Re:Shame on Y Combinator
by pbhjpbhj on Tuesday October 18, 2016 @04:16PM
(#12738243)
>Political positions are moral positions, to believe otherwise is hopelessly naive //
But so to is to believe that one can't vote for someone who has acted, or intends to act, immorally and yet maintain the most ethical position.
Here in the UK for example: suppose one party is for nuclear weapons, another is for killing the NHS, another is for war in Syria. I might consider all those positions immoral but nonetheless I'd [most likely] cast a vote.
From the OP:
>"This isn’t voting for an economic or social policy — this is literally paying a huge amount of money to directly support [...unethical acts...]."
So, if you see Clinton winning as leading to even greater travesties what should you do? Not vote for Trump, Trump is surely the only other reasonable option.
Maybe Thiel does support those unethical acts, but we surely can't tell, it seems as likely from the sidelines that he simply sees that if Trump gets in Thiel personally will be better off. That seems to be the way a lot of people vote.
But so to is to believe that one can't vote for someone who has acted, or intends to act, immorally and yet maintain the most ethical position.
Here in the UK for example: suppose one party is for nuclear weapons, another is for killing the NHS, another is for war in Syria. I might consider all those positions immoral but nonetheless I'd [most likely] cast a vote.
From the OP:
>"This isn’t voting for an economic or social policy — this is literally paying a huge amount of money to directly support [...unethical acts...]."
So, if you see Clinton winning as leading to even greater travesties what should you do? Not vote for Trump, Trump is surely the only other reasonable option.
Maybe Thiel does support those unethical acts, but we surely can't tell, it seems as likely from the sidelines that he simply sees that if Trump gets in Thiel personally will be better off. That seems to be the way a lot of people vote.