Of course there's a sign about everyone's favorite boogyman, AIPAC. No one likes to mention the billions in Saudi, UAE, and Qatari influence that drive anti-Israel movements.
this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)
News
22897 readers
4964 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Israel's own genocidal actions drive anti-Israel movements while AIPAC is trying to unseat progressives.
Are Saudi, UAE, or Qatar trying to get anti-Israel politicians elected? Anywhere? lol
AIPAC is such a tiny player in politics, which is obvious to anyone who can do basic addition. They do make a convenient scapegoat to distract from the real power players influencing US policy.
The USA gives twice the arms to Saudi Arabia than Israel. Ten times more Houthis have been killed than Gazans. At least twice as many are displaced.
I'm not defending AIPAC. I'm pointing out that there is a bizarre and disproportionate vilification of one of the smallest players in the game. AIPAC is smaller than the Real Estate, Finance, or Oil lobby. When was the last time you saw a protester with a sign condemning the Susquehanna International Group, or Thiel Capital, or National Assn of Realtors? They all dwarf the size of the little Israel lobby.
Think about who the distraction benefits.
I think AIPAC is blamed too much for American support, because America has a special interest in Israel already. If Israel didn't exist, America would have to create it to serve her interests. That's not a secret, but blaming AIPAC is a way that Americans try to absolve our government from the evil it commits i.e. "it's not America's fault, it's those damn lobbyists!"
We shouldn't blame AIPAC for our own government supporting genocide. That's just ordinary American policy.
But uh, the recent pledge of $100M is more than any of the groups you listed as well - though who knows, maybe the others will start putting up more cash to compete. Also, do they actually do anti-Israel lobbying? Pretty sure that's just oil lobbying.
Do you think that's also why there is such a disproportionate focus on the Israel-Hamas war as opposed to others in Yemen, Sudan, etc. that have such a higher humanitarian cost?
I think the focus comes from how important Israel is to the US. Israel is the 51st state, all those other countries are just vassals on the periphery of the empire. That's why Biden can say he'll make Saudi a pariah, yet Israeli visitors have visa free travel to the US.
Think of it more like the Iraq War than a foreign war. It's not really just some foreign country attacking another - it's us vs them.
Regardless of your stance on what is going on in Gaza, I don't think unions should be picking a side either way.
The point of a union is to represent the worker toward their employer. This is most effective if all workers stand together.
Taking a stance on a matter that is so politically controversial as the situation in Gaza/Israel, only serves to divide workers, reducing the effectiveness of unions to achieve their core purpose.
If individuals (or groups of individuals) want to support or denounce either Israel or Palestine that should be their choice, but I don't think a union should get involved in that.
So why have unions supported Israel for decades?
I never said I approved of that either. I'm just voicing my opinion on what the role of unions is / should be.
That wasn't my question.
Your theory, that unions should avoid picking a side, does not have any basis in how actual unions act in the real world.
Why do you think that is?
Wow. Reading comprehension is a tough.
🙄
They had so much to say about why unions should remain neutral, but I keep coming back to the fact that the unions have never been neutral. So either the poster believes they have cracked the code and all other union leaders are too stupid to grasp it, or something else is going on.
I think you don’t really have a point and are simply looking to argue.
It was very clearly stated in the comment what the intent of the comment was.
The intent of their comment was "voicing my opinion on what the role of unions is / should be."
I asked why unions, in the real world, do not behave that way. Why are actually existing unions acting in roles that they do not believe unions should? If that's what the role of unions is or should be, then in the real world unions would try to fulfill that role. They do not.
There's a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of unions that I'm trying to highlight by showing how wrong it is!
Unions made a huge mistake when they welded themselves to the military-industrial complex. Glad to hear the trend might reverse.