this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2025
934 points (96.1% liked)
Comic Strips
19833 readers
1717 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
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
I can conceive of anything.
But what I conceive wouldn't be the reality of the last election.
Here are two examples of people doing politics. Take notes.
Frederick Douglas was an escaped slave. In 1860 he had a choice; speak out for the strongly pro-abolition candidate, or back Lincoln, who was not going to call for immediate abolition. Douglas figured that it was better to back Lincoln and have the President's ear, than to back a candidate who had no chance of winning.
Martin Luther King's top assistant was a gay Black man named Bayard Ruskin. Ruskin never put himself forward, even though he was a vital part of the Movement. He knew that America wasn't ready to accept LGBTQ issues at that time, so he stayed silent.
So, can you conceive of looking at things dispassionately and playing the long game?
Playing "the long game" on genocide is effectively actively murdering people, especially when previous administrations have actually employed the "yank the chain" policy on israel. There is no long game here, there's genocide or no genocide.
As we speak, the genocide is ongoing. So nothing you advocate actually helped.
You can stamp your feet and scream all you want, but ignoring the facts does nothing.
But I won't support a genocide either, rhetorically or with a vote as you have. It's called having principles. Try it.
So we both agree that your high principles did nothing to actually stop the genocide.
And your lack thereof did?
I am fine with having the same level of principles as Frederick Douglas, Bayard Ruskin, and the WW2 partisans who took aid from colonial England and racist America.
Don't forget being way into genocide
If I enjoyed genocide I'd be like you. Sit on the sidelines and do nothing at all, then proclaim how morally superior I was.
No u
Sadly, that's the most intelligent thing you've added to the conversation.