• purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I think his past statements were bad, but I think his overall line on Hamas would be tolerable if not for things like knowingly and openly hiring Zionists, and I think it’s like that. He’s good at pivoting, and I don’t think whatever kowtowing to orthodoxy is hugely concerning (even if we should condemn it) so long as he is using it as a means to pivot to condemning the military aggression of the US toward VZ and threats to others.

    It would be bad, it’s just not something to put as your top concern.

    • LeninWeave [none/use name, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      That’s fair, I just don’t think the condemning he did of military intervention was strong or effective enough to counterbalance the damage he did by accepting the gusano premise in the first place. And the fact that he was talked around by gusanos to a worse position after the fact makes me not confident in his commitment to even bare-minimum anti-imperialism. Only time will tell, I suppose.

    • Le_Wokisme [they/them, undecided]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 days ago

      things like knowingly and openly hiring Zionists,

      he really didn’t have to phrase it the way he did but it’s probably impossible not to be hiring zionists considering every liberal in the country is a zionist.