True. This exposes American foreign policy as hypocritical as it usually is. What is also sad is the fact that US citizens can do little about it as long as nothing fundamentally changes. In the next presidential election, they only have the choice between an obviously criminal fascist and a halfway normal-thinking politician who does not shy away from supporting crimes against humanity. How one can still speak of a functioning democracy in this situation is beyond me. It’s just a choice between plague and cholera.
You’re not wrong about most of what you said but I am wondering why you seemed to equate those two choices in President. From the way you described them one seems pretty drastically worse than the other to me.
You have to decide for yourselves. All I am saying is that choosing between two evils does not correspond to my understanding of a democracy in which politics pursues the interests of the people. Of course, you always have to make concessions, but for me both candidates would be unelectable if there were alternatives, namely a third or even a fourth option. But your system doesn’t provide for that. That’s why I think you should consider whether this system makes sense - but you’ll have to answer this question yourselves, I’m afraid.
We are now in a scenario where we’ll settle for a genocidal monster, because we keep voting for harm reduction. Harm reduction failed in practice; it was never a good idea in the first place.
I’m not a fan of Joe Biden at all but I’m also not taking issue with my description of him compared to Trump. OP is the one who described him as a normal politician. The only person shoving shit in your mouth is you.
True. This exposes American foreign policy as hypocritical as it usually is. What is also sad is the fact that US citizens can do little about it as long as nothing fundamentally changes. In the next presidential election, they only have the choice between an obviously criminal fascist and a halfway normal-thinking politician who does not shy away from supporting crimes against humanity. How one can still speak of a functioning democracy in this situation is beyond me. It’s just a choice between plague and cholera.
Removed by mod
Well, all the more need for change then.
If you’re going to imply that Biden is an "obviously criminal fascist," I’m going to need some receipts.
You’re not wrong about most of what you said but I am wondering why you seemed to equate those two choices in President. From the way you described them one seems pretty drastically worse than the other to me.
You have to decide for yourselves. All I am saying is that choosing between two evils does not correspond to my understanding of a democracy in which politics pursues the interests of the people. Of course, you always have to make concessions, but for me both candidates would be unelectable if there were alternatives, namely a third or even a fourth option. But your system doesn’t provide for that. That’s why I think you should consider whether this system makes sense - but you’ll have to answer this question yourselves, I’m afraid.
Genocide is genocide.
Harm reduction arguments only work to a point. If genocide is still the outcome, then it isn’t really harm reduction.
If we’re here now, then the harm reduction arguments worked while the plan didn’t.
What does that even mean?
We are now in a scenario where we’ll settle for a genocidal monster, because we keep voting for harm reduction. Harm reduction failed in practice; it was never a good idea in the first place.
Your are still trying to shove shit in our mouths and convince us it is a great choice since it comes with a little mustard to cut the taste
I’m not a fan of Joe Biden at all but I’m also not taking issue with my description of him compared to Trump. OP is the one who described him as a normal politician. The only person shoving shit in your mouth is you.