• @Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    33 months ago

    In their moral justification, the argument of the lesser evil has played a prominent role. If you are confronted with two evils, the argument runs, it is your duty to opt for the lesser one, whereas it is irresponsible to refuse to choose altogether. Its weakness has always been that those who choose the lesser evil forget quickly that they chose evil.

    -Hannah Arendt, from “Personal Responsibility under Dictatorship”, 1964

      • @Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        03 months ago

        I will not vote for candidates sending arms and aid to genocidal apartheid ethnostates. if the PSL is on the ballot in my state I will vote for them, otherwise it’ll probably be Stein 👍

    • @PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Tankies quoting Hannah Arendt when she specifies that she’s speaking specifically about totalitarian societies, and not even dictatorships; much less actual functioning democracies. Average tankie reading comprehension. Or, in Hannah Arendt’s words from the same essay…

      Those who denounce the moral fallacy of this argument are usually accused of a germ-proof moralism which is alien to political circumstances, of being unwilling to dirty their hands; and it must be admitted that it is not so much political or moral philosophy (with the sole exception of Kant, who for this very reason frequently stands accused of moralistic rigorism) but religious thought that most unequivocally has rejected all compromises with lesser evils.

      You keep the fascist dogma up, buddy. It’ll save your soul someday. :)