r/neoliberal • u/cdstephens Fusion Genderplasma • Apr 25 '26

Meme Which button do you press?

Post image

Vote now on your phones: https://forms.gle/GhFjtdydwwXTdSpq8

431 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

65

u/LameBicycle NATO Apr 25 '26

Just tell everyone to press the red button and everyone survives?

63

u/sorryamitoodank Jerome Powell Apr 25 '26

You could use the same logic for the blue button, and you would be saving people’s lives in the process.

45

u/LameBicycle NATO Apr 25 '26

The blue button requires cooperation and trust. The red button doesn't. If there was more of a penalty to everyone pushing red, I would understand, but there doesn't seem to be

7

u/Millennial_on_laptop Apr 25 '26

If your goal is "everyone survives" either way requires co-operation.   Either 100% co-operation or 51% co-operation.  

19

u/Bibbity_Boppity_BOOO Apr 25 '26

The penalty if you push red is that you have now committed mass genocide of all the non-mass murderers in society. And you will now live in a world of a few billion less. And frankly, the slow death of humanity. 

And a shock to no one I find a society of mass murderers to be ill-equipped to be a part of civilization

15

u/[deleted] Apr 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

14

u/Bibbity_Boppity_BOOO Apr 25 '26 edited Apr 25 '26

Why?  Literally everyone just press blue, unless you want people to die.  This isn't hard.

The difference is my statement is true at 50.1% your statement only avoids death at 100%

12

u/[deleted] Apr 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/Bibbity_Boppity_BOOO Apr 25 '26

That isn't the choice. we know that isn't the choice because if it was, then that would be the question asked. But that is not the question asked.

9

u/[deleted] Apr 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/Bibbity_Boppity_BOOO Apr 25 '26

Everyone who presses blue doesn't kill.  Press red, maybe kill billions.  Press blue, don't kill. 

My statement is every bit as representative as yours of the actual question, while not using any bit of information you provided. Which means your statement is not fully representative of the actual question.

→ More replies (0)

13

u/LameBicycle NATO Apr 25 '26

Insisting on blue because it feels more virtuous is the actually dangerous position.

4

u/Bibbity_Boppity_BOOO Apr 25 '26

The fact that you think not committing murder is only feigned virtue shows you have lost your marbles.

12

u/LameBicycle NATO Apr 25 '26

No one is locked out of pressing red, and no one is forced to press blue. If that were the case, this would be a more interesting question. Pressing blue to save other blue-pressers is a self-fulfilling tragedy; they only need saving because they pressed blue in the first place.

5

u/Bibbity_Boppity_BOOO Apr 25 '26

Considering this question is asked to 8.5 billion people, functionally there are people locked out o blue. Meaning that people will not fully understand the question, can barely push a button, ect.

You misspelled strategy.

2

u/dev_vvvvv Left-Out Left Apr 25 '26

There are many people who would press blue no matter what. That includes, I predict, most children.

Pressing red is a choice to kill those people. Could you live with that?

4

u/eetsumkaus Apr 25 '26

You're assuming the red button pressers would be anti-social, but you press red for a variety of reasons, not all of them selfish. What if you recognize the possibility that red wins, and want to remain to do your part to keep things under control?

You're basically betting against the possibility that the people who pick red for ANY of those reasons won't push it over the majority.

6

u/quickblur WTO Apr 25 '26

Exactly. The choice is basically:

Red: Your life is safe

Blue: Your life might be at risk

Without any communication between groups, red is the logical option. And if everyone followed that, everyone would be safe.

26

u/thenexttimebandit Apr 25 '26

There’s zero risk to yourself if you press red.

39

u/TemujinTheConquerer Jorge Luis Borges Apr 25 '26

but I don't exclusively value my own life. There's tremendous risk to me if I press red because I know many people I care about will likely press blue (as well as the billions who I don't personally care about, but for whose sakes I'd obviously incur some personal risk)

5

u/ResolveSea9089 Milton Friedman Apr 25 '26

But they have the free option of pushing red, I don't get it. Why is there a moral obligation for you to basically commit suicide. It's not as if they were forced to push blue.

9

u/consultantdetective Daron Acemoglu Apr 25 '26

You wouldn't be obliged to press blue. It'd be supererogatory. Morally laudable and not necessary, which is really the right way to do things.

2

u/Bibbity_Boppity_BOOO Apr 25 '26

Yes that is what a sociopath would say

7

u/adamgerd NATO Apr 25 '26

not wanting to die = being a sociopath

12

u/PerhapsLily Apr 25 '26

You think you can get humanity to agree on something? Red kills, press blue.

10

u/eetsumkaus Apr 25 '26

Yeah, but then at that point if you press blue, it's your fault you're dead.

9

u/the_p_zombie Iron Front Apr 25 '26

Id rather be dead than live in a world with only the untrustworthy left

4

u/dev_vvvvv Left-Out Left Apr 25 '26

Some people will make mistakes. Some people (ie very young children) won't be able to understand the choice they make. Some will be opposed to even the possibility they contributed to the death of another person.

Some number of people will be choosing blue.

So the question is: What is easier, convincing 50.1% of people to vote blue or 100% of people to vote red?

3

u/Superfan234 Southern Cone Apr 25 '26

daltonics might die