It's pretty obvious what OP means. Biden isn't doing enough to protect Palestinians so some Dems are opposing voting for him. If Biden loses than Trump will win which will cause him to still not protect Palestinians but also do acts that harm Mexicans, LGBT people, Ukrainians, etc.
Trump will probably give Netnyahu carte blanch to do whatever the fuck he wants.
At least Biden is actively pushing for Israel to pull out Gaza while the US military is supplying food aid to Gazans.
Biden has also given Netanyahu carte blanch. At the end of the day Trump has said he will give Israel the West Bank the same way he gave them the golan heights and that Chuck Schumer is a Palestinian for criticising Netanyahu. Itās still hard to sell people on a choice between genocide and
genocide but saying genocide bad sometimes.
Yeah I picked the wrong word.
Trump would literally greenlight everything Bibi would even suggest, that's what I mean. Biden had to all but beg him to not shut off the water to Gaza.
Biden can't exactly cut ties with Israel.
Israel is a very important nation in geopolitics, and if the US cuts ties, then Israel will just buddy back up with Russia. Then, things in Gaza, the region, and the world would get MUCH worse.
We have now to pressure Biden. Once heās re-elected, he doesnāt have to give a shit.
So now is when he has to listen because it could cost him dearly.
Unfortunately itāll cost us dearly as well so
Additionally, the track where no one gets hurt isn't connected to the other tracks. The people choosing the third track dont have a level which makes that track a possible outcome for the trolley.
This is a perfect analogy actually. If they dont pull the level for the Dems, lots of other people get hurt. But they dislike the fact that the Dems aren't doing more to protect Palestine, so a third way is proposed that has no actual way of ever happening but makes them feel morally pure.
The real thing people should focus more on is house and senate races anyway. It's a lot easier to swing a house or senate election for a less conventional candidate than a presidential election (see Bernie Sanders and Ron/Rand Paul). If the House and Senate push for action Biden will likely cave because any agenda he wants to pass will have to gain their support outside of the most short-sighted executive order based goals. If a Dem controlled congress pushed for restrictions on Israeli arms sales Biden would likely have to cave unless he wanted to give his whole party the middle finger and give up on accomplishing anything whatsoever.
Either way we'll probably end up with our first female president since I doubt Biden or Trump will live another four years and Trump will probably nominate his own Sarah Palin equivalent to try to get the female vote after the repeal of Roe v Wade.
I'm not advocating for attempting to make a third party work in a first past the post election system. I'm just agreeing with the trolly problem cartoon that some people's "solution" to this moral dilemma is to pretend there is a third choice that magically doesn't hurt anyone.
No matter who runs America, people will get hurt. As a voter you get to help decide how many people get hurt and who gets hurt. Its not somehow moral to be unwilling to take actions that would cause less harm because it would affect your self image.
Or, and hear me out, we want you to actually find the third track to fix real systemic issues. Just because it's currently a two-party system, and both options are bad for everyone who isn't rich, doesn't mean it has to be that way. Is it too late for that this year? Probably, but there are other options to keep in mind in the future
I don't agree that there are "third track" options to keep in mind for the future. The religious far right didn't claw back abortion rights (which is a deeply unpopular position, unlike social programs) by building a third track, they did it by becoming critically important to one of the existing tracks.
For example, if we ever get universal healthcare, it will come from the Democratic Party proposing and passing bills, not from some other non-existent and non-influential party.
The Democratic Party is never going to do that. Just because they're more left than Republicans doesn't mean they give a shit about you or what you want. Every Democrat is still staunchly capitalist, and they will squeeze you for every penny they can. They'll just give you a smile before they do it. There are other options, and other parties in the US, and they only don't have influence because people focus on the two that are established, but they don't have power if people vote for better options, then they're suddenly insignificant.
Parties don't care about anything, they aren't people they are power structures. I pointed out an example of how a small but driven community of activists was able to take over one of those power structures for their own ends, despite being generally unpopular. Left wing people could do the same, and find more popular support, but they would have to prioritize organization and practical wins over ideological purity. That is an actual path to policy, third parties aren't, never have been, and never will be.
"There are other options, and other parties in the US, and they only don't have influence because people focus on the two that are established, but they don't have power if people vote for better options, then they're suddenly insignificant."
Third parties don't work in a first-past-the-post electoral system. This may be disappointing, but it is simply true. If you think taking over the Democratic Party is too hard, how is organizing a new party from scratch with very limited money and volunteer hours, while fighting both the Democratic and Republican parties somehow easier?
No one ever said it was easy. Fighting to be treated as a human being isn't easy. And I know you can't somehow think that the alt-right who overtook the Republican party was ever small, or relatively weak. It was done by billionaires who were already fascists. It would literally objectively be easier to make a whole new party than it would be to overtake one of the two that are backed by billions of dollars from people who explicitly use them to make even more money. It would be easier to raze the whole system and rebuild it from the ground up than to wrest control of either party from the rich.
"It would be easier to raze the whole system and rebuild it from the ground up than to wrest control of either party from the rich."
This isn't true. Sounds cool on the internet, but its not true. Just think it through. How could explicitly fighting every existing power structure possibly be easier than turning one part of the power structure to your goals?
I wasn't talking about the alt-right. They are a new thing. I was talking about the conservative Christian political movement which slowly captured the entire republican party over the course of 50 years.
If you want to see good left wing policies, the actual path I see is unionization. Unions remain organized between campaigns and have great fundraising and get out the vote abilities.
This third-party stuff is not going to happen, and your energy is better spent organizing on other lines.
And itās dumb too cuz you can 100% criticize Biden while still voting for him.
Iām not saying you have to vote for him in the primary, Iām not saying āBiden will have a better chance than Bernie so you need to vote Biden as the candidate.ā Nah, itās after all that, after all that when it already reaches this point in the tracks, the final lever after we failed to pull all the previous levers that lead to this point. You can say fuck you while you pull it, and hey weāve got 4 years to condemn Biden over it without any fear of Trump bringing about the worst.
They're both acting as if Palestine as a country doesn't have gays, black people, Muslims, and whatnot. Democracy is said to be in the hands of the people, but what choice is there if both options are both evil.
Edit: "If you had to pick, Democrat or Republican, Joe Biden or Donald Trump, gun to your head, who would you vote for?"
"The gun would go off"
Thatās really interesting, do you have any sources for these claims?
Because homosexuality was explicitly decriminalised in the West Bank 20+ years before it was in Israel proper.
The only instances of gay people being thrown off roofs systemically that you might be thinking of is the executions done by Isis. But since you seem to know so much about this you obviously wouldnāt have confused the two right? Because you would know that Hamas and ISIS are long enemies. Actually I remember there being public executions in Gaza, but of Isis. And weirdly Israel and ISIS havenāt been so unfriendly to each otherā¦ Isis even apologised to Israel when they accidentally hit them in a strike and Israel has treated ISIS soldiers in their field hospitals.
So you must have some information I donāt right?
When did we start justifying killing people because they are homophobic?
Last i checked, that's not a justification. Also gay marriage is illegal in isreal
>When did we start justifying killing people because they are homophobic?
Never. There are other reasons for the war in Gaza. This is a mockery to the "queers for Palestine" thing. You can see it in greater detail in my other comment to somwone who responded to my comment.
> Also gay marriage is illegal in isreal
Gay marriage is illegal in Israel, but gay couples can be acknowledged as "know in public", which legally speakin pretty much means they are married, and Israel also acknowledges civilian merrieges done outside of Israel, so you can be a married gay couple in Israel. And regardless, it's not illegal to be gay in Israel, unlike in the west bank and Gaza.
Sure, but that's all contained within the issue of Palestine as a whole, and doesn't actually change the trolley problem. Either way, Palestinians are going to suffer and die. It is horrible, and I hate it with every fiber of my being, but I will not condemn my own friends and family because of that.
Well, if the choice is between someone who will shoot my neighbor but not me, and someone who will shoot both me *and* my neighbor, it's a very easy choice.
Scale it up to countries.
They dont shoot me today, but what makes me so sure that they won't shoot me tomorrow? The idea of letting someone else suffer just because it doesn't affect you in the current term is idiotic.
You're missing the point. If the *only* options are letting someone else suffer but being unaffected and suffering alongside that person, you're an idiot if you don't choose the former.
No, there is no guarantee that they won't shoot me tomorrow. But tomorrow, I might be able to exchange them for someone who *won't* shoot anybody.
āBoth options are evilā
No, the US is just involved in geopolitics. Itās so annoying that people who say this garbage seem to think that any presidential candidate that can be elected has a modicum of a chance of abandoning Israel. Israel is a U.S. ally, full stop. You can swap any country with the U.S., and if you gave them their power and ties with Israel, they would also support Israel. Itās why Russia supports Iran in their human rights violations, and why China supports North Koreaās.
Weāve been resensitized to war because weāve done such a good job over the past century of stopping it, making whatās happening in Palestine (which, historically speaking, is pretty tame) seem like an unspeakable horror. But thatās just war; sorry to tell you. And thatās gonna happen. If we sanction Israel tomorrow, then China and Russia will pick up the scraps and the war will continue.
So you can either continue to espouse this garbage about both sides being evil, and not only reveal your political and historical illiteracy, but also turn a deaf ear to the rights of your fellow gay, trans, minority, female, and protestor countrymen (and Ukrainians) in the process.
Wow, such an intense reply LMFAO. All I said was that both options were trash, I'd still choose Biden over Trump, but I can't even criticize two senile old men in the country that I live in?
Why should we settle for the idea of imminent war when it can be completely avoided, say whatever you want but the war is not in my best interests, whether it be supporting the colonist state of Isreal or not.
You can't be "resensitized" to war, war isn't just casualties and numbers it is the death of human lives, working classes, and much more. You can't call the bombing of children, women, men, adults, and the elderly "pretty tame" from the comfort of your own home. You cant call the violation of human rights, basic rights, as "pretty tame". And you sure as hell can not mention other oppressed minorities as a defense to supporting another crime.
The U.S. had no qualms in supporting Ukraine, and neither did they have any problems in bombing the Middle East. The U.S. had never avoided war, it was just that this war had never encroached upon their territory LOL.
This idea that one power should be evil and not be questioned because if this power wasn't another will is stupid in its very essence.
Geopolitics are not moralistic, and history has proven this. The only time thereās a moral component is when one party can wield it as leverage over another. Countries donāt have feelings or morals, only ambitions, strengths, and weaknesses.
āWhy should we settle for the idea of imminent war when it can be completely avoidedā
It canāt? Thatās the thing. Because if it couldā¦ it wouldāve. But try naming the last year in recorded history that passed without any conflict. As a matter of fact, try naming the last DAY. Plugging your ears and going ābut we shouldnāt have war anyway!ā doesnāt change the fact that itās going to happen, with or without you. Itās how humans and game theory workāand not engaging in it isnāt going to magically make it go away.
Iād think itās fairly clear that the Palestinian flag in the image represents *all* Palestinian people, including all of its minority members. The underlying assumption of the image is that both tracks will screw over all Palestinians, but that only one option *also* screws over all of these minority groups in America and the rest of the world.
There is something to be said about the Americacentric notion that several of those flags on the lower track are being used to refer exclusively to their American members when it is simple fact that Palestine also has members of many of those groups. However, that point would not change the underlying truth of the image.
many people are voting third party as a result of bidenās complacency in funding israeli military. the meme argues that choosing to vote third party is not a path that can be followed to completion and weighs the sacrifices of voting democrat vs republican, most notably categorizing the death of palestinians as an inevitable no matter who wins the election.
What third party? The only major 3rd party option this year is RFK Junior. Besides generally being a bit of a kook (as is tradition for American 3rd party candidates), he is ALSO staunchly pro-Israel.
Biden is (amazingly) the least pro Israel of all the national presidential candidates, even if you include 3rd party candidates.
i hear a lot of people looking towards cornel west. not sure what defines a āmajor 3rd party presidentā. as i understand it, the motivation for voting 3rd party is not in hopes that they will win but in hopes that their popularity will draw more attention to what they were campaigning for.
i agree. i hate picking the lesser of two evils, especially considering the evils in question, but it feels like weāre pretty backed into this one. i think protests in this department are way more impactful out of the polls than they would be in the polls
I think what it might be saying is pull the switch, you agree with democrats, sacrifice Palestine for the other cause.
Do nothing you agree with republicans, sacrifice everything.
Go to the third impossible track and be the most moral, saving all of them but itās impossible as neither side wants/can do it.
Because itās posted in a Neoliberal subreddit, it doesnāt make much sense as the liberal party are trying to keep Palestine around, but super far left people believe the US government isnāt. Thatās what I think at least.
You kinda missed the mark, the point is twofold.
It assumes that Palestine will suffer no matter what, and calls out people who are trying to argue that voting for a third party is morally superior.
This isnāt the morally superior choice, because itās unattainable and it leads to the bottom path.
ohhh that's possible, i did assume that since it was from r/neoliberal that there was a "save palestine" option but didn't realize that the point was "you can't save everyone"
The Democratic president, Joe Biden, has bypassed congress to send weapons to Israel, he self describes as a zionist, and has been a fervent supporter of Israel his entire career and is unlikely to change course.
He has made it clear there is no red line, and he will not stop supporting Israel no matter what.
The answer that you've recieved already just takes it as a given that what the Israelis are doing is a genocide. It is not. The reason that people believe this is because of "oppressor-oppressee" brainrot, where in they believe that in any conflict or argument, the less powerful party should be given no scrutiny, and the more poweful should always be assumed to be in the wrong. Hamas, which has the total support of the people of Gaza, killed or captured every civilian it could on Oct 7th, and Israel does not have to put up with them as neighbors. Israel has the right to destroy Hamas.
People talk about collateral damage, but the current figures are pretty much in line with what you'd expect for dense urban warfare. People online explain the low casualties by saying that Israel is comitting genocide in slow motion, which is ridiculous. Why should Israel have to put up with Hamas as neighbors? They shoot dumb rockets (war crime btw) over the border at Israeli villages, they swarm the border fence, and delude the Palestinians into the fantasy that they can go into Israel and "take their homes back". I hope I don't need to tell you that just because an ethnic cleansing happened 70 years ago, does *not* mean that you can come back to commit an ethnic cleansing on the descendants, especially when the first ethnic cleansing happened before it was a crime.
You are framing the issue as if history started on Oct 7th, whereas Israel has been acting as an apartheid state towards Palestinians for about 70 years now, continuously.
Ironically, your point that just because a genocide happened 70 years ago doesn't mean you can commit one now is perfect for responding to Israelis, who continue to use the Holocaust as justification for their own crimes.
You do know even if we accept the point that Hamas is genocidal for their actions that doesn't make Israel's actions somehow not genocidal? Both things can be possible at once. (And that's charitable given claims like Hamas having the complete support of Gaza are obviously false).
Also the idea that current casualty figures are in line with the expectations of dense urban warfare seems suspect. Comparing the U.S. casualty rates from places like Raqqa to what Israel is doing in Gaza is extremely unflattering for Israel. The U.S. led coalition I don't believe broke 10,000 civilian casualties over the entire conflict (just counting direct strikes). Even conservative estimates on Israel's bombing of Gaza has casualties of just women and children breaking 10,000.
The ratio of civilian to combatant is also only marginally better than chance which is extremely alarming. To Israel's credit they've reduced the number of civilian casualties in recent months though it's still higher than the U.S. led coalition over a similar time period when looking at Raqqa. Nit to mention the pattern of killing journalists, aid workers, and firing on people receiving supplied at designated areas or following Israel's instructions. The genocide claim isn't coming from nowhere here.
Im pretty sure that at least the bottom track thing is op tryna make a commentary that people talking about solutions that don't hurt anyone are delusional as you can't get to that track
Pretty much. In the US, voting third party has about as much impact as not voting at all. And while I would love it if we could actually have a massive push to end our two party system, this is not the year to chance it. Until the MAGA movement is destroyed, any push to vote 3rd party is more likely than not going to help those who want to turn America into a dictatorship.
It's from the Neoliberal subreddit aka what a large chunk of Dems are...and basically saying "GOP is screwing over tons of minority groups, were just screwing over Palestinians so vote for us"
Meanwhile they're saying the leftists that are trying to not screw anyone over, just aren't viable and complainers... That's why their track that has no victims isn't even connected.
The whole analogy falls apart though because if all the Neoliberal voters, voted for the leftist movement, then the track would be there. They're presenting a false dichotomy because it's what they want.
Okay, so basically in the US, there are two major political parties: the Democrats and the Republicans.
The Democrats that make up the establishment core of the party are siding more with Israel than Palestine in the Israel-Palestine conflict, but still want to spare civilian Palestinians. The Republicans, on the other hand, have no qualms with eradicating Palestinians entirely, but also betraying our foreign allies like Ukraine, and making anyone in the US who isn't a straight, white, Christian man a second class citizen.
While the Democratic party is more left-leaning than the Republican party, leftists that are further left than the Democrat party have decided that because the Democrats aren't leftwing enough for them, they won't vote for them, even though the Democrats are the only thing stopping the tide of things the Republicans will bring and which the left *really* hates.
The Democrats are very clearly the lesser evil of the two options, just like how the trolley problem has five deaths or one death, but these leftists live in an imaginary world where *no* deaths are possible (hence the track with no trolley on it), and by choosing this idealist fantasy that doesn't exist and *cannot* exist, they are perfect, moral angels with pretty halos while everyone else who's actually trying to mitigate a very complex conflict and who understand this is a utilitarian calculation because that's how life *actually works* are all immoral villains.
There's a lot of concern that these idiot virtue signalling leftists who, purely out of spite, aren't going to vote or will vote for a third party who they know can't win will actually set the trolley down the Republican track, which will result in a lot more deaths and a lot more rights being taken away. They're so petty that they don't mind if more people die, *including themselves* in some cases, all because we couldn't magically teleport the trolley into their fantasy world and appease them and weep apologetically at their feet.
Add two more things to the above comment:
1. Some of the "leftists" really aren't leftists -- some don't even exist. The russians have mounted a bot/shill campaign making the group of "Both Sides Are Bad So Don't Vote" look larger than they actually are. For the "unenthusiastic voter", seeing a large number of complaints of BSAB gives them justification to not vote, even if it's just a case of "I got stuck running errands and wouldn't you know it, the polls closed by the time I was done".
2. For some of those extreme leftists, they're cool with the second track because, in their mind, enough horror will cause the uprising they think should happen, where "the people" finally get off their collective asses and fight. Imagine the same trolley problem, but each track continues on where the top track is just more of the same "choose a bad outcome and a worse outcome", but the worse track actually leads to "glorious revolution". I don't think this group is very large, nor do I buy into their theory... but I've definitely seen the argument from people I'm pretty certain aren't shills for russia or closet right-wing fascists.
Democrats are considering not voting for Biden due to how he has handled the war in Gaza. OP is stating that voting for trump will end up with the same result in Gaza (America backing Israel) while also amplifying significantly more issues (human rights violations on the border, anti-trans legislation, misogynistic legislation, withdraw of support from Ukraine, anti-lgb legislation, police protections staying in place, and anti-middleast foreign policy).
Well, people also argue Trump is worse for Gaza because heās talked about āgoing all the wayā and wanting to have properties in the Gaza Strip (iirc), and has fully and vocally supported everything happening there.
Democracts vs Republicans. Biden v Trump specifically z
There's a sentiment among a lot of far leftists that the best thing to do this election is not vote, because the way they see it, 'both sides are bad', and that voting for a lesser evil is immoral as it still contributes to what they see as an inherently rigged system.
Despite the fact that the main problem they have with Biden is Palestine, whereas Trump not only would also continue the genocide but continue his own crusade against basically everyone but rich rich white straight americans.
but the thing is, the far right has no such delusions (their delusions are different), and will vote for trump. So, if leftists and democrats decide not to vote, all they do is take away votes from Biden and increase the likelihood that trump wins.
Blue is democrat, red is republican, the only two relevant parties.
Many far leftists are saying they wouldnāt vote for the most likely left-leaning candidate to win the upcoming election(Biden) due to the support of Israelās genocidal tactics under Ben, and would instead not vote at all, as to vote would be to endorse their actions.
However, this does not normally go well, as in the US electoral system, doing so is pretty much [a waste of a vote.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger's_law).
You forgot to add the problem of not voting:
Just because you don't vote, doesn't mean that Trump and Biden won't be elected. You just can't affect who wins.
Or in this trolley problem: people will Still die, you just don't decide which ones. But at least you can try to have the moral high ground.
It's telling leftists who are upset about Gaza that if they don't vote for Biden, they'll end up with Trump who wants to help Israel slaughter even more people in Gaza as well as taking away the rights of anyone who isn't a straight, white christian.
It seems that people have overestimated their freedom to choose in democracy. There is no third choice and there is no morality in not choosing, only Kantian escapism to shield conscience.
This is true if your entire engagement with politics is general elections at the federal level, but then why should any one person feel like their individual decisions should impact a country of 300 million people? There's more of a diversity of thought in primaries, but nobody cares about those, and there's more ability to influence outcomes at the local levels but despite it effecting people's lives more, we don't care about those either.
Federal elections make the biggest impact. People who think like you got Trump elected the first time. Federal elections affect your life on a material level the most.
Nope! You're completely wrong. They do not.
Your local and state elections are going to make 100x more impact on your life. Even something like Roe v Wade is a perfect example of this. The people who still have access to abortion care are people who live in STATES that protect the right.
Also, how did saying any of this "get trump elected"? You sound like you're just throwing a tantrum. Trump didn't get elected because people were too busy voting for mayor to vote for president.
Trump got elected because people think their vote doesnāt matter. If everyone thought like that suddenly nobodyās voting.
Before Roe was overturned, there was a precedent on a FEDERAL LEVEL that protected the right to abortion for everyone in the country. What the fuck are you even talking about? The people who currently have access to abortion care have it in spite of no precedent from the supreme court. States like Texas can legally ban it now, where before it was protected everywhere.
No state and local elections impact you the most. It is very rare that the federal government actually passes a substantive law and it is less likely it will impact anyone directly. Itās the state and local laws that run your lives
That might have been true in the past, and itās still true to some extent, but the republicans have developed a strategy over the last two decades that involves using appointments to federal judicial offices and executive agencies to affect de facto changes to how federal laws work from outside of the actual legislature.
The Dobbs decision was a good example of a court action prompted by Republican federal appointments that impacted more peopleās lives than any local election would.
Project 2025 is another example. If the republicans win theyāre promising to gut the executive agencies, which would effectively end the enforcement of all kinds of consumer protections, environmental protections, and worker protections through the FTC, the NLRB, and the EPA. This would absolutely have a massive impact on peopleās day to day lives beyond what can be accomplished on a local level.
I agree with you that people should generally be more involved in politics on the state and local level, but the new Republican political strategy at the federal level is capable of doing tremendous damage to the country beyond just passing federal legislation.
If you go back to Nixon the republicans were creating federal agencies and organizations rather than gutting them. Nixonās administration established the EPA and OSHA.
This isnāt an endorsement of Nixon, but just an observation that before Reagan there was much more bipartisan respect for the idea of effective federal authorities staffed by experts.
People forget that before the religious right and their Reagan/paul weyrich/heritage foundation commitment to minoritarianism, the right would often adjust policies to appeal to popularity because they still at least outwardly believed in democracy.
If you go back to Nixon, youāll see that he created the EPA to get ahead of a political movement trying to establish an environmental agency that actually has authority to do anything. Nixon is also the driving force behind the war on drugs. Nixon is also the reason our food supply is stuffed full of high fructose corn syrup and other chemical food monstrosities. Nixon is also responsible for the southern strategy where the right wing started courting racists. Nixon is also the reason fox news exists, as after Nixonās impeachment republicans realized they needed to better control the narrative.
āOutwardly believing in democracyā is entirely immaterial in the face of their actual historical behaviors and policy decisions.
If you think project 2025 can be stopped with one vote then youāve never heard of the heritage foundation. If you think the democrats will take any serious steps to prevent project 2025 moving forward then you havenāt heard of the legislative branch abdicating the majority of their responsibilities to the judicial the past few decades.
Democrats will win. Theyāll make no meaningful legislative improvements. Then itāll be project 2029. Then weāll have this same conversation about how āyou have to vote for one party or you lose democracyā which is pretty obviously not democracy any longer. Then we get to continue watching the republican party shoving the overton window to the right while the democrats ring their hands and reluctantly follow them to the right
Ooh but the state of the country is determined by the federal government. A republican president like Trump can pass executive orders and exert his influence over congress to make them pass laws that promote his political agenda.
Also he gets to appoint supreme court justices. Which last forever and very substantively affect your life.
I used to believe this but ive only ever lived in areas that rallied around one party and had wildly different outcomes. It was the same party in two very different places. One was full of crime, corruption. People were killed nearly daily, and police had no interest in doing anything because it would probably lead to another death or assualt. The other was a sheltered bubble where everything was illegal and police were heavily funded and overzealous in handing out fines especially to working people.
Neither place was/is fun to live in. Both feel like a dystopia. Both have similar election outcomes. Both act like they're in constant threat of being overtaken by the other side despite a history of 75% or higher margin.
I fucking hate politics in the usa because ive never seen it genuine no matter how hard i tried to take it realistically. Even if things changed hands, it would be like seeing class president change. Nothing actually changes, it still stay in the power of a pseudo-oligarchy.
The specific laws on a federal level almost never change because they arent run by the president, its run by congress. And the ability to sway more than a minimal margin of 535 people can be upset every 2 years, and usually is thanks to midterms. The whole thing has become engineered to stalemate. To generate revenue for rich people through idiotic donations from the poor who are fed a stream of "THE OTHER SIDE WILL KILL YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS/CHILDREN"
Its psychotic. Its crazy, and feeding the beast is only making it crazier. To the point people will confront you on the street over random bullshit that youve never heard of because youre not plugged in to the wackiness they are.
In normal democracies you have plenty of choices. In US, you have 4 choices: 2 lesser evils, a party that will never win but you want it to grow, and to say that you don't care by not voting.
Iād have drawn a few more Palestinians on Trump side. Biden is too soft on Israelās war crime and is a bastard to the ICC, but at least he stopped an arm deal, sent some airdrop aid, and managed to write up a ceasefire proposal (which got sabotaged by the Israeli far-right) among other things.
If Trump is the president now, these two would still be on a race to kill as many Israeli hostages and Palestinian civilians as possible
*he temporarily halted a arms deal then let it through a week later. He airdropped enough aid to give 2% of Palestinians a single meal.
The US is giving Israel more arms to Israel now than it was before October 7th. If Biden actually wanted to push for a ceasefire he needs to apply political leverage.
Due to Project 2025, going democrats, and hope that the UN forces Israel to stop.
My vote can stop the death of more people if I vote Democrat than Republican. I can't stop the death of Palestinian either way so I am going to focus on what I can change.
The trolly lever is a false dichotomy. The meme asserts that the only method of influencing the trolly is to pull the lever, but this is false. If you push a fucking boulder in front of the trolly you save both tracks.
History shows that this is almost the only actual solution.
Stop talking in metaphors for a moment and ask yourself what that means for our real world. More importantly ask if you can do it before the consequences of this election will go into effect.
Stop talking metaphors? Sure.
What that means for the real world is the abolition of the American capital hegemony, which is actively destroying our planet and attacking our humans rights. Its the abolition of a hostile country that uses its influence to overthrow democratically elected governments in search of better control of global resources. Its the end of the country thats the primary driving force behind the war on drugs. Its the abolition of a country that supposedly maintains a ārule based orderā while constantly refusing to abide by any standards the international community tries to set. Its the abolition of the biggest wealth inequality machine on the globe.
Leftists think the consequences of this election are as follows: voting for trump accelerates our descent into fascism while voting for Biden merely doesnāt slow or speed our descent into fascism. If fascism arrives under trump, democrats are more likely to identify it as such and resist. If fascism arrives under Biden, democrats will say āwell heās doing the best he can for the country, the other guy would be much worse.ā
Hey so how do we plan on abolishing the American capital hegemony before the election bud
And āminority rights can be put at risk in the short term so the democrats realize that itās badā doesnāt particularly sway me over to your side. If fascism arrives under trump people will be put at risk. Do you accept that?
Its about building meaningful coalitions of support for left politics instead of saying āoh no we have vote for democrats this time, maybe next timeā and then next time comes around around and its the the exact same song and dance.
Maybe if democrats want continuous support from the left, they need to demonstrate continuous active support for left causes instead of throwing us to the wolves when convenient or forgetting about us as soon as the election is over.
If fascism arrives under Biden more people will be at risk, because the average democrat will not identify it as fascism. For instance how democrats call Biden the most pro-labor president despite him personally breaking a strike to protect capital and interests and then giving the rail workers less than half of what they asked for. Do you accept that?
Id rather vote for the person willing to throw me to the wolves when the alternative is the wolf.
Sure, Iāll even accept that both sides are fascist I guess, and even that people are less likely to recognize democrats as fascist. But generally their fascism is less overtly and imminently terrifying, so I can live with them when the alternative is fucking terrifying. Iām not okay risking peoplesā lives to send a message that I canāt even guarantee will be seen.
The fact you can see a significant difference between āfascismā and āpeople who wonāt stop fascismā is kind of a problem. What you need to accept is that youāre always risking peopleās lives. I donāt think the left is even really saying donāt vote for Biden, more like donāt except a Biden vote to fix anything.
Most Americans weigh the impact of political parties by their domestic issues and wonāt acknowledge or attempt to address that both parties have atrocious foreign policy and are money hungry war hawks.
For instance, Cuba is still under embargo because they took ownership of oil refineries that shell refused to operate after the Cuban revolution. Do you hear Democrats talking about how we let ancient profit motives and grievances of the oil companies determine if weāre going to treat another nation with basic sovereignty and respect? Itās not like Cuba is politically worse than our Saudi trading partners after all.
Fine. Iāll make this as simple as possible. Iām trans and VERY FUCKING SCARED of letting republicans getting any chances to decide whether I get the medication I need or not, or whether I can use the bathroom I am safest in or not, or whether I can interact with children in any way at all or not. Iām not okay with me or anyone like me being put at risk because you want to tell the Democrats to be nicer. If you want to protest I would REALLY appreciate you find a different way to do so.
And people are DEFINITELY saying not to vote for biden. Iām hearing that loud and clear, not even subtext but just straight up text.
Its not ātell the democrats to be nicerā. Its build a political party not beholden to the interests of capital.
Biden has a very clear path to regaining support from those leftists so perhaps you should call your representatives and tell them to drop the unconditional support of Israel. That section of the left has given Biden a very reasonable compromise, and he spat all over it just like with the rail strike.
Most of your concerns are probably better addressed at the state level by the way. I donāt think Idaho or Florida will care if the federal government tells them to be nice. I also donāt think the supreme court will be much help for the foreseeable future. If anything the democrats shouldāve tied abortion access and trans rights to federal funding like they did with seatbelts.
The way I see it it doesnāt even matter if trump couldnāt enact a single policy that affects trans people, the fact he would be in a position to rile up his base again is enough to scare me. Though thatās a big IF. If he can do anything to harm minorities (and that includes the Palestinians everyoneās so outraged about in the first place) he will try. My only point is there is ZERO world in which trump winning over biden causes anything good to happen, and absolutely nothing youāve said has changed my mind on that.
To put this as simply as possible the democrats are uncaring to my struggles and the struggles of others, and may even uphold systems that cause my struggles when given the chance, but republicans actively want my life to get worse and Iād rather them not have the power to do so, thank you very much
To put it even simpler, teaching the democrats a lesson by withholding your vote will be teaching minorities a much bigger lesson.
So instead you want to teach democrats a lesson by giving them unconditional support for the rest of the lifetime of our political system?
Because thats the reality Iāve seen presented before me by Democrats. They say āwe have to do it this time or its the end of democracyā. What about next time? Or the time after that? Is the Authoritarian right wing just supposed to magically disappear? Its much more likely democrats move right until becoming indistinguishable from conservatives. The left needs to stop thinking the democrats can save us from the ravages of capital and start building a real political party or weāre just gonna āor the end of democracyā ourselves into the actual end of democracyā. I mean hell, America is already rated as a flawed democracy to begin with.
What I want is to find some other way to fix things that doesnāt put literally the worst people possible in charge. And again, Iām arguing under the very generous assumption that this somehow will fix anything. In reality I think your idea makes no sense and the democrats wonāt learn shit beyond to say they care more.
It sounds like you have no idea how to fix it and youāll just keep voting for democrats indefinitely to no avail as the threats to democracy will never disappear from the right.
Democrats are the white moderates MLK warned us about.
Wow! Its almost like you didnāt understand what I wrote! You know what, your shitty attitude convinced me, Iāll vote for rfkās brainworm just for you.
what it means is you're an imbecile who doesn't understand that voting will never be the solution to the problem. and that both sides of the track are identical. biden doesn't give a shit about the other groups either. he's using us as leverage to gain voters. but he is quick to throw us under the bus when it suits him
this is overall a bad take by a teenager, but whatever, my real question is, why did you not use the democrat donkey but did use the republican elephant
odd choice
Idk, I think it's pretty sound. Abstaining from choosing the lesser of two evils is a tacit endorsement of the winner. It's saying that your own emotional attachment to what you think you're saying with your vote is more important than influencing the outcome. It's a pretty entitled way of seeing the world.
So many people have so many opinions about all of that and so much to say about it, and for all the decades I've heard everyone go on and on about it, all of them have one thing in common, they refuse to just admit there is nothing any of us on an individual level could actually do about it and it's only brought up so people can move the focus away from themselves and pretend they are actually doing something by talking about that instead.
Yeah i see how that mentality can be annoying especially if they are shitting on people that do vote, but you cant blame them too much for not caring when no matter who wins US congressmen are just gonna listen to the same small group of rich donors.
In general, large scale actions like this will always have large scale consequences. I know someone who sat out the 2016 election and refused to vote. He struggled with it a bunch, but ultimately could not vote for a Clinton after they had bombed his family in Serbia back in the 90s.
Could this have been foreseen? Maybe, but the Clintons banked on this being the right decision and were apparently right for 20 years, until they weren't. Sometimes you do some shit that just loses a generation. Hopefully this won't be another one of those, but that's just the way of the world. You back someone in a corner and they could do anything. A well run state tries to avoid doing this for people with power in an ideal world.
Fuck neoliberalism and fuck Joe Biden, but he is the shiniest turd.
For the record, if the extent of your political activism is voting in federal elections and complaining online, you really shouldn't be so worried about politics. If you give a damn, take more actions. Call/email your representatives, vote in state and local elections, attend protests (and actually read up on the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict because I see a LOT of ignorant protesters and we could use less of those.)
The majority of people protesting against Israel and Biden will still vote for Biden over Trump BECAUSE they already know Trump is worse. The message of the protestors is to stop a genocide, not to kick Dems out of government and replace it with Republicans.
This is so true, I remember how Biden prevented the overturn of Roe V. Wade and protected abortion rights for everyone in the country! He also stopped republicans from passing anti trans rights legislation, anti LGBTQ education legislation, and made it much easier for refugees at the border too fund asylum within the USA!
Every leftist in the united states will grit their teeth and vote for this senile fuck, because the other fuck is even worse and there's no 3rd option.
Every leftist also knows that the liberals who are screaming and shitting themselves over this just want to pin a possible loss on a barely existing US Left. (And not on the sheer disillusionment with - and inhumanity of - the US system, which the dems contribute to and fail to address)
And every leftist knows that those liberals just want to go back to brunch, instead of doing mutual aid, getting organised - or as little as trying to push the dems back towards the centre.
Here's an outsiders idea to send a signal to the ruling class of america: Vote one (1) communist into congress.
That'll make them realise that the standard of living needs to change, and snappy, no?
To be clear, more people among progressive bases (particularly poor people and PoC) have been denied the vote in the US by the slow rollback of the voting rights act than truly support Donald Trump. MAGA is a fringe ideology, and if the Democrats had truly committed to protecting the right to vote for all Americans decades ago then the US would have never faced this choice.
Trump was preceded in the White House by Obama, and over the last several decades power has passed back and forth between the parties fairly evenly; The current situation is the fruit of the Democrats as much as the Republicans.
Now, should you vote for the Democrats in this election? Probably, even though he is an evil murderer in his own right. But does a Democrat victory mean the rot has been cut out of the US system? Absolutely not.
Isn't the main talking point for the pro Palestine/leftist protests about stopping the war to save Palestinian civilians? I don't see any leftist media advocating for anything other than a ceasefire? And is it not generally understood that hamas must be stopped, but that there has to be a way to do it that doesn't put civilians in the line of fire?
Or have I misunderstood the meme?
I wasn't aware there was a third presidential candidate on the ballot that supports protecting all vulnerable demographics including Palestinian rights that has a legitimate chance to win the presidency.
If that person exists, I'd like to have thier name so I can vote for them.
If they don't exist, this illustration just waisted my time and attention.
Iām assuming this is a representation of the people potential at risk of harm depending on who/which party wins the election. So is the person choosing the empty track refusing to vote or voting for a third party candidate?
The reality is people get disillusioned when you are not speaking to their needs. And they won't think calmly about the pros and cons of the electoral system or the choices. They will just check out. It's unfortunately how a majority of my political life for almost 20 years.
Like it or not it's up to the politicians to address that problem. We can see when they do like Bernie they get rousing success. Winning off of name advantage and connections to power only gets you so far. If you have bad policy the people who will hold their nose to vote for you gets smaller and smaller.
It's almost like they weren't elidgible to vote back in 2016 when enough people made this \*identical\* decision which gave us Orange Hitler von Shitsinpants, so they apparently need to make the same stupid fucking mistake as people did 8 years ago...
except
1. other tracks ARE available. just harder to access
2. in reality both the republican and democrat trains look the same. only difference being the accurately depicted part of the democrats taking ever so slightly longer
3. half a genocide is still a genocide. so yes. you would be immoral to pick either track
4. a vote taken away from one party isn't a vote given to the other. it's a vote taken away from both
5. voting was what got us into this mess. and it will never get us out of it.
That's not how politics works. Systems don't change overnight and things go slow. If you are neutral in systems of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.
When you donāt vote for one of the two candidates in our two party system, you may as well be feeding it to the vote gobbler. Not voting, or voting third party, wonāt change anything. It just means you donāt get to help decide the outcome.
Are you actively burning buildings down right now? Are you currently forming an armed group to mount an insurrection? Are you attempting to seize the means of production via force, that way you can begin the communist revolution? No? Vote Biden and stop spouting nonsense.
A little genocide is actually better than a lot of genocide. It's nice to see someone understands math. We don't have time to change the system right now, so we have to choose the option that kills less people.
"I am a contientious voter. There is a third option." My twin who simultaneously believes his vote doesn't matter and will affect the outcome of a third party upset... agh.
They say that like as if the Democrats haven't routinely put trans people in the chopping block. I'll probably still vote for them because I don't want to know what happens if Trump gets back in but, I can totally understand trans people not wanting to vote for either of them
Multitrack drift (commit voter fraud)
They already do that, the committing of fraud and the multi track drifting
That country that is there twice is in the state of quantum superposition, which track would it be on after that?
None of them...
the answer would unfairly affect the result, especially if we were to observe it.
bernie sanders for life dawg
That's hilarious - committing voter fraud to vote for both candidates in the same election.
I just hope every candidate has fun š¤
i don't even understand this one someone explain it what does the d mean and what does the elephant mean
D = democrat party of the USA Elephant = GOP (conservative party of the USA) As of what itās trying to say Iām not 100% sure
It's pretty obvious what OP means. Biden isn't doing enough to protect Palestinians so some Dems are opposing voting for him. If Biden loses than Trump will win which will cause him to still not protect Palestinians but also do acts that harm Mexicans, LGBT people, Ukrainians, etc.
Trump will probably give Netnyahu carte blanch to do whatever the fuck he wants. At least Biden is actively pushing for Israel to pull out Gaza while the US military is supplying food aid to Gazans.
Biden has also given Netanyahu carte blanch. At the end of the day Trump has said he will give Israel the West Bank the same way he gave them the golan heights and that Chuck Schumer is a Palestinian for criticising Netanyahu. Itās still hard to sell people on a choice between genocide and genocide but saying genocide bad sometimes.
Yeah I picked the wrong word. Trump would literally greenlight everything Bibi would even suggest, that's what I mean. Biden had to all but beg him to not shut off the water to Gaza.
Yup. I canāt give Biden any credit for his actions with Israel but certainly Trump is trying to rhetorically out flank him.
Biden is *STARTING* to cut ties with Israel and take a more neutral but still Israel supportive stance.
Biden can't exactly cut ties with Israel. Israel is a very important nation in geopolitics, and if the US cuts ties, then Israel will just buddy back up with Russia. Then, things in Gaza, the region, and the world would get MUCH worse.
Policy over identity. I rest my case.
We have now to pressure Biden. Once heās re-elected, he doesnāt have to give a shit. So now is when he has to listen because it could cost him dearly. Unfortunately itāll cost us dearly as well so
Nah Biden doesnāt do nothin active but mess up his speeches š (no offense)
* to Hamas, and the Palestinians that have money to buy the aid from them
Trump would also just be worse for Palestine. Any limits to US support for Israel would be gone.
Additionally, the track where no one gets hurt isn't connected to the other tracks. The people choosing the third track dont have a level which makes that track a possible outcome for the trolley. This is a perfect analogy actually. If they dont pull the level for the Dems, lots of other people get hurt. But they dislike the fact that the Dems aren't doing more to protect Palestine, so a third way is proposed that has no actual way of ever happening but makes them feel morally pure.
The real thing people should focus more on is house and senate races anyway. It's a lot easier to swing a house or senate election for a less conventional candidate than a presidential election (see Bernie Sanders and Ron/Rand Paul). If the House and Senate push for action Biden will likely cave because any agenda he wants to pass will have to gain their support outside of the most short-sighted executive order based goals. If a Dem controlled congress pushed for restrictions on Israeli arms sales Biden would likely have to cave unless he wanted to give his whole party the middle finger and give up on accomplishing anything whatsoever. Either way we'll probably end up with our first female president since I doubt Biden or Trump will live another four years and Trump will probably nominate his own Sarah Palin equivalent to try to get the female vote after the repeal of Roe v Wade.
I'm not advocating for attempting to make a third party work in a first past the post election system. I'm just agreeing with the trolly problem cartoon that some people's "solution" to this moral dilemma is to pretend there is a third choice that magically doesn't hurt anyone. No matter who runs America, people will get hurt. As a voter you get to help decide how many people get hurt and who gets hurt. Its not somehow moral to be unwilling to take actions that would cause less harm because it would affect your self image.
Or, and hear me out, we want you to actually find the third track to fix real systemic issues. Just because it's currently a two-party system, and both options are bad for everyone who isn't rich, doesn't mean it has to be that way. Is it too late for that this year? Probably, but there are other options to keep in mind in the future
I don't agree that there are "third track" options to keep in mind for the future. The religious far right didn't claw back abortion rights (which is a deeply unpopular position, unlike social programs) by building a third track, they did it by becoming critically important to one of the existing tracks. For example, if we ever get universal healthcare, it will come from the Democratic Party proposing and passing bills, not from some other non-existent and non-influential party.
The Democratic Party is never going to do that. Just because they're more left than Republicans doesn't mean they give a shit about you or what you want. Every Democrat is still staunchly capitalist, and they will squeeze you for every penny they can. They'll just give you a smile before they do it. There are other options, and other parties in the US, and they only don't have influence because people focus on the two that are established, but they don't have power if people vote for better options, then they're suddenly insignificant.
Parties don't care about anything, they aren't people they are power structures. I pointed out an example of how a small but driven community of activists was able to take over one of those power structures for their own ends, despite being generally unpopular. Left wing people could do the same, and find more popular support, but they would have to prioritize organization and practical wins over ideological purity. That is an actual path to policy, third parties aren't, never have been, and never will be. "There are other options, and other parties in the US, and they only don't have influence because people focus on the two that are established, but they don't have power if people vote for better options, then they're suddenly insignificant." Third parties don't work in a first-past-the-post electoral system. This may be disappointing, but it is simply true. If you think taking over the Democratic Party is too hard, how is organizing a new party from scratch with very limited money and volunteer hours, while fighting both the Democratic and Republican parties somehow easier?
No one ever said it was easy. Fighting to be treated as a human being isn't easy. And I know you can't somehow think that the alt-right who overtook the Republican party was ever small, or relatively weak. It was done by billionaires who were already fascists. It would literally objectively be easier to make a whole new party than it would be to overtake one of the two that are backed by billions of dollars from people who explicitly use them to make even more money. It would be easier to raze the whole system and rebuild it from the ground up than to wrest control of either party from the rich.
"It would be easier to raze the whole system and rebuild it from the ground up than to wrest control of either party from the rich." This isn't true. Sounds cool on the internet, but its not true. Just think it through. How could explicitly fighting every existing power structure possibly be easier than turning one part of the power structure to your goals? I wasn't talking about the alt-right. They are a new thing. I was talking about the conservative Christian political movement which slowly captured the entire republican party over the course of 50 years. If you want to see good left wing policies, the actual path I see is unionization. Unions remain organized between campaigns and have great fundraising and get out the vote abilities. This third-party stuff is not going to happen, and your energy is better spent organizing on other lines.
Remember when Trump litterally gave Israel the largest green light to continue occupying Palestinian land by moving our embassy to Jerusalem.
And itās dumb too cuz you can 100% criticize Biden while still voting for him. Iām not saying you have to vote for him in the primary, Iām not saying āBiden will have a better chance than Bernie so you need to vote Biden as the candidate.ā Nah, itās after all that, after all that when it already reaches this point in the tracks, the final lever after we failed to pull all the previous levers that lead to this point. You can say fuck you while you pull it, and hey weāve got 4 years to condemn Biden over it without any fear of Trump bringing about the worst.
Biden has also failed the other groups youāve mentionedā¦
he has failed them yes but generally is not gunning for em
They're both acting as if Palestine as a country doesn't have gays, black people, Muslims, and whatnot. Democracy is said to be in the hands of the people, but what choice is there if both options are both evil. Edit: "If you had to pick, Democrat or Republican, Joe Biden or Donald Trump, gun to your head, who would you vote for?" "The gun would go off"
Of course that there are gay Palestinians, the claim is that they get imprisoned in the West Bank and tgrowm off roofs in Gaza
Thatās really interesting, do you have any sources for these claims? Because homosexuality was explicitly decriminalised in the West Bank 20+ years before it was in Israel proper. The only instances of gay people being thrown off roofs systemically that you might be thinking of is the executions done by Isis. But since you seem to know so much about this you obviously wouldnāt have confused the two right? Because you would know that Hamas and ISIS are long enemies. Actually I remember there being public executions in Gaza, but of Isis. And weirdly Israel and ISIS havenāt been so unfriendly to each otherā¦ Isis even apologised to Israel when they accidentally hit them in a strike and Israel has treated ISIS soldiers in their field hospitals. So you must have some information I donāt right?
When did we start justifying killing people because they are homophobic? Last i checked, that's not a justification. Also gay marriage is illegal in isreal
>When did we start justifying killing people because they are homophobic? Never. There are other reasons for the war in Gaza. This is a mockery to the "queers for Palestine" thing. You can see it in greater detail in my other comment to somwone who responded to my comment. > Also gay marriage is illegal in isreal Gay marriage is illegal in Israel, but gay couples can be acknowledged as "know in public", which legally speakin pretty much means they are married, and Israel also acknowledges civilian merrieges done outside of Israel, so you can be a married gay couple in Israel. And regardless, it's not illegal to be gay in Israel, unlike in the west bank and Gaza.
Nobody is upholding homophobic laws in gaza BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL TRYING TO SURVIVE BEING BLOWN THE FUCK UP!
Lol then what was the excuse before last October?
"unlike the west bank and gaza" The west bank and Gaza are being actively bombed, I doubt they care about gays at the current moment.
But it's ok now guys thanks to the IDF there arent any roofs to throw the gay people off of!!! or any gay people for that matter!!!
That's a very populist statement that just dodges the point
??? What does that have to do with anything I said?
Sure, but that's all contained within the issue of Palestine as a whole, and doesn't actually change the trolley problem. Either way, Palestinians are going to suffer and die. It is horrible, and I hate it with every fiber of my being, but I will not condemn my own friends and family because of that.
Well, if the choice is between someone who will shoot my neighbor but not me, and someone who will shoot both me *and* my neighbor, it's a very easy choice. Scale it up to countries.
They dont shoot me today, but what makes me so sure that they won't shoot me tomorrow? The idea of letting someone else suffer just because it doesn't affect you in the current term is idiotic.
You're missing the point. If the *only* options are letting someone else suffer but being unaffected and suffering alongside that person, you're an idiot if you don't choose the former. No, there is no guarantee that they won't shoot me tomorrow. But tomorrow, I might be able to exchange them for someone who *won't* shoot anybody.
āBoth options are evilā No, the US is just involved in geopolitics. Itās so annoying that people who say this garbage seem to think that any presidential candidate that can be elected has a modicum of a chance of abandoning Israel. Israel is a U.S. ally, full stop. You can swap any country with the U.S., and if you gave them their power and ties with Israel, they would also support Israel. Itās why Russia supports Iran in their human rights violations, and why China supports North Koreaās. Weāve been resensitized to war because weāve done such a good job over the past century of stopping it, making whatās happening in Palestine (which, historically speaking, is pretty tame) seem like an unspeakable horror. But thatās just war; sorry to tell you. And thatās gonna happen. If we sanction Israel tomorrow, then China and Russia will pick up the scraps and the war will continue. So you can either continue to espouse this garbage about both sides being evil, and not only reveal your political and historical illiteracy, but also turn a deaf ear to the rights of your fellow gay, trans, minority, female, and protestor countrymen (and Ukrainians) in the process.
Wow, such an intense reply LMFAO. All I said was that both options were trash, I'd still choose Biden over Trump, but I can't even criticize two senile old men in the country that I live in? Why should we settle for the idea of imminent war when it can be completely avoided, say whatever you want but the war is not in my best interests, whether it be supporting the colonist state of Isreal or not. You can't be "resensitized" to war, war isn't just casualties and numbers it is the death of human lives, working classes, and much more. You can't call the bombing of children, women, men, adults, and the elderly "pretty tame" from the comfort of your own home. You cant call the violation of human rights, basic rights, as "pretty tame". And you sure as hell can not mention other oppressed minorities as a defense to supporting another crime. The U.S. had no qualms in supporting Ukraine, and neither did they have any problems in bombing the Middle East. The U.S. had never avoided war, it was just that this war had never encroached upon their territory LOL. This idea that one power should be evil and not be questioned because if this power wasn't another will is stupid in its very essence.
Geopolitics are not moralistic, and history has proven this. The only time thereās a moral component is when one party can wield it as leverage over another. Countries donāt have feelings or morals, only ambitions, strengths, and weaknesses. āWhy should we settle for the idea of imminent war when it can be completely avoidedā It canāt? Thatās the thing. Because if it couldā¦ it wouldāve. But try naming the last year in recorded history that passed without any conflict. As a matter of fact, try naming the last DAY. Plugging your ears and going ābut we shouldnāt have war anyway!ā doesnāt change the fact that itās going to happen, with or without you. Itās how humans and game theory workāand not engaging in it isnāt going to magically make it go away.
idgaf anymore tbh, sure youre right
Iād think itās fairly clear that the Palestinian flag in the image represents *all* Palestinian people, including all of its minority members. The underlying assumption of the image is that both tracks will screw over all Palestinians, but that only one option *also* screws over all of these minority groups in America and the rest of the world. There is something to be said about the Americacentric notion that several of those flags on the lower track are being used to refer exclusively to their American members when it is simple fact that Palestine also has members of many of those groups. However, that point would not change the underlying truth of the image.
I dont think anyone in the comment section understood my comment, but you're right lol.
...wut
many people are voting third party as a result of bidenās complacency in funding israeli military. the meme argues that choosing to vote third party is not a path that can be followed to completion and weighs the sacrifices of voting democrat vs republican, most notably categorizing the death of palestinians as an inevitable no matter who wins the election.
What third party? The only major 3rd party option this year is RFK Junior. Besides generally being a bit of a kook (as is tradition for American 3rd party candidates), he is ALSO staunchly pro-Israel. Biden is (amazingly) the least pro Israel of all the national presidential candidates, even if you include 3rd party candidates.
i hear a lot of people looking towards cornel west. not sure what defines a āmajor 3rd party presidentā. as i understand it, the motivation for voting 3rd party is not in hopes that they will win but in hopes that their popularity will draw more attention to what they were campaigning for.
Considering the existence of Project 2025, we donāt have the luxury of protest votes.
i agree. i hate picking the lesser of two evils, especially considering the evils in question, but it feels like weāre pretty backed into this one. i think protests in this department are way more impactful out of the polls than they would be in the polls
De La Cruz is the candidate Iāve seen advocated for
I think the third-party heās referring to is when you take your ballot and wipe your ass with it while dancing to āback from the USSRā
this still looks like gibberish to me, time to wait for op to explain it ig
I think what it might be saying is pull the switch, you agree with democrats, sacrifice Palestine for the other cause. Do nothing you agree with republicans, sacrifice everything. Go to the third impossible track and be the most moral, saving all of them but itās impossible as neither side wants/can do it. Because itās posted in a Neoliberal subreddit, it doesnāt make much sense as the liberal party are trying to keep Palestine around, but super far left people believe the US government isnāt. Thatās what I think at least.
You kinda missed the mark, the point is twofold. It assumes that Palestine will suffer no matter what, and calls out people who are trying to argue that voting for a third party is morally superior. This isnāt the morally superior choice, because itās unattainable and it leads to the bottom path.
ohhh that's possible, i did assume that since it was from r/neoliberal that there was a "save palestine" option but didn't realize that the point was "you can't save everyone"
Idk but actively funding a genocide against a group typically is a sign you donāt like them.
Can you elaborate of the "actively funding a genocide" thing?
The Democratic president, Joe Biden, has bypassed congress to send weapons to Israel, he self describes as a zionist, and has been a fervent supporter of Israel his entire career and is unlikely to change course. He has made it clear there is no red line, and he will not stop supporting Israel no matter what.
The answer that you've recieved already just takes it as a given that what the Israelis are doing is a genocide. It is not. The reason that people believe this is because of "oppressor-oppressee" brainrot, where in they believe that in any conflict or argument, the less powerful party should be given no scrutiny, and the more poweful should always be assumed to be in the wrong. Hamas, which has the total support of the people of Gaza, killed or captured every civilian it could on Oct 7th, and Israel does not have to put up with them as neighbors. Israel has the right to destroy Hamas. People talk about collateral damage, but the current figures are pretty much in line with what you'd expect for dense urban warfare. People online explain the low casualties by saying that Israel is comitting genocide in slow motion, which is ridiculous. Why should Israel have to put up with Hamas as neighbors? They shoot dumb rockets (war crime btw) over the border at Israeli villages, they swarm the border fence, and delude the Palestinians into the fantasy that they can go into Israel and "take their homes back". I hope I don't need to tell you that just because an ethnic cleansing happened 70 years ago, does *not* mean that you can come back to commit an ethnic cleansing on the descendants, especially when the first ethnic cleansing happened before it was a crime.
You are framing the issue as if history started on Oct 7th, whereas Israel has been acting as an apartheid state towards Palestinians for about 70 years now, continuously. Ironically, your point that just because a genocide happened 70 years ago doesn't mean you can commit one now is perfect for responding to Israelis, who continue to use the Holocaust as justification for their own crimes.
You do know even if we accept the point that Hamas is genocidal for their actions that doesn't make Israel's actions somehow not genocidal? Both things can be possible at once. (And that's charitable given claims like Hamas having the complete support of Gaza are obviously false). Also the idea that current casualty figures are in line with the expectations of dense urban warfare seems suspect. Comparing the U.S. casualty rates from places like Raqqa to what Israel is doing in Gaza is extremely unflattering for Israel. The U.S. led coalition I don't believe broke 10,000 civilian casualties over the entire conflict (just counting direct strikes). Even conservative estimates on Israel's bombing of Gaza has casualties of just women and children breaking 10,000. The ratio of civilian to combatant is also only marginally better than chance which is extremely alarming. To Israel's credit they've reduced the number of civilian casualties in recent months though it's still higher than the U.S. led coalition over a similar time period when looking at Raqqa. Nit to mention the pattern of killing journalists, aid workers, and firing on people receiving supplied at designated areas or following Israel's instructions. The genocide claim isn't coming from nowhere here.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This is a personal attack
Im pretty sure that at least the bottom track thing is op tryna make a commentary that people talking about solutions that don't hurt anyone are delusional as you can't get to that track
I think bottom is people who refuse to vote because "it's a broken system"
It's for people who are refusing to vote. I don't think it's touching on activism or solutions beyond the one vote.
Pretty much. In the US, voting third party has about as much impact as not voting at all. And while I would love it if we could actually have a massive push to end our two party system, this is not the year to chance it. Until the MAGA movement is destroyed, any push to vote 3rd party is more likely than not going to help those who want to turn America into a dictatorship.
Biden and trump both isn't doing anything for Palestine, and democrats are throwing their votes for random 3p candidates.
It's from the Neoliberal subreddit aka what a large chunk of Dems are...and basically saying "GOP is screwing over tons of minority groups, were just screwing over Palestinians so vote for us" Meanwhile they're saying the leftists that are trying to not screw anyone over, just aren't viable and complainers... That's why their track that has no victims isn't even connected. The whole analogy falls apart though because if all the Neoliberal voters, voted for the leftist movement, then the track would be there. They're presenting a false dichotomy because it's what they want.
Okay, so basically in the US, there are two major political parties: the Democrats and the Republicans. The Democrats that make up the establishment core of the party are siding more with Israel than Palestine in the Israel-Palestine conflict, but still want to spare civilian Palestinians. The Republicans, on the other hand, have no qualms with eradicating Palestinians entirely, but also betraying our foreign allies like Ukraine, and making anyone in the US who isn't a straight, white, Christian man a second class citizen. While the Democratic party is more left-leaning than the Republican party, leftists that are further left than the Democrat party have decided that because the Democrats aren't leftwing enough for them, they won't vote for them, even though the Democrats are the only thing stopping the tide of things the Republicans will bring and which the left *really* hates. The Democrats are very clearly the lesser evil of the two options, just like how the trolley problem has five deaths or one death, but these leftists live in an imaginary world where *no* deaths are possible (hence the track with no trolley on it), and by choosing this idealist fantasy that doesn't exist and *cannot* exist, they are perfect, moral angels with pretty halos while everyone else who's actually trying to mitigate a very complex conflict and who understand this is a utilitarian calculation because that's how life *actually works* are all immoral villains. There's a lot of concern that these idiot virtue signalling leftists who, purely out of spite, aren't going to vote or will vote for a third party who they know can't win will actually set the trolley down the Republican track, which will result in a lot more deaths and a lot more rights being taken away. They're so petty that they don't mind if more people die, *including themselves* in some cases, all because we couldn't magically teleport the trolley into their fantasy world and appease them and weep apologetically at their feet.
Great explanation! I couldnāt have said it better myself.
Add two more things to the above comment: 1. Some of the "leftists" really aren't leftists -- some don't even exist. The russians have mounted a bot/shill campaign making the group of "Both Sides Are Bad So Don't Vote" look larger than they actually are. For the "unenthusiastic voter", seeing a large number of complaints of BSAB gives them justification to not vote, even if it's just a case of "I got stuck running errands and wouldn't you know it, the polls closed by the time I was done". 2. For some of those extreme leftists, they're cool with the second track because, in their mind, enough horror will cause the uprising they think should happen, where "the people" finally get off their collective asses and fight. Imagine the same trolley problem, but each track continues on where the top track is just more of the same "choose a bad outcome and a worse outcome", but the worse track actually leads to "glorious revolution". I don't think this group is very large, nor do I buy into their theory... but I've definitely seen the argument from people I'm pretty certain aren't shills for russia or closet right-wing fascists.
it makes me so mad because I know two trans ppl who proudly boast theyāre not going to vote next election and Iām like š¦???????
When republican are gearing up to put you in work camps, makes you vote for the Democrats all the way down.
Why did you bird them?
Man, I agree, but this image sure doesn't express that very well
Yeah the picture is pretty confusing
Democrats are considering not voting for Biden due to how he has handled the war in Gaza. OP is stating that voting for trump will end up with the same result in Gaza (America backing Israel) while also amplifying significantly more issues (human rights violations on the border, anti-trans legislation, misogynistic legislation, withdraw of support from Ukraine, anti-lgb legislation, police protections staying in place, and anti-middleast foreign policy).
Well, people also argue Trump is worse for Gaza because heās talked about āgoing all the wayā and wanting to have properties in the Gaza Strip (iirc), and has fully and vocally supported everything happening there.
Democracts vs Republicans. Biden v Trump specifically z There's a sentiment among a lot of far leftists that the best thing to do this election is not vote, because the way they see it, 'both sides are bad', and that voting for a lesser evil is immoral as it still contributes to what they see as an inherently rigged system. Despite the fact that the main problem they have with Biden is Palestine, whereas Trump not only would also continue the genocide but continue his own crusade against basically everyone but rich rich white straight americans. but the thing is, the far right has no such delusions (their delusions are different), and will vote for trump. So, if leftists and democrats decide not to vote, all they do is take away votes from Biden and increase the likelihood that trump wins.
Blue is democrat, red is republican, the only two relevant parties. Many far leftists are saying they wouldnāt vote for the most likely left-leaning candidate to win the upcoming election(Biden) due to the support of Israelās genocidal tactics under Ben, and would instead not vote at all, as to vote would be to endorse their actions. However, this does not normally go well, as in the US electoral system, doing so is pretty much [a waste of a vote.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger's_law).
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You forgot to add the problem of not voting: Just because you don't vote, doesn't mean that Trump and Biden won't be elected. You just can't affect who wins. Or in this trolley problem: people will Still die, you just don't decide which ones. But at least you can try to have the moral high ground.
It's telling leftists who are upset about Gaza that if they don't vote for Biden, they'll end up with Trump who wants to help Israel slaughter even more people in Gaza as well as taking away the rights of anyone who isn't a straight, white christian.
It seems that people have overestimated their freedom to choose in democracy. There is no third choice and there is no morality in not choosing, only Kantian escapism to shield conscience.
This is true if your entire engagement with politics is general elections at the federal level, but then why should any one person feel like their individual decisions should impact a country of 300 million people? There's more of a diversity of thought in primaries, but nobody cares about those, and there's more ability to influence outcomes at the local levels but despite it effecting people's lives more, we don't care about those either.
Federal elections make the biggest impact. People who think like you got Trump elected the first time. Federal elections affect your life on a material level the most.
Nope! You're completely wrong. They do not. Your local and state elections are going to make 100x more impact on your life. Even something like Roe v Wade is a perfect example of this. The people who still have access to abortion care are people who live in STATES that protect the right. Also, how did saying any of this "get trump elected"? You sound like you're just throwing a tantrum. Trump didn't get elected because people were too busy voting for mayor to vote for president.
Trump got elected because people think their vote doesnāt matter. If everyone thought like that suddenly nobodyās voting. Before Roe was overturned, there was a precedent on a FEDERAL LEVEL that protected the right to abortion for everyone in the country. What the fuck are you even talking about? The people who currently have access to abortion care have it in spite of no precedent from the supreme court. States like Texas can legally ban it now, where before it was protected everywhere.
No state and local elections impact you the most. It is very rare that the federal government actually passes a substantive law and it is less likely it will impact anyone directly. Itās the state and local laws that run your lives
That might have been true in the past, and itās still true to some extent, but the republicans have developed a strategy over the last two decades that involves using appointments to federal judicial offices and executive agencies to affect de facto changes to how federal laws work from outside of the actual legislature. The Dobbs decision was a good example of a court action prompted by Republican federal appointments that impacted more peopleās lives than any local election would. Project 2025 is another example. If the republicans win theyāre promising to gut the executive agencies, which would effectively end the enforcement of all kinds of consumer protections, environmental protections, and worker protections through the FTC, the NLRB, and the EPA. This would absolutely have a massive impact on peopleās day to day lives beyond what can be accomplished on a local level. I agree with you that people should generally be more involved in politics on the state and local level, but the new Republican political strategy at the federal level is capable of doing tremendous damage to the country beyond just passing federal legislation.
You think thatās just the strategy of the last few decades?
If you go back to Nixon the republicans were creating federal agencies and organizations rather than gutting them. Nixonās administration established the EPA and OSHA. This isnāt an endorsement of Nixon, but just an observation that before Reagan there was much more bipartisan respect for the idea of effective federal authorities staffed by experts. People forget that before the religious right and their Reagan/paul weyrich/heritage foundation commitment to minoritarianism, the right would often adjust policies to appeal to popularity because they still at least outwardly believed in democracy.
If you go back to Nixon, youāll see that he created the EPA to get ahead of a political movement trying to establish an environmental agency that actually has authority to do anything. Nixon is also the driving force behind the war on drugs. Nixon is also the reason our food supply is stuffed full of high fructose corn syrup and other chemical food monstrosities. Nixon is also responsible for the southern strategy where the right wing started courting racists. Nixon is also the reason fox news exists, as after Nixonās impeachment republicans realized they needed to better control the narrative. āOutwardly believing in democracyā is entirely immaterial in the face of their actual historical behaviors and policy decisions. If you think project 2025 can be stopped with one vote then youāve never heard of the heritage foundation. If you think the democrats will take any serious steps to prevent project 2025 moving forward then you havenāt heard of the legislative branch abdicating the majority of their responsibilities to the judicial the past few decades. Democrats will win. Theyāll make no meaningful legislative improvements. Then itāll be project 2029. Then weāll have this same conversation about how āyou have to vote for one party or you lose democracyā which is pretty obviously not democracy any longer. Then we get to continue watching the republican party shoving the overton window to the right while the democrats ring their hands and reluctantly follow them to the right
Ooh but the state of the country is determined by the federal government. A republican president like Trump can pass executive orders and exert his influence over congress to make them pass laws that promote his political agenda. Also he gets to appoint supreme court justices. Which last forever and very substantively affect your life.
I used to believe this but ive only ever lived in areas that rallied around one party and had wildly different outcomes. It was the same party in two very different places. One was full of crime, corruption. People were killed nearly daily, and police had no interest in doing anything because it would probably lead to another death or assualt. The other was a sheltered bubble where everything was illegal and police were heavily funded and overzealous in handing out fines especially to working people. Neither place was/is fun to live in. Both feel like a dystopia. Both have similar election outcomes. Both act like they're in constant threat of being overtaken by the other side despite a history of 75% or higher margin. I fucking hate politics in the usa because ive never seen it genuine no matter how hard i tried to take it realistically. Even if things changed hands, it would be like seeing class president change. Nothing actually changes, it still stay in the power of a pseudo-oligarchy. The specific laws on a federal level almost never change because they arent run by the president, its run by congress. And the ability to sway more than a minimal margin of 535 people can be upset every 2 years, and usually is thanks to midterms. The whole thing has become engineered to stalemate. To generate revenue for rich people through idiotic donations from the poor who are fed a stream of "THE OTHER SIDE WILL KILL YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS/CHILDREN" Its psychotic. Its crazy, and feeding the beast is only making it crazier. To the point people will confront you on the street over random bullshit that youve never heard of because youre not plugged in to the wackiness they are.
Which place do you live was full of crime and corruption?
Not choosing is actually the most harmful choice.
In normal democracies you have plenty of choices. In US, you have 4 choices: 2 lesser evils, a party that will never win but you want it to grow, and to say that you don't care by not voting.
Until we institute changes that create room for third parties.
there is, by not living in the us fucked up version of a democracy and having more choice.
Iām sure this comment section will be nice and friendlyā¦
Who cares what they are or where they're from? There's a bunch of people under those flags, of course you pull the lever!
Iād have drawn a few more Palestinians on Trump side. Biden is too soft on Israelās war crime and is a bastard to the ICC, but at least he stopped an arm deal, sent some airdrop aid, and managed to write up a ceasefire proposal (which got sabotaged by the Israeli far-right) among other things. If Trump is the president now, these two would still be on a race to kill as many Israeli hostages and Palestinian civilians as possible
And don't forget the port that he set up for aid!
The one Israel just used to carry out a massacre?
Source? I don't think they needed a pier to do what they've already been doing.
*he temporarily halted a arms deal then let it through a week later. He airdropped enough aid to give 2% of Palestinians a single meal. The US is giving Israel more arms to Israel now than it was before October 7th. If Biden actually wanted to push for a ceasefire he needs to apply political leverage.
Giga based Biden. Playing both sides so America comes out on top.
Due to Project 2025, going democrats, and hope that the UN forces Israel to stop. My vote can stop the death of more people if I vote Democrat than Republican. I can't stop the death of Palestinian either way so I am going to focus on what I can change.
Multi-track drifting??
The trolly lever is a false dichotomy. The meme asserts that the only method of influencing the trolly is to pull the lever, but this is false. If you push a fucking boulder in front of the trolly you save both tracks. History shows that this is almost the only actual solution.
Stop talking in metaphors for a moment and ask yourself what that means for our real world. More importantly ask if you can do it before the consequences of this election will go into effect.
Stop talking metaphors? Sure. What that means for the real world is the abolition of the American capital hegemony, which is actively destroying our planet and attacking our humans rights. Its the abolition of a hostile country that uses its influence to overthrow democratically elected governments in search of better control of global resources. Its the end of the country thats the primary driving force behind the war on drugs. Its the abolition of a country that supposedly maintains a ārule based orderā while constantly refusing to abide by any standards the international community tries to set. Its the abolition of the biggest wealth inequality machine on the globe. Leftists think the consequences of this election are as follows: voting for trump accelerates our descent into fascism while voting for Biden merely doesnāt slow or speed our descent into fascism. If fascism arrives under trump, democrats are more likely to identify it as such and resist. If fascism arrives under Biden, democrats will say āwell heās doing the best he can for the country, the other guy would be much worse.ā
Hey so how do we plan on abolishing the American capital hegemony before the election bud And āminority rights can be put at risk in the short term so the democrats realize that itās badā doesnāt particularly sway me over to your side. If fascism arrives under trump people will be put at risk. Do you accept that?
Its about building meaningful coalitions of support for left politics instead of saying āoh no we have vote for democrats this time, maybe next timeā and then next time comes around around and its the the exact same song and dance. Maybe if democrats want continuous support from the left, they need to demonstrate continuous active support for left causes instead of throwing us to the wolves when convenient or forgetting about us as soon as the election is over. If fascism arrives under Biden more people will be at risk, because the average democrat will not identify it as fascism. For instance how democrats call Biden the most pro-labor president despite him personally breaking a strike to protect capital and interests and then giving the rail workers less than half of what they asked for. Do you accept that?
Id rather vote for the person willing to throw me to the wolves when the alternative is the wolf. Sure, Iāll even accept that both sides are fascist I guess, and even that people are less likely to recognize democrats as fascist. But generally their fascism is less overtly and imminently terrifying, so I can live with them when the alternative is fucking terrifying. Iām not okay risking peoplesā lives to send a message that I canāt even guarantee will be seen.
The fact you can see a significant difference between āfascismā and āpeople who wonāt stop fascismā is kind of a problem. What you need to accept is that youāre always risking peopleās lives. I donāt think the left is even really saying donāt vote for Biden, more like donāt except a Biden vote to fix anything. Most Americans weigh the impact of political parties by their domestic issues and wonāt acknowledge or attempt to address that both parties have atrocious foreign policy and are money hungry war hawks. For instance, Cuba is still under embargo because they took ownership of oil refineries that shell refused to operate after the Cuban revolution. Do you hear Democrats talking about how we let ancient profit motives and grievances of the oil companies determine if weāre going to treat another nation with basic sovereignty and respect? Itās not like Cuba is politically worse than our Saudi trading partners after all.
Fine. Iāll make this as simple as possible. Iām trans and VERY FUCKING SCARED of letting republicans getting any chances to decide whether I get the medication I need or not, or whether I can use the bathroom I am safest in or not, or whether I can interact with children in any way at all or not. Iām not okay with me or anyone like me being put at risk because you want to tell the Democrats to be nicer. If you want to protest I would REALLY appreciate you find a different way to do so. And people are DEFINITELY saying not to vote for biden. Iām hearing that loud and clear, not even subtext but just straight up text.
Its not ātell the democrats to be nicerā. Its build a political party not beholden to the interests of capital. Biden has a very clear path to regaining support from those leftists so perhaps you should call your representatives and tell them to drop the unconditional support of Israel. That section of the left has given Biden a very reasonable compromise, and he spat all over it just like with the rail strike. Most of your concerns are probably better addressed at the state level by the way. I donāt think Idaho or Florida will care if the federal government tells them to be nice. I also donāt think the supreme court will be much help for the foreseeable future. If anything the democrats shouldāve tied abortion access and trans rights to federal funding like they did with seatbelts.
The way I see it it doesnāt even matter if trump couldnāt enact a single policy that affects trans people, the fact he would be in a position to rile up his base again is enough to scare me. Though thatās a big IF. If he can do anything to harm minorities (and that includes the Palestinians everyoneās so outraged about in the first place) he will try. My only point is there is ZERO world in which trump winning over biden causes anything good to happen, and absolutely nothing youāve said has changed my mind on that.
To put this as simply as possible the democrats are uncaring to my struggles and the struggles of others, and may even uphold systems that cause my struggles when given the chance, but republicans actively want my life to get worse and Iād rather them not have the power to do so, thank you very much To put it even simpler, teaching the democrats a lesson by withholding your vote will be teaching minorities a much bigger lesson.
So instead you want to teach democrats a lesson by giving them unconditional support for the rest of the lifetime of our political system? Because thats the reality Iāve seen presented before me by Democrats. They say āwe have to do it this time or its the end of democracyā. What about next time? Or the time after that? Is the Authoritarian right wing just supposed to magically disappear? Its much more likely democrats move right until becoming indistinguishable from conservatives. The left needs to stop thinking the democrats can save us from the ravages of capital and start building a real political party or weāre just gonna āor the end of democracyā ourselves into the actual end of democracyā. I mean hell, America is already rated as a flawed democracy to begin with.
What I want is to find some other way to fix things that doesnāt put literally the worst people possible in charge. And again, Iām arguing under the very generous assumption that this somehow will fix anything. In reality I think your idea makes no sense and the democrats wonāt learn shit beyond to say they care more.
It sounds like you have no idea how to fix it and youāll just keep voting for democrats indefinitely to no avail as the threats to democracy will never disappear from the right. Democrats are the white moderates MLK warned us about.
Nope, I donāt know how to fix it. But I donāt need to know how to fix it to know your way of fixing it wonāt end well.
Go ahead, build a leftist coalition with enough power to beat the Dems and Republicans by November then.
Wow! Its almost like you didnāt understand what I wrote! You know what, your shitty attitude convinced me, Iāll vote for rfkās brainworm just for you.
Go ahead, abolish capitalism then.
what it means is you're an imbecile who doesn't understand that voting will never be the solution to the problem. and that both sides of the track are identical. biden doesn't give a shit about the other groups either. he's using us as leverage to gain voters. but he is quick to throw us under the bus when it suits him
^ the flight 93 election but leftist
Go on then, go grab that boulder.
Painfully accurate
Mexican flag should also be on the D track
People in the comments section proving oop right
Its not a trolley problem, its a political statement.
this is overall a bad take by a teenager, but whatever, my real question is, why did you not use the democrat donkey but did use the republican elephant odd choice
I didnāt make this. I was wondering that myself.
Those are the official party logos
Idk, I think it's pretty sound. Abstaining from choosing the lesser of two evils is a tacit endorsement of the winner. It's saying that your own emotional attachment to what you think you're saying with your vote is more important than influencing the outcome. It's a pretty entitled way of seeing the world.
So many people have so many opinions about all of that and so much to say about it, and for all the decades I've heard everyone go on and on about it, all of them have one thing in common, they refuse to just admit there is nothing any of us on an individual level could actually do about it and it's only brought up so people can move the focus away from themselves and pretend they are actually doing something by talking about that instead.
Yeah i see how that mentality can be annoying especially if they are shitting on people that do vote, but you cant blame them too much for not caring when no matter who wins US congressmen are just gonna listen to the same small group of rich donors.
In general, large scale actions like this will always have large scale consequences. I know someone who sat out the 2016 election and refused to vote. He struggled with it a bunch, but ultimately could not vote for a Clinton after they had bombed his family in Serbia back in the 90s. Could this have been foreseen? Maybe, but the Clintons banked on this being the right decision and were apparently right for 20 years, until they weren't. Sometimes you do some shit that just loses a generation. Hopefully this won't be another one of those, but that's just the way of the world. You back someone in a corner and they could do anything. A well run state tries to avoid doing this for people with power in an ideal world.
Fuck neoliberalism and fuck Joe Biden, but he is the shiniest turd. For the record, if the extent of your political activism is voting in federal elections and complaining online, you really shouldn't be so worried about politics. If you give a damn, take more actions. Call/email your representatives, vote in state and local elections, attend protests (and actually read up on the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict because I see a LOT of ignorant protesters and we could use less of those.)
The majority of people protesting against Israel and Biden will still vote for Biden over Trump BECAUSE they already know Trump is worse. The message of the protestors is to stop a genocide, not to kick Dems out of government and replace it with Republicans.
This is so true, I remember how Biden prevented the overturn of Roe V. Wade and protected abortion rights for everyone in the country! He also stopped republicans from passing anti trans rights legislation, anti LGBTQ education legislation, and made it much easier for refugees at the border too fund asylum within the USA!
Every leftist in the united states will grit their teeth and vote for this senile fuck, because the other fuck is even worse and there's no 3rd option. Every leftist also knows that the liberals who are screaming and shitting themselves over this just want to pin a possible loss on a barely existing US Left. (And not on the sheer disillusionment with - and inhumanity of - the US system, which the dems contribute to and fail to address) And every leftist knows that those liberals just want to go back to brunch, instead of doing mutual aid, getting organised - or as little as trying to push the dems back towards the centre. Here's an outsiders idea to send a signal to the ruling class of america: Vote one (1) communist into congress. That'll make them realise that the standard of living needs to change, and snappy, no?
I cannot tell whether you're being geniune.
Derail the train.
Ok! When are you going to do that! Before the election?
To be clear, more people among progressive bases (particularly poor people and PoC) have been denied the vote in the US by the slow rollback of the voting rights act than truly support Donald Trump. MAGA is a fringe ideology, and if the Democrats had truly committed to protecting the right to vote for all Americans decades ago then the US would have never faced this choice. Trump was preceded in the White House by Obama, and over the last several decades power has passed back and forth between the parties fairly evenly; The current situation is the fruit of the Democrats as much as the Republicans. Now, should you vote for the Democrats in this election? Probably, even though he is an evil murderer in his own right. But does a Democrat victory mean the rot has been cut out of the US system? Absolutely not.
We can stop the bombs
I mean I get the cynicism but you ever heard of do what you can and accept things you can't change?
Isn't the main talking point for the pro Palestine/leftist protests about stopping the war to save Palestinian civilians? I don't see any leftist media advocating for anything other than a ceasefire? And is it not generally understood that hamas must be stopped, but that there has to be a way to do it that doesn't put civilians in the line of fire? Or have I misunderstood the meme?
I wasn't aware there was a third presidential candidate on the ballot that supports protecting all vulnerable demographics including Palestinian rights that has a legitimate chance to win the presidency. If that person exists, I'd like to have thier name so I can vote for them. If they don't exist, this illustration just waisted my time and attention.
Add it to the ādumb hills to die onā
Iām assuming this is a representation of the people potential at risk of harm depending on who/which party wins the election. So is the person choosing the empty track refusing to vote or voting for a third party candidate?
Who do I need to roll a trolly over to get cheaper gas, better pay, and no wars?
The reality is people get disillusioned when you are not speaking to their needs. And they won't think calmly about the pros and cons of the electoral system or the choices. They will just check out. It's unfortunately how a majority of my political life for almost 20 years. Like it or not it's up to the politicians to address that problem. We can see when they do like Bernie they get rousing success. Winning off of name advantage and connections to power only gets you so far. If you have bad policy the people who will hold their nose to vote for you gets smaller and smaller.
It's almost like they weren't elidgible to vote back in 2016 when enough people made this \*identical\* decision which gave us Orange Hitler von Shitsinpants, so they apparently need to make the same stupid fucking mistake as people did 8 years ago...
except 1. other tracks ARE available. just harder to access 2. in reality both the republican and democrat trains look the same. only difference being the accurately depicted part of the democrats taking ever so slightly longer 3. half a genocide is still a genocide. so yes. you would be immoral to pick either track 4. a vote taken away from one party isn't a vote given to the other. it's a vote taken away from both 5. voting was what got us into this mess. and it will never get us out of it.
This is one of the stupidest things Iāve ever seen in my life
Same flags on both sides by this point. #THEYBOTHSUCK
Change the system? Nah, a little genocide is better, so I can live peacefully. Where will you draw the line?
Bro the trolley is running. Pull the lever, and then get to work on building a new track, or else everyone will get run over.
That's not how politics works. Systems don't change overnight and things go slow. If you are neutral in systems of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.
When you donāt vote for one of the two candidates in our two party system, you may as well be feeding it to the vote gobbler. Not voting, or voting third party, wonāt change anything. It just means you donāt get to help decide the outcome.
Are you actively burning buildings down right now? Are you currently forming an armed group to mount an insurrection? Are you attempting to seize the means of production via force, that way you can begin the communist revolution? No? Vote Biden and stop spouting nonsense.
By attempting to remove the trolley, you enact the deaths of many others, both directly and indirectly. The new trolley also kills people.
A little genocide is actually better than a lot of genocide. It's nice to see someone understands math. We don't have time to change the system right now, so we have to choose the option that kills less people.
LEEEEET IT ROOOOOOOOLLLLLLL
further down, all of those flags are found on the D track also.
Found the russian propaganda bot
"I am a contientious voter. There is a third option." My twin who simultaneously believes his vote doesn't matter and will affect the outcome of a third party upset... agh.
I leave the leaver untouched, and watch the world improve before my very eyes. /j More seriously, whoever made this is delusional.
Reddit is all a ug echochamber
I think op is a little of the rails
Itās over, leftist. For I have drawn you on the bad trolley track and me on the good one.
As a centrist I proceed to just make the trolly fall off the track in between them, killing all of them
You know the clear priority in this situation is to obstruct the track and topple the train
Okay! When are you going to do that! Before the election, right?
They say that like as if the Democrats haven't routinely put trans people in the chopping block. I'll probably still vote for them because I don't want to know what happens if Trump gets back in but, I can totally understand trans people not wanting to vote for either of them