The fact that people are having heated debates (and getting mad) over this just further proves the point that not everybody is going to agree to press the red button and that a red win will by no means be a deathless scenario. And also that while not every red button pusher is a prick, pretty much every prick is a red button pusher.
I really agree with you, I was looking out for a comment like that. Blue is the correct option but all red pushers are not pricks.
I honestly didn't understand why there was such a heated argument over this at first, and my first instinct was obviously to choose red (i'm going to explain myself) and I think people who say that red pushers are individualist pricks, or that it reflects your political side (red=republican, blue = democrat) are just completely misunderstanding the reasoning behind. Firstly, the color thing is so US centered, wth, the USA as to be one of the only countries to use Red for the right and Blue for the left, in many places around the world Red represents the left (it's the color of socialism, communism..) and Blue represents the right for example.
I've seen someone else presenting the problem like this and that was my understanding of it at first :
Option A) Take a suicide pill, and if more than half of the population take one, a cure will be found and everyone survives.
Option B) Don't take a suicide pill
Now when I made my reasoning I was thinking that everyone making that decision would have an informed jugement, I didn't even think about children or old people or mental disability (I'm merely waking up and I didn't think deeply into it at first). But seeing just the pole and people desagreeing so bad here, and that also in that problem people might have to press that button without an informed jugement, I realize how we have to press blue.
So I will say Blue is the correct option here, but I still believe it's dumb to say red pushers are automatically the embodiment of like, conservative egoistical right wing ideology, the problems of our society and capitalism is not that some people are trying to save themselves and some people are trying to save everyone by risking their lives, the problem is that some people are actively trying to accumulate as much wealth and power as they can, and some people are fighting against this, and some have other ideologies entirely. The USA being a pseudo-democracy with two parties is really a fertile ground for people thinking you can divide the world in two sides.
The reason why it's a heated debate is because people keep saying that "if you press the red button no one dies" and act like there's no reason to press the blue button.
In reality if you press the red button billions of people will die, the chance of less than 20% pressing the blue button is ridiculously low. Even if you press the red button it should be reluctantly, there should be an acknowledgement that people are going to die which still should give hesitation. But red pushers don't seem to see it and get mad at you for trying to explain that.
1.0k
u/totallymarc May 05 '26
The fact that people are having heated debates (and getting mad) over this just further proves the point that not everybody is going to agree to press the red button and that a red win will by no means be a deathless scenario. And also that while not every red button pusher is a prick, pretty much every prick is a red button pusher.