Serious The Politics Thread

[Adeleine]

Yep, this is why my local MP has virtually an email a week from me highlighting the issue, over and over again.

Don't think we're pro this - the majority of the UK's population has completely turned 180 degrees on the Israel/Palestine conflict.

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/artic...s-to-the-israel-gaza-conflict-may-2024-update

View attachment 661333
The tide is slowly turning - we are currently in the summer recess for government and when it is back in September, 11 months on, I am expecting some fiery debates again.

The Tory Party are at the heart of much of the UK support for Israel's genocide. Unsurprisingly they are getting found out now for their complicity in it.

I'm unfamiliar with UK public opinion, but I'm looking at past polling data and I do not see a "180 degree turn" as you say taking place. Past data suggests the UK formed their pro-Palestinian*, pro-ceasefire opinion basically immediately and held tight to it ever since. Like, to be clear, I am glad you all predominantly have and have held the correct opinion, that is great. I just note that, if anyone is expecting a new development predicated on a new understanding that Palestine should be supported, they may be disappointed. Polling since November last year suggests the British public has always been heavily pro-ceasefire, where it was 59/19 (as opposed to 69/13 this summer, as you note). Polling since 2019 also suggests the British public has been pro-Palestine for a long time.

* "With reference to the conflict", to acknowledge the scope of the survey. I have no reason to believe the broad British opinion, not limited to the conflict, would be any different from their pro-Palestine stance in the conflict, though.

	Absolute Gap (Pro Palestine - Pro Israel)	Relative Gap (Pro Palestine ÷ Pro Israel)
2019 (month after war begins)	9%	1.9x
2020 (roughly a year after prior)	12%	2.2x
2021 (roughly a year after, and so on)	14%	2.3x
2022	14%	2.4x
2023	14%	2.4x
2024	14%	1.8x

We see the opinion solidify slightly in the first two years, but the magnitude is moderate. Palestine support rises by 4 percentage points, and Israel support falls by 1 percentage point. (If it was not clear, the remaining respondents answered "Neither" or "Don't Know".) After that, public perception is pretty stable until the current year, where the absolute gap has remained the same but the relative gap has shrunk. Specifically, the margins shifted from 24/10 to 31/17. Recently, a bunch more people acquired meaningful opinions than in the first four years after the war–"Don't Know" fell by 10 percentage points, or about 1/3–but these new entrants to the conversation are basically 50/50 split between Palestine and Israel.

 

[RaikouLover]

How can you both talk of trump as hes going to be a mega dictator if he gets elected but also think that demanding something from him or the republican party which supports him almost fully is gonna do anything. The convo is gonna go "stop sending aid to israel" "kill yourself commie" but presented more nicely since they cant tell people to kill themselves. They don't even conceed to democrats which are just as much of ghouls as they are, tell me why they'd even listen to a single leftist demand unless they have a gun on their head

Exhibit A in making excuses not to confront the Republicans on their policy positions. It’s a Presidential election; you demand answers from both candidates.

I fully believe that Trump is a threat to my existence and yet I'm not gonna vote for Kamala unless something changes because I'm not willing to sacrifice other people for my comfort.

Then you really should not go down the path of comparing or trying to educate the community that fought for 300 years to win civil rights for everyone in this country. The strategy of “only hold my friends accountable” is a not one that moves the needle.

 

[Bakugames]

Exhibit A in making excuses not to confront the Republicans on their policy positions. It’s a Presidential election; you demand answers from both candidates.

Yknow, despite you guys constantly saying to leftists that we should live in the real world or be realistic, you seem extremely deatached to reality and what effective action is.

we dont need to demand answers because the republicans already gave us one: they support israel, they support trump, they support genocide and they want leftists to die, and theyve made it very clear that theyre not budging. I know libs are accostumed with doing stuff that gets no results and just waffling around with empty movements, but usually protests are meant to target things that can change or be pressured

 

[RaikouLover]

Yknow, despite you guys constantly saying to leftists that we should live in the real world or be realistic, you seem extremely deatached to reality and what effective action is.

we dont need to demand answers because the republicans already gave us one: they support israel, they support trump, they support genocide and they want leftists to die, and theyve made it very clear that theyre not budging. I know libs are accostumed with doing stuff that gets no results and just waffling around with empty movements, but usually protests are meant to target things that can change or be pressured

Exhibit B of refusing to confront the Republicans on their policy positions.

Thankfully, my great grandparents in the Jim Crow South didn’t pursue your suggested strategy.

 

[Bakugames]

Exhibit B of refusing to confront the Republicans on their policy positions.

Thankfully, my great grandparents in the Jim Crow South didn’t pursue your suggested strategy.

being black doesnt really make throwing the resistance to jim crow laws, and comparing it to doing a protest (whos context is demands to change policies, not even removing the candidate from political power) to a candidate whos not in power currently nor will move the needle on his policies, because otherwise his party wouldnt vote him in in the first place and the folks protesting him would never vote him anyway less stupid, sorry to say

 

[ant4456]

Exhibit B of refusing to confront the Republicans on their policy positions.

Thankfully, my great grandparents in the Jim Crow South didn’t pursue your suggested strategy.

As a history nerd, no, protesting Conservatives was not actually the way things changed lmao.

The gatekeeper of progress was and always will be the Liberal in America; ostensibly "progressive", but always supporting every protest and movement in history, yet never supporting any new ones in front of their eyes.

The Civil Rights movement was extremely Leftist, and many leaders of the movement found that the white moderate/liberal was a greater problem to the cause than the KKK, because the KKK isn't who you need to convince to make progress.

The gatekeeper is always the Liberal moderate.

 

[RaikouLover]

The gatekeeper of progress was and always will be the Liberal in America; ostensibly "progressive", but always supporting every protest and movement in history, yet never supporting any new ones in front of their eyes.

The Civil Rights movement was extremely Leftist, and many leaders of the movement found that the white moderate/liberal was a greater problem to the cause than the KKK, because the KKK isn't who you need to convince to make progress.

The gatekeeper is always the Liberal moderate.

The problem is that liberals have no humility and would rather be morally smug than win. You just admitted last page you prefer to throw the election to Trump if your preferred action on Gaza is not met. This only validates my original comment about discussions we are having in black community regarding this issue.

 

[atomicllamas]

Because the Republican Party is not going to be pushef Left lol. This has been explained many times.

Also using a minority group to pretend there is a consensus to try to guilt people who are protesting a genocide is extremely cringe. Pretending that the Democratic cause = Civil Rights cause is also just ahistorical, and wrong. The stakes are the same for that community as they are for say, groups I belong to (queer and disabled), so I don't see why this is supposed to be a gotcha too.

In the theoretical Trump Nazi regime or whatever, you realize I get murdered right?

I fully believe that Trump is a threat to my existence and yet I'm not gonna vote for Kamala unless something changes because I'm not willing to sacrifice other people for my comfort. "Commit to voting for Kamala or let Trump win" is a false dichotmy, Kamala can change her position and promise policy at any time.

So you acknowledge that Republicans are worse on Palestine, and will not be pushed to be better (implying democrats can be pushed to be better). So theoretically best case scenario Republican control of the government would result in the same amount of deaths as democratic control, but realistic scenario will result in even worse conditions and more deaths.

You also believe republicans are an existential threat to you.

Objectively the next President is going to be Trump (the person you stated is committing treason by asking Netanyahu to not sign a cease fire) or Harris. You not voting does not change that. Choosing not to vote does not make you any less morally culpable for the outcome of an election than someone who does decide to vote, choosing not to participate in voting is still making a choice in the system.

Organizing, protesting, and lobbying for Palestine are all things I support. But not voting doesn’t make you morally superior to people that do, it’s just kind of stupid and not at all pragmatic.

As a history nerd, no, protesting Conservatives was not actually the way things changed lmao.

The gatekeeper of progress was and always will be the Liberal in America; ostensibly "progressive", but always supporting every protest and movement in history, yet never supporting any new ones in front of their eyes.

The Civil Rights movement was extremely Leftist, and many leaders of the movement found that the white moderate/liberal was a greater problem to the cause than the KKK, because the KKK isn't who you need to convince to make progress.

The gatekeeper is always the Liberal moderate.

Assuming this is a reference to a Letter from the Birmingham Jail, I absolutely agree it makes sense to apply pressure on liberal moderates. But I don’t think the take away MLK was intending was “if there is an election between the KKK and a moderate liberal, don’t vote lmao”.

 

[ant4456]

Objectively the next President is going to be Trump (the person you stated is committing treason by asking Netanyahu to not sign a cease fire) or Harris. You not voting does not change that. Choosing not to vote does not make you any less morally culpable for the outcome of an election than someone who does decide to vote, choosing not to participate in voting is still making a choice in the system.

Organizing, protesting, and lobbying for Palestine are all things I support. But not voting doesn’t make you morally superior to people that do, it’s just kind of stupid and not at all pragmatic.

I do not know how many times I have to explain this.

You are not voting on August 22nd, 2024. You are voting in November! She can change her position on Gaza! I want to vote for Kamala, I want her to change this position.

Assuming this is a reference to a Letter from the Birmingham Jail, I absolutely agree it makes sense to apply pressure on liberal moderates. But I don’t think the take away MLK was intending was “if there is an election between the KKK and a moderate liberal, don’t vote lmao”.

When did I say don't vote???

I believe in not committing your vote because the moment you commit your vote, you lose all leverage in your constituency. The people who are 100% voting for Kamala right now have literally zero power to move her position on policies because they are already locked in.

When you have a constituency that isn't locked in, the politician has to cater, or lose votes. The point isn't to NOT VOTE, the point is to GET THE POLITICIAN TO CHANGE THEIR POLICY, so that YOU VOTE FOR THEM.

People on Twitter who say "I'll never vote" are just virtue signalling, but the majority of actual on-the-grounds protestors are traditionally progressive voters who want to change her position, so they can vote for her in good conscience.

The point of protesting is either two things: 1. To gain attention to an issue. 2. To show leverage.

We are at 2; Gaza isn't an unknown problem, and we are far beyond the point of just trying to educate people on what is happening. The point of uncommitted protests is to bring Kamala to the table, to change her policy, in exchange for voting for her in November.

If Kamala becomes President (which I hope she does! after committing to good policy on gaza!), your actual concerns do not matter. She is free to do whatever she wants on policy she didn't clearly commit to for years until the next election cycle begins. By the time of the next election cycle, Gaza will be a golf course! So this is the last time things can actually change!

The fact that protesters want to vote for Kamala is such a big part of it, and it's why conservatives saying "oh we'll be better on Gaza" wouldn't be worth the pandering, plenty of protestors are other minorities Trump wants to kill, or just people they mutually hate. Most protesters want to vote for Kamala Harris *when she commits to positive policy on Gaza, because they like her social policy and the change from a geriatric 80+ year old man to a (relatively) younger woman has everyone Libbed Up!

We aren't voting in the election today, and we weren't voting on the election months ago when this argument even began!

If every Liberal who said "being uncommitted = no vote in months from now" and made this argument joined the protestors and literally said "I won't vote for the Democratic Party until they have good policy on this issue", even if you literally lied, Biden would actually literally probably have already changed his foreign policy by this point, let alone Kamala Harris' potential presidency.

 

[SittinGamer]

I am just relaying the sentiment I’m hearing in the black community. The black community has significant pull in the 2024 Democratic Party. We are not dying on this hill. No matter how many times you say “protesting Republicans is useless” what we see is a double standard and smoke only being directed at the black woman.

Ah. I see. Protesting for Gaza is actually racist.

 

[Chou Toshio]

Can I say, the DNC is absolutely lit— and I never thought I’d ever praise the content of a Democratic convention.

This one is fire

 

[SittinGamer]

Can I say, the DNC is absolutely lit— and I never thought I’d ever praise the content of a Democratic convention.

This one is fire

It would be more lit if they allowed a Palestinian American to even simply speak at the event

(On the whole I agree with you but fuck man it sounds like they're TRYING to piss off the younger and Arab American voters that had been signaling less support for the party in power supplying a genocide)

 

[RaikouLover]

If Kamala becomes President (which I hope she does! after committing to good policy on gaza!), your actual concerns do not matter. She is free to do whatever she wants on policy she didn't clearly commit to for years until the next election cycle begins. By the time of the next election cycle, Gaza will be a golf course! So this is the last time things can actually change!

You have it backwards. Not voting is no leverage at all. Do not vote for Kamala and see how many fucks she does not give about your concerns. The work starts after she gets elected.

Ah. I see. Protesting for Gaza is actually racist.

No, but being cool with Trump getting elected is.

 

[SittinGamer]

No, but being cool with Trump getting elected is.

Not what you said. You said it smells of attacking "the black woman."

Edit to actually respond with ANYTHING more than a gotcha: I don't know how many times it needs to be said that left leaning protests catered towards the people who literally actively platform for the OPPOSITE policy goal is not worth time when there is a party that actually CAN be moved to the left. Also helps that people at the DNC will walk away with their ears plugged while someone crying to defund Israel at a Trump rally would likely be called a Hamas supporter by Trump himself and then be beaten to a pulp by his surrounding cult of personality.

 

[RaikouLover]

Not what you said. You said it smells of attacking "the black woman."

Edit to actually respond with ANYTHING more than a gotcha: I don't know how many times it needs to be said that left leaning protests catered towards the people who literally actively platform for the OPPOSITE policy goal is not worth time when there is a party that actually CAN be moved to the left. Also helps that people at the DNC will walk away with their ears plugged while someone crying to defund Israel at a Trump rally would likely be called a Hamas supporter by Trump himself and then be beaten to a pulp by his surrounding cult of personality.

It is not a gotcha; it is a double standard. There is a blatant refusal for the protests to disrupt or even engage the Republican campaign at all. It is not even a subject for discussion. There are two major parties actually running for President. The last sentence is very telling; they must be afraid of Republicans.

 

[ant4456]

You have it backwards. Not voting is no leverage at all. Do not vote for Kamala and see how many fucks she does not give about your concerns. The work starts after she gets elected.

This is such a silly view of politics it's crazy.

Only someone who would genuinely assume that Presidents care about their constituency after they're President would see this as true — and that's not true! And has never been true! Candidates don't do things all the time!

Have you heard of lying? It's an extremely common part of politics, because turns out: Most politicians don't care once they're in power! No one who has the drive and ability to become the President actually cares that much!

Your election is about exchanging time, policy and commitment for votes through constituencies that you choose and believe are strategically the best to win. Once you are President you pick issues to fight on that will help keep credibility for your future political prospects, but outside of that it's entirely your personal discretion and nobody can hold you accountable outside of voting you out of office. 3+ years later, by which the time 99% of your constituency has forgotten 70%+ of the shit you did or didn't do.

And, turns out, most Liberals don't really care as long as things look orderly, so they actually don't have to do much. Say the conservatives are blocking progress, use half the issues you campaigned on last time, again, as a carrot on the stick, and literally fund Donald Trump because you think the threat of Fascism makes you more likely to win.

Thinking that the President actually has the want or care to listen to their constituency post election is pretty cute, though, and that starry-eyed worldview would indeed explain a lot. If the Dems do win a supermajority, be ready for Johnathon Carls of the IHateHumanityAndMyself District who is technically a Democrat to say "Well actually legalizing all abortion is radical", and I'm willing to bet that improving the law on abortion will be on the 2028 agenda.

Simply vote harder and you'll get better policy, they'll say while wining and dining with the guy they totally hate.

It's pretty awesome (and convenient) that all the Democrats gotta do to win several constituencies is do nothing, right? Queer people, disabled people, most minority groups, really. Has queer rights really improved in the last 4 years? Naw, they've gotten worse in many states; but is Trump worse? Yeah, so obviously they're gonna vote for the Dems.

It's the Dem specialty. Creating a situation where they don't have to do anything while still being automatically the better candidate. Must be nice. I'm sure it'd be convenient, too, if the protesters right now just quieted down, silently accepted that she won't do anything, listen to sweet nothings from "leakers" that she probably cares about innocent people's lives, and the Dems hope that in three years of what are probably more grueling politics, they'll simply care less by the next election.

Nominee Ron DeSantis will be a good enough reason for them to forget about the long-over Genocide, anyways; we got domestic issues to care about!

 

[myowngamertag]

It is not a gotcha; it is a double standard. There is a blatant refusal for the protests to disrupt or even engage the Republican campaign at all. It is not even a subject for discussion. There are two major parties actually running for President. The last sentence is very telling; they must be afraid of Republicans.

It's because they don't view the Republican party as amenable to a pro-Palestinian position whatsoever. They're protesting Dems because they feel like the needle can be moved there. How is this hard to understand?

 

[SittinGamer]

Protestors (with limited time, resources, and manpower): We want the US to stop funding a genocide.

Democrats: I swear it's really complicated but we hear you (No)
Republicans: No, and in fact, you are terrorist sympathizers. Additionally, we have been found to be colluding with foreign officials during an election year so as to undermine Democrats AND keep the war going longer.

Liberals: WhY aReNt ThE pRoTeStOrS mOvInG rEpUbLiCaNs LeFt?!?!?!

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

I'm unfamiliar with UK public opinion, but I'm looking at past polling data and I do not see a "180 degree turn" as you say taking place. Past data suggests the UK formed their pro-Palestinian*, pro-ceasefire opinion basically immediately and held tight to it ever since. Like, to be clear, I am glad you all predominantly have and have held the correct opinion, that is great. I just note that, if anyone is expecting a new development predicated on a new understanding that Palestine should be supported, they may be disappointed. Polling since November last year suggests the British public has always been heavily pro-ceasefire, where it was 59/19 (as opposed to 69/13 this summer, as you note). Polling since 2019 also suggests the British public has been pro-Palestine for a long time.

* "With reference to the conflict", to acknowledge the scope of the survey. I have no reason to believe the broad British opinion, not limited to the conflict, would be any different from their pro-Palestine stance in the conflict, though.

	Absolute Gap (Pro Palestine - Pro Israel)	Relative Gap (Pro Palestine ÷ Pro Israel)
2019 (month after war begins)	9%	1.9x
2020 (roughly a year after prior)	12%	2.2x
2021 (roughly a year after, and so on)	14%	2.3x
2022	14%	2.4x
2023	14%	2.4x
2024	14%	1.8x

We see the opinion solidify slightly in the first two years, but the magnitude is moderate. Palestine support rises by 4 percentage points, and Israel support falls by 1 percentage point. (If it was not clear, the remaining respondents answered "Neither" or "Don't Know".) After that, public perception is pretty stable until the current year, where the absolute gap has remained the same but the relative gap has shrunk. Specifically, the margins shifted from 24/10 to 31/17. Recently, a bunch more people acquired meaningful opinions than in the first four years after the war–"Don't Know" fell by 10 percentage points, or about 1/3–but these new entrants to the conversation are basically 50/50 split between Palestine and Israel.

Sorry I should have made my view clear:

The 180 degree is the support for Israel, which is receding at significant rates. This poll is one of several which shows that the vast majority of brits want a ceasefire, want both sides to negotiate, want an end to the fighting.

I would disagree with you that the majority of the public have been pro Palestine. I think it has accelerated publicly, which is not the same thing.

But equally, maybe mainsteam british media has skewed mine and others views, I don’t know.

Either way, there has been a notable and clear change (but not as sweeping as I was, unintentionally, saying earlier).

My apologies, I hope that makes my view clearer.

 

[Blue glass]

Trying to get leverage right before the elections is the right move but saying that protests are useless after them is simply untrue, otherwise Ruto in Kenya wouldn't have walked back or Hasina would still be governing Bangladesh.

 

[RaikouLover]

Protestors (with limited time, resources, and manpower): We want the US to stop funding a genocide.

Democrats: I swear it's really complicated but we hear you (No)
Republicans: No, and in fact, you are terrorist sympathizers. Additionally, we have been found to be colluding with foreign officials during an election year so as to undermine Democrats AND keep the war going longer.

Liberals: WhY aReNt ThE pRoTeStOrS mOvInG rEpUbLiCaNs LeFt?!?!?!

Not once this entire election cycle has the Republican campaign actually been confronted to spell out their Gaza policy to contrast it with the current administration. That used to be an expectation in elections. I see a lot of strawmaning and defensiveness at even the thought of such discussion happening.

 

[Blue glass]

Liberals: WhY aReNt ThE pRoTeStOrS mOvInG rEpUbLiCaNs LeFt?!?!?!

I hope that this is an election mindset and if Trump wins people don't go all "why bother protesting? Republicans won't listen anyway"

Not once this entire election cycle has the Republican campaign actually been confronted to spell out their Gaza policy to contrast it with the current administration.

To be fair, Biden continued many policies introduced by Trump like the Abraham Accords and moving the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem so the contrast is that republicans are more willing to say that all Palestinians are terrorists. But yeah, they should be confronted more about that.

 

[faint]

You guys need to stop simultaneously saying "the polls look good" (which is complete copium given where half of you stood on them over a month ago) while criticizing people for not voting for the Democrats because they're the lesser of two evils. I am so tired of repeating this line but for the last time the goal of a politician is to earn your vote. That is either done by policy change, promising policy change, or lying. Nobody should be expected to just vote because they dislike the opposition party. Do you know how many single issue voters vote Republican? Where are the calls for us to appeal to them? Instead, I keep reading deranged shit about how someone's black grandparents were apparently so effective at ending segregation that they somehow convinced KKK-era conservatives that "not all negroes are bad." Just stop. This is idpol bs on a level never before seen. In the mid-60's, MLK has disapproval ratings in the high 60's. That doesn't happen by "convincing both liberals and conservatives that something is bad." Our country has shown, time and time again, that one party wants to move forward while the other wants to move us backwards. If you truly want to believe that for us to change policy on Gaza, we need to pressure conservative leaders, you are living in another world. We target Democrats for two reasons: they control the WH, i.e. they directly fund Israel, and we want to vote for them but want to see them address a genocide for what it is.

Also, back on this whole Jim Crow era bs: if you honestly believe black people got the rights they have today because black leaders decided to equally target both parties, you are [mod edit: redacted]. Do you really think the 20% non-blacks marching alongside MLK in Washington were made up of 1960s liberals and conservatives? Fuck no. They were leftists and pioneers in human rights that understood race is not intended to be a barrier to freedom. This revisionist history is some of the dumbest shit I've ever read on this website.

 

[lilyhollow]

The democrats are slaughtering thousands of Palestinians with glee as we speak. They lie about an interminable 'ceasefire process' in order to extend the slaughter when they could simply turn the weapons faucet off any day if they wanted to. They plug their ears and laugh as we confront them about this.

Then they become upset and try to distract us by pointing us elsewhere. "What about Trump?" "Hey look at these poll numbers!" "Why don't you protest someone else?" "The DNC is lit! [???]" "This isn't helping your cause."

Sorry, you cannot jingle some keys and distract us from a holocaust. No Palestinian speaker at the DNC could change this either. The monstrous nazis who commit daily massacres and rape against Palestinians, and the democratic party which materially supports these nazis with weapons and diplomatic cover, will all be held to account.

 

[RaikouLover]

The democrats are slaughtering thousands of Palestinians with glee as we speak.

They are? Which Democrats are doing this? Name them.