Tell that to the people who’se families would get deported, to the women who lose reproductive rights, to the Ukrainians relying on our support to fight off an imperial aggressor, to the poor elderly and disabled people on social security…
If both parties are the same to you, you’re likely in a position of privilege.
A Trump presidency will be disastrous for Gaza and Lebanon. If you actually have a friend there, and give a single shit about their future, you will vote for Harris.
What the hell are you talking about? Basically the American establishment has been Pro Israel since it's inception. You have a two party system that treats this as the air America breathes effectively speaking you aren't and never were going to be voting about the stance of Israel in this election. If you want that you need to organize and fight like hell and you should but there is nothing anyone can say or do to change the election promises on the table right now. If they could, they already would have.
But that means that you are still voting for something. You are voting for everything else on the table. In your country's case, your chance to actually have elections in another four years.
You have noble concerns but you are letting them blind you to the reality here. This election is important. Republicans have spend decades rigging the game so they need less voters to win and their candidates have started spewing outright Nazi rhetoric. While your veiw is in the distance the wolf is in the grass in front of you. You need to deal with this first if you want your country not to not remove your personal power to influence it further... And I'm not inferring elections, I mean other forms of resistance.
Also, watch as I disappear for four years, and then reappear only to whine about the state of the Democratic Party and how they didn't pander to my progressive ass enough.
This is more direct, but I always saw the original thought experiment as a way to explore that very concept - is inaction a "choice"? IMO, the only rational answer is Yes.
Even without the third rail, "no choice" is very clearly a choice. People just selfishly want to believe they don't share responsibility if they just let things happen "naturally", as of their inaction means they aren't involved. But they are. We all are. Pretending otherwise is foolish.
Yeah, that's why there's all the variations of pushing an extremely large person in front of the train to stop it, and things like that. The lever, obviously it's a choice that you should make. The person, it's still a choice, but at what point is it not an issue you should try to handle.
Voting is a lever. There's other actions that are more akin to pushing someone onto the tracks.
A thought experiment about an individual choice is not even close to applicable to the choice facing a single voter since in that thought experiment not-choosing is the same as making the default choice whilst in a vote not-chosing is leaving the choice to all other voters.
The use of this though experiment as a metaphor for the choice facing individual American voters is downright deceitful and propagandistic, self-servingly so since it's being used to try and boost the chances of one side.
People just selfishly want to believe they don’t share responsibility if they just let things happen “naturally”
Elections are a weak tool for individuals to shape policy at the national level. Observing that your Congresscritters are blind and deaf to your solicitations, that gerrymandering and voter caging renders your vote almost meaningless, and that policy - particularly foreign policy - seems to be shaped by DC mega-donors and lobbyists and think tanks more than any recently elected officials doesn't make you selfish. That's absurd.
And when you look at the miserable job guys like Eric Adams or Henry Cuellar or Richie Torres or Joe Manchin have done during their time in office, you begin to question the wisdom of this "Vote Blue No Matter Who" shit.
Those of us who don’t vote know this. We’re counting on it.
The machine is going to keep on killing people overseas and persecuting minorities. But the system is based on consent. If Harris wins she will claim that the voters have endorsed her and all her policies, even if we held our nose and voted for in spite of those policies. Same with Trump, who tried to take away his supporters’ healthcare and was surprised that there was a backlash since his campaign was claiming the people had spoken and he had a mandate.
A big enough group of third party and non voters shows the flaw of these parties. If they want me to support them, then work with me, pander to me dammit. Expecting my vote when you promise absolutely nothing for my community is a common Democratic trait; look at how little some Democratic politicians did for the black community and their retort was “where else are you gonna go?” They’re doing it again for black Americans and Muslim Americans. Harris won’t even be seen with those voters but she found time to hug Liz Cheney and invite her into the big tent. Harris says Black Lives Matter, she says Trans lives matter, she says Israeli lives matter, she won’t say that Arab lives matter equal to Israeli ones. Why shouldn’t I vote for Stein, who DOES say this? Harris made a choice to back every one of Biden’s failed policies and made a calculated decision that she can win the election without me. Hillary thought the same, and hoped that by throwing Muslim-Americans under the bus she could maybe get a few republicans to change to her side. It failed, and it will fail again.
Edit: ah yes, downvote me all you want but I’ve been speaking to voters in swing states and you’re only lying to yourself if you can’t address this issue for them. Harris can’t even bring herself to say the most basic talking points in support of Palestinian rights. Just say you plan to make a committee to look into how to build a future Palestinian state or that looking back it was wrong for Biden to deny the Palestinian death count, and that would address a lot of concerns, but it’s like she’s intentionally making it harder for Arabs and Muslims to vote for her.
But we DO vote. American Muslims actually have been a reliable Democratic voting bloc since 2004 and since we are a more educated and more wealthy community than the average American we also have been reliable democratic donors. Why the party under Biden has gone out of its way to avoid us is just horrifying.
TLDR If you care about the Palestinians then vote for Harris because her being president is useful for reaching a ceasefire.
The other post about this topic got locked as I was typing a reply. I feel like my comment is relevant to this discussion so I would like to leave it here. I would think this reply, the original comment, and this post are tightly related and are all about the same thing.
One thing I’ve learned this election cycle is how few people have any knowledge of utilitarianism. Genocide is better than genocide+1. Not acting is a moral choice, and frequently a cowardly one.
There is utilitarianism the ethical philosophy and there is utility. Utilitarianism is still a form a moral reasoning as it subjectively elevates the maximization of happiness and well-being. And what constitutes happiness and well-being is not universal. Utility is a method of analysis used to determine how effectively a stated action advances a stated goal. Utility relies on empirical evidence, observation and math, and is goal agnostic.
For many people on Lemmy, their goals are probably roughly summarized by wanting to end Israel's genocide, Palestinian statehood, and general prosperity for the Palestinian people. Harris has stated multiple times that she wants a ceasefire. Trump has stated he thinks Israel needs to be allowed to finish what they started. Trump has also stated he's going to be a dictator on day one and that his followers are never going to have to vote again.
Moral reasoning that is consistent with our goals paralyzes us in this case. Voting for a candidate whose administration oversaw and contributed to a genocide of Palestinians is subjectively immoral. Voting for a candidate who is threatening to complete a genocide of Palestinians is subjectively immoral. Not voting or voting third party when the candidate threatening to complete a genocide of Palestinians is favored by the electoral college in a FPTP system is subjectively immoral. We can subjectively state one of these options to be the lesser evil, but we have no empirical way to measure evil. Thus in theory, there is no way to form a consensus with subjective moral reasoning alone.
For people whose goal is to support the Palestinian people, it is useful to elect Harris, because someone in power who wants a ceasefire is a useful step to actually getting a ceasefire. Where as Trump will allow Israel to complete it's genocide and end our democracy. This would allow Israel to continue it's genocide indefinitely without US citizens ever being able to influence US foreign policy again.
Everyone is prone to moral reasoning. It's intuitive and philosophers have been doing it since ancient times. In this case, there is a consensus around wanting to help the Palestinian people. But any given moral reasoning derived from our goal doesn't necessarily lead us to a course of action that can help them. With a clear goal in mind, utility provides a clear-cut and consistent answer in the form of voting for Harris. edit: typo
For people whose goal is to support the Palestinian people, it is useful to elect Harris, because someone in power who wants a ceasefire
I have seen no material evidence to this effect.
That's not even an argument against Harris per say. But this insistence in a double-super secret pro-Palestinian insider movement insider her staff is delusional. Harris has been outspoken in her defense of "Israel's right to defend itself" time and time and time again. She's backed every effort to send more weapons of war to Netanyahu. She's defended the UN ambassador's decision to vote against sanctions for Israel or an end to hostilities or a future legitimized Palestinian state. She's directly fundraising from AIPAC. At this point, claiming she's a pro-Palestinian candidate is about as rational as claiming Trump is pro-Ukrainian.
In this case, there is a consensus around wanting to help the Palestinian people.
There is a relatively broad national consensus. But we are devoid of a political class reflective of those views. Hell, two of the most outspoken pro-Palestinian advocates in the US House - Jamal Bowman and Cori Bush - got kicked out of their seats in primaries fueled by AIPAC lobbyists. Ilham Omar and Rashida Tlaib nearly lost their jobs in the same manner.
The internal institutions of the Democratic Party are openly in favor of the genocide of Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank, and of the people of Lebanon, and of Iran. If this shit keeps up, we could see the war spread to Jordan and Syria and Iraq as well. Certainly, there's no love lost by Americans for two of those states.
The political consensus is in favor of more killing, an escalation of the scope of the war, and free rein for the Israeli leadership in its mission to subjugate the surrounding territories. With continued US support, its very possible that the Israelis will get exactly what they desire, and we'll be looking at a permanent occupation and continuous holocaust of native peoples on a scale not seen since the genocide of First Nations people in the US.
If you're sitting on the October Surprise please share it. All the evidence we have suggests that Harris wants a ceasefire. While Trump wants a christo-fascist dictatorship and is content to watch Israel complete its genocide. The candidates have distinct positions despite your argument's attempt to conflate the two.
Problem is that public statements are one thing, actions are another. And politicians are known to make great many statements they then contradict by their actions.
She could have publicly renounced the Israeli government instead of defending it.
She could have voted against and started voting initiatives to stop weapon sales and military aid.
She could have went to court to sue the government if Biden was reluctant. The arms sales are illegal by US law, as Israel is known to attack US and international humanotaroan aid
She could have made a point of opposing Netanyahu when he was in congress instead of just not being there.
She could have threatened to step down as VP and followed through with it, once she became candidate.
She could have let Palestinian Americans speak at the DNC convention instead of silencing them, while giving Families of Israeli hostages a place to speak. This was the bare minimum to do, unless clearly picking the side of Zionism.
Then the party establishment had two options:
Either they would have fallen in line, winning the election and accepting that genocide is a no go for Harris.
Or they could have tried to oust her, knowing that it would cost them the election, or create so much push back that she remains as candidate and gets to toss them out.
When Harris took office the 117th Congress's Senate was divided 50–50 between Republicans and Democrats;[193] this meant that she was often called upon to exercise her power to cast tie-breaking votes as president of the Senate. Harris cast her first two tie-breaking votes on February 5. In February and March, Harris's tie-breaking votes were required to pass the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 stimulus package Biden proposed, since no Senate Republicans voted for it.[194][195] On July 20, Harris broke Mike Pence's record for tie-breaking votes in the first year of a vice presidency[196] when she cast the seventh tie-breaking vote in her first six months.[197] She cast 13 tie-breaking votes during her first year in office, the most tie-breaking votes in a single year in U.S. history, surpassing John Adams, who cast 12 in 1790.[197][198] On December 5, 2023, Harris broke the record for the most tie-breaking votes cast by a vice president, casting her 32nd vote, exceeding John C. Calhoun, who cast 31 votes during his nearly eight years in office.[199][200] On November 19, 2021, Harris served as acting president from 10:10 to 11:35 am EST while Biden underwent a colonoscopy.[201] She was the first woman, and the third person overall, to assume the powers and duties of the presidency as acting president of the United States.[202][203][204]
As early as December 2021, Harris was identified as playing a pivotal role in the Biden administration owing to her tie-breaking vote in the evenly divided Senate as well as her being the presumed front-runner in 2024 if Biden did not seek reelection.[205]
So from my understanding she gets the final vote on split issues. She could have leveraged her political power to push these issues to get to vote.
Keep moving those goalposts. Btw, I hope this is literally your job because wow. 4 hour old account, and since jumping on this morning, you have been EVERYWHERE.
At the moment: 40 comments in 4 hours. All about one thing. Nice.
At this point, claiming she’s a pro-Palestinian candidate is about as rational as claiming Trump is pro-Ukrainian.
I just wanna take this a step further and say it's actually less rational.
What Trump is talking about is stopping aid to Ukraine, something which he had previously supported and delivered on.
What Harris isn't talking about is stopping aid to the people killing Palestinians, a position that she has never supported.
Of course I'm not actually saying Trump is actually pro-Ukraine. But if I had to choose one, I'd have an easier time defending that claim than the idea that Kamala is pro-Palestine because at least I'd have something material to work with.
Why would you do this, yet completely ignore what Trump will do in Palestine and what Harris will do in Ukraine? Why is one only important for the one candidate, and the other for the other?
Trump will stop aid to Ukraine, and, as he has already said, will give Netanyahu carte blanche to eliminate the Palestinian people in Gaza.
Harris will continue to aid Ukraine, and has not taken a clear position on Israel/Palestine (because, if she did, she would 100% lose this election), but at the very least, has called for a cease-fire.
Why would you do this, yet completely ignore what Trump will do in Palestine and what Harris will do in Ukraine?
Because that's not relevant to the specific point being discussed. The comparison was Harris on Palestine vs Trump on Israel. Y'all might expect people to constantly pay homage to your candidate to signal that we're on your side or whatever, even when it's not relevant, but I have no interest in doing so.
Why is one only important for the one candidate, and the other for the other?
I'm not voting for either or telling anyone to vote for either so this is nonsense. Trump is obviously not a good candidate and you shouldn't vote for him.
Harris will continue to aid Ukraine, and has not taken a clear position on Israel/Palestine
Absolutely false. Harris has been completely clear that she agrees with Biden's policy of unconditional military aid to Israel.
Edit: I don't give a shit how many down votes I get. I'm correct! Vote blue! And show Palestinian, Arab, and all marginalized demographics you/we are not going to abandon them for self preservation. Show more empathy via doing everything within your capacity to help those around you. There are marginalized people around you. Do more. Be better. We all will be put in the tracks as the individual and we all hope others won't boil down your life to a binary train track meme.
I'm going to be 100% with yall that comment and post this shit.
Before I go on, let me say I voted dem and know they would be better for the world over Trump.
But is that's the standard and argument you expect people to vote for, you are in for a rude awakening... To anyone reading this or agreeing with these outright insulting comments and posts about how you know better need to take a long look in the mirror. Because...
If the only support you are giving to the Palestinian and Arab people is voting Dem and having arguments about lesser evils, then you are not helping the situation.
Yes vote dem. But get off your ass and protest, donate, and support those communities currently harmed be democrats disastrous Gaza and Middle East policy. That's how you sway hearts and minds. These fucking backhanded, self serving, ignorant posts and comments won't stop anything but prove to those communities that the democrats base does not give a shit about anything that doesn't directly effect themselves.
Yall are missing the forest from the trees. Not voting for the light genicidal party nor the full genicidal party isn't some gotcha win for Trump. It's a failure on our part to demand our party doesn't continue using our votes to do harm.
call your senators daily and demand they publicly denounce Israel and the IDF. Donate money to organizations that are saving lives destroyed by our bombs. March with your fellow Palestinian and Arab brothers and sisters. Divest and boycott any business with ties to Isreal and the IDF.
We should be on the tracks trying to destroy them not worrying about who we are sending the train towards. We're better than this. This is just conservative tactics used on a population that we need to vote blue! We are better than this! show some empathy and get involved. I have Palestinian friends and they would spit in your face if you said this kind of shit to their face because it's removing the humanity of the 40k people killed by Isreal via bombs provided by Biden/Harris. If you/we don't care why should they?
If the only support you are giving to the Palestinian and Arab people is voting Dem and having arguments about lesser evils, then you are not helping the situation.
Jesus fucking Christ man, is it really so ridiculous to believe that a week before the election the current concern is voting Dem considering that is the upcoming issue with a hard and irreversible cutoff?
Many of us are involved in politics outside of voting. I write my congresscritters regularly, usually on matters of foreign affairs, for all the good it does. I donate when I can.
But right now a considerable number of people are banging the "DON'T VOTE BOTH SIDES THE SAME" drum when there is a very good chance of a literal fucking fascist being elected, the issue of "These votes are NOT fucking equivalent" is pretty fucking important to bring attention to, and bringing it to attention with asspats and "I understand if you don't want to stop any further genocides happening, but..." is the kind of feckless, useless civility politics bullshite I'm constantly criticizing the Dems for, so you can be sure as shit I'm not cutting anyone else slack for that approach.
Ya exactly. Where the fuck have yall been? I'm not trying to be pedantic or insulting but we that actually cares have been fighting for a long time to actually help! And yes they're are things outside of our control but we should never fucking stop trying to stop the train. You (those that haven't done anything to in your personal life to oppose fucking genicide outside of commenting and posting) are the reason why Palestinian and Arab Americans will stay home on election day. We need their vote! So get involved! Regardless of how the election ends we need to come together as a unified community and not individuals that act as if the Palestinians are already dead regardless of our collective actions! I'm guessing there are enough more marginalized demographics between you (not you specifically) and the next set of binary track decisions. If they (the rich and powerful) can do it to the Palestinian people they'll do it to you. And when they do come for you I pray others don't wait until a week before elections when they start posting train track memes as that's a point that should be made.
Get involved. Show communities that are currently on the chopping block you'll never stop trying to save their lives regardless as how close the train is. Get involved! Voting is the absolute least you can do, but you can do more! This post and comment won't sway a fucking election but us unifying and help those in need as much as possible will!
I'm done. Yall be acting like I'm the one being crazy when I'm saying no one has to be on the tracks of more keyboard warriors actually did something for others. Get involved!
For sure. We should do better so we're not in this predicament.
But unfortunately, we are, and there are people on the tracks. Right now. And we have a decision to make (and "not playing" is one of those choices, and it doesn't absolve you of blame).
Many of us are involved in politics outside of voting. I write my congresscritters regularly, usually on matters of foreign affairs, for all the good it does. I donate when I can.
I hate to be a bad news bear, but calling and writing congress does effectively nothing. When it comes to actual policy (and not empty lip service), politicians only serve donors and lobbyists.
If we want real change then we will need to replace our broken and corrupt two party system with a modern multiparty democracy
I'm voting Democrat to preserve some semblance of democracy in this country, but I have to say I'm quite disappointed in my congress critters. My senator in particular. I've emailed her frequently, including links to articles detailing the crimes against humanity committed by the IDF, and all I get is a form letter response about how "Israel's right to defend itself is so important" and "October 7th was terrible" and maybe a line about how horrible it is that Palestinians are suffering written in a way that either only blames Hamas or uses the most passive voice I have ever seen in writing.
Exactly. And that does not mean our job is done. Please keep writing and advocating. If more people do this we can save lives. Not only if those that we can see. It's about fighting for the best of humanity opposed to the race to the bottom. Vote blue, get involved, fuck the IDF, divest and boycott.
When I have more time during my winter break, I'm going to mail a handwritten letter with some articles printed out, and follow up with a phone call. I'll read the damn article to her if I have to.
Agreed but the chance those tracks will be destroyed before the election is slim.
I applaud your call to activism but in reality much less people will ever commit to fighting for their ideals that way.
Many more people will however are willing to give a token to a “right cause”
Voting D is that token. It doesn't fix shit, especially considering the genocide but it will be a slower decline of human rights then the alternative.
More time to do activism.
There are many others, also on lemmy that are not calling for activism but for a token of not voting. I think the meme is a representation of that particular logic.
Everything you said is correct. I just don't want to see all the surprised Pikachu when their inaction and self-righteousness results in a Trump victory. They'll cry, "why didn't the Palestinian and Arab Americans show up for the democrats?!"
The train hasn't hit yet there are still millions of lives we can save by doing more than just voting. If we're not willing to do everything to save them, why should they do anything to save us? I don't care how close the train is. I'll be trying to destroy the tracks until it hits me and the persons tied to the tracks. That's my point.
These memes boil an unbelievably complex issue to a binary outcome. Marginalized communities are going to be there regardless of the outcome of the elections. Don't wait until the train is about to hit you or something you care about before you decide to start dismantling the tracks. Then see how you feel when someone presumes your inevitable cleansing. I honestly feel like I'm living in Bizarro world or something. Like is what I'm saying beyond our capacity? We are doomed if we won't all step on the tracks to stop the trains.
There is not enough time for a revolution before the election.
Reality is people will have to make a choice D/R or neither. No matter how they chose there will be either a D or R in political power.
If you have a proposition that will actually guarantee a different outcome i am willing to listen..
My personal take is to wait till the second this power game is over and hard dictatorship is avoide. start then. At the very least you will have many more people willing to join. Currently your just hurting the credibility of your own cause.
We have the same admin and reps until January, so even before the election people can start doing what they should have been doing all along and participate in more than just a vote. I'll say it again, this genocide didn't start a few weeks ago (when the "don't vote for genocide" meme started), it didn't start last October, it didn't begin on any other major event that got the media attention for a while, it's been decades, almost a century, of illegality and oppression and killing.
Also a reminder, if you're of one party or another and a different party gets into the seat, they are still your representative. You do not have to wait to get a matching letter to call them and praise or bitch about what they are doing.
what credibility anything will have when harris says that america has voted for her with the policy to continue arming israel to any extent ?
a policy she has repeated multiple times during her campaign without leaving any ambiguity.
what’s stopping her from saying this is the will of the american people and start locking up any protest in name of antisemitism ?
and its not just israel, her policy on fracking and inflation is no better. life for working class has become hell in last four years, corporate greed is out of control and her campaign has been just “trump this trump that, vote me else you will have trump.”
If you have a proposition that will actually guarantee a different outcome i am willing to listen..
only outcome that will bring any iota of change is one in which popular vote clearly suggests we don’t want trump or harris.
if its not possible to happen then stop harassing others with these utterly vile memes. all it does is shows the world what a broken vile society we have become.
if the number that doesn’t want to vote harris or trump is insignificant then why is every left community being brigaded with this kinda trash begging to give our support to a child murdering, pro fracking, prison slavery shill. you guys are no better than the racist bigots supporting trump.
There's a huge difference between a majority and a minority big enough to sway it for idiot weirdo geriatric genocidal trump, with his out loud promise to kill leftists for their political views, but you're not so hot on spotting differences, are you?
that doesn’t matter to them. it would have been bernie running against harris and they will be still still saying vote harris else sanders will destroy the economy. remember 2016 ?
2016? Hmm… wasn’t that the year Bernie asked everyone to support the nominee vs. Trump and one in ten of them did the exact opposite and voted Trump instead?
Between that and 2020, it’s no surprise if no one takes third party or its voters seriously. Don’t blame anyone else for this. You did it to yourselves.
2016 was also the year when dnc rigged the primaries and fcked the country.
yes we got what we deserved for supporting that. since then dnc and morons who keep posting these disgusting memes have made sure to see what dnc is. a corrupt party of leeches who only pretend to care about blm and lgbt while doing genocide.
Uhhhhhh what? Are you being purposely dumb? Of course when I say call your senators, I'm not saying get them on the actual fucking line! Call his office/voice mail and make the comment... And don't just comment one thing comment about all the communities currently being tied up on the tracks. And if you don't want to do that have you donated to charities helping in marginalized communities local or abroad? How about volunteering? How about protesting? Whatever is in your capacity you should be doing it!
If you've always thought people ment literally call your senators personal lines when they say, "call your senators" you probably are a moron. It's that better? No one ever has ment it in the literal sense.
Maybe they haven't and are just pointing it out. Few do, and that's the problem. It's not democracy, it's representative democracy, but it only works like a democracy would if people hold their reps accountable.
So no, the ones suggesting to hold their reps to the fire, now and after the election, probably haven't themselves. But they aren't wrong, and it shouldn't be thrown back in their face but instead embraced as a good idea to start now.
Otherwise nothing changes, because other factors already contact our reps daily and influence them, that's why they vote the way they do.
For a single voter call, that's true. That's why it needs to be in mass numbers, and constant. Make them concerned that if they don't show some change, people will start showing up physically. With pitchforks.
And if they don't still, then go get some pitchforks.
Our community is suffering, and the only solution people are offering are to yell at us and shame us for not finding this situation unlivable. “Your community will keep dying in either administration but could you vote for the pro-trans politician while you’re suffering?”
Mehdi Hasan was the only person who was able to reach out and connect to those voters with his recent video, and he did so with sympathy and understanding. He convinced me to vote and did so without bullying or calling me names.
If the only support you are giving to the Palestinian and Arab people is voting Dem and having arguments about lesser evils, then you are not helping the situation.
I would flip this back on those who suddenly, despite decades of oppression, really care about Palestinians... Show me one thing that any of those people have done the further that goal.
As someone that supported BDS years before oct 7, I don't think it's fair to fault someone for learning new politics. Especially considering how these events demonstrate the utter failure of our media to cover this topic with even an ounce of non-partisanship.
This shit is getting annoying because it's such a fundamental misunderstanding of what the trolley problem tries to tell you. You cannot use the trolley problem to prove that utilitarianism is better. The entire point is to show the difference between deontology and utilitarianism. It's just tiring to watch.
I saw this exact one with someone on the bottom that said "I refuse to participate in a broken system" on r/PeterExplainsTheJoke and NOBODY understood it.
Reposting my comment from the other thread because I was specifically asked to elaborate by @[email protected] but the thread got locked:
:::spoiler Previous comment
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.
:::
Elaboration:
The trolley problem isn't intended to demonstrate that consequentialism is simply correct, as some people seem to think. Rather, it's meant to highlight disagreements between different moral philosophies and present contradictions in our moral intuitions. There are two follow ups to the classic trolley problem: one involves pushing someone off a bridge to stop the trolley, and the other involves a doctor killing a healthy patient in order to harvest their organs to save the lives of five people who need transplants. While a majority of people agree with pulling the lever in the original problem, most people disagree with pushing the man off a bridge, and virtually no one agrees with harvesting organs from a healthy patient. This reveals an apparent contradiction in our moral intuitions. To adopt the principal that it is right to kill one to save five very quickly leads to conclusions that are widely condemned as morally abhorrent, and so a deeper examination is needed. Like most things in philosophy, the trolley problem is meant to raise questions, not answer them.
The deontological answer is to say that consequentialism is simply wrong, because it leads to those sorts of conclusions, but in my view this is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
The reason our moral intuitions scream at us not to push the man off the bridge or harvest organs is that these hypotheticals have unrealistic constraints and foreknowledge. In real life, it's extremely unlikely that a trolley with enough force to run over 5 people would be stopped by one person, and it's also not something we could possibly calculate with any degree of certainty ahead of time. Our physical intuitions get mixed up with our moral intuitions, and it's difficult to actually accept the constraints of the hypothetical. The organ harvesting example is even worse. If the crime was ever revealed to the public, it would cause major damage to the reputation of the entire medical field, which would cause people to avoid potentially lifesaving treatments, and the doctor doing it would lose their license preventing them from saving who knows how many lives. Meanwhile, surgeries carry inherent risks and it is impossible to know with the certainty assumed by the problem that they will be successful, and there's also the possibility that the other patients could miraculously recover. Moreover, the problem of not having enough organs could be addressed on a larger scale through policy without resorting to murder. The problem asks us to assume that every possible alternative is arbitrarily cut off and that we are 100% guaranteed to get away with it - which our brains rebel against, for very good reason. Many people commit crimes feeling certain that they'll get away with it, but then get caught, and immediate, short term solutions often seem appealing, even when they might have very negative long term consequences or when a more cautious, long term approach might be wiser.
It might seem that I'm simply rejecting the validity of those hypotheticals altogether, and to an extent I am, but this analysis reveals something important. People often fail to consider all these different factors that might make a situation not as simple as the original trolley problem, even when they appear to be. That is the danger of "base" consequentialism, of applying the principle of "the ends justify the means" blindly and without due consideration of alternative solutions or of consequences that are not immediately apparent. It is generally very foolish to reduce things to the trolley problem when they are more complicated, and people who reduce the election to a trolley problem are making the exact same kind of error as people who reduce the organ harvesting thought experiment to a trolley problem.
I'll use a hypothetical of my own to further illustrate my point. Suppose you and four other people have been taken hostage, and the hostage taker tells you to kill one of the other hostages, or else he'll kill all of them including you. Is this a trolley problem? It might appear to be, but the reality is that introducing a human actor instead of a purely mechanical process changes everything. What happens if, after you kill a hostage, the gunman says, "Great! From now on, you work for me. You will kill anyone I say to kill. And if you refuse, I'll kill twice as many people. My first order is for you to capture more hostages so I can repeat this and recruit another person just like you." Isn't that obviously indefensible? It would be completely justified for someone to kill you to stop you from doing that. But this is exactly where the ideology of lesser-evilism leads. We cannot allow ourselves to be manipulated like machines into strengthening the very people who put us into the situation in the first place.
I make a point every time I refer to lesser-evilism to call it an ideology, because that's what it is, even though it's adherents do not recognize it as such and simply call it obvious, objective, and rational. It is none of those things. It is important to recognize that this is a specific belief system, and one that frequently leads to absurd and abhorrent conclusions, and that many people reject, including many academics and philosophers.
Was my comment one that attracted reports? If so, why didn't you give an actual reason for removing it? If not, then what's the problem with continuing a part of the conversation that wasn't part of the reason the other thread got locked? This is ridiculous.
How is it fair to keep up OP when it's clearly a continuation of the previous post, but then remove my comment for the same reason?
I feel at this point the majority of content on this sub is not funny or a meme anymore. While I don't agree with Trump at this point Lemmy is becoming "astroturfed" like reddit
Is it? Your complaint is that things you disagree with are appearing more frequently, which they do when people upvote them. Sorry most of us have similar feelings about not voting / voting third party, but the only reason you'd call it astroturfing is if you think it's disingenuous.
You dont like voting third party/not voting, yet you would frame me as your opponent...Nice framing. I haven't said I disagree or agree with it. Not everything is so black and white as you may see it.
All I said was is that I don't like seeing the same posts appear X times on political Memes every day.
And what I think is disengenious is the way you frame it. To frame my statement as such that I support not voting/ voting third party.
Astroturfing is when there is a disingenuous coordinated campaign with a goal in mind. This post is specifically against not voting or voting third party, and you came here to complain about seeing too many things like this post. If your complaint was about seeing too many voting / politics memes in general, I imagine you would recognize what sub this is and what month it is.
I don't believe you would be calling an abundance of voting related memes in a political memes sub this close to an election with no goal in mind "astroturfing" unless you didn't know what the word meant. The obvious implication is that you believe there is a disingenuous coordinated campaign against voting third party or not voting. My point is that there doesn't have to be. It's more likely that many people, myself included, agree with the message of the political meme in the politics sub, and probably more than normal since we are so close to the election.
Every single time I open Lemmy I see at least 5 posts about " voting third party bad" it is not much different from reddit during the 2016/2020 campaign. How it is run now I wouldnt know because I havent browsed reddit since 2023.
Even political Memes are generally lighthearted and people dont fight as much in the comments compared to reddit.
Oh, I agree that it has been astroturfed. Anyone who's been on this site longer than a few months can tell you that.
Except it's not memes like this that are being pushed. In fact, this meme is a direct response to the massive influx of propaganda that this site has seen in the past couple of months.
Sub? Really? You know this isn’t Reddit, right? And it’s called: Political Memes. Not SuperHappyFunnyHaHaMemes. Want funny? maybe go to a “sub” that hosts funny memes. I dunno. Just a thought.
Considering everyone is talking about fascists coming to power and life getting more threatening, it would make some sense for the groups in the photo to look into being armed.
Alternatively: "I'm voting for Diet Fascism and if you don't vote for Diet Fascism too, you're voting for Full-Fat Fascism" but said with the sternest voice the weakest losers can muster.
More "I'm voting for diet fascism and if you don't vote you're complicit in anything that comes, which will either be diet fascism or full-fast fascism. Not voting doesn't prevent either of these, and one is obviously preferably. No action is still a choice you're making."
For this to be correct the"moral high" track should go to before the junction since it's literally a choice of leaving the decision to others.
In this specific case were what's portrayed is the lever in the hands of each individual person amongst over 200 millions voters (rather than, say, the choice in the hands of people like Biden, who pretty much has an individual Genocide/No-Genocide choice), it's not Logical to portray the choice of sticking with one's moral principles as a choice for either side since there are still millions of other people needed for the choice to be made - in fact it's downright deceitful and self-serving propaganda to misportray what's literally a "I refrain from chosing hence leave the choice to the rest" as a being the same as a choice for one of the options.
The whole use of this format were an individual is represented as being alone in making a choice when the actual situation is "one vote amongst hundreds of millions" is downright deceitful and self-serving propaganda.
The essence of the trolley problem is to ask whether choosing not to exercise the agency that you have is a moral choice. The fact that you may not have complete control over the outcome doesn't make the analogy bad in and of itself.
Suppose everyone else except you had already voted and exit polls suggested Trump had won by one vote. Would you vote, then? I don't care what your answer is would be; that is between you and your own conscience. But, is the situation really so different from the real world situation where for all you know your vote might actually count?
You can disagree that the trolley problem comparison is apt, but I think calling it "deceitful and self-serving" is a stretch.
FWIW I am from the UK and I don't care whether you vote or not.
In your specially crafted scenario it is indeed applicable.
However that's not at all how it's being used here. Here it's just another variant of the propaganda used in the last year or so by the members of the Democrat tribe which boils down to "if you don't vote Democrat you're voting Trump", which is a blantant false dichotomy and falacy.
Couple such sleazy salesman style of political propaganda with their active support of a Genocide were tens of thousands of children have already been murderer and, when seen in the broader context of World Politics, the Democrats are almost as low and disgusting as the Republicans.
To add insult to injury, I suspect that it's the continued expectation amongst the Democrat Party leadership that the use of these propaganda techniques will retain enough of the Leftwing vote for them to win no matter what they do, that has allowed Biden during the last year to overtly support a Genocide to the point of doing things like sending Israel the very 2000lb bombs (which the US Military refuses to use because of their massive collateral damage) that they used in bombing Lebanese neighbourhoods: by having been parroting for months shit like this false-choice meme, these people have enabled Israel to be sent the very weapons with massive collateral damage that they used in bombing civilians and have hence been indirectly responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands.
(Had they instead been putting pressure on the Democrat Party, as the Israeli Neue Nazi side did for themselves via AIPAC, things would likely be very different now).
I too am not an American, I just have been involved in politics in two countries and seen it right up close in another two and after having been massivelly exposed to American Political Propaganda here in Lemmy in the last year or so, find it appallingly manipulative and deceitful, from both sides, though far more hypocrite from the Democrat side (Republicans are more users of straightforward lies rather than using more sophisticated methods of deceit such as presenting false choices like this one or cherry picking).
Funnilly enough, my enormous disgust with this kind of sleazy propaganda grew up during the decade I lived in the UK, especially the Leave Referendum period: compared with The Netherlands and Portugal were I lived before that, English politics, which is dominated by Public School types, is insanelly heavy on this kind of sleazy slimmy posh-salesman discourse crafted to mislead without outright lying and especially after my decade living amongst the plain speaking Dutch, I've come to really detest that kind of hypocrisy, especially when, like here, it's deployed to cover those commiting morally unacceptable acts such as activelly supporting the mass murder of human beings.
It was bad enough when such style of politics was used in the UK to screw the lives of millions and its even worse when it's used in America to enable the outright murder of hundreds of thousands of people, over 40% of whom are children.
I can barelly begin to convey my utter disgust with such practices and those who use them to enable what can only be described as evil-doing.
Except, you’re implying that’s not what you’re doing. You want to believe that your vote can accomplish everything you want, as easily snapping your fingers, but that’s not how it works. No positive change in history has happened in a day, but you seem to want to vote as if positive change can happen immediately.
Everybody knows this. We’re just asking people to make the best choice given the circumstance. A protest vote against Harris isn’t going to teach them anything, a loss isn’t going to teach them anything. We’ll be left with a situation worse than we are in now.
Why was the choice set since like a year already? And we met the same hostility and "reasons" 9 months ago. Truth is not enough people care enough to push for change. They just wanted to feel that their lot is not threatened, solidarity be damned. Well this does not work, as history has infamously shown time and time again. Unless people band together they'll be picked off one by one.
The only time I saw resistance was when people were pitching about Joe or harris without saying, hey vote for candidate x y or z in the primary they are better than Joe or Harris.
If all you do is say so, and so is ship I'm not voting for them, then your just being a nuisance.
And when the context is Trump or Harris being elected, saying "I'm not voting for Harris" means by default you are supporting Trump.
If you þink letting Donald Trump back into office is a reasonable answer to democratic leniency on Israeli war crimes after he handed Bibi West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Golan Heights, and is right now actively encouraging Bibi to keep going in mimic of Nixon and Reagan before him, you are eiðer a knowing zionist agent, or an unwitting one, and eiðer way you need to quit bitching, sit ð fuck down, and do your share of solidarity ðis november if you want to keep using my people's bodies as your set dressing for your white people savior shit.
You'd like it better back there, they love unfunny forced running gags, imagine all your updoots! Surely you'll get enough attention there to satiate your histrionics
Really? Because in my experience what ðey really love is soulless killjoys who take as little as a fucking letter to get triggered and condescending because how dare someone not write to cater to my expectation of ð status quo!
I may not be cool for using it, but you're definitely not cool just for hating it. You're just fragile and mad.
I think it is pretty telling that these people who pretend to care so much about Palestinian lives, lash out like this when a real one tells them something they don't want to hear.
Yeah, it's cringey... But if the person really is a Palestinian, it seems like a super convenient way to just disregard everything they have to say, doesn't it? Maybe ignore the stupid letter and look at the content of the comment?
I live in a deep red state. Not a swing state. Not a questionable state. A state where registered red voters outnumber blue voters 2-1.
I'm not saying that this applies to everyone but even if blue had an excellent turnout including me and reds had a bad turnout, it would still be a red win with a ratio 3-2.
I'm not voting not because I don't care, not because I don't think it's the right thing to do, not for some moral high ground, but because it actually doesn't matter. I am disenfranchised, I accept it, I make the best decisions I can knowing that.
I'm sure some will still tell me I'm wrong but I'm going to focus on my own interests and mental health.
If you are in a swing state, please vote. If not for yourself, for me. I'll consider it a favor.
(I have good reasons for living here. If you tell me I should move then why don't you move to a swing state?)
My state was red until it was purple. If all the potential blue voters in your state took the time to vote instead of just assuming it was futile, you might find out that your state could actually be purple too.
Fucking thank you. Some of us are old enough to remember when Texas was "solid red with no chance of ever switching" and yet the past several elections have told a different story.
You are quite dug in on the presidential election, but do keep in mind you are usually also voting for local/county positions on that same ballot, where one vote often makes the difference and has a more immediate impact on your interests
So you don't vote because it doesn't matter - but is it just to save a few minutes that you would rather spend on something else?
If it was me, I would always want to exercise my democratic powers (it might be the last time, hehe), but perhaps I am also not too bothered about wasting my time.
It's still worth voting for those down-ballot items. I'm in a very blue area of a swing state and we currently have some local ballot proposals that are so poorly written they'll get the city mired in lawsuits for years to come.
I like this, talking about your mental health. Whatever that means for many others, it's just about you.
Honestly your mental health will be alot worse off if you're part of the problem. Just vote.
I'm not an American (thank fuck) but I don't see any reason why I'd help red. At all. It's blue all the way since at least Kamala has some sense in her.
Ask yourself, why does everyone care about Palestinians so badly, do you even know any to begin with?
I am al for ending suffering but it seems the focus about what it's really about is lost in the elections...
The liberals claiming to be different from the far-right muppets whilst engaging in the same kind of simpleton take on politics would be hilarious if the results of them having been propaganda muppets for decades weren't so bad for everybody (by moving the center of American politics so far to the Right that it now sits on what is considered Far Right in World political terms).
The only upside of this shit is that by now pretty much nobody outside the US looks to it for references on Politics - even the Far-Right in Europe stays away from lots of American quirks like hyper-religiosity.
Cool, so, inside that trolley are also all the issues listed there who will die if it's derailed, because anyone who thinks that a revolution will be communist led and bloodless hasn't spent more than ten minutes in this fucking country.
Sorry you want a revolution without doing the hard work of actually establishing the popular basis for one.
How does one do that in this metaphor? Vote for one by mail and the other in person? That just lands you in jail and is functionally equivalent to sending the train down the "moral high ground" track.
The 1932 elections in Germany had three candidates: Hitler, Hindenburg, and Thälmann. The social democrats denounced Thälmann as being just as bad as Hitler and supported the "center-right" candidate Hindenburg as a lesser-evil. Hindenburg appointed Hitler as chancellor which enabled him to seize power, become a dictator, and slaughter the left.
If you think the lesson from that is that the communists were being unreasonable for refusing to back Hindenburg, the guy who historically won and brought about the rise of Hitler, then I don't know what to tell you. There was exactly one anti-Hitler candidate in that race.
So the lesson you take from that is that you shouldn’t vote? You are misreading the moment if you think that.
There is no viable third party. And under no circumstances will Harris put Trump in power. He is far more likely to end up in jail than in power if Harris win.
The lesson from nazi germany is that you do not let fascists take power
Doing nothing is implied to go down the middle here, I'm pretty sure, which results in everyone getting run over.
More realistically, Palestine would be laid down on the track before the fork, with the Trump track looping around to run over Palestine a second time.
Meh. Voting dems is doing effectively nothing. People have been voting for them for decades and you still ended up supporting genocide and one step away from fascism. Do literally anything else instead which is not begging politicians or rich people in one way or another.
Meh. Voting dems is doing effectively nothing. People have been voting for them for decades and you still ended up supporting genocide and one step away from fascism.
Oh, okay, so let's just let that last step happen. It's effectively nothing, right?
Do literally anything else instead which is not begging politicians or rich people in one way or another.
You do realize that 'anything else instead' will be harder under a fascist regime, right?
Even if you think this is nothing but buying time, buy it. Hastening the arrival of fascism isn't exactly good praxis.
Oh, okay, so let’s just let that last step happen. It’s effectively nothing, right?
You just voting is not preventing the last step happen is my point.
You do realize that ‘anything else instead’ will be harder under a fascist regime, right?
If people put all the effort you put into thinking and talking about voting to doing direct action, it will probably be better. But most voters will go "oh well, we tried" and let fascists do fascist things which is the exact things that has been happening for the past 50 years, which is why you're at the point of voting for a fascist & genocide or just voting for genocide.
Even if you think this is nothing but buying time, buy it. Hastening the arrival of fascism isn’t exactly good praxis.
Just Buying time is only effective is you actually do something with the time you buy. Do I need to mention you've been "buying time" since Reagan and yet you're still at fascism and genocide? I'm not saying to hasten fascism. I said put all the effort you put into voting into doing direct action, which is the only thing actually stopping fascism. The figurehead above doesn't matter.
You just voting is not preventing the last step happen is my point.
It quite literally is, unless you think there's no difference between who wins in this election, in which case I would prefer you say it and save us all the time.
Preventing something from happening in an immediate sense is still preventing it from happening, even if it doesn't solve the long-term problems leading to it. Patching up a hole in one's gut may not solve the autoimmune disorder that's killing you, but it'll prevent you from dying in a more immediate sense.
If people put all the effort you put into thinking and talking about voting to doing direct action, it will probably be better.
... all the effort we put into thinking and talking about voting?
Most people in this country don't even bother to vote regularly. Those that do often put no more effort into their vote than a day at the polling station based on a few caught glimpses of the political realities of this country.
What level of effort is that going to translate into direct action? You're looking at people entered into a 100-meter sprint, nearly half of whom decided to drop out before even beginning, with many of those who've finished are bitching about how long it was, and saying "If they put that effort into an ultramarathon, THEN we would really be getting somewhere!"
But most voters will go “oh well, we tried” and let fascists do fascist things which is the exact things that has been happening for the past 50 years, which is why you’re at the point of voting for a fascist & genocide or just voting for genocide.
Is it your opinion that we are more fascist now than we were 50 years ago, then? Or 100 years ago?
Just Buying time is only effective is you actually do something with the time you buy.
Buying time give the potential to do something with the time bought. Not buying time doesn't magic into existence extra options; not buying time only reduces your options.
I’m not saying to hasten fascism.
Really? Because I would think that a literal fascist and his cronies being put into executive power might hasten fascism a tiny bit.
I said put all the effort you put into voting into doing direct action, which is the only thing actually stopping fascism. The figurehead above doesn’t matter.
So you do think that there's no difference in who wins the election, and this whole conversation is pointless?
Genuinely curious, because I see you using this narrative a lot. What are you planning to do after the election to end the genocide? You seem to balk at direct action and talk a lot about voting which is fine, but voting takes 5 minutes and we watched Kamala backtrack on all of her progressive policies and muzzled Walz' progressive nature. What are you going to do after the election?
As mentioned, I'm not even whole enough to walk more than a few blocks, and I live self-employed and under the poverty line. All I can do is donate when I can and speak to those close to me. I write my reps, but that's pretty in-line with representative democracy, and I get the feeling that you're looking for non-voting action outside of the norm. I've notably reddened my social circle, but that's all I can claim.
I miss being able to march. But I have neither the physical nor emotional fortitude for that anymore.
You seem to balk at direct action
I don't balk at direct action. I decry the idea that it's a replacement for voting. Direct action is important. Voting in certain elections is, likewise, important. Dedication to direct action does not and should not preclude taking one day out of the year, or less if you live in a state with good mail-in voting laws, for harm reduction, especially when that harm is at an exceptionally bad precipice point. Nor does voting preclude direct action.
Are US troops involved there? Because one candidate clearly says that Biden is not doing enough to help Israel.
Israel currently is led by a similar fascist with criminal record to trump, that once he loses his power he will go to jail. He is using attack on October 7 as an excuse to get rid of Palestine.
And we have seen that no one can really stop Israel. Do you think Biden wouldn't prefer that the conflict would be over (and Israel wouldn't be stirring new shit) and not distract from the war in Ukraine?
It's clear that Netanyahu won't stop what he is doing no matter what and actually wants trump to win as trump promises to help.
It quite literally is, unless you think there’s no difference between who wins in this election, in which case I would prefer you say it and save us all the time.
Ultimately, there's no difference who wins this election. You are still going inexorably to move towards fascism and genocide, as we've seen in all the past elections.
Preventing something from happening in an immediate sense is still preventing it from happening,
You're not. You're just adding stab wounds instead of bullet wounds and say "well, better than bullets at least."
… all the effort we put into thinking and talking about voting?
If all the dedicated people doing all the voting prep work did the direct action work, it would have improved people's lives and you would have converted them to direct action as well. but since voting doesn't do shit, nobody gives a shit.
Is it your opinion that we are more fascist now than we were 50 years ago, then? Or 100 years ago?
More. In fact, I think you're one step before civil war and I doubt you will avoid it through any amount of voting.
Buying time give the potential to do something with the time bought. Not buying time doesn’t magic into existence extra options; not buying time only reduces your options.
You won't though, because your praxis is conditioning people to think voting is the only thing that matters, since everyone is putting so much effort all the time convincing people how important it is to vote for the next thing that's just around the corner. You don't buy time. You just hasten fascism by not doing direct action and by putting all your energy into talking about how important voting is and begging politicians with letters.
So you do think that there’s no difference in who wins the election, and this whole conversation is pointless?
Ultimately there's no difference for your society no. You'll still move towards fascism and continue the genocide.
Ultimately, there’s no difference who wins this election.
Oh, cool, I'll remember this if Trump wins and we're in line for the camps together. "Ha ha, this is just like it was in the good old days, under those damn Democrats, right?"
You’re not. You’re just adding stab wounds instead of bullet wounds and say “well, better than bullets at least.”
Okay. Let's go with that analogy. With the choice of a stab wound or a .50 cal through the chest, which is preferable? Which will give you more time to deal with the problem?
More. In fact, I think you’re one step before civil war and I doubt you will avoid it through any amount of voting.
You think... the US... is more fascist now than it was in the 70s. Or the 50s. Or the 30s. Or the 10s.
This is privilege. It is plain what another trump term will mean for many minorities and at risk folks, including Muslims. Suggesting voting Dem is "effectively nothing" is privilege when the comparison is widely known.
I wasn't trying to make the US election into a philosophical problem, because Trump winning will have serious global consequences, regardless of how immoral voting for Democrats might be.
voting or not voting for trump is going to have important global consequences given that it doesn't matter who the figurehead is when half your country is fascist. If not Trump, then someone else. and no amount of voting democrats is going to change this.
The philosophical problem is more a game theory one. You are participating in a limited outcome, constrained system. Depending on where you live, non participation results in a trump win.
The philosophical problem assumes only one action available to you with clear results. Neither of these is true here.
More to the point. The philosophical problem is about the agony of inaction. You don't need to bastardize the meme to add a third "inaction" route. That's just inane.
Again that dodges the conclusion that one of the two WILL win. Understanding your district and the "cost" or teinal result of inaction still funnels all choices and interests to one of two results.
All outcomes are foreseen. The one that will occur is not. Abstaining and 3rd party voting has known impacts that lead to one or the other possible outcome.
That's untrue. We know each candidates general stance from past time in executive office. It's easy to look up trump's past actions and current words on the middle east, and to the meme, we know his stance on minority communities, abortion, citizen rights, etc. as well.
No love for Harris, but her platform is far saner and even ethical than trump's.
Last time I went to vote, it was for the 2016 election. I spent 3 hours in line, only for them to close the voting library with around 200 people ahead of me still waiting to vote. Our state does not allow early voting.
Tell that to the ~200 people that didn't get to vote that evening. Hell, everyone was standing in the rain waiting in line to vote when they closed, and everyone waiting outside was like what the fuck?!
How do you even manage to vote in a state that doesn't allow early voting? Last time I tried to vote, I spent around 3 hours in line, only for them to close with about 200 people ahead of me still waiting to vote.
Wow, won't even allow voting for those in line? You don't even have to tell me which party controls that state. Bet there's no mail-in or absentee ballot availability either, or very strict rules to limit it.
I've been watching early voting numbers in my county, they even have a "current wait" tracker online, and it's been regular 30 mins to even a few hours wait each day. Now imagine the same number of people all in one day. It's madness to force that on people.
My only solution to you is try to use midterm voting for the local stuff. Or bend the rules and claim you'll be out of state and need an absentee ballot. I think they legally can't prevent that, even thought they'd love to.
It's not that simple to just pack up and move elsewhere at the drop of a hat. They might have friends and family there that they don't want to leave behind, and moving can be very expensive and exhausting particularly if you have a lot of stuff. It's especially hard to move right now with rent and housing prices through the roof.
Just telling people to move doesn't help, because if they had the means and wanted to, they probably already would have.
With all due respect, I know you're right in many cases, but fuck that. If you're street smart, you can get the hell out and figure it out from there. All you need is two grand, a positive personality, and appreciation for those who help, you can last a long time in this world
Not having Jury Duty is like, the least important thing when it comes to voting. Usually they pay you for your time, and hell, sometimes you show up and they either strike you from the pool or don't have cases left for the day, and send you home soon after you arrive. I had jury duty earlier this year, got taken out of the jury pool, and I still got paid for my time.
They must have updated the system in my area. On Thursday, I got an email telling me I didn’t have to show up for jury duty that was supposed to start Monday.
Any of you don't want to be on jury duty just saying you don't wish to do it can be enough to be removed fron the jury pool (alternatively seeming way too interested could also be a tactic)
Last time I went to vote, it was for the 2016 election. And you better bet your ass I wasn't gonna vote for the orange man then either.
I spent 3 hours in line, only for them to close the voting library with around 200 people ahead of me still waiting to vote. Biggest waste of my time ever.
It's reprehensible that they closed the polling place.
But three hours is a small, tiny price to pay to participate in democracy and potentially help tons of minorites and at risk folks avoid another trump term.
I acknowledged the issue with them closing the polls. But if you had gotten in, the time would not have been a waste. You dont know you won't get in this time.
Add disabled people to this list, homeless people, just so many of us who would suffer under a facist.
Pretty sure the homeless one should be on both ends of the track
In a sense very true.
However Trump’s proposals would make being homeless even worse, while Harris’s would make it somewhat better (although way less than is needed).
So I still stand by my categorisation.
Nuance is unacceptable. There is only utopia and hell.
Some people really think like that ahaha.
“Both parties are the same”…
Tell that to the people who’se families would get deported, to the women who lose reproductive rights, to the Ukrainians relying on our support to fight off an imperial aggressor, to the poor elderly and disabled people on social security…
If both parties are the same to you, you’re likely in a position of privilege.
Tell that to my friend in lebannon whose parents are getting bombed with white phosphorus. How privileged /s
Literally this but without the /s
A Trump presidency will be disastrous for Gaza and Lebanon. If you actually have a friend there, and give a single shit about their future, you will vote for Harris.
What the hell are you talking about? Basically the American establishment has been Pro Israel since it's inception. You have a two party system that treats this as the air America breathes effectively speaking you aren't and never were going to be voting about the stance of Israel in this election. If you want that you need to organize and fight like hell and you should but there is nothing anyone can say or do to change the election promises on the table right now. If they could, they already would have.
But that means that you are still voting for something. You are voting for everything else on the table. In your country's case, your chance to actually have elections in another four years.
You have noble concerns but you are letting them blind you to the reality here. This election is important. Republicans have spend decades rigging the game so they need less voters to win and their candidates have started spewing outright Nazi rhetoric. While your veiw is in the distance the wolf is in the grass in front of you. You need to deal with this first if you want your country not to not remove your personal power to influence it further... And I'm not inferring elections, I mean other forms of resistance.
Also, watch as I disappear for four years, and then reappear only to whine about the state of the Democratic Party and how they didn't pander to my progressive ass enough.
Then disappear again for another four years...
I'd actually say not really, democratic proposals for urbanism would significantly help ð unhoused even on ð more NIMBY end of ð spectrum.
homeless people need a flag
Pretty sure they need houses
But for comical effect I found this https://www.walmart.com/ip/Homelessness-Awareness-Month-USA-Flag-T-Shirt/5628172427
Walmart selling that is just rich
Actually, they need a home. Common misconception. Flags are indeed not homes.
In the early days of the IWW, many of the Wobblies were hobos. So maybe you could say that the IWW cat is a homeless icon.
My favorite one is missing! Political Dissidents AND party members deemed a nuisance!
There isn't enough space in the frame for the flags that represent all of the people who get stomped on by fascism.
It's one national government, Micheal! What could it cost to derail, 10 lives?
There’s always rubles in the borscht stand.
"Elon Musk isn't just some no good immigrant, he's my no good immigrant"
This is more direct, but I always saw the original thought experiment as a way to explore that very concept - is inaction a "choice"? IMO, the only rational answer is Yes.
Even without the third rail, "no choice" is very clearly a choice. People just selfishly want to believe they don't share responsibility if they just let things happen "naturally", as of their inaction means they aren't involved. But they are. We all are. Pretending otherwise is foolish.
Yeah, that's why there's all the variations of pushing an extremely large person in front of the train to stop it, and things like that. The lever, obviously it's a choice that you should make. The person, it's still a choice, but at what point is it not an issue you should try to handle.
Voting is a lever. There's other actions that are more akin to pushing someone onto the tracks.
As Jeff Bridges said in the newer TRON movie
But he was wrong, as his inaction would have caused him to lose
There are over 200 million voters.
A thought experiment about an individual choice is not even close to applicable to the choice facing a single voter since in that thought experiment not-choosing is the same as making the default choice whilst in a vote not-chosing is leaving the choice to all other voters.
The use of this though experiment as a metaphor for the choice facing individual American voters is downright deceitful and propagandistic, self-servingly so since it's being used to try and boost the chances of one side.
Elections are a weak tool for individuals to shape policy at the national level. Observing that your Congresscritters are blind and deaf to your solicitations, that gerrymandering and voter caging renders your vote almost meaningless, and that policy - particularly foreign policy - seems to be shaped by DC mega-donors and lobbyists and think tanks more than any recently elected officials doesn't make you selfish. That's absurd.
And when you look at the miserable job guys like Eric Adams or Henry Cuellar or Richie Torres or Joe Manchin have done during their time in office, you begin to question the wisdom of this "Vote Blue No Matter Who" shit.
Those of us who don’t vote know this. We’re counting on it.
The machine is going to keep on killing people overseas and persecuting minorities. But the system is based on consent. If Harris wins she will claim that the voters have endorsed her and all her policies, even if we held our nose and voted for in spite of those policies. Same with Trump, who tried to take away his supporters’ healthcare and was surprised that there was a backlash since his campaign was claiming the people had spoken and he had a mandate.
A big enough group of third party and non voters shows the flaw of these parties. If they want me to support them, then work with me, pander to me dammit. Expecting my vote when you promise absolutely nothing for my community is a common Democratic trait; look at how little some Democratic politicians did for the black community and their retort was “where else are you gonna go?” They’re doing it again for black Americans and Muslim Americans. Harris won’t even be seen with those voters but she found time to hug Liz Cheney and invite her into the big tent. Harris says Black Lives Matter, she says Trans lives matter, she says Israeli lives matter, she won’t say that Arab lives matter equal to Israeli ones. Why shouldn’t I vote for Stein, who DOES say this? Harris made a choice to back every one of Biden’s failed policies and made a calculated decision that she can win the election without me. Hillary thought the same, and hoped that by throwing Muslim-Americans under the bus she could maybe get a few republicans to change to her side. It failed, and it will fail again.
Edit: ah yes, downvote me all you want but I’ve been speaking to voters in swing states and you’re only lying to yourself if you can’t address this issue for them. Harris can’t even bring herself to say the most basic talking points in support of Palestinian rights. Just say you plan to make a committee to look into how to build a future Palestinian state or that looking back it was wrong for Biden to deny the Palestinian death count, and that would address a lot of concerns, but it’s like she’s intentionally making it harder for Arabs and Muslims to vote for her.
No politician is going to bend their policies for the population that doesn't vote.
For so long, boomers had the majority of sway with politicians because they had the highest percentage of voter participation.
But we DO vote. American Muslims actually have been a reliable Democratic voting bloc since 2004 and since we are a more educated and more wealthy community than the average American we also have been reliable democratic donors. Why the party under Biden has gone out of its way to avoid us is just horrifying.
Probably because ð actual reason you broke rank is because you want to exclude queer folks.
You þink we don't see your guy endorsing Trump is ð same one who went around his city taking down rainbow flags and cancelling pride marches?
Ð ummah always saw Palestine as a pawn to anchor ðeir antisemitism wið, and now ðey're using us again to anchor ðeir queer-phobia.
Nonsense. The majority of American Muslims support LGBT. So does every elected Muslim in Congress. Take your bigotry elsewhere.
Ð original was actually intended as a joke to mock ð schools of þought represented by boþ options presented.
Basically saying ðat boþ lead to horrifying outcomes when unchecked by oðer ways of þinking.
This cursed text is like writing in oWo speak. You sound just as dumb as them.
TLDR If you care about the Palestinians then vote for Harris because her being president is useful for reaching a ceasefire.
The other post about this topic got locked as I was typing a reply. I feel like my comment is relevant to this discussion so I would like to leave it here. I would think this reply, the original comment, and this post are tightly related and are all about the same thing.
There is utilitarianism the ethical philosophy and there is utility. Utilitarianism is still a form a moral reasoning as it subjectively elevates the maximization of happiness and well-being. And what constitutes happiness and well-being is not universal. Utility is a method of analysis used to determine how effectively a stated action advances a stated goal. Utility relies on empirical evidence, observation and math, and is goal agnostic.
For many people on Lemmy, their goals are probably roughly summarized by wanting to end Israel's genocide, Palestinian statehood, and general prosperity for the Palestinian people. Harris has stated multiple times that she wants a ceasefire. Trump has stated he thinks Israel needs to be allowed to finish what they started. Trump has also stated he's going to be a dictator on day one and that his followers are never going to have to vote again.
Moral reasoning that is consistent with our goals paralyzes us in this case. Voting for a candidate whose administration oversaw and contributed to a genocide of Palestinians is subjectively immoral. Voting for a candidate who is threatening to complete a genocide of Palestinians is subjectively immoral. Not voting or voting third party when the candidate threatening to complete a genocide of Palestinians is favored by the electoral college in a FPTP system is subjectively immoral. We can subjectively state one of these options to be the lesser evil, but we have no empirical way to measure evil. Thus in theory, there is no way to form a consensus with subjective moral reasoning alone.
For people whose goal is to support the Palestinian people, it is useful to elect Harris, because someone in power who wants a ceasefire is a useful step to actually getting a ceasefire. Where as Trump will allow Israel to complete it's genocide and end our democracy. This would allow Israel to continue it's genocide indefinitely without US citizens ever being able to influence US foreign policy again.
Everyone is prone to moral reasoning. It's intuitive and philosophers have been doing it since ancient times. In this case, there is a consensus around wanting to help the Palestinian people. But any given moral reasoning derived from our goal doesn't necessarily lead us to a course of action that can help them. With a clear goal in mind, utility provides a clear-cut and consistent answer in the form of voting for Harris. edit: typo
I have seen no material evidence to this effect.
That's not even an argument against Harris per say. But this insistence in a double-super secret pro-Palestinian insider movement insider her staff is delusional. Harris has been outspoken in her defense of "Israel's right to defend itself" time and time and time again. She's backed every effort to send more weapons of war to Netanyahu. She's defended the UN ambassador's decision to vote against sanctions for Israel or an end to hostilities or a future legitimized Palestinian state. She's directly fundraising from AIPAC. At this point, claiming she's a pro-Palestinian candidate is about as rational as claiming Trump is pro-Ukrainian.
There is a relatively broad national consensus. But we are devoid of a political class reflective of those views. Hell, two of the most outspoken pro-Palestinian advocates in the US House - Jamal Bowman and Cori Bush - got kicked out of their seats in primaries fueled by AIPAC lobbyists. Ilham Omar and Rashida Tlaib nearly lost their jobs in the same manner.
The internal institutions of the Democratic Party are openly in favor of the genocide of Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank, and of the people of Lebanon, and of Iran. If this shit keeps up, we could see the war spread to Jordan and Syria and Iraq as well. Certainly, there's no love lost by Americans for two of those states.
The political consensus is in favor of more killing, an escalation of the scope of the war, and free rein for the Israeli leadership in its mission to subjugate the surrounding territories. With continued US support, its very possible that the Israelis will get exactly what they desire, and we'll be looking at a permanent occupation and continuous holocaust of native peoples on a scale not seen since the genocide of First Nations people in the US.
Here's a user's comment that listed three sources:
https://lemmy.world/comment/13069715
If you're sitting on the October Surprise please share it. All the evidence we have suggests that Harris wants a ceasefire. While Trump wants a christo-fascist dictatorship and is content to watch Israel complete its genocide. The candidates have distinct positions despite your argument's attempt to conflate the two.
There you go bringing facts and rationality into a bOTh sIDes debate. Bold move.
Hey look more "fact and rationality":
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-says-it-has-secured-87-billion-us-aid-package-2024-09-26/
But sure, she's "calling for a ceasefire". Are you really that guillible or just bad faithed?
I wonder what you would see in your search results if you searched for Harris call for ceasefire.
Less than 87 billion words.
Very much so. Most of the links in mine were about Kamala Harris calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Hey you want some facts and rationality?
https://www.amnestyusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/4.29.2024-NSM-20-AIUSA-submission-re-Israel.pdf
Harris should be in jail.
ROFL! Harris should be in jail?
For what exactly? I’d LOVE to see this. Please. If you would, explain in detail.
So, tell everyone that you don't know what the VP does without saying it.
Did you mean to respond to someone else with this?
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1091
https://www.amnestyusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/4.29.2024-NSM-20-AIUSA-submission-re-Israel.pdf
https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-us-military-spending-8e6e5033f7a1334bf6e35f86e7040e14
Sooo… Harris is president? I don’t think you understand how any of this works.
Please explain how the Vice President is to blame for this.
Problem is that public statements are one thing, actions are another. And politicians are known to make great many statements they then contradict by their actions.
What actions would you have a vice president take? What exactly do you think she has the power to do right now?
Then the party establishment had two options:
From just your second line I can see that you have no idea what powers the vice president has.
Where and when was she supposed to vote against or for those things?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris
So from my understanding she gets the final vote on split issues. She could have leveraged her political power to push these issues to get to vote.
So she called for a ceasefire back in March? and then in July? And then in September?
That doesn't sounds very effective does it?
Keep moving those goalposts. Btw, I hope this is literally your job because wow. 4 hour old account, and since jumping on this morning, you have been EVERYWHERE.
At the moment: 40 comments in 4 hours. All about one thing. Nice.
He just does this until an account gets banned. All his usernames are some form of "fuckamericans". Edgy 12 year old.
I just wanna take this a step further and say it's actually less rational.
What Trump is talking about is stopping aid to Ukraine, something which he had previously supported and delivered on.
What Harris isn't talking about is stopping aid to the people killing Palestinians, a position that she has never supported.
Of course I'm not actually saying Trump is actually pro-Ukraine. But if I had to choose one, I'd have an easier time defending that claim than the idea that Kamala is pro-Palestine because at least I'd have something material to work with.
Why would you do this, yet completely ignore what Trump will do in Palestine and what Harris will do in Ukraine? Why is one only important for the one candidate, and the other for the other?
Trump will stop aid to Ukraine, and, as he has already said, will give Netanyahu carte blanche to eliminate the Palestinian people in Gaza.
Harris will continue to aid Ukraine, and has not taken a clear position on Israel/Palestine (because, if she did, she would 100% lose this election), but at the very least, has called for a cease-fire.
Get out of here with this dishonest bullshit.
Nothing I said was remotely dishonest.
Because that's not relevant to the specific point being discussed. The comparison was Harris on Palestine vs Trump on Israel. Y'all might expect people to constantly pay homage to your candidate to signal that we're on your side or whatever, even when it's not relevant, but I have no interest in doing so.
I'm not voting for either or telling anyone to vote for either so this is nonsense. Trump is obviously not a good candidate and you shouldn't vote for him.
Absolutely false. Harris has been completely clear that she agrees with Biden's policy of unconditional military aid to Israel.
Edit: I don't give a shit how many down votes I get. I'm correct! Vote blue! And show Palestinian, Arab, and all marginalized demographics you/we are not going to abandon them for self preservation. Show more empathy via doing everything within your capacity to help those around you. There are marginalized people around you. Do more. Be better. We all will be put in the tracks as the individual and we all hope others won't boil down your life to a binary train track meme.
I'm going to be 100% with yall that comment and post this shit.
Before I go on, let me say I voted dem and know they would be better for the world over Trump.
But is that's the standard and argument you expect people to vote for, you are in for a rude awakening... To anyone reading this or agreeing with these outright insulting comments and posts about how you know better need to take a long look in the mirror. Because...
If the only support you are giving to the Palestinian and Arab people is voting Dem and having arguments about lesser evils, then you are not helping the situation.
Yes vote dem. But get off your ass and protest, donate, and support those communities currently harmed be democrats disastrous Gaza and Middle East policy. That's how you sway hearts and minds. These fucking backhanded, self serving, ignorant posts and comments won't stop anything but prove to those communities that the democrats base does not give a shit about anything that doesn't directly effect themselves.
Yall are missing the forest from the trees. Not voting for the light genicidal party nor the full genicidal party isn't some gotcha win for Trump. It's a failure on our part to demand our party doesn't continue using our votes to do harm.
call your senators daily and demand they publicly denounce Israel and the IDF. Donate money to organizations that are saving lives destroyed by our bombs. March with your fellow Palestinian and Arab brothers and sisters. Divest and boycott any business with ties to Isreal and the IDF.
We should be on the tracks trying to destroy them not worrying about who we are sending the train towards. We're better than this. This is just conservative tactics used on a population that we need to vote blue! We are better than this! show some empathy and get involved. I have Palestinian friends and they would spit in your face if you said this kind of shit to their face because it's removing the humanity of the 40k people killed by Isreal via bombs provided by Biden/Harris. If you/we don't care why should they?
Jesus fucking Christ man, is it really so ridiculous to believe that a week before the election the current concern is voting Dem considering that is the upcoming issue with a hard and irreversible cutoff?
Many of us are involved in politics outside of voting. I write my congresscritters regularly, usually on matters of foreign affairs, for all the good it does. I donate when I can.
But right now a considerable number of people are banging the "DON'T VOTE BOTH SIDES THE SAME" drum when there is a very good chance of a literal fucking fascist being elected, the issue of "These votes are NOT fucking equivalent" is pretty fucking important to bring attention to, and bringing it to attention with asspats and "I understand if you don't want to stop any further genocides happening, but..." is the kind of feckless, useless civility politics bullshite I'm constantly criticizing the Dems for, so you can be sure as shit I'm not cutting anyone else slack for that approach.
Ya exactly. Where the fuck have yall been? I'm not trying to be pedantic or insulting but we that actually cares have been fighting for a long time to actually help! And yes they're are things outside of our control but we should never fucking stop trying to stop the train. You (those that haven't done anything to in your personal life to oppose fucking genicide outside of commenting and posting) are the reason why Palestinian and Arab Americans will stay home on election day. We need their vote! So get involved! Regardless of how the election ends we need to come together as a unified community and not individuals that act as if the Palestinians are already dead regardless of our collective actions! I'm guessing there are enough more marginalized demographics between you (not you specifically) and the next set of binary track decisions. If they (the rich and powerful) can do it to the Palestinian people they'll do it to you. And when they do come for you I pray others don't wait until a week before elections when they start posting train track memes as that's a point that should be made.
Get involved. Show communities that are currently on the chopping block you'll never stop trying to save their lives regardless as how close the train is. Get involved! Voting is the absolute least you can do, but you can do more! This post and comment won't sway a fucking election but us unifying and help those in need as much as possible will!
I'm done. Yall be acting like I'm the one being crazy when I'm saying no one has to be on the tracks of more keyboard warriors actually did something for others. Get involved!
END
For sure. We should do better so we're not in this predicament.
But unfortunately, we are, and there are people on the tracks. Right now. And we have a decision to make (and "not playing" is one of those choices, and it doesn't absolve you of blame).
I hate to be a bad news bear, but calling and writing congress does effectively nothing. When it comes to actual policy (and not empty lip service), politicians only serve donors and lobbyists.
If we want real change then we will need to replace our broken and corrupt two party system with a modern multiparty democracy
Bullshit. They keep tallies of what their constituents have called in for and it does work when enough people pester long enough.
I'm voting Democrat to preserve some semblance of democracy in this country, but I have to say I'm quite disappointed in my congress critters. My senator in particular. I've emailed her frequently, including links to articles detailing the crimes against humanity committed by the IDF, and all I get is a form letter response about how "Israel's right to defend itself is so important" and "October 7th was terrible" and maybe a line about how horrible it is that Palestinians are suffering written in a way that either only blames Hamas or uses the most passive voice I have ever seen in writing.
Exactly. And that does not mean our job is done. Please keep writing and advocating. If more people do this we can save lives. Not only if those that we can see. It's about fighting for the best of humanity opposed to the race to the bottom. Vote blue, get involved, fuck the IDF, divest and boycott.
When I have more time during my winter break, I'm going to mail a handwritten letter with some articles printed out, and follow up with a phone call. I'll read the damn article to her if I have to.
Sen. Tammy Baldwin?
Nah. Amy Klobuchar. I'm a Minnesotan.
Damn, that makes two of 'em, then.
Almost all of them. It’s nauseating.
Agreed but the chance those tracks will be destroyed before the election is slim.
I applaud your call to activism but in reality much less people will ever commit to fighting for their ideals that way.
Many more people will however are willing to give a token to a “right cause”
Voting D is that token. It doesn't fix shit, especially considering the genocide but it will be a slower decline of human rights then the alternative.
More time to do activism.
There are many others, also on lemmy that are not calling for activism but for a token of not voting. I think the meme is a representation of that particular logic.
Everything you said is correct. I just don't want to see all the surprised Pikachu when their inaction and self-righteousness results in a Trump victory. They'll cry, "why didn't the Palestinian and Arab Americans show up for the democrats?!"
The train hasn't hit yet there are still millions of lives we can save by doing more than just voting. If we're not willing to do everything to save them, why should they do anything to save us? I don't care how close the train is. I'll be trying to destroy the tracks until it hits me and the persons tied to the tracks. That's my point.
These memes boil an unbelievably complex issue to a binary outcome. Marginalized communities are going to be there regardless of the outcome of the elections. Don't wait until the train is about to hit you or something you care about before you decide to start dismantling the tracks. Then see how you feel when someone presumes your inevitable cleansing. I honestly feel like I'm living in Bizarro world or something. Like is what I'm saying beyond our capacity? We are doomed if we won't all step on the tracks to stop the trains.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1091 https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/u-s-made-weapons-used-by-government-of-israel-in-violation-of-international-law-and-u-s-law/
why didn’t the democrats show up for the Palestinian?
Yes. There will be a binary outcome very very soon.
Trump will win our Harris will win.
Trump will try to make worse things happen. Kamala will try to make better things happen.
It's simple. It's binary. Trump or Harris. There is no third possibility. There are no shades of grey.
by any logic it accelerates the decline. it gives a clear signal that they can get away with anything as long as they can project a worse alternative.
"Enabling mediocrity of non-fascists is a faster decline into fascism than literally electing a fascist"
Even by your own assertions on the matter of what electing Dems does, this is absurd.
Still less absurd than you blaming the few people who don't vote for your cult.
The right is because of the right, firstly. Then secondly, it's because the people in literal power right now did shit with it.
There is not enough time for a revolution before the election.
Reality is people will have to make a choice D/R or neither. No matter how they chose there will be either a D or R in political power.
If you have a proposition that will actually guarantee a different outcome i am willing to listen..
My personal take is to wait till the second this power game is over and hard dictatorship is avoide. start then. At the very least you will have many more people willing to join. Currently your just hurting the credibility of your own cause.
We have the same admin and reps until January, so even before the election people can start doing what they should have been doing all along and participate in more than just a vote. I'll say it again, this genocide didn't start a few weeks ago (when the "don't vote for genocide" meme started), it didn't start last October, it didn't begin on any other major event that got the media attention for a while, it's been decades, almost a century, of illegality and oppression and killing.
Also a reminder, if you're of one party or another and a different party gets into the seat, they are still your representative. You do not have to wait to get a matching letter to call them and praise or bitch about what they are doing.
what credibility anything will have when harris says that america has voted for her with the policy to continue arming israel to any extent ? a policy she has repeated multiple times during her campaign without leaving any ambiguity.
what’s stopping her from saying this is the will of the american people and start locking up any protest in name of antisemitism ?
and its not just israel, her policy on fracking and inflation is no better. life for working class has become hell in last four years, corporate greed is out of control and her campaign has been just “trump this trump that, vote me else you will have trump.”
only outcome that will bring any iota of change is one in which popular vote clearly suggests we don’t want trump or harris.
What planet are you on that you believe that this could happen or that it would make anything better in any way whatsoever?
if its not possible to happen then stop harassing others with these utterly vile memes. all it does is shows the world what a broken vile society we have become.
if the number that doesn’t want to vote harris or trump is insignificant then why is every left community being brigaded with this kinda trash begging to give our support to a child murdering, pro fracking, prison slavery shill. you guys are no better than the racist bigots supporting trump.
BoTh SidEs!
There's a huge difference between a majority and a minority big enough to sway it for idiot weirdo geriatric genocidal trump, with his out loud promise to kill leftists for their political views, but you're not so hot on spotting differences, are you?
What do you mean by “project”? Trump is objectively worse.
that doesn’t matter to them. it would have been bernie running against harris and they will be still still saying vote harris else sanders will destroy the economy. remember 2016 ?
2016? Hmm… wasn’t that the year Bernie asked everyone to support the nominee vs. Trump and one in ten of them did the exact opposite and voted Trump instead?
Between that and 2020, it’s no surprise if no one takes third party or its voters seriously. Don’t blame anyone else for this. You did it to yourselves.
2016 was also the year when dnc rigged the primaries and fcked the country.
yes we got what we deserved for supporting that. since then dnc and morons who keep posting these disgusting memes have made sure to see what dnc is. a corrupt party of leeches who only pretend to care about blm and lgbt while doing genocide.
Honestly, do YOU do that? Daily?
What has been your success rate in getting your senator on the line?
You must be on a first name basis by now.
Uhhhhhh what? Are you being purposely dumb? Of course when I say call your senators, I'm not saying get them on the actual fucking line! Call his office/voice mail and make the comment... And don't just comment one thing comment about all the communities currently being tied up on the tracks. And if you don't want to do that have you donated to charities helping in marginalized communities local or abroad? How about volunteering? How about protesting? Whatever is in your capacity you should be doing it!
Getting real tired of this Trump-supporter-like line of reasoning
If you've always thought people ment literally call your senators personal lines when they say, "call your senators" you probably are a moron. It's that better? No one ever has ment it in the literal sense.
Are you genuinely unaware that the process of calling your reps doesn't go directly to them?
Maybe they haven't and are just pointing it out. Few do, and that's the problem. It's not democracy, it's representative democracy, but it only works like a democracy would if people hold their reps accountable.
So no, the ones suggesting to hold their reps to the fire, now and after the election, probably haven't themselves. But they aren't wrong, and it shouldn't be thrown back in their face but instead embraced as a good idea to start now.
Otherwise nothing changes, because other factors already contact our reps daily and influence them, that's why they vote the way they do.
A problem is that even if you do, you're just talking to some part-time intern they hired to not have to listen to you.
For a single voter call, that's true. That's why it needs to be in mass numbers, and constant. Make them concerned that if they don't show some change, people will start showing up physically. With pitchforks.
And if they don't still, then go get some pitchforks.
THANK YOU!
Our community is suffering, and the only solution people are offering are to yell at us and shame us for not finding this situation unlivable. “Your community will keep dying in either administration but could you vote for the pro-trans politician while you’re suffering?”
Mehdi Hasan was the only person who was able to reach out and connect to those voters with his recent video, and he did so with sympathy and understanding. He convinced me to vote and did so without bullying or calling me names.
I would flip this back on those who suddenly, despite decades of oppression, really care about Palestinians... Show me one thing that any of those people have done the further that goal.
As someone that supported BDS years before oct 7, I don't think it's fair to fault someone for learning new politics. Especially considering how these events demonstrate the utter failure of our media to cover this topic with even an ounce of non-partisanship.
Good meme that angered everyone.
it is a good thing there is no option for political violence on this helpful chart about the distribution of political violence
you wouldn't want anyone to get the wrong ideas about the direction political violence has to flow
This shit is getting annoying because it's such a fundamental misunderstanding of what the trolley problem tries to tell you. You cannot use the trolley problem to prove that utilitarianism is better. The entire point is to show the difference between deontology and utilitarianism. It's just tiring to watch.
I saw this exact one with someone on the bottom that said "I refuse to participate in a broken system" on r/PeterExplainsTheJoke and NOBODY understood it.
Reposting my comment from the other thread because I was specifically asked to elaborate by @[email protected] but the thread got locked:
:::spoiler Previous comment
:::
Elaboration:
The trolley problem isn't intended to demonstrate that consequentialism is simply correct, as some people seem to think. Rather, it's meant to highlight disagreements between different moral philosophies and present contradictions in our moral intuitions. There are two follow ups to the classic trolley problem: one involves pushing someone off a bridge to stop the trolley, and the other involves a doctor killing a healthy patient in order to harvest their organs to save the lives of five people who need transplants. While a majority of people agree with pulling the lever in the original problem, most people disagree with pushing the man off a bridge, and virtually no one agrees with harvesting organs from a healthy patient. This reveals an apparent contradiction in our moral intuitions. To adopt the principal that it is right to kill one to save five very quickly leads to conclusions that are widely condemned as morally abhorrent, and so a deeper examination is needed. Like most things in philosophy, the trolley problem is meant to raise questions, not answer them.
The deontological answer is to say that consequentialism is simply wrong, because it leads to those sorts of conclusions, but in my view this is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
The reason our moral intuitions scream at us not to push the man off the bridge or harvest organs is that these hypotheticals have unrealistic constraints and foreknowledge. In real life, it's extremely unlikely that a trolley with enough force to run over 5 people would be stopped by one person, and it's also not something we could possibly calculate with any degree of certainty ahead of time. Our physical intuitions get mixed up with our moral intuitions, and it's difficult to actually accept the constraints of the hypothetical. The organ harvesting example is even worse. If the crime was ever revealed to the public, it would cause major damage to the reputation of the entire medical field, which would cause people to avoid potentially lifesaving treatments, and the doctor doing it would lose their license preventing them from saving who knows how many lives. Meanwhile, surgeries carry inherent risks and it is impossible to know with the certainty assumed by the problem that they will be successful, and there's also the possibility that the other patients could miraculously recover. Moreover, the problem of not having enough organs could be addressed on a larger scale through policy without resorting to murder. The problem asks us to assume that every possible alternative is arbitrarily cut off and that we are 100% guaranteed to get away with it - which our brains rebel against, for very good reason. Many people commit crimes feeling certain that they'll get away with it, but then get caught, and immediate, short term solutions often seem appealing, even when they might have very negative long term consequences or when a more cautious, long term approach might be wiser.
It might seem that I'm simply rejecting the validity of those hypotheticals altogether, and to an extent I am, but this analysis reveals something important. People often fail to consider all these different factors that might make a situation not as simple as the original trolley problem, even when they appear to be. That is the danger of "base" consequentialism, of applying the principle of "the ends justify the means" blindly and without due consideration of alternative solutions or of consequences that are not immediately apparent. It is generally very foolish to reduce things to the trolley problem when they are more complicated, and people who reduce the election to a trolley problem are making the exact same kind of error as people who reduce the organ harvesting thought experiment to a trolley problem.
I'll use a hypothetical of my own to further illustrate my point. Suppose you and four other people have been taken hostage, and the hostage taker tells you to kill one of the other hostages, or else he'll kill all of them including you. Is this a trolley problem? It might appear to be, but the reality is that introducing a human actor instead of a purely mechanical process changes everything. What happens if, after you kill a hostage, the gunman says, "Great! From now on, you work for me. You will kill anyone I say to kill. And if you refuse, I'll kill twice as many people. My first order is for you to capture more hostages so I can repeat this and recruit another person just like you." Isn't that obviously indefensible? It would be completely justified for someone to kill you to stop you from doing that. But this is exactly where the ideology of lesser-evilism leads. We cannot allow ourselves to be manipulated like machines into strengthening the very people who put us into the situation in the first place.
I make a point every time I refer to lesser-evilism to call it an ideology, because that's what it is, even though it's adherents do not recognize it as such and simply call it obvious, objective, and rational. It is none of those things. It is important to recognize that this is a specific belief system, and one that frequently leads to absurd and abhorrent conclusions, and that many people reject, including many academics and philosophers.
"Rehashing a discussion from a locked post?" Seriously?? Then remove OP's whole post! @[email protected] I want an explanation.
I locked the post due to a ton of reports on comments. That's not happened here.
Was my comment one that attracted reports? If so, why didn't you give an actual reason for removing it? If not, then what's the problem with continuing a part of the conversation that wasn't part of the reason the other thread got locked? This is ridiculous.
How is it fair to keep up OP when it's clearly a continuation of the previous post, but then remove my comment for the same reason?
I'm on Mobile right now. I restored the comment, as it broke no rules.
Thank you.
Sorry to bother again, but it still shows removed on my end from .ml, but shows up if I go to .world, do you know if there's a way to fix that?
Sadly, just time. Federation isn't always instant
It should be giving the choice to a Nazi.
I feel at this point the majority of content on this sub is not funny or a meme anymore. While I don't agree with Trump at this point Lemmy is becoming "astroturfed" like reddit
This is, objectively, a political meme. Humor is not requisite.
This happens every election cycle the closer election day comes. Is it really any surprise political advocacy is higher during political season?
And what makes this "astroturfed"?
"Things I disagree with are being upvoted so it must be a coordinated campaign"
That is so disengenious and you know it...
Is it? Your complaint is that things you disagree with are appearing more frequently, which they do when people upvote them. Sorry most of us have similar feelings about not voting / voting third party, but the only reason you'd call it astroturfing is if you think it's disingenuous.
You dont like voting third party/not voting, yet you would frame me as your opponent...Nice framing. I haven't said I disagree or agree with it. Not everything is so black and white as you may see it.
All I said was is that I don't like seeing the same posts appear X times on political Memes every day.
And what I think is disengenious is the way you frame it. To frame my statement as such that I support not voting/ voting third party.
Astroturfing is when there is a disingenuous coordinated campaign with a goal in mind. This post is specifically against not voting or voting third party, and you came here to complain about seeing too many things like this post. If your complaint was about seeing too many voting / politics memes in general, I imagine you would recognize what sub this is and what month it is.
I don't believe you would be calling an abundance of voting related memes in a political memes sub this close to an election with no goal in mind "astroturfing" unless you didn't know what the word meant. The obvious implication is that you believe there is a disingenuous coordinated campaign against voting third party or not voting. My point is that there doesn't have to be. It's more likely that many people, myself included, agree with the message of the political meme in the politics sub, and probably more than normal since we are so close to the election.
Every single time I open Lemmy I see at least 5 posts about " voting third party bad" it is not much different from reddit during the 2016/2020 campaign. How it is run now I wouldnt know because I havent browsed reddit since 2023.
Even political Memes are generally lighthearted and people dont fight as much in the comments compared to reddit.
These are just facts though. Until idiots stop voting 3rd party and spoiling elections for fascists, this pattern will continue.
You would be better off convincing the ignorant to stop engaging in the Spoiler Effect.
Then the memes shall stop. Everyone wins.
A better solution would be for the US to implement some kind to voting system where third party voting does matter. Like lots of the world has.
100% agree. The only way to that is electing Dems and sending the GOP the way of the Whigs.
Yep. The thing I worry about is, even if the dems pull of a win that gives them the power to do this, would they actually do it? I doubt it, somehow.
American elections bring out the worst in everyone everywhere.
No shit, my friends in lebannon getting bombed and some idiots first worldist privileged yank are drawing memes with palestinians tied to a track.
Oh, I agree that it has been astroturfed. Anyone who's been on this site longer than a few months can tell you that.
Except it's not memes like this that are being pushed. In fact, this meme is a direct response to the massive influx of propaganda that this site has seen in the past couple of months.
Sub? Really? You know this isn’t Reddit, right? And it’s called: Political Memes. Not SuperHappyFunnyHaHaMemes. Want funny? maybe go to a “sub” that hosts funny memes. I dunno. Just a thought.
This picture misses that the choice also kills the switcher.
I just want a candidate that supports both universal healthcare and the 2nd amendment.
Quick, somebody get this guy on the ballot!
Considering everyone is talking about fascists coming to power and life getting more threatening, it would make some sense for the groups in the photo to look into being armed.
Alternatively: "I'm voting for Diet Fascism and if you don't vote for Diet Fascism too, you're voting for Full-Fat Fascism" but said with the sternest voice the weakest losers can muster.
More "I'm voting for diet fascism and if you don't vote you're complicit in anything that comes, which will either be diet fascism or full-fast fascism. Not voting doesn't prevent either of these, and one is obviously preferably. No action is still a choice you're making."
Preferable for you.
For this to be correct the"moral high" track should go to before the junction since it's literally a choice of leaving the decision to others.
In this specific case were what's portrayed is the lever in the hands of each individual person amongst over 200 millions voters (rather than, say, the choice in the hands of people like Biden, who pretty much has an individual Genocide/No-Genocide choice), it's not Logical to portray the choice of sticking with one's moral principles as a choice for either side since there are still millions of other people needed for the choice to be made - in fact it's downright deceitful and self-serving propaganda to misportray what's literally a "I refrain from chosing hence leave the choice to the rest" as a being the same as a choice for one of the options.
The whole use of this format were an individual is represented as being alone in making a choice when the actual situation is "one vote amongst hundreds of millions" is downright deceitful and self-serving propaganda.
And the Gold Medal for Mental Gymnastics goes to...
... whomever keeps misportraying a person casting a single vote amongst 200 million as them individually making the final decision.
The essence of the trolley problem is to ask whether choosing not to exercise the agency that you have is a moral choice. The fact that you may not have complete control over the outcome doesn't make the analogy bad in and of itself.
Suppose everyone else except you had already voted and exit polls suggested Trump had won by one vote. Would you vote, then? I don't care what your answer is would be; that is between you and your own conscience. But, is the situation really so different from the real world situation where for all you know your vote might actually count?
You can disagree that the trolley problem comparison is apt, but I think calling it "deceitful and self-serving" is a stretch.
FWIW I am from the UK and I don't care whether you vote or not.
In your specially crafted scenario it is indeed applicable.
However that's not at all how it's being used here. Here it's just another variant of the propaganda used in the last year or so by the members of the Democrat tribe which boils down to "if you don't vote Democrat you're voting Trump", which is a blantant false dichotomy and falacy.
Couple such sleazy salesman style of political propaganda with their active support of a Genocide were tens of thousands of children have already been murderer and, when seen in the broader context of World Politics, the Democrats are almost as low and disgusting as the Republicans.
To add insult to injury, I suspect that it's the continued expectation amongst the Democrat Party leadership that the use of these propaganda techniques will retain enough of the Leftwing vote for them to win no matter what they do, that has allowed Biden during the last year to overtly support a Genocide to the point of doing things like sending Israel the very 2000lb bombs (which the US Military refuses to use because of their massive collateral damage) that they used in bombing Lebanese neighbourhoods: by having been parroting for months shit like this false-choice meme, these people have enabled Israel to be sent the very weapons with massive collateral damage that they used in bombing civilians and have hence been indirectly responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands.
(Had they instead been putting pressure on the Democrat Party, as the Israeli Neue Nazi side did for themselves via AIPAC, things would likely be very different now).
I too am not an American, I just have been involved in politics in two countries and seen it right up close in another two and after having been massivelly exposed to American Political Propaganda here in Lemmy in the last year or so, find it appallingly manipulative and deceitful, from both sides, though far more hypocrite from the Democrat side (Republicans are more users of straightforward lies rather than using more sophisticated methods of deceit such as presenting false choices like this one or cherry picking).
Funnilly enough, my enormous disgust with this kind of sleazy propaganda grew up during the decade I lived in the UK, especially the Leave Referendum period: compared with The Netherlands and Portugal were I lived before that, English politics, which is dominated by Public School types, is insanelly heavy on this kind of sleazy slimmy posh-salesman discourse crafted to mislead without outright lying and especially after my decade living amongst the plain speaking Dutch, I've come to really detest that kind of hypocrisy, especially when, like here, it's deployed to cover those commiting morally unacceptable acts such as activelly supporting the mass murder of human beings.
It was bad enough when such style of politics was used in the UK to screw the lives of millions and its even worse when it's used in America to enable the outright murder of hundreds of thousands of people, over 40% of whom are children.
I can barelly begin to convey my utter disgust with such practices and those who use them to enable what can only be described as evil-doing.
You're 100% right
Just nuke the planet cuz humans suck regardless
Magneto was right!
Third party represent.
So that's the middle path, a useless/selfish moral high ground that will ultimately see more people dead/suffering.
People on the internet who claim to hold democracy in the highest regard and gatekeeping voting if ideology differs.
Name a more iconic duo.
It's hardly a democracy, it's really just voting to not shit the bed.
You guys should ask the UN to establish a protectorate since both side are genociders.
Except, you’re implying that’s not what you’re doing. You want to believe that your vote can accomplish everything you want, as easily snapping your fingers, but that’s not how it works. No positive change in history has happened in a day, but you seem to want to vote as if positive change can happen immediately.
Good luck dismantling the system with Hitler+ in power. You'd have an easier time dismantling it while 'regular' Hitler is in power.
Hey look, a reason to vote.
Everybody knows this. We’re just asking people to make the best choice given the circumstance. A protest vote against Harris isn’t going to teach them anything, a loss isn’t going to teach them anything. We’ll be left with a situation worse than we are in now.
Well you should do that pissing match during the candidate selection then. Don't drag it out to after the choices are set.
Why was the choice set since like a year already? And we met the same hostility and "reasons" 9 months ago. Truth is not enough people care enough to push for change. They just wanted to feel that their lot is not threatened, solidarity be damned. Well this does not work, as history has infamously shown time and time again. Unless people band together they'll be picked off one by one.
The only time I saw resistance was when people were pitching about Joe or harris without saying, hey vote for candidate x y or z in the primary they are better than Joe or Harris.
If all you do is say so, and so is ship I'm not voting for them, then your just being a nuisance.
And when the context is Trump or Harris being elected, saying "I'm not voting for Harris" means by default you are supporting Trump.
Well what exactly are you doing to dismantle the system? Posting on Lemmy? How's that working out? Not great?
Now get off your lazy, entitled, privileged ass and vote against Hitler+.
I don't remember Hitler lite defending sexual assault victims. Or fighting for justice
By your logic, you're more genocidal because at least she's publicly asking for a ceasefire. You're just ignoring those requests and shouting over her
Imagine fighting for people's rights your entire life only to have nut jobs pretend like you're killing children.
How many people have you helped?
Amrikani Falesteini here,
If you þink letting Donald Trump back into office is a reasonable answer to democratic leniency on Israeli war crimes after he handed Bibi West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Golan Heights, and is right now actively encouraging Bibi to keep going in mimic of Nixon and Reagan before him, you are eiðer a knowing zionist agent, or an unwitting one, and eiðer way you need to quit bitching, sit ð fuck down, and do your share of solidarity ðis november if you want to keep using my people's bodies as your set dressing for your white people savior shit.
Go back to reddit
Fuck no, you go back.
You'd like it better back there, they love unfunny forced running gags, imagine all your updoots! Surely you'll get enough attention there to satiate your histrionics
Really? Because in my experience what ðey really love is soulless killjoys who take as little as a fucking letter to get triggered and condescending because how dare someone not write to cater to my expectation of ð status quo!
I may not be cool for using it, but you're definitely not cool just for hating it. You're just fragile and mad.
You are welcome here.
I think it is pretty telling that these people who pretend to care so much about Palestinian lives, lash out like this when a real one tells them something they don't want to hear.
That's not why people want them to leave, it's because they have a cringey gimmick that makes Lemmy harder to read
Yeah, it's cringey... But if the person really is a Palestinian, it seems like a super convenient way to just disregard everything they have to say, doesn't it? Maybe ignore the stupid letter and look at the content of the comment?
I'm not disregarding anything they have to say, my messages are entirely within the capacity of their cringey gimmick.
It's kinda hard when it's being purposefully obfuscated, isn't it?
look, alright, you did your bit, it's passed the point of unique and quirky and gotten into just plain annoying.
If you're annoyed by a letter, you deserve to be annoyed.
i -- no.
everyone in this goddamn thread is annoyed by you deliberately making your comments harder to read because you think it makes you seem quirky.
if you keep it up people will just block you.
How do you feel living in a safe first world country that is selling bombs to blow your brothers? Just asking
I live in a deep red state. Not a swing state. Not a questionable state. A state where registered red voters outnumber blue voters 2-1.
I'm not saying that this applies to everyone but even if blue had an excellent turnout including me and reds had a bad turnout, it would still be a red win with a ratio 3-2.
I'm not voting not because I don't care, not because I don't think it's the right thing to do, not for some moral high ground, but because it actually doesn't matter. I am disenfranchised, I accept it, I make the best decisions I can knowing that.
I'm sure some will still tell me I'm wrong but I'm going to focus on my own interests and mental health.
If you are in a swing state, please vote. If not for yourself, for me. I'll consider it a favor.
(I have good reasons for living here. If you tell me I should move then why don't you move to a swing state?)
My state was red until it was purple. If all the potential blue voters in your state took the time to vote instead of just assuming it was futile, you might find out that your state could actually be purple too.
Fucking thank you. Some of us are old enough to remember when Texas was "solid red with no chance of ever switching" and yet the past several elections have told a different story.
https://apnews.com/projects/election-results-2024/south-dakota/?r=0
https://sdsos.gov/elections-voting/upcoming-elections/voter-registration-totals/voter-registration-comparison-table.aspx
If you add all registered Dems and independents it still doesn't reach the number of Republicans that actually voted for Trump.
Just go vote dude. It takes you five minutes, you probably already know who you'd vote for regardless. You literally have nothing to lose
You are quite dug in on the presidential election, but do keep in mind you are usually also voting for local/county positions on that same ballot, where one vote often makes the difference and has a more immediate impact on your interests
Just a short question:
So you don't vote because it doesn't matter - but is it just to save a few minutes that you would rather spend on something else?
If it was me, I would always want to exercise my democratic powers (it might be the last time, hehe), but perhaps I am also not too bothered about wasting my time.
It's still worth voting for those down-ballot items. I'm in a very blue area of a swing state and we currently have some local ballot proposals that are so poorly written they'll get the city mired in lawsuits for years to come.
I like this, talking about your mental health. Whatever that means for many others, it's just about you.
Honestly your mental health will be alot worse off if you're part of the problem. Just vote.
I'm not an American (thank fuck) but I don't see any reason why I'd help red. At all. It's blue all the way since at least Kamala has some sense in her.
Ask yourself, why does everyone care about Palestinians so badly, do you even know any to begin with?
I am al for ending suffering but it seems the focus about what it's really about is lost in the elections...
https://apnews.com/projects/election-results-2024/south-dakota/?r=0
https://sdsos.gov/elections-voting/upcoming-elections/voter-registration-totals/voter-registration-comparison-table.aspx
If you add all registered Dems and independents it still doesn't reach the number of Republicans that actually voted for Trump.
So again, not part of the problem, Disenfranchised.
Why should people speak out when they come for communists, when they're not communists?
Why should people speak out when they come for socialists, when they're not socialists?
Why should people speak out when they come for trade unionists, when they're not trade unionists?
Why should people speak out when they come for Jews, when they're not Jewish?
Why should people speak out when they come for Palestinians, when they're not Palestinian?
Because if you don't speak out for them, there will be no one left to speak out for you.
How can you help anyone when you carry the burden of the world on your shoulders.
Do what is right.
Good luck!
So, the colorful left is just killing everyone and everything but with extra steps and the illusion of doing the right thing. Sounds about right.
So the bland right is just drawing memes and basing their entire world-view off them.sounds about right
The liberals claiming to be different from the far-right muppets whilst engaging in the same kind of simpleton take on politics would be hilarious if the results of them having been propaganda muppets for decades weren't so bad for everybody (by moving the center of American politics so far to the Right that it now sits on what is considered Far Right in World political terms).
The only upside of this shit is that by now pretty much nobody outside the US looks to it for references on Politics - even the Far-Right in Europe stays away from lots of American quirks like hyper-religiosity.
keep voting, keep paying, this time will be different
from Wikipedia
Cool, so, inside that trolley are also all the issues listed there who will die if it's derailed, because anyone who thinks that a revolution will be communist led and bloodless hasn't spent more than ten minutes in this fucking country.
Sorry you want a revolution without doing the hard work of actually establishing the popular basis for one.
How does one do that in this metaphor? Vote for one by mail and the other in person? That just lands you in jail and is functionally equivalent to sending the train down the "moral high ground" track.
popular vote goes to Harris but Trump gets inaugurated because the supreme court ruled otherwise?
I'm not loyal to the Democrats or to America and I still vote
What else are they going to do? Change their policies to suit their voter base?
Suck it up, Palestine, you'd be fucked anyway
“After Trump, Our Turn”. It worked with Hitler, surely it will work again, eh comrade?
Lesser evilism is what gave us Hitler.
Lololol nope what gave us Hitler was his opposition failing to unite to keep him out of power
The 1932 elections in Germany had three candidates: Hitler, Hindenburg, and Thälmann. The social democrats denounced Thälmann as being just as bad as Hitler and supported the "center-right" candidate Hindenburg as a lesser-evil. Hindenburg appointed Hitler as chancellor which enabled him to seize power, become a dictator, and slaughter the left.
If you think the lesson from that is that the communists were being unreasonable for refusing to back Hindenburg, the guy who historically won and brought about the rise of Hitler, then I don't know what to tell you. There was exactly one anti-Hitler candidate in that race.
So the lesson you take from that is that you shouldn’t vote? You are misreading the moment if you think that.
There is no viable third party. And under no circumstances will Harris put Trump in power. He is far more likely to end up in jail than in power if Harris win.
The lesson from nazi germany is that you do not let fascists take power
Ehm.. no? At very least jail mr Trump
You have to be a troll?
Kinda the only way to support my family, sir
This different then the argument, "suck it up Americans your fucked either way."?
In one image, show us you don't understand the philosophical problem.
When people are insisting that "Doing nothing is choosing NEITHER track!", sometimes a less subtle approach is needed.
The meme is implying complicity with genocide is unavoidable and I hope one day you will see the consequences of your action.
Doing nothing is implied to go down the middle here, I'm pretty sure, which results in everyone getting run over.
More realistically, Palestine would be laid down on the track before the fork, with the Trump track looping around to run over Palestine a second time.
omg, it's like I never looked at the image - yeah, ignore my comment, jfc
Doing nothing results in taking the Moral High track, which loops around to the top track.
yeah, I'm an idiot 😭
Nah. Usually this problem has two tracks. I can see why you overlooked it.
that's sweet of you, lol
No shame in making mistakes! Happens to the best of us.
aww, thank you!! ❤️
Trolley prolems are not real life. Go outside.
Meh. Voting dems is doing effectively nothing. People have been voting for them for decades and you still ended up supporting genocide and one step away from fascism. Do literally anything else instead which is not begging politicians or rich people in one way or another.
Oh, okay, so let's just let that last step happen. It's effectively nothing, right?
You do realize that 'anything else instead' will be harder under a fascist regime, right?
Even if you think this is nothing but buying time, buy it. Hastening the arrival of fascism isn't exactly good praxis.
You just voting is not preventing the last step happen is my point.
If people put all the effort you put into thinking and talking about voting to doing direct action, it will probably be better. But most voters will go "oh well, we tried" and let fascists do fascist things which is the exact things that has been happening for the past 50 years, which is why you're at the point of voting for a fascist & genocide or just voting for genocide.
Just Buying time is only effective is you actually do something with the time you buy. Do I need to mention you've been "buying time" since Reagan and yet you're still at fascism and genocide? I'm not saying to hasten fascism. I said put all the effort you put into voting into doing direct action, which is the only thing actually stopping fascism. The figurehead above doesn't matter.
It quite literally is, unless you think there's no difference between who wins in this election, in which case I would prefer you say it and save us all the time.
Preventing something from happening in an immediate sense is still preventing it from happening, even if it doesn't solve the long-term problems leading to it. Patching up a hole in one's gut may not solve the autoimmune disorder that's killing you, but it'll prevent you from dying in a more immediate sense.
... all the effort we put into thinking and talking about voting?
Most people in this country don't even bother to vote regularly. Those that do often put no more effort into their vote than a day at the polling station based on a few caught glimpses of the political realities of this country.
What level of effort is that going to translate into direct action? You're looking at people entered into a 100-meter sprint, nearly half of whom decided to drop out before even beginning, with many of those who've finished are bitching about how long it was, and saying "If they put that effort into an ultramarathon, THEN we would really be getting somewhere!"
Is it your opinion that we are more fascist now than we were 50 years ago, then? Or 100 years ago?
Buying time give the potential to do something with the time bought. Not buying time doesn't magic into existence extra options; not buying time only reduces your options.
Really? Because I would think that a literal fascist and his cronies being put into executive power might hasten fascism a tiny bit.
So you do think that there's no difference in who wins the election, and this whole conversation is pointless?
Genuinely curious, because I see you using this narrative a lot. What are you planning to do after the election to end the genocide? You seem to balk at direct action and talk a lot about voting which is fine, but voting takes 5 minutes and we watched Kamala backtrack on all of her progressive policies and muzzled Walz' progressive nature. What are you going to do after the election?
As mentioned, I'm not even whole enough to walk more than a few blocks, and I live self-employed and under the poverty line. All I can do is donate when I can and speak to those close to me. I write my reps, but that's pretty in-line with representative democracy, and I get the feeling that you're looking for non-voting action outside of the norm. I've notably reddened my social circle, but that's all I can claim.
I miss being able to march. But I have neither the physical nor emotional fortitude for that anymore.
I don't balk at direct action. I decry the idea that it's a replacement for voting. Direct action is important. Voting in certain elections is, likewise, important. Dedication to direct action does not and should not preclude taking one day out of the year, or less if you live in a state with good mail-in voting laws, for harm reduction, especially when that harm is at an exceptionally bad precipice point. Nor does voting preclude direct action.
Are US troops involved there? Because one candidate clearly says that Biden is not doing enough to help Israel.
Israel currently is led by a similar fascist with criminal record to trump, that once he loses his power he will go to jail. He is using attack on October 7 as an excuse to get rid of Palestine.
And we have seen that no one can really stop Israel. Do you think Biden wouldn't prefer that the conflict would be over (and Israel wouldn't be stirring new shit) and not distract from the war in Ukraine?
It's clear that Netanyahu won't stop what he is doing no matter what and actually wants trump to win as trump promises to help.
Ultimately, there's no difference who wins this election. You are still going inexorably to move towards fascism and genocide, as we've seen in all the past elections.
You're not. You're just adding stab wounds instead of bullet wounds and say "well, better than bullets at least."
If all the dedicated people doing all the voting prep work did the direct action work, it would have improved people's lives and you would have converted them to direct action as well. but since voting doesn't do shit, nobody gives a shit.
More. In fact, I think you're one step before civil war and I doubt you will avoid it through any amount of voting.
You won't though, because your praxis is conditioning people to think voting is the only thing that matters, since everyone is putting so much effort all the time convincing people how important it is to vote for the next thing that's just around the corner. You don't buy time. You just hasten fascism by not doing direct action and by putting all your energy into talking about how important voting is and begging politicians with letters.
Ultimately there's no difference for your society no. You'll still move towards fascism and continue the genocide.
Oh, cool, I'll remember this if Trump wins and we're in line for the camps together. "Ha ha, this is just like it was in the good old days, under those damn Democrats, right?"
Okay. Let's go with that analogy. With the choice of a stab wound or a .50 cal through the chest, which is preferable? Which will give you more time to deal with the problem?
You think... the US... is more fascist now than it was in the 70s. Or the 50s. Or the 30s. Or the 10s.
Check, please!
This is privilege. It is plain what another trump term will mean for many minorities and at risk folks, including Muslims. Suggesting voting Dem is "effectively nothing" is privilege when the comparison is widely known.
It's privilege to think that the minorities being exterminated right now are an acceptable loss.
Nobody said it was an acceptable loss. You've missed the point.
People have been voting for the GOP for decades too you goofball
Why are computer bros so socially illiterate for God's sake
I wasn't trying to make the US election into a philosophical problem, because Trump winning will have serious global consequences, regardless of how immoral voting for Democrats might be.
voting or not voting for trump is going to have important global consequences given that it doesn't matter who the figurehead is when half your country is fascist. If not Trump, then someone else. and no amount of voting democrats is going to change this.
The philosophical problem is more a game theory one. You are participating in a limited outcome, constrained system. Depending on where you live, non participation results in a trump win.
The philosophical problem assumes only one action available to you with clear results. Neither of these is true here.
More to the point. The philosophical problem is about the agony of inaction. You don't need to bastardize the meme to add a third "inaction" route. That's just inane.
Again that dodges the conclusion that one of the two WILL win. Understanding your district and the "cost" or teinal result of inaction still funnels all choices and interests to one of two results.
One of these winning, doesn't mean the results are foreseen. Which is unlike the meme where the results are foreseen.
All outcomes are foreseen. The one that will occur is not. Abstaining and 3rd party voting has known impacts that lead to one or the other possible outcome.
"Foreseen" is there will be one track chosen, not what is lying on that track.
That's untrue. We know each candidates general stance from past time in executive office. It's easy to look up trump's past actions and current words on the middle east, and to the meme, we know his stance on minority communities, abortion, citizen rights, etc. as well.
No love for Harris, but her platform is far saner and even ethical than trump's.
The 'philosophical problem' with tankies trading people's lives to teach a politician a lesson?
Wow what a great sense of morality you have.
db0 is referring to the fact that the trolley problem is about inaction.
The philosophical problem of the trolley problem itself, but don't let me stop you from moralizing in advance.
The meme hasn't been about the philosophical problem in a long time.
I'll be honest, I'm not planning to vote. Though if I did, it would most certainly not be for the orange man.
I don't care to sign up for potential jury duty some random day.
I do not care to vote for anyone with religious motivations.
I don't care to vote for anyone with their head stuck in other countries' business.
I'd much rather vote for someone that actually has our country first and foremost.
Honestly I feel ashamed to even be born in a country that hocks weapons like candy.
I could go on, but when I feel the election is like choosing between the lesser of two evils, then I choose not to vote for either evil.
Too bad there isn't a clear better candidate in the lead.
Not voting means you're fine if either of the two major candidates win. Inaction is also a choice with consequences that can have decades of impact.
Last time I went to vote, it was for the 2016 election. I spent 3 hours in line, only for them to close the voting library with around 200 people ahead of me still waiting to vote. Our state does not allow early voting.
That's very strange that they closed the polls with people waiting. My understanding was you had a right to vote if you were in line.
Because it's a made up story bro.
I hope at least someone is paying you to lie lol
8pm is 8pm, no exceptions.
Sad that I (and a few friends) got there and stood in line from around 5pm on, only to still be like 200 people back in line when they closed.
Cool story, too bad it's inaccurate. In every state in the USA, if you are waiting in line when polls close you have the right to remain in line and cast your vote, regardless of how long it takes.
If you were told to go home because the polls were closed and they weren't accepting further voters, then you were lied to.
Tell that to the ~200 people that didn't get to vote that evening. Hell, everyone was standing in the rain waiting in line to vote when they closed, and everyone waiting outside was like what the fuck?!
This is not legal; you have a right to vote. Call those numbers if you have an issue and don't leave the line.
We don't all have to be activists, but one day of the year we can spend a little extra time ensuring we remain a democracy.
What about your local stuff? You can vote and just not pick a President choice. Although #1 still applies, I guess.
How do you even manage to vote in a state that doesn't allow early voting? Last time I tried to vote, I spent around 3 hours in line, only for them to close with about 200 people ahead of me still waiting to vote.
Wow, won't even allow voting for those in line? You don't even have to tell me which party controls that state. Bet there's no mail-in or absentee ballot availability either, or very strict rules to limit it.
I've been watching early voting numbers in my county, they even have a "current wait" tracker online, and it's been regular 30 mins to even a few hours wait each day. Now imagine the same number of people all in one day. It's madness to force that on people.
My only solution to you is try to use midterm voting for the local stuff. Or bend the rules and claim you'll be out of state and need an absentee ballot. I think they legally can't prevent that, even thought they'd love to.
Mississippi. Doesn't even register on the early voting states list..
https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/early-in-person-voting
My condolences. I don't take red states as a "us or them" but more of a failing of the country to prevent any place to fall to that level.
I'm not exactly impressed with this state either ☹️
Easy solution; move out of Mississippi. I did it and never looked back
It's not that simple to just pack up and move elsewhere at the drop of a hat. They might have friends and family there that they don't want to leave behind, and moving can be very expensive and exhausting particularly if you have a lot of stuff. It's especially hard to move right now with rent and housing prices through the roof.
Just telling people to move doesn't help, because if they had the means and wanted to, they probably already would have.
With all due respect, I know you're right in many cases, but fuck that. If you're street smart, you can get the hell out and figure it out from there. All you need is two grand, a positive personality, and appreciation for those who help, you can last a long time in this world
Not having Jury Duty is like, the least important thing when it comes to voting. Usually they pay you for your time, and hell, sometimes you show up and they either strike you from the pool or don't have cases left for the day, and send you home soon after you arrive. I had jury duty earlier this year, got taken out of the jury pool, and I still got paid for my time.
He said he was voting in 2016, so he is in jury duty list already and this argument is pointless.
They must have updated the system in my area. On Thursday, I got an email telling me I didn’t have to show up for jury duty that was supposed to start Monday.
Where I'm at you have to call a number every evening to see if you need to show up in the morning.
Yeah, that’s what I was expecting, too. I’ve had to do that before.
Any of you don't want to be on jury duty just saying you don't wish to do it can be enough to be removed fron the jury pool (alternatively seeming way too interested could also be a tactic)
They pay you. Not very much though. If you're living paycheck to paycheck it's a financial hit.
Ah the bridge option. Nice job "not choosing"
Last time I went to vote, it was for the 2016 election. And you better bet your ass I wasn't gonna vote for the orange man then either.
I spent 3 hours in line, only for them to close the voting library with around 200 people ahead of me still waiting to vote. Biggest waste of my time ever.
And no, our state does not allow early voting.
It's reprehensible that they closed the polling place.
But three hours is a small, tiny price to pay to participate in democracy and potentially help tons of minorites and at risk folks avoid another trump term.
With around 200 people ahead of me? It would have taken way more than 3 hours to even have a chance to get in the door.
I acknowledged the issue with them closing the polls. But if you had gotten in, the time would not have been a waste. You dont know you won't get in this time.
I'm a live-in caretaker for an elderly man that has an out of state doctor's appointment on the 5th, I won't even be in the state that day.
My hands are tied any which way you look at it.
That's completely different than the situation discussed above.ajd totally understandable.
You couldn't apply for an absentee ballot? Even in Mississippi you have an ironclad reason that you cannot be present on election day.
Which state? https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/early-in-person-voting
Mississippi. Doesn't even register on their list.
Oof, that's too bad.