https://midwest.social/post/18536008
Edit of yesterday's meme with accounted for non-voters
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.
Good meme that angered everyone.
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
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.
It's one national government, Micheal! What could it cost to derail, 10 lives?
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.
True, it's a misapplication of the original thought experiment.
But it also kind of lays bare the consequences of choosing "the moral high ground" over an outcomes-based approach to morality. And I think that is still a useful thing.
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.
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.
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
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.