You know, if you just kill everyone, there will be nobody left to accuse you of supporting atrocities.
Humanity is going to humanity.
What you propose is the only solution.
The final one, even.
Death solves all problems...
Upvote for death
Except for death...
Unless you're Jesus.
Judge death does.
The crime is life the sentence is death.
I literally thought of this yesterday.
"Hold up. Why have I been put in this situation? Where's those responsible? Has anyone gone after the bridge guy, the brakes guy? Is anyone trying to get the sick fucks tying people down on tracks? What's being put in place to prevent this? Fences?Cameras? E-brakes? Who has liability and are they getting investigated?"
"Just Shutup and choose."
"I guess B is most logical."
"Oooh, you're a sick murderer and just want people dead!"
It's hard to participate when most people only have an A/B, us/them, left/right, right/wrong mentality view on things when it's obviously more complex when viewed from a few steps back. It's being stuck in either yard or on the fence, but if you climb a tree you'll realise there's many more yards and fences to the street to consider.
How dare you kill that person, that makes you a murderer!!!!1!
It's trolley problems all the way down.
Enough with that! You can't question the trolley situation, it's been like this for generations. Get on board. We have flags!
Your last paragraph is so good - thanks
I rather think you're missing the point.
Well, that doesn't mean I can't share something I thought of the other day before seeing this reminder :)
Your first problem is giving a shit what anyone else thinks.
According to this I can go naked in the streets
Second problem: too many people give a shot about what you do or look like
In principle, in a free country, you should be able to. But you can't, so it's not actually free.
How far does that freedom to do what you please extend? Am I not actually free because I can't beat up people I disagree with? Personally I feel the freedom to disagree without the threat of violence is more important.
There is freedom to, and there is freedom from. Don't undervalue freedom from.
I don't give a shit about your opinion!
Good for you. I'm happy for you. That's a good way to live.
The issue, which is obvious to most people that aren't Euro-American, is that if you view generations of colonial violence as a normal baseline, then calling for "both sides" to "stop fighting" whenever colonial subjects resist isn't actually calling for peace. It's calling for the colonized to submit and go back to being quietly exterminated in an orderly fashion so you can go back to not thinking about it.
Which goes back to the saying "you can't use the masters tools to tear down the masters house." Which I disagree with, you can't use the masters tools to build your own house but you can and should use any and every tool available to you to tear down the masters house.
With that said, us being observers at best, you can just feel bad about the whole thing. It's okay to just feel bad that bad things are happening, you don't need to force that feeling to pick a side. There is no both sides argument, but people on both sides are getting hurt and it's okay to not feel okay about that.
Is conquest exclusive to euro-american history?
No, but modern settler colonialism is largely limited to the Euro-American present. White Euro-Americans built the empire they now live in on a centuries long campaign of ongoing brutal extraction against the rest of the world, then turned around and said “This is just the way god made the world. Why would anyone want to disrupt this natural state of peace?”
Peace for a slaver is not peace for a slave.
Brutal extraction isn't unique to colonialism either. Colonialism is just ancient imperialism with boats.
That said, imperialism has never been moral and we shouldn't excuse contemporary imperialists, just like we'd probably be appalled at the exploits of Julius Caesar during the Gallic Wars if we weren't so far removed from them.
No but colonizing generally is.
With the exception of Japan.
Oh, really?
What about the middle eastern empires? Or the turks? Or the Aztecs?
Or literally any other force in history lmao
If you reread they never said those nations didn’t engage in conquest.
And they also settled and slaved on the annexed lands, thus engaging in colonization
Dilemma
Oh no! I knew this would be controversial.
The best part is you can edit the title and none would be the wiser
I'm still getting used to being able to edit post titles after years of being unable to
Did you find all the different directors cuts of Naughty Furry Adventures you were looking for?
I wish Lemmy kept records of all edits.
Do you even know what the rest of the people on the tracks will do if you stop the trolley? You will be responsible for what happens to the trolley operators and passengers.
There's no dilemma. If the goal is to express disapproval to people, then do what people think is disapproval... Which is doing nothing covered by some acting to appear as trying to do something
Start a charity, then?
That's just tax evasion
Yeah! In the form of acting like we care while doing nothing, like mentioned in the prior comment.
Hypocrites! The ones in the trolley are the one in motion
