https://time.com/6334409/is-whats-happening-gaza-genocide-experts/ https://time.com/6334409/is-whats-happening-gaza-genocide-ex... > his sort of bombastic rhet

https://time.com/6334409/is-whats-happening-gaza-genocide-experts/ https://time.com/6334409/is-whats-happening-gaza-genocide-ex... > his sort of bombastic rhetoric hurts the pro-Palestinian cause. First off, that dichomoty of "pro-Israel" or "pro-Palestine" something I reject. I stand for international law and against Nazis. I know you find that "bombastic", too, but I prefer the company I'm in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zM2fXTkjU2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zM2fXTkjU2 Secondly, it's not even that clear cut as you make it out to be. https://time.com/6334409/is-whats-happening-gaza-genocide-experts/ https://time.com/6334409/is-whats-happening-gaza-genocide-ex... > Raz Segal, the program director of genocide studies at Stockton University, concretely says it is a “textbook case of genocide.” Segal believes that Israeli forces are completing three genocidal acts, including, “killing, causing serious bodily harm, and measures calculated to bring about the destruction of the group.” He points to the mass levels of destruction and total siege of basic necessities—like water, food, fuel, and medical supplies—as evidence. If a director of genocide studies says there is a case to be made, there is a case to be made. I can try to make the case, if you want, until dang steps in to curtail a flamewar between two people who aren't even mad at each other and who nobody else reads ^^ But more importantly, what practical difference do you see? I say our neighbour is murdering his daughter, right now. All sorts of people come from the brushwork to call me a neighbour-hater, berate me in all sorts of ways, seek nuance, blah di blah. Turns out, he didn't murder his daughter, he was "just" raping her and cutting her legs off while people made excuses to do fuck all. And then they feel vindicated even! See? False alarm. It wasn't crime A that is beyond that pale, it was crime B that is beyond that pale! Hannah Arendt explained how totalitarianism can only by fully understood by obduction, and how people who can't get mobilized by what is already known, wouldn't be mobilized by the full picture either. Don't criticize me for doing imperfectly what you are not doing at all and expect anything but a tired groan. Put people on trial and then the judges can and should be nuanced. Until then, nope.