kittenzrulz claims that the takeover of this community was entirely over links getting burned out. this post would appear to contradict that.

furthermore, they completely disregarded my points in the questions i asked, particularly around the ideological motive around the changes they made when giving feedback, and failed to respond when i pushed them on the point, despite posting elsewhere.

i would argue that both the mod of this community, and the admin of the instance, are hostile to anarchist and leftist politics, and cannot be trusted. recommend finding a new instance.

    • Grail (Capitalised)@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      4 months ago

      Fortunately, no such situation has come up yet. Biden is not threatening any people that Trump isn’t. So favouring Biden over Trump does not subject any additional people to genocide in comparison with inaction. That means we’ve never had to choose to harm some people to save others. It’s always been a straightforward situation of harming more people vs less people, with the smaller group inside the larger one.

      If you’d like to switch to asking tricky questions, though, I’ve got one for you. How many lives is inaction worth? How many people have to die as a result of your choice not to act, before action becomes preferable? Is the difference a billion people? A million? A thousand? One? If you knew doing nothing would kill a million people, and doing something would kill a thousand, would you let a million die to keep the blood off your hands?

      • Ambii [She/They]@lemmy.mlEnglish
        3·
        3 months ago

        If you knew doing nothing would kill a million people, and doing something would kill a thousand, would you let a million die to keep the blood off your hands?

        So which tenet of soulism decides which group of people is worth genociding for another?