this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Comradeship // Freechat

2159 readers
16 users here now

Talk about whatever, respecting the rules established by Lemmygrad. Failing to comply with the rules will grant you a few warnings, insisting on breaking them will grant you a beautiful shiny banwall.

A community for comrades to chat and talk about whatever doesn't fit other communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The notion that Biden represents a lesser evil compared to the chaotic reign of Trump is a common argument. However, we must not forget that there exists a moral threshold below which neither choice is acceptable. To suggest that enabling a literal genocide can be considered a lesser evil is a morally bankrupt stance.

Saying that voting for Biden is a moral obligation to prevent the return of Trump perpetuates a dangerous fallacy. It implies that the democratic party is immune from scrutiny and accountability, no matter the atrocities they commit. This line of thinking allows for a never-ending cycle of justification, as long as there's somebody considered worse, the democrats are granted a blank check. This is nothing more than a form of gaslighting, manipulating the public into believing that their only choice is between two evils, rather than demanding a better standard of leadership and true representation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

In terms of the trolley problem that would be if you could instantaneously pull the lever while simultaneously attempting to get people off or derail the train or sabotaging the track.

Because pulling the lever adds legitmancy to the people who tied those people to the rails and made you choose, you agreed to play there game, you particpiated and are culpable.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

This is the first response that I think is actually engaging with my question.

My disagreement stems from not seeing that adding of legitimacy as worth as much as actual people's lives that are different in count on the different tracks.

It's okay, I apparently made a faux pas trying to engage to learn here on this issue but this community is clearly more for comradeship like its name suggests rather than outreach. That's fine, I'm going to discontinue this conversation here as my interjections are clearly unwelcome.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

It’s okay, I apparently made a faux pas trying to engage to learn here on this issue but this community is clearly more for comradeship like its name suggests rather than outreach.

You have received a lot of attention and information. What do you expect, for people to bend over backwards to talk to you about this on your terms? What person who takes learning seriously does this? Do you show up to a classroom and leave if the teacher does not re-frame their lecture on physics into the trolley problem? "Outreach" does not mean you change nothing about yourself and everyone else changes what they're doing for you. You could receive the ideal maximum of compassion, patience, and clarity of thought and word, but if you are only willing to approach it on your terms, then no matter what you tell yourself about your intent, the substance of your actions is that of reinforcing what you already believe, not learning.

And I am speaking from some experience here. I did not always have the views that I do and one of the most important things in changing that was doing more listening to people who are better informed. Philosophical questions like the trolley problem gives people a false sense of competence in understanding a given issue; that as long as you can abstract a problem to its component parts, you can overcome any ignorance of it and arrive at the correct position. This is not so. You must understand what is happening correctly, so that you can properly generalize. If your information on the fundamentals is incorrect, attempting to generalize will only obfuscate rather than clarify and give a false sense of confidence in your position.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

This is the first response that I think is actually engaging with my question.

Every single comment in this thread has fully engaged with your question, your inability to percieve that or your ego getting in the way isnt a failure on there parts, I havent seen one take in this thread I dont agree with. Most of them are poking at the american liberal exceptionalism you're displaying, where you're presenting this topic as a A:B situation.

The most effective way to save those people wouldnt be an induvidual act of pulling the lever, then running to untie the millions of tied down people. Its organizing into a large collective and dealing with the problem at its origin, not at its symptoms.

Break the tracks, save the people as a collective, no empty solutions that continue to perputate the endless cycle of violence.