This demonstrates why open, federated, censorship resistant platforms are necessary for a healthy world wide population.
Love them or hate them, voices silenced are voices oppressed.
You can’t be pro-Palestine if you’re not anti-Hamas.
Remember, Netanyahu is pro-Hamas because he knows Hamas is bad for Palestinians.
Sadly this is turning into one of those “I support the troops, but I don’t support the war” moments. People just hear “pro-Palestinian people” and immediately think “omg, you support Hamas and terrorists!”
I dunno. This just seems like one of those stupid talking points that sounds clever on the surface but when you actually think about it, it’s dumb as hell.
Like, are you really stupid enough to believe Hamas would sabotage any legitimate chance of getting Jews out of Israel because they prefer Gazans to be oppressed? Nah. They’d rather be in control of Israel.
Unfortunately, the snowball effect has already taken hold, so those who can’t think for themselves will just parrot what you’re saying without second thought in order to fit in.
Yes
Once you start making social media platforms legally liable for the contents of their users’ posts, this is what will always happen. E.g. this state of affairs appears to be the express purpose of Canadian law. I don’t know why anyone is surprised.
If you want free speech, you have to stop punishing the courier who delivers messages you don’t like.
I would have thought the answer to that was obvious? Of course they are.
@Ordoabchao @Mrkawfee not either
This is probably just a coincidence: US Supreme Court blocks order curbing Biden administration social media contacts. However, I haven’t looked into it.
Thoughts?
The president has no business coordinating with social media on any issue.
Truth!
Social
The question before SCOTUS boils down to: “Is it against the First Amendment for the government to inform social media platforms that a post/account violates that platform’s TOS?”
The Biden administration is explicitly NOT ordering these platforms to take down posts, but reporting them to mods, like any other user can.
What’s the opposite of Betteridge’s law
Worseflat’s law?
Egdiretteb’s law, obviously
Rhetorical Bait
Obviously censoring is bad, but which side is the
goodbetter guys?The civilians who are just trying to survive anyway they can.
And what if they’re killing other civilians in the process?
Then we should have open platforms to be able to discuss the issues. And not have a third party censoring it to push forward an agenda
And you’re looking at ad-pushers like google, facebook or tiktok to be these discussion platforms?
No, central control will always tens toward censorship. Open federated distributed platforms like Lemmy
I don’t get it, how can we be pro-palestinian ? They are sending hundreds of missile every year since like 2005. Israel could have just gone in and raze the place to the ground but they just waited for years. I don’t think the war is good by any means but damn, someone came into your home, killed your friends and family and you’re not supposed to do a thing about it ? What am I missing here ?
Like, would people be OK if we were protesting for alqaida right after 9/11 ? That’s just insensitive. I understand not all Palestinians are for the war but what is Israel supposed to do here ?
I don’t think the war is good by any means but damn, someone came into your home, killed your friends and family and you’re not supposed to do a thing about it ? What am I missing here ?
I think you just defined Palestinian position.
but they just waited for years
Israel destroys Gaza tower housing AP and Al Jazeera offices - 2021
Israel Bombs Hospital and UN Building - 2019
‘The world stands disgraced’ - Israeli shelling of school kills at least 15 - 2014
You can Google for “Israel bombs”, limit the results to whatever range of years you want, and you’ll find plenty of these. Throughout the years there’s been areas of Gaza that haven’t even had time to rebuild before they’re being bombed again. Searching for “UN condems Israel” is another great one. It’s almost funny how many times a country can be condemned for war crimes by the UN without any actual repercussions against that countries’ government, as long as they’re “allies”. Is this what you call “waiting for years”?
Israel has kept Palestinians in a concentration camp called Gaza since 2005. They control entry and exit in addition to electricity and water. Palestinians have been made refugees in their own country since 1948 and have watched white European settlers ethnically cleanse villages, raze farms and kill livestock while killing and imprisoning anyone who resisted. That’s not to mention the millions of refugees languishing abroad with no hope of return.
When I see comments like yours, I have to double take to see if it is an troll comment or not.
How can you not be for Palestinian people?
- They have been driven out of their land since 1948
- Been oppressed ever since being forced to leave their homeland
- Been murdered, ridiculed, victimized ever since then
- All country presidents seems to be okay with it
How can someone even be for Israel government with all this knowledge?
Certainly what Hamas did is wrong and I condemn it however if you are being oppressed for 70+ years, at one point, you’ll seriously lose it and fight back. Realize Hamas was made in 1987 to fight for Palestinian lives, if Israel didn’t just steal land, oppress Palestinian people and keep doing that for so long - Hamas might not even have existed.
What Hamas did on 7 October, Israel have been doing that for decades upon decades to the Palestinian people and no one cared. Now it’s a country with lots of money, artillery and such - everyone cares all of a ‘sudden’.
Removed by mod
It’s why I happily soak up the downvotes all the time from the pro-Hamas crowd on here.
The second part of this sentence is likely why you’re downvoted. The whole “everyone who disagress with me is pro-Hamas / anti-semitic” is tiring, disingenuous, shoves aside any possible good faith discussion, and I’d argue it’s actually destructive as it muddies the definition of these terms. Anti-semite specifically is a term I don’t think people should be throwing around willy nilly, but by this point, 99% of the time I see it used in online discourse it describes someone who doesn’t think mass civilian bombings are OK, and maybe 1% actual anti-semites. It’s basically the right wing version of some “leftists” calling people fascists for having the slightest right of center opinion.
I usually either scroll past any mention of these or downvote and move on because it’s too tiring to devote time to people who, most of the time, are arguing in bad faith.
Removed by mod
I get what you mean. My pet peeve is more with “real life” people. I don’t spend that much time on Lemmy anymore because, well, in a lot of ways it’s a lot like the worst parts of Reddit. And, in general, I’ve started to notice that “internet opinions” hardly ever represent what I see when I talk to real life people. So I tend to not care much about anything coming out of Lemmy, Reddit, Twitter, etc, as I find it’s often the loud very tiny minority.
But I have the habit of reading opinion pieces on a couple of national newspapers, and I’ve noticed the “you’re an anti-semite if you disagree with me” pattern a lot. Most opinion pieces by usually left leaning political writers have been more level headed than I actually expected them to be - in the sense that there’s a couple of them who usually hold far more extreme positions on pretty much everything else and have been surprisingly “center” on this issue. Whereas on the right, a few people who I would say are usually fairly moderate and level headed have gone hard on the “the left actually hates jews, they don’t care about civilians” trope. And it’s very confusing to me because I have yet to find any actual left leaning person who’s any relevant in my country’s political scene actively sharing that discourse. So it all feels like baseless deflection. It was the kind of behavior I expected out of Reddit - it’s been the case for years I feel that in most bigger subreddits any critique of Israel’s government would immediately make you an honorary anti-semite. Though that seems to have changed a bit after we entered the “Bibi is trying to turn Israel into a dictatorship” arc and he’s not seen as the savior of Israel anymore. But it weirds me out to see these talking points coming out of real life political commentators who I would usually expect to be at least somewhat level headed. In general, with exceptions from the usual crazies and outside places like Twitter, I have yet to find the big leftist pro-Hamas discourse everyone seems to pretend is all around.
Lemmy in 1993:
I don’t get it, how can we be pro-Irland ? They are sending hundreds of bombs every year since like 1968. The UK could have just gone in and raze the place to the ground but they just waited for years. I don’t think the war is good by any means but damn, someone came into your home, killed your friends and family and you’re not supposed to do a thing about it ? What am I missing here ?
I understand not all irish are for the war but what is the UKl supposed to do here ?
If you’re saying crimes by some members of a population, condemn the entire population. That’s going to be a rough sell, is every citizen in Mexico responsible for the drug trafficker activity? Can we just start bombing Mexico, saying any collateral damages the responsibility of the drug traffickers?
When looking at the power dynamics of a situation you have to look at who has more capabilities. In an apartheid situation where one population has unequal access to power, weapons, civic services, infrastructure, energy, water, human rights… you have to look at what is the systemic cause for the violence not just who’s committing the violence.
When slaves rebel, it’s usually very bloody, and lots of non-slave owners get killed. The solution to that is not we’re going to triple down on slavery, it’s oh slavery is a terrible situation that causes lots of violence but it’s very nature.
The fun thing is none of us have a direct hand in resolving the conflict, but we can identify the systemic issues that are causing the cyclic violence. So if a terrible thing happens, and then people respond with another terrible thing, and then people respond to that with another terrible thing, it’s the classic eye for an eye leaves the world blind.
So let’s just think logically through these scenarios, either you have to come to peace with the oppressed population, deal with them fairly to end the violence… Or you have to kill every single one of them so that it doesn’t matter that they were being oppressed.
You’re conflating Palestinian with Hamas. Hamas is an extremist group within the Palestinian population and no one in sane mind is on their side.
I don’t think the war is good by any means but damn, someone came into your home, killed your friends and family and you’re not supposed to do a thing about it ? What am I missing here ?
You’re certainly not supposed to go to the murderer’s neighborhood and kill everyone that lives there just because that’s where the culprit lives.
I understand not all Palestinians are for the war but what is Israel supposed to do here ?
Not indiscriminately kill civilians? Especially ones trying to cross the border for refuge or fleeing from bombardment? I’m not going to pretend it’s an easy situation, but the way they’ve been behaving the last couple of weeks almost seems purposely malicious, especially after that deranged speech at the UN council.
Thousands of missles. Since Hamas’s invasion, they launched over 5000 rockets. That figure was from the first week.
Sure but that’s war. I don’t think they sent rocket before they declared war no ?
Hamas fires rockets all the time. In fact they did fire plenty of rockets right before and during their terrorist attack in Israel.
