• lemonmelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 hours ago

    The proverb works when you realize that the Republicans will never allow the first bite to be taken. Not only are they fully endorsing a genocide, they are taking notes and pondering the best way to implement their own here at home. The elephant is the same, but instead of eating you’re flirting with being trampled by it.

    • macabrett[they/them]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      So what’s the elephant in your metaphor here? Is it ending genocide? Because the democrats are currently preventing us from eating that elephant. Is it communism? The democrats also won’t help us eat that elephant. Is it ending American Empire? Well, the democrats seem pretty against eating that elephant. Is is global liberation? Can’t possibly see the democrats joining us in eating that elephant, given the previous points.

      I’m sure you’ll come back and tell me the elephant is “democracy” as if saying “you must vote for this candidate or democracy is over” isn’t already the end of democracy.

      • lemonmelon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        You set the goalposts at “opposing genocide,” so that’s still the elephant in the metaphor. I can understand why you think someone might shift the meaning mid-discussion in order to “win,” but that’s not happening here.

        There are two candidates in this presidential election who have a realistic chance of success. One has voiced support for a ceasefire as a step to a two-state solution and concern for Palestinian suffering. The other has expressed the belief that a ceasefire is an unreasonable constraint on Israel, and that a swift, decisive victory is the only solution. One has acknowledged the need for Palestinian self-determination, the other has bragged about figuratively burying Palestine. One has openly stated that they “respect the voice” of pro-Palestinian protestors, the other has signaled that political dissent by “enemies within” will be persecuted.

        However, if we’ve reached the point where you’ve determined that you are sure you know what I’ll say, then this discussion has run its course. Language like that implies that you’re preparing for an argument that would very likely either start off circular or quickly regress to that state.