You’re right, both sides aren’t the same. One side has devolved into foregoing what we like to think of as humanity because they have a boner for hate and the other makes excuses on why degrading themselves to the same level isn’t the same.
It’s a play on words. I’ll skip the nuances and get right down to the core, “they started murdering people, so I’m murdering them back”. But here’s the thing, killing is still killing, even in self-defense.
No matter how many justifications, running away from this concept only serves to bring you ever closer to the mentality of the other side.
The very simplified “both sides” is alluding to the idea that both are very much willing to give up empathy, ethics and law if it means getting rid of the opposite side.
The selective application of these three concepts is what bridges you together in a way that makes an outside observer say “so similar, they might as well be the same” a.k.a. “both sides”.
No exception to empathy, no exception to ethics, no exception to law, no matter how saintly and no matter how evil.
so you advocate rolling over and letting literal genocides occur because killing is bad. that’s what your logic naturally leads to.
trolley problem is all about this shit. and your stance is that millions can get ran over by the trolley as long as you don’t have to pull the handle to decide. because of your cowardice.
You’re right, both sides aren’t the same. One side has devolved into foregoing what we like to think of as humanity because they have a boner for hate and the other makes excuses on why degrading themselves to the same level isn’t the same.
It’s a play on words. I’ll skip the nuances and get right down to the core, “they started murdering people, so I’m murdering them back”. But here’s the thing, killing is still killing, even in self-defense. No matter how many justifications, running away from this concept only serves to bring you ever closer to the mentality of the other side.
The very simplified “both sides” is alluding to the idea that both are very much willing to give up empathy, ethics and law if it means getting rid of the opposite side. The selective application of these three concepts is what bridges you together in a way that makes an outside observer say “so similar, they might as well be the same” a.k.a. “both sides”.
No exception to empathy, no exception to ethics, no exception to law, no matter how saintly and no matter how evil.
The far right: let putin take over, he’s a strong man and one of us
The far left: Let us not defend against putin and take him over, because violence is bad.
I think I get your point, but were comparing extremists with extremists here.
People, as individuals or groups, are complicated. And annoying. This is such a pain to deal with… Don’t wanna. Bleh.
so you advocate rolling over and letting literal genocides occur because killing is bad. that’s what your logic naturally leads to.
trolley problem is all about this shit. and your stance is that millions can get ran over by the trolley as long as you don’t have to pull the handle to decide. because of your cowardice.
I’m advocating that you stop making excuses for yourself.
intellectual cowardice is all you have. because it’s all you are. you support the murder of millions.
You know, the loudest homophobes are often revealed as closeted homosexuals.
You are also very loud in your opinion. You should probably reexamine yourself.