Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Would you not judge people for putting a gun to the head of a child and pulling the trigger?
Because buying from some companies is paying the salary and the bullets of the people who do exactly that.
When people are designated as "terrorists" you can even be held criminally liable under the current system, if you keep doing business with them. Shouldnt the same standard apply for people doing business with genocide?
Those are completely separate examples and you know it.
If you think that giving a murderer money so he can buy a gun to murder people with is not related to the act of murdering people, i would love to hear the explanation.
First of all, you're demanding me answer something that is completely separate from the original argument. OP asked about judging other people for their purchases. You are asking about an action that presents direct violent harm, something completely different. Purchasing something from a company may support violence in some way, but purchasing an item may support the company's practices, but it does not necessarily mean that every purchase directly funds those harmful actions. Your comparison is quite literally the "Appeal to Emotion" fallacy, it is not a good-faith argument, you are trying to present an emotional picture that isn't relevant, and I won't buy into it.
All the time on the internet this happens. Someone here put it very well. Someone can ask "What is 2+2" and a commenter will reply "4". Someone else then will inevitably reply "Well what about 2+3?! You didn't even consider it!"
The question was asked and answered, you're asking something completely separate.