First, I think it helps to share an old adage:

Two Jews: three opinions.

We’re famously discursive. In any situation it should be assumed that Israelis are in a tense debate about nearly everything.

The families of remaining hostages in particular want a ceasefire because its a prerequisite for returning loved ones (or at least rematriating their remains). Many people also recognize that the war has no honorable or defensive purpose and is tearing apart society, fomenting regional tensions, destroying support on the world stage, and placing a huge toll on reservists and their families.

You are correct, though: as long as Netanyahu and allies are in power, every other voice is a reed in a monsoon flood.

Yeah, this.

Normally I’d agree, but The Guardian is actually usually an outlier in this regard:

Israel accused of act of genocide over restriction of Gaza water supply [Dec. 19]

Defining genocide: how a rift over Gaza sparked a crisis among scholars [Dec. 20]

A consensus is emerging: Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Where is the action? [Dec. 23]

‘Secretary of genocide’: Blinken speech on Middle East interrupted by protester – video [Today]

I can’t help but notice that the article describes conditions that are clearly intended to kill, cause serious bodily harm, and deliberately inflict on a group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.

It really seems like there’s a word for that. It’s weird that the article describes those conditions without using any particular word that those conditions describe.

I normally like the Guardian, but that article feels weird because I don’t know why it can’t just say that Gaza’s condition is that of an unambiguous genocide in progress.

It’s an interesting article, because to be honest, it feels like an attempt to create news more than cover it. Two-hundred or so objectors is paltry, frankly. If anything, I think the lack of dissenters in Israel is a more notable point of news.

But then again, refusing to serve and criticizing Netanyahu can be a very frightening and risky thing to do. The culture is brutal, and the head of police in particular, Ben G’vir, is a hardline fascist who doesn’t tolerate challenges to the ruling government. So we’ll see what happens.

I’d like to just clarify a point which I think @froh42@lemmy.world is making as well.

My concern about censorship is not based on “fairness” or being sympathetic to voices I disagree with. I’m strictly speaking about effectiveness.

Creating rules about what ideas aren’t allowed to be expressed has a particular set of strengths and weaknesses that have to be understood in order for this tool to be used effectively.

The strength is that it can slow dissemination of dangerous ideas. Restrictions on certain types of speech can be very effective for that. The weakness is that it cannot eliminate the infectiousness of an idea. Additionaly: suppressed ideas which have appeal may spread widely without opponents knowing about it, and opponents of these ideas may not develop counter-messaging that diminishes the appeals of these ideas. Lastly, restrictions on speech can create an evolutionary pressure on words and ideas to specifically find the weaknesses in the restrictions. A ban on saying certain words inherently creates a list of things you can say instead.

Taken altogether, prohibitions on speech or ideas are a lot like antibiotics. They’re very powerful and effective, but they lose their efficacy with use. And overusing them can actually lead to a complete breakdown in their efficacy. So they must be used in concert with a wide array of ecosystem health measures to limit their need.

You might say ‘Why worry? They’ve worked so far.’ But if you do, that over reliance can lead to a catastrophic failure.

What’s the use of that information? They have that problem now.

It appears to be an internationally occurring problem.

That might be a good idea, but I think that folks need to examine fundamental factors underlying the rise of the far right and the ways in which limiting speech may be a weak remedy.

Someone correct me if I’m mistaken, but aren’t these a massive undercount because they’re only counting combat casualties and omitting the starvation and excess mortality of complete civil collapse?

According to the Lancet, indirect deaths are typically 3 - 15 times direct deaths. So a conservative estimate is that the actual death toll is around 200k, or ~10% of the prewar population.

It should be noted that northern Gaza is in a deliberate famine during winter. Words just fail me.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01169-3/fulltext

Whaaaaaaaaaa???!? /s

This is so tragic.

It must be pretty stressful to be the president of a country like Azerbaijan in this situation. What are you going to do? I’m surprised he has been this frank in his anger. Calling out Russia under Putin in a situation like this seems like it has a lot of downsides and no real upsides.

Good for him. People shouldn’t die like this.

These are great tips.

I think the solution might be using a bunch of these.

Do you have any advice on speeding up their breakdown? Are there any tools or practices that cause them to shrink in volume faster? I think she’s just trying to manage slipping on walkways and visual effect, and she has a very high volume.

I think making small piles and letting them rot is probably a good idea. I think mulching them and raking them into beds is probably smart. I’ll try stuff and see.

I’m sorry he hasn’t liked it, but critique is how we get better. Hope Mastodon keeps growing.

Still, this basically feels like a speed-run of losing the Prisoner’s dilemma.

I believe today is actually the sixty-fifth of the month.

The seventy-second is next Sunday.

This sounds cool, but too technical for me to follow.

That makes a lot of sense.

That looks much more like a data artifact than an accurate representation of behavior.

I think that the trajectory of the three low dots matches the overall slope very closely in a way that looks far more like a flat subtraction of all three. If it was behavioral, I think you’d see the behavior come and go over the course of several days.

There is a lot about this that is nuts, but one thing that really jumps out at me.

It seems like Netanyahu is planning an October surprise to shank Harris. And it seems like he is doing it in broad daylight. It certainly seems like a massive offensive strike on Iran one or two weeks before the election is a straightforward way to throw a close election to Trump.

But with this I have to ask: are Biden and Harris assisting with a plan that is clearly intended to cost Harris the election?

I want to say that they surely must’ve told Israel not to launch anything before election day. But based in their actions so far, it doesn’t seem like they’re imposing a “no election interference against us personally” requirement as a condition of their assistance.

I guess we’ll see.

As someone who has thought about this a lot, here’s what I try to do myself.

First, let’s reconcile some things. On one hand, you have a sense of powerlessness, and it’s not an illusion. However on the other, I think there is a real and valid sense among many that Israel’s situation has changed in fundamental ways that cannot be undone. And it seems realistic that the current order will fall in our lifetimes. So then how do you and I act to hasten that?

First (and really second, third, and fourth), we must bear witness. We must continue to read these articles and learn about this situation well enough to try and explain it to others. Save articles by Palestinians to use to lift up their voices when opportunities arise.

At this point, it helps to reflect on a certain model of persuasion I like. Our goals are not to convince someone who opposes us to join our side. It’s to move people along a ladder. You want to find people who already agree with you but are passive, and activate them to do the things you’re already doing. You want to convince people who are neutral to agree with you, passively. You want to convince people who are passively opposed to become neutral. And you want to convince people who are actively opposed to lose their conviction and become passive in their opposition.

This has been happening for a long time, and it’s begun to accelerate in the last year. Learn and share knowledge. I don’t mean facts: I mean listen to people and slip them time-bomb ideas tailored to where they are that will move them on the ladder the next time they read a headline that you’ve primed them to look at with new eyes.

Second: I think it’s very likely that major turning points will be accompanied by mass actions. Protests don’t do anything … until suddenly they do. Be a member of a group – DSA, JVP, PYM, etc. – to make sure that when people march, you’ll get the call.

That’s pretty much what I have now. That and conversations like this one.

Third, I try to make sure I’m visible in my politics. I wear a kippah, and I have a Palestinian flag pin on it. I’ve found that this lets fellow Jews who’ve felt silenced know that I’m safe to talk to about this, and quietly lets Muslim neighbors know I’m with them. I have a drawstring bag with a pro-Palestine message I often carry. If useful to you, consider signaling politely where you stand to let others know.

And lastly: keep the faith. That ladder I mentioned? Zionists are trying to do all this to you too. There are people who want to exhaust you and demoralize you. Take breaks if needed. Don’t burn out. Do what you must to stay active for the long haul.