740
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025
740 points (96.5% liked)
Political Memes
9096 readers
495 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Harm reduction is highlighting that both sides are not the same. Fuck's sake.
It's basically saying one side harms, the other side harms less. Aka both sides harm. Aka both sides same. I see it as "both sides same" lite.
People got called out on "both sides same" so they switched the term to "harm reduction" to slip in the notion that both sides harm. I already see it in this thread.
You don't understand the intended message of this post. The people abstaining from voting because the ice cream is not vegan ARE the "both sides are the same, none will bring real change, that's why I won't vote/vote 3rd party" people that ultimately help steer the bus off the cliff. "Harm reduction" as used in this post is an argument for voting for the better of two realistic outcomes, even if that outcome doesn't meet your purity standards. The point being that one option (bus driving off the cliff) is much much worse than the other.
Holy fucking shit
Do you not see it already on this thread? I already saw "more like the ice cream does not exist" and "more like one side wants to drive off, the other wants to drive really close so they can decide to drive off later."
Yes, but they're explicitly in opposition to harm reduction as illustrated in the meme.
I think the main target audience here are people who already think that both sides do harm. I think what is being told here is that "even if we were to accept that both sides do harm, then the other side does it magnitudes more than the other one."
Couple thoughts on that 1) Don't play into their notion that both sides harm/both sides the same. That's what they want. 2) We need to show them dems actually deliver. That's not harm reduction, that delivering. Then the conversation turns to how to get more.
I'm realizing lots of people have binary thinking. It's either harm or help. So the idea of harm reduction allows them to mentally put it in the same camp as harm. And once it's in the same camp, then they think it's all the same, and then they think there's no point in it.