Nina spitting truths as always. She’s on fire recently, so follow her if you’re not doing so already.
To be clear; everyone working in my government, particularly after today, is a Nazi, or someone who works for Nazis. Do you know what we call people who worked for the Nazis, in the Nazi government? Yes, that is correct, Nazis.
So Machado is certainly not gonna feel lonely on the list of people on my TV who are definitely Nazis.
Oh, was that too harsh? Are you feeling bad for the good career civil servants, working for the literal fucking Nazis, who I have just impuned? Cool, let’s refer back to that part where I said I was surrounded by people who openly recognize that this is fascism, and ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY refuse to accept what that actually means.
We call people, who worked for the Nazi Party, in the Nazi government, Nazis. Nobody says “the Nazi government and the career civil servants who hated them but stayed.”
“They’ll just find someone else.”
Then let them. “I took the job at the concentration camp because I was sure Hitler would find someone else” was not a good defense in court last time, and it won’t be this time either.
Yep and so they choose to be Nazis.
The nuance you’re looking for doesn’t exist.
If you were told to rape and murder an 8 year old or you and your family dies, what would you do? Either you’re dead or a child rapist and child murderer. There’s not some gray area there.
Good thing teaching children is not the same as raping and killing them.
Ok, got you down for child rapist and murder since you dodged the question and I have no doubts that you will neither dodge nor say no when it’s a Nazi asking.
You’ve got a great debate strategy. You must have gone to the same seminars as Charlie Kirk.
You clowns are such a joke
Right, so you’re saying the teachers are complicit. I’m saying that’s how the logic works. You either take it or leave it. I’m not disagreeing with the OP, I’m clarifying for someone.
If you don’t agree with me, that’s not as clear.
Anyway, it’s all ethics. So in your example, you have one 8 year old who you have to kill. (What you do to them doesn’t really matter, except in how it’ll fuck up your own memories and dreams and whatnot. But as far as the ethical scales are concerned, your impact to the universe is you killed 1 child. And maybe others know it, maybe they don’t — you didn’t specify. Now, if you weigh that against just your partner being killed, maybe you’ve been married a long time, you’re both getting up there. You sacrifice yourself and your partner for this one child, as you should. But, what if your family includes three children about the same age? Then you have the classic trolley problem. Your inaction results in the death of the three children (plus whatever other family members). Your cruel action results in the death of one child. There is no easy answer, which is why the trolley problem continues to test people. Personally, my answer to the trolley problem is the inaction — you do nothing, more people die, you blame the trolley. You could have saved them, but by doing nothing, you didn’t do a bad thing, you just didn’t do a good thing and a bad thing. Ethically I think it’s the right call. Not everybody agrees.