A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
Related communities:
Hey does Pepperidge farms remember all the fucking morons on Lemmy urging not to vote for Harris because she was allegedly complicit in genocide? I sure as shit do.
Know what's gonna be objectively worse, 100% regardless of the veracity those allegations? The reality that they helped forge instead.
'allegedly'
The mental gymnastics will only intensify as these fucking crypto-nazis get to distance themselves from their beliefs and actions of just a few months ago.
It's also obvious that Trump and BB we're coordinating during the election to ensure Biden couldn't get a ceasefire deal in place in order to harm him politically. But as soon as Trump takes the office they just agree to a ceasefire no problem (as if that hadn't been the plan all along) aaaaaaand then Trump goes off about finishing the job and annexing the whole west bank for the US. What a fucking surprise.
I still can't get over how they were essentially presented with a simplified version of the trolley problem and chose to not pull the lever.
By their own narrative that "the democrats are complicit in a genocide in Gaza", they were aware that Palestinians were metaphorically tied to both tracks, yet decided to not pull the lever when America itself and every marginalized person living within was also on the track the trolley barreled towards.
I find it scary how easily people where fine with having genocide on both sides of the ticket.
I suspected that many of the accounts were Russian plants or Trump supporters trying to divide the Democrat vote. Most of the time when I checked account age they were made either that day or the day before.
I know that Lemmy is new and all but still was sus.
I haven't gone back to accounts to see if they are still active. I suspect that they aren't.
I suspect that what we saw here on lemmy were actual people who had been indoctrinated elsewhere.
Lemmy isn't really big enough to be a target for bots and so on.
Bots are cheap to write. That's naive to think there wasn't a disinformation war going on with bots being on the forefront of it.
Calling it simplified does a disservice of the real world impacts of the "trolley" - especially since unlike a thought experiment - this trolley problem is physically constructed by people to achieve imperialistic goals - so expending energy blaming random lemmings for this - instead of figuring out who built, maintains and presents the trolley as the only option and how to dismantle it seems useless.
I believe we should avoid infighting and actually organize to do something so we don't have to choose if we pull the lever or not every 4 years (if there even is another election..)
Cool, we remember - now what? What do we materially do now to resist that isn't just blaming non-voters online?
There aren't many options... Which is probably why op is blaming non-voters, who are complicit in creating our current situation.
I remember the BBC manufacturing consent for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris complicity genocide as well.
Interesting that such a fucked system exists that could allow the 50/50 chance that who wins an election could singlehandedly decide if everything is fascism and genocide or not, with what appears to be no real checks of power in place.
And you choose to blame those who have nearly no control over said system.
Lemmy is also a tiny community relative to other similar communities online. Lenmy is also not even just people in the US. You also don't know how many of those posts were trolls or bots.
It sure seems to me that the larger system and set of choices are completely fucked to begin with and gives the "people" next to no options or say in much of anything.
But yes. If Lemmy people had not slammed Harris.... then... something might have been..... different?
The system is fucked but we exist within that system.
China really needs to start throwing their weight around on the global stage if they want to be anything more than a regional power.
China should be filling the vacuum on the global stage that the US is vacating.
China is just sitting back and letting the U.S. hang itself. They'll step up and step in once America is well and truly down for the count.
edit: autocorrect
To be fair to the BBC, they're 'supposed' to report the facts without judgement. How successful they are at that is debated endlessly, you can find anyone of any political flavour who will swear blind the BBC is 'obviously' biased against 'them'. They can't win no matter what they do.
Nah, I remember back when Corbyn was the leader of the Labour Party and the BBC gleefully participated in the campaign to slander him, including in a news program having as a background a large picture of him digitally altered to put a Soviet hood on his head.
I also remember countless "two side" discussions hosted by the BBC on things like worker rights or the Environment were they put a professional politician on the side against it facing a total amateur on the side for it.
The BBC's "two sides" has always been a multi-layered propaganda format, starting by the small detail that any social and political subject which is not ridiculously simple has more than 2 options to interpret and tackle it - in other words, more than 2 sides - and going into the above mentioned point that their supposedly open "giving equal voice to both sides" is actually controlled by their choice of the subject matter, who represents each side and even the interviewer's take on each side and accompanying materials (a typical example would be them reporting as event as "such and such happened" when the source is IDF versus "According to Hamas such and such happened" when the source is Hamas).
The BBC are very sophisticated in how they do it, but their output is heavily spinned and propagandistic.
It's not factual reporting when one side refuses to interact with the truth
That this is a very poor excuse at propaganda because the BBC goes out of its way to use "loaded terms" when it comes to adversaries of the empire.
Here is an example from yesterday. https://youtu.be/34Ta0IcQi-E?t=85
Impartiality goes out of the window when the BBC needs to remind everyone that "the Palestinian health ministry is ran by Hamas which is designated as a terrorist organisation in America, the UK and Europe" every single time the death toll in Gaza is brought up as well.
"The unprecedented attack on October 7th." is here to justify Israel slaughtering tens of thousands of starving civilians.
The problem for the BBC is that not all stories have equally valid opposing views but they are forced to treat both sides equally at all times.. So as the world drifts further and further to insanity, their reporting makes crazy positions seem legitimate as they have to be aired alongside more mainstream views.
It worked OK when the world was fairly stable and political positions were close together. It doesn't work when political positions are so polarised and extreme.
Case in point: Brexit. The BBC really struggled in challenging extreme positions and outright lies during the brexit campaign.
Unfortunately though I'm not sure there is much alternative. Its fat from perfect but provably the best a public service broadcaster can try to do. At least it tries to provide the facts so people can make up their own minds - that in itself remains laudable.
One of the newsreaders said after leaving that they could easily find 60 economists willing to say brexit would be disastrous, and 1 saying it would be good. Come the show, they'd present one of each to demonstrate balance, but it was very lopsided. Before he went mental, they had Graham Linehan and his wife on a current affairs show to tall about the stress of getting an abortion in Ireland. The producers were then lambasted for not having a pro-abortion person on.
Although, IIRC, the original director general in his diary wrote "the government know they can trust us not to be truly impartial." You never get Anarchists or Communists on discussion shows.
I'm all for impartiality. But if a dude says "We should kill everyone who isn't like me!" You don't have to say "Before you judge, let's hear his side." You can start judging immediately.
So much for "never again," eh? More like "whenever we feel like it" if trends in global hegemony are any indication.
Still #Undecided?
We still litigating this?
The dems ran a deeply unpopular candidate on status quo in an election about how the status quo was hurting non-rich Americans. They shoved leftists out of the way in favor of more moderate and conservative leaning people trying to reach out to those that were already not going to vote for them.
I did vote, and I voted for Kamala; that vote wasn't an excited vote, but one in the hopes that she could win and we could inch another 4 years to a hopefully better candidate set. The amount of emails sent to both Biden and Kamala, and the amount of shitty responses about how its totally OK was deeply disheartening, but I still voted, even though it felt like nothing would change.
Those that didn't vote due to Gaza, which if memory serves was a small block, specifically stated they just wanted to be recognized. The campaign instead tried to go on Joe Rogan and "toured" with a Cheney.
There's not some crazy reason people stayed home. They stayed home because either choice felt like doom, and probably felt they didn't want to participate in either.
That's all without even getting into the amount of actual voter suppression in general.
But yea, blame those voters.
they just wanted to be recognized
Well they got their wish. They are certainly recognized now.
What a takeaway lol.
Dude, I'm also super angry, but blaming people for wanting to be seen isn't going to help. If anything, its just going to setup for further divisions, which is what this administration wants.
Do you imagine this wouldn't have happened if the election had gone the other way? Yeah they've gone mask off, so it's harder now to pretend it isn't happening, but the results for people in Gaza are pretty much the same, since this was already Israel's plan for decades and the US government continued to supply them with the weapons to carry it out. The only real difference is the republicans language saying it out loud and making it harder to ignore.
If we buy into the idea that the situation in Palestine would be exactly the same, that means not voting for Harris because of Palestine was choosing all of the other horrible shit Trump is doing for zero benefit to Palestine.
Really showed them Dems!
Sure, I didn't make any comment about the internal situation in America, I'm not American. I do think it's valid to have voted for the democrats for those reasons though, absolutely. But like, even now the democrats are enthusiastically cooperating with the current republican agenda and not really bothering to do anything against it, so I don't think they care that much either way, even if they wouldn't have advanced it as fast.
I also think that you have to speak to people's concerns to win elections and they clearly did not do a good job of that. Of course you can to some extent blame voters for being uninformed, but they are not the ones with a billions dollars marketing budget to communicate what they will actually do to improve things, so I don't think you can blame them the most.
The BBC has been complicit in the last 16 months of genocide and for good reason.
Robbie Gibb, who is on the BBC's Board of Trustees, is also Editor of the Jewish Chronicle, a fanatically Zionist rag whose funding is hidden but suspected to be tied to the Israeli embassy.
Raffi Berg, BBC News online editor, is a former state department employee, fan of Netanyahu and has been described by one journalists as "This guy’s entire job is to water down everything that’s too critical of Israel”
More here:
https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/bbc-civil-war-gaza-israel-biased-coverage