Image Alt-Text

A two panel Comic.

First panel is set somewhere in the middle ages in south america. A child is sacrificed on an altar.

The people observing this say: why do we have to kill kids? - it’s not a “killing”, it’s a “sacrifice”. - if we didn’t sacrifice kids the rain god will be mad… - … and the rain may stop falling… - … and our crops would stop growing … - …and we’ll starve to death!

Second panel is modern day street scene, a dead child is lifted into an ambulance, a crushed tricycle left on the road.

The people observing this say: why do we have to kill kids? - it’s not a “killing”, it’s a “car accident”. - if we motorists had to drive slower, it would hurt car sales… - … and the economy would be upset… - … and we’ll all lose our jobs… - …and we’ll starve to death!

I did not see this banger of a comic on here, so have it, please

  • Wytch@lemmy.zipEnglish
    51·
    2 days ago

    Apply this justification to anything, same result.

    Why do we have to starve kids? We’re not starving them, they’re homeless / Gazan / African / poor.

    We have euphemisms for all our cruelties.

  • grrgyle@slrpnk.netEnglish
    17·
    2 days ago

    The euphemism really does hide the fact - people die and we could stop it if we really wanted but for our fucked priorities.

  • Annoyed_🦀 @lemmy.zipEnglish
    101·
    2 days ago

    If motorist have to drive slower it would hurt car sales

    Nowadays the excuse is it pollute more.

  • IDraw4u@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    2233·
    2 days ago

    Oh yes, an intentional religious murder is definitely the same as someone unintentionally running into a child.

    People can definitely take you seriously with an argument like this

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      641·
      2 days ago

      The design of cities and their traffic infrastructure is very well researched. We know how to make better cities that kill a lot less people, but have failed to do so for decades. Seems pretty intentional to me or at least willfully ignorant/acceptant.

      Also the people in the first scene arent killing the person themselves directly, but their decisions as a culture are. Same applies to the bottom one.

    • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@slrpnk.netEnglish
      351·
      2 days ago

      It’s a systemic problem tolerated by society as the cost of society… even though it’s not intractable, or even unthinkable.

      The fault doesn’t lie with the motorist like it lies with the wielder of the sacrificial knife, sure; but in both cases the system is set up to kill kids, and it’s society as a whole that needs to adapt to fix the problem.

    • Deme@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      231·
      2 days ago

      We keep letting it happen, despite knowing exactly what could be done to stop it. The meme is about excuses made in order to not change things at the wider level, not the murderous intent or lack thereof of whoever ends up doing this all too frequent ritual.

    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.networkEnglish
      194·
      2 days ago

      I think a lot of people need to go back to elementary school for remedial lessons on metaphor.

      I see often see two errors. One, this one, where two things are not alike in all ways and thus they are not alike at all. The other one, where two things are alike in one way and thus they are alike in all ways.

      • Soup@lemmy.worldEnglish
        51·
        2 days ago

        I feel like people do understand the point but they take it further in order to find a weak point. It’s all in bad faith, of course, and while I do not doubt that stupidity plays a large role it’s become pretty obvious to me that it always comes up when someone is desperate to defend something they are being shown is bad.