• rbesfe@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    Strawmen belong in fields, not comment sections.

    Also: does every ml user have an allergy to pragmatic problem solving?

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      57 minutes ago

      This is an article about why Arab-Americans are abandoning the Democrats for endorsing and materially supporting genocide, and the response is “Trump would be bad too!” Yea, of course he would be, Harris is so bad that she isn’t a solution either.

      Also: does every ml user have an allergy to pragmatic problem solving?

      What do you mean by this?

    • basmati@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      20 hours ago

      “pragmatic” problem solving is killing all undocumented migrants to solve the housing and work shortages in the US.

      Pragmatic problem solving was the excuse for the necessity of the Holocaust. Pragmatic problem solving is making black people count as two thirds a white person to appease fascists.

      Pragmatic problem solving is a liberal appointing Hitler chancellor so commies don’t get power and Nazis stop doing violence.

      Pragmatic problem solving is behind the worst human atrocities. Let’s not pretend it’s ever been good.

      • Lightor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        No average dem is fantasizing about Republicans hurting people. This is nonsense, pathetic, and textbook straw man, all your word salad doesn’t change this. We get it, you like Trump, stop with all the games.

        • basmati@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 hours ago

          I’m not voting for genocide. In fact I already voted against genocide.

          The Dems nor Republicans have a candidate that is against genocide.

          • Lightor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            9 hours ago

            So you voted for someone you know won’t get elected. So you’re ok with the worse of the two between Dem and Rep? Because you had a chance to help prevent the worse of the two coming into office and didn’t. Choosing to cast a vote that won’t impact the outcome helps literally no one. The Gaza situation is not all that is happening in the world.

            • basmati@lemmus.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 hours ago

              I’m not ever going to vote for a genocide, and there is no moral high ground if you do .

              • Lightor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                8 hours ago

                But you realize that a Dem or Rep is who will be president. And they won’t handle the situation exactly the same. So you’re allowing the person who will handle it worse a better chance to be in power. That is literally what you’ve done. So if the worst happens, the option you could have helped prevent, just know you had a chance to make it less bad and decided your conscious was worth more than people’s lives.

                • basmati@lemmus.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  8 hours ago

                  There is no better or worse in actively arming and participating in a genocide.

                  • Lightor@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 hours ago

                    Yes, yes there is. Omfg. Honestly look at this and tell me there isn’t.

                    If there are 3 candidates.

                    Candidate A wants to spend 100 mil a month arming people to commit genocide.

                    Candidate B wants to spend 1 mil a month arming people to commit genocide.

                    Candidate C wants no spending.

                    It’s obvious candidate A is much worse, 100x worse actually. Now if candidate A and B are very close in who will win, while candidate C has 0 chance how can you best help people. Voting for candidate C does nothing. They won’t get elected. But voting for candidate B prevents as much death as you are able. By voting for C you are one less vote against A. So if A wins, you’ve not prevented that in any way and have enabled 100x more death than B. If you want to stop death you need to look at the situation and see how you can have impact. Being overly idealistic can end up hurting you, like voting for C and changing nothing when you had a chance to save lives.

        • Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          9 hours ago

          buddy, half of the comments on this post are libs fantasizing about mass deportations, and acting smug the whole time. they cannot wait to say “I told you so” when the camps get built. stop kidding yourself.

          • Lightor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Lol half the comments? Really? I just scrolled and don’t see 1 in 2 comments being about fantasizing about mass deportation. Almost like you’re being just as hyperbolic as the comic is lol.

        • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          12 hours ago

          “We get it, you like Trump, stop with all the games.”

          Pot meets kettle. So I guess all of that talk about “strawmen” was just projection. Okay. I see what you did there.

          • Lightor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            Saying some BS like a group of people fantasizes about people getting hurt, yeah that sounds very on brand for Trump and people who follow him.

            Also, assuming who someone is voting for is not a straw man lol, might wanna look up the term. And when someone says being pragmatic is bad, yeah, sounds like a Trump voter. Pragmatic literally means: dealing with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations. Look it up.

            If you think that’s bad then you’re literally living in a fantasy world of theories and what ifs. Kinda like his tariffs idea or injecting bleach, or a million other stupid ideas he’s had.

            • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              I see you are now trying to construct a new straw man. You might want to look up the term “projection.” Go ahead, look it up.

    • Djtecha@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Yes, yes they do. Pretty sure it’s either a bot farm or dumb ass undergrads…