• DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    6 days ago

    “I’m not complicit”

    Okay, so why’d you kick someone off the tour for?

    It was to silence them so the genocide could be covered up and continued. It was to silence them so Israel had less pressure to stop.

    Israel has killed people for speaking out. Helping them silence others is absolutely complicity.

    Imagine if Ed Sheran was helping keep the Holocaust quiet, or helping keep political pressure off of the Nazis. We’d say he’s complicit, a Nazi spokesperson and political collaborator.

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      technically he didn’t the promoter did, but like the rest of the acts he is able to walk away. he may face contract breach fines, but he can afford that a lot better than the acts that left already. basically choosing to be on the fence or undeclared is a choice for the more aggressive and violent party in any case.

      • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        6 days ago

        he didn’t the promoter did

        Bruh it’s Ed Sheeran’s tour he can’t just act like he didn’t have power here. What’s the promoter gonna do without you if you make an ultimatum?

      • 🇵🇸antifa_ceo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        6 days ago

        Yep there is no such thing as not taking a side in genocide. You either are against it or you are for it. If you refuse to speak out on it or try to equivocate that both sides are some how the same then guess what? You’re doing the bidding of those doing the genocide.

        There is no such thing as being apolitical in society. Just apathetic and selfish.

      • DredPyr8Roberts@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        The decision was his. Sheeran said: “After Macklemore’s performances at my New Jersey shows, venues on my upcoming tour dates communicated that they would pull the shows if he was still supporting."

        He was in a position to force the venues to pull the shows and put the responsibility on them, and he didn’t do that.

      • village604
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        but he can afford that a lot better than the acts that left already.

        Do we know his financials well enough to determine that? Could be the penalties would be enough to bankrupt him.

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          probably not, he may make a lot of money touring but he still has millions, the other issue is that he can afford lawyers and I doubt the contracts the venues agreed to had iornclad control over his opening acts.

          • village604
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Regardless, the legal battle would have shut down the tour as well.

              • village604
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                I can almost guarantee that the venue had a bullshit morality clause that let them do it. People don’t become billionaires by not knowing how to abuse contract law.