I respectfully disagree. Note that we are talking about holocaust denialism, not holocaust support. The first is just very dumb, whereas the latter is morally despicable.

In other words: Supporting a crime against humanity is never an option. Denying a crime against humanity is always an option.

Talk with people! Discuss it with your friends! Be aware that they might have a very different outlook on this, so be patient with people. Here is a list of things to do when discussing this with people supporting Israel:

• Don’t berate them. These are your friends, not murderers. Direct your anger towards the actual murderers.
• Ask them if they believe Israel is mounting a heavy disinformation/propaganda campaign towards the west. If they do not believe this, it is relatively easy to prove, see example below.
• Show them the Twitter accs of Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. These guys are quite outspoken in their intentions.
• Show them examples of heroic acts of Palestinas, rather than just Palestinians suffering. This will help them respect Arabs, as that seems to be difficult for many Americans due to two and a half decades of Indoctrination that all arabs all terrorists.
• Also the obvious things (tens of thousands of children killed, not letting food enter, cutting off water, etc)

Example of Israeli disinformation: They created a fake hamas website (hamas dotttt com) whereas the real website was taken down from all of internet (hamas dottt ps). The fake one was heavily promoted by Israel’s official twitter acc and several Israeli government officials on twitter and recieved heavy traffic during Oct 2023-end of 2024. Use the wayback machine or similar for this, I believe both sites are down now.

There has also been many, many other lies by the Israeli government. Find proved examples and show.

I take it you do not believe Israel is commiting genocide? Or are you genuinely asking in which way the USA is enabling this?

https://zadzmo.org/code/nepenthes/

https://zadzmo.org/code/nepenthes/

Ah fair

Yes I’ve encountered it. I don’t get the bomb part though?

I don’t understand it, could someone care to explain? :)

Grave of the fireflies

Very very very odd law, is it not? Right to exist?? What does that even mean and why would a government force you to subscribe to it?

Someone: “I voted for what I belive in, which one of course should be able to do in a well functioning democracy”

Lemmy: “Nooooo you gotta vote for this one and only option, it’s the only way to protect our democracy (???)”

Guys the third party voters is not the problem, the two party system is. Come on. Voting third party or is a valid and important statement. Voting major party is legitimising an undemocratic system.

Riot against your government on the streets. That’s where you make the big difference - not in the voting booth.

Running free instances is a) way easier if you’re a government, and b) gives you important moderation control.

Also, a government running an instance that allows and promotes material that is very critical of said government could very well happen. It might sound contradictory, but allows for future control over “problematic” movements, if the need ever occurs.

Alright, I guess we simply have (somewhat) different opinions on the matter. Also I’m European so my general news intake might (should?) be less focused on domestic US politics and more on foreign policy.

It was nice debating with you, take care :)

You almost get me!

Vote for whoever you want! What I am saying is that your anger towards your peers who happened to indulge in different propaganda and voted for something different is misdirected.

The voters are not the problem.

In this scenario, I’m not the one choosing, Bob is. And when Bob says “five”, i will be angry, but it will be nothing in comparison with my Anger towards Alice who now can kill five people instead of the two she has been killing on a regular basis before. She’s the one presenting the alternatives, Bob isn’t. She’s the one performing the murders, Bob isn’t. She’s the one that deserves my anger.

In a similar fashion I am not angry with anyone saying “two” either, “beacuse they could’ve said none yadayada”. I am, almost exclusively, angry with Alice.

In my example I very clearly am rallying against Alice. In every possible way. I would be fuming, throwing stones, screaming to everyone around me. But I would not accept her proposition to Bob. I would not claim that I “have” to play Alice’s game, because she’s in charge and I have to accept that. I don’t have to accept that. At all.

I would do everything I could to stop her, and almost all of my Anger would be towards her, not towards Bob (I obviously would be angry with him too but he’s after all not a murderer - Alice is).

Keep in mind that in the example, Bob probably believes for some reason that when Alice says two, she means ten.

Paste of part of my answer from another reply:

Imagine if Alice is a murderer, and she asks Bob if she should kill two people or five people. Bob says “five”. Now, I will of course be angry at Bob for choosing the obviously worse alternative, but I will in no way claim that he is the cause of the problem. I will not go out and rally support for “Only two people”, I will rally support for “Let’s get rid of Alice”.

You seem to completely misunderstand me. Voting for any of the two main parties, both of whom want the country to be a tyrannical military megaforce that is no stranger to overthrowing democracies, is like accepting the faith of the bullet. Going against any such system is what I am advocating - NOT accepting the bullet. We simply seem to have different views of what the bullet is.

Imagine if Alice is a murderer, and she asks Bob if she should kill two people or five people. Bob says “five”. Now, I will of course be angry at Bob for choosing the obviously worse alternative, but I will in no way claim that he is the cause of the problem. I will not go out and rally support for “Only two people”, I will rally support for “Let’s get rid of Alice”.

No. A systematic de-democratization for decades combined with a non-democratic elective system to begin with is to blame. Don’t take out your anger on the average Joe, it is worth so much more to be angry at someone with actual power.

Country: Has undemocratic two-party system. Elects a nutjob.

You guys: “The people are the problem!!1!1! Just vote for the only other party even if you don’t agree with them on anything!”