The choice between genocide and slightly less genocide is no choice at all. That’s like asking someone to choose between being stabbed in the lung or the heart. Both are likely to kill you. Any reasonable person in that situation would be doing everything in their power to find another way. Arguing that being stabbed in the lung is somehow the rational choice is ridiculous.
Then fucking present a realistic and actionable third chois? Why is this so difficult? This has been an issue for years, but where are the realistic third options?
You haven’t present one because you can’t. All of your “solutions” or “better options” are either unrealistic on not actionable.
If I were in a situation where I had to pick between being stabbed in the lung or the heart and there are no realistic alternatives that are likely to increase my odds of survival, I’d choose my lung and hope I can get medical attention in time. You’ve basically given a variation of the trolley problem here.
The actionable choice has nothing to do with voting. It has everything to do with organizing, be it in your workplace or your community. You have to create structures that can actually hamstring the power of the state to oppress you and those you care about. You can argue these are unrealistic or not actionable but history shows us that this is actually how progress is made. Even in the US the abolitionist movement, labor movement, and the civil rights movement did not win their demands through strategic voting.
If you want to argue that getting stabbed in the lung is more survivable… okay sure. But you’re an idiot if you think fighting back and trying to disarm your attacker isn’t the rational choice, especially when Americans by and large can’t just pick up and leave. It’s fight or flight but you’re here arguing for people to just accept their demise.
The choice between genocide and slightly less genocide is no choice at all. That’s like asking someone to choose between being stabbed in the lung or the heart. Both are likely to kill you. Any reasonable person in that situation would be doing everything in their power to find another way. Arguing that being stabbed in the lung is somehow the rational choice is ridiculous.
Then fucking present a realistic and actionable third chois? Why is this so difficult? This has been an issue for years, but where are the realistic third options?
You haven’t present one because you can’t. All of your “solutions” or “better options” are either unrealistic on not actionable.
If I were in a situation where I had to pick between being stabbed in the lung or the heart and there are no realistic alternatives that are likely to increase my odds of survival, I’d choose my lung and hope I can get medical attention in time. You’ve basically given a variation of the trolley problem here.
The actionable choice has nothing to do with voting. It has everything to do with organizing, be it in your workplace or your community. You have to create structures that can actually hamstring the power of the state to oppress you and those you care about. You can argue these are unrealistic or not actionable but history shows us that this is actually how progress is made. Even in the US the abolitionist movement, labor movement, and the civil rights movement did not win their demands through strategic voting.
If you want to argue that getting stabbed in the lung is more survivable… okay sure. But you’re an idiot if you think fighting back and trying to disarm your attacker isn’t the rational choice, especially when Americans by and large can’t just pick up and leave. It’s fight or flight but you’re here arguing for people to just accept their demise.
Well said