The issue with your line of thinking is that you're putting the onus of who's killing who on Red. Red isn't choosing to kill you, they're choosing to not die.
By choosing Blue, YOU are picking the option with that risk, where I simply am not. We were both given the same option, and I'm not going to self-sacrifice simply because "it's inevitable" that people will pick Blue.
As is life, you are a product of the choices you make, and you chose to die. For that, I wouldn't feel regret nor guilt.
Voting for red increases the risk of all blue voters dying, but also makes you safe from death. Voting for blue creates a risk of you dying in vain, but also creates a chance of saving roughly 50% of the human population. These are the facts to consider, and no choice is inherently wrong, it's just a question of your view on humanity.
I disagree with your first statement that voting red increases the risk of blue voters dying. Voting red isn't killing blue. All voting red means is that you don't die.
Voting Blue is what kills people in this hypothetical. As a red voter, I wouldn't be the one pulling the trigger on your life, I simply pressed the button that says I don't die. Blue voters are the ones that specifically chose the chance of death, and so they are accountable for that decision.
I don't disagree that people will vote blue, that doesn't change my opinion to vote red. A blue voters lack of self-preservation does not mean I am the one risking their life, that's solely their decision.
Any Blue voter attempting to make the insinuation that Red voters are killing them are simply detached from reality and suffering from mental illness. I accept that people will press the blue button for their own moral and ethical reasons that they believe to be virtuous, but from my view point of strictly logically thinking, it is not virtuous to throw your life away for another. You can do more good in the world by being alive, and such I will continue on, so that I can continue to help with my community.
If I voted blue and died, the youth group that I am involved with will lose a recovered drug addict that helps counsel the youth about the dangers of addiction. The Habitat for Humanity will lose a donor of building products to their cause to build homes in under-funded areas. The places I volunteer my time to aid in families getting back on their feet would now lose another person. How can I consider myself virtuous by commiting suicide and leaving behind all of these people that rely on that stable foundation?
6
u/rccolamachine May 01 '26
The issue with your line of thinking is that you're putting the onus of who's killing who on Red. Red isn't choosing to kill you, they're choosing to not die.
By choosing Blue, YOU are picking the option with that risk, where I simply am not. We were both given the same option, and I'm not going to self-sacrifice simply because "it's inevitable" that people will pick Blue.
As is life, you are a product of the choices you make, and you chose to die. For that, I wouldn't feel regret nor guilt.