• InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
      26·
      6 months ago

      I’m broken record but I can’t help but think libs should not be allowed to use 𝚠𝚘𝚞𝚕𝚍 + 𝚃𝚛𝚞𝚖𝚙 until after the election permanently. They should get an electric shock if they do. I too love counterfactuals but enough already for this thought-terminating cliché for libs.

      I used to not understand Adam Johnson’s great dislike of counterfactuals. But I sure do now!

    • KurtVonnegut [comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
      20·
      6 months ago

      At this point, the biggest difference between the Democrats and the Republicans are their ad campaigns. One says, “We melt the poor, but we feel really bad about having to melt them,” while the other says, “We melt the poor, because the poor fucking deserve it.”

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
      31·
      6 months ago

      If only we could do something.

      Before I was worried that the invasion of Rafah will be a slaughter of historical proportions. It still might be. But now I wonder if the slaughter will be - in the POV of Biden, the dems, and the Israelis - a manageable slaughter that can be handled via propaganda.

      It seems to me that Biden’s biggest desire is how things look.

  • lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    18·
    6 months ago

    Maybe the real pier was the bombs we dropped along the way

    Or something. I don’t think they ever intended this bullshit pier to be used for food distribution.

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
      11·
      6 months ago

      The Biden administration created it as PR. They hoped it would give the illusion of action. I wonder how it’s doing on that. MSNBC is my go-to way to see what the libs are up to. But have been avoiding it because it’s the 24/7 TRUMP DERANGEMENT CHANNEL. Hopefully his fucking NYC trial ends soon. Next week I hope. I can start hate watching the network again. It’s my drug - erm… I mean jam.

      -–

      Ninja edit

      Oh, well fuck it - it’s the top of the hour. I’ll check the networks.

      • CNN. TRUMP TRIAL!

      • MSNBC. TRUMP TRIAL!
        ⠀

      Oh, well.

  • Skeleton_Erisma [they/them, any]@hexbear.netEnglish
    15·
    6 months ago

    I did the fatal mistake of looking in a comments section from a news site about this situation.

    Mfers really believe “hamas attacked the aid and withheld it for themselves”

    debord-tired While it angers and depresses me that people think like this, I’m also not surprised? but also bewildered.

  • yuli [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
    11·
    6 months ago

    is “the people of gaza” worse than “gazans”? if it was “the people in gaza” i could see how that could enable israeli propaganda on indigeneity, but “of” does suggest some link to their land

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
      17·
      6 months ago

      The typical way to describe people from a place is to use the demonym. An example is Californian. “People of California” sounds like something a pol would say. Or a poet or something. I think it’s very notable that - as far as I know - the West Bank has no demonym. Everybody - including reporters - is forced to use a clumsy mouthful of syllables like “Palestinians in the West Bank”. I’m not a linguist but it seems really weird to me that a simple demonym (West Bankers?) isn’t used.

      -–

      Edit

      A comment to me at another site

      A significant number of them are officially refugees and therefore not Gazan.

      • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.netEnglish
        15·
        6 months ago

        amending ‘people’ to demonyms is meant to center the humanity of subjects in speech and engender thought and empathy in writing. the most widespread application is probably ‘people of color’. i think the whole project was well intentioned and has some legit positives, it feels better to write ‘imprisoned people’ instead of criminals or prisoners

        but it also rings nauseatingly hollow how corpos and politicals adopted it, they’ll sign off on genocide but use the nice words as if that means anything.

  • Speaker [e/em/eir]@hexbear.netEnglish
    4·
    6 months ago

    Why say “the people of Gaza” when “Gazans” is right there?

    Because it’s only for the settler-colonists who haven’t evacuated or been killed by the IOF, yet, the only humans recognized as “people” in the entire territory.