• LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      3 days ago

      All monied interests are. But yes AIPAC is one of the worst considering it’s openly by and for the benefit of a foreign government. Imagine if the PRC had such an organization how that would be perceived.

      The good news here is their willingness to support a republican here could make them into a great liberal boogie man with the right messaging.

      • Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        The Democratic Party is just as much in the pocket of AIPAC as the Republican Party; if anything this will just cause AIPAC to increase their lobbying further.

        Edit: I’m not trying to make a ‘both sides’ argument; the Democratic Party is far and away superior to the Republican Party. However, the party itself is not nearly as anti-Israel as its most progressive-leaning candidates are, meaning that a nationwide Democratic victory is unfortunately unlikely to result in the complete cessation of arms sales to Israel or recognition of genocide in Gaza.

        • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          They don’t deserve the down votes, they’re right. Until the Gaza Genocide, a LOT of Dems were happy to take money from AIPAC, because there was little to no negative consequences for it.

          Now it has become TOXIC to take AIPAC money, but they hate losing such a reliable pipeline, and their AIPAC handlers are probably demanding they EARN the bribes they’ve been paid, so they’re really motivated to stay on the side of Israel, unless…

          …unless it means they lose their office. It doesn’t make sense to support Israel if it means it’s the last political decision they’ll ever make. We need to punish those who are still sucking AIPAC teat at the ballot box, in multiple successive elections, until Dem candidates know that AIPAC is poison, and stay away.

        • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          I mean that obviously isn’t true, that’s what this whole article and comment section is about. Democratic candidates standing up to AIPAC.

          Now if you said almost as much, I would give you a pass.

          • Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            It just means that it’s cheaper for them to lobby Republicans than Democrats as the former are predisposed to unconditionally supporting Israel. As a result, 58.6% of AIPAC congressional lobbying went to Democrats in 2024.

            Not that resistance isn’t building against AIPAC, but the central Democratic Party is far less anti-AIPAC than candidates like El-Sayed.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      3 days ago

      AIPAC was literally created because their predecessor had to register as a foreign agent…

      AIPACs first recipients of funds, were the people who sat on the very same committee. I want to think just months later, but it was at least the same people.

      And that’s the story of how shit got so fucked up, and why AIPAC doesn’t have to register as a foreign agent.

    • AuroraZzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hmmm. It seems like we give a lot of money to Israel and they return the favor by using that money bribe all of the politicians over here