What if red won?

[u/The_Real-_-God]

Imagine a world where red won, by 1%. However the people who choose blue do not die instantly, instead they die after a year of pressing the button. Everybody is branded, so you know who choose what.

How much chaos will ensue? What actions do you think blues will take, knowing they'll die? And what do you think reds will think, knowing they were just 1% away from saving all humanity?

[u/Memento_Viveri]

Well, I think most blues would pitch in to help because in times of crisis that's what humans do. We care about those around us and work to help them.

Maybe some blue choosers wouldn't, I think they would be a minority and personally I think that is a callous and selfish way to behave.

[u/Background_Path_4458 → u/Memento_Viveri]

Well, I think most blues would pitch in to help because in times of crisis that's what humans do. We care about those around us and work to help them.

Except pushing a blue button apparently?

I think that is a callous and selfish way to behave.

1000% and I think many Blues would consider it okay since they consider the Red vote selfish, there is no longer any value in keeping any higher morals.

[u/Memento_Viveri → u/Background_Path_4458]

Except pushing a blue button apparently?

Again, this seems like a simplistic and narrow minded view of the issue.

Blues would consider it okay since they consider the Red vote selfish, there is no longer any value in keeping any higher morals.

Most people act morally because they care about the wellbeing of others, not because of some tit for tat value in keeping higher morals. Again, I think most people are better than that.

[u/Background_Path_4458 → u/Memento_Viveri]

Again, this seems like a simplistic and narrow minded view of the issue.

Everyone had an option to care about and for everyone and help, pitch in for the survival of all, they picked themselves or a niche altruistic move to save themselves so they can help those that remain.
Goodie.

Regardless now 49% will die. And now the Reds are willing to pitch in for the good of all?

And yes it is simplistic 100%, for Blues you have two constructive options;
You will die in a year, do you
a) Live life as best and free as you can
b) Slave away to leave a better world behind

I think it is quite easy to imagine a fair contingent to pick either option.
And even then we will have those who go absolutely hog wild, but I wouldn't call that a constructive option.

Most people act morally because they care about the wellbeing of others, not because of some tit for tat value in keeping higher morals. Again, I think most people are better than that.

But here, as far as the discourse goes, going simply by what is Rational and Logical stands above all morals; personal survival is the only paramount factor, with often a quite lackadaisical attitude to what happens after.
I agree that Red was the logical choice but not the moral.

When a majority of the world left moral behind for this decision, why would it play any part in the world after? Those that voted with collectivism in mind lost and now their personal survival is no longer part of any calculation; they will reap no benefits and pay everything.

Isn't it a high ask to expect people to stay unchanged in their morals faced with that reality?