While Education and Organizing is building the parts for a new engine the rest of the year.

  • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    This seems earnest, but

    “advocating for drug decriminalization is advocating for drug abuse”
    It isn’t.

    “socialism is tyranny”
    It isn’t.

    “housing homeless means you want more homeless”
    It doesn’t.

    “banning abortions means you want women to suffer”

    Now see, this one is actually true. The right will claim “nooo, of course nooot,” but that’s the only outcome. They don’t want child care, they don’t want welfare for parents or single moms, but they do want to ban abortions. This directly leads to parents who don’t want to be, with to much responsibility to go to college, start a career or just enjoy their time. So, whether the right likes it or not, they want women to suffer. They want everything about the suffering, just without calling it that.

    The problem is not that X leads to Y. It’s that, in the other cases, X doesn’t lead to Y. If X actually does lead to Y, then X is by consequence a pro Y position.

    But if it doesn’t, it isn’t.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      You’re kind of ignoring my point though, whether or not Y is the consequence of X, if someone genuinely supports X and genuinely opposes Y it is malicious to call them supporters of Y whether or not Y is the result of X.