Skip Navigation
Political Memes @lemmy.world
lengau @midwest.social

bOtH sIdEs ArE tHe SaMe

380 comments
  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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...😔

  • 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.

    • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • I really hate you people for spewing your propaganda like that.

    1. The "worse" part implies the democrats didn't give Israel everything it ever wanted which is in itself outright propaganda.
    2. 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
    3. 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?

380 comments