• DagwoodIII@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    Back in the day, ex-slave Frederick Douglas had to choose between supporting a Presidential candidate who was for immediate abolition of slavery or helping a wishy-washy liberal who wouldn’t come out in favor of abolition. Douglas chose to support the liberal because Douglas thought the liberal had a better chance of winning the election. Douglas had to weight the odds and decided that it was better to have a President who might listen to the abolition cause than it was to be ‘moral’ and lose the election.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 days ago

      Perfect example since slavery wasn’t banned until the slave states straight up declared war on the free states. You’ll never get a wishy-washy candidate to oppose institutional violence. Only direct action will end injustice

      • DagwoodIII@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        You really should read up a bit more on the Civil War. Maryland was a slave state that stuck with the Union.

        • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Moral relativism is consequentialist nonsense, and like most consequentialist nonsense, easy to abuse to justify evil acts. I can’t agree to that.

          • DagwoodIII@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Back in the day, philosophers would stand in the public square and debate any one as an equal.

            Today, ‘philosophers’ hide behind specialized lingo only they understand.

            And don’t say I could look it up. Einstein said that if a scientist couldn’t explain what he was doing to a five year old the scientist was a fraud.

            • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Okay, five-year-old:

              Doing good is important. Sometimes, you want do do a lot of good but feel like you can only do a little good. That’s okay! Do what you can.

              Sometimes you may think it’s okay to be naughty, because you know other kids who are very naughty all the time. But it’s still not okay to be naughty, even a little bit.

              • DagwoodIII@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                My father is going to beat up my mom if he finds out that she took his drug money to buy food.

                Are you saying I shouldn’t lie? That it’s more important to tell the truth than to protect my mom from a beating?

                • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  False dichotomy, those aren’t your only choices.

                  Further, lying isn’t automatically wrong. Deceiving or otherwise inhibiting a hostile, evil entity is virtuous.