Democratic Party Rebuild

[AquaCityBoy]

and you think that Tom Macdonald can wake up tomorrow, decide that he's a woman, and that makes it true

Is that a Tom MacDonald lyric

 

[Outlaw]

No, I'm not missing the point -- you are. You're flattening a complex issue into ideological absolutism that sounds bold but collapses under basic scrutiny.

First, claiming that anyone who supports *any* defensive aid to Israel is complicit in genocide is not just intellectually lazy, it's morally incoherent. If the goal is to protect innocent lives, then that rejection directly increases civilian death, including children. How exactly does that align with a pro-human life stance? She doesn't want to see any innocent civilians suffer.

You're also contradicting yourself. You acknowledge that Marjorie Taylor Greene's amendment is a bad-faith stunt, yet you attack AOC for refusing to play into it. Her vote didn't greenlight genocide or send offensive aid, it rejected a performative move that would've cut off only defensive capabilities, while leaving actual US-funded bombs raining on Gaza untouched. That's what's unprincipled.

Your Russia/Iran/Iron Dome comment is complete nonsense. That's not a serious argument, it's a rhetorical smokescreen and a false equivalence. You're tossing in names to sound like you're making a broader moral point, but it's disconnected from reality.

As for AOC: she's been one of the clearest voices in Congress calling for an end to US complicity in Israel's war crimes. She's named their genocide. She's pushed for cutting lethal military aid and accountability for both Israel and the US's crimes. That's not being soft, it's being morally consistent as someone who values human life and civilian safety. You don't reduce human suffering by punishing civilians or pretending all aid is the same. Her stance doesn't excuse Israel's actions, it aims to stop the killing without fueling more. That's a serious stance from a serious person.

You're demanding purity. She's demanding accountability *and* an end to senseless death. That's the difference. So no, I didn't miss the point. I'm just not interested in abandoning critical thinking in the name of empty radicalism.

 

[Loose]

No, I'm not missing the point -- you are. You're flattening a complex issue into ideological absolutism that sounds bold but collapses under basic scrutiny.

First, claiming that anyone who supports *any* defensive aid to Israel is complicit in genocide is not just intellectually lazy, it's morally incoherent. If the goal is to protect innocent lives, then that rejection directly increases civilian death, including children. How exactly does that align with a pro-human life stance? She doesn't want to see any innocent civilians suffer.

Of course its complicity, Israel is only emboldened to commit genocide due to the protectionism that is provided by the United states government. This is like arguing countries whom funded and supported the Germans wasnt complicit in the Jewish genocide in ww2.

You're also contradicting yourself. You acknowledge that Marjorie Taylor Greene's amendment is a bad-faith stunt, yet you attack AOC for refusing to play into it. Her vote didn't greenlight genocide or send offensive aid, it rejected a performative move that would've cut off only defensive capabilities, while leaving actual US-funded bombs raining on Gaza untouched. That's what's unprincipled.

Yes she is a bad faith actor, prove her bad faith is in fact eeal by drawing up your own resolution on banning both offensive and defensive weapons to israel. Yes her vote for protecting Israel does indirectly greenlights israels genocide, protecting a right wing government with defensive weapons is just that.

As for AOC: she's been one of the clearest voices in Congress calling for an end to US complicity in Israel's war crimes. She's named their genocide. She's pushed for cutting lethal military aid and accountability for both Israel and the US's crimes

She should be pushing to eliminate all aid to Israel, this is complicity by design

. That's not being soft, it's being morally consistent as someone who values human life and civilian safety.

nothing about this is morally consistent, shes not pushing for an iron dome in gaza or anywhere else Israel is currently indiscriminately murdering civilian populations

You don't reduce human suffering by punishing civilians or pretending all aid is the same. Her stance doesn't excuse Israel's actions, it aims to stop the killing without fueling more. That's a serious stance from a serious person.

Her stance absolutely does excuse Israel's actions, in fact her stance is hypocritical and cowardly. If AOC goal is to protect civilians populations , she should be leading the charge of funding iron domes in the 3 counties I listed beforehand. Once again Israel is only emboldened to take civilian life due to the Iron Dome enhancing Israel's offensive capabilities.

You're demanding purity. She's demanding accountability *and* an end to senseless death. That's the difference. So no, I didn't miss the point. I'm just not interested in abandoning critical thinking in the name of empty radicalism.

Nothing about this is purity, no one on the left should be running to protect country that is enacting genocide , its flat out bad politics and im happy many are calling it for what it is.


BTW AOC ultimately voted NO on the entire bill, which included the aid but her reasoning still dog shyt

 

[wire28]

Sounds like AOC blew her chance to be a part of the democratic rebuild.

 

[the cac mamba]

if even AOC doesn't pass the purity test, the rest of us have no chance

 

[Outlaw]

Yes, it is @Outlaw

Pitchforks for those who you agree with on over 80% of issues and olive branches for fascists like MTG.

Twitter leftists in a nutshell

 

[Outlaw]

if even AOC doesn't pass the purity test, the rest of us have no chance

AOC is turning me into a believer if she continues to say the right rational things

 

[wire28]

AOC is turning me into a believer if she continues to say the right rational things

Newsome/AOC may actually have a shot now we may lose loose screws but we will gain 10 cac mambas

 

[Loose]

Pitchforks for those who you agree with on over 80% of issues and olive branches for fascists like MTG.

Twitter leftists in a nutshell

I agree voters shouldn't voice disagreement with their representatives in hopes they listen, should just behave like mindless drones circle the oval every 2 years

 

[Outlaw]

Newsome/AOC may actually have a shot now we may lose loose screws but we will gain 10 cac mambas

I think that ticket would win but dare I say it, Hall Monitor/AOC could be a 16 year dynasty.


I don’t have faith in Newsom’s ability to govern but I think Beshear would be popular enough for a second term and set AOC up for a run after him.


Newsom would tarnish AOC if he fails

 

[wire28]

I think that ticket would win but dare I say it, Hall Monitor/AOC could be a 16 year dynasty.


I don’t have faith in Newsom’s ability to govern but I think Beshear would be popular enough for a second term and set AOC up for a run after him.


Newsom would tarnish AOC if he fails

AOC being always on camera for damn near 30 years since her career started would be wild

But she definitely would help us consolidate the left and now that Bernie finally gave in and realized maybe he should give someone else street cred, she has the lefts blessing

fukk it. Hall Monitor/boricua 2028

 

[Tony D'Amato]

Obama use to be way more media savvy. All the shyt going on and he's still sucking up to the gays.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

Of course its complicity, Israel is only emboldened to commit genocide due to the protectionism that is provided by the United states government. This is like arguing countries whom funded and supported the Germans wasnt complicit in the Jewish genocide in ww2.


Yes she is a bad faith actor, prove her bad faith is in fact eeal by drawing up your own resolution on banning both offensive and defensive weapons to israel. Yes her vote for protecting Israel does indirectly greenlights israels genocide, protecting a right wing government with defensive weapons is just that.


She should be pushing to eliminate all aid to Israel, this is complicity by design


nothing about this is morally consistent, shes not pushing for an iron dome in gaza or anywhere else Israel is currently indiscriminately murdering civilian populations

Her stance absolutely does excuse Israel's actions, in fact her stance is hypocritical and cowardly. If AOC goal is to protect civilians populations , she should be leading the charge of funding iron domes in the 3 counties I listed beforehand. Once again Israel is only emboldened to take civilian life due to the Iron Dome enhancing Israel's offensive capabilities.

Nothing about this is purity, no one on the left should be running to protect country that is enacting genocide , its flat out bad politics and im happy many are calling it for what it is.


BTW AOC ultimately voted NO on the entire bill, which included the aid but her reasoning still dog shyt

You're not making a morally sound argument, you're making a totalizing one. You're collapsing every type of aid, every vote, every position into one binary that damns anyone to complicity in genocide if they don't support your 1:1 position. That may sound righteous, but it ignores material distinctions that matter when you're trying to *actually* stop violence, as opposed to scoring points online. Besides, she voted against the defense spending bill, and refused to fall for MTG's performative amendment. She is displaying a moral intelligence that a lot of people lack.

The rest of your argument is just nonsense.

Your comparison to countries supporting Nazi Germany is not only sloppy, it cheapens both the Holocaust and the current genocide in Gaza. The US isn't accidentally complicit in what Israel is doing, it's knowingly enabling mass slaughter of civilians. But that doesn't mean defensive aid is morally interchangeable. Treating a missile defense system the same as the bombs flattening Gaza is intellectually dishonest. You're so committed to making everything complicit that you're ignoring how harm is scaled, delivered, and prevented.

As far as your point about funding Iron Domes for Russia -- why? Break that down for me. Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine, just like Israel is the aggressor in Gaza. So what exactly are we defending them from? You're trying to make a blanket point about fairness, but you're not even bothering to account for who's doing the bombing and who's being bombed.

And then you toss in Gaza like it's just another country on the list, as if an Iron Dome would even be feasible or relevant in that context. Gaza doesn't need missile interception technology -- it wouldn't do anything given the scale of Israel's bombardment -- it needs the bombs to stop falling. You're asking how to shield people from US-funded airstrikes by the same power that would need to authorize such a defense system. That's not a serious suggestion, it's just a rhetorical trick that completely ignores power dynamics.

You don't seem to understand that you're downplaying the real asymmetry of violence here. You're treating all aid as morally equivalent, and all governments as equally positioned, when that's just not the reality. Gaza is under occupation, blockade, and sustained assault. It's not launching a war, it's surviving one. And when you demand "equal" treatment in abstract terms without recognizing the material imbalance, you're not standing up for justice, you're flattening it.

You want to end US complicity in genocide? You want to end the genocide? So do I. And so does AOC. But I'm not going to pretend performative absolutism with no attention to consequences is the same as a coherent anti-war position.

 

[Loose]

.

As far as your point about funding Iron Domes for Russia -- why? Break that down for me. Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine, just like Israel is the aggressor in Gaza. So what exactly are we defending them from?

I had a long drawn out reply but then I got to this part and realized you agree we shouldn't be funding israel based on the merits above . I have nothing else to say you, you coveyed my thoughts well on how its hypocritical in the sense we are providing israel "defensive weapons"

Thanks

 

[wire28]

Solidifying her position in Newsome or beshears cabinet