6 ms·
Can you imagine any situation at all where you would side with this position? There ought to be many real-life example of the trolley problem.
by DenisM 7y ago
Can you imagine any situation at all where you would side with this position?
There ought to be many real-life example of the trolley problem.
- roenxi 7y agoYeah, it happens fairly regularly. Majorities are scary in that they seem to be able to willfully blind themselves to any moral standard in pursuit of what seems like a good idea for their prosperity. Nobody is going to admit to thinking that way, but there is pretty overwhelming evidence that most people do. History is replete with genocides and selective memories. The cynic in me notes that by not acknowledging the threat they pose, majorities free themselves of the need to limit their own power in the name of decency and giving others a fair go.
- raxxorrax 7y agoThat can also be true for minorities evidenced by crime networks of all sorts. So the quantity isn't that relevant. It is just essential to separate people into distinct groups. That allows you to create enemies in the first place.
- lonelappde 7y agoYou don't even need the mafia. Many national governments have been dedicated to persecuting the majority. But it's relatively rare because that's far more expensive than having the majority oppression the minority
- raxxorrax 7y agoTrue, rule of the majority probably never even happened. It is always a minority rule that can have the support of the majority. But that isn't even a necessary criteria as many states have demonstrated.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y agoI would never side with the position as stated. But I have only weird and unsatisfying explanations of how that's compatible with supporting a government that sometimes fights wars or courts that sometimes convict innocents. That's arguably why Stalinism worked - if you're motivated to, you can force yourself into a perspective where the purges are just a bit of malfunctioning in the justice system.
- ergl 7y agoIt just depends on what minority you use. Blacks/LGTB/Jews? Not many people would consider it. White supremacists/Nazis/Islamic Fundamentalist? It's already mainstream.
- comex 7y agoWhat exactly are the “great injustices” being inflicted on white supremacists, Nazis, and Islamic fundamentalists? We certainly aren’t going around killing them in purges...
- ergl 7y agoInjustices are subjective. Nazis would consider it a great injustice that we don't allow them to go around killing other minorities, or that we made Nazi parties illegal in the western world. What I'm getting at is that the OP statement can be bent to fit whatever ideology you want, and with that be able to get widespread support to "repress" minorities. It's not only "evil" people the ones repressing others.
- SomeOldThrow 7y agoYou’re absolutely right, Nazis should be squashed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
- alasdair_ 7y ago>What exactly are the “great injustices” being inflicted on white supremacists, Nazis, and Islamic fundamentalists? Killing the children of Islamic fundamentalists in drone strikes. Holding them for years without any trial or recourse in gitmo. Torture. I'm sure there are other things.
- hedgedoops2 7y agoThose are all islamic fundamentalists though. More precisely, we are talking about the people targeted or captured during the 'war on terror'. The pertinent category here is "whoever is considered an 'enemy' in 'war'" - they will get their rights trampled.
- alasdair_ 7y ago>Can you imagine any situation at all where you would side with this position? Some people still think drone strikes that kill innocent children are worthwhile, so long as they also take out the bad guy.
- mcguire 7y agoThe United States and slavery?