As millions of Americans are about to go hungry due to the US government refusing to fund SNAP, just remember that only two countries voted against making food a basic human right. The US and the terrorist colony of Israel

      • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        5 days ago

        1 month difference, 1 year difference, 6 missed votes, 60 missed votes, Either the information is correct, or it isn’t. There’s no excuse to have incorrect dates and votes when the information is available to everyone.

        The reason for the difference is because OP didn’t bother to look into any of it. He probably just heard from someone that USA and Israel voted No on this topic, and that was enough, the rest didn’t matter to him.

        So, this is why you should be cautions

        • Smoogs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          I’d usually be with you on batting away the misinformation but all that was brought here to make your point was negligible and completely missing the overall point.

          So I’m also cautious of derailing underlying topics just to be nit picky. It’s rude on it’s face and self serving at it’s root.

          • DNS@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Folks that are nitpicky, especially when something such as statistics that goes against their views, is a red flag. Lowest form of rebuttal

            • Soup@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 days ago

              They weren’t mad that it went against their views, they were upset that there was no reason why these numbers should be wrong. The information is available, just do it right.

              People who will brush aside poor execution because it worked out this time is a huge red flag.

        • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          4 days ago

          You are technically right but the essence of only America and Israel voting against it is still correct. If anything Israel is getting away with it a bit too easily by being so small

          • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 days ago

            Yes, but how would you know that’s the 1 out of 4 pieces of information that is correct? Especially when they don’t even provide the source of the information.

            The point is not about the 1 out of 4 pieces of information that was correct, the point is to not take info-graphics at face value without verifying the source. To be vigilant and critical of that which doesn’t provide a source.

            And honestly,if the lack of sources didn’t catch your eye, the fact that the date in the image has a mismatched font and font size to the rest of the text, should. It stuck out like a sore thumb, and that was my first clue that I need to find the actual source.

        • GodlessCommie@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          The yea, missing, or missed votes dont matter. Both times the resolution has come up at the UN the only ones to vote no have been the US and Israel

          • Soup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            A huge point of the image is to show that those two countries are the odd ones out. It super does matter and it’s wild you don’t see that.

          • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            5 days ago

            Instead of owning it, telling us you’ll double check your facts for next time, you’re just excusing it with “at least the ones to vote no was correct”. Which is quite disappointing

            • Smoogs@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 days ago

              I’m actually more concerned with the lack of common sense on your part to keep missing the overall point and still insist your’s still stands now that it’s been pointed out to be too negligible to derail the overall point.

              This has been like observing as AI doubling down about a pebble on the ground trying to convince all humans with spatial awareness and instinct that it matters more than a meteor colliding with earth.

              If in the case you really are an AI bot that somehow fell into the fediverse:

              educating privileged, wealth hoarding capitalist masses about basic right to just simply not starve to death is probably more fucking important here.

              And If in the case you are not an AI bot: This is low. Even for a troll.

              • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                4 days ago

                What are you even talking about?

                The truly concerning part here is that you are somehow arguing against verifying the source of information.

        • foggianism@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          The point is that the USA and Israel are against the notion, pal. Stop pretending like you are all about straightening out facts.

          • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            4 days ago

            This is so not about straightening out facts, buddy. Without a source, how are you supposed to know ANY of this is actually true? It’s downright scary how many people just accepted this as facts and not once, questioned the validity of what is unverified information.

            If you can’t see why this is a problem, you’re part of that problem. Part of that gullible population that believes everything they see just because it’s a coloured map

            • foggianism@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              You pasted the source and it confirms what the post intended to show. So what is your problem exactly?

            • Smoogs@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Had it made a lick of difference to the overall point, maybe. But all this is is being technical to be nitpicky. No actual wrong was corrected here.

    • sik0fewl@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 days ago

      That’s why I usually just downvote info graphics to be on the safe side.

      • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Nazi Germany was directly inspired by the US’s manifest destiny, racist laws and racial theorists from the US, we blocked Jewish refugees from coming to the US in 30s and after the war gave several prominent Nazis positions in US organizations, the US is called ‘The Great Satan’ for a reason.

          • Oppopity@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            5 days ago

            If Germany stuck to genociding Jews in their own country there would be no war. Even the US didn’t get involved until they got sttacked directly.

              • Oppopity@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                5 days ago

                Right but you said it was ironic that the US is now like Nazi Germany. Implying they fought the Nazis out of anti-Nazism only to end up like Nazis themselves. That would indeed be ironic but that’s not what happened. The US were always like Nazis, the Nazis were literally inspired by America. They only fought the Nazis because they were attacked not because they had some moral integrity.

                • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  No, the irony in the US’s case is that they were instrumental in their downfall, regardless of any hypocrisy. Germany were portrayed as the bad guys, the ultimate evil. And they were attacked by Japan, not Germany - they could have just gone after them, but chose to enter the whole war.

  • skisnow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    5 days ago

    At the risk of getting banned, when I only saw one country in red and “2” in the summary l knew exactly where on the map I needed to zoom to find the second

    • PolydoreSmith@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      5 days ago

      I had the exact same thought. If you could really be banned for saying that ISRAEL is a scourge on the planet earth for starving an entire population of innocent people, I’d rather not be on .world anyway.

      • IronBird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        it really is impressive (and terrifying, if i’m being honest) just how…extensive and all encompassing this Israeli/AIPAC propaganda is.

        like…it’s so bad that I don’t even feel comfortable thinking on it too much, because what if I’m falling into some antisemitic rabbithole that blames the jews for everything? the start of some alt-right pipeline?

        but then it’s undeniable, that there is a concerted effort to suppress any and all information about israel’s atrocities across the western world, with plenty of jews in positions of power essentially sanctioning it.

        • GodlessCommie@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 days ago

          When you make the distinction that there are more christian zionists than Jewish ones calling out their bullshit cant be considered antisemitic

        • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          I’d add that it is not only Jews doing it, and a lot of Jews you will meet are not complicit. In fact, they are most likely being marginalised by their own communities.

          Also, it’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s a publicly admitted Israeli effort, look up hasbara on Wikipedia.

        • Yeather@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          So you’re denying your own obvious observations because you disagree with some of the other people that hold those thoughts?

          • IronBird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            consider me recently (re)awakened, also i don’t entirely trust my own memories/experience if I’m being entirely honest.

            i’v done some psychedelics in the past and know how fragile (fluid?) the human mind/pysche can be

            also I’m kind of like a dog that was never socialized properly, so just in general things are new to me

      • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Some communities have weird stances on where they draw the line. To some extent, I have sympathy, because it can be quite easy for a discussion to devolve into shit slinging that involves surprise Zionists popping up, and often legitimate antisemitism ends up appearing if mods aren’t able to stay on top of things (by “legitimate antisemitism”, I mostly mean stuff that indirectly conflates Israel with Jewish people by using antisemitic rhetoric to attack Israel). Some communities may have fewer mods, or a culture that leads to discussions becoming toxic sooner.

        This community is a good counter example to the culture problem. There’s been a lot of harshly worded comments against Israel in this thread (reasonably so), but I haven’t seen anything that falls into the trap I describe above, but that’s no doubt a credit both to the culture of this place, and the efforts of the mods here

      • Blaster M@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Considering the biblical law laid out charity as a rule (don’t harvest the edges of your field, allow the poor etc. to eat from it)

    • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      we are thankfully not on reddit. you can hate zionism in peace without getting banned.

        • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          i didn’t know that.

          .world was always more reddit-y and conservative, but i wasn’t really expecting fascism/zionism from them so soon.

          • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            5 days ago

            JordanLund and Seriunus are two prime examples. Power mods who remove you if you prove them wrong. Serinus even said that “from the river to the sea, palestine will be free” is actually antisemetic, and the admins didn’t do anything about it, nor JL’s constant power abuse when he was wrong. Even after the admins took over a month to do something, they just dumped entire load onto JonsJava, which made him leave in protest of the Admin doing that without talking to him.

    • zergtoshi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Afaiu having a brain and stating facts are only bannable offenses over at that Reddit shithole.
      Nevertheless I wish you luck 😅

      • skisnow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 days ago

        Huge miss. I wasn’t saying it as a form of defence, I was saying it as a sideswipe at people like you who wilfully interpret criticism of a country’s actions as bigotry.

        • Gladaed@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          I don’t consider your statement bigotry. I am just annoyed by people hedging.

  • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    to people saying the resolution is useless theatrics and just symbolic. then if there were no consequences, why the fuck would the US and Israel vote against it?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Because they’re assholes on principle.

      These resolutions are toothless without the materials and logistics to implement them. Food should be a right and it’s an easy thing to vocally support (unless you’re manufacturing a famine in Gaza).

      But how do you relieve the famine in Sudan if you’re unwilling to export agricultural surplus at below market rates from Southern Europe? How do you meet global human demand for fresh produce if you’re dedicating enormous qualities of arable land to high profit, low yield livestock? These generic statements of principle don’t actually change how and why food is distributed.

      And those are just the “capitalism bad” dumb lefty critiques.

      What about in a war zone? Should we be feeding Russians occupying Ukraine? What about Israel settlers in the West Bank or Han Chinese in Xinjiang and Tibet or illegal Hamas ISIS Haitian Cartel MS-13 terrorists attacking people’s dogs in Cleveland, Ohio?

      Shouldn’t we be killing these people instead?

      • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 days ago

        Should we be feeding Russians occupying Ukraine?

        they should have their own logistics, and if surrendered/captured then yes, 100% we should feed them

        What about Israel settlers in the West Bank

        Illegal settlers likely already get plenty of assistance and welfare. But if there was justice, they would be captured as invaders and deported back to Israel borders, and fed during custody

        Han Chinese in Xinjiang and Tibet or illegal Hamas ISIS Haitian Cartel MS-13 terrorists attacking people’s dogs in Cleveland, Ohio?

        I lost track, but if captured, then yes, otherwise as long as you aren’t actively blocking food from entering (a literal war crime) then it is acceptable.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          5 days ago

          they should have their own logistics

          “Everyone has a right to eat, but not everyone should have the right to the logistical supply chain that they need to receive the food” is UN doublespeak in a nutshell.

          • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            5 days ago

            I am pretty sure if you have a military invading another country, it should be your responsibility to feed them.

            And if they get hungry and surrender just to eat, because the “enemy” is following international law, the that is good.

            Also, there are programs to feed starving people, but it is often blocked by malicious states (like Israel). There is no demand for Israel to feed Gaza, but there is demand for them to not block existing aid from coming in.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              5 days ago

              And if they get hungry and surrender just to eat, because the “enemy” is following international law

              If its international law to guarantee everyone gets fed and you are able to defeat an military by starving out the host population (a technique the Israelis are claiming is being used to defeat Hamas) then how are you following international law?

              Also, there are programs to feed starving people

              How’s that working out?

              • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                5 days ago

                Well, Israel is breaching international law, and way too many western nations are complicit in that genocide.

                There’s a difference between attacking enemy supply lines and blocking food from entering a civilian urban area.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  Sure. And you can know the difference. And I can know the difference.

                  And the UN Security Council can pretend not to know the difference.

              • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 days ago

                And if they get hungry and surrender just to eat, because the “enemy” is following international law

                If its international law to guarantee everyone gets fed and you are able to defeat an military by starving out the host population (a technique the Israelis are claiming is being used to defeat Hamas) then how are you following international law?

                I think it’s about the enemy soldiers starving into surrender, not the civilian populace. Surely this doesn’t mean you are not allowed to attack the supply lines of an invading army inside your own borders?

                Or… does it?

                A quick google yields the resolution: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3954949?ln=en&v=pdf#files

                Starting to read it…

                It… starts with six pages of “recalling this”, “acknowledging that”? Are UN resolutions like patents, where only a small fraction of the text is actually meaningful? Maybe I should find a guide for reading them first…

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  I think it’s about the enemy soldiers starving into surrender, not the civilian populace.

                  Shy of magic, that’s not a policy you can implement. Either people in a region have access to food or they don’t. You can’t just put a stamp on a loaf of bread that makes it inedible to anyone carrying a gun.

                  Are UN resolutions like patents, where only a small fraction of the text is actually meaningful?

                  :-/

                  A lot of it is legalese that matters much more to an actual court system than a random layman picking through the fine print. But yes, broadly speaking a central critique of the UN has been its habit of going out and announcing “Bad Thing Is Bad” and then failing to do much to back that statement up.

                  At the same time, when the UN has intervened… well… look at the horror show that was the Korean War. Nevermind the intervention and occupation of Yugoslavia or Somalia. Or the Oil for Food Scandal with regard to Iraq.

                  I mean, the fundamental problem with the UN is that its still composed of many of the countries that are actively participating or tangentially benefiting in whatever horrible thing they’re supposed to be preventing. Much like any republican institution, you’re stuck with people who were put there by the corrupt institutions they’re supposed to police. How do you untangle that web? Ask Alexander the Great, maybe.

                • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  Found one: https://politics.stackexchange.com/a/31493

                  What’s actually important about these italicized words is the division between the preambulary and operative clauses as a whole. Whereas the preamble uses gerunds such as “Reaffirming” and “Recalling” and similar terms, the operative clauses, which are binding, use terms such as “Decides” “Appeals” and “Approves”.

                  So… I need to look at the first word of each paragraph, determine whether or not it’s operative, and if it is it’s worth reading the rest of the paragraph?

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      Both sides, I guess. One side wasn’t that great, and the other is setting everything on fire. Seems about equal. 😜

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        More like: “if the one side wasn’t consistently shitty (even if not as shitty as the other side), they might find more success in winning elections.”

        It’s like they push the fucking envelope on how much bullshit we’ll put up with and still vote for them. And unfortunately for all of us, they lost that bet in 2024.

        • Katana314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          This is what I feel a lot of people miss. Yes, the Democratic party is far worse than we deserve. But they still manage to get away with being the second worst option and taking money from whichever evil billionaire wants to build an orphan crushing machine, because Republicans are able to give such stupid talking points and openly hire rapists and racists, and their base is brain-dead enough to give them that leeway.

          That second bit is what I still fail to understand. They cater to anger even when that anger is facing the complete wrong direction.

        • turdcollector69@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          It’s a very corporate mindset. Any bullshit they could have gotten away with but didn’t is viewed as loss while pushing it too far is just the cost of doing business.

          It really is corpo ghouls vs death cult ghouls.

      • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        wasn’t that great

        You people will never not be funny. Great to whom? People in Iraq? Afghanistan? Syria?

        Just say you fuckwits only care about yourselves and try some introspection next time to think how it got to a point you have to choose between the lesser “evil”.

        You wanted less evil for yourselves, not anyone else.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          It depends who you mean by “you people”.

          If you mean “Liberals (in the American style)” you’re probably right.

          If you mean “Americans”, you’re wrong, not because many or most Americans think like that, but because many do not at all think like that.

          PS: And I use “American-style” because I don’t just mean those in America, rather any who believe in a certain kind of self-proclaimed “Liberal” politics which is the same as “Liberals” in America (basically Neoliberalism, with or without the Identity Politics decorative elements). People who believe in that kind of politics are definitelly not just in America.

        • Rhaedas@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          Starting off with “you people” always sets the bar for a good discussion. Maybe part of my sarcasm was referring to those situations as well as domestic problems, or how either or both sides could have done a lot better for decades. I wonder if you think all this is recent? I’ve been seeing this shit for decades, trying to change it… I guess it’s my fault that it hasn’t. This sure sounds like projection.

      • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        how many branches of the US government were under Democrat control for how long and at what points but we still got no living wages, universal healthcare, police reform, clean environment, etcetera

        Democrats have held a majority in Congress at various times, with notable periods including the long stretch from 1955 to 1995 in the House and from 1933 to 1953, the control of both chambers after the 2006 elections, and a brief, two-week majority in the Senate in 2001. The party’s largest majority was in the 75th Congress (1937–1938).

        House of Representatives

        1955–1995: Democrats held a majority in the House for 40 years.

        1937–1938: The 75th Congress saw the largest Democratic majority in the House.

        2006: Democrats gained a majority in the House following the midterm elections.

        2018: Democrats won a majority in the House again in the November 2018 midterm elections.

        Senate

        1893–1895: The 53rd Congress had a Democratic majority in both the House and Senate.

        2001: Democrats held a majority for a short period from January 3 to January 20, 2001, due to the deciding vote of Vice President Al Gore.

        2006: Democrats regained control of the Senate after the midterm elections.

        2008: Democrats increased their majority in the Senate, and after the 2008 election, they briefly held a filibuster-proof majority (60–40).

        Other significant periods

        1933–1953: This period is known as the New Deal Democratic Era and saw the party dominate federal government.

        1964: Following the election, Democrats had their largest plurality in history, leading to a Democratic majority in Congress and the 89th Congress.

        2009: Democrats achieved a “trifecta” (control of the House, Senate, and presidency) after the 2008 election.

        https://www.britannica.com/topic/Democratic-Party#%3A~%3Atext=Aided+by+the+growing+opposition%2CTed+Kennedy+following+his+death.

        https://www.senate.gov/senators/majority-minority-leaders.htm#%3A~%3Atext=From+January+3+to+January%2C%2C+effective+June+6%2C+2001.

        https://www.pbs.org/fmc/book/10politics2.htm#%3A~%3Atext=In+thirty-two+of+the%2Cbreak+from+1955+to+1995.

        democrats suck too quit trying to be an uncle tom defending

        both parties suck and should be fucking obvious they are not going to shit for us no matter how many times vote straight ticket democrat or republican

        forty fucking years was that not enough or did republicans fuck that up too somehow or the other voters democrats are always blaming or was the third parties again

        make it make sense

        • Allero@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Easy. Democrats are sponsored by billionaires. So are Republicans, but they can be openly supportive of billionaires, while Democrats have to show they’re here “for the people”. If Democrats would get serious about anti-billionaire social policies, they would lose funding and media coverage overnight.

          Just look at how they desperately try to tank Mamdani, despite the fact he is fully aligned with Democratic party lines and is immensely popular. Dems know that his “for the people” reputation, even if it’s one mayor of one city, will make billionaires upset, and desperately try to reverse course. Also, other, way less popular candidates got more campaign funds, with much higher average donations - guess who got involved.