• Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    8 days ago

    I’m not going to be upset about that.

    In 2026? I don’t know what the situation was back then, but if the CIA came to you in 2026 with a bunch of funding for a project that was actually important and meaningful to you, you would take that money??

    • Freeposity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      I’m always going to choose harm reduction. If the CIA wants to help me with that, I’ll take their money.

      • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        That only makes sense if both you and the CIA genuinely want the same thing. That’s bonkers to even put into type. If the CIA genuinely wants to do something good, then you saying, “find someone else to help you,” does not stand in the way of that good being done. There is zero risk from an altruistic point of view, the perceived risk here is that you don’t get money. That’s so short-sighted.

        And anyway, they don’t want the same thing as you. Reducing harm is not their mandate. You are taking something you care about, and you are giving it to the CIA for their unstated ends. Congratulations, you no longer have something you care about.