That’s not what I said that in response to. This doesn’t mean I oppose resistance to genocide, this means I have expectations towards resistance groups. Not the same position.
Exactly my point, you think you have any moral right to decide in what form and shape the local resistance against Zionism has to take shape, and otherwise it doesnt get your support.
There are material reasons why Hamas is structured the way it is, and you may not like them or share all their goals, but their primary goal is the liberation of Palestine from Zionism and you should support them in that
If that’s your point, you replied to the wrong comment of mine earlier.
When I said “I don’t agree on that claim, no.” I was specifically referring to the claim that I oppose resistance to genocide, period. When in reality I’m opposing the form that resistance is taking, not resistance itself. That’s why I said I don’t agree with the claim made.
You don’t seem to argue with that fact, you’re just arguing about my actual position. Which isn’t what I was denying.
So, you do support Hamas?
You’re really not arguing in good faith, are you? Not supporting hamas doesn’t mean I’m not in favor of resistance against genocide.
But just to clear this up once more:
So no, I do not support Hamas. But yes, I do support Palestinian resistance in theory.
But yes, I do support Palestinian resistance in theory
So my point was correct, Hamas is not morally pure enough for your standards, and you don’t support resistance against genocide in practice, which is what matters because that’s the actually existing resistance against genocide.
and you don’t support resistance against genocide in practice
What I don’t agree with is that wording.
I don’t support this specific form of resistance against genocide in practice. What you wrote there most literally means I don’t support resistance against genocide in practice in general, which is what I can’t agree with. If we’re just talking about Hamas specifically, or the shape that resistance has taken in this genocide specifically, then I agree with the statement. But the way it’s written here and was written before, I can’t agree with it, it’s too broadly worded.
This is just linguistic gymnastics, though. Hamas, and the broader Palestinian resistance, is the resistance to genocide. There isn’t another, and better groups like the PFLP all work with Hamas, because they are fighting genocide and extermination.
This doesn’t mean I oppose resistance to genocide, this means I have expectations towards resistance groups.
A sentence so steeped in colonial attitudes it’s practically tea.
😂
Hamas does not fulfill my standards
Wow, we have a contender for most The Most Western Sentence of all time
They really managed to do worse than their earlier “This doesn’t mean I oppose resistance to genocide, this means I have expectations towards resistance groups.”
“I don’t oppose resistance against genocide, I just coincidentally oppose all groups resisting genocide
the shape that resistance has taken in this genocide specifically, then I agree with the statement.
Ok, so it’s not that you oppose resistance to all genocides, you just oppose resistance to the Palestinian genocide.
Oh my fucking god, they just admitted it. he-admit-it i-am-adolf-hitler
Look, you’re free to keep replying, but I’m not going to further talk here. I’m just writing this last comment to clarify that, so you can stop wasting your time. I realize that you’re not arguing in good faith, so this is just going to go on endlessly.
“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.“
