this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
182 points (92.1% liked)

World News

39000 readers
2332 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/17423369

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I couldn’t force my adult daughter to flee with me, so I think it would be obvious that I was talking about her as a child.

You couldn't 'force' your daughter to flee with you now, at 14, if the state was trying to keep her for conscription purposes, as the only way you can 'force' her now is either by physical force (which would not be viable over fleeing an entire country unless you live a very short trunk ride to the border) or by the coercive apparatus of the state (ie filing a missing persons' report if she runs off).

Look, I get that you currently think that I support genocide because, as a parent whose biggest fear in life is his child dying would do anything to stop that from happening, but I think you need to take a step back and a deep breath and think about what I’m saying here and what you expect of me.

I expect that "Literally anything and everything" be off the table as an acceptable sacrifice.

Let’s say your biggest fear in the world was being in the room with a dog and someone started telling you that if you didn’t get in a room with a dog, you held an evil genocide-supporting position?

It's good that you bring up fear of dogs - I have very severe arachnophobia. I can't stay in the same room as a spider, no matter how harmless. I can't even look at a spider, real, photographed, or drawn, without panicking. If I said that ANY cost was worth me not having to go into a room full of spiders from floor to ceiling, and someone pointed out "What about an actual and serious risk of genocide being committed because you didn't", for me to hold that any cost was worth me not going into that room would be evil and in support of genocide, without a doubt.

I can’t not be terrified of something that terrifies me.

This is true.

I can’t not do whatever is in my power to stop the thing that terrifies me from happening.

So by your argument, if someone feared being poor, more than anything in the world, they would be helpless to stop themselves from stepping on anyone and causing any amount of mass deaths in pursuit of remaining rich, and it would not be alright for anyone to call them evil for that?

After all, preservation of one's own wellbeing transcends not only species but kingdoms.

Good for you if you can, I don’t have that sort of bravery and I would suggest that most people do not have that sort of bravery or there wouldn’t be things like therapy for irrational phobias.

I would say most people don't make apologia for their phobias.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So by your argument, if someone feared being poor, more than anything in the world, they would be helpless to stop themselves from stepping on anyone and causing any amount of mass deaths in pursuit of remaining rich, and it would not be alright for anyone to call them evil for that?

I'm sorry, I can't take you seriously after this analogy.

Feel free to believe I'm an evil person who supports genocide because I won't allow my underage daughter to die in a war. That's fine. Just bear that in mind when you agree with me on any other position I hold on any other issue that you are agreeing with someone who also is an evil genocide supporter, so you might want to think about whether or not it's a good idea after all.

Anyway, you implying you're not being uncivil is just silly and I think we should just end this before you end up taking a break from this community.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I’m sorry, I can’t take you seriously after this analogy.

Because it casts doubt on whether a fear-based justification for immoral behavior is valid?

Feel free to believe I’m an evil person who supports genocide because I won’t allow my underage daughter to die in a war. That’s fine.

In the discussion you literally posited that any cost, including genocide, was worth not letting your daughter (implicitly, as I clearly outlined, not when she was underaged) die in a war. I don't know what you call that except conditional support for genocide. Most people, I think, would have some sort of moral issue with the cost being 'literal genocide'.

Just bear that in mind when you agree with me on any other position I hold on any other issue that you are agreeing with someone who also is an evil genocide supporter, so you might want to think about whether or not it’s a good idea after all.

The fuck? That's some "Hitler liked dogs too - are you SURE you like dogs?"

Even if your positions were 99% evil and 1% good, that doesn't make the 1% good no longer worth agreeing with. And in all likelihood, it's probably closer to the reverse. I don't know why you feel that people can't defend evil positions unless their entire worldview is evil.

Anyway, you implying you’re not being uncivil is just silly and I think we should just end this before you end up taking a break from this community.

Uh-huh. It's just silly, because you made the accusation that I called you and not the position you were defending evil, and after it was pointed out that I quite clearly stated that the position you were defending was evil, you lost the ground you were making threats on. But ban me if you like. It would be terrible if someone thought that allowing genocide was evil.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Okay, I'd say you had enough warnings that you were not being civil. You have been here far more than long enough to know why your behavior is not acceptable. I'll give you some time to cool off.