Exactly. They fund genocide because it’s politically expedient. The opposition funds genocide because they love killing brown people
It’s conceivable to convince one side that genocide is no longer politically favorable. You’re never going to convince the other side to stop wanting to kill brown people. There is no third option with prospects to win.
This feels like trying to explain to someone that you can have 2 different infinities, and one is larger than the other. Both are bad, but one is clearly worse.
“What’s the difference if you end up at the same place?”
The difference is that 2 genocides is not the same place as 1 genocide. It is reasonable to criticize the people supporting a genocide while at the same time recognizing that the people wanting more genocides are not the same.
I don’t live in the US, there are no consequences for me as a result of Trump being president. Significantly more people are being harmed under Trump and I actually give a shit about other people instead of putting some idealized moral high ground above actual human lives.
“I won’t vote for someone who isn’t speaking about X” is an idealized moral high ground when the alternative is not only X getting worse, but even more X happening.
“I won’t vote for someone who isn’t speaking about X” is an idealized moral high ground when the alternative is not only X getting worse, but even more X happening.
Fuck you you genocidal prick. Substituting genocide for “x” is disgusting. It’s not “oh there’s just this one bad thing”. It’s genocide. It’s literally the worst possible thing you can do on this planet. And you’re saying other people have an idealised moral high ground because they think GENOCIDE is something that should never be done.
Right, the person complaining about there being more genocide means they… want genocide? What a useful thought terminating cliche you have there that gives you an excuse to avoid questioning if your own actions could have been better.
It’s genocide. It’s literally the worst possible thing you can do on this planet
You know what’s worse than genocide? More genocide. I don’t know how to simplify this further for you.
People were being harmed under Biden, our foreign and domestic policy has consequences for the vast majority of the world, you’re either a moron or lying
“Everything America does directly affects everyone else in the world. You only care now because of this. I cared before and that’s why I did nothing to stop this.”
Hell yeah brother. Personally I think Hitler was fucking great and would vote for him in a heartbeat if it meant stopping Himmler from being in charge. /s
At what point did I say Democrats were fucking great? They are absolute shit and people need to stand up for something better.
You also need to live in fucking reality a realize that stopping things from getting a lot fucking worse is worthwhile while you work on trying to get something better.
Also, Republican’s are the Nazi’s here. You refused to vote against Hitler.
To be clear, I personally don’t believe that genocidal fascism has to be a non-negotiable bipartisan policy that we just have to accept. I’m just trying to make the point that, if I did accept that premise, then the logical next step would be accelerationism.
The meme is the trolly problem, and this guy is saying “it doesn’t matter if you pull the lever, someone dies either way, it’s exactly the same!”
Except in the actual situation is more like “if you pull the lever the trolly will divert from running over group A and will run over group B. If you do nothing the trolly accelerates and runs over both groups A and B.”
I’m saying it’s worth pulling the lever while you work on a solution to stop the trolly. Someone arguing against that either doesn’t care about group A, or cares more about not being involved than in actually saving lives.
What’s the actual difference? You end up at the same place with either one.
Says who? Yeah, the Dems are filthy neolibs, but all they really care about is money and influence. They’re rainbow capitalists.
The other is literally based on hate and fear, they might actually care about building a christo-nationalist ethnostate more than money.
They certainly have some goals in common, but even compromise isn’t going to the same place.
Correct.
That is why they maintain American imperialism.
Such as funding a genocide in the middle east.
Exactly. They fund genocide because it’s politically expedient. The opposition funds genocide because they love killing brown people
It’s conceivable to convince one side that genocide is no longer politically favorable. You’re never going to convince the other side to stop wanting to kill brown people. There is no third option with prospects to win.
You cannot convince the rich and powerful that it’s politically unfavourable when it’s economically favourable to do genocide.
They don’t care about what people want. They care about what they want, and that’s US imperialism.
I’m saying that it’s possible to make it economically unfavorable. If, for instance, you had massive boycotts or strikes or something.
No amount of boycotts or striking are going to make the others stop wanting to murder brown people for its own sake.
That makes the choice clear.
This feels like trying to explain to someone that you can have 2 different infinities, and one is larger than the other. Both are bad, but one is clearly worse.
“What’s the difference if you end up at the same place?”
The difference is that 2 genocides is not the same place as 1 genocide. It is reasonable to criticize the people supporting a genocide while at the same time recognizing that the people wanting more genocides are not the same.
The only real difference is that there are consequences for you at home in the US and that’s the only part you actually care about
I don’t live in the US, there are no consequences for me as a result of Trump being president. Significantly more people are being harmed under Trump and I actually give a shit about other people instead of putting some idealized moral high ground above actual human lives.
Zero genocide isn’t an idealised moral high ground and it’s incredibly telling to see someone excuse it.
“I won’t vote for someone who isn’t speaking about X” is an idealized moral high ground when the alternative is not only X getting worse, but even more X happening.
Fuck you you genocidal prick. Substituting genocide for “x” is disgusting. It’s not “oh there’s just this one bad thing”. It’s genocide. It’s literally the worst possible thing you can do on this planet. And you’re saying other people have an idealised moral high ground because they think GENOCIDE is something that should never be done.
Right, the person complaining about there being more genocide means they… want genocide? What a useful thought terminating cliche you have there that gives you an excuse to avoid questioning if your own actions could have been better.
You know what’s worse than genocide? More genocide. I don’t know how to simplify this further for you.
The person belittling a genocide is a genocidal prick. There is no “more genocide”. If genocide isn’t a redline for you then you’re a genocidal prick.
People were being harmed under Biden, our foreign and domestic policy has consequences for the vast majority of the world, you’re either a moron or lying
American exceptionalism strikes again.
“Everything America does directly affects everyone else in the world. You only care now because of this. I cared before and that’s why I did nothing to stop this.”
It’s not exceptionalism it’s the direct result of our interference in other governments, goddamn you’re dumb
And a million dead kids because Trump killed usaid but go off I guess.
“But what about the american children” like I said
How do you find yourself typing something like this and not pause for thought?
What’s worse than genocide?
2 genocides.
I don’t know how to make this any more clear.
Hell yeah brother. Personally I think Hitler was fucking great and would vote for him in a heartbeat if it meant stopping Himmler from being in charge. /s
At what point did I say Democrats were fucking great? They are absolute shit and people need to stand up for something better.
You also need to live in fucking reality a realize that stopping things from getting a lot fucking worse is worthwhile while you work on trying to get something better.
Also, Republican’s are the Nazi’s here. You refused to vote against Hitler.
So glad actual hitler was defeated by voting against him.
The people who make compromises with the Nazis have convinced you that voting is the most important and only tool at your disposal.
I’m so glad Hitler was voted into power and not Himmler that would’ve been bad.
Never said that either. You seem to be having a conversation with someone else so I’ll leave you to it.
Himmler was also a Nazi, genius, that was the point of the analogy.
And when both sides are genocidal fascists, the lesser evil option is whatever destroys the country the fastest.
Cool, what are your doing to destroy the country faster? Or having you convinced yourself that inaction is helpful?
Voting for a genocidal politician: action!
To be clear, I personally don’t believe that genocidal fascism has to be a non-negotiable bipartisan policy that we just have to accept. I’m just trying to make the point that, if I did accept that premise, then the logical next step would be accelerationism.
Seriously, how do you not pause for thought typing that out?
The meme is the trolly problem, and this guy is saying “it doesn’t matter if you pull the lever, someone dies either way, it’s exactly the same!”
Except in the actual situation is more like “if you pull the lever the trolly will divert from running over group A and will run over group B. If you do nothing the trolly accelerates and runs over both groups A and B.”
I’m saying it’s worth pulling the lever while you work on a solution to stop the trolly. Someone arguing against that either doesn’t care about group A, or cares more about not being involved than in actually saving lives.