I think you’re confusing levels of behavior, here. It may be that their net effect is to support Hamas, but that they don’t intend this, and that their actual intent does not make the mistake you’re (at least if I read correctly) attributing to intent here. I do think they end up on net having intentions that make them vulnerable to being manipulated by those in power in adversary groups, since their intent is to support the weak among any group. In particular, they typically are thinking in different group selectors than you seem to assign here; of the people I’d guess you mean, in my interactions with them, they don’t seem to profess support for Hamas, and in fact explicitly say they’d like to support palestinians without supporting hamas.
But, I strongly agree that leftists tend to pessimize their values on net, and that that is one of the biggest issues with leftist approaches to the world. So whether we disagree depends on what level we’re looking at.
Your reasoning seems like it would be improved by finding people who seem to exhibit the belief you suspect exists and want to model, and interviewing them without letting your opinions leak, to try to get a map of their actual opinions; before making this comment I spent some time brainstorming to find a way to do that fast, and didn’t come up with one, so perhaps it makes sense to not take this suggestion, but I maintain that it would be useful if practical. As a stopgap, going to the main locations that a group discuss things online can be useful, keeping in mind that then one will have uncertainty like the kind I have about you: you seem overall to be a good person as far as I’ve been able to tell so far, but you interact enough with people whose personal policies in practice support things that seem to me like they’re at imminent risk of causing human-induced catastrophic outcomes for many of the humans in the world that it’s unclear to me what your intentions are.
I think you’re confusing levels of behavior, here. It may be that their net effect is to support Hamas, but that they don’t intend this, and that their actual intent does not make the mistake you’re (at least if I read correctly) attributing to intent here. I do think they end up on net having intentions that make them vulnerable to being manipulated by those in power in adversary groups, since their intent is to support the weak among any group. In particular, they typically are thinking in different group selectors than you seem to assign here; of the people I’d guess you mean, in my interactions with them, they don’t seem to profess support for Hamas, and in fact explicitly say they’d like to support palestinians without supporting hamas.
But, I strongly agree that leftists tend to pessimize their values on net, and that that is one of the biggest issues with leftist approaches to the world. So whether we disagree depends on what level we’re looking at.
Your reasoning seems like it would be improved by finding people who seem to exhibit the belief you suspect exists and want to model, and interviewing them without letting your opinions leak, to try to get a map of their actual opinions; before making this comment I spent some time brainstorming to find a way to do that fast, and didn’t come up with one, so perhaps it makes sense to not take this suggestion, but I maintain that it would be useful if practical. As a stopgap, going to the main locations that a group discuss things online can be useful, keeping in mind that then one will have uncertainty like the kind I have about you: you seem overall to be a good person as far as I’ve been able to tell so far, but you interact enough with people whose personal policies in practice support things that seem to me like they’re at imminent risk of causing human-induced catastrophic outcomes for many of the humans in the world that it’s unclear to me what your intentions are.