4 ms·

It is interesting that he brings up the assistance of helping Saif Qaddafi getting a PHD as morally flawed. The destruction of Libya led Africas richest countr

It is interesting that he brings up the assistance of helping Saif Qaddafi getting a PHD as morally flawed. The destruction of Libya led Africas richest country - with free education and healthcare - to become a failed state with black slave markets and human trafficking. Is everyone that voted for Obama also complicit in the human misery/genocides in Libya ( or insert Somalia, Yemen, South Sudan, Chad etc.)? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-security-rights/executions-torture-and-slave-markets-persist-in-libya-u-n-idUSKBN1GX1JY https://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-security-rights/exe... https://www.amazon.com/Dissent-Channel-American-Diplomacy-Dishonest/dp/1541724488 https://www.amazon.com/Dissent-Channel-American-Diplomacy-Di...

ojnabieoot 6y ago
> Is everyone that voted for Obama also complicit in the human misery/genocides in Libya On one hand, all American citizens are complicit in US foreign policy. On the other hand, anti-war voters who voted for Obama didn’t do so because they sold out, it was because the idea that McCain or Romney would be more dovish is transparently ridiculous. Some people may comfort themselves in a consumerist, selfish fantasy that their vote must express their principles. But voting is an exercise or limited power, not personal expression. Using this power responsibly means taking seriously its compromises and limitations. Going back to the employment analogy: working for an ethically suspicious employer because you are facing homelessness is a lot more defensible than the Harvard grad who worked for McKinsey after writing a blog post pretending to be anguished about the moral choices.
scarmig 6y ago
Nah. Voting isn't some divine representation of the will of the people; it's a feedback mechanism to push the governing apparatus toward goals that are beneficial to the voting population, however halting or misguided the approach is. Some people voted for McCain over Obama; does that give them the moral, anti-war high ground, since Obama killed Libyans and McCain never had a chance to? Not at all. Nor does throwing away your vote by going third party, spoiling your ballot, or abstaining give you any particularly sympathetic reason to morally preen. Voting isn't a moral activity.
- ses1984 6y ago
  Voting isn't a moral activity, this is a really, really strange proposition that I am not sure I can accept. Don't morals factor into deciding what goals are beneficial to the population? (I'm not even sure I agree with the proposition that voting pushes the governing apparatus this way in many democracies including the USA)
  - scarmig 6y ago
    > (I'm not even sure I agree with the proposition that voting pushes the governing apparatus this way in many democracies including the USA) I agree that it doesn't, but it's the intent. I don't think that's inherent to democracy, though, just the particular "democratic" structures that have evolved that we live with. > Don't morals factor into deciding what goals are beneficial to the population? As individuals, we can vote how we like, and everyone can and should use whatever individual morality they have to cast their vote (or not). But the act of voting doesn't mean that the voter has delegated their moral agency (and, with that, the potential for moral blame or praise) to the people in government. If I vote for someone who decides to do something monstrous, I may be an idiot if I mis-predicted that would be a result, but I discount attempts to put the moral blame for their actions onto me. This is a relatively unpopular view nowadays (because people see it as a way for Trump voters to distance themselves from Trump's actions), but a world that does assume voters bear moral responsibility for the actions of their government merely by the act of having voted for whoever is performing the actions is a world where it's impossible to be moral.
    - cycomanic 6y ago
      I don't think I can agree with that argument. There is definitely a moral responsibility of the people to hold their governments accountable. I definitely see a responsibility of the German during the 3rd Reich to have a moral responsibility to what happened and the generation which did live during that time were justifiably challenged by their children about what they did or didn't do.
    - ses1984 6y ago
      What if a candidate runs on a monstrous platform and then implements exactly what they promised, is it ok to put any blame on those voters? I don't think in cases where voters are deceived it would be fair to blame them.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

ojnabieoot 6y ago

> Is everyone that voted for Obama also complicit in the human misery/genocides in Libya On one hand, all American citizens are complicit in US foreign policy. On the other hand, anti-war voters who voted for Obama didn’t do so because they sold out, it was because the idea that McCain or Romney would be more dovish is transparently ridiculous. Some people may comfort themselves in a consumerist, selfish fantasy that their vote must express their principles. But voting is an exercise or limited power, not personal expression. Using this power responsibly means taking seriously its compromises and limitations. Going back to the employment analogy: working for an ethically suspicious employer because you are facing homelessness is a lot more defensible than the Harvard grad who worked for McKinsey after writing a blog post pretending to be anguished about the moral choices.

scarmig 6y ago

Nah. Voting isn't some divine representation of the will of the people; it's a feedback mechanism to push the governing apparatus toward goals that are beneficial to the voting population, however halting or misguided the approach is. Some people voted for McCain over Obama; does that give them the moral, anti-war high ground, since Obama killed Libyans and McCain never had a chance to? Not at all. Nor does throwing away your vote by going third party, spoiling your ballot, or abstaining give you any particularly sympathetic reason to morally preen. Voting isn't a moral activity.

ses1984 6y ago
Voting isn't a moral activity, this is a really, really strange proposition that I am not sure I can accept. Don't morals factor into deciding what goals are beneficial to the population? (I'm not even sure I agree with the proposition that voting pushes the governing apparatus this way in many democracies including the USA)
- scarmig 6y ago
  > (I'm not even sure I agree with the proposition that voting pushes the governing apparatus this way in many democracies including the USA) I agree that it doesn't, but it's the intent. I don't think that's inherent to democracy, though, just the particular "democratic" structures that have evolved that we live with. > Don't morals factor into deciding what goals are beneficial to the population? As individuals, we can vote how we like, and everyone can and should use whatever individual morality they have to cast their vote (or not). But the act of voting doesn't mean that the voter has delegated their moral agency (and, with that, the potential for moral blame or praise) to the people in government. If I vote for someone who decides to do something monstrous, I may be an idiot if I mis-predicted that would be a result, but I discount attempts to put the moral blame for their actions onto me. This is a relatively unpopular view nowadays (because people see it as a way for Trump voters to distance themselves from Trump's actions), but a world that does assume voters bear moral responsibility for the actions of their government merely by the act of having voted for whoever is performing the actions is a world where it's impossible to be moral.
  - cycomanic 6y ago
    I don't think I can agree with that argument. There is definitely a moral responsibility of the people to hold their governments accountable. I definitely see a responsibility of the German during the 3rd Reich to have a moral responsibility to what happened and the generation which did live during that time were justifiably challenged by their children about what they did or didn't do.
  - ses1984 6y ago
    What if a candidate runs on a monstrous platform and then implements exactly what they promised, is it ok to put any blame on those voters? I don't think in cases where voters are deceived it would be fair to blame them.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]