Tap tap tap
Tap tap tap
You're viewing a single thread.
218 comments
-
Country: Has undemocratic two-party system. Elects a nutjob.
You guys: "The people are the problem!!1!1! Just vote for the other party whose opinions doesn't align with yours at all!"
-
The people who voted for the guy directly endorsed by nazis and hate groups, who has an agenda drafted by a prominent hate-monger, are indeed the problem.
Yes, the other choice was a genocide apologist who ALSO sucks corporate dick, but has the decency to throw the average populous a bone now and again and doesn't fuck up (as many) foreign trade deals and alliances.
Yes, the SOLUTION is to change our election system. But the PROBLEM is fascism, and a shit ton of people voted for more fascism.
-
Paste of part of my answer from another reply:
Imagine if Alice is a murderer, and she asks Bob if she should kill two people or five people. Bob says “five”. Now, I will of course be angry at Bob for choosing the obviously worse alternative, but I will in no way claim that he is the cause of the problem. I will not go out and rally support for “Only two people”, I will rally support for “Let’s get rid of Alice”.
-
Same scenario
You CAN'T stop Alice. You just can't. You don't have the man power or the legal means.
So your choices are, 2 people or 5 people. If you choose to do nothing, 5 people die, if you swallow the moral superiority, only 2 people die.
Which are you choosing?
-
You formulated a question where your answer means you don't have ANY culpability even though you can clearly see the murders coming and mitigate it's damage.
Yes, outside of this decision, campaign to have Alice executed or jailed or whatever, but that won't stop Alice from killing 5 people, she's just GOING TO WIN if you don't stop her. You CAN reduce the number of deaths and continue to fight, hopefully with 3 more people to stand up to that kind of tyranny.
-
In this scenario, I'm not the one choosing, Bob is. And when Bob says "five", i will be angry, but it will be nothing in comparison with my Anger towards Alice who now can kill five people instead of the two she has been killing on a regular basis before. She's the one presenting the alternatives, Bob isn't. She's the one performing the murders, Bob isn't. She's the one that deserves my anger.
In a similar fashion I am not angry with anyone saying "two" either, "beacuse they could've said none yadayada". I am, almost exclusively, angry with Alice.
-
-
-
-
Your stance is like a person seeing a riot from afar... deciding to walk towards the riot, the closer they get the more violence they see, the worst it looks, yet this person decides it's no problem and keeps on walking closer and closer until they get to the heart of the riot, fire everywhere bullets flying around... one group tells the person to duck and get cover but this person decides it's all the same and maybe those bullets don't hurt as much as people say so they decide to jump right in the middle of the street.
Finally, when a bullet is heading their way, time slows down and with the bullet inches away from their forehead they say "well, I have no choice but to eat this bullet!, there is no other recourse now, I have no choice in the matter"
-
You seem to completely misunderstand me. Voting for any of the two main parties, both of whom want the country to be a tyrannical military megaforce that is no stranger to overthrowing democracies, is like accepting the faith of the bullet. Going against any such system is what I am advocating - NOT accepting the bullet. We simply seem to have different views of what the bullet is.
Imagine if Alice is a murderer, and she asks Bob if she should kill two people or five people. Bob says "five". Now, I will of course be angry at Bob for choosing the obviously worse alternative, but I will in no way claim that he is the cause of the problem. I will not go out and rally support for "Only two people", I will rally support for "Let's get rid of Alice".
-
No, you lack nuance
The democrats are the people telling to duck for cover, they are not solving the problem, but they are delaying the bullet to the head
You are also not advocating anything against the system. That would require at least some action.
In your example, you are not rallying agaist Alice, you are just refusing to make a choice so the rest will do it for you
The reality is, however you got there, that either 2 or 5 people will die. Your lack of participation ensures 5 people will die
-
In my example I very clearly am rallying against Alice. In every possible way. I would be fuming, throwing stones, screaming to everyone around me. But I would not accept her proposition to Bob. I would not claim that I "have" to play Alice's game, because she's in charge and I have to accept that. I don't have to accept that. At all.
I would do everything I could to stop her, and almost all of my Anger would be towards her, not towards Bob (I obviously would be angry with him too but he's after all not a murderer - Alice is).
Keep in mind that in the example, Bob probably believes for some reason that when Alice says two, she means ten.
-
Yes but in your example, not voting for 2 people to die guaranteed 5 did
You talk like voting for Kamala to prevent Trump means you nowbside with Kamala and the system in every way. Voting for the lesser evil does not stops you at all from rallying against the system and doing everything possible to change it.
-
You almost get me!
Vote for whoever you want! What I am saying is that your anger towards your peers who happened to indulge in different propaganda and voted for something different is misdirected.
The voters are not the problem.
-
I do get you, I just do not think letting MAGAs off the hook is accurate, fair or wise for the future... Same way I can understand someone stealing food out of hunger but wouldn't condone them if they steal with violence
I get some people were fooled into this but I'm convinced MAGAs devotion for trump is not coming from "he'll make the food cheap again" and more from "that'll show
<insert minority group here>
who is the boss around here"Full disclosure, I'm Canadian so these are not my peers although we do have equivalent ones
-
Alright, I guess we simply have (somewhat) different opinions on the matter. Also I'm European so my general news intake might (should?) be less focused on domestic US politics and more on foreign policy.
It was nice debating with you, take care :)
-
Yes, fair enough... have a great day and stay safe
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
218 comments