Ignore the shrill Democratic Party partisans — even if Donald Trump would be worse, you’re right to be outraged at Joe Biden’s enabling of Israel’s slaughter in Gaza.
Thanks, I really appreciate this. I would add to the argument against utilitarianism as the guide for all decisions, that if everyone always reasoned this way, then the possibility for a better future would likely be greatly reduced, if not eliminated.
Political & moral progress has often been a push-pull between the compromisers and those who refuse to do so. Most of the New Deal would have been unthinkable without the Socialists, Communists and Anarchists of the 20th century world forcing onto the table a host of options that would have originally been unthinkable. In their day, abolitionists were considered extreme radicals -- especially the ones who did things like, burn the Constitution as a covenant with slavery. But it's hard to argue today that they didn't contribute significantly to the coming of the Civil War and the stigmatization of slavery ever-after as a basic, mainstream political value.
More abstractly and subjectively; I just don't want to live in a world entirely determined by utilitarianism. A human culture without people who make decisions based on exactly these kind of deep, moral commitments you discussed here sounds, to me, like a world run by AI. And what can I say, but that's not my idea of a utopia.
I am enthusiastically (or adamantly) anti Trump. I am VERY reluctantly pro Biden (under the circumstances). I am deeply sorry that the Democratic Party is so sclerotic as to not be able to have imagined an alternative to Biden. (And Joe could do the world a great favor by doing a Johnson and stepping aside. ) I also accept what you’re saying about maintaining a personal ethical framework. That said though, I think it is important to recognize that Trump does not represent an alternative to the current policy of support for genocide but with other bad stuff that we also care about. He is the choice of the same genocidal policy plus a lot of other bad stuff. Electoral politics is weird. The Eagleton affair caused fatal disillusion with McGovern because it revealed that he was not wholly a paragon of the new politics so many hoped for. So he went down to one of the worst defeats in history to a man so corrupt he was subsequently driven from office. I don’t urge people to vote for Biden out of any sort of comfort level with Gaza. I urge it because I am profoundly terrified of a second Trump presidency which I sincerely believe has the potential to end human life on this planet.
Great piece. Something that has been on the minds of many the past 6 months. Drawing a red line, honoring your moral litmus test, in a two-party duopoly, while also honoring the value of utilitarian harm reduction, leaves one feeling utterly defeated.
Thanks, I really appreciate this. I would add to the argument against utilitarianism as the guide for all decisions, that if everyone always reasoned this way, then the possibility for a better future would likely be greatly reduced, if not eliminated.
Political & moral progress has often been a push-pull between the compromisers and those who refuse to do so. Most of the New Deal would have been unthinkable without the Socialists, Communists and Anarchists of the 20th century world forcing onto the table a host of options that would have originally been unthinkable. In their day, abolitionists were considered extreme radicals -- especially the ones who did things like, burn the Constitution as a covenant with slavery. But it's hard to argue today that they didn't contribute significantly to the coming of the Civil War and the stigmatization of slavery ever-after as a basic, mainstream political value.
More abstractly and subjectively; I just don't want to live in a world entirely determined by utilitarianism. A human culture without people who make decisions based on exactly these kind of deep, moral commitments you discussed here sounds, to me, like a world run by AI. And what can I say, but that's not my idea of a utopia.
I am enthusiastically (or adamantly) anti Trump. I am VERY reluctantly pro Biden (under the circumstances). I am deeply sorry that the Democratic Party is so sclerotic as to not be able to have imagined an alternative to Biden. (And Joe could do the world a great favor by doing a Johnson and stepping aside. ) I also accept what you’re saying about maintaining a personal ethical framework. That said though, I think it is important to recognize that Trump does not represent an alternative to the current policy of support for genocide but with other bad stuff that we also care about. He is the choice of the same genocidal policy plus a lot of other bad stuff. Electoral politics is weird. The Eagleton affair caused fatal disillusion with McGovern because it revealed that he was not wholly a paragon of the new politics so many hoped for. So he went down to one of the worst defeats in history to a man so corrupt he was subsequently driven from office. I don’t urge people to vote for Biden out of any sort of comfort level with Gaza. I urge it because I am profoundly terrified of a second Trump presidency which I sincerely believe has the potential to end human life on this planet.
Great piece. Something that has been on the minds of many the past 6 months. Drawing a red line, honoring your moral litmus test, in a two-party duopoly, while also honoring the value of utilitarian harm reduction, leaves one feeling utterly defeated.