PugJesus

@PugJesus@lemmy.world

Alt of PugJesus for ensuring Fediverse compatibility and shit

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

PugJesus,

Things can get heated in certain threads.

PugJesus,

In PoliticalMemes, but it was removed for not being political(?)

PugJesus, (edited )

I’m so glad we couldn’t ignore this fine protest too

PugJesus, (edited )

Seems like the biggest difference between your example and mine is that one is demanding equality and one is demanding forced segregation.

Which means, in objective terms, the biggest difference between our examples is whether you (or, if you prefer, anyone who isn’t a horrendous cretin) agree with it.

Protests must be addressed carefully - a government that concedes to every large-scale protest has neither democracy nor rule of law - likewise, a government that concedes to no large-scale protests has probably neither democracy nor rule of law.

PugJesus, (edited )

But a democracy that can outright ignore (and put down by force, even) a protest demanding something that is by all accounts reasonable

Reasonable is nothing but a point of view, man. That’s the point of democracy. Democracy does not create reasonable solutions - it creates solutions that are approved of by the majority.

If you want reasonable governance, find a philosopher-king that agrees with you. Democracy provides consensus governance, or what is as close as seems possible.

is, what, exactly?

A government that doesn’t collapse because a large number of people gather in one place. Not much else is inherently implied by a government that doesn’t concede to large-scale protests.

PugJesus,

And what is your point of view on supporting genocide, then?

My point of view? That supporting genocide is unreasonable.

If we all agree that supporting genocide is bad then i’d think we’d all also agree that protesting against it is… Good?

Yep. Both from an ordinary moral standpoint (“genocide is bad”) and a civic moral standpoint (“protesting is a civic duty”).

And it might be one of those kinds of protests that a democracy isn’t supposed to ignore.

It’s one of those kinds of protests that a moral government isn’t supposed to ignore. Although, arguably, if there was such a thing as a moral government to begin with, protests against genocide support would not be necessary.

But ‘moral’ and ‘democratic’ are two entirely different concepts. The purpose of a democratic government is to represent the will of the people - the consensus. The process through which that will, that consensus, is confirmed is elections, or recall petitions in some governments, not protests. Protests are merely a warning in most democratic governments, that there is some amount of groundroots support for (or against) an issue - it is not a confirmation of the opinion of the whole electorate, but that of exceptionally animated (and dutiful) citizens.

PugJesus,

edit: i really have to admire that you’ve gotten to the point where you’re arguing against protesting government-supported genocide. That’s an unexpected level of reactionary

Silly me, not realizing saying “Protests are good, but not conceding to large-scale protests does not inherently make a government non-democratic” actually meant “Protests against genocide are bad”

PugJesus, (edited )

We’re running around in circles. I thought you said voting for a candidate is not and indication support for all their policies?

Voting for a candidate is not an indication of support for all of their policies - it’s an indication that you prefer their policies, taken as a whole, to those policies of the realistic opposition candidates, taken as a whole. Seeking consensus is not the same as seeking a complete lack of dissent - consensus inherently includes compromise. Typically, those citizens actually involved in the political process begin by running, assisting, and promoting candidates in the primaries, who they agree with most closely. Then, as the agreement of proportions of the electorate winnow down the field to a smaller number of candidates whose policies are acceptable to a larger subsection of the voters, voters pick which one they disagree with least; as the concept of finding a candidate that agrees with you 100% on every issue is about as insane as finding a fellow voter that agrees with you 100% on every issue. I understand this concept can be confusing to those more familiar with ‘democratic centralism’, in which everyone toes the party line, but this is how actual democracies work.

Do I have to simplify this any further, or have I now succeeded where your high school civics course failed?

PugJesus,

You aren’t wrong.

PugJesus,

AI bots and paid actors are the exception, rather than the rule.

Now, useful idiots who amplify the talking points pushed by paid actors? Those are a dime a dozen.

PugJesus,

I guess where we disagree is probably more at how common certain talking points become. We, as social creatures, naturally adopt the mannerisms and at least some of the outlooks of our communities - thus, sowing specific points of view in a niche community is a very cost-effective and practical way of amplifying propaganda.

Of course, as the saying goes, “You are not immune to propaganda”. It’s something we all must be aware of, lest we become (or remain) useful idiots ourselves.

PugJesus,

Politically, human dignity is important to me. There is room for that discussion of humanity and autonomy, but it’s certainly not foremost of all. Human dignity cannot manifest if we begin and end conversations by calling into question whether there’s a human capable of making decisions on the other end of the line.

You’re a very genial individual. I don’t know how you do it, honestly. Keep up the good fight!

PugJesus,

and then you’re saying “but i’ll fucking DEVOUR that genocide if you serve it up to me anyway, and i’ll get all my friends to commit to eating it too”

Because the alternative is the genocide buffet. Have you already forgotten that?

Woops, you’ve already accepted defeat to genocide there. Even your performative outrage isn’t all that strong, if you’re eager to move past the choice Biden has to not serve it to you.

Cool, instead the backup chef comes out. It’s Trump. Genocide buffet, including the sandwich we rejected. So glad that we’ve made things worse for no gain. Great job, us. Maybe a little circlejerk before we’re taken out and executed will lift our spirits.

PugJesus,

Thank you! Mostly I’m just trying to express my frustration in a way that is coherent and (hopefully) in some way productive.

PugJesus,

Then let’s fucking storm the kitchen then?

Are you actually ready to do that?

Obviously you don’t have to answer, but if you are not ready to do that, or you think that it will end in failure, then harm reduction is the only moral choice.

If you’re ready to fight and die for a better world, if you think peace has run its course, if you think only political violence can resolve the issue and that the resulting death toll will be less horrific than the currently proposed one, then by all means. But if you are not ready - if you think the polity is not ready, if you think there are other, preferable routes to explore, if you think the death and suffering will be worse than either of the current options - you must sit down and bite the bullet.

I’m not of the opinion that a long and bloody civil war which has a high chance of resulting in one or several fascist states in the former USA arising while our allies themselves struggle with emerging far-right movements inspired by the violence in the USA and the provocation of far-right states in the world is worth me expressing moral disgust with support of a genocidal state at this point in time. The calculus of suffering there is horrendously lopsided, and not in favor of starting a civil war. If it’s Biden, complete with support of a genocide, or civil war, I pick Biden as the choice which causes the least human suffering.

PugJesus,

You seem pretty content to let countless Gazans die to possibly prevent you facing oppression here.

Yep, because Trump has committed to stopping the Gazan genoci-

Wait, what’s that?

Oh, he’s actually said he wants MORE dead Gazans?

Huh.

The solution is guwtting leftists into supporting genocide, but to get the Democrats to oppose genocide.

It’ll be great if they do. I plan on raising awareness as much as I can about the atrocities in Gaza. But if it comes down to it, and Biden is still in support of Israel come election day, I’m not dumb enough to vote for MORE genocide for EVERYONE.

PugJesus,

The music is unironically good, though, unlike brownshirt fash trash. GRENADA, GRENADA, GRENADA MOYA!

PugJesus,

See, the issue comes when “plenty to do” ends up with “justifying allowing fascism”, as a glance down any of these threads will show is a common position. “If Biden doesn’t change his position, he DESERVES to lose”; of course, the deaths Trump will cause is irrelevant; minorities must die to punish the old fucks in the DNC. There is an approach on a deontological level that is fucking insane from a utilitarian standpoint, and it’s not something that I feel warrants standing by silently about.

On here, on Lemmy, fucking no one is in favor of Israel, except that one weirdo who got himself banned from 2/3s of the communities on here. Thank the gods. “Genocide bad” is already accepted; what is sometimes missed is “A Trump election implies a significant increase in genocide”, which is why I beat the drum on here. I’ve seen leftists on here (by no means representative of all leftists, not even all Lemmy leftists, I know) say things as repulsive, nonsensical, and varied as:

  • America deserves genocide anyway for supporting genocide, so it’s okay if Trump wins
  • Trump winning will spark a left-wing revolution, so everything will be better in the end
  • Trump actually isn’t any different than Biden, and won’t kill any significantly greater number of people
  • A personal moral stand is worth the lives of millions of minorities and leftists
  • As long as the moderates are taught a lesson, it’s worth it

As long as I see those opinions regularly pop up outside of .ml and like instances, I will continue beating the “Vote for Biden you dumb fucks” drum over the “Genocide is BAD you dumb fucks” drum that I would favor when interacting with the general American population.

PugJesus,

Their deaths easily left a power vacuum that was filled by soviet leaning german communists, most especially after 1922 when the civil war ended and the soviets emerged victorious. While some of the prominent german communists that werent russian soviets… were dead.

Yet the period of the United Front between the KPD and SPD lasted from '23 to '28. The idea that it was an organic change because of deep-seated grudges is extremely questionable even just by the timeline, much less the details of the interactions of the 20s and early 30s.

PugJesus, (edited )

The kind of people who say “Liberals hate leftists more than fascists” and then proceed to oppose liberal coalition candidates in situations where a leftist coalition candidate is nonviable, even though fascism is the only realistic alternative outcome to the liberal coalition candidate winning.

PugJesus,

Honestly trump would probably just ignore them altogether,

Jesus fucking Christ.

PugJesus,

I do it for the low, low price of not being sent to a concentration camp with my family under a fascist regime.

PugJesus,

Other than the fact that the Democratic majority is often in name only, I agree. Dems are only the lesser evil - we must fight to build REAL alternatives in the long term.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • megavids
  • thenastyranch
  • DreamBathrooms
  • ethstaker
  • InstantRegret
  • Youngstown
  • magazineikmin
  • osvaldo12
  • slotface
  • khanakhh
  • rosin
  • kavyap
  • everett
  • tacticalgear
  • JUstTest
  • ngwrru68w68
  • GTA5RPClips
  • cisconetworking
  • mdbf
  • cubers
  • Durango
  • anitta
  • modclub
  • normalnudes
  • tester
  • Leos
  • provamag3
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •