So killing is not okay except when its internet-approved vigilantism?

Example: "Polititian commutes death sentences" Lemmy be like "good", but then when "Politician condemns assassination" Lemmy have a problem with condeming political violence?

(Like Gavin Newsom commutes all death row immates in California vs when Democratic polititians condemned Luigi Mangione)

Or are these different groups of Lemmings?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 28 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

There is a difference between practical statements and moral statements. You can simultaneously believe that nobody should die (moral belief), while also believing that assassinations are the natural consequence of unchecked capitalism (practical belief).

This is made particularly confusing in English, since the word "should" can use both definitions. eg, you should apologize (moral), vs you should protect yourself (practical)

I am of the belief that Brian Thompson should (moral) have been locked up for his actions. Having failed that, I predict that Brian should (practical) have been assassinated. And he was.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

    But they were asking why users were enjoying something they purportedly dislike. Regardless of whether you view it as a practical necessity, you should not celebrate his death if you oppose murder overall.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago (1 child)

    His death already happened. They were not saying someone should go and kill him, they were celebrating the lack of Kirk going forward, the reduction in harm. It is not morally right to plan and execute a murder, but objectively speaking there will be less harm now that he is dead and that is a relief.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment