It’s educate, AGITATE, organize
edit: putting this at the top so people understand the basis for this:
You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.
If agitating this issue is enough to make that threat real then it’s enough for them to address it. It’s that simple.
Address it… how? By swapping their position and losing even more votes from those with a pro-Israel position?
Either by swapping their position and making their case to those who disagree with it,
or
keeping their position and attempt justifying it to those who disagree with it
The fuck do you think they’ve been doing.
The problem with that is their position is “let’s keep supporting genocide” which isn’t a justifiable position.
Nothing particularly convincing to anyone paying attention.
I have yet to hear their justification on ignoring the war crimes committed by an ally. I’ll happily ruminate on it if I did.
Okay, so they are doing what you want them too, you just still don’t like it enough to work to stop fascism.
I (quite loudly) disagree with what you say constitutes ‘working to stop fascism’. And I will continue voicing that disagreement loudly until that changes.
Yes, you quite loudly disagree with the idea that working to stop a fascist from getting into power is ‘working to stop fascism’. It very much highlights where your priorities are.
Almost, I disagree that working to stop fascism entails supporting them while they commit atrocities abroad