Mehdi’s Memo on the results of our new poll on Gaza and Iran

  • If people threated to kill all your family if you didn’t kill one of them yourself, killing any of your family members doesn’t prove you ACTUALLY care about your family. Not everyone subscribes to outcome-based utilitarianism. If you do, cool for you. But there’s plenty of competing ethical frameworks people have and plenty of people don’t subscribe to any specific frameworks consistently, but still have rules that they believe shouldn’t be viable.

    But, again, do you honestly think trump would be better for Palestine?

    It could go either way, but probably would be worse in the short-term. Trump is such a baby that he could get made over some slight offense (or unwillingness to participate in some form of corruption he demands of them) and decide he doesn’t want to play with Israel anymore and he’s already shown he has no problem withholding approved weapon spending (even if illegal to do so). Not saying its likely, but Biden, is pretty much certain continuation of funding genocide, and possibly an escalation of that involvement when he no longer has to worry about re-election.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Not going to touch that example with a ten foot pole but:

      If your ethics require you to take a pointless moral stand that accomplishes nothing for the people you claim to care about? Cool. Have fun.

      This is not the trolley problem where you are deciding if one person or ten people die. This is a case where that same one person is going to die either way but the other ten can be saved.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        If your ethics require you to take a pointless moral stand that accomplishes nothing for the people you claim to care about?

        It’s only pointless if a few people do it…

        Like literally every social change, including voting.

        If enough people say “I can’t vote for Biden because of his support of Israel” then a rational candidate would appease their voters, at least till after the election.

        If the candidate refuses to do that…

        Whats the point in voting for someone who openly refuses to care what their voting base wants?

        You’re mad at the wrong person here. Be mad at Biden for putting Israel over America, when according to your opinion, Israel wouldn’t have an issue continuing genocide with trump in office.

        Think about Biden’s refusal to listen to voters and that for a minute.

        He cares more about Israel than America.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Okay. What does not voting for Biden and letting trump win do for Palestine?

          is the orange fuckface going to say “Oh wow. I only won because Biden handled Palestine so poorly. Let me go fight for the rights of ‘muslims’”?

          OH! I know. The Democrats will decide they need to do better during the next election as we lose even more supreme court judges and the next election never happens (as per gop plan). But hey, maybe a few Palestinians will be alive in four to infinity years.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      It would not go either way, buddy.

      Donald threatened Iran with nuclear weapons. Donald tried to ban Muslims from the country. Donald wants Israel to finish the job. The Repubs, who usually have oppositional defiant disorder about everything the Dems do, want to arm Israel.

      You can be smug as you like about choosing not to touch the switch on this trolley problem. But please pull your head out of the sand about what will happen.