Yeah. I have no idea what the intent of the flotilla people specifically was, but laying bare the brutal nature of something that was masquerading as something “civilized” or “defensive” or something is often a huge purpose behind things like that.
It is why unarmed and overtly undeniably peaceful efforts are often a lot more successful ways of taking down a brutal regime than trying to fight them force for force (at which contest they will obviously win.) No person and no government can survive without support, and every time they show their true face they lose support which is very hard for them to ever win back.
You post stuff like, “What? you mean a nation founded on rights only for rich white males and that entrenched slavery into their constitution isn’t a great place to be? Kinda crazy.” and “They can. But that would make you ‘lose’ capitalism. […] Why settle for one yatch, when you could have several mega yatchs?”
Which makes me think you’re not some right winger and probably a decent person, but yet you’re saying something so needlessly callous about someone trying to do something decent, was that intentional?
Because once you start laying down the rules for what people are and are not allowed to say about some particular world situation, it’s hard to know when to stop.
So let’s remove all rules. How about allowing all kind of racism, celebrating people death or torture because once you start laying down the rules for what people are and are not allowed to say about some particular world situation, it’s hard to know when to stop. What a dumb logic
Because there’s degrees to this shit? Speech isn’t some black and white clean line. We have to make a judgement call, and being cold hearted can be tolerated whereas racism can’t.
I won’t try to speak for any “objective” standard here, I’m just saying the way I see it. Having a viewpoint about the Gaza flotilla protestors that is, to me, just objectively wrong, is okay. Telling another Lemmy commenter that they, the Lemmy commenter, should kill themselves is not. I can see how there could be debate about the first thing, but the second one is forbidden in practically every place on Lemmy that I know of.
Because once you start laying down the rules for what people are and are not allowed to say about some particular world situation, it’s hard to know when to stop.
I just used the same logic of you to prove that your argument is so dumb
Having a viewpoint about the Gaza flotilla protestors that is, to me, just objectively wrong, is okay.
You can think the idea of those Flotilla is wrong but you can justify their members to be mistreated by Israel. Why are you ok with people blaming the victim? Why are you allowing things that civilized people and international laws don’t accept?
I just used the same logic of you to prove that your argument is so dumb
Fair enough, I guess. My point was that personally I don’t feel comfortable saying that people can only say viewpoints about world events that I’m comfortable with or that I think are right.
It’s fine to reply to the wrong person and say “WTF, that is victim blaming, you are wrong.” To me, the evils that arise when a moderator steps in and says “That is victim blaming, not permitted,” and deletes the comment, far outweigh the harm of just having to pick through some wrong comments every now and then while you are reading your comments sections.
You can think the idea of those Flotilla is wrong but you can justify their members to be mistreated by Israel. Why are you ok with people blaming the victim?
You need to direct these questions at the person that made the comment, not at me.
Israel is a genocidal state and leading a convoy with 500 people to a genocidal state for a publicity stunt is a stupid idea. Both can be true at the same time.
Greta has no official political power, and somehow she expected to… What? Land in Gaza like a savior? Israel is starving millions of people, bombing food convoys, but you think your publicity stunt boat trip is going to be safe? Lol.
Greta has no official political power, and somehow she expected to… What?
If you are asking this question honestly, you should read From Dictatorship to Democracy. Basic TL;DR, every power structure that has ever existed in human history is built out of a tower of humans all, more or less, obeying the power structure. If the people involved stop cooperating, the whole edifice collapses. It can happen literally in weeks or days. By far the most effective way to undermine support for a monstrous regime is to destroy the base of people who are supporting it: In this case, the international community of political leaders that prop up Israel (or at least don’t condemn it in any way that matters), and the people inside Israel who actually run the machine. By far the most effective way of doing that is to expose the brutal nature of the system, and turn people against the idea of cooperating with it.
The stated goal of the flotilla organizers was to open a humanitarian corridor. To keep sending clearly unarmed civilian vessels, which of course will several times get intercepted, until the Israeli narrative is no longer sustainable and they decide to let humanitarian aid into Gaza again. I have no idea whether they would add to that the goal of laying bare what the nature of Israel’s brutality is, by deliberately exposing Western people to it in addition to “Arabs/Hamas/terrorists/whatever” being the only targets. But I wouldn’t automatically assume that isn’t part of the goal. And, if that is part of what they’re trying to do, it is probably one of the most effective ways of ending the genocide that is available to anybody.
they still don’t deserve to be abused which Israel did. So why are you victim blaming them. Did you forget that Israel attacked the flotilla in Tunisia, you are accusing people risking their lives to do publicity stunt so ridiculous.
I am not expecting the trip to be safe, i expect when they are intercepted everybody condemn human right abuses. Your stupid argument makes no sense
I did not twist your word you refuse to condemn human right abuses by Israel towards those activists just because you think it is a publicity stunt and because they expected it to happen
Surprisedpikachu.bmp
Wtf did they expect would happen?
So you’re condoning this?
I don’t think they are suprised.
They simply hope to put a spotlight on the inhumanity and horror to encourage “civilized” governments to finally grow a moral backbone.
Yeah. I have no idea what the intent of the flotilla people specifically was, but laying bare the brutal nature of something that was masquerading as something “civilized” or “defensive” or something is often a huge purpose behind things like that.
It is why unarmed and overtly undeniably peaceful efforts are often a lot more successful ways of taking down a brutal regime than trying to fight them force for force (at which contest they will obviously win.) No person and no government can survive without support, and every time they show their true face they lose support which is very hard for them to ever win back.
Must say, I’m a bit confused.
You post stuff like, “What? you mean a nation founded on rights only for rich white males and that entrenched slavery into their constitution isn’t a great place to be? Kinda crazy.” and “They can. But that would make you ‘lose’ capitalism. […] Why settle for one yatch, when you could have several mega yatchs?”
Which makes me think you’re not some right winger and probably a decent person, but yet you’re saying something so needlessly callous about someone trying to do something decent, was that intentional?
They are a wild liberal doing what liberals do
Removed by mod
Yes, parent comment is shitty, but no you can’t tell people on Lemmy to kill themselves.
Why are you allowing victim blaming?
Because once you start laying down the rules for what people are and are not allowed to say about some particular world situation, it’s hard to know when to stop.
So let’s remove all rules. How about allowing all kind of racism, celebrating people death or torture because once you start laying down the rules for what people are and are not allowed to say about some particular world situation, it’s hard to know when to stop. What a dumb logic
Because there’s degrees to this shit? Speech isn’t some black and white clean line. We have to make a judgement call, and being cold hearted can be tolerated whereas racism can’t.
Racism is harmful, justifying human right abuses because the victim expected the abuse to happen is also harmful and show how uncivilized you guys are
That’s your opinion, and you’re welcome to it. I know where i stand on support for Palestine, and am not bothered by your opinion there.
https://www.scribbr.com/fallacies/slippery-slope-fallacy/
I won’t try to speak for any “objective” standard here, I’m just saying the way I see it. Having a viewpoint about the Gaza flotilla protestors that is, to me, just objectively wrong, is okay. Telling another Lemmy commenter that they, the Lemmy commenter, should kill themselves is not. I can see how there could be debate about the first thing, but the second one is forbidden in practically every place on Lemmy that I know of.
Lol it is you who started using that fallacy
I just used the same logic of you to prove that your argument is so dumb
You can think the idea of those Flotilla is wrong but you can justify their members to be mistreated by Israel. Why are you ok with people blaming the victim? Why are you allowing things that civilized people and international laws don’t accept?
Fair enough, I guess. My point was that personally I don’t feel comfortable saying that people can only say viewpoints about world events that I’m comfortable with or that I think are right.
It’s fine to reply to the wrong person and say “WTF, that is victim blaming, you are wrong.” To me, the evils that arise when a moderator steps in and says “That is victim blaming, not permitted,” and deletes the comment, far outweigh the harm of just having to pick through some wrong comments every now and then while you are reading your comments sections.
You need to direct these questions at the person that made the comment, not at me.
Because it was expected you blame the victim instead of the one doing the crimes?
Israel is a genocidal state and leading a convoy with 500 people to a genocidal state for a publicity stunt is a stupid idea. Both can be true at the same time.
Greta has no official political power, and somehow she expected to… What? Land in Gaza like a savior? Israel is starving millions of people, bombing food convoys, but you think your publicity stunt boat trip is going to be safe? Lol.
Edit: added details to my comment
If you are asking this question honestly, you should read From Dictatorship to Democracy. Basic TL;DR, every power structure that has ever existed in human history is built out of a tower of humans all, more or less, obeying the power structure. If the people involved stop cooperating, the whole edifice collapses. It can happen literally in weeks or days. By far the most effective way to undermine support for a monstrous regime is to destroy the base of people who are supporting it: In this case, the international community of political leaders that prop up Israel (or at least don’t condemn it in any way that matters), and the people inside Israel who actually run the machine. By far the most effective way of doing that is to expose the brutal nature of the system, and turn people against the idea of cooperating with it.
The stated goal of the flotilla organizers was to open a humanitarian corridor. To keep sending clearly unarmed civilian vessels, which of course will several times get intercepted, until the Israeli narrative is no longer sustainable and they decide to let humanitarian aid into Gaza again. I have no idea whether they would add to that the goal of laying bare what the nature of Israel’s brutality is, by deliberately exposing Western people to it in addition to “Arabs/Hamas/terrorists/whatever” being the only targets. But I wouldn’t automatically assume that isn’t part of the goal. And, if that is part of what they’re trying to do, it is probably one of the most effective ways of ending the genocide that is available to anybody.
they still don’t deserve to be abused which Israel did. So why are you victim blaming them. Did you forget that Israel attacked the flotilla in Tunisia, you are accusing people risking their lives to do publicity stunt so ridiculous.
I am not expecting the trip to be safe, i expect when they are intercepted everybody condemn human right abuses. Your stupid argument makes no sense
You’re twisting my words there. Read my comment again.
I did not twist your word you refuse to condemn human right abuses by Israel towards those activists just because you think it is a publicity stunt and because they expected it to happen
Lol. Ok