Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
More than 99% of people reject Green parties, and instead keep voting for parties and politicians subsidizing a mass extinction.
Would it be ethically correct for the 1% of people who don’t want a mass extinction, to keep killing the omnicidal class - which the 98% will then find replacements for?
It’s not just the richest 1% who are the problem - yes they cause vastly more harm than the rest, but it’s also the other 98% poorest who vote for the most violent, Machiavellian, narcissists there are to rule them.
More than 99% of people reject Green parties, and instead keep voting for parties and politicians subsidizing a mass extinction. Would it be ethically correct for the 1% of people who don’t want a mass extinction, to keep killing the omnicidal class - which the 98% will then find replacements for?
It’s not just the richest 1% who are the problem - yes they cause vastly more harm than the rest, but it’s also the other 98% poorest who vote for the most violent, Machiavellian, narcissists there are to rule them.