• UnequalExchange@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        4 hours ago

        Yes.

        Sudan, PAlestine, and The Congo in that order

        There are suspicions that there is a genocide occurring in Nigeria. I have Christian family members in Nigeria who have said that they are doubtful of there is a genocide occurring there against Christians since their region has not (yet) been hit by boko haram forces. Also Im pretty sure that boko haram have indiscriminately killed people even Muslims. (They claim to be Muslims…but funnily enough, just like isis, they indiscriminately target , persecute and prosecute other Muslims more than they target other non-Muslim peoples … 😒… sus)

        Also I think I read somewhere that there are suspicions of a famine and genocide in Myanmar currently though Ive only seen one video that said thst such a thing is occurring there . I cant find that video anymore . I guess It was deleted.

        We should stand up for and aid those who are experiencing genocide is all Im saying 🤷🏿‍♂️ . And Im proud of Lukas Graham, Macklemore and Beogla Music for doing what was right in this situation.

    • PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      3·
      2 days ago

      There is some Ed Sheeran drama about something. I’m out of the loop too, but its Palestine vs Israeal related apparently.

      • erin@piefed.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        19·
        2 days ago

        Ed Sheeran booted Macklemore from his tour for giving a pro-Palestine speech, and it’s basically imploded his career. Basically every artist that was going to perform with him has dropped him. The public no longer sees being apolitical as a virtue; staying out of politics is consent for the status quo.

        • Hildegard (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          1·
          2 days ago

          I still see being apolitical as a virtue, but what Ed did was very political. Removing someone from your tour for their political statements is itself a political statement. He made an active choice to support the genocide.

          The apolitical stance in the situation would be for him to stand with his collaborators, and cancel some of the shows if the billionaire stadium owner forces it. There’s still politics involved, Ed would not be the one doing the politics, only others around him.

          Standing with your colleagues and not allowing others to have editorial control over your work is a principled stance that is apolitical. This stance would not have invited a major backlash against Ed, while maintaining neutrality.

          • erin@piefed.blahaj.zoneEnglish
            4·
            1 day ago

            Oh, I agree, but I don’t believe Ed Sheeran consciously chose that. I believe he’s still trying to hold on to the old program of trying to appeal to the majority of people and avoid upsetting anyone. He misjudged public opinion, or more likely, he bowed to the slightest pressure from a powerful person that still operates on the guidelines of manufacturing consent for the status quo. I don’t think Ed Sheeran’s choice had anything to do with his actual opinions, but a desire to avoid any controversy compounded by an apathy towards Palestine’s plight.

                • UnequalExchange@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  1·
                  4 hours ago

                  Its just kind of icky to me.

                  Like I get that Ed just wants to get paid but why perform at such an intimate event as a birthday personally for a billionaire who would fire you at the drop of a hat?

                  If I were ed? I would pre record a video of me and my band performing then send it to kraft and then after that it is up to kraft to pay us after that. Im not gonna fly out to perform in person for a dude who would fire me over the tiniest of slip ups let alone a billionaire.

                  I would perform personally for my close friends or family members who I love . But for a boss who I barely know and who barely knows me?..No . Sorry.