this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2026
474 points (96.8% liked)

World News

57807 readers
1601 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

that they simply can’t bring themselves to vote for anybody breaking those principles.

But what if by not voting or voting for someone who literally cannot win you are helping someone who makes it clear they will violate the principles you hold dear even more flagrantly? Because that's what happened.

One or the other WILL win. So do you help as much as you can or do you sit in a corner and cry?

I honestly don't feel bad about blaming the people that chose to sit in a corner and cry. Especially because their decision to do so affected a whole lot more than genocide on the other side of the planet.

isn’t a Moral High Ground

For me it isn't a moral high ground. It's making the decision that is BEST for my country AND the people in Gaza and wondering why the people who chose to cry in a corner couldn't do the same.

it seems to me that the competent candidate who trully means to represent their voters would move towards what voters want

Geopolitics isn't some simple thing. Should a candidate run on abandoning an ally when a subset of their voters don't like that country anymore? Especially if they aren't sure that those voters represent enough of the total to cost them the election? And when a lot of their voters still do want to be allies with that country?

Turns out a lot of people can't see the forest for the trees.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Except that's selective bullshit.

We don't really know if the other candidate who also very openly proclaimed her "unwavering support" for Israel would cause Israel to act differently in any way form or shape - you're just assuming a "rosy outcome" had things been different based on at best wishful thinking, possibly even just tribalist loyalty (you think your tribe's leader is better and thus assume she would do things better, even in the face of her very openly supporting Israel just as much as the other candidate which indicates that on this subject such thing cannot be assumed).

Further, parties will put forwards on subsequent elections different candidates if the ones they put forward in previous elections got trashed by voters. This means that refusing to vote actually influences which choices will be available in the next cycle of this Ultimatum Game. I have actually seen this happen in Europe (and in fact in America too: the Republicans changed from conservatives to populist Fascists exactly by following the electorate which turns out to have quite a high percentage or Racists)

Turns out a lot of people when it comes to politics can't (or maybe refuse) to logically analyze things beyond the superficial 1st order effects.