u/Minecrafter_of_Ps3

Left to right:

Azumarino(Azumarill & Nidorino)

Moltres(self, used Nincada evolution dupe glitch)

Shedsharp(Shedinja & Bisharp, saw my rival use it and ended sweeping the champion fight with it)

Alaeon(Alakazam & Espeon)

Luxroc(Luxray & Lycanroc, specifically Dusk Form)

Last but not least, Aggitar(Aggron & Tyranitar, the highest level in my party due)

Honorable Mentions:

Genape(Gengar & Infernape, my starter. Amazing sprite)

Furowl(Furret & Noctowl, there since the beginning, Hypnosis + Echoed Voice goes hard)

Nosekid(Nosepass & Elekid, the obligatory Rock Smash Pokémon before getting the pickaxe)

Found them on my way to defeat ice wraiths for the Stormcloak questline

The red perspective: Everyone who wants to live should pick red, blue potentially gets you killed, and is a 50/50 at best

The blue perspective: Why should we trust everyone to pick red? The original post says everyone on Earth, so there will be people who pick randomly. We ought to save those people and pick blue

So what is the correct choice? Let's explore first

The ideology of(most) red pickers is that, at absolute worst, 49%(approximately) will die. At absolute best, 0% will die. While there will be some that are basically guaranteed to die due to choosing randomly, to minimize risk we ought to all choose red, and mourn those who chose blue

The ideology of(most) blue pickers is that, at absolute worst, 51% of the population will live, and at absolute best, 100% will live. To minimize the number of deaths, we ought to all pick blue

Notice how red thinks only in death(heavily generalizing), and blue thinks only in life(again, heavily generalizing, exceptions are bound). From these perspectives, death is either guaranteed or only a possibility, despite mechanically being the exact same

So why is this so divisive?

A red picker might say it's because blue pickers are unreasonable for trusting that 51% of the population will pick blue, as we are emotional and illogical creatures. A single blue vote only risks yourself, and safety is not guaranteed

A blue picker might say it's because red pickers are selfish, and that every vote towards blue is a vote closer to 100% of humanity surviving, especially with randomness

Personally, I think blue is the correct choice

The typical mindset of a red picker I have seen is that a single blue vote doesn't save anyone, and only risks yourself, which is only half true. It's the same as saying "I'm not going to vote in the presidential election, because my 1 vote won't change the outcome". These statements feel true, because technically they are, but again, only halfway. If you extend this line of thinking to billions of others, then suddenly we have a problem. It is hard to trust one another with something so important, however trust is the only way something gets done. A single protestor does not a movement make, but a million does

Those who pick red aren't unreasonable. Self-preservation is a natural instinct, and the brain is hardwired to prioritize you above all else. It's hard for the brain to comprehend that, if everybody risks themselves, the risk disappears

Beyond that, it's simply easier to ensure 100% survival by picking blue. It only takes 51% of people to do so, but takes 100% for red, and if there's one thing everyone can agree on, it's that it's impossible for everyone to agree on something, especially a decision of this magnitude. But blue doesn't need everyone, it just needs the minimum majority

Ultimately, the line of thinking that nothing happens if you press blue is flawed; nothing happens if everyone presses blue, but something cataclysmic will happen if most people don't. You have to trust your fellow humans to press blue with you. But maybe you can get away with pressing red, right? After all, there's no way blue won't win in a landslide, but just in case, right? Right?

Imagine, if you will, that you choose red, and 49% of the population dies. Now imagine you can see a tally of the votes; a 1 vote difference, 3.9 billion to 4.000000001 billion(heavily rounding here). Your vote could have saved 49% of the human race(one less vote for red and one more vote for blue inverts the difference). Yet you chose red. You think to yourself "if those people wanted to live, they should have picked red", but you know this isn't true. They wanted everyone to live, not just themselves, and chose blue accordingly. If you focused on more than just yourself, nobody would have died. But here you are, on a planet that's 3.9 billion lifeforms smaller

It's hard to choose to potentially sacrifice yourself, and it's even harder to trust that your potential sacrifice won't be in vain. But every person who doesn't trust makes that potential sacrifice all the more real, until, eventually, it is inevitable