More than 100 Arizona Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, and progressive Democrats and community leaders have signed a letter making the case for those reluctant to support Kamala Harris against Donald Trump.
“We know that many in our communities are resistant to vote for Kamala Harris because of the Biden administration’s complicity in the genocide,” the letter, published Thursday night, reads.
“Some of us have lost many family members in Gaza and Lebanon. We respect those who feel they simply can’t vote for a member of the administration that sent the bombs that may have killed their loved ones,” the letter continued. “As we consider the full situation carefully, however, we conclude that voting for Kamala Harris is the best option for the Palestinian cause and all of our communities.”
You should not normalize genocide by voting for any genocider candidate, nor publicly rationalizing doing so.
It is extremely effective to not vote! The republicans have been pushing this shit for years and I trust them.
I would like you and others to stop normalizing the genocide of Palestine. If you stop announcing your unconditional support for the people genociding Palestine to any degree then it has been effective.
In terms of being more generally politically effective, it is important to take a step away from the dictates of your political class faction. I think that having a simple red line of not supporting genocide should be enough for any moral person to do so.
Yes, let’s let a fascist who wants to kill the Palestinians even faster into power. It will be super effective to protest against him when he is using military force to suppress us. It’s not like he hasn’t already used BOTAC to kill leftists during the George Floyd uprisings. Surely all the guardrails will allow us to stop the genocide with him in power!
“After Trump, Our Turn” comrades! Don’t vote!
Israel already has unconditional material support from the Biden-Harris administration on which the genocide is entirely dependent.
However, you can help prevent the normalization of genocide by saying it is your red line that you will not cross.
The Biden-Harris regime recently issued an EO, prompting a corresponding memo from the Pentagon, to authorize domestic military use, including lethal force against citizens in the US. Harris’ running mate mobilized the national guard against George Floyd protesters. Harris is a prosecutor known for harsh and unfair treatment of the accused.
They are not oppositional forces in this matter.
The people that killed leftists were cops and right wing stochastic terrorists. The cops are funded and defended and overseen and protected by Dems at all levels of government. And it is a rabbit hole, but the fates of Ferguson organizers are something to follow as well.
There are no guardrails. The question is whether you will take the first step in opposition of genocide by refusing to support it. There is much more work to be done.
Please center Palestine in your thoughts.
I’m aware of literally everything you are talking about but I have historical context that you apparently lack. Look up what happened to socialists in nazi germany. We need to stop the fascists before they take power or everything gets worse. Things can fucking get worse.
My inclination is damage limitation not some bullshit ideal. There are two options on the table, and I voted for Harris because I love my trans brothers and sisters, my many migrant friends, my wife who is a disabled immigrant. I hate Harris and Biden for what they are doing to migrants and Palestinians. Trump would make literally everyone worse off. So I will take my meager power at the ballot box to oppose fascism. Outside of the ballot box I will oppose the democrats for the genocidaires they are.
I don’t need to look it up, of course. Who knows where you got this ides that I don’t know history. Maybe you should just ask instead of presuming? They were killed and oppressed and organized resistance as partisans.
Stop the fascists by doing what?
Remember what the various left factions did in the 192ps and 1930s? How did Hitler become chancellor?
I do need to say that the US is not like Germany leading up to the Nazis, though. If it has similarities to Germany it is Germany from the late 1800s, before they lost status in WWI. But even that doesn’t make sense because the Germany of the late 1800s had a much larger left than the US. The important factor here is that the US is not an embarrassed former imperialiat nation in decline, it is the dominant global superpower overseeing and causing most of the war and intentional death on the planet. Why are you worried about Hitler when you are voting for Himmler while he does a genocide? That is not fighting fascists!
Being against genocide is a bullshit ideal? Tell me more.
There are, of course, more options on the table. Third party candidates and leaving it blank. You did not have to vote for someone that is committing a genocide, let alone rationalize it as just a decision to help marginalized people. You almost seem proud of it.
Not enough to not give them exactly what they want and tell others to do the same.
I don’t think Trump would have had your consent to genocide the Palestinian people. I think you would have had this “bullshit ideal” and there is a decent chance I could have gotten you to mobilize at least once and foment a crisis re: unilateral executive arms donations (which Biden is doing BTW). I don’t think Trump would have been as competent at coordinating European complicity, likely would have thrown a wrench in the works.
I think you are overlooking material impacts and are focused on the reactionary aesthetics.
PS Dems are promoting at least one transphobic D politician now. They will shift right in this just like they now embrace the border wall, introduced and fought for a harsh right wing immigration bill, and are tiptoeing around mass deportation discourse.
One if the reasons they can do all of this is that they don’t need to earn your vote. Ever. You will even vote for them when they commit genocide. Unmoored by any attempt to organize demands they will do whatever they think is best for their donors and can’t be managed by PR goons. And you are helping, not just with your own vote, but in justifying it to others and by being shitty to those who oppose genocide with a coherent, principled stance.
You are contradicting yourself because you are telling everyone here that what you did was good and right and aligned with opposing fascism. If you want to vote for a genocider and never tell anyone to do the same I would accept that compromise.
I’m sure the not-Harris candidate who wins will do wonders for Palestine
Refusing to normalize genocide is an important first step for working against it. The reason Dems can do genocide and not fear a loss is that so many people fall in line over threats that “the other guy” will win.
I get the concept of the Boogeyman opponent, but I’m this case nothing is myth, or fearmongering. We can see what the Biden admin is doing, and assume Harris won’t be very far from it. It’s not desirable but holy shit is there room for more chaos and death.
We have seen how trump handles the middle east, and color that with his modern statements. It’s evident trump’s path will be materially worse for Palestinians.
Given that trump or Harris will be the next president, the best choice for everyone is Harris.
As a bonus, the opportunity to “refuse to normalize” will be in jeopardy with trump, as evidenced by his language to go after dissidents, his treatment of protesters, and the leveraging of stochastic terrorism to motivate his base towards race/ethnicity based attacks, the Muslim ban, the kashoggi murder, the soleimani assassination, his conservative judicial appointments, his under the table relationship with Saudi Arabia via kushner, and his on the record praise of strongmen like netanyahu.
If you think it’s hard to denormalize what’s happening re Israel now, strap in for the trump ride.
Edit by abstaining on principle “you” may bring about the single worst person for progressive ideals, middle east stability, and Muslim security in the US with consequences lasting for decades.
There really isn’t in Palestine, in terms of the US. The US is competently organizing and supporting this genocide precisely because very competent Zionists are in charge, namely Biden, the team he has curated over decades, and Harris. They are actually pushing hard beyond what the Pentagon et al recommend, strategically, due to ideological commitment to the project. Harris is, of course, an empty suit, but one that is fully in line with this set of policies, and has taken on a major role in terms of selling the fake, appropriating “ceasefire” narrative and in running the DNC and its overall messaging, which has been brazenly pro-Israel during a genocide, committing to guaranteeing unconditional material supporting, and not even doing any form of pandering or aesthetic appeasement. Everyone knows that they could have brought on some wishy-washy Palestinian to do some both-sides pro-peace message at the DNC or later, but they are unwilling to do even that. That is how little they will give in on this issue. Those are the monsters created by this political self-disempowerment.
It is not evident. Trump is not as competent as Biden and his admin. He will have the same imperialist state that will of course back Israel, but he will also screw things up in various ways. I do not think Trump would have executed European subservience nearly as effectively as Biden-Harris. That is the primary outcome of their approach to Ukraine: to scuttle an independent Europe. They are now fully dollar-dependent and dependent on the US for energy while slowly deinstrializing themselves. Of course they will now fall in line more strongly on the US-backed genocide of Palestine. Trump actually pushed Europe in the opposite direction. This is not because he is smart and good, but he is inadvertently disruptive to carefully-laid plans, even while adhering to them 95% of the time.
Though to be clear, I do not subscribe to lesser-evilism logic. This is a self-defeating logic that is very shortsighted.
The best choice is to not normalize genocide. I will accept a compromise: if you don’t tell anyone to vote for Harris, nor defend such people, I don’t mind if you cast your vote for her. Deal?
The Biden-Harris administration is heavily pro-cop, and of course Harris called herself California’s top cop. She was known for being particularly cruel as AG. Oppression against dissidents primarily happens via local police and sometimes state police and the military. This faction of the Dems fully coopted and then worked directly against the George Floyd protests to massively fund cops and it is local Democrats that facilitate and run the police departments engaging in naked and disproportionate violence. In addition, it is the Biden admin that just signed an EO to authorize the use of “lethal force” by the US military on US soil, something backed up by a subsequent Pentagon memo. It is important to understand that these are not really oppositional forces, they are co-amplifiers of one another, and the Democratic political class openly enable the slide into oppression and then pretend to be against it when it has a bad look. They are slick, but not reducing harm.
I could go on more about the examples you listed if you would like me to, I just don’t want to take up too much space away from centering Palestine, particularly if it is not something you would want to discuss at length. Let me know if you would like to or if there is one particularly salient point that is most relevant. I could also continue that discussion in another thread or via DMs.
Under Trump, the people here normalizing genocide would be anti-genocide to the hilt, or at least in how they internalize this red line to themselves. They could be mobilized to protest, they could learn the core lessons at hand, they could demand that Dems et al work against this, and they could get involved with direct actions. When they are normalizing genocide, they tend to work in the opposite direction, and things will get far worse.
I do quite a bit of work against the genocide on Palestine and political work. I am not simply “abstaining” from politics. But I do suggest that those who think of politics as electoralism consider what they are doing when they announce that it’s okay to voter for genociders. What that really means and who you think you are vs. who you actually behave as, and what you will not just tolerate, but openly justify.
In not voting you normalize genocide, effectively turning away, to not look upon the mess.
Edit in a trump presidency activism will be harder, and progressive folks, and minority communities will be at increased risk. The ideal of getting involved and making your.voice heard will be a vanishing opportunity.
Personally, I will be voting for a candidate that is explicitly against the genocide. In this way, the message of my vote will be fairly clear.
So, do you agree with these Muslim leaders, or are you saying you know better than them?
An astonishingly racist question.
As a brown person myself I want to know if you agree with the leaders or if you’re saying you know better than us. It’s hardly racist to wonder if we’re being patronized by people who claim to know better than us.
What’s racist is calling the group simply Muslim and then taking a tokenizing approach to them.
Maybe you should read the letter they signed before defending support for genocide, and before trying to weaponize your own identity against solidarity with Palestine.
Shameful.
We should protest and take action, but vote for those who will make things less bad. Our system is fucked, but making yourself effectively invisible doesn’t help. If your vote doesn’t got for one of the two parties you are worth as much as someone who doesn’t exist.
The Biden-Harris administration is committing this genocide. “Less bad”, friend, they are doing the worst thing.
Given the extent to which Dem voters rely on personal moralism, I think that “don’t vote for genocidera” should be enough. You are complicit if you vote for a person doing genocide.
But if you prefer to think this is about strategy, what do you think makes your interests more relevant? Being a loudly guaranteed lever pull for the party even when you acknowledge they are doing a genocide, or someone that will, at least some of the time, actually withhold their vote on a stated principal?
It is actually your logic that leads to irrelevancy. It is logic handed down by party PR ghouls and they repeat it because it works: it means they don’t need to listen to you, they can just convince you to disempower yourself!
I disagree, but even if I didn’t, a vote complicit in genocide is worse than not voting at all.
They’re not doing the worst thing. Doing Genocide AND the 2025 Trump agenda is worse.
Genocide is the worst thing and should be a red line. Please do your best to not help erase that red line.
Question: Is genocide in Xinjiang a red line for you?
I already know what your answer’s going to be, I’m just asking to highlight what your real goal here is.
I do not live in China and cannot do any advocacy related to Xinjiang. Though I will point out that there is not a genocide there. By now you should be able to recognize the differences. The mass killings, the videos, the diaspora, the intense censorship. We could discuss the ridiculous think tank and fake university apparatus that sold that lie with the US State Department, but to be frank, it is disgusting to distract from opposition to the genocide of Palestinians with this lazy attempt at a gotcha. Personally, I think you should apologize.
My real goal is to advocate against normalization of genocide in the US. I have organized actions and protests to this effect for over a year.
Do your best to at least not believe your own bullshitting.
Okay, so you’re okay with genocide in Xinjiang, just not in Gaza. And your strategy for solving the genocide in Gaza is to let someone come into power who’s even more pro-genocide that the tepid pro-genocide stance of the current Democrats. Dooming millions of innocent people who can’t fight back to a catastrophe beyond even their present catastrophe.
So you’re okay with certain genocides. And you don’t want strategies that will avoid a huge escalation of the existing genocide in Gaza.
It honestly doesn’t sound like you’re very anti-genocide.
This is a lie and I will not respond until it is retracted.
Fucking 🤡
Go away.
Please do your best to engage in good faith and avoid namecalling.
Yes. BadA + BadB < BadA
Unconditional support for genocide cannot be made any more maximalist. There is no BadB to add.
Yeah there is. Genocide vs Genocide with agenda 2025.
The genocide itself cannot be made more maximalist. You mean there is another category.
I reject that argumentation as well, as genocide should be a red line. You don’t get to come back from that. You cannot put salve on that wound so easily. Look at yourself in the mirror and see if you can withstand it. And if you can, ask yourself why anyone should look to you for solidarity and what you would be doing in Germany 1930, in the US in 1855. Would you be the abolitionist? Would you be the person fighting against fascists? Or would you be the “pragmatist” supporting regulation of slavery, the Whigs, and compromise with monarchists and liberals?
I understand your stated idealist position, “I won’t vote for someone engaged in genocide”.
… but the reality is that Trump win, which is likely without every possible Dem vote, will cause the worst possible genocide.
So by withholding your vote you’re not complicit in Harris-supported genocide, but you’re complicit in Trump supported genocide, which everyone understands to be worse.
As I often say in these threads, withholding your vote is precisely what the republicans want you to do.
Seriously, will your ideals be much comfort when Trump supported Netanyahu is grinding Gaza to dost?
I don’t think it’s particularly idealist, though it is formulated to appeal to those with empathy. If they won’t listen to “genocide is a red line”, what do you think they will listen to? A long-winded explanation of political organizing, realignments, game theory, economics? Just saying “don’t support genocide” elicits a flurry of bad-faith insults and absurd lies.
There is no bigger gun to threaten people with. There is already genocide with maximalist support from the United States and a deftly subjugated Europe. It even gets support from alleged “good guys” that vote for Democrats. No resistance except from those with personal connections, a stronger connection to empathy, or the politically educated.
That’s funny, I don’t think I told anyone to vote for Trump, either. Instead, I do work against genocide, organizing actions, politically educating those who don’t just sit on their computers and justify supporting genocide to one another.
Of course it is, because the GOP and Democrats are competing for votes for an election. Do you believe this to be revelatory?
That is already happening under the Biden-Harris administration that forwarded this genocide for over the last year. Have you not seen the destruction, mass murder, burning of children alive? Do you not know where those weapons come from, how they are donated, what logistical support they receive, how the US attacks all opposition to the genocide?
“don’t vote for Harris” means “vote for trump”, so that is what you are saying, with a bunch of other BS tacked on.
Who should I vote for?
Anyone that is not a genocider. Even not voting is better. If you would like to communicate that genocide is unacceptable, then the camdidates with anti-genkxise messages are de la Cruz and Stein.
I will not vote for those people.
why not? either one would be better than harris or trump at this time. primarily due to the fact neither has the support of a major group of genocidal congress critters.
Because they won’t win and it would be a wasted vote. I live my life aware of reality.
Feel free to read my post history many explanations on how to vote intelligently without risking a trump presidency. You’ll probably be surprised its not ‘dont vote harris’. Its ‘under these conditions your best option is likely…’ which both undermines harris platform with other Democrats, supports ending a genocide, and lets you stop spouting nonsense everywhere.
But you will vote for genociders? Please do some introspection.
You and your gang at .ml don’t have a problem with genocide. Why are you pretending to? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_genocide_of_Ukrainians_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
If you would like to decenter the genocide of Palestinians, I will gladly discuss your bullshit presumptions in another thread. Feel free to make one and ping me.
I’m so fucking sick of this ridiculous argument. You’ve identified the problem, what’s your genius solution?
They solution is to I’ve the country to trump and not have elections anymore. They are not too bright.
The solution requires commitment to building power, i.e. leverage and numbers, gaining a political education, and engaging in action.
What I am suggesting is just the absolute bare minimum, and you all know it: genocide should be a red line and you are complicit if you vote for someone doing a genocide.
Your vote isn’t strategic, either. You are just demonstrating that you will put up with anything and will be ignorable for the indefinite future for them to do these and greater crimes. And by justifying it to yourself, you will fail to take the necessary steps to, in your words, “solve the problem”.
It’s possible to vote Dem and still do all the other things you listed.
It is possible, but it doesn’t happen particularly often. The kind of thinking on display in this thread is defense of a barrier to doing these kinds of actions, from recognizing one’s own lack of political education, from developing a concrete notion of leverage or collective action.
When people do hold themselves to those standards but still hold out hope for Dems, they learn some uncomfortable lessons. The first one is that Democrats make you their opponent and gladly lie about you and will even throw their money and influence behind Republicans instead. Something else that people learn (at least when they are honest with themselves) is that they often don’t really have a concrete idea of how to make demands or build leverage, and so they will engage in actions and spin their wheels. The ones that are not honest with themselves will still claim a victory. The ones that are honest with themselves will engage in productive criticism and development of their political program.
But this is so many steps past what the people here are doing, relying on tired canards shared as memes. I would rather they at least get to the “try and fail” step of becoming politically educated and a force for humanity, but we are stuck at the “defend everything Dems tell us to do” phase.
As someone who is politically active in ways other than voting, I’m calling bullshit. You’re just making assumptions about how other people act, you have no evidence.
Is that so? What else do you do?
After you answer the same question
I have already described some of it throughout this thread. One if the things I do is organize with and among Palestinians to engage in actions and organization building.
Your turn.
Great intro to philosophy lesson. In the real world, we have the choice between Harris and Trump. You can forget anyone else exists because our election system is broken. If I don’t vote, one of them will still win. Now, without philosophizing, what do we do to stop the violence?
I did not describe anything particularly philosophical.
Oh, so you just mean you are trying to be condescending and pretend I am not being reakistic. Unfortunately for this excuse for why you will vote for someone doing a genocide, I am pragmatic. I criticize your ideas of “strategy”, which are just bog standard lesser evil vote shaming trotted out to discipline Democrats’ empathetic voters every 4 years and suggest you take the first steps towards empowerment by doing the same. My hope would be that them asking you to support genocide would be enough to take that srep., that you could accept that there is not a greater evil than genocide, and that as a good person, you would be an opponent of genocide rather than complicit.
If you want to talk more specifically on being pragmatic when it cones to political power,I would be happy to do so. It is mostly about building leverage, which is basically the exact opposite of your rhetoric.
The system is working as intended.
But in your terminology, would you say it is more broken or less broken than when the Whigs dissolved and an abolitionist party took its place over the issue of slavery? In this scenario, you would be someone saying that you must always vote for the pro-slavers.
Yes, that is true. But are you going to orient yourself in opposition to genociders or are you going to decide on which one to support? I think it should be a red line.
Never again means never again for anyone. What do you think that phrase means?
“The violence” is far too vague for me to give you any real answer. If you mean US support for genocide, then you will need to join groups opposed to the genocide, participate in political education, and build those organizations so that they can make demands and enact material change, such as blockading weapons manufacturers. Or, if you can only understand politics through elections, you can spend your time organizing a principled anti-genocide voting bloc, ideally tied to some material interest. You have no leverage as a voter unless you can credibly threaten to withhold your vote. And your leverage is dramatically decreased when you act as an individual rather than an organized bloc.
Is that practical enough for you?
That was a lot of words that, in no way, answered my question.
It did answer your question but you clearly don’t actually care about the topic. It is just a rhetorical device for you to avoid thinking about your complicity in genocide.
Let me know when you have the courage of your convictions. If it were me, I would be damn sure I knew what I was talking about if there was any risk of me normalizing genocide.