• Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    The meme didn’t say they were the same, they said they both crush children. People gotta come with a list before it’s okay? Not great for memes.

    (It’s not just Palestinian children either btw)

    • hperrin@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      16 hours ago

      They’re literally drawn as the same person with different colors.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      16 hours ago

      The meme heavily implies that the only difference is that one is polite and one is rude, which is not the only difference.

      They both operate the exact same Palestinian child crushing machine, but one also operates a number of additional child crushing machines. People didn’t support the lesser evil because they’re more polite, they do it to keep those additional child crushing machines from operating.

      • 挂路灯人@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        16 hours ago

        You think Palestine is the only Bi-partisan machine? You really need to open a history book. Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Syria and all the rest are all bi-partisan.

      • Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I understand why people do it but what I don’t understand is why they are content to continue supporting any child crushing and discourage people from discussing it.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Discussing it is fine, I think people only get touchy about it right before an election because they don’t want other people to lose sight of the utility of voting lesser evil. I think the ones who actually think about it don’t support any child crushing, they just recognize that the election has a binary outcome, and they’d rather fight the lesser evil than the greater one.

          At the end of the day, voting in bourgeoisie elections is just choosing the enemy you’ll be fighting, and choosing the lesser child crushing gives you a fight you’re more likely to win.

          • Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            When else can people put pressure on the lesser evil to “tone down” the evil? Or take the opportunity to ensure folks know about the evil? Isn’t it when things look their worst they say “well actually we need to be slightly more evil to get those swing voters”?

            Maybe I don’t understand the US system but I believe platforms are individual to candidates and that there are no overall party platforms that the candidates are expected to adhere to. How is there no shift to less evil under these conditions? So many individual elections for individual people and a whole lot of wack people getting elected.

            and they’d rather fight the lesser evil than the greater one.

            I think this is my point: when do they fight the lesser evil?

              • Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                5 hours ago

                I decided against continuing the convo you are replying to because it felt like the other person and I had both explained our points of view and anything further might feel like trying to convince them to adopt mine but I had wanted to bring up primaries.

                Doesn’t this same thing play out in the primaries? Otherwise how could the lesser evil stay evil?

                • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 hours ago

                  It can happen in primaries too, yes. But if your preferred candidate loses the primary, you can still vote for the candidate who does win the primary in the general election, so it is generally safer to voice your real opinion in the primaries rather than vote strategically.

                  • Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    3 hours ago

                    I guess what I don’t understand is how the candidates in the general election can be so unpalatable if the primaries are the place where people can ask for what they really want.

            • dubs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              14 hours ago

              Maybe I don’t understand the US system but I believe platforms are individual to candidates and that there are no overall party platforms that the candidates are expected to adhere to.

              While the platforms are technically individual, they aren’t really. They have to get approval from their bosses (donors) on what they get to run on. And the few actual good things that they run on has to be just empty rhetoric. If they get elected, they are expected to immediately forget those things.

              when do they fight the lesser evil?

              Thats the neat part, they don’t. The cycle goes like this:

              • It’s election season. You can’t point out that the child-killers want to kill children, or the evil people will win.
              • Election season is over. The child-killers are in power, but their hands are tied because of the evil people who aren’t in power. Its unrealistic to expect the child-killers to just stop helping the evil people kill children.
              • It’s election season. You can’t point out that the child-killers have been killing children, or the evil people will win.
              • Election season is over. The child-killers aren’t in power. What do you expect them to do? They have to keep helping the evil people kill children.

              Rinse, repeat

            • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              14 hours ago

              Maybe I don’t understand the US system but I believe platforms are individual to candidates and that there are no overall party platforms that the candidates are expected to adhere to.

              Sincerely don’t mean to be rude, but the first 7 words provide the answer. Even when there are no official overall party platforms, the eyebrows waggle in a certain direction. Especially where campaign funding is concerned.

              I think this is my point: when do they fight the lesser evil?

              I do my part. Many others do too. The fighters are in the minority, which is why it’s so important that the bystanders at least make our work easier.