But that's factually incorrect. Billions of dollars of new US military aid to Israel, during the genocide, were okayed by the Biden admin. This is not controversial, this is not classified, this is public knowledge that made headlines in all major news outlets at the time.
Thank goodness he lives in a country where the cancer hospitals haven't been bombed out of existence with weapons funded by the United States under the leadership of Joe Biden.
Claiming that the genocide, apartheid, and colonialism perpetrated by Israel is in any way complex or nuanced is such a disgustingly smug way of revealing you haven't spent even a moment thinking the situation through, or reading up on the history. Gross.
47 should be 86'd, primarily because the genocide that Israel is committing in Palestine (which resembles the genocide the nazis committed against the Jews in WWII) has intensified a lot under Trump. Of course the underlying problem is Zionism, which is inherently a colonial project, and Zionism as an ideology has about as much right to exist as Nazism. From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free, and a good first step would be to 8647.
It's really one of the most uncomplicated conflicts in human history, I think. Israel took the Palestinian's land by force, and has killed thousands upon thousands of innocent Palestinian civilians over the past 77 years. It's really as simple as the Holocaust to figure out who's in the wrong here. Sure, the Palestinian's fight back with little effect, but so did the Jews in WWII, and no one thinks the Holocaust was complex.
Don't forget about making complex decisions about difficult moral quandaries such as whether or not to commit genocide. It's a real doozy. Is genocide good or bad? Or is it very complicated and is there maybe a middle ground such as 50% genocide? I'm glad liberals are here to reassure me that you cannot just label genocide a good or bad thing and that you can't make rash moral judgements on whether killing tens of thousands of children is a bad thing. Thanks liberals!
Ok, I think we're miscommunicating. Either my question was't formulated very clearly, or I misunderstood what you said in the first place. I took what you said ("democracy needs capitalism") to mean "if you want democracy, you need capitalism", or alternatively "if you don't have capitalism, you cannot have democracy". My question is why you believe this (if you do, that is; I may have misunderstood).
Your answer I completely agree with, but it just argues that capitalism is harmful to democracy and that at best democracy is like a guard rail for capitalism. If anything it shows that capitalism and democracy are kind of incompatible.
And it's a side track, but the Nordic countries are not a good example of democracy counteracting the excesses of capitalism. They've just outsourced the worst of the misery to the global South. And domestically the situation for workers gets worse year by year (although they're a long way from dropping to American levels).
No, I don't think it's nitpicky, and I think it's relevant to modern day political discourse. It demonstrates that progressive policies and positions are a viable political strategy for the democratic party. I think it's important to stress this, because a lot of liberals today feel like courting the right is the only way to possibly win an election for the democrats. Stating "always have been" plays into this delusion, and it's good to remind ourselves that it's a complete and utter falsehood.
But that's factually incorrect. Billions of dollars of new US military aid to Israel, during the genocide, were okayed by the Biden admin. This is not controversial, this is not classified, this is public knowledge that made headlines in all major news outlets at the time.