127
rule (lemmygrad.ml)

Just reposting this excellent point from lemmygrad

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Egon@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think I take issue with the choice of calling the act monstrous. It was both necessary and understandable, while we can be detached from emotion, that family sat at the top of a system that had plagued people for centuries. Expecting cold rationality, especially in those conditions, is silly.
I don't think a monstrous act can be necessary.

[-] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think, as you mentioned elsewhere, this is such a situation where it's not black and white. The family had been a true blight on the people and could not be allowed to continue their rule. You are absolutely correct in that expecting cold rationality is a mistake humans are emotional creatures (something that I've had to get comfortable with myself). To me, killing a child will always be a monstrous act and being found necessary or understandable doesn't change that.

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

Fair enough, good point.

this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
127 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13447 readers
827 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS