Fuck countering your argument. I'll state an opinion. The Trolley Problem is a choice between choosing the least amount of harm, if given so. Pure logic. Concepts such as malevolence should not even enter the equation if dealing with something pragmatically.
Discussion
'I call anything that harms or destroys a thing evil, and everything that preserves and benefits it good.'
/ Socrates (via Plato's Republic)
That's the classical definition of good versus evil and it's purely logical.
Do you agree or disagree that the Trolley Problem can be used for motives of power and control? If there is agreement then we are debating situations and applications that can be explored individually.
"Hitler is on the default track. If you flip the switch, it smears 5 alphabet people" - Is this what you are asking?
Those are your assumptions, not mine.
Governments using the Trolley Problem is very risky and the potentials for harm and undermining individual liberties are evident.
Is this clear enough as to how I used the term?
Dude goes and quotes Socrates, but turns into a shrinking violent the second I go full Godwin in 1 post.
Nice place for genuine intellectual debate.