• agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 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
      5
      ·
      2 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.

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        44 minutes ago

        Eh, the degree varies greatly. And ultimately, bi-partisan machines are irrelevant to the choice. Look at the partisan ones. Which side is operating more partisan machines?

        • Tolc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          23 minutes ago

          The difference in both parties is of 100% hitler and 99.5% hitler. Not much

    • Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 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
        2
        ·
        45 minutes 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
          1
          ·
          7 minutes 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?