• 0 Posts
  • 18 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 27th, 2024

help-circle

  • Idk I mean that sounds ideal but I also think once someone has been a blight for all life on the planet for decades it goes a bit beyond being just “someone I disagree with”. Curious if, in your mind, there is any hypothetical behavior or line to cross after which advocating murder does become acceptable?

    Sometimes I also question if he does actually have loved ones or just sycophants and boot lickers but you never know maybe you are right



  • I totally agree with this notion, everybody should do what they realistically can, and it will look different for everyone. Some can be vegan and it will work out great, others will struggle to give up meat. Some can bike/walk to work everyday, or avoid air travel, and some can’t. Anyone doing well 80% of the time is probably doing just fine.

    All that said, it is worth remembering that these industries are (mostly) funded by consumers, and while giant corporations are obviously the way bigger issue, consumers have more power than we often give ourselves credit for to restrict those companies. In a hypothetical world where everyone stops eating beef, it isn’t like the beef industry continues to pollute. They will directly produce the amount of beef people will buy. Even if everyone has their steak now and then but doesn’t make it an every night staple, that alone would already do a lot to limit the emissions of the beef industry. It’s not a whole solution, but it is the one that is easiest and most obtainable, because convincing the government to stop subsidizing beef is not on the agenda of any major politicians at least in the states, even if I wish it were.





  • danciestlobster@lemm.eetoMemes@lemmy.mlCooked
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    27 days ago

    Maybe this is overly wishful thinking, but I do think there is enough data analysis on how people vote that it could be real: if a large body of people with a history of voting blue vote in this election and vote blue down the ballot but omit the president, or have a third party for the president instead, then that might actually send a message to the Democrats that they are fucking up their candidate selection badly, and make them at least marginally more likely to cater to the left when choosing candidates in the future.

    That said I am not sure I can condone this tactic in good faith in this particular election given the alternative, but part of me feels like the right will perpetually have more and more abhorrent alternatives and there needs to be a line somewhere, and if it’s not at genocide then I honestly don’t know where it is.

    No matter how you look at it all the options are bad. At least Tim being slightly left of Kamala shows Democrats slightly more willing to negotiate with disenfranchised left voters than chasing nebulous farther right independents. Not left enough to condemn genocide though so a very minor distinction