Trump's latest idea has renewed Democratic criticism of pro-Palestinian activists who encouraged voters not to back Biden or Harris in the presidential election.
If your opponent was overtly in favor of ethnic cleansing, and you weren’t
“overtly” is doing some pretty heavy lifting there
if Trump was “overtly” in favor of genocide* what was Biden’s position?
the Israeli military was (and is) committing genocide, with US-supplied weapons, and Biden insisted on continuing those weapons shipments (including in his lame duck period, when he could have stopped them without political backlash, if he actually cared to).
at best, you could maybe say Biden was “covertly” in favor of genocide? he would certainly deny it, but actions speak louder than words, and there’s a lot of actions that he took that were complicit in the genocide.
meanwhile, Trump on the campaign trail was somewhat “covert” as well. from March 2024:
“You’ve got to finish the problem,” Trump said on Fox News on Tuesday when asked about the war. “You had a horrible invasion that took place that would have never happened if I was president.”
When asked on the program whether he supported a cease-fire in Gaza, Trump demurred, avoiding an explicit position on Israel’s military effort that has now also left more than 30,000 people dead in Gaza, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry. The likely 2024 Republican nominee has not provided his own position on U.S. or Israel’s strategy throughout the five months of the war.
if you’re politically savvy, it’s not hard to read between the lines and understand what “finish the problem” really means. but that’s still a dogwhistle. it’s still “covert”.
the point that I think those Uncommitted activists were making is that Democrats had an opportunity (and I would argue, an obligation) to be overtly against genocide. and to back that up with actual action, and not do some wishy-washy “we think death is bad. also we’re sending Israel another multi-billion-dollar military aid package” crap.
this is a widespread, ongoing problem with Democratic campaigns - don’t just point at the other guy and say “he’d be bad, so vote for me” but make a positive case for “I’d be good, so vote for me”.
“overtly” is doing some pretty heavy lifting there
No it isn’t.
if Trump was “overtly” in favor of genocide* what was Biden’s position?
Biden’s position was in favor of a cease-fire, repeatedly pushing for one and having the Israelis sabotage it, trying to provide humanitarian aid, putting sanctions on settlers, pausing some weapons shipments, reinstating aid for UNRWA, while also providing Israel with the literal shitload of weapons which every US administration since Israel’s formation has also provided.
Trump’s position was nominally in favor of a cease-fire, unpausing all the weapons shipments, cancelling aid for UNRWA, saying we needed to move all the Gazans somewhere else, not saying a peep about the commencement of killing now in the West Bank, while also providing the shitload of weapons et cetera including unpausing some of the ones Biden paused. Also talking about landing US troops there, deporting students who protested for Palestine, making Netanyahu the first foreign leader to visit the White House, IDK, I can probably think of more.
Under Biden, the US and international community wasn’t doing nearly enough to stop it. Why all of that applied instantly to Harris, I have no idea. Why Trump’s absolutely clear indications that he was planning to be 10 times worse, so much so that I think there’s a real possibility Palestine will be destroyed by the end of his term, didn’t matter enough for you to be concerned about them, apparently, I have no idea. But no: There is a huge difference between being friends with a serial killer and selling him weapons, already a massive crime, and going out serial-killing with him and encouraging him to do more killing and think bigger.
If someone was concerned about Palestinians, they needed to try to make sure the Democrats won the election (while also ideally working for quite a bit fucking better than the Democrats). Now, a whole lot more of them are going to die. If someone says that their opposition to the Democrats in last year’s general election was founded on concern for the Palestinians, they’re either confused or lying. Well-founded criticism aimed at the Democrats to be quite a bit better than their currently genocide-enabling selves doesn’t change that.
“overtly” is doing some pretty heavy lifting there
if Trump was “overtly” in favor of genocide* what was Biden’s position?
the Israeli military was (and is) committing genocide, with US-supplied weapons, and Biden insisted on continuing those weapons shipments (including in his lame duck period, when he could have stopped them without political backlash, if he actually cared to).
he repeated the genocide-denial talking point that the death count from the “Hamas-run” health ministry was artificially inflated.
at best, you could maybe say Biden was “covertly” in favor of genocide? he would certainly deny it, but actions speak louder than words, and there’s a lot of actions that he took that were complicit in the genocide.
meanwhile, Trump on the campaign trail was somewhat “covert” as well. from March 2024:
if you’re politically savvy, it’s not hard to read between the lines and understand what “finish the problem” really means. but that’s still a dogwhistle. it’s still “covert”.
the point that I think those Uncommitted activists were making is that Democrats had an opportunity (and I would argue, an obligation) to be overtly against genocide. and to back that up with actual action, and not do some wishy-washy “we think death is bad. also we’re sending Israel another multi-billion-dollar military aid package” crap.
this is a widespread, ongoing problem with Democratic campaigns - don’t just point at the other guy and say “he’d be bad, so vote for me” but make a positive case for “I’d be good, so vote for me”.
* I try to avoid the “ethnic cleansing” euphemism
No it isn’t.
Biden’s position was in favor of a cease-fire, repeatedly pushing for one and having the Israelis sabotage it, trying to provide humanitarian aid, putting sanctions on settlers, pausing some weapons shipments, reinstating aid for UNRWA, while also providing Israel with the literal shitload of weapons which every US administration since Israel’s formation has also provided.
Trump’s position was nominally in favor of a cease-fire, unpausing all the weapons shipments, cancelling aid for UNRWA, saying we needed to move all the Gazans somewhere else, not saying a peep about the commencement of killing now in the West Bank, while also providing the shitload of weapons et cetera including unpausing some of the ones Biden paused. Also talking about landing US troops there, deporting students who protested for Palestine, making Netanyahu the first foreign leader to visit the White House, IDK, I can probably think of more.
Under Biden, the US and international community wasn’t doing nearly enough to stop it. Why all of that applied instantly to Harris, I have no idea. Why Trump’s absolutely clear indications that he was planning to be 10 times worse, so much so that I think there’s a real possibility Palestine will be destroyed by the end of his term, didn’t matter enough for you to be concerned about them, apparently, I have no idea. But no: There is a huge difference between being friends with a serial killer and selling him weapons, already a massive crime, and going out serial-killing with him and encouraging him to do more killing and think bigger.
If someone was concerned about Palestinians, they needed to try to make sure the Democrats won the election (while also ideally working for quite a bit fucking better than the Democrats). Now, a whole lot more of them are going to die. If someone says that their opposition to the Democrats in last year’s general election was founded on concern for the Palestinians, they’re either confused or lying. Well-founded criticism aimed at the Democrats to be quite a bit better than their currently genocide-enabling selves doesn’t change that.