There are other genocides happening in Myanmar and Sudan that nobody talks about.
And as far as US, you had a distinct movement that was against Kamala specifically because she was pro Israel.
I really don't understand the obsession with this particular conflict to the point where you feel like you are in the moral right by essentially punishing US people and making it worse for the people you care about (in terms of Republicans being way more pro Israel), specifically because the democratic party, didn't offer up a candidate that is EXPLICITLY against Israel.
You don’t get why people would be upset that their politicians are green lighting a genocide? The Americans have blood on their hands when it comes to Gaza and the same cannot be said about other conflicts.
In voting, you had 3 choices, vote Dem, vote Rep, or abstain.
When it comes to Palestine, you had 2 choices, vote Dem, which is arguably the better choice as Dems overall are more humanitarian minded, or the other 2, which both increase chances of Trump winning, which is way worse for Palestine.
I don't get what mental gymnastics one has to do to find that abstaining is the morally justified position. Its not like if enough people abstain, nobody becomes president.
>The Americans have blood on their hands when it comes to Gaza and the same cannot be said about other conflicts.
Uh.....lol?
The other big thing is that I dunno how one can support people that actively murder people for being gay, but thats just me.
>There are other genocides happening in Myanmar and Sudan that nobody talks about.
Sounds a lot like whataboutism. I heard a lot of that term going around whenever anyone dared mention any non-mainstream talking point about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but funnily enough, no one seems to talk about now.
Lol its not whataboutism. You can't do this thing where you just throw in fallacies at something randomly do discredit.
Whataboutism is when you justify the wrongdoing of X by pointing out that Y is also wrong and nothing is being done about it.
Im simply pointing out that if your outrage about Palestine is genocide, then you should be outraged about the other genocides. You can either agree, or you can further narrow down your position on why specifically Palestine conflict is the one you chose to place your outrage on, and not others.
It absolutely is about whataboutism insofar as people here (not you specifically) use it as a pseudo-argument that automatically wins a discussion, but applying it only when convenient for their political preferences or worldview.
"I can think of one very powerful country doing exactly that for over half a century. Hope we're all collectively raging against anything coming from that country."
and
"There are other genocides happening in Myanmar and Sudan that nobody talks about."
Please be honest and fair. Don't you agree both of these arguments are more or less in the same vein? We're both pointing out that Bad Shit is happening elsewhere in time or space, and for some reason we think that public attention/outrage is unfairly shifted towards a specific conflict. We both imply that there is a deliberate political reason leading to that specific conflict being in the limelight and not any other conflict.
Given our little discussion here, I probably strongly disagree with you on the specifics of this specific conflict (Gaza). But we both have made the same argument, coming from diametrically opposed points of view: we both think (correct me if I'm wrong) that people/media/society etc have pet conflicts to be outraged with in detriment of all other ongoing conflicts. Or in short -- hypocrisy. Although I disagree with you, I very much think this specific argument is absolutely valid.
My point is that media and online people (HN) were very eager to scream Whataboutism when the exact same comment was made in another context (Ukraine), but everyone seems to have forgotten about Whataboutism in this conflict when people like yourself make comments in the same vein.
And as far as US, you had a distinct movement that was against Kamala specifically because she was pro Israel.
I really don't understand the obsession with this particular conflict to the point where you feel like you are in the moral right by essentially punishing US people and making it worse for the people you care about (in terms of Republicans being way more pro Israel), specifically because the democratic party, didn't offer up a candidate that is EXPLICITLY against Israel.