• 0 Posts
  • 8 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: September 4th, 2024

help-circle

  • delusion@lemmy.myserv.onetoPolitical Memes@lemmy.world*Tap tap tap*
    link
    fedilink
    Svenska
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    In this scenario, I’m not the one choosing, Bob is. And when Bob says “five”, i will be angry, but it will be nothing in comparison with my Anger towards Alice who now can kill five people instead of the two she has been killing on a regular basis before. She’s the one presenting the alternatives, Bob isn’t. She’s the one performing the murders, Bob isn’t. She’s the one that deserves my anger.

    In a similar fashion I am not angry with anyone saying “two” either, “beacuse they could’ve said none yadayada”. I am, almost exclusively, angry with Alice.


  • In my example I very clearly am rallying against Alice. In every possible way. I would be fuming, throwing stones, screaming to everyone around me. But I would not accept her proposition to Bob. I would not claim that I “have” to play Alice’s game, because she’s in charge and I have to accept that. I don’t have to accept that. At all.

    I would do everything I could to stop her, and almost all of my Anger would be towards her, not towards Bob (I obviously would be angry with him too but he’s after all not a murderer - Alice is).

    Keep in mind that in the example, Bob probably believes for some reason that when Alice says two, she means ten.


  • Paste of part of my answer from another reply:

    Imagine if Alice is a murderer, and she asks Bob if she should kill two people or five people. Bob says “five”. Now, I will of course be angry at Bob for choosing the obviously worse alternative, but I will in no way claim that he is the cause of the problem. I will not go out and rally support for “Only two people”, I will rally support for “Let’s get rid of Alice”.


  • You seem to completely misunderstand me. Voting for any of the two main parties, both of whom want the country to be a tyrannical military megaforce that is no stranger to overthrowing democracies, is like accepting the faith of the bullet. Going against any such system is what I am advocating - NOT accepting the bullet. We simply seem to have different views of what the bullet is.

    Imagine if Alice is a murderer, and she asks Bob if she should kill two people or five people. Bob says “five”. Now, I will of course be angry at Bob for choosing the obviously worse alternative, but I will in no way claim that he is the cause of the problem. I will not go out and rally support for “Only two people”, I will rally support for “Let’s get rid of Alice”.