Seriously I’m so confused on this. The USA has a 2 party system. You either vote for Biden or you get Trump. Abstaining from the vote you get Trump. MAGA will have a 100% turnout for their God Emperor.
Trump supports Israel 100%. Again, by not voting for Biden the reality is you’re voting for Trump who is even more supportive of Israel and will also attempt to upend democracy in the west.
You don’t have any options here that support Palestine. The reality of the situation is you either get Biden or Trump and the latter is infinitely worse for the ideal you’re trying to uphold by abstaining. That’s how politics work in the US. You might not like it, it sucks, but unfortunately that’s just the way things work.
CMV
So you’re voting for genocide then. Got it.
no, I’m voting against genocide. only by voting for Democrats or Republicans are you voting for genocide, as this post makes so abundantly clear.
Refusing to make a choice is still a choice.
The only options are: status quo that doesn’t do the bare minimum against genocide, or an actual fascist who is literally promising to do more genocide.
Yes I know that both options are terrible and the system is fucking garbage, but if you refuse to vote for the lesser evil you’re not taking some moral high road, you’re just enabling the worst evil
if the choice i’m making is “not endorsing a genocidal president” then i can live with that. i couldn’t live with myself if i did endorse genocide.
Again
the only people enabling evil are those who vote for it.
i expect to have at least 4 names on my ballot. i don’t need to pick one of your favorite teams.
Do any of those names have a snowballs chance in hell to prevent Trump or Biden from winning the election?
In the real world, I mean, not in your imaginary perfect world.
i don’t have a crystal ball, but i do have a conscience.
Some people will refuse to pull the lever to divert the trolley from killing 10 people, because pulling the lever kills 1.
me. that’s me. i don’t murder people.
I don’t think anyone in this thread is saying that you aren’t making the choice to not let someone die.
People are just expecting you to be able to handle being asked, “Why did you let 10 people die when there was an option for you to only let 1 person die instead?”
The trolley being on the warpath isn’t your fault; but you did have the option to reduce the number of deaths by taking action. Through your choice, an objectively larger number of people suffered, died, or lost a loved one. And for some actual reason you didn’t pull the lever other than “I’m not a murderer.”
We understand you aren’t a murderer. You aren’t intending to hurt anyone. But through your action, you can reduce the number of people murdered. Don’t be surprised when people are confused at your lack of rationale.
that’s not really the choice. the choice is let 10 people die or murder one person.
i’m being fully rational about this for any deontological viewpoint. if you disagree with deontological ethics, then we have nothing to discuss: i don’t care to try to convince you you’re wrong, and i’ve heard all the arguments you can summon.
I remember 2016 and the dialogue around the election fairly well, and this feels nostalgic. “Maybe he won’t be so bad”* is coming after trump is elected.
*Editors note: he will be
i’m not voting for him, so don’t worry.
May your sister experience an unwanted pregnancy in the Deep South, my friend.
what a thing to wish on someone who isnt voting for trump.