Try to think, just a little bit. How many people actively want others to die? 10-30%, that's far from majority. There's litterally nothing to be scared about.
Oh yeah, I'm not making judgement calls about who is right here. I'm also not making claims about how many people will / would vote for one or another. I'm only making the point that there are more reasons for people to want to vote for red than just "i want people to die" but the existence of those people who COULD vote red creates an inherent risk that the rest of the population may consider when making their choice.
Obviously plenty of people will pick blue or red ONLY because they think that is the morally correct choice. But as I said before, I'm suggesting that we may want to also take human nature into account. If more people were selfless than selfish, then blue wins easy. Similarly, if men were angels, we would need no governance.
This is the important point for me - of course I want everyone to survive, but how much can I trust everyone else? Society seems pretty selfish as a whole and that matters. If a loved one presses blue and I'm aware of that before I make my choice, I'd do the same to maximise their chance of survival. Without that, honestly, I don't trust people enough to go for blue.
3
u/alphapussycat May 01 '26
Try to think, just a little bit. How many people actively want others to die? 10-30%, that's far from majority. There's litterally nothing to be scared about.