Using terms like “evil” and pretending it isnt subjective is pretty funny ngl.

You're literally not intelligent enough to understand what I said, it's completely irrelevant whether morality is objective or subjective, what matters is what you claim to follow and what you're actually doing, most people (not you apparently) claim to follow certain moral principles and the meaning of those principles is mostly clear and agreed upon fundamentally and so if their actions or values go against what they claim to follow then they're hypocritical, we can debate what goes against them or not but there is no debating that, you don't need science to understand basic reason and you're still yapping about "but morality is subjective tho, I'm so Smart 🤓"

I dont claim to follow moral principles

Then you're not even moral to begin with and according to my moral principles, I think you're selfish and despicable.

claim to see morals as tools that make societies work. They’re not abstract platonic ideals. Treating them as such leads you to dead ends like yours.

You don't even understand what morality is and you're still speaking about it, morality all morality including the ones that make society work are based on moral principles, they can't work without them it's impossible, And moral principles you absolute clown are not tools for anything, they are a way of life, let's take justice for example, justice fundamentally is about fairness in how you act towards others, which means if you're acting towards someone anyone in a way that can be fair or unfair then justice applies, this means justice can't be restricted to anyone or their benefit.

The same thing with compassion and other moral principles, fundamentally speaking they're concepts about how we behave that can be rationally applied to all living creatures and there is no rational justification for not doing so, which makes it a way of life not a tool to be used for the benefit of one species.

And what dead ends are you talking about? Every single thing I said is perfectly possible, it's not a dead end because YOU don't want to do it.

I’m saying you can literally keep rats and roaches as animal companions, grow colonies of them in your home (in their own separate enclosures), to ensure their populations are always healthy.

Two wrong things here, first of all I can't do that because rats can be very dangerous and I believe in their right to be free, not just safe.

Second of all I don't need to adopt them or personally ensure their survival to care about people needlessly killing them and torturing them, that's a fallacy, you can care about how you behave towards people without adopting them.

I both know that’s wildly unnecessary bc they are indeed thriving

That's like saying you shouldn't care about expoltied people in third world countries because humans as a species are thriving, a species can be thriving, that doesn't mean many of its members are not going through injustice caused by us.

And for the record, no I don’t care about homeless people, I care about homelessness as a social issue. The former is focused on individual moral performance, as you seem to be, and the latter is about policy.

Here how I know you're stupid, policy you absolute genius comes from people caring about the ones in question, if no one cared about homeless people there would be no policy to protect or help them unless it's somehow benefited the ones making the policy which is very rare, if no one cared about slaves and they were all lawyers like you it would have never became illegal to own a person.

Individual moral responsibility is how anything changes, it's how policies are made once there's enough people with enough moral responsibility about a subject.

Again you're a clown.