148
submitted 1 day ago by pete_link@lemmy.ml to c/usa@lemmy.ml

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/21396125

Stephen Starr in Hamtramck, Michigan
Mon 14 Oct 2024 11.00 EDT

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] 2ugly2live@lemmy.world 20 points 18 hours ago

I guess that just doesn't make sense to me in the current political landscape. We know the third party isn't going to get the votes, and we also know that Trump is not only not going to save Gaza, he's going to do everything in his power to make this country worse as well. Currently, voting third party is throwing your vote away. I'm not saying I'm in love with the system or that it isn't fucked, but we have two options this election. Neither of them is going to save Gaza, but I don't see why damming the whole country, as well as yourself, to a worse existence, is the more sane option.

[-] basmati@lemmus.org 9 points 18 hours ago

It's a basic philosophical question.

Say you find yourself locked in a room with a gun, and two people tied to a chair. A voice announces that if you kill one of them, you and the other go free, if you don't kill anyone or if you kill yourself, everyone dies.

Your solution to this, voting Harris, is trust the voice is telling the truth and figure out who is the worse person so you don't feel as bad about being a murderer.

Their solution is not being a murderer.

Maybe the voice is telling the truth, and thus the voice will be a murderer, but they won't be -- you would be though with your choice. Maybe the voice is lying, in which case they made the right choice and you objectively made the wrong one, the worst one.

Most humans, ideally, would choose to not be murderers, even if that means a psychopath does a murder "because" you refused to.

[-] 2ugly2live@lemmy.world 17 points 17 hours ago

In your example, their solution is absolutely being a murderer. They didn't pull the trigger, but they condemned those people to death. They know that refusing is killing those people, that their refusal is the cause for those peoples deaths. I'm not saying that I don't think Gaza is important, or that it's not worth fighting for, but I extend that same importance to my countrymen as well. I think the woman who may need an abortion is important, even if I never get one. I think that my neighbor's kids should have a save school, and not be laden I'm debt, even thought I don't plan to have children.

I cannot stop what's going on in Gaza. It's a horrible, terribly bitter pill to swallow, but it is the truth. However, I'm not going to set everyone else on fire so we can all burn together in solidarity. Too many other people's lives are at stake. And I'm not saying their lives are more important than those in Gaza, I'm saying they're just as important. Kill one person, or kill everyone. I would rather save someone than no one.

[-] basmati@lemmus.org 12 points 16 hours ago

Exactly, you think being a murderer is okay.

That is the core philosophical difference.

You are completely okay with killing innocent people. These people are not, normal people are not.

This difference cannot be reconciled. These people will never think the way you do, and thank every God ever imagined for that, as someone needs to be the moral party if only as an example of how normalized and justified pure evil is.

[-] Djtecha@lemm.ee 3 points 7 hours ago

How are you not a murder in your role play here? By doing nothing everyone dies, that blood is ALSO on your hands for inaction.

[-] basmati@lemmus.org 1 points 7 hours ago

I'm not the one murdering them, quite literally. Just like in real life, there is no mystical unstoppable force of nature in play. It's another person, like you. Their choices aren't your choices.

To put it another way, if you sold a kid a bike and he later crashes and dies despite the bike having no faults, are you responsible? Most would correctly identify that you are not responsible in that scenario, as the kid is responsible for what they did with the bike.

[-] Scirocco@lemm.ee 2 points 7 hours ago

Fucking ridiculous.

A vote for anyone OTHER than Harris directly results in MORE Gazan suffering.

Trump will not restrain Israel. On the contrary, he will encourage them to 'end it' and achieve "peace" by ACTUALLY genociding all remaining Palestine resistance.

[-] sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world 1 points 13 minutes ago* (last edited 13 minutes ago)

restrain Israel

Are you really so deluded to beleive all of Bidens play acting about how he was seeking peace all this time? He used 0% of his levers to make peace happen and 100% of his levers to encourage Israels murder spree.

[-] basmati@lemmus.org 2 points 7 hours ago

There already has been no restraint from Biden. Genocide is genocide, and Harris supports genocide.

I'm not voting for genocide, there is no moral argument to do so.

[-] 2ugly2live@lemmy.world 14 points 15 hours ago

That's not at all what I said, and I think you know that. Wanting to help someone is not the same as wanting to kill someone else. My vote doesn't save Gaza, because there is unfortunately no option, but my vote could still help someone. Not voting, or throwing it away, literally doesn't help anyone.

I hope you find peace with your indecision and your cowardice should the rest of the country not be able to make up for your inactivity. But I'm sure those suffering in Gaza will feel better knowing that someone in Texas is bleeding out in the parking lot. That'll show 'em.

[-] basmati@lemmus.org 6 points 13 hours ago

Have fun in international court.

[-] 2ugly2live@lemmy.world 5 points 13 hours ago
[-] basmati@lemmus.org 7 points 12 hours ago

I'm sure the Nazis that just voted felt the same way.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
148 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7163 readers
515 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS