• 2 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 1 month ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2025

help-circle





  • alcibiades@sh.itjust.workstoScience Memes@mander.xyzwe are creators
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    What are you talking about? Everyone was a capitalist back then as they are now. The space race was as much a capitalist conquest for glory as it was beneficial for technology/science.

    In the USA we wasted time, money, and media resources going to the moon while black people were treated as less than citizens and millions were living in abject poverty. Not much has changed on that front for the countries entire history. What good did the moon landing do for the average man?

    Same with the USSR. As people starved and lived under a dictatorship, the ruling class wasted the countries money by getting into a dick measuring contest.

    The billionaires have taken over since colonialism became the status quo in the 15th century. Most of the technological progress since then is guided by capital and not something noble.

    — I forgot to add that most of the technological progress in the 20th century happened because we were so hellbent on murdering one another that we had to come up with new and efficient methods. Your concept of “progress” is skewed in favor of the same systems that you want to dismantle.




  • I agree that they didn’t use enough anti-genocide supporters, their sources were one sided.

    But your second critique would require a complete rewrite and would change the article completely.

    I agree that pro vs anti genocide is the better way to approach the conflict, however, for reporting purposes, it makes more sense to call it an Israel vs Palestine conflict. Calling it pro vs anti genocide means that you have taken the position of calling the conflict a genocide (which I agree with, it is genocide). But as the article states, Israel does not see this as a genocide and neither do a lot of governments.

    AP describes the conflict as a war of Israel against Hamas. Not a war of Israel against Palestine. This could be interpreted as 1) diminishing the genocide and 2) reporting on one specific facet of the conflict ie Israel against Hamas forces, which it could be argued, is a different conflict than Israel against the Palestinian people. This also means that by the articles definitions, Palestinian supporters are different than Hamas supporters.

    Their second position does not say one side is correct and one side is wrong. They say

    Israel and some supporters have described the protests as antisemitic

    Israel and their supporters, not the AP describe protests as antisemitic.

    critics say Israel uses such descriptions to silence opponents.

    Critics, not the AP, say Israel is incorrect in their antisemitic descriptions.

    If the article did what you wanted, it would be an opinion piece about how we need to call the conflict a genocide, and all future reporting should reflect this.

    I don’t think this article is very supportive of the Palestinian people’s struggles. I also don’t think it supports the Israelis. It is tip-toeing the very fragile line of (falsely accused) antisemitism that they write about. It isn’t perfect, but it’s unfair to call it pro Israel.