• queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Except the bottom track loops around to run over everyone else when the Supreme Court decides it wants to hurt more people.

      Let’s say the Supreme Court decides to end gay marriage at a federal level and send it back to the states. Harris won’t do shit to help people in red states, she’ll just tell them to vote for Democrats in 2026/2028 but otherwise ignore them.

      • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        Controlled opposition parties like the US democrats love to dangle these carrots during election seasons. Roe v Wade in red states was unrolled under Biden, while he held up his hands and said there was nothing he could do about it. But as soon as election season rolls around, they’re suddenly champions of women’s rights. If they were to actually do something about it, they’d no longer be able to campaign on it.

      • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m starting to think now the trolley problem should be reframed as a catch-22 / false choice / manufactured consent.

        Who constructed this trolley? Why are there only two options shown? Do these options actually match reality? etc.

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        More of an intelligence test. “Do you understand the fact that inaction has consequences?” Helps separate adults from children.

        • halyk.the.red@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Makes sense. As a grown adult, I also require overly simplistic illustrations in order to grasp concepts.

          • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            When you are filtering out the young, the dumb, and those arguing in bad faith, overly simplistic is an excellent first filter. If they can pass that base level filter of rudimentary critical thinking skills, then you can feel free to enter into more nuance and subtlety.

            No point in engaging with those who can’t even grasp the simplest concepts.

            • halyk.the.red@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Seems like a bigger waste of time to just end up engaging with people who can vault over pictures, but can’t handle nuance.

              Start the discussion on an intellectual level, and those who can’t grasp it can go read until they’re ready to talk.

              Or they can go find someone else who will argue with cartoons or whatever, I’m sure they’ll be happier there.

              • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                2 months ago

                When it comes to battling fascist-enabling rhetoric, I prefer as comprehensive an approach as possible. In truth, the circle jerk tankies and bad faith actors won’t be swayed by any amount of intellectual engagement. The goal isn’t to convince them, it’s to publicly counter their garbage takes in as simple and straightforward a way as possible, in order to avoid letting sincere but impressionable leftists fall for superficially reasonable looking moral imperatives.

    • linkhidalgogato@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      u think voting for california’s ex head pig is gonna keep black people safe from pigs??? how does that work? how does continuing the “i think we can all agree what we need is to found the police” regime make black people safe from pigs?

      Also how would republicans be worse than Palestinians than the continuation of a regime currently led by a self proclaimed non jewish zionists.

      also also democrats could have and did nothing to protect womens bodily autonomy and they have done next to nothing for lgbtq people or any other oppressed peoples for that matter.

      but non of that matters there is regime in power which is genocidal which has done everything in its power to support and aid a genocide, u can either support it or not, that is all.

      • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        That, and also they drew the picture in a way that makes genocide of palestinians inevitable. Genocide is not inevitable, no matter how much US democrats think it is, and tell everyone to get in line behind it.

        Its so easy to construct trolley problems that have nothing to do with reality, and don’t represent the options actually available, or even the problem / scenario correctly.