• OBJECTION!
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yes, I’m aware that those are the only realistic winners of this election. I’m not aware of anything I might have said that would imply I think otherwise.

    • capital@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Then I have to think you believe Trump and Harris would be equally bad and therefore don’t feel compelled to vote strategically against either.

      Do I have that right?

      • OBJECTION!
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        No. They are not equally bad, but neither is an acceptable choice.

        • capital@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          You’re pretty sanguine about getting the worse of the two. I find that strange.

          • OBJECTION!
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            2 months ago

            I don’t subscribe to the ideology of lesser-evilism.

              • OBJECTION!
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                2 months ago

                Sure. Ethically speaking, anyone who’s not an act utilitarian will accept the “greater evil” in some circumstances, and if you don’t, it leads to some absurd conclusions, like chopping up a healthy person to get organ transplants to save five. Another example would be, “If you don’t kill someone for me, I’ll kill two people.” I can’t prevent every bad thing from happening, but I can control my own actions and choose not to be a party to bad things.

                • capital@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Got it. Voting, in your mind, is akin to two different examples of murder.

                  It sounds to me like you’d opt out of giving someone the Heimlich maneuver so as not to bruise their abdomen, letting them choke to death.

                  I can control my own actions and choose not to be a party to bad things

                  You can pretend to opt out but not voting or voting third is a choice not to help prevent the worse outcome. You’ve participated in bringing that to fruition.

                  • OBJECTION!
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    9
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    I thought you were asking for why one would be accept a greater evil, generally speaking, so I demonstrated why lesser evilism is not automatically the correct position.

                    You’ve participated in bringing that to fruition.

                    Nope, that is blatantly false. Not voting for either major candidate, so by definition I haven’t participated in getting either of them elected.

              • OBJECTION!
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                2 months ago

                Nope, not supporting the worse evil either.

                Lesser-evilism freqently produces worse results than more coherent strategies and ethical systems.

        • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          So I’ll use a random what-if/analogy since you seem to love them SO much!

          Imagine a magic elf came down from magic elf land, and made you chose between having an acute health condition and cancer. Do you mean to say that you are totally fine with allowing other people to decide for you- full-well knowing that half of the people deciding are huge fans of cancer and not at all fans of you?

          Because this is your logic mirrored right back back at you.

          Or would you actually give a shit in this case because it will be YOU that’s affected by the outcome.

          Either way-

          You’re getting one regardless. Not choosing doesn’t make the election not happen. But you know this. Don’t you?

          • ltxrtquq
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            choose between having an acute health condition and cancer

            The ironic part is you just might be better off with the cancer. An acute problem could be anything, from broken bones or an infection to a heart attack or acute radiation poisoning. At least with cancer you know what you’re going to get and should have time to seek treatment.

            • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              The common cold is also an acute condition. So maybe if you try reeeeeeaaaaally hard, you’ll actually get the point I’m making here and why I used that as an example.

              Best of luck!

              • ltxrtquq
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Could have said something specific then, rather than “literally anything acute”. As it is, I don’t know why you’d assume your magical elf that’s known to cause cancer could also be so benign as to only give people a cold.