wild to me how many people are upset by “i find genocide unacceptable and won’t vote for anyone who has it as part of their policies”
they treat it as if it’s some kind of insane opinion and not, like, the bare fucking minimum in terms of ethics???
I feel like there was a time when voting for the “lesser genocide” would have just been presented as a hypothetical to show the logical extreme of lesser evil voting, but somewhere along the line people just started advocating that openly and unironically.
i’m convinced that it’s because people considered it in theory only; disconnected from the real human preventable tragedy that it is.
now social media is making it difficult to ignore the impact of this human tragedy and it’s forcing people to add their humanity to that theoretical consideration.
i’m also convinced that the age/id verification systems that all western gov’ts are currently implementing are geared towards returning us to a state of giving greater emphasis on theory rather than humanity.
Probably because it does nothing to actually keep those who accept genocide out of office. Don’t get me wrong, the intentions are noble, it’s just impotent as a strategy. The genocide rages on, indifferent to noble intentions. But now lots of additional people are suffering too.
The opinion makes sense to deontologists, but to the teleologists of the world it rightfully seems insane.
The opinion makes sense to deontologists, but to the teleologists of the world it rightfully seems insane.
from a deontologist’s view, refusing to play along with a system that enables genocide is the only moral move. you don’t need it to be effective. you need to not be complicit. that’s the intention and goal that you seem to be miss understanding.
teleologists call that insane because they only care about outcomes. but that’s exactly the problem – their framework treats genocide as just another variable to optimize around instead of the human & ethical tragedy it is in irl and it’s not a bug; it’s the system working as designed.
so when people choose not to operate inside the american system’s confines – where genocide is a natural outcome – they aren’t being naive. they’re rejecting that system entirely. they’re acting like deontologists in a world that only rewards teleologists. that’s not a misunderstanding. that’s a refusal.
it’s a refusal and the only sane response to a system that has genocide and ethnic-cleansing baked into its logic.
you need to not be complicit. that’s the intention and goal that you seem to be miss understanding.
I completely understand that intention and goal. But it’s literally just virtue signaling. Teleology is concerned with securing the most favorable outcome, deontology only cares about preserving individual moral superiority. The teleologists obviously recognize the ethical tragedy, they’re just more interested in trying to save as many people as they can than keeping their hands clean and pure.
Deontology is self-centered and immature. It’s feels over reals. Who cares how many people suffer and die, at least you personally didn’t participate.
so when people choose not to operate inside the american system’s confines – where genocide is a natural outcome – they aren’t being naive. they’re rejecting that system entirely
Except that rejection accomplishes nothing. It does nothing to stop, or even slow, ongoing genocide. It’s a the ethical equivalent of shutting your eyes and plugging your ears.
The situation isn’t even really comparable to the trolley problem, because Gaza was on both tracks. By not pulling the lever, Gaza was not spared. All inaction accomplished was the suffering of all the other people on the straight track.
Allow me to clarify the position
Again, a noble intention, but it did not actually accomplish that goal.
Sometimes things do not happen instantly, and we should not lower ourselves to supporting genocide just because doing that is instant.
That doesn’t mean that this strategy will ever work. It won’t happen instantly, but it also won’t even happen eventually.
Allow me to clarify the position. It’s like a child that learns their mother has cancer; even with expensive treatment, there’s no guarantee treatment will end her suffering or defeat the cancer. So the child decides to take the money for treatment and spend it instead on building a shrinking ship like in The Fantastic Voyage to go into their mother to attack the cancer directly.
Yes, a noble intention, but the strategy is a pure fantasy, and all it’s actually done is remove resources from a treatment that might actually accomplish something.
It’s a childish fantasy that directly harms people.
“But now lots of additional people are suffering too.”
Americans getting a taste of their own medicine.And it is the only good strategy.
You may not win the first time but voting for the uniparty with a choice between moving to the extreme-right fast or a bit slower is what got them there.
I guess your teleologists don’t see that’s the only purpose they are working towards.
It’s a guaranteed losing strategy and it’s totally their own fault.
If everyone would simply ignore the genocide, we could all eat brunch while the bombs fell eternally over in some other country, which is fine. /s in case it wasn’t obvious
And they will have democratic gas prices
we joke here; but that’s literally what the hasbara narrative seems to be on reddit like platforms.
comments deriding liberals for not voting for kamala harris are followed up by snarky comments denigrating people for showing concerns about the genocide and ethnic cleansing.
inb4 the liberals VoTE BlUE every1!!!
too late
I’m not responsible for this, I didn’t vote
Y’all our foreign policy towards Israel hasn’t changed in the last 65 years. Yes, both sides serve them.
So we have to strip that out of the system, since burning the system down doesn’t seem feasible.
Which party do you think is most likely to see the light on them… hmm
Which party do you think is most likely to see the light on them… hmm
PSL, duh.
Neither party can nor will see the light on this, as both are instruments of capital. The working classes need their own party.
Or we can be part of making that a condition of the democrats doing well. Not supporting a genocide isn’t something we can or should “strip out” of our expectations of politicians. If you’re right, then burning the system down is the only feasible thing. Nothing else is feasible.
It’s infeasible to expect decent people to rally around genocidiers.
Don’t let the people with power tell you what is or isn’t feasible. Not supporting a genocide is easy for them. They may lie to themselves about it, but it’s obvious.
our foreign policy towards Israel hasn’t changed in the last 65 years
Which party do you think is most likely to see the light
How’s that blue MAGA brunch going?
