President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump have both accepted an invitation from CNN to debate on June 27, a historically early showdown that will set the tone for the final months of the 2024 campaign.
If you would have voted for Biden, and you’re choosing not to vote or you vote third-party, you are effectively voting for Trump. That’s the worse choice, ethically.
You are not giving a rational argument - you are describing a course of action that will result in the less moral outcome.
If both candidates are morally reprehensible and the political elite refuse to give the voters better options. Then revolution and overthrow of the government is the only ethical course of action available.
I think you are describing a path of political damage control, but I am of the opinion that the political parties are two sides of the same right-wing coin. A vote for either results in our rights being stripped away to benefit the wealthy class. It’s just a matter of speed and approach. Also, there is an argument to be made that minorities are already living under severe state oppression and to uphold the system as is only benefits the white majority.
At some point I have to pull the moral rip cord and stop participating in a immoral system as much as possible. Otherwise I am just an enabler.
I think there is better way to run human society and I don’t think the American Republic as is has a path towards that.
Apathy/“checking out” is an intended consequence of amped-up propaganda. In Russia, it’s deployed so the “ruling elite” have even less oversight.
To make things better, you have to help steer - saying you’re not going to participate unless everything is perfect nullifies your impact.
And, to be sure, “burning it down” will almost certainly not result in things aligning to your moral stance - opportunistic, evil actors thrive in chaos.
If you would have voted for Biden, and you’re choosing not to vote or you vote third-party, you are effectively voting for Trump. That’s the worse choice, ethically.
You are not giving a rational argument - you are describing a course of action that will result in the less moral outcome.
If both candidates are morally reprehensible and the political elite refuse to give the voters better options. Then revolution and overthrow of the government is the only ethical course of action available.
I think you are describing a path of political damage control, but I am of the opinion that the political parties are two sides of the same right-wing coin. A vote for either results in our rights being stripped away to benefit the wealthy class. It’s just a matter of speed and approach. Also, there is an argument to be made that minorities are already living under severe state oppression and to uphold the system as is only benefits the white majority.
At some point I have to pull the moral rip cord and stop participating in a immoral system as much as possible. Otherwise I am just an enabler.
I think there is better way to run human society and I don’t think the American Republic as is has a path towards that.
I think we might be the bad guys…
Apathy/“checking out” is an intended consequence of amped-up propaganda. In Russia, it’s deployed so the “ruling elite” have even less oversight.
To make things better, you have to help steer - saying you’re not going to participate unless everything is perfect nullifies your impact.
And, to be sure, “burning it down” will almost certainly not result in things aligning to your moral stance - opportunistic, evil actors thrive in chaos.