top | item 45413527

(no title)

amval | 5 months ago

Well, yes, it would be better if he didn't amplify propaganda for the country that is committing a genocide and would raise awareness for the victims.

Is this not self-evident?

discuss

order

JumpCrisscross|5 months ago

The point is this comes down to a foreign policy disagreement that isn’t germane to Ellison’s comments on surveillance. (I can come with a litany of policy disagreements with anyone of Ellison’s stature, some of which I probably feel about strongly.)

Read in good faith, it’s overzealous advocacy. In bad faith, which I don’t assume here, it serves to get this discussion flagged off the front page.

dfxm12|5 months ago

These things are not happening in a vacuum:

1. Ellison's comments about surveillance

2. Conservative billionaires, including Ellison, consolidating ownership of social media, print media, TV media, etc.

3. NSPM-7 & the current admin's appetite to criminalize speech

4. The current administration kowtows to Netanyahu, who relishes in conservative ownership of TikTok

The dots are all there: if you express something that doesn't following an accepted US stance, like maybe its stance on Israel, maybe on TikTok, it gives Trump the ability to easily find, label & punish you as a terrorist, maybe even at Netanyahu's request. Trump's desire to do things like this has been explicitly stated since the death of Charlie Kirk. He's always talked about his desires to throw his political enemies in jail.

Even before this, the admin has been targeting people like Mahmoud Khalil, Mario Guevara, etc. for speech.

amval|5 months ago

You don't think that the fact that Ellison is a staunch defender of regimes that disregard the international order in favour of military might is relevant to the fact that is also advocating for building a surveillance state?

In case you don't, to me it's painfully clear that these are just different aspects of the move towards more authoritarian forms of government. You CANNOT support a genocide and expect that this will not have an effect on democracy.

EDIT: Also note that I am trying to take your comments on good faith, but characterising support for genocide as "a foreign policy disagreement" feels a bit like an understatement.