• WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    You still don’t have any red lines though. There’s nothing a candidate could do, no behavior so monstrous, no atrocities so grand that would ever make you not vote for the lesser of two evils. Again, you would vote for Mussolini if he was running against Hitler.

    If not, where is your red line? What would a Democrat have to do before you would refuse to vote for them, regardless of who they were running against?

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      There’s nothing a candidate could do, no behavior so monstrous, no atrocities so grand that would ever make you not vote for the lesser of two evils.

      Yeah that’s basic moral judgement. You realize that the alternative to the lesser evil is the greater evil, yeah? For as grand and magnificent as the atrocities you’re talking about are, the existence of a greater evil implies even grander and more magnificent atrocities. Given a choice between “grand and magnificent atrocities,” and “grander and more magnificent atrocities,” which would you choose?

      Is it worth allowing the grander and more magnificent atrocities to happen just to fool yourself into thinking you had no part in it?

      • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m not entertaining a philosophical debate with someone who equates Mussolini and Hitler.

        We can try again when you’re older.

        -disguy_ovahea@lemmy.word, c. 1939