cross-posted from: https://hcommons.social/users/adachika192/statuses/114611927184686873
Pro-Israel Figures Threaten to Kill Greta Thunberg Over Gaza Aid Mission - Quds News Network (2025-06-02)
https://qudsnen.co/pro-israel-figures-threaten-to-kill-greta-thunberg-over-gaza-aid-mission/
------>> … Greta Thunberg is facing a wave of violent threats by pro-genocide individuals after joining a Gaza-bound aid flotilla. Pro-Israel figures have called for her death or harm as she sails to challenge Israel’s siege on the devastated territory.
>> Republican Senator Lindsey Graham posted on X: “Hope Greta and her friends can swim!”…
#StopIsrael #StopGenocide #FreedomFlotilla
@palestine@lemmy.ml @palestine@a.gup.pe
I’m sure he only means it as “this is the shitty way the world actually works”. Not that he personally believes it himself.
The fact that you’re stopping to read what the person said and form a charitable interpretation of it instead of just leaping down their throat while smashing your phone / keyboard with rage is commendable.
Ignoring the actual content / intended meaning of what they said the moment THIS right here disappears from Lenny is the moment it’s dead.
I mean, if they actually think the holocaust was hunky dory then fuck them, but I agree it’s probably just poorly phrased.
If that were the case I’d hope they would try to be clearer.
The “@mhague@lemmy.world is a giant asshole” reading is much, much easier than the “@mhague@lemmy.world thinks the world sucks” reading, for me at least. The second reading takes some mental gymnastics for me.
Hoping you’re right, but not convinced. Also giving a lot of side-eye.
i don’t agree with the original comment bc it is pessimistic reductionism but i think you and the people dogging on it severely lack media literacy and critical thinking skills, as kindly as that can be stated.
in what way is the former reading more likely than the latter??
you need to make far more assumptions about the original comment and commenter to come to the conclusion that he made the comment out of some weird bigoted malice than to just accept the obvious reading of it being a commentary on global society’s attitudes towards various genocides.
jesus fucking christ i see this shit all over the internet and it is why our society is collapsing. just droves of people behaving and thinking in ways that would fucking abhor a literature teacher from even just a decade ago.
Hard agree. And many folk forget, English is not everyone’s first language.
It’s janky phrasing, but after a reread, it makes sense.
I’m personally scared for what the future holds, we are living in a post-Enlightenment society.
At the risk of sounding a little chud-y… we are tasked with the same challenge people like Newton or Spinoza dealt with in life; we need to rebuild meaning, reason, and thought from first principles in a way that is amicable to the modern order.
People, like those that we’re seeing in action here, probably think Modest Proposal is actually encouraging the audience to eat children. It’s a serious problem.
When someone says “I think the only bad thing about the Holocaust was that Germany did it” they need to do a fair amount of work to clarify that they do not mean that literally. Otherwise, I will be inclined to take them at their word.
of course he means it literally?
that’s why i think, as i said, his comment is reductionist. the key word is
he’s just trying to draw an edgy hyperbolic narrative that the world only cares about the Holocaust in particular not because it is a genocide but because it threatened the international status quo. he’s wrong, but he’s not a nazi, at least as far as i can tell from his singular comment. i won’t come up to bat for the original commenter, he very well could be a bigot or a nazi. i don’t have enough context to know as a reader. his use of leftist diction and the way he wields it is a pretty strong indicator that this was his intended thesis, on top of obvious contextual clues.
man fuck idek what else to say. your response here is purely reactionary, you aren’t even saying anything other than reaffirming things you’ve already said.