Weren’t some of the attackers on Oct 7th literal children? I remember reading reports of some of them being teenagers… and yes, the same thing applies to them. A leader like Sinwar and a child soldier should not get the same blame, that’s just silly.
This is true, but we also have to acknowledge that things aren’t simple or as black and white as they seem.
The big takeaway from WWII is that the Nazis were evil and responsible for the atrocities that they committed, not the German people. Low ranking soldiers being complacent through coercion is not the same thing as being a leader who has influence over the situation. That’s why we condemn Hitler and the Nazi leaders, and not the foot soldiers.
You’re saying it as if this is common, it’s absolutely not. Russian defections and desertions to Ukraine and vice versa are very rare, and for good reason. The chances of you successfully running away are slim compared to failing and getting killed by either Russia or Ukraine. If it was as easy as you think it is then number of causalities among troops in this war wouldn’t be in the millions.
But this also ignores how these are not comparable situations at all. The Gaza war is nothing like the Ukraine war, where are IDF conscripts supposed to defect to? It’s not like there’s anything in Gaza, they can’t leave through legal channels, and all their neighboring countries will kill them the moment they find out they’re in the IDF. It’s a difficult situation to be in.
You can choose to not join or to leave the IDF (it might cost you some jail time, but if that’s the price for keeping one’s soul, so be it). You can’t choose to not be an Arab.
I see this delusional and out of touch argument being made all over the internet, and it’s so damn annoying. These takes are always from chronically online larpers who never leave the comfort of their house, they always say shit like:
“why don’t people of Iran just overthrow the theocracy?”
“why don’t the people of North Korea just topple the Kim dynasty?”
“why don’t Russian conscripts just refuse to fight in Ukraine?”
“why don’t Israelis just refuse to be in the IDF?”
“why don’t Americans just have a revolution?”
Could it be because that reality is not that simple? It’s easy to sit there in your dark room all day dreaming about being a heroic revolutionary, but in reality? You wouldn’t do shit because you understand that the consequences are a lot harsher in reality than in your imagination. This over simplistic view of the world just boils away the complexity and nuance of humanity. Nobody is willing to risk their freedom, stability, future, or life to appear moral or have a “clean soul”. When shit gets real and you’re in the same position as all these people, you’ll end up doing the same as them. If reality was that easy then we wouldn’t have tyrannical regimes or wars or exploitation, but we do. Trying to blame a 20 year conscript for being forced to serve in the military by extremist leaders is stupid and unhelpful. They’re not making the situation better, but it’s also not their fault they’re in that position in the first place.
I don’t worship youtubers, I’m just not braindead enough to deny reality because of my myopic personal preferences. This guy has a 110 million subscribers and his every video has been getting millions of views for well over a decade now. He is one of the biggest and most well known people on the internet, and he has a lot of influence because of it. When this guy puts out a video about a cause, his point of view is going to introduced and adopted by a lot of people. In this case, he put out a video on a cause that people in here advocate for, and they’re pleasantly surprised that their views are getting this kind of exposure. You not understanding this obvious nuance is your problem, not anybody else’s.
What in the fuck are you even on about? Your hypothetical doesn’t address my points and it’s not used to demonstrate a point of your own. What is the point you’re trying to drive here that endorsements from extremists is a good thing? That’s just stupid and so is this hypothetical because it’s a situation that NEVER happens. Nobody accepts endorsements from extremist groups they disavow. That’s why it’s a problem. Accepting an endorsement from an extremist group, especially when you preach that you’re against extremism, is a big red flag because it shows a conflict, it shows a contradiction. The inconsistencies in morals, views, values, and character are a problem. This common sense, this is obvious. I should not need to explain this to you this many times.
I don’t think you understand that hypotheticals need to have a valid point to make in order for them to be relevant. Making them for the sake of it is pointless. It’s clear you don’t even understand what my point is, what I’m arguing against, or why I’m arguing against it. I spelled it out for you multiple times, and you still don’t get it. There are only two possibilities for this, either you’re too ignorant for this conversation or you’re too disingenuous for it. Arguing for the sake of arguing is a waste of time, especially if you’re engaging in bad faith which I’m pretty sure you are. In the words of the great T-Pain “If you ain’t got it by now then you’re just ain’t getting it”
“I’m incapable of understanding the nuance of someone with a lot of influence speaking out in favor of a topic I advocate for because I’m ignorant and judgemental towards certain activities and people who make a living off of them”
Yeah okay, bud. Good mentality you got there. But you’re right, this conversation is pointless, so let’s end it here.
Ok, so that’s not happening. What do you think the consequences of that should be? Do you want him out of office? Or just for people to say hey, that’s bad! And then go about our business? Should we have withheld votes over that one thing or not?
It’s crazy that instead of acknowledging that this is a bad thing, you’re willing to go through all these mental gymnastics in hopes of sweeping it under the rug. Where’s your moral integrity?
We have a politician who is in position to be elected to a very powerful office, and this individual has accepted and endorsement from a group that’s known for being extremist, pro violence, and pro tyranny. That is a big red flag because it means he agrees with their views and actions enough to proudly accept and display their endorsement. I hope that I don’t need to explain why that would set a dangerous precedent.
As citizens of a democratic country, it is our civic duty to criticize him for things like this. The public should apply enough pressure on him to where he comes out and publicly distances himself from this organization, or at the very least have him explicitly condemn their extremist actions. That way he’ll be on public record that he has disavowed their extremist methods and views, and that’s a standard that he can and will be held to during his entire time in office. That way he can face consequences should he go back on his words and start employing tactics from this group.
Trying to make excuses for him because he’s a progressive is incredibly stupid. Nobody should ever have double standards for politicians. They should all face the same criticisms for same questionable actions. All politicians who openly accept endorsement from unethical organizations should face the same criticisms whether it’s Cuomo, Adams, or Mamdani. It should be clear at this point that I’m not criticizing him for the sake of it, but because I have an actual point and an actual concern. How you don’t see this as something concerning is beyond me.
Your questions? Oh I don’t care about the DSA thing at all. I’m more concerned with where his actual focus lies as a local mayor, not who endorsed him and the optics of endorsements.
It’s not about optics, that’s such a mind numbingly shallow point of view. Even if a politician’s platform doesn’t explicitly reflect an extremist group’s views, openly accepting their endorsement is still concerning. It legitimizes harmful ideologies, signals poor judgment, and undermines the candidate’s credibility, especially if they claim to stand for integrity or justice, which Mamdani does. Endorsements carry weight that goes beyond optics, and failing to distance from extremist groups erodes public trust and inadvertently amplify dangerous narratives, which is already a big problem in this country. Ultimately, it raises questions about his values and character, which is why a clarification is necessary.
I’m more curious as to what you hope to accomplish by your comments.
My comments express my opinions, and if they are able to raise awareness about this then that’s a plus. At least I have a point in my comments, what is the point of your comments? To me, it looks like you’re just big mad that I’m criticizing this guy for doing something questionable and you want that to stop.
One of the things the right does better than the left is maintaining party cohesion, so it always intrigues me when people self sabotage incremental moves in the right direction.
What in the fuck are you even talking about? The Republican part has zero cohesion. They have no platform, no ideology, no structure, no values, no leadership, nothing. The whole party starts and stops with Trump and his senile opinions that can change from one extreme end to other at the drop of a hat. The Republican party died when Trump started purging all the ideological diversity that existed within the party during his first term. Right now the party only consists of MAGA cultist worshipers and slimy opportunists who lack a spine.
The left should definitely NOT model itself to be more like the right. One of the hallmarks of a successful democracy is having these internal debates and having the ability to criticize politicians freely and openly about anything they do that’s deemed inappropriate. The progressives who think they should become blue MAGA are just as dumb as MAGA. This isn’t self sabotage, this is an opportunity for us to hold our politicians accountable so they could serve us better in the ways that we want them to.
I don’t know enough about the DSA or any of the stuff that are bothering you so much to make it a wedge issue.
Hold on, if you don’t even understand what I’m talking about, then why the fuck are you arguing and defending something you don’t even know?
I’m arguing with you right now. If you endorsed me, I’d accept it. I’d take your money and use it for whatever I wanted. I’d take your endorsement to mean you agree with my views, regardless of what your words say.
It’s easy to say this because you know I’m just a normal person, but imagine for a second that you got an endorsement from someone who isn’t normal. Say for example, an islamist group like Al Qaeda endorsed you, would you still accept their endorsement? How about if a branch of the KKK endorsed you? Maybe, the church of Scientology? You probably wouldn’t, but why? It’s because basic morals and ethics wouldn’t allow you to, or at least they shouldn’t. I don’t care how many votes or money their endorsements brings, their views and past doings are more than enough for me to reject their support.
Or are you claiming some quid pro quo we should be worried about? Because that’s usually the actual concern when talking about big money donors in politics.
That’s one issue, but it’s not the only one.
This isn’t a random youtuber and his video isn’t clickbait. You not understanding why people are talking about him posting this video is not the same as these discussions being pointless or spam.
No, I’m not saying one is good. My whole point is that the gap between them is also large.
People are out here calling him a nazi and that’s just crazy. It’s an example of how the left is not immune to propaganda, misinformation, poor critical thinking skills.
Oh no, 4 different posts that were posted on 4 different communities on 4 different instancess, all of which are about the topic he’s talking about in the video… The horror
The only people who have called this guy a nazi are terminally online far left jackoffs who get all their information from other jackoffs in the same echo chambers.
He’s one of the biggest and most loved youtube personalities. He has influence, and him saying this kind of stuff is a big deal. Pretending he’s a nobody shows that you’re simply ignorant.
That would literally be the best this to happen to this god forsaken platform. There isn’t nearly enough users, diversity of content, or sheer volume to make this place a genuine alternative to Reddit. Getting an influx from a huge youtuber like him means this place might finally get active communities for mainstream hobbies like sports, music, and videogames.
Calling this guy an ass shows that you have no idea who he is. You’re probably the type of person who thinks they’re well informed but exclusively get their info from echo chambers like Lemmy.
There’s no redemption arc because he literally never did anything wrong. His content was always family friendly
He literally never did anything evil or bad. This is a myth that was entirely created by the far left, who falsely call everything fascist, despite never watching his content.
I agree with this.