You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
27 points

Yeah, right? AOC is a bad ass until her party is suddenly unfavorable because some of them but not her aren’t supporting Gaza hard enough. But unsurprisingly, none of these people ever complain about Uyghur genocide—the other Muslims.

It’s easy for Jill to be hard on this topic because she knows the presidency is out of her reach. But AOC is still in play, and sadly—in the actual world we live in—she has to play the game to win.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

It’s ironic to me that you people can acknowledge that Jill Stein is just virtue signaling from the side lines because it costs her nothing. She’s not actually spending political capital on something that has any chance of happening. She’s just paying it lip service.

You understand this. That’s good.

But then in the same breath, you applaud AOC for saber rattling to pack the supreme court and other ideas that are impossible without a super majority. Which only served to make Biden look weak and disenfranchise progressive voters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

And look how that turned out. Biden left. Now there is actually a shot at beating Trump.

I consider that a success.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-18 points

But unsurprisingly, none of these people ever complain about Uyghur genocide—the other Muslims.

You know who else doesn’t complain about it? Other Muslims, because they know it’s bullshit.

https://twitter.com/un_hrc/status/1578003299827171330

#HRC51 | Draft resolution A/HRC/51/L.6 on holding a debate on the situation of human rights in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of #China, was REJECTED.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

That’s not what that means. That’s not what any of that means. And you know it. Why such bad faith arguments? If your argument were rational and logical then the genocide in Gaza isn’t happening either. Because there’s large groups of people that don’t really care about it. Probably even large groups of Muslims who have other larger going concerns than it.

If China really didn’t have anything to hide then they or any other superpower would be willing to allow independent un escorted investigators and journalists and to see the conditions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

It was the United States that blocked that UN visit: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-usa-rights/u-s-germany-slam-china-at-u-n-security-council-over-xinjiang-diplomats-idUSKCN1TX2YZ/

Last month the United States, Britain and other western countries objected to a visit by the United Nations counterterrorism chief to Xinjiang, concerned the visit would validate China’s argument that it was tackling terrorism.

Delegates from Muslim countries did visit. From the US’ own propaganda outlet: Arab League Visits China’s Xinjiang Region, Rejects Uyghur Genocide

If your argument were rational and logical then the genocide in Gaza isn’t happening either.

Speaking of rationality & logic, that sentence is sheer nonsense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-14 points

Reason: Genocide denial

Best of luck with your censorship efforts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-34 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

What about the Rohingya in Myanmar, or Sudan? Are those propaganda too? Or do they not qualify because it doesn’t fit your narrative?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points
*

I mean, I could make the exact same garbage argument about you denying the Canadian genocide of the Flemish, which I just made up. Myanmar & Sudan aren’t even germane to the issue, so what’s the point of this diversion?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-24 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 9.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 215K

    Comments