1068
Israel's Backers Are Now Advocating The Assassination Of Greta Thunberg
(www.caitlinjohnst.one)
this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2025
1068 points (96.7% liked)
Progressive Politics
2710 readers
557 users here now
Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)
(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This should make it abundantly clear that Zionism is a pure moral evil, there is no "both sides" or any argument whatsoever that justifies the Zionist Occupation. The Zionist Occupation Zone (ZOZ) must end as must the genocide against the native peoples of Palestine.
It is pure moral evil, because zionism is Nazism.
ZioNazi is the most apt term. "Never again" just meant "Never again to us."
Of course it did. Ask about shabbos goy, usurious interest rates toward goy, Israeli genocide of their neighbors in the Levant, and you get a glib "Jewish law doesn't apply to gentiles." If they're that honest.
Yes, Zionazi sums it well, especially considering Herzl's personal views.
Because Israel is commiting genocide you want to genocide Arab and Jewish people in return? What the fuck
All of the "religions of peace" need to be shown that there is no god once and for all.
Since mod removed it, what I said was that after its full-throated commitment to genocide Israel should be turned to glass along with Bethlehem and Mecca which are also homes for Abrahamic religions. They are all violent and oppressive and this shit NEEDS TO FUCKING STOP
Your mistake is presuming that people elsewhere in the world are any different. We all have the capacity for both great good and great evil. Hell, in the US right now we are ramping up the oppression of immigrants and minorities in prelude to what could easily turn into a genocide if we do not change course.
It's also important to recognize that the Abrahamic religions are just what are currently used as post hoc justifications for settler-colonialism and imperialism. In the past other philosophies - religious or otherwise - were used and in the future there will be new ways of justifying atrocities. The underlying driver of war and conquest is greed, and that cannot be erased. Eradicating the Abrahamic religions like you suggest will not stop the killing, but would instead likely form the basis of a new justifying dogma.
When knowledge had to spend months crossing an ocean and be dispensed vy one ambassador, maybe.
Not now.
Religion is the problem
I don't understand how the speed of communication is relevant here, would you mind elaborating?
In modern day there is no excuse for religion to be a part of any conflict or political discussion whatsoever. Instead every abrahamic religion has doubled down on the violence and oppression.
I agree that religion has no place in government, what I'm getting at is that there isn't anything unique about the Abrahamic religions that makes them more susceptible to being used to justify violence and oppression. In India right now Hindu nationalism forms the basis of their fascist government. In the past there have been countless belief systems of all sorts that were used as justifying dogmas for all manner of atrocities. I would argue that the Abrahamic religions have been shaped by the violence and oppression they've been used to justify and not the other way around, and that's true of all justifying dogmas which causes them to share many similarities.
And I say all this to push back against the idea that repressing the Abrahamic religions - or any religion for that matter - will do anything to stop the violence. In fact, repression of specific religions and of religion in general is quite common throughout history, and as I said before, it tends to form the basis of a new justifying dogma for violence and oppression rather than stopping it.
That's possible, but the argument from everyone so far has been "its not the religion!"
Hypocritically, when some dick shoots up a school or nightclub they insist that its the guns and not the ideology of the people doing the shooting
Well my argument is more than just saying "it's not the religion!" I'm saying that it's more than that. Religion is an effect, not a cause. The distinction is important because it helps us know what to do about it, and trying to eradicate religion isn't it. That's just like the "war on drugs" or the "war on terror." It's a fight that you can never win and that only causes more harm.
So what is the rational argument against "one of our people paid a few sheckels 4000 years ago so that land is rightfully ours and we have the Divine Right given by God to kill every single fucking man, woman, and child on it!"?
If it isnt the religion, what is it?
There isn't a rational argument for that. I'm not defending religion or even private property, I'm simply pointing out that religion is not something you can eradicate because it is an idea that emerges spontaneously from human psychology. Even if you murdered every follower of religion it will eventually re-emerge in a new - but still familiar - form. In addition, the idea of private property is not exclusive to religion. Religion just provides a convenient framework for justifying it.
Like I said, the underlying problem is greed and lust for power. There is no easy solution.
Ah yes, the zero state solution
Not even the good "zero state solution". Guess I'll have to rename it to "the absolutely no states solution"