Skip Navigation

Disenchanted with the democratic party due to Gaza, where do I go now?

My disenchantment is based on how differently the current administration reacts to 2 conflicts: Ukraine-Russia and Gaza-Israel, in the latter supporting Israel’s indiscriminate war against Palestinian civilians with the excuse to exterminate Hamas. This post summarizes my disappointment after finally accepting that the US is not the benevolent hegemon I thought it was and how even the supposed American liberals, the democrats, while publicly calling the Israeli government to restrain itself, keep sending them every weapon they ask for and protect them at the UN with our veto. I’m now politically orphan.

I always thought America stood against bullies, America was the great nation, a country where we help others protect their human rights, fight authoritarianism of any kind, be it left, right, religious… the way we did with Ukraine against Russia. Ukraine fits here because authoritarian Putin decided he couldn’t accept an independent Ukraine anymore: I’m all for sending Ukraine the means they need to defend themselves to deny authoritarian Russia a successful occupation. The Ukrainian war is not a morally gray one like the ones in Iraq or Afghanistan, this one is black and white. Putin has to be stopped. America is here on the right side of history supporting Ukraine.

However, in Gaza, America doesn’t act like the benign hegemon I thought we were, but like a external power supporting a client state: Our government supports the indiscriminate bombing of Palestinian civilians in the name of fighting terrorism and calls everybody that questions the narrative that Israel is fighting against terrorists an antisemite, yet ignoring that Gaza has been an open air prison for 20 years and that these conditions make it ideal for fanatics and hate to thrive.

No, I’m not an Islamist (I don’t care about any religion) and no, I don’t want Israel to be wiped off the planet and no, I don’t have anything against Jews or Israelis, and no, I don’t deny the holocaust and the 6 millions of Jews who were murdered. It’s ridiculous to have to say this before even criticizing Israel.

America loves to support Israel’s right to defend itself, yet this same right in practice means carte blanche to kill Palestinian civilians as well, destroying their hospitals and their capability to function as a normal society. The Israeli army and government are not behaving any better than the Hamas fanatics that invaded Israel and killed 1300 Israeli civilians, the Israeli army has killed far more Palestinian civilians than Hamas did when they invaded Israel, yet simply saying what I did, simply comparing both sides like I did or calling for a cease fire gets you labeled an antisemite, hoping that simply uttering those words will make everybody rally against you and justify killing Palestinians.

A life is a life everywhere. All lives matter.

No, not every Palestinian is a terrorist, yet the media and the Israeli and American right insist in no making distinctions, make no effort to create a separate Palestinian state and keep not questioning the conditions of deprivation that will make another violent reaction against Israel in 20 years possible, when the current Palestinian children, now bombed and homeless, grow up and reach maturity, accusing Hamas of hiding behind civilians, ignoring that the policies of the Israeli right created them.

And our government does nothing to stop that. Worse, keeps arming and protecting the other side, the more powerful side.

Where do I go now?

64

You're viewing a single thread.

64 comments
  • There are two things you do when voting in a two-party system:

    1. Vote to keep out the candidates that would do real damage
    2. Vote to communicate your preferences for candidates with platforms that match your priorities

    I know it seems like a third party is the only solution to your current situation, but it's not. The solution is to keep the idiots out by voting Democrat in general elections, and then to vote in primaries or with your campaign contribution dollars for Democrats who match your views on Israel/Palestine.

    You might also support candidates who are in favor of voting reform, including things like ranked choice voting, which also happen to be people who currently run as Democrats.

    • Yes, exactly. The short term solution requires that people recognize the greater evil in the room and defend what little progress we've made. We can't let perfect be the enemy of good. Our first part the post voting system is horrible, but until we can build up enough progressive movement to update it to a better system, priority 1 is exactly what you said.

      Choosing not to vote for Democrats because they're not perfect is choosing to step back and give republicans a free ticket to burn all of our progress to the ground. It's naïve to think otherwise.

      And honestly, that naïveté is holding us back from actually addressing issues like us aid to israel. Enoguh splintering among progressives will by default give control back to republican leaders who would happily sit back and watch palestinians die while lying about it and blaming it on anything anyone else other than themselves.

      • but until we can build up enough progressive movement to update it to a better system

        We also need to try and expose as many people to the alternatives as possible. Anyone who can should be trying to utilize RCV. Trying to figure out what game(s) to play at game night? Use RCV. There are plenty of free apps out there to facilitate.

        The more people who use it, see it's benefits and that it's not as complicated as people make it out to be, the faster it will happen.

        • Instant runoff voting is terrible and more complicated than people think, and I will never support it. It's a false improvement whose adoption will discourage meaningful change.

          If it's a single winner election and you want a simple improvement, use approval voting. If you want to take on a little complexity for some further improvement, use delegable yes/no voting. I have one idea for further improvement, if anyone is really interested in voting methods.

          Link to my anti-IRV rant

          • STAR voting offers the same benefit of "vote for as many as you want" without Approval Voting's drawback of being unable to rank your preferences. I have yet to find a better method. It is, of course, miles better than IRV, both in complexity to the voter (rate candidates 0-5 stars) and simplicity of tallying the result (two steps).

            • Any thoughts on the alternative I mentioned, DYN, described here?

              • At first blush, that sounds really complicated for the voter to understand what happens to their ballot. Potentially delegating part of their vote to one of the candidates? That's going to be a hard sell. Sure, the direct mechanics for voting seems simple, but the system that ballot would go into feels unlikely to lead to better satisfaction than STAR, and might even lead to less informed voters. Even reading your link several times, I'm still not sure I correctly understand how the delegated votes are supposed to work, because I keep going back to "Why would anyone want that?"

                My takeaway is either what we value in a democratic voting system is significantly different in some key area, or I don't understand how the delegation in DYN is supposed to work, but I suspect it's the former. I'm not a political scientist or a voting system enthusiast though, I just happen to like STAR.

          • It's not 'terrible', but it does have issues just like every other voting system. It's significantly better than what we have now.

            Approval voting simplifies things but also has limitations because it removes any weight/preference people may have. If 55% vote for A, and B, but prefer A over B, and 45% vote B and C, but prefer C over B.... B wins but 55% of the voters preferred A. Same exact issue you're raising with RCV but occurs more often with approval than RCV.

            Keep fighting the good fight, but don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

            • Approval voting simplifies things but also has limitations because it removes any weight/preference people may have.

              Yes, but nowhere near the problems of IRV. If those particular limitations bother you, as I said:

              If you want to take on a little complexity for some further improvement, use delegable yes/no voting.

              . . . don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

              I see zero "good" in IRV, for all the reasons outlined in the rant. Its failures are absurd and beyond unacceptable given that there are strictly better and simpler alternatives. Don't let something shiny and terrible stop you from using something actually quite good.

    • ☝️☝️☝️ this ☝️☝️☝️

      Nobody gets their way 100% in democracy. Vote in the primaries or try and run... Then vote from who's on the field.

You've viewed 64 comments.