• Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    138·
    3 days ago

    Eh… what’s the proposed alternative to “going about your day normally”?

    Something absolutely should be done about it, but I don’t see any sort of plan here, just blame being cast a whole lot of people who mostly aren’t actually the ones to blame.

    • just_an_average_joe@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      6·
      2 days ago

      One alternative could be learning how “going about your day normally” leads to the problem that we all are facing.

      Another alternative would be participating in organizing event, protests and even engaging in dialogue with other about the situation

      • Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        63·
        2 days ago

        I don’t really see those things as an alternative to “going about your day normally”.

        What I read that statement in the meme as is an indictment of everyone who doesn’t drop everything and spend all their energy trying to solve that problem. Which, frankly, is a luxury not available to most people. Most working class people would starve (or at the very least, lose a lot of what little power they do have) in short order if they stop doing their day-to-day activities.

        If that’s not what was intended by the meme, it’s worded very poorly. It should be more clear in what it is calling out because as it is, it could easily be applied to basically everyone.

    • Farhad@freefree.psOP
      74·
      3 days ago

      @Mk23simp

      You can do what you are willing to do, every time you purchase a product, every time you use a service, every time you listen to music or watch a movie, you can make a choice. By not supporting those backing the genocide, but not supporting politicians who support this genocide and by raising your voice.

      It is easy to just sit and do nothing, that is what most Germans did during the Holocaust.

      • Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        84·
        3 days ago

        There is no ethical consumption under capitalism. I try to choose better options when I can, both in consumption and in politics.

        A refusal to purchase from any unethical companies or a refusal to vote for any unethical politicians is a surrender of what little control we as the working class do have, by giving up our votes or our very lives.

        You cannot fault the working class just for going about their lives as the ruling class performs atrocities. Encourage them to work for good, yes, but do not place the blame on them for acts that are not under their control. Place the blame on the ruling class, and unite the working class against them rather than sewing division among the working class by blaming those you see as not doing enough.

        • vatlark@lemmy.world
          2·
          2 days ago

          To paraphrase you a little:

          A refusal to purchase from any unethical companies […] is a surrender of what little control we as the working class do have […]

          If there is an unethical company and I refuse to buy from them am I giving up control?

          Edit: Do I not control my purchases?

          • Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            22·
            2 days ago

            If you refuse to buy from one unethical company, then you buy from a different unethical company. Or, if you refuse to buy from all unethical companies, you starve.

            You have some agency to try to pick less bad options, but you can’t just refuse to participate in the unjust system.

            • vatlark@lemmy.world
              2·
              2 days ago

              You asked:

              what’s the proposed alternative to “going about your day normally”?

              And I think you gave one good answer with:

              You have some agency to try to pick less bad options

              • Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                2·
                1 day ago

                I don’t think you understand what I meant by that question.

                If you participate in society trying to pick the less bad options, someone could look at you and say that you are “going about your day normally”. And also, doing that should be what going about your day normally means because you should be doing that all the time.

                I think that the call-to-action to not go about your day normally is effectively asking people to not participate in society at all, which is not practical for anyone unless they have a ton of privilege already.

                • vatlark@lemmy.world
                  1·
                  1 day ago

                  I think I understand now, thank you, but I think that your definition of “going about your day normally” is not the author’s intent, it seems circular.

                  By your definition(if I understand it):

                  • If I put in the work to avoid buying Israeli products, I am still going about my day normally, because I normally try to avoid supporting a genocide.
                  • All of the members of the Samud Floatila were just going about their day normally when they went head to head with the Israel military, because they normally fight genocide.
                  • Harriet Tubman and Nelson Mandela were just going about their day normally, because amazing activism is what they normally do.

                  I think the author’s intent is that if you learned you were supporting genocide, like many people that pay taxes to the US, Germany, and other places are coming to realize, then you should act to stop supporting the genocide.

  • ceoofanarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    4·
    3 days ago

    Don’t you know by calling them “terrorists” even with no evidence of anything, it automatically renders them inhuman monsters that you can do anything to.

  • Kowowow@lemmy.ca
    25·
    3 days ago

    I’ll admit that, I only seem to be able to actually get mad about ads for some stupid reason