this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
2148 points (99.9% liked)

Political Memes

8104 readers
2729 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
2148
Just a reminder (lemmy.world)
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 21 points 11 months ago (5 children)

But what if I don't want a typical Democrat in office either?

[–] [email protected] 30 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

What if you really want a warm hug but you only have the choice between a poke in the eye with a sharp stick and not a poke in the eye?

You still choose "not a poke in the eye", dumbo.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

How about the people who keep voting against the warm hug in the primaries get some of these lectures? Is that an option at some point?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

David Attenborough voice: "We see here an 'internet troll' employing a strategy known as 'whataboutism'. It shows that it's desperate, and feels threatened by a stronger opponent."

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What stronger opponent? You and Biden want me to vote for him again. I'm not going to.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Refusing to make the optimal play when lives are on the line isn't brave, good, or noble. If you increase the danger of others to preserve your sense of pride, innocence, or purity then you commit a deep evil.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don’t want Biden to be president. So I’m not going to vote for him. It really is that simple. If the Democrats want my vote, they need to earn it by running a worthy candidate. My vote shouldn’t be taken for granted.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don’t want Biden to be president.

Hey me too.

So I’m not going to vote for him.

Anti-fascism means doing everything we're able to stop fascism Being against genocide means doing what we can to shift the probability of genocide increasing as low as possible. If you can't put your petty feelings aside for long enough to push a few buttons, you shouldn't call yourself either. It's not about you.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (5 children)

Wait which one is the genocidal maniac? I can't keep up

What happened to Lemmy being a leftie safehaven?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Thinking that all information has been revealed, and therefore that anyone who plays a different move must have deliberately avoided the optimal one, is called “totalitarianism”.

One of the important pieces of information that should not be ignored about the universe is that there is more information than can be process by the available information processing mechanisms.

Also, there is no logical way to prioritize information for processing (at least in part because logic requires complete information).

To deal with the fact that life is not even qualitatively like a textbook optimization problem, and cannot ever be due to limitations in how information works, we have developed cultural heuristics that ensure relevant information is not lost.

One of those heuristics is having respect for others’ opinions, even when you think they’re wrong.

The opposite of the totalitarian viewpoint is the humble viewpoint. That’s the one that says “I know I don’t understand this completely” and behaves accordingly.

Tic tac toe is a good scenario to behave in a totalitarian way. It’s damned easy to see if a move is optimal or non-optimal in tic tac toe, because the number of possible permutations is pretty small.

If an ongoing game of Tic Tac Toe were somehow linked to whether people lived or died, and I saw someone was about to make an un-optimal move on behalf of the rest of us, I’d say tie that idiot up and override his rights because he was about to kill us all.

But games more complex than tic tac toe are harder to commit. Tic Tac Toe has nine spaces, so you have like 9! paths the game can take. But reality’s bigger than that. Hundreds of orders of magnitude bigger. I can’t be computed or grokked or boiled down to the point where you know what optimal is.

Even deterministic small game like systems get hard to optimize quickly.

It’s hard to get total knowledge of real life, so behaving in a totalitarian way is wrong, in real life. If real life were just one game of tic tac toe, maybe totalitarian attitude would be correct: “You are making a bad move, it’s going to cost us everything, it’s worth it to violate your rights because your rights are worthless when we’re all dead anyway”.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I'm a mathematician; I too am aware of game theory and the principles of logic. Furthermore, you've made several mistakes.

is called “totalitarianism”

Bullshit. This is a common tankie word game.

there is no logical way to prioritize information for processing

This is wrong

logic requires complete information

Partially because this is wrong. Logic can operate with incomplete information. Heuristics and the standard of "cogency" exist for this very purpose.

Furthermore, this criticism entirely ignores the context of:

Potential optimal play provided

"No I don't wanna"

Which is a blatantly immoral thing to do, regardless of how much information is available because they have decided not to regardless of available information.

Furthermore, this is an internet argument; I'm not threatening violence, and so it's absolutely asinine of you to act like I'm "violating [somone else's] rights". I'm making a argument online about the morality of someone else's choices. Your entire argument is sophistry.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

What if the options are sharp stick or dull stick?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago

Do you really want me to answer that for you? Is it really that hard to think for yourself?

Alright then... You get either one or the other, there's no way out of that whether you make a choice or not. Wouldn't you still want to influence the choice so you get the one that hurts a lot less?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I mean at that point you struggle to escape, but assuming that's definitely not possible, then sharp sticks hurt less. 🤷‍♂️ "Optimal" does not necessarily mean "good" or "desirable".

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Sharp sticks hurt less...

What?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, equally deep and long injuries with a sharper implement destroy fewer cells (since they have a smaller cross-section), cause less trauma, and are less disruptive to the surrounding tissues. I know it's unintuitive, but it's true.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Thank you. That's what I was trying to say.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The dull stick is going to gouge your eye out entirely. I have no frame of reference of what would hurt more, but I guess that would be it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No a dull stick would probably fuck your eye up, a sharp stick will absolutely destroy your eye.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That entirely depends on how deep the stick goes into your eye - though at some point it won't matter anyway.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yes if fired the dull stick out of a fucking cannon it would destroy the eye, how many bits of criteria are we going to add to this (what should be anyway) very straightforward analogy?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

There are times when a clean cut hurts less than a crude one. We're not talking about actual damage done, which wasn't part of the analogy to begin with.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Voting for someone in an election in the US is not an endorsement of that person. You have effectively two choices in many of the elections due to how the system is designed. You vote for the best choice of those two.

Not voting, or voting for a non viable candidate, is a signal that you Do Not Care who is in power.

Voting is a tool, and a civic duty. It's one of the few ways US society allows direct input from citizens.

If you actually are against facism, don't use misguided idealism to encourage people to throw away the little political power they have.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It’s one of the few ways US society allows direct input from citizens.

Okay here's my input: I don't vote for people who support genocides or block strikes.

If you want my vote work for it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Boycotting is also very patriotic

[–] [email protected] 16 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Then go run for office and be better. Until then, unfortunately, pick the FAR lesser evil

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Millions are unsatisfied. Should everyone run for office?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

A ballot sheet with thousands of names is not the answer

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

A ballot sheet with thousands of names is not the answer

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (5 children)

Nothing is ever "the answer"

All yall want to do is complain

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

So allowing babies to be bombed is not that evil got it

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

Nice leap there

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

Give it a rest.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I did. Marianne Williamson was shut out of the conversation and smeared by the media. Not my fault the left cannibalizes itself every election cycle. Biden might as well be a Republican

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

Right now the Democratic Party's convention and local election Primaries haven't happened. Best that can be done is to influence the party platform through this primary season to influence or change what a 'typical' Democrat may be.

There's a massive influx of money right now going towards keeping typical Democrats in line with Israel. So it appears that will predictably be a prevailing issue one way or another.

So like: most of my local elections usually feature Democrats v Democrats so I'll likely opt for the non-Zionist or at least the less Zionist of the two. That may send a message for the winner of the Presidential ticket, if anything.