• agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It’s always they’re not a monolith and true enough but if a literal vote doesn’t represent the overall will of the group then that’s implying thay democracy doesn’t work. If most of them voted for this then thats what most of them wanted. We have exit polls and data on this, it’s not as if anyone’s attributing to a group characteristics that only a few of them have, it’s the clear majority, year over year.

    • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The will of the majority shouldn’t infringe on the liberty of the minority. Might shouldn’t make right.

      Are you saying the actions of a portion of an arbitrarily defined group should condemn the group as a whole? I’ll ask the same question I asked another commenter; are you okay with that same principle being applied to you in the future?

      • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        It’s being applied to me now. Every thread talking about millennials political preferences top comment is always ‘then they should actually vote’ despite the fact that I havent missed an election. The least we can do is keep the same consistency here. Im not here to coddle boomers and treat them in higher regard than how we get treated. You get what you give and the majority of boomers are also getting exactly what they voted for. Must be nice, that’s not a luxury my generation has.

        Also whos being condemed? Are you suggesting honoring the democratic outcome of a vote of a group is condeming them? If so then who exactly did the condeming? No one says I’m being condemed when I have to live with shit I didn’t vote for, the comparison is ridiculous.

        • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          We agree the current “boomer” policies are inadequate and should be changed, yes? Then is your position that improvements to the status quo should exclude people of a certain age because of how a portion of that population has voted?

          If that’s your position, then that’s condemnation. The entire group is being excluded from the solution, despite only a portion having created the problem in the first place.

          Apply that logic to any minority/disadvantaged/disenfranchised group, and see where it takes you. Should all Palestinians be punished because they didn’t do enough to stop Hamas? Should black Americans born in the 1910s not have enjoyed the benefits of the Civil Rights movement because they didn’t affect enough change in their youth?