. That’s worth repeating: DNC attendees cheered as the police “controlled” those protesting against what human rights groups worldwide call a genocide (a US-funded one). One murmur traveling across the bus, sparking much excitement, was that the police even used tear gas (something that did not, in fact, seem to happen).
FT: (opinion piece from Edward Luce) ‘Gaza’ is the word Democrats dare not whisper in Chicago -
Silence is the wisest option for Kamala Harris on a divisive election issue that is harming the global image of the US
The downside to Harris saying nothing is that each side has scope to imagine the worst of her. As Democrats celebrate the vibes around their new standard-bearer, America’s global reputation is suffering untold damage. Visual tours of Gaza are redolent of Warsaw 1945 or Grozny 1999. No one surveying the levelled territory could believe that Israel has practised anything like precision bombing. “Indiscriminate” is not quite right. Israel’s razing of Gaza looks more like a deliberate policy to teach Palestinians a collective lesson, chiefly with American weapons.
That Biden is being celebrated as a great president in Chicago is partly a function of Democratic guilt. The party forced him to quit with uncharacteristic ruthlessness. Praising him on the way out is one way to salve its conscience. Yet the encomia for Biden risk straying into hyperbole. His poor record on the Middle East dates back to before the Hamas slaughter on October 7 last year.
He failed to redeem his promise to rejoin the Iran nuclear deal. Trump pulled America out in 2018. Biden’s hyper-caution was motivated by fear of the pro-Netanyahu Israeli lobby, which always saw the Iran deal as appeasement. That set the template for his response to October 7. Every time Netanyahu has called Biden’s bluff, he has caved. A Martian observing the relationship between the US and Israel might conclude that Israel was calling the shots. On the few occasions that Biden has hinted he might use America’s power to restrain Israel, he has felt obliged to climb down.
(Don't worry he described the 'anti-zionist left' as infantile)
Jacobin but useful for this is an interview with a legal scholar: Reminder to Democrats: Israel’s Occupation of Palestine Is Illegal
Heidi Matthews
The main takeaway is that the court found Israel’s prolonged military occupation of the Palestinian territory to be unlawful and said that Israel is under an obligation “to bring to an end its unlawful presence” in the territory “as rapidly as possible.” That is on the basis of a number of extremely serious violations of basic rules of international law caused by Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Territory. This is the first time that the court has made such a clear finding of illegality around the occupation itself.
In 2004, the court had the opportunity in its advisory opinion on the legality of the wall that surrounds, transects, and fragments the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In that case, the particular policy and practice of building the wall basically to protect the settlements was found to breach Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law. Now we have this much broader finding that is about the occupation in its totality.
It’s really a sweeping finding. The headlines have focused on Israel’s settlement policy, which has long been established as illegal in international law. That in and of itself is nothing new. But the broader occupation being unlawful is. The court also clearly indicated that Israel retains obligations to the population of Gaza under the law of occupation, to the extent that Gaza remains under its effective control. Also striking is the court’s finding that Israel’s policies and practices violate the human rights law prohibition on “racial segregation and apartheid.”
(...) I’m not expecting there to be any positive impact on the ground within Israel. Since this opinion came out, there has actually been an intensification of violence in Gaza. We saw that in the aftermath of each of the decisions ordering provisional orders in the genocide case as well.
What I’m looking at in terms of impact is not so much Israel (although we should be concerned with the way in which the Israeli government claims victimhood based on these decisions of the ICJ and then further supports its right to do whatever it wants to in Gaza), but really for every other state who is a member of the United Nations. This is one area where the work of the ICJ is quite different from the work of the International Criminal Court [ICC], which also has proceedings separately underway.
The ICJ is often referred to as the “world court” because it is the highest judicial body in the UN system, which is the central infrastructure of international law after World War II. In this opinion we see the court clarifying its legal position on some of the most important obligations that states can owe toward one another. These obligations — referred to as “erga omnes” — concern rights that are so fundamental that all states are understood to have an interest, and a role, in their protection. These sorts of obligations are actually owed by each state to every other state.
As such, Israel’s violations of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and its unlawful annexation of large portions of Palestinian territory create obligations for all states not to recognize the occupation as lawful and to bring these violations to an end using lawful means.
This opinion clarifies the obligations for every other state in the world vis-á-vis Israel’s continued presence in the occupied territory. So not only has the occupation been found to be illegal, but the court says that Israel is under an obligation to bring it to an end as rapidly as possible, which entails not only evacuating settlements but removing its presence entirely from the occupied Palestinian territory.
All these other states — the US, Canada, the UK, Germany, who are the main states propping up and giving financial and material aid and assistance, but also moral support and encouragement to the Israeli government, not just in its war in Gaza, but with respect to the occupation in its entirety — are now under an obligation to not render that aid or assistance, and to not recognize as legal the continued unlawful presence of Israel in the territory, or any other unlawful effects created by the occupation.
From a concrete policy perspective, that can take a lot of different forms. This really clarifies international legal obligations around the arms trade, around preferential free trade agreements with Israel, and around corporate or university investments, pension fund investments, etc., not only in companies that provide arms to Israel, but that in any way support the occupation.
America has never found itself in a custom or habit (unlike other western countries) of using international law as the final arbiter or precedent for domestic legal positions, but there's enough for lawsuits to continue being filed, I reckon (thinking about state-level anti-BDS laws), to really drive home the cost of being tax paying war criminals.
posted by cendawanita at 7:54 AM on August 22 [18 favorites]
More from Prem Thakker:
As DNC refuses to welcome a Palestinian on stage, members of Congress, hostage family member, and now UAW have come out against decision.
Uncommitted says members will *continue* their sit-in & encourages any officials, delegates, press, Americans to visit and hear from them.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 8:00 AM on August 22 [10 favorites]
As DNC refuses to welcome a Palestinian on stage, members of Congress, hostage family member, and now UAW have come out against decision.
Uncommitted says members will *continue* their sit-in & encourages any officials, delegates, press, Americans to visit and hear from them.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 8:00 AM on August 22 [10 favorites]
I am really glad for the links and excerpts that everyone is posting (especially cendawanita). I am horrified and sickened, and after reading this I'm waffling between despair and hope.
posted by rednikki at 8:04 AM on August 22 [5 favorites]
posted by rednikki at 8:04 AM on August 22 [5 favorites]
A recent episode of the The Run Up includes an interview with Abbas Alawieh as well as some of the those protesting. But it's the interview with Alawieh that's worth listening to - that the DNC refuses to give space for even a voice that is so calm and moderate is absurd. Georgia State Rep Romman (one of the potential Palestinian American speakers) tweeted out yesterday "My speech urged us to unite behind Harris, criticized Trump, and spoke about the promise of this moment. The only reason we’re doing this is to save the soul of our party and prevent bad actors from using our pain in an ongoing voter suppression campaign." A lot of the Uncommitted faction believe in the potential of the party despite the fact that it's been facilitating the decimation of their homeland - the DNC is idiotic for not recognizing the value of that to the party.
posted by coffeecat at 8:40 AM on August 22 [5 favorites]
posted by coffeecat at 8:40 AM on August 22 [5 favorites]
Hey thanks to everyone, but I really want to shout out to toastyk too, and Noisy Pink Bubbles, Glengrinof the Pig-man for their links (among others) and also lately, kliuless.
I think, while things are changing, is it 'arms embargo commitment before November' changing? 'The genocide stops tonight' changing? No - and there'll be people who'd like to think so and portray themselves as sophisticates or cynics, or those who think so because they're not naive to the work needed to be done. CUFI has done a lot within the right-wing evangelical world to stabilize support for genocide and occupation but AIPAC has also not been a slouch for their decades-long project (following the Lebanon invasion) to really make American mainstream institutional position for progressive politics to never include Palestine in any meaningful way.
But isn't this one of those times when that can-do spirit will have to commit itself to the work*? It doesn't even have to be life-changing. Can be as anonymously instrumental as nominating Bisan for an Emmy, or just pushback at any cry bullying, like non-white non-christian racialized people can't be colonizers and outright criminals (hi, hello, reporting from the Global South). Even if you can't disagree at that moment, or you're feeling upset you're being made to feel bad, even changing your own mind is still something.
And yes, that's against a background of Palestinians being killed right now. Israelis too, unless you enjoy seeing them radicalized to such an extent they're not fit company for anyone who's not a fascist. I didn't ask to be born in a country that's systematically racist to all refugees, but that's my legacy and I'm working on it where I can.
*TBH I've seen similar observation from minoritarian Americans when the white or cissex people in their lives realize the extent of discrimination there is
posted by cendawanita at 8:45 AM on August 22 [12 favorites]
I think, while things are changing, is it 'arms embargo commitment before November' changing? 'The genocide stops tonight' changing? No - and there'll be people who'd like to think so and portray themselves as sophisticates or cynics, or those who think so because they're not naive to the work needed to be done. CUFI has done a lot within the right-wing evangelical world to stabilize support for genocide and occupation but AIPAC has also not been a slouch for their decades-long project (following the Lebanon invasion) to really make American mainstream institutional position for progressive politics to never include Palestine in any meaningful way.
But isn't this one of those times when that can-do spirit will have to commit itself to the work*? It doesn't even have to be life-changing. Can be as anonymously instrumental as nominating Bisan for an Emmy, or just pushback at any cry bullying, like non-white non-christian racialized people can't be colonizers and outright criminals (hi, hello, reporting from the Global South). Even if you can't disagree at that moment, or you're feeling upset you're being made to feel bad, even changing your own mind is still something.
And yes, that's against a background of Palestinians being killed right now. Israelis too, unless you enjoy seeing them radicalized to such an extent they're not fit company for anyone who's not a fascist. I didn't ask to be born in a country that's systematically racist to all refugees, but that's my legacy and I'm working on it where I can.
*TBH I've seen similar observation from minoritarian Americans when the white or cissex people in their lives realize the extent of discrimination there is
posted by cendawanita at 8:45 AM on August 22 [12 favorites]
A slight addendum to my comment - earlier I had seen Rep Romman as one of a few names put forward, but it appears she's now the top name Uncommitted is advocating to speak.
posted by coffeecat at 9:03 AM on August 22 [4 favorites]
posted by coffeecat at 9:03 AM on August 22 [4 favorites]
I have met Georgia rep Romman - she would be an excellent choice to speak and play well nationally. If she can walk that line even in GA she is not going to embarrass the ticket; there is no good reason to say no to her.
posted by corb at 9:08 AM on August 22 [9 favorites]
posted by corb at 9:08 AM on August 22 [9 favorites]
If the prospect of Trump & Project 2025 is as dire as stated (it is), shouldn't that be as threatening to other wings of the "not-Trump" pseudo-coalition, & shouldn't everybody else be as enthusiastic about the necessity of sacrificing their *own* important values in the name of electoral success? If "not taking action to at least slow the rate of material support of genocide" is really an electoral risk, then perhaps we should do something about that.
After all, it's democracy on the line we're all told, so surely people making full-throated support of the current Israeli government their key issue should be *happy* to fall in line. Vote Blue No Matter Who, right?
There's another angle for people that are angry in ways that we lack proper language for: What happens to the opposition party when the aggrieved fascist retakes power? Like, basically every time an aggrieved fascist retakes power.
If there isn't progress on helping Gazans there will be people who settle for consequences and a reckoning (many threads ago there was a "Michigan Arabs/Palestinians consider voting Trump" article). And when the election in 2020 was decided by fewer than 60,000 people spread across three states, boy howdy do you not want "I'll take any punishment for these fuckers I can get" to be a factor for anyone.
Despite this, to me, the DNC continues with a sort of "beneath the thirsting laughter of dark gods" energy, like it won't really be an issue. Despite the aforementioned margins.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:14 AM on August 22 [3 favorites]
After all, it's democracy on the line we're all told, so surely people making full-throated support of the current Israeli government their key issue should be *happy* to fall in line. Vote Blue No Matter Who, right?
There's another angle for people that are angry in ways that we lack proper language for: What happens to the opposition party when the aggrieved fascist retakes power? Like, basically every time an aggrieved fascist retakes power.
If there isn't progress on helping Gazans there will be people who settle for consequences and a reckoning (many threads ago there was a "Michigan Arabs/Palestinians consider voting Trump" article). And when the election in 2020 was decided by fewer than 60,000 people spread across three states, boy howdy do you not want "I'll take any punishment for these fuckers I can get" to be a factor for anyone.
Despite this, to me, the DNC continues with a sort of "beneath the thirsting laughter of dark gods" energy, like it won't really be an issue. Despite the aforementioned margins.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:14 AM on August 22 [3 favorites]
Protests are effective at two things but they require two different approaches.
Firstly, if a political class actually is pursuadable by numbers then a protest can bring attention to an issue and produce change. This almost never happens because a political class is almost always well aware of the issue and doesn't care.
We see this vividly in the pictures of delegates plugging their ears in a giant "fuck you" to people trying to make them pay attention to the dead. They know the death toll their policies are costing and they're fine with it. They weren't trying not to hear, they were expressing contempt at the very concept that hearing about the dead could influence them. And, indeed, it cannot.
A protest is a braometer more than anything else, it tells us if the political class cares or not. And almost always they do not.
Where things go wrong is that people sort of get stuck on the idea of a protest as an event, as a singular thing with a definite start and stop and the goal of making noise.
Which brings us to the SECOND thing protests can do, and why it requires a different approach.
For the first function of protest a single noise making event is sufficient. You will either bring awareness to your cause and get a resolution, or you will have hard data to establish that the problem is not lack of awareness.
The second thing a protest can do is cause harm to money and thereby coerce an indifferent or hostile political class to take action they don't want to.
This requires a protest not as a singular event with a definite start and stop and with the goal of making noise. It requires instead an open ended protest that continues for days, weeks, months even, and has the goal of shutting down or restricting the flow of goods and services so as to cause harm to the economy.
We saw this sort of protest in Egypt during the Arab Spring. In one sense it was peaaceful, no shots were fired, no stones were thrown, no one got physically injured. But in another sense it was not peaceful at all: it virtually shut down the economy in Egypt for its duration. They blocked roads, shops, factories, government buildings. They caused millions, if not billions, of dollars in lost revenue.
If the first sort of protest will not work, then trying harder to make more noise is just a waste of time. It might feel good, but it will accomplish nothing.
Therefore the question for people who want to move policy is simple: do you have the numbers and committment to undertake the second sort of protest? Can you and your comrades commit to undertaking action which is peaceful but causes harm to the money which is the one thing the political class actually cares about?
If not, then you're just having a good time and venting some anger. But you won't change anything.
There is one thing, and ONLY one thing, that separates the powerful from the pawns: how dangerous they are. If you're dangerous they'll deal with you, if you're not they'll ignore you. The danger here doesn't need to be, and really shouldn't be, a potential for physical violence. Simply being a danger to profits is sufficient and gives you the moral high ground where trying to cause actual physcal harm makes you look like a threat to the general public.
I sympathize with the protesters at the DNC. But I think they're taking entirely the wrong approach. We know the Democrats don't care about the dead and will cheerfully continue funding and supplying the genocide. We can either STFU, or we can undertake real, serious, protest.
posted by sotonohito at 9:25 AM on August 22 [3 favorites]
Firstly, if a political class actually is pursuadable by numbers then a protest can bring attention to an issue and produce change. This almost never happens because a political class is almost always well aware of the issue and doesn't care.
We see this vividly in the pictures of delegates plugging their ears in a giant "fuck you" to people trying to make them pay attention to the dead. They know the death toll their policies are costing and they're fine with it. They weren't trying not to hear, they were expressing contempt at the very concept that hearing about the dead could influence them. And, indeed, it cannot.
A protest is a braometer more than anything else, it tells us if the political class cares or not. And almost always they do not.
Where things go wrong is that people sort of get stuck on the idea of a protest as an event, as a singular thing with a definite start and stop and the goal of making noise.
Which brings us to the SECOND thing protests can do, and why it requires a different approach.
For the first function of protest a single noise making event is sufficient. You will either bring awareness to your cause and get a resolution, or you will have hard data to establish that the problem is not lack of awareness.
The second thing a protest can do is cause harm to money and thereby coerce an indifferent or hostile political class to take action they don't want to.
This requires a protest not as a singular event with a definite start and stop and with the goal of making noise. It requires instead an open ended protest that continues for days, weeks, months even, and has the goal of shutting down or restricting the flow of goods and services so as to cause harm to the economy.
We saw this sort of protest in Egypt during the Arab Spring. In one sense it was peaaceful, no shots were fired, no stones were thrown, no one got physically injured. But in another sense it was not peaceful at all: it virtually shut down the economy in Egypt for its duration. They blocked roads, shops, factories, government buildings. They caused millions, if not billions, of dollars in lost revenue.
If the first sort of protest will not work, then trying harder to make more noise is just a waste of time. It might feel good, but it will accomplish nothing.
Therefore the question for people who want to move policy is simple: do you have the numbers and committment to undertake the second sort of protest? Can you and your comrades commit to undertaking action which is peaceful but causes harm to the money which is the one thing the political class actually cares about?
If not, then you're just having a good time and venting some anger. But you won't change anything.
There is one thing, and ONLY one thing, that separates the powerful from the pawns: how dangerous they are. If you're dangerous they'll deal with you, if you're not they'll ignore you. The danger here doesn't need to be, and really shouldn't be, a potential for physical violence. Simply being a danger to profits is sufficient and gives you the moral high ground where trying to cause actual physcal harm makes you look like a threat to the general public.
I sympathize with the protesters at the DNC. But I think they're taking entirely the wrong approach. We know the Democrats don't care about the dead and will cheerfully continue funding and supplying the genocide. We can either STFU, or we can undertake real, serious, protest.
posted by sotonohito at 9:25 AM on August 22 [3 favorites]
I also think that protests can challenge the legitimacy of the state/institution. States and institutions usually don't just run on raw power - that's why they don't just shoot their opponents dead in the street, etc. They have to maintain a degree of legitimacy in order to get buy-in. If your state or institution starts to seem totally corrupt and immoral, then people stop cooperating in various ways - they threaten instead of comply, they are motivated to cheat or overlook cheating, they are motivated to organize parallel structures, they provide false or incomplete information when more or less truthful information is needed, etc.
This is why protests don't get a lot of news coverage, and it's why people are desperate to avoid saying anything unpleasant and true about, eg, Obama or other widely admired figures.
It's certainly possible to run a state on raw power and just jail or kill the people who oppose you, but things tend to get unstable, it's difficult to staff bureaucracies with experts, you have to spend all that money and expertise on cops and jails, etc. It's not impossible - definitely there have been times in US history and in various regimes around the world where it's pretty much terrible, widespread policies enforced by brutality. But you have to be all-in on that, and I think it helps not to have had long periods of relative democracy and stability immediately beforehand.
The United States and in particular the Democratic party have these narratives that are rooted more in American exceptionalism, morality, etc than in nationality or ethnicity. Obviously the United States is often spoken of as if we're a white Christian nation, but our official story about ourselves is that what makes us Americans is democratic practice and values. That means that things which contradict that story need to be discredited, downplayed or suppressed. (Which is why, frankly, mefites should never hippie-punch - let's not do the regime's work for it.)
Up to a point, the state can just say, "fuck you, we'll kill as many people as we want and look good doing it", but they can't do that forever on every issue, which is why moral suasion does have a role in activism.
posted by Frowner at 10:48 AM on August 22 [10 favorites]
This is why protests don't get a lot of news coverage, and it's why people are desperate to avoid saying anything unpleasant and true about, eg, Obama or other widely admired figures.
It's certainly possible to run a state on raw power and just jail or kill the people who oppose you, but things tend to get unstable, it's difficult to staff bureaucracies with experts, you have to spend all that money and expertise on cops and jails, etc. It's not impossible - definitely there have been times in US history and in various regimes around the world where it's pretty much terrible, widespread policies enforced by brutality. But you have to be all-in on that, and I think it helps not to have had long periods of relative democracy and stability immediately beforehand.
The United States and in particular the Democratic party have these narratives that are rooted more in American exceptionalism, morality, etc than in nationality or ethnicity. Obviously the United States is often spoken of as if we're a white Christian nation, but our official story about ourselves is that what makes us Americans is democratic practice and values. That means that things which contradict that story need to be discredited, downplayed or suppressed. (Which is why, frankly, mefites should never hippie-punch - let's not do the regime's work for it.)
Up to a point, the state can just say, "fuck you, we'll kill as many people as we want and look good doing it", but they can't do that forever on every issue, which is why moral suasion does have a role in activism.
posted by Frowner at 10:48 AM on August 22 [10 favorites]
(And "organize parallel structures" sounds great until you reflect that while some will be amazing mutual aid organizations, some will also be organized crime and protection rackets, and that it is difficult to organize a parallel chemo facility until your parallel structures have a lot of momentum.)
posted by Frowner at 10:49 AM on August 22 [9 favorites]
posted by Frowner at 10:49 AM on August 22 [9 favorites]
Keith Ellison Knows Peace in Gaza Is Possible, and He Wants Democrats To Talk About Achieving It
posted by Artw at 11:53 AM on August 22 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 11:53 AM on August 22 [2 favorites]
Here is the speech that Uncommitted wanted to give, from Georgia State Rep. Ruwa Romman:
This past year has been especially hard. As we’ve been moral witnesses to the massacres in Gaza, I’ve thought of him, wondering if this was the pain he knew too well. When we watched Palestinians displaced from one end of the Gaza Strip to the other I wanted to ask him how he found the strength to walk all those miles decades ago and leave everything behind.
But in this pain, I’ve also witnessed something profound—a beautiful, multifaith, multiracial, and multigenerational coalition rising from despair within our Democratic Party. For 320 days, we’ve stood together, demanding to enforce our laws on friend and foe alike to reach a ceasefire, end the killing of Palestinians, free all the Israeli and Palestinian hostages, and to begin the difficult work of building a path to collective peace and safety. That’s why we are here—members of this Democratic Party committed to equal rights and dignity for all. What we do here echoes around the world.
posted by toastyk at 12:19 PM on August 22 [20 favorites]
This past year has been especially hard. As we’ve been moral witnesses to the massacres in Gaza, I’ve thought of him, wondering if this was the pain he knew too well. When we watched Palestinians displaced from one end of the Gaza Strip to the other I wanted to ask him how he found the strength to walk all those miles decades ago and leave everything behind.
But in this pain, I’ve also witnessed something profound—a beautiful, multifaith, multiracial, and multigenerational coalition rising from despair within our Democratic Party. For 320 days, we’ve stood together, demanding to enforce our laws on friend and foe alike to reach a ceasefire, end the killing of Palestinians, free all the Israeli and Palestinian hostages, and to begin the difficult work of building a path to collective peace and safety. That’s why we are here—members of this Democratic Party committed to equal rights and dignity for all. What we do here echoes around the world.
posted by toastyk at 12:19 PM on August 22 [20 favorites]
I'm so frustrated with the refusal to allow Romman's speech. In the article they even said they were never asked for the speech text to review it, and even had a list of many possible speakers, trying to be as flexible as possible. The speech as written was completely uncontroversial, and even if it had been given, I would probably give not much credit to the DNC, in view of the massive arms deal that just went thorugh all while Biden claims to be "pressuring" Israel. But the fact that even this speech wasn't allowed is infuriating.
posted by unid41 at 1:33 PM on August 22 [9 favorites]
posted by unid41 at 1:33 PM on August 22 [9 favorites]
The speech as written was completely uncontroversialYou should read more carefully!
posted by kickingtheground at 1:39 PM on August 22
You should read more carefully!
Sorry, can you clarify what you find controversial? or am I missing some sarcasm here?
posted by unid41 at 1:44 PM on August 22 [5 favorites]
Sorry, can you clarify what you find controversial? or am I missing some sarcasm here?
posted by unid41 at 1:44 PM on August 22 [5 favorites]
I mean, it didn't start off by telling us whether or not she condemned Hamas.
posted by pattern juggler at 2:06 PM on August 22 [8 favorites]
posted by pattern juggler at 2:06 PM on August 22 [8 favorites]
jfc...
Mehdi Hasan is reporting that DNC is basically lying and saying that they accepted Rep Romman as a speaker but got turned down by Uncommitted.
posted by toastyk at 3:07 PM on August 22 [15 favorites]
Mehdi Hasan is reporting that DNC is basically lying and saying that they accepted Rep Romman as a speaker but got turned down by Uncommitted.
posted by toastyk at 3:07 PM on August 22 [15 favorites]
I know I shouldn't be surprised, but given how calm and reasonable the Uncommitted movement has been, and given what a gift Romman's speech could have been to the Harris-Walz campaign, I still can't get over the unforced error of not giving her two measly minutes of time.
And clearly I'm not alone. As some may have seen, even Jonathan Chait has tweeted that Romman's speech deserves stage time. Less out of left field but with invariably more power, House Rep for Texas Lloyd Doggett has made a similar call, as have other progressive members of Congress, and as has Keith Ellison. I still have a smidgen of hope that someone on the current lineup will cede a bit of their time.
posted by coffeecat at 4:22 PM on August 22 [15 favorites]
And clearly I'm not alone. As some may have seen, even Jonathan Chait has tweeted that Romman's speech deserves stage time. Less out of left field but with invariably more power, House Rep for Texas Lloyd Doggett has made a similar call, as have other progressive members of Congress, and as has Keith Ellison. I still have a smidgen of hope that someone on the current lineup will cede a bit of their time.
posted by coffeecat at 4:22 PM on August 22 [15 favorites]
Google doc of every elected politician/official calling for a Palestinian to speak. Whatever happens, it seems noteworthy that this many people have made it known they don't approve of the DNC's decision.
posted by coffeecat at 5:23 PM on August 22 [6 favorites]
posted by coffeecat at 5:23 PM on August 22 [6 favorites]
I'm really infuriated that they haven't given Romman a moment to speak. I feel like I've spent a lot of the last year telling skeptical friends, brokenhearted and enraged by the war, that the Democratic party had room for them. I had very low expectations for what the party would give the protestors, and I am shocked to see them not even rise to the meager level of letting one of their own lawmakers give a speech that actually casts the party in a pretty positive light.
posted by nightcoast at 5:26 PM on August 22 [11 favorites]
posted by nightcoast at 5:26 PM on August 22 [11 favorites]
I don't have the words to express my abject and utter loathing for every single American who's willing to "compromise" over tens of thousands of dead babies and millions of tons of rubble.
posted by adrienneleigh at 8:31 PM on August 22 [7 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 8:31 PM on August 22 [7 favorites]
Uncommited: Harris’ biggest applause line of the night was on Palestinian freedom. Let’s go get an arms embargo
Taleed el-Sabawi: .@Uncommitted had its utility= To demonstrate to Arab & Muslim Americans that even if we organized & tried to “play their game” to move the Democratic party establishment —it wouldn’t work. BUT they had to try. So that now— we can execute the next stage of mobilization…it is time to go from #uncommitted to #Unaffiliated and the Democratic Party in mass & officially change your registration to Independent.
https://www.usa.gov/change-voter-registration
Why is this important? Why not just “vote for Trump”to send a message? Because then the Republican Party won’t work for your vote either. Unaffiliate. Register Independent. That signals we mean business.
Yousef Munayer: When Harris got to Gaza part, the DNC crowd got a lot quieter and more apprehensive, especially as she was delivering the worn out pro-Israel talking points that weren't meant for the room, until the line about Palestinian freedom. Might have been loudest applause of the speech.
Akbar Shahid Ahmed: 🚨 “We invite VP Harris to meet with us” by Sept 15, Uncommitted announces outside the United Center.
posted by cendawanita at 9:27 PM on August 22 [10 favorites]
Taleed el-Sabawi: .@Uncommitted had its utility= To demonstrate to Arab & Muslim Americans that even if we organized & tried to “play their game” to move the Democratic party establishment —it wouldn’t work. BUT they had to try. So that now— we can execute the next stage of mobilization…it is time to go from #uncommitted to #Unaffiliated and the Democratic Party in mass & officially change your registration to Independent.
https://www.usa.gov/change-voter-registration
Why is this important? Why not just “vote for Trump”to send a message? Because then the Republican Party won’t work for your vote either. Unaffiliate. Register Independent. That signals we mean business.
Yousef Munayer: When Harris got to Gaza part, the DNC crowd got a lot quieter and more apprehensive, especially as she was delivering the worn out pro-Israel talking points that weren't meant for the room, until the line about Palestinian freedom. Might have been loudest applause of the speech.
Akbar Shahid Ahmed: 🚨 “We invite VP Harris to meet with us” by Sept 15, Uncommitted announces outside the United Center.
posted by cendawanita at 9:27 PM on August 22 [10 favorites]
"...I'm waffling between despair and hope."
I'm on the despair side. The elephant in the room is that a majority of Israelis see Palestinian lives as worthless. And a majority of Palestinians see Israeli lives as worthless.
Until that changes, a ceasefire does nothing except put a brief pause on an ongoing toll of senseless slaughter.
posted by storybored at 10:08 PM on August 22
I'm on the despair side. The elephant in the room is that a majority of Israelis see Palestinian lives as worthless. And a majority of Palestinians see Israeli lives as worthless.
Until that changes, a ceasefire does nothing except put a brief pause on an ongoing toll of senseless slaughter.
posted by storybored at 10:08 PM on August 22
The elephant in the room is that a majority of Israelis see Palestinian lives as worthless. And a majority of Palestinians see Israeli lives as worthless.
While I can't speak for Palestinians, my impression from looking at history and reading about how other victims of colonial violence and imperial violence have reacted to their oppressors is that they don't see the lives of their oppressors as worthless; they just want these people to leave them alone so that they can live their lives in peace.
posted by mydonkeybenjamin at 10:43 PM on August 22 [18 favorites]
While I can't speak for Palestinians, my impression from looking at history and reading about how other victims of colonial violence and imperial violence have reacted to their oppressors is that they don't see the lives of their oppressors as worthless; they just want these people to leave them alone so that they can live their lives in peace.
posted by mydonkeybenjamin at 10:43 PM on August 22 [18 favorites]
these I also shared in the genocide thread:
Politico: With cease-fire in Gaza looking less likely, officials press for release of hostages -
Getting the hostages home has become one of the main focuses of the cease-fire talks this week.
While the return of hostages from Gaza has always been part of the talks related to a cease-fire in Gaza, it was one point among many that the U.S., Egypt and Qatar have weighed including in a formal agreement. The Biden administration has also long made the need to ramp up the delivery of humanitarian aid a priority.
But in recent weeks, Biden officials have refocused much of their efforts at the negotiating table on fine-tuning details around how and when the hostages will be released under the bridge proposal recently endorsed by Israel, according to two Israeli officials, a U.S. official and a Western aid representative briefed on the negotiations. As in previous discussions, the hostages would be traded for Palestinian prisoners.
Other terms, including the withdrawal of Israeli forces, are still on the table but are viewed by many in the U.S. camp as being contentious and in need of additional, extensive negotiations.
(...) “The cease-fire is dead,” said a Western aid representative briefed on the talks, referring to the idea that fighting would subside with a deal. “It seems like the war is never going to end … even if a deal is reached. So, they are trying to get the hostages home knowing that the fighting is going to continue anyway.”
(...) Some Israeli officials have grown increasingly frustrated with how Netanyahu has handled the talks, and have privately lamented that he added new conditions to the deal after his July 22 trip to Washington in which he met with the families of the hostages. Those officials claim the ask for additional hostages slowed down the talks.
Hamas has in recent days rebuked Israel’s request, claiming that some of the hostages it is asking to be released are soldiers — not civilians — and therefore fall into a category that would be released later, a second Israeli official said.
Others question whether any of the hostages remaining in Gaza are still alive. Negotiations have also included Hamas releasing the bodies of hostages who have died.
MEMO: Israel: sources accuse Blinken of sabotaging Gaza ceasefire talks
Well-placed Israeli sources accused US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday of sabotaging negotiations for a ceasefire in Gaza and a prisoner exchange between Israel and Hamas, Anadolu Agency has reported.
According to Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, unnamed sources said that, “Blinken made a grave mistake by claiming that Netanyahu accepted the US proposal, putting the ball in Hamas’s court.”
The sources argued that Blinken “seriously undermined the negotiations and demonstrated a lack of understanding,” accusing him of fostering false optimism for internal US political reasons, particularly to ensure the smooth running of the Democratic Party’s national convention in Chicago this week.
They added that senior Israeli negotiators were alarmed by Blinken’s statements during his press conference, believing that he had “dealt a death blow to the deal” by siding with Netanyahu and giving a “gift” to the Israeli prime minister.“
No agreement will occur if Israel continues to insist on deploying forces along the Philadelphi Corridor,” which borders Gaza and Egypt, said the sources. “Blinken’s remarks implied US support for Netanyahu’s position on maintaining Israeli forces along Philadelphi, despite opposition from both Hamas and Egypt.”
Expectations had been that Blinken would encourage both Israel and Hamas to show flexibility, but instead, he “embraced Netanyahu and distanced himself from Hamas,” casting significant doubt on the feasibility of reaching a deal.
This is for the UK but it's got critical implications for the US as well - GLAN: New testimonies obtained in Gaza reveal Israel’s systematic torture of Palestinians undermining assurances to UK government.
"Israeli torture is now so routine it contaminates all intelligence and undermines assurances given to the US and the UK and other governments when considering arms exports" says GLAN Director Dr Gearóid Ó Cuinn.
----
ok fresh for this thread:
The Intercept: The U.S.-Led Ceasefire Talks Are Just Buying More Time for Israel’s Genocide -
Breaking this cynical cycle requires getting honest about Biden and Harris’s roles in this blood-soaked charade.
(Don't worry, it's 'just' Gideon Levy - can you imagine someone like him in the third-largest US circulation newspaper though? lol) Haaretz (ungated): Biden's Capitulation to Netanyahu Is a Betrayal of His Values
In Chicago, the president pounded the lectern with his fist, fiercely and with conviction: "We're working around the clock to … surge humanitarian health and food assistance into Gaza … and finally, finally, finally deliver a cease-fire and end this war," he said with uncharacteristic pathos. But a few hours earlier, Blinken had moved to do exactly the opposite: He fell in line with Netanyahu, acting as a consummately dishonest broker, ensuring that the war and the atrocities will continue and saying no to a cease-fire and to the return of the hostages.
The American surrender to Netanyahu caused this. The distance between Biden's rhetoric and Blinken's diplomacy could not be greater or more painful.
Not that the secretary of state does not share the lofty goals put forward by the president. But what happened during his visit here is nothing less than astonishing: Israel said what it thought the outline should be, and the United States toed the line in order to say that Israel agrees, so it could blame Hamas and buy quiet until the November election.
Less than two days have gone by, and the optimism the United States sprinkled like confetti was replaced by reports that the talks had stalled. Perhaps America wanted an agreement, but it did everything possible to thwart it. It sang high praise for a deal, but did not even consider putting genuine pressure on Israel – with actions, not words.
And so the near-eternal question, which has no answer, arises: What is going on here? What is behind the puzzling behavior of the United States? Who here is the superpower and who the client state?
LOL. LMAO even. That's Biden's legacy in the wider world: a fool.
Guardian report: Muslim Women for Harris disbands and withdraws support for candidate
Diwan (a magazine under the Carnegie Middle East Center): Israel’s Exceptionalism Is Untenable -
As Western elites shape their countries’ relationship with the Jewish state, they should apply one standard for all.
At the heart of the Gaza conflict is the matter of Israel’s morality. For those who support Israel, there is no question the country is morally superior to its enemies. This has been one reason why Western elites have continued to look the other way on Israel’s horrific campaign in Gaza, even as its impact has been visible for months thanks to Arab satellite television channels and social media outlets that governments have been unable to control. The pollyannaish bias was set early on by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who stated in October 2023 that “Israel is a democratic state guided by very humanitarian principles, so we can be certain that the Israeli army will respect the rules that arise from international law in everything it does.”
Scholz would come to regret his words as reports mounted almost immediately of Israel’s efforts to engage in the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population in Gaza; as its forces destroyed hospitals, schools, homes, and infrastructure; as it withheld food and medicine to the Palestinians under siege; as it allowed multiple diseases to spread, including scabies and polio; and, more generally, as it shamelessly and indiscriminately engaged in mass murder.
Yet this did not prevent members of the U.S. Congress from applauding and guffawing when Netanyahu came before them and denounced fellow American citizens as “useful idiots” of Iran because they were engaging in their constitutional right to protest Israeli actions. Not one of those who celebrated his words—at least none that I’ve seen—rebuked Smotrich for his yearning that Israel starve all Palestinians in Gaza to free its hostages.
The issue of morality is important for two main reasons. First, it allows the United States to justify its continued supply of weapons to Israel, which have been used in most if not all of Israel’s multiple massacres in Gaza, most recently that at the Tabaain school in Gaza City, in which over 100 people were killed, many of them children. The Israelis, as is their habit, claimed that Hamas members were operating from the school, which Hamas denied. When the Israeli military posted photographs of the alleged Hamas militants killed, a Palestinian professor involved in human rights work, who knew several of the men, published a post on X denying any such affiliation.
The second reason is that for as long as Israel is perceived as a moral actor in the West, when everyone can plainly see the contrary, the rift will grow between Western countries and those around the world who will sense that a double standard is being applied. And this may have major geopolitical repercussions, as many of these states, especially in the Global South, will see no compelling reason to accept Western narratives about the need to defend democracy and human rights. Already, we have seen such rejection over Ukraine, and Gaza has carried the displeasure with U.S. hypocrisy further, a situation that China has exploited very skilfully.
posted by cendawanita at 12:51 AM on August 23 [15 favorites]
Politico: With cease-fire in Gaza looking less likely, officials press for release of hostages -
Getting the hostages home has become one of the main focuses of the cease-fire talks this week.
While the return of hostages from Gaza has always been part of the talks related to a cease-fire in Gaza, it was one point among many that the U.S., Egypt and Qatar have weighed including in a formal agreement. The Biden administration has also long made the need to ramp up the delivery of humanitarian aid a priority.
But in recent weeks, Biden officials have refocused much of their efforts at the negotiating table on fine-tuning details around how and when the hostages will be released under the bridge proposal recently endorsed by Israel, according to two Israeli officials, a U.S. official and a Western aid representative briefed on the negotiations. As in previous discussions, the hostages would be traded for Palestinian prisoners.
Other terms, including the withdrawal of Israeli forces, are still on the table but are viewed by many in the U.S. camp as being contentious and in need of additional, extensive negotiations.
(...) “The cease-fire is dead,” said a Western aid representative briefed on the talks, referring to the idea that fighting would subside with a deal. “It seems like the war is never going to end … even if a deal is reached. So, they are trying to get the hostages home knowing that the fighting is going to continue anyway.”
(...) Some Israeli officials have grown increasingly frustrated with how Netanyahu has handled the talks, and have privately lamented that he added new conditions to the deal after his July 22 trip to Washington in which he met with the families of the hostages. Those officials claim the ask for additional hostages slowed down the talks.
Hamas has in recent days rebuked Israel’s request, claiming that some of the hostages it is asking to be released are soldiers — not civilians — and therefore fall into a category that would be released later, a second Israeli official said.
Others question whether any of the hostages remaining in Gaza are still alive. Negotiations have also included Hamas releasing the bodies of hostages who have died.
MEMO: Israel: sources accuse Blinken of sabotaging Gaza ceasefire talks
Well-placed Israeli sources accused US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday of sabotaging negotiations for a ceasefire in Gaza and a prisoner exchange between Israel and Hamas, Anadolu Agency has reported.
According to Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, unnamed sources said that, “Blinken made a grave mistake by claiming that Netanyahu accepted the US proposal, putting the ball in Hamas’s court.”
The sources argued that Blinken “seriously undermined the negotiations and demonstrated a lack of understanding,” accusing him of fostering false optimism for internal US political reasons, particularly to ensure the smooth running of the Democratic Party’s national convention in Chicago this week.
They added that senior Israeli negotiators were alarmed by Blinken’s statements during his press conference, believing that he had “dealt a death blow to the deal” by siding with Netanyahu and giving a “gift” to the Israeli prime minister.“
No agreement will occur if Israel continues to insist on deploying forces along the Philadelphi Corridor,” which borders Gaza and Egypt, said the sources. “Blinken’s remarks implied US support for Netanyahu’s position on maintaining Israeli forces along Philadelphi, despite opposition from both Hamas and Egypt.”
Expectations had been that Blinken would encourage both Israel and Hamas to show flexibility, but instead, he “embraced Netanyahu and distanced himself from Hamas,” casting significant doubt on the feasibility of reaching a deal.
This is for the UK but it's got critical implications for the US as well - GLAN: New testimonies obtained in Gaza reveal Israel’s systematic torture of Palestinians undermining assurances to UK government.
"Israeli torture is now so routine it contaminates all intelligence and undermines assurances given to the US and the UK and other governments when considering arms exports" says GLAN Director Dr Gearóid Ó Cuinn.
----
ok fresh for this thread:
The Intercept: The U.S.-Led Ceasefire Talks Are Just Buying More Time for Israel’s Genocide -
Breaking this cynical cycle requires getting honest about Biden and Harris’s roles in this blood-soaked charade.
(Don't worry, it's 'just' Gideon Levy - can you imagine someone like him in the third-largest US circulation newspaper though? lol) Haaretz (ungated): Biden's Capitulation to Netanyahu Is a Betrayal of His Values
In Chicago, the president pounded the lectern with his fist, fiercely and with conviction: "We're working around the clock to … surge humanitarian health and food assistance into Gaza … and finally, finally, finally deliver a cease-fire and end this war," he said with uncharacteristic pathos. But a few hours earlier, Blinken had moved to do exactly the opposite: He fell in line with Netanyahu, acting as a consummately dishonest broker, ensuring that the war and the atrocities will continue and saying no to a cease-fire and to the return of the hostages.
The American surrender to Netanyahu caused this. The distance between Biden's rhetoric and Blinken's diplomacy could not be greater or more painful.
Not that the secretary of state does not share the lofty goals put forward by the president. But what happened during his visit here is nothing less than astonishing: Israel said what it thought the outline should be, and the United States toed the line in order to say that Israel agrees, so it could blame Hamas and buy quiet until the November election.
Less than two days have gone by, and the optimism the United States sprinkled like confetti was replaced by reports that the talks had stalled. Perhaps America wanted an agreement, but it did everything possible to thwart it. It sang high praise for a deal, but did not even consider putting genuine pressure on Israel – with actions, not words.
And so the near-eternal question, which has no answer, arises: What is going on here? What is behind the puzzling behavior of the United States? Who here is the superpower and who the client state?
LOL. LMAO even. That's Biden's legacy in the wider world: a fool.
Guardian report: Muslim Women for Harris disbands and withdraws support for candidate
Diwan (a magazine under the Carnegie Middle East Center): Israel’s Exceptionalism Is Untenable -
As Western elites shape their countries’ relationship with the Jewish state, they should apply one standard for all.
At the heart of the Gaza conflict is the matter of Israel’s morality. For those who support Israel, there is no question the country is morally superior to its enemies. This has been one reason why Western elites have continued to look the other way on Israel’s horrific campaign in Gaza, even as its impact has been visible for months thanks to Arab satellite television channels and social media outlets that governments have been unable to control. The pollyannaish bias was set early on by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who stated in October 2023 that “Israel is a democratic state guided by very humanitarian principles, so we can be certain that the Israeli army will respect the rules that arise from international law in everything it does.”
Scholz would come to regret his words as reports mounted almost immediately of Israel’s efforts to engage in the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population in Gaza; as its forces destroyed hospitals, schools, homes, and infrastructure; as it withheld food and medicine to the Palestinians under siege; as it allowed multiple diseases to spread, including scabies and polio; and, more generally, as it shamelessly and indiscriminately engaged in mass murder.
Yet this did not prevent members of the U.S. Congress from applauding and guffawing when Netanyahu came before them and denounced fellow American citizens as “useful idiots” of Iran because they were engaging in their constitutional right to protest Israeli actions. Not one of those who celebrated his words—at least none that I’ve seen—rebuked Smotrich for his yearning that Israel starve all Palestinians in Gaza to free its hostages.
The issue of morality is important for two main reasons. First, it allows the United States to justify its continued supply of weapons to Israel, which have been used in most if not all of Israel’s multiple massacres in Gaza, most recently that at the Tabaain school in Gaza City, in which over 100 people were killed, many of them children. The Israelis, as is their habit, claimed that Hamas members were operating from the school, which Hamas denied. When the Israeli military posted photographs of the alleged Hamas militants killed, a Palestinian professor involved in human rights work, who knew several of the men, published a post on X denying any such affiliation.
The second reason is that for as long as Israel is perceived as a moral actor in the West, when everyone can plainly see the contrary, the rift will grow between Western countries and those around the world who will sense that a double standard is being applied. And this may have major geopolitical repercussions, as many of these states, especially in the Global South, will see no compelling reason to accept Western narratives about the need to defend democracy and human rights. Already, we have seen such rejection over Ukraine, and Gaza has carried the displeasure with U.S. hypocrisy further, a situation that China has exploited very skilfully.
posted by cendawanita at 12:51 AM on August 23 [15 favorites]
I was just about to turn in, then I see this scoop, and I'm sorry, is Biden intending to tank Harris's electoral chances? (I'm trying to phrase it in the most feel-good Democrat voter way possible)
HuffPo: Exclusive: Joe Biden Appoints Hawkish Official To Lead Israel Policy At State Department -
Former State Department official Annelle Sheline said Biden's pick would "provide unconditional material support for Israel's genocidal campaign against civilians in Gaza."
The Biden administration on Friday tapped Mira Resnick, an official deeply involved in weapons transfers to Israel, for a new role shaping policy at the State Department on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, according to two people familiar with the move.
The decision surprised some foreign policy professionals and was seen as particularly alarming by skeptics of President Joe Biden’s near-total backing of Israel’s devastating ongoing military campaign in Gaza.
(...) As the new deputy assistant secretary for Israeli-Palestinian affairs in the department’s Middle East office, Resnick is replacing Andrew Miller, an official who left the State Department this summer and was known by fellow U.S. officials to be wary of Biden’s overwhelming support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“Miller was known as someone who understood the nuances of the situation and did his best to try to push back on the administration’s determination to facilitate genocide. Whereas DAS Resnick will eagerly support it,” Sheline said.
I don't presume to know what's in his heart or in his mind but what in the cursed hell is this. Tirelessly for ceasefire? How? Flattening it all to the ground?
posted by cendawanita at 10:57 AM on August 23 [13 favorites]
HuffPo: Exclusive: Joe Biden Appoints Hawkish Official To Lead Israel Policy At State Department -
Former State Department official Annelle Sheline said Biden's pick would "provide unconditional material support for Israel's genocidal campaign against civilians in Gaza."
The Biden administration on Friday tapped Mira Resnick, an official deeply involved in weapons transfers to Israel, for a new role shaping policy at the State Department on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, according to two people familiar with the move.
The decision surprised some foreign policy professionals and was seen as particularly alarming by skeptics of President Joe Biden’s near-total backing of Israel’s devastating ongoing military campaign in Gaza.
(...) As the new deputy assistant secretary for Israeli-Palestinian affairs in the department’s Middle East office, Resnick is replacing Andrew Miller, an official who left the State Department this summer and was known by fellow U.S. officials to be wary of Biden’s overwhelming support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“Miller was known as someone who understood the nuances of the situation and did his best to try to push back on the administration’s determination to facilitate genocide. Whereas DAS Resnick will eagerly support it,” Sheline said.
I don't presume to know what's in his heart or in his mind but what in the cursed hell is this. Tirelessly for ceasefire? How? Flattening it all to the ground?
posted by cendawanita at 10:57 AM on August 23 [13 favorites]
I presume they mean tirelessly as in without tires. So no grip, no traction and no progress, just endless spin.
posted by flabdablet at 11:16 AM on August 23 [6 favorites]
posted by flabdablet at 11:16 AM on August 23 [6 favorites]
I also wonder how long it's going to be before it becomes common knowledge that Hamas kicked out the weapons inspectors.
posted by flabdablet at 11:18 AM on August 23 [3 favorites]
posted by flabdablet at 11:18 AM on August 23 [3 favorites]
Oh no! Without weapons inspections we might have to invade Iraq again!
posted by stet at 12:01 PM on August 23 [3 favorites]
posted by stet at 12:01 PM on August 23 [3 favorites]
It is hard not to think, given Harris' focus on border security and bringing back the border bill, that things are just going to get worse at home as well:
The Palestine Laboratory and the US-Mexico Border:
And I guess in many ways seeing the border wall the last few days reminds me of the wall in Palestine. It’s different from the wall in Palestine. Palestine is more concrete. Here, I’m not sure what it’s made of, but it has barbed wire at the top. In Palestine people sometimes do cross the wall and jump over. Here, I understand it does happen occasionally too. And these Elbit towers are dotted across the borderlands.
You know, you look at this tower and people think, well it looks quite benign, it’s just a tower. A tower’s not a weapon per se. It’s not killing anyone directly. But what it does, it makes an enemy of people who are simply seeking asylum. They’re going to more dangerous areas. They may die of lack of water or from the heat.
I guess I wanted to come and see with my own eyes and to understand in some ways that what Israel is doing in Palestine is a model for the world. But I think increasingly what the U.S. is doing on its border is also inspiring other countries globally. So it’s a weird, unhealthy, parasitic relationship between two sadly very close allies.
posted by toastyk at 12:17 PM on August 23 [9 favorites]
The Palestine Laboratory and the US-Mexico Border:
And I guess in many ways seeing the border wall the last few days reminds me of the wall in Palestine. It’s different from the wall in Palestine. Palestine is more concrete. Here, I’m not sure what it’s made of, but it has barbed wire at the top. In Palestine people sometimes do cross the wall and jump over. Here, I understand it does happen occasionally too. And these Elbit towers are dotted across the borderlands.
You know, you look at this tower and people think, well it looks quite benign, it’s just a tower. A tower’s not a weapon per se. It’s not killing anyone directly. But what it does, it makes an enemy of people who are simply seeking asylum. They’re going to more dangerous areas. They may die of lack of water or from the heat.
I guess I wanted to come and see with my own eyes and to understand in some ways that what Israel is doing in Palestine is a model for the world. But I think increasingly what the U.S. is doing on its border is also inspiring other countries globally. So it’s a weird, unhealthy, parasitic relationship between two sadly very close allies.
posted by toastyk at 12:17 PM on August 23 [9 favorites]
While I can't speak for Palestinians, my impression from looking at history and reading about how other victims of colonial violence and imperial violence have reacted to their oppressors is that they don't see the lives of their oppressors as worthless; they just want these people to leave them alone so that they can live their lives in peace.
The difference in this colonial situation is that the land is shared between oppressor and oppressed. Both parties want the same land. Yes, both want to be left alone, but for substantial majorities on the two sides, the way forward on that is now "let's make the other side just go away". But it isn't a way forward at all.
Essentially there is immoral leadership on both sides, when they deeply need the opposite. A ceasefire will not provide that leadership. I imagine it requires a grass roots overthrow of the two current regimes.
posted by storybored at 12:52 PM on August 23 [1 favorite]
The difference in this colonial situation is that the land is shared between oppressor and oppressed. Both parties want the same land. Yes, both want to be left alone, but for substantial majorities on the two sides, the way forward on that is now "let's make the other side just go away". But it isn't a way forward at all.
Essentially there is immoral leadership on both sides, when they deeply need the opposite. A ceasefire will not provide that leadership. I imagine it requires a grass roots overthrow of the two current regimes.
posted by storybored at 12:52 PM on August 23 [1 favorite]
The oppressor in this case is currently annexing land that the oppressed are already living on and giving them nowhere to go. Palestinians have their homes stolen outright from them, been attacked by settlers on the land they currently live, and being subject to pogroms by Jewish settlers.
Saying that "both sides" want the same land is not true. One side is living on land that is theirs by right, and the other side is forcing them out of it to take it for "their" side.
That some of the Palestinians are resorting to joining more militant factions is a direct result of the oppression they are facing.
“No one comes to you and tells you to join the resistance,” Qutaybah said. “What is there for us here anyway? We live in a prison.”
He and his friends have learned some lessons from Gaza, he added.
“We see the Israelis killing our innocent women and children. Their plan is to carry out a genocide here next,” he said. Gaza will at least “encourage more in the West Bank to resist.”
posted by toastyk at 1:09 PM on August 23 [9 favorites]
Saying that "both sides" want the same land is not true. One side is living on land that is theirs by right, and the other side is forcing them out of it to take it for "their" side.
That some of the Palestinians are resorting to joining more militant factions is a direct result of the oppression they are facing.
“No one comes to you and tells you to join the resistance,” Qutaybah said. “What is there for us here anyway? We live in a prison.”
He and his friends have learned some lessons from Gaza, he added.
“We see the Israelis killing our innocent women and children. Their plan is to carry out a genocide here next,” he said. Gaza will at least “encourage more in the West Bank to resist.”
posted by toastyk at 1:09 PM on August 23 [9 favorites]
Essentially there is immoral leadership on both sides
That analysis completely leaves out the elephant in the room (which is currently actually a donkey but let's not get derailed here). Any view of what's happening in Palestine that doesn't put the massive asymmetry between the combatants front and centre is misconceived and misleading.
The only reason that Israel remains capable of inflicting the atrocities that it's been routinely inflicting for generations is that the US supports it in doing so. Directly. With weapons, money and diplomatic cover up to and including nobbling every Security Council resolution that might have the effect of demanding that Israel comply with international law. International law that the US apparently considers itself to be above, incidentally.
Harris talking out both sides of her mouth at the DNC is absolutely consistent with longstanding US Middle East policy.
A frequently wheeled out Israeli talking point is that the drawing of any moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas is both unwarranted and offensive, and I agree. Every disgusting and reprehensible thing that Hamas has ever done, Israel has done first and done hundreds of times, on top of countless atrocities uniquely its own. There is no moral equivalence. Hamas is dirty but Israel is unconscionable.
This is not a complicated, intractable, both-sides-at-fault conflict at all. It's a one-sided land grab and human extermination project, conducted by the region's best-equipped army and funded by the world's wealthiest country without a skerrick of legal or moral justification, and the "both sides" framing that continues to dominate US public discourse on it is even more nauseating when Biden does it at the DNC than when TFG did it after Charlottesville.
posted by flabdablet at 1:28 PM on August 23 [20 favorites]
That analysis completely leaves out the elephant in the room (which is currently actually a donkey but let's not get derailed here). Any view of what's happening in Palestine that doesn't put the massive asymmetry between the combatants front and centre is misconceived and misleading.
The only reason that Israel remains capable of inflicting the atrocities that it's been routinely inflicting for generations is that the US supports it in doing so. Directly. With weapons, money and diplomatic cover up to and including nobbling every Security Council resolution that might have the effect of demanding that Israel comply with international law. International law that the US apparently considers itself to be above, incidentally.
Harris talking out both sides of her mouth at the DNC is absolutely consistent with longstanding US Middle East policy.
A frequently wheeled out Israeli talking point is that the drawing of any moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas is both unwarranted and offensive, and I agree. Every disgusting and reprehensible thing that Hamas has ever done, Israel has done first and done hundreds of times, on top of countless atrocities uniquely its own. There is no moral equivalence. Hamas is dirty but Israel is unconscionable.
This is not a complicated, intractable, both-sides-at-fault conflict at all. It's a one-sided land grab and human extermination project, conducted by the region's best-equipped army and funded by the world's wealthiest country without a skerrick of legal or moral justification, and the "both sides" framing that continues to dominate US public discourse on it is even more nauseating when Biden does it at the DNC than when TFG did it after Charlottesville.
posted by flabdablet at 1:28 PM on August 23 [20 favorites]
Skerrick is a great word.
posted by Gadarene at 1:57 PM on August 23 [4 favorites]
posted by Gadarene at 1:57 PM on August 23 [4 favorites]
For some levity, Patrick Gathara appears to be doing one of those bits where he's reporting on the US DNC as one would a foreign country:
In the last four years, the Biden regime has enacted little reform to enhance the credibility of the country’s violence-plagued elections, which are routinely stolen through gerrymandering and voter suppression. This has led to fears of a repeat of the 2021 post-election violence and ensuing political instability, with some even openly talking about civil war.
So terrified are Americans of a Trump return to power that even some prominent members of the opposition Republican Party addressed the convention and pledged loyalty to Harris and her running mate, Tim Walz. Further, several former presidents including Barack Obama, a Black, as well as other local celebrities, including musicians and TV personalities, were also on hand to appeal to voters to unite to prevent a Trump presidency.
posted by toastyk at 6:40 PM on August 23 [6 favorites]
In the last four years, the Biden regime has enacted little reform to enhance the credibility of the country’s violence-plagued elections, which are routinely stolen through gerrymandering and voter suppression. This has led to fears of a repeat of the 2021 post-election violence and ensuing political instability, with some even openly talking about civil war.
So terrified are Americans of a Trump return to power that even some prominent members of the opposition Republican Party addressed the convention and pledged loyalty to Harris and her running mate, Tim Walz. Further, several former presidents including Barack Obama, a Black, as well as other local celebrities, including musicians and TV personalities, were also on hand to appeal to voters to unite to prevent a Trump presidency.
posted by toastyk at 6:40 PM on August 23 [6 favorites]
And why should he not? For most of the world, the US is a foreign country and it's quite refreshing to see its internal affairs reported without the usual heavy glaze of exceptionalism.
posted by flabdablet at 8:59 PM on August 23 [3 favorites]
posted by flabdablet at 8:59 PM on August 23 [3 favorites]
I absolutely love Patrick Gathara. One of the funniest, most pointed writers on the entire internet, and absolutely clear-eyed about the many mortal sins of the Global North.
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:03 PM on August 23 [1 favorite]
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:03 PM on August 23 [1 favorite]
« Older School students @ excursion discover creature most... | Bats in Churches Newer »
posted by CrystalDave at 10:17 PM on August 20 [17 favorites]