> Destruction is a terrible yet inevitable end that should only be induced to protect the weak and ameliorate suffering, so be just and resolute when you seek it.
I think an issue with this reasoning is that "protect the weak" and "be just" are things that many people (admittedly not all) from "both sides" _do_ want to do, and that reality is often not so straightforward, involving tradeoffs that cannot be objectively evaluated as "just".
Personally I believe that a lot of disagreements in this realm come down to misunderstanding, in which case it's very sad to have to resort to destruction, when better communication and efforts to work together could create agreement or at least compromise. Admittedly resolving these misunderstandings is really hard, and I think a lot of us don't have the skills or tools to do so in a reasonable amount of time.
I abhor destruction and it is troubling that we have ideologues in power who subscribe to the most odious philosophies mankind has created.
Your reticence and observations are astute.
For context, I was raised in a mormon home and have spent most of my life as a scientifically-minded atheist, which makes my recent connection with well-documented spiritual qualia remarkable to me.
I think an issue with this reasoning is that "protect the weak" and "be just" are things that many people (admittedly not all) from "both sides" _do_ want to do, and that reality is often not so straightforward, involving tradeoffs that cannot be objectively evaluated as "just".
Personally I believe that a lot of disagreements in this realm come down to misunderstanding, in which case it's very sad to have to resort to destruction, when better communication and efforts to work together could create agreement or at least compromise. Admittedly resolving these misunderstandings is really hard, and I think a lot of us don't have the skills or tools to do so in a reasonable amount of time.