Too many reports. Locking this down.
Democrats could nominate hitler reincarnated but you people would people would be defending them because republicans would have hitler reincarnated but who also hates animals. "Other guy worse" as a defense only means things continue getting worse because there will always be something worse. When can things actually get better for a change?
Voting isn't an avenue for that kind of change. There are other avenues for more real change, but they require a lot more work and in some cases personal risk.
That doesn't mean voting isn't important, but it is a tool that's very limited in the breadth of what it can do. Atleast in the US.
You people should be less worried about leftists who despise both parties and more worried about the huge amount of people who just don't want to vote. Now it would be easier to convince people to get out and vote for an actual candidate rather than an artifact of campaign financing but hey, that's your problem to solve. Tell the Democrats to do better next time.
Shaming and blaming is so much harder than reaching unaffiliated/disaffected voters and winning them over.
So much easier to denounce Ralph Nader for a 450 vote margin in Florida than to tap the 4M people who didn't turn out in one of the lowest turnout elections in recent history.
So much easier to claim the election was rigged in 2020 and kick off a riot than to get more people registered and in line to vote in Michigan or Pennsylvania or Georgia.
One thing I've learned this election cycle is how few people have any knowledge of utilitarianism. Genocide is better than genocide+1. Not acting is a moral choice, and frequently a cowardly one.
Utilitarianism isn’t a great framework for decision making. It can be used to justify any number of atrocities. For example, if there is a minority which comprises 0.1% of the population, and 10% of the rest of the population hates that minority, and they would be happier if the minority had fewer rights, utilitarianism could be used to justify oppression of that minority, since the suffering of 0.1% of a group is eclipsed by the happiness of the 10%.
That depends on how you define utilitarianism though.
That minority also factors into a utilitarian's assessment of what will maximize happiness. If 10% of the population hates the 0.1% minority, but oppressing that minority would also harm them, then you have to factor in the relative harm caused to them as well, not just in raw %'s, but also in terms of if the value given to the 10% from their oppression would outweigh the harm done to those being oppressed.
Furthermore, I'd argue most utilitarians would argue that the very hate towards that minority in the first place is what causes harm, not the minority themselves. The best utilitarian action to take would be to reduce the hate for that minority, and increase their acceptableness, rather than oppress that minority to satisfy the 10%. Especially considering we know this tends to not just be a one-time thing, and that hate will likely continue, leading to further oppression over time, and harm not only to the minority, but also to the mental well-being of the 10%. Thus, the best course of action would be to eliminate the hate, not the minority.
Of course, utilitarians aren't a monolith, but that's at least how I would interpret the situation.
The way I see it is, if one side wins, the Left will not only have to worry about the Palestinians, but suddenly they’ll have to choose between protesting about all those other things AND it’ll be with a hostile government that will curtail civil rights and probably start committing abuses against US citizens.
If the other side wins, all those other issues become less of a danger and the Left can focus on keeping up the pressure on Democratic leadership to stop supporting Israel. It’s still not guaranteed, but it’s a much better chance than in the alternative world where out and out fascism takes over. Focus on what’s important, don’t needlessly add more problems on to the pile.
Stop trying to condescend to me. Just because the Palestine policy is mere shades different between the two parties doesn’t make it any more acceptable. Both parties voted to cut UNRWA aid. Trump cut all aid to Palestinians, Biden resumed it then stopped it again. Trump moved the embassy to Jerusalem and recognized the illegal settlements. Biden never undid that. Trump closed the Palestinian embassy in Washington and Biden kept it closed.
What kind of nonsense is this? Republicans used to argue that since Bush was not as bad as Saddam he could get away with killing Iraqis too. It was a stupid argument and it’s also stupid now. Palestinians aren’t judging us by our speeches or Biden’s intentions, they’re judging us by our violent actions.
If Harris wanted us to vote for her, she could at least try to reach out to us. Harris says Black Lives Matter, she says Trans lives matter, she says Israeli lives matter, she won’t say that Arab lives matter equal to Israeli ones. Why shouldn’t I vote for Stein, who DOES say this? Harris pandered to everyone on that list except Arab Americans and Muslim Americans. Her campaign didn’t even allow a single Palestinian to endorse her at DNC. Biden detoured his campaign stops so he could avoid Arab-American voters, has Harris done any different? You’re asking me to vote for you even though your administration caused suffering of Palestinians I know in Palestine, and you won’t promise anything different?
Edit: ah yes, downvote me all you want but I’ve been speaking to voters in swing states and you’re only lying to yourself if you can’t address this concern for them and expect them to magically come to your side. Killing the messenger won’t solve anything. Harris can’t even bring herself to say the most basic talking points in support of Palestinian rights. Just say you plan to make a committee to look into how to build a future Palestinian state or that looking back it was wrong for Biden to deny the Palestinian death count, and that would address a lot of concerns, but it’s like she’s intentionally making it harder for Arabs and Muslims to vote for her.
Stop trying to condescend to me
Nah.
We have some very bad people; we have some sick people, radical-left lunatics. And it should be very easily handled, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.
- Donald Trump
"Oh, but I don't actually go outside - so he doesn't mean me," he said communistly.
TIFI
The guy at the lever actually has the power to stop the trolley entirely.
But will they, that's the question.
They have the ability to, but if they won't, then we still end up with the same two choices. And if picking the other side won't make them change their mind, then whatever they can do is irrelevant in a conversation about what will produce the best tangible outcome.
Liberals before they vote: I need to vote, any action to save democracy must be taken
Liberals after they vote: Welp time to do nothing for the next four years, also if you disagree with the Democrat president you're a threat to democracy and you hate freedom :3
Yeah where is this energy during the actual cycles of governance? Campaigning on important issues, grassroots activism and canvassing, volunteering with the various lobby groups... Nope the only thing that matters is that you Vote Blue.
And four years later they'll vote for a democrat whose positions are eerily similar to those of the republicans today, because it's the least bad option. Race to the bottom. Four years ago, republican anti-immigrant nonsense was ridiculed, and we laughed at the border wall shit. Now Harris is all for stronger borders, and Biden actually resumed building the wall. Four years ago we ridiculed Trump for "drill baby drill", today Harris is pro fracking, as she explained in her recent town hall with undecided voters. The vote blue no matter who crowd is flushing their democracy down the toilet.
"Give away your vote for nothing or you're a genocidal bigot" is "Pokemon Go to the polls" but for terminally online armchair activists and election tourists.
I see .ml found this post. There are almost as many dumb comments as there are downvotes.
They be like "but if the top people are being ran over, it'll radicalize them into communist ideology, and no way could a surveillance state, that is being promised by Trump and co. to to be even more extensive than the current one, combined with the promise of using the military against protestors, ever hinder the ability of a nation-wide revolution".
I'm so glad that deteriorating material conditions radicalize people into left-wing ideologies, here I was worried that educating people was what radicalized them into left-wing ideologies. That's why whenever I go home to Appalachia for a visit everyone there is wearing red. Th-that is the reason they're so politically fond of red, r-right...?
This is in an unbelievable reduction of the reality, but sure. I'd also love a citation on how Trump will be worse for Palestine. Unless you're going to suggest something utterly outrageous like he's going to nuke the whole planet or something, the situation is already a horrific genocide. Harris and Biden are already funding and arming the genociders. Trump has said this is also what he plans to do. His main argument against Harris vis a vis Palestinian genocide is that he's better friends with Netanyahu.
I'm not American and I think your archaic system is stupid, but there is definitely a difference between Ds and Rs when it comes to Palestine. Ds are like calling for a ceasefire while Rs are saying "finish the job". The Ds are trying to gently (too fucking gently IMO) steer Israel away from genocide, while the Rs are egging Israel on. So, yea, there is a difference. Also, Rs want to call in the army to shoot any students that dare protest the Palestine policy, whereas Ds don't.
Me when I ignore state violence and genocide that happen under Dems. Maybe if we ask Dick Cheney nicely enough, he can get Harris to change her mind on policy.
Man it's getting downright gross how liberals are just so blasé about their acceptance of Palestinians being murdered.
This is not about being blasé. Yes, the stance on the genocide that Harris has taken is fucking abhorrent and inhumane, and should not be accepted.
But this election is currently between Harris and Trump. Those are the only possible outcomes.
There is no outcome where this genocide ends now, and that is fucking gutwrenching. There is however an outcome that will make the probability of it ending way fucking smaller. Not choosing Harris is equal to accepting Trump, and all the shitty things he drags with him. Even if this election is between two bad choices, there is a less worse choice in this election.
should not be accepted
*gets accepted through a dumb meme about a contrived situation involving a trolley*
There is no outcome where this genocide ends now
There is, but it involves democrats actually using their power for good instead of doing bad things while pointing at republicans whose only point of existence is to be the worse party so that "it could be worse" can always be used as an excuse.
Man, it's disappointing to see how uncreative FSB intelligence has become since China made Russia a vassal state.
Can't you guys find something new to blame liberals for?
You can have this one for free, "liberals are so dumb that they're going to elect a black woman as president and save American democracy for four more years!"
You talk about being "uncreative" but then run to the go-to "all opposition is Russia" talking point. This might blow your mind, but people could actually be against genocide without being a Russia puppet. What might also blow your mind is that a system where there's only one "good" party isn't a democracy, so you're not saving anything. The Holocaust wouldn't have been better if hitler was a black woman.
save American democracy
lol
It is really amazing to see a repeat of Weimar Germany going on. Next Harris just needs to appoint Steven Miller to some office and history will truly rhyme.
Liberals have proven yet again the difference between themselves and fascists is just aesthetics.
Honestly, I wonder how much of our disagreements do ultimately come down to moral philosophy. I see a lot of people making this comparison and I'd be happy to put aside the present political situation and step back to discuss a higher level of disagreement.
I am a consequentialist, and I would agree, in principle, that the correct decision in the trolley problem is to pull the lever. But that should always come with an extreme amount of disclaimers. There are no shortage of people throughout history who have made justifications for their actions on the basis of "the ends justify the means," but often, they turned out to be wrong. To use an example, torture under the Bush administration was claimed to be justified on the basis of getting useful intelligence in order to save lives. But no such intelligence was ever extracted. Really, it was more motivated by revenge, or a desire to be the sort of cool antihero who does the stuff nobody else will that needs to be done, but "the ends justify the means" served as a rationalization. Another example like that (though perhaps more controversial) is the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The problem with applying the trolley problem to real life is that we are mere human beings of flesh and blood. We have a whole host of cognitive biases that mislead us even when we have the best of intentions. If we give our minds a way to justify things that we know are bad, it gives it an out that allows us to rationalize the irrational and justify the unjustifiable.
There are two practices that are necessary to apply in order to counteract these biases. First, it is necessary to adopt a set of strong moral guidelines based on past experience and historical evidence. Second, it is necessary to regularly practice some form of introspection or meditation in order to better understand where your thoughts and feelings arise from, and how they flow through your mind. Said guidelines do not have to be rigorously adhered to 100% of the time, but they should be respected, and only deviated from after clear, careful consideration, understanding why the guideline exists and why deviation from them is almost always bad.
"Base" consequentialism, where you recognize that pulling the lever in the trolley problem is the correct decision, but simply accept that as a guiding principle, is a terrible moral philosophy, worse than deontology and possibly worse than having completely unexamined moral views. Some of the worst atrocities in history are the result of that sort of "ends justify the means" approach, detached from a set of moral guidelines and detached from humility and self-reflection. I would even say, speaking as a communist, that many of the bad things communists have done in history are a result of that kind of mentality. Following moral rules blindly is preferable to breaking moral rules without first doing the necessary work to be trusted with breaking them.
There's plenty more I could say on the topic but people always complain about my long posts so I'd better cut myself off there.
Just reply to yourself with additional information. People like me can read through them all, and everyone else can skip them.
I found your post useful myself.
I keep trying to explain this to people, maybe this graphic will work.
According to the comments here it didn't work.
The philosophical position is that if they pull the lever, they become personally responsible for the resulting deaths. If they don't pull the lever, that's sad so many people die, but it's the responsibility of the people running the train and who tied all those groups to the tracks. They have no personal blame in that case.
It's not an intuitive position to many of us, but philosophers take it seriously.
These are all sort of parody to begin with but the purpose of the trolley dilemma isn't about the results of the lever switch, it's about approaching complicity and participation in a system that creates this kind of immoral choice.
But if you have a choice between lots of violence and less violence isn't it immoral not to try and at least minimize the violence that you have to no power to stop?
I mean that's why I referred to this as a parody: the point is with the trolley dilemma is that you're being forced to participate in an immoral choice (the lever), not just that the lever applies or absolves the user from a moral liability.
A major part of the exercise is that the choice seems simple to flip the switch as plain harm reduction, but that people change their calculus the moment the single victim has a personal connection: (it is their parent, spouse, child being killed instead of the other 5 strangers.)
The forced immoral act (killing) ceases to be the moral quandry and instead harm reduction is the level of personal connection and culpability that people begin to weigh.
Since these memes tend to portray the trolley effectively running down both tracks with one outcome, the whole premise is kind of defeated.
It depends if you have to participate in the violence to minimize it.
For example, take a public shooter who disabled a police responder. Does a nearby citizen have an obligation to seize the cops gun and attempt to stop the shooter? Should they be shamed if they do nothing and hide? Is that choosing to allow violence or choosing not to be a part in it?
Natural disasters happen, accidents happen, and people regularly stop and help. I would be surprised if someone didnt in those situations.
but the purpose of the trolley dilemma isn’t about the results of the lever switch, it’s about approaching complicity and participation in a system that creates this kind of immoral choice.
...
Libs are so inspirational with their memes about the inevitability of genocide.
Get out and participate in this system, yall!!! \s
inspirational with their memes about the inevitability of genocide.
Inspiration isn't the point here. The point is to show how sitting by and doing nothing is worse. It's an argument, not a fanfic.
Get out and participate in this system, yall!!! \s
The system is going to kill, and there is no chance that it is going to stop overnight. The least we can do is ensure it does the least amount of harm possible.
I was going to make this, but put Palestine before the fork. And then put the person away from the lever refusing to participate when pulling the lever would move it to a track with nobody on it. Or pulling a different lever that does nothing (labeled Jill Stein).
Palestine is and will continue to get run over regardless who wins the presidency, so they aren't exactly relevant to the choice. It's not a real trolley problem because it's not a trade for different people. It's just "let the trolley run over Ukrainians, lgbtq+ people, minorities, and immigrants" or... don't. And then refusing to touch the lever because it somehow makes you "love genocide" to have anything to do with the trolley, even if to mitigate the damage.
I think a good representation would be to put the trolley already running over Palestine and then having to choose between keeping things as they are or adding the others + speeding up the train.
Or, changing the premise a little further, show the person as choosing between continuation, upgrade and using his own body to derail the trolley.
Please also put someone on the trolley with control over the brake and label them: Israeli leaders, military, and citizens. Since the trolley doesn’t actually need to go anywhere, regardless of whether the US track-switching money/arms are sent.
Please do make it! Just wait a day or so maybe?
A Trump defeat could have been guarantee long ago by Biden by simply not sending Weapons and Ammo to Israel.
This tram has already been running over Palestinians and Lebanese for over a year and it's Biden to keeps sending it down that line branch.
Both the framing of this as a false dichotomy and the claim that the power to switch the line is in the hands of common people - all of which are the core of Democrat Propaganda at the moment - have always been lies.
We don't know that. Remember that Lemmy is one hell of an echo chamber. Everyone doe6s think the same way as people on here.
This is literally true but also irrelevant. I’m pissed that democrats are sacrificing our democracy for a ethnostate’s expansion and genocide.
But that doesn’t negate the fact that we have the power to keep literal fascists that are threatening violence if we don’t vote for them out of office. We have genocide on the one hand vs many genocides plus project 2025 plus an even worse Supreme Court plus a vengeful Trump with a new expansive presidential immunity on the other plus more Ukrainians dying plus Taiwan being handed over to China plus Trump selling our country to the highest bidder legally since the Supreme Court said that was a Ok, etc.
I picked genocide in Palestine (Harris will hopefully actually threaten Israel is in power) rather than the other choice. It sucks ass. But Trump getting power is just so much fucking worse.
Please do, I'd love to be able to just slap that image down whenever "bUt tHe gEnOcIdE!" comes up around here.
If we're being real, it's just Hamas, Hezbollah, the IRGC, and anyone unfortunate enough to be too close to those assholes on the bottom track.
Too close being defined as, in the same country.
Don't be a journalist, or a first responder, because they seem to get special attention from Israel. Also Don't be in a hospital or a school, because again, special attention.
Not that the "special attention" actually involves recon and targeting of individuals. No, it's more a case of someone looking at a map and saying "well, that structure is still standing, so let's blow it up". The exception being journalists and first responders, whose locations are subject to recon for better targeting.
Imagine believing this is what's "real".
I get that this is not the hill to die on in this meme, but the tracks should really be reversed.
This implies "doing nothing" will only sacrifice Palestine, while "pulling the lever" (i.e. voting) will sacrifice Palestine+all other at risk groups.
Otherwise, this really is a classic trolly dilemma. We can't stop the train and someone is going to get killed.
Yeah, but that would require an understanding of the trolley problem as a philosophical dilemma, and how are you gonna use that to yell at people you hate?
Hasn’t everyone watched the Good Place?
We can’t stop the train and someone is going to get killed.
We really fucking can, it just requires more people to care enough to be willing to do more than the bare fucking minimum of participating in this theatre those profiting from war have set out for us, and look outside of the system you have indoctrinated to believe isn't only the default, but the best (and if this doesn't demonstrate that fact to you, I honestly think you're beyond help).
I fully believe the system we live in is broken, and is nowhere near "the best". But the system does have many people who are indoctrinated, and many who benefit from it too greatly to make me believe we have sufficient time to derail it before some of the death implied in this meme comes.
But if you have a plan more tangible then telling people "wake up sheeple!", then I'm ready to hear it. And if it's actually convincing, then I'm ready to help.
But randomly telling people they have been indoctrinated, declaring it to be self evident, and then accusing them of being beyond help if they don't see it, is nothing more than pointless moral masturbation. Maybe it makes you feel better, but it's not helping nor convincing anyone.
Let me know what your plan is when you have it figured out. In the mean time, I'm going to go back to helping who I can.
This meme also implies that the current US strategy is not to fund Ukraine just enough to take Russia to Hell with it. It also implies the Democrats don't rely on anti-LGBTQ votes because one single comment made by Waltz. This meme also implies Democrat are pushing laws to combat police brutality (at least fix this at local or state levels in cities where they hold the majority).
The Democrats here now have worse arguments than the tankies.
Kamala literally used to fight for sexual assault victims and such
Walz used to fight for his school kids
Trump bragged on Howard Stern about perving on young girls and is a convicted rapist
You do realize there is both a house and Senate right, and unless they have control of both, they can't necessarily just push laws. That's what politics is
And in the past few years, the Republicans have only been interested in sabotage it seems (if Trump loses this election, there is a better chance they will be more willing to work when Democrats)
They're not relying on this shit. The most commonly cited reason even by Republicans voting for Harris is that Trump is a dictator that wants to ruin the country
Right, and one of the main, basic ways in which one can consider the trolley problem is that, regardless of the difference in outcomes, pulling the lever makes you morally responsible for what happens.
I'm hoping once Harris takes office that she can improve the Isreal/Palestine situation. But I suspect for now she has to keep her cards close or she'll lose some key support.
Politics has been an old-boys club for a long time. She probably has to tread carefully until she knows if she has a majority or not.
I actually wonder if she has a different stance on Israel but simply will not/cannot talk about it because she is also the VP and it's a "bad look to go against the boss," so to speak.
I appreciate the optimism but Harris being elected is far from a foregone conclusion. Far, far. Between tricks and the electoral college, it needs to be a blowout to win. And we're not seeing a blowout so far. I am hopeful as hell, but not affording optimism.
I’m hoping the same thing. Politics is a complicated game. The first person to say they understand how it all works is the first person I wouldn’t trust to explain any of it to a third grader.
We’re all making best guesses on almost everthing.
Lmfao, don't hold your breath (not that anyone putting any faith in to her actually cares)
They are already in office, they are the vice president of the united states, the second highest charge in the country
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States
Presides over the Senate, but can't even vote in it. Unless there's a tie. And she's an advisor to the president. Literally less actual power than a random senator.
And then you get offended when people call you russian bots. You're either knowingly or unknowingly spreading misinformation. In the end, the result is the same.
She won't do shit cause she has to get reelected in four years.
She won’t do shit cause she
has to get reelected in four years.like the rest of the democratic party don't give a shit about Palestinians, nor disturbing the status quo.FTFY
Immigrants used to be on top rail, but after four years, they have been placed on both rails, just like the Palestinians. There is no guarantee that the groups placed on the top rail will not be shifted to the bottom rail as well in four years.
Voting for Democrats is always advertised as the lesser of two evils, but it sure seems like the lesser evil is just trying to kill the same groups the greater evil. If they want people to vote for them, the Democrats should start working to save and prevent people from being tied to trolley tracks.
Or at least lie about it.
Didn't Kamala already refuse to protect Trans rights? The Dems will put everyone on the tracks if it gets them votes/donations
Plus we have Democrat-run cities implementing AI to spot homeless people, so add that to both rails as well
anybody on the left withholding their vote at this point fundamentally disbelieves in a system with exactly two discrete options, so this type of post doesn't persuade anybody
fundamentally disbelieves in a system with exactly two discrete options
except the polls are exactly about two discrete options. "not believing" in it is like not believing in gravity. it doesn't make you philosopher, it makes you dumb moron.
which is what people said before biden was replaced
Anyone who doesn't "believe" that we have the system we have is beyond reaching
Yeah I don’t “believe” our system best serves the common good. But I sure as hell will vote for Kamala because it’s very clear that is my best course of action to serve the common good. Voting for a third party won’t lead to a system where more parties have a voice, it will help Trump get into power, where only a single party has a voice, and any other voice will be silenced
Yes, according to the meme both sides are murderers. Directly supporting criminals by endorsing them or voting them makes you complicit in their crime.
Bruh you literally argued the opposite in your recent comments about Turkey and India.
"So am i allowed to insult all Turks in general because their president is a fascist?"
This is the only post about "turkey" i made recently.
How are the two thing supposed to be related? If you knowingly support and vote a criminal you are complicit in the crime. If you happen to be born in a country ruled by a criminal and someone assume you are bad because of your nationality that's equal to racism.
Voting is now directly supporting.
Must be nice and simple to live in such a polarised world.
Wtf. I've never seen so many people annoyed that their fellows are protesting genocide. How do you take a situation like this and make it a fucking trolley meme.
I don’t think people are saying you shouldn’t protest the genocide. You should! But it’s stupid to not vote for Harris over it because letting Trump win doesn’t just throw women, LGBTQ people, etc. under the bus, it also makes the genocide of Palestinians even worse.
Imagine you're strapped to an operating table, incapacitated. There are two other people in the room strapped to tables with you.
In walk two psychopaths, let's call them Al and Bob. They explain to you that they've decided to let the three of you choose your fate: Al wants to chop off your right hand, Bob wants to chop off all four of your limbs. They give you five minutes to decide, and then they'll come back to take a vote, majority decides whether Al or Bob gets their way. If you refuse to vote they'll flip a coin.
Immediately one of the other victims starts saying how terrible Al is and how horrible it is to chop off someone's right hand. Non-stop protesting the inhumanity of Al, how important it is to deny Al the opportunity to take your right hand.
For whatever reason they seem oddly quiet on the fact that Bob also wants to take your right hand, and arm, and the left, and both legs. Whenever you try to interject with that fact, they accuse you of being pro-handchopping and how could you even suggest voting for Al the evil handchopper. And now the other victim seems to be taking this anti-Al rhetoric quite seriously.
Would you find that annoying?
imagine you've been abducted by 2 psychopaths
This is America
How do you take a situation like this and make it a fucking trolley meme.
You have to be a bigot who is happy to sacrifice others for your own comfort.
The original argument was "Both sides are evil/bad and we need to get rid of both." These Democrats are trolling non-stop. Hopefully, they'll be gone in a few weeks.
Remember to never question why such an orphan crushing trolley exists!
Just pull the lever and vote blue!
It is questioned, the trolley is that first past the post system you hear people complain about.
But at the same time you don't just let the trolley do the maximum amount of crushing before it can be shut down for good.
Remember to never question why such an orphan crushing trolley exists!
This is really the crux of every one of these arguments about Gaza-related voting decisions though.
The people saying vote Harris please because (see OP) are saying that because they consider the trolley as an unstoppable force. There is no spectrum of feasible action that involves stopping the trolley before it takes one of those two paths. There may be feasible action that involves getting rid of the trolley later, but not now.
The people saying ZOMG you are voting for genocide if you vote for Harris seem to be focused on the trolley and can't believe we're all worrying about lesser evils when the orphan crushing trolley is right fucking there.
I am not a member of this second group, but it seems to me that they think getting rid of the trolley before it takes one of those paths is possible. Or, they think destroying the trolley later necessarily involves sacrificing ALL those groups (on both tracks above) now.
Thank you for confirming my bias that both sides are indeed the same - I will now proceed accordingly. 😜
/s btw, and damn I wish this was funny. As it is, it feels all too real...😔
What's the difference between the first two flags?
I wonder what T stands for in LGBT+
And what those colours in the flag's triangle are meant to represent.Trans flag and the pride flag
Ah, I see. Thanks. I only know the not-a-rainbow one, what's with the triangles?
No, that's the progress flag
Intentional divisiveness in an attempt to derail the entire movement, and idiots keep taking the bait.
Trans folks have been getting targeted heavily by the right for years now. They can be represented separately and the overall pride progress flag can also be present considering all of the other groups contained within and what the right says about them as well. Two things can be true without detracting from each other.
I think the flags serve a purpose almost like some form of heraldry when interacting in-group, as a shorthand way to share identity.
But as an outsider, I'm not going to keep track of every variant. I'd prefer there be one generic flag used when presenting to a general audience that is meant to encompass the entirety. And sticking with it. Maybe there already is one that is preferred?
In other words, op is proud and open about their willingness to sacrifice Palestinian lives in order to preserve their own comfort and safety under the status quo.
Anyone who can look at this meme and not only see one option as acceptable, but be proud of this depiction of how "right" they are (in their own minds) to pick the "lesser" (but still) evil, is the embodiment of "scratch a liberal, a fascist bleeds".
All to avoid having to do any more than the bare fucking minimum that is voting in this theatre, and getting their pat on the back for being brave antifascists (lmmfao, only in their own minds, of course).
In other words, op is proud and open about their willingness to sacrifice Palestinian lives in order to preserve their own comfort and safety under the status quo.
Don’t worry - the Terminally Online Leftists will change their tune from “It won’t change the election” to “If Palestine gets genocided by Israel, it’s only fair minorities in the US are genocided too”.
I get what you mean, but I think the point behind this image is not to say that doing what you call the "bare minimum" is enough, but to try and get more people to actually do that bare minimum.
One day, you will be the only one on both rails, while people watch and say they have no choice but to let you die, pretending there isn't an third empty rail.
- In reality the tram has already been running in on a tram track were it has already run over more than 180.000 Palestinians (as estimated in Lancet article some months ago) as well as thousands of Lebanese.
- There have been hundreds of branches all allowing the tram to switch to a line free of victims and at each time Biden and Harris - the ones who have actually had the power all this time - pulled the lever to keep the tram on the line were it ran over more Palestinians and recently also Lebanese.
As usual with these propaganda "memes" the situation is misportrayed as one were the power is in the hands of common Americans, when the power has always been in the hands of the likes of Biden and Harris and who have repeatedly chosen to give more weapons to the Nazis, whilst knowing that it increases the risk of a Trump victory.
Even the kind of human being that only cares about "what's in it for me" and "is relaxed about the mass murder of babies" should be able to see that the Trump defeat they desire could have been guarantee almost a year ago by Biden simply stopping the sending of weapons and ammo to Israel.
What are you babbling about? Yes, the "tram has already been running in on a tram track were it has already run over more than 180.000 Palestinians", but the elections, which are literally up to the voters, will determine if it gets even worse and spreads to even more groups and well into fascism.
Your comment is much more propaganda than this meme is. And no, stopping sending weapons and ammo to Israel would not have ensured a Trump defeat, they are not only separate things but it would have likely pushed AIPAC and other Israeli influence operations to join in with the Russian ones to try to influence US elections towards a Trump win. Sadly, a significant portion of the US public cares shit all about doing the right thing, and you only need to look at Reddit's worldnews to see the sort of severely skewed bubble those that would care are being entrapped in regarding the conflict.
The choice cannot be so single issue. Donald Trump is doing everything he can to subvert the election process, and will try to upend it entirely if he can. Harris is a disappointing choice at best, downright revolting at worst, but she respects the election process. Under Harris, I have a chance to continue voting third party in local elections and trying to change the system. Under Trump, not only is my life and the life of many other Americans in danger, but this may very well be the last time I ever get to vote.
The choice cannot be so black and white. The Democrats have always been neo-libs that are okay with bombing third world countries for imperialist reasons. However, in this election, they're the ones we have the best chance of voting again under and continuing to try to change the system. I will not be so short sighted as to believe the average American is going to do anything but vote Biden or Harris, so making an ideological stand is doing nothing but wasting my opportunity to stop total fascism from removing the ability to make this country better in the future.
Even if I believed Trump and Harris would be identical on the issue of Gaza, when I strongly believe Trump will accelerate the genocide, I still have to vote Harris in order to retain the ability to vote in the future and secure the current (distasteful) state of our democracy so it can be improved in the future.
still have to vote Harris in order to retain the ability to vote in the future and secure the current (distasteful) state of our democracy so it can be improved in the future.
My honest feeling, and this is just speculation, but it seemed like it was easier to organize large protest movements under trump than under Biden. Once Biden got into office all the liberals stopped supporting protest and started defending the status quo.
I really hate you people for spewing your propaganda like that.
-
The "worse" part implies the democrats didn't give Israel everything it ever wanted which is in itself outright propaganda.
-
I don't know why Ukraine is portrayed like Palestine. Where are they getting ethnically cleansed that I missed? Where is this coming from? Show some respect to the worst humanitarian crisis of the 21st century for the love of god
-
At how many atrocious policies do you say enough? At how many rollbacks from republicans that the democrats do nothing about do you say enough? At how many genocides do you say enough? If the democrats committed a second one? Trump would commit more you say. A third one? Trump would commit more. A fourth? A fifth? At what point do you draw the line?
https://medium.com/@ashwinjitsingh/the-trolly-problem-utilitarianism-vs-deontology-bd624a8e321e
"If one were to take a utilitarian standpoint, the means are justified by the end, which from a utilitarianist perspective, is the maximization of benefit. Hence, for a utilitarianist, whatever option guarantees the outcome of the maximum benefit is what is moral. Therefore, in the trolly case, a follower of classical utilitarianism would say that it is morally permissible to sacrifice 1 to save 5.
The deontological perspective in contrast, advocates for the means justifying the end. This, for a deontologist, the morality of the action should be based on whether the action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules, rather than being based on the consequence. In this light, a follower of deontologism would argue that it is morally impermissible to sacrifice one to save five because making the choice of having to kill someone is inherently wrong."
I don’t know why Ukraine is portrayed like Palestine. Where are they getting ethnically cleansed that I missed?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_genocide_of_Ukrainians_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
On 17 March 2023, following an investigation of war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, and Maria Lvova-Belova, Russian Commissioner for Children's Rights, for the unlawful deportation and transfer of children from Ukraine to Russia during the invasion.[20] According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, over 307,000 children were transferred to Russia from 24 February to 18 June 2022, alone.[21] In April 2023, the Council of Europe deemed the forced transfers of children as constituting an act of genocide in with an overwhelming majority of 87 in favour of the resolution to 1 against and 1 abstaining.[22]
The director of Amnesty International Ukraine, in an interview with Deutsche Welle on 4 April 2022, accused Russia of using targeted tactics to deplete the civilian population in besieged cities (deliberately cutting off access to food, water, electricity, and heat supply) and bringing them to a humanitarian catastrophe. There were noted cases of blocking humanitarian corridors, shelling of buses, killing of civilians who tried to leave the besieged cities.[31]
"Who's to say that Ukraine will exist on the world map in two years at all?"
Dmitry Medvedev, 15 June 2022[96]
"The Ukraine that you and I had known, within the borders that used to be, no longer exists, and will never exist again".
Maria Zakharova, 19 June 2022[97]
"But if you don't want us to convince you, we'll kill you. We'll kill as many as necessary: one million, five million, or exterminate all of you".
Pavel Gubarev, 11 October 2022[98]
"These are the non-humans that the Ukrainian Maidan spawned. Religion in Ukraine is replaced by them with false faith and sectarianism, and the junta itself is first replaced by them."
Vladimir Putin, 12 December 2022[99]
Nice wall of text, bro. So what do you suggest people should do?
-
It's so sad that that is the best available option.
People who don't want to vote for Harris over Palestine, please watch this video: https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo
You're basically doing exactly the right thing, and just not factoring in an obscure yet critical piece of context, which this video lays out. When that context is factored in, it totally flips the call on who to vote for, even though none of the values change.
This whole idea that its a bad system rests on people using it in a negative way instead of a positive one. It relies on people figuring out who's the least likely to win and then moving votes appropriately.
You dont need to base your vote on who got what last election. You dont need to be so embarrassed the person you voted for lost, that you need to change your values and vote differently.
Everyone should be voting for someone not against someone. I think popular vote will help with this if it passes in enough states.
You would be correct if your system wasn't so archaic.
(but worse)
This amounts to genocide denial.
No it doesn't. It implies that the level and rate of genocide would be even worse than it is now.
(but worse)
This amounts to genocide denial.
This amounts to genocide denial.
It's weird how easy it is to say something stupid.
As you can see I have drawn stink lines above your opinion therefore defeating you qed
Trump loves money. One of the best ways best way for him to get more money once in power is increasing our military spending on Israel aid, that’s the “but worse” part. In what world do you think he’d do the inverse of maintaining his power? There’s a reason the military industrial complex wants him in power
You live in a completely sealed off palace in your own mind. Democrats have been tripping over themselves to send repeated aid packages. Israel is using ordinance faster than we can make it. You shouldn't feel so comfortable just saying whatever the fuck makes sense to you when you're trying to talk about reality. You should look at it.
The democrats are committing a genocide. "But worse" implies they aren't already doing the worst crime against humanity that exists in our imagination. It is genocide denial.
ITT: Americans debating whether choosing between "the ONLY two choices they have" is good or bad, completely forgetting revolts exist and completely disregarding their beloved 2nd amendment.
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Sounds like you aren't free anymore. You can bitch and moan about only having two choices all you want. If you vote Trump/Kamala/3rd party instead of taking up arms, overthrowing your state government and forcing your state to secede until the elections are changed to no longer be FPTP, then you are tacitly supporting genocide.
But maybe it was really hard to consider such extreme actions. Well, now you know what the anti-genocide choice is. Let's see if you risk your lives to stop your government from being genocidal fucks, or if you're gonna do nothing about it because you've been completely pacified as a nation and are now unable to even consider fighting against tyrants. If you'll excuse me, I'm not gonna hold my breath.
I don't think the 2nd amendment was intended to be used as a means to dictate foreign policy. The point is to allow the populace to defend itself from the government.
ITT: Tankies that think the only solution to a non-utopian outcome is to burn everything to the fucking ground.
And then starve.
-"It's the capitalists fault!! Urgh..."
ITT: Libs being confronted with the fact that the system they insist on participating in is designed to maintain genocide, and doing whatever mental gymnastics they deem necessary to defend it, because their own comfort and privilege is more important to them than the lives of some brown people, or the wellbeing of society at large.
ITT: I found a term that allows me to demonize the left, so I can stay comfortably oppressed in the center.
Dwight shrute energy.
If I were American I'd just restart it!
Well fucking said.
I legit was thinking of the trolley scenario what I was doing laundry earlier today. Great minds think alike
I just made the dishes and here we are!
You didn't even make this meme correctly.
The point of this is that not pulling the lever leads to more dead but pulling the lever leads to less deaths but due to your action of pulling the lever.
Good job?
Good to see blue MAGA finally admitting they are fascist and evil.
If you seriously think the queer community is supposed to stand on your side, as you actively support genocide, and pretend like they won’t be the next sacrifice needed to SaVe DeMoCrACy….
Lmao
SaVe DeMoCrACy
Right yes of course if you succeed at electing trump he will stop what Israel is doing, and immediately so. 😂
✅ - bLuE mAGa
✅ - geNoCiDe!
✅ - inaccurately attributed fascist accusation
✅ - prediction with nothing to support it
✅ - Lmao
Folks, I believe we have reached “socialist” bingo!
Somebody giving weapons to the KKK whilst they're going on a rampage against Afro-Americans would be rightly deemed KKK.
So somebody giving weapons to ethno-Fascists (i.e. the same kind of Fascist as Nazis) whilst they're going on a rampage against the ethnicity they describe as "human animals" is rightly deemed an ethno-Fascist.
Unless you're a Racist yourself who thinks the ethnicity of the victims and perpetrators involved somehow changes the judgment on the situation, it's perfectly valid to conclude that the Democrat leadership are, by their own actions, not just Fascists but pretty much a modern kind of Nazi.
I do agree however that the previous post is structured as just bunch of slogans.
Derail the train don't accept a false choice not to mention democrats also are terrible on policing and immigration for example so more should also be on the democrats track.
Either the Dem or Rep nominee will become president. It’s going to happen. There’s no “derailing the train”.
You can doubt me now. You’ll see soon enough.
No, really. Q says there's a super special session of the real Congress that happens on February 7th with jfk jr presiding to choose the real president, but it only happens if you don't vote. Trust me, bro.
There’s no “derailing the train”.
from Wikipedia
Reversing the points under a moving train will almost always derail the train.
The point is nobody is saved by electoral politics instead do actual organizing and actions.
I mean...yeah...but also fuck the democrats. We shouldn't be stuck in this position of genocide and fascism there and here or "just" genocide and fascism there. There are certainly degrees of being a piece of shit, but at this point, we are splitting hairs.
I don’t think “kill fewer people” is splitting hairs. I think it’s gross to leverage Palestine for political points but only against Democrats.
I don’t think “kill fewer people” is splitting hairs.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/08/16/biden-oil-drilling-production/ :
As he campaigned for president in 2020, Joe Biden made a bold promise at a New Hampshire town hall, adding repetition for emphasis: “No more drilling on federal lands. Period. Period. Period. Period.” […] The Biden administration has now outpaced the Trump administration in approving permits for drilling on public lands, and the United States is producing more oil than any country ever has. […] The country is expected to produce 13.2 million barrels of oil per day on average this year — millions of barrels more than Saudi Arabia or Russia.
"producing more oil than any country ever has" is making the biosphere unlivable, and causing a mass extinction which will kill more people.
If enough people vote for green parties, we can reverse anthropogenic climate change and stop the anthropocene extinction. If however we keep voting for the omnicidal lesser evil, then we're voting for omnicidal evil, and complicit in killing more people.
I think it is fucking reprehensible that the only two parties we have to choose from both support genocide. It doesn't matter if they support "less genocide." Supporting genocide makes them a piece of shit, regardless of how much genocide it is. You just find it better because it doesn't affect you. The fact that I am being made complicit by the realities of the situation I've been forced into by the majority in my country (read: white colonizers) really pisses me off.
"splitting hairs" could mean the difference between up to a couple million people dying, and potentially tens of millions of people or more dying. That's not splitting hairs at that point. That's not "po-tay-toe/po-tah-toe" anymore. Anyone arguing otherwise is either brainwashed or is arguing in bad faith.
Imagine thinking that there's no difference between one genocide and several, simultaneous genocides.
Bad faith? It is bad faith to find any genocide "acceptable," while simultaneously becoming angry at anyone pointing out that genocide is unacceptable. Seriously, what the actual fuck? This is white liberalism in its most concentrated lethal form. Ironically, it'll eventually lead to the genocides you don't find acceptable. If it wasn't for this shit mentality, we wouldn't be here.
Youre stuck in this position and it sure as shit isnt the fault of "democrats".
Have them change the voting system then, because not voting/voting 3rd party isn't going to get you there either, and will make it far worse. Having this attitude in 2016 already made it far worse.
Youre also going to have to come to the reality that genocide is an American tradition, in the very foundation of its economy. That's why Americans still have military weapon reveals lmao, and y'all love it
or as the great prophet George Carlin, may peace be upon him, said "Garbage in, Garbage out"
anyone still participating in this broken system believes genocide is an acceptable choice. The only responsible choice is to burn it all to the ground and start again.
“After Hitler, Our Turn”
Sweet plan, where do we meet up for the "burn it to the ground" option?
And while we are planning, do you think you could consider voting for Kamala, you know, so more of our potential comrades aren't locked up? Best to shore up our numbers right? Sic semper tyrannis!
what is your plan when it's all burned down and now you have to fight MAGA for control of the country?
People who refuse to participate in the democratic process and then complain that it doesn't work for them are hilarious.
The only responsible choice is to burn it all to the ground and start again.
Huh, funny. Last i heard to achieve this you want to insert someone that have the exact believe that will change the system, and there's two way to do this: one is to vote in a democratic process, slowly and surely move toward that future one vote at the time; and two is to cause a civil war. People that's jaded but comfortable in their situation usually want to pick the latter, which mean killing people that's not on your side and sending young people to die for your cause. Sounds familiar? That's because it's what Trump tried last time. Does that sounds responsible to you?
I doubt that's happening, disparate groups acting in an unconcerted manner aren't likely to achieve much. They already kill us sleeping in our beds.
