8 ms·
Your 'everything is connected, inaction is action' argument is only compelling if you can provide a counter-example. A place where your rule breaks down. A rule
by Rule35 6y ago
Your 'everything is connected, inaction is action' argument is only compelling if you can provide a counter-example. A place where your rule breaks down. A rule without exceptions, in a complex domain, is just wrong.
Yes, we all breathe the same air. But at what point is you not fighting my battles with me reasonable disinterest - neutrality - rather than an active choice to hinder me? Clearly if you don't know me, and if you don't know the facts, etc...
I obviously reject it sooner than you, but if you don't reject it at some point then it's ideology and I reject that out of hand.
- jakelazaroff 6y agoA union gains leverage by monopolizing the sale of labor to a company; a company gains leverage when they can buy labor elsewhere. If you don’t support the union, you are necessarily chipping away at their monopoly. There’s no action whereby your choice doesn’t change the balance of power between the two.
- Rule35 6y agoDid you try to catch a serial killer today? If not you helped kill their victim. Now either explain the limit to that logic or turn yourself in to the police.
- jakelazaroff 6y agoThe limit to the logic is that it only applies where you are forced to choose between zero sum options.
- Rule35 6y agoYeah, like deciding between spending your limited time on here or hunting a serial killer. Zero sum, son. You don't seem to have realized that you aren't the first group to use these arguments and tactics, or how badly they fail. Sadly only after exacting great societal consequences though.