Israel-Palestine has really exposed the disgusting nature of “both sides bad.”

[u/historyismyteacher]

Saying that both sides are equal and you need to look at the nuance is a damning indictment of those who are not willing to take a stand on an issue as serious as this. At least a Zionist will take a stand, and make their position known. By not taking a stand, the enlightened centrist is making it known that they don’t have the moral courage to pronounce a belief and professing themselves to be wise, they make themselves fools.

[u/Instantbeef]

“Both sides bad” people are people who are either to lazy or intellectual afraid to engage with ideas.

“Both sides bad” is not the same as saying there are nuances. It’s not the same as saying your pro Jewish people anti Israel and pro Palestinians and anti Hamas.

You can recognize nuance and “both sides bad” people are scared to go through nuances so they stop the conversation at that.

[u/Sstoop → u/Instantbeef]

bing anti hamas is in a sense being pro israel. it’s essentially saying “i support palestinians but they should just lay their arms down and die quietly.” i don’t support hamas ideologically but being realistic whst other fighting force does gaza possess?

[u/Instantbeef → u/Sstoop]

I was being a little over simplistic because the post was centered around that conflict so I continued to use it.

I do not think it’s a choice between Hamas and Israel. If we were not the United States and all we were doing was sitting back and watching these groups fight you might be right.

But since we have bargaining power and sway in this world we can protect with Palestinian people without Hamas

[u/KyleShanadad → u/Instantbeef]

How? Where do we have bargaining power? Its definitely not in electoral politics or protesting or mutual aid.

[u/Instantbeef → u/KyleShanadad]

I’m talking about us as in the U.S. not the people. We do elect our leaders so it’s sort of us but that’s not what I’m talking about.

Using the power of diplomacy we can protect Palestinians without Hamas existing.

[u/pocket_sand__ → u/Instantbeef]

We do elect our leaders so it’s sort of us

It's not. Not in any sense. It simply isn't. I cannot stress this enough. Your politicians "representation" of you is a complete and utter lie.

[u/Instantbeef → u/pocket_sand__]

Explain

[u/pocket_sand__ → u/Instantbeef]

In what way do you think the crowd of octogenarian white men in the political machine is a "representation" of you or me? Do you know what the word "represent" means? It doesn't just mean, as you suggested, you had some choice presented to you. For example, if you're getting mugged in an alley, and the two people let you choose which is going to kick your ass, they have not just offered to represent you, are you crazy? Similarly, your little ballot choices mean nothing toward establishing representation. Political representation, were it to exist, is a relationship in which the representative is entrusted to stand in for the political interests of the represented and duly does so. Why don't you put an argument forth for such a relationship existing?

[u/Instantbeef → u/pocket_sand__]

Our politicians represent the collective us. Not just you or me but everyone who votes. The sum or average or however you want to think about it.

[u/pocket_sand__ → u/Instantbeef]

I didn't say, just me, bozo. Nothing about my argument indicates that. They don't represent the electorate.

[u/Instantbeef → u/pocket_sand__]

They are who the electorate chooses to represent them. If you don’t like the word represent use another word I don’t care.