- 2,647
The Political Satire/Meme Thread
- Thread starter Danoff
- 13,800 comments
- 784,425 views
- 29,726
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Much of what he's spewing (and indeed spews) is garbage, but the thrust of this particular garbage is that the irrational behavior exhibited by these black people is the result of "systemic oppression" which has recently [again] reached a tipping point after a supposed wrongful death [again] at the hands (er, knee) of one of those supposed oppressors.
I suspect you know this, but you have determined it appropriate to undermine the argument by misrepresenting the remarks instead of tackling the argument the right way as others have.
- 40,767
I just posted this and I guess I have to post this again already
Sounds like a bunch of thugs who needed to be shot by the government to me.
- 2,647
Lain
Premium
- 7,085
- Pasadena, TX
- Yaywalter
I'll take their denial with as much a grain of salt as the claim.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,009
- Mile High City
- 24,614
- Anoka, MN
It's almost like neither thing should happen because they dont actually accomplish the goal they are intended to achieve. 💡
I could see the smoke from a good distance this morning, I'm still not sure what it's supposed to accomplish.
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
Charlie Kirk is vile. His first post after the murder of George Floyd was a video about how "Black Lives Matter is based on lies and is bad for black people". A month earlier, when Ahmaud Arbery was killed, he posted a video right after called "White Privilege is a racist lie that's being taught". Nothing about honoring either man who tragically died. Just race-baiting and trying to rile things up. You know it's bad when even his right-wing supporters called him out for these posts.
UKMikey
Premium
- 18,114
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
- 29,726
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Nurts! Still, I'll take it.Deflection and obfuscation.
With everything that's going on lately, I missed him.
I'll go back to what I was doing at some point. I'm obviously not hoping for it, but I suspect I'll be compelled to pay tribute in that little way to someone who's passed. That's how it started.
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
- 29,726
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
This behavior is irrational. Behavior can actually be irrational, but it's a huge, HenrySwansonian leap to suggest that irrational behavior is linked in any meaningful or statistically significant way to other identifiable characteristics such as skin color. What you did was misrepresent another's remarks as that, when they in fact were not that.
What? Speak up, I couldn't hear you over the sound of "Let's face it, Trump could walk on water and all you'd be hearing is how terrible he is because he can't swim."
Here's one: "Incidentally, if Trump said blacks are the root of all of society's problems and should be killed, all of you Trump supporters would proceed to carry out this wish in earnest."
Fun.
Ah, the privilege of being able to suggest the outcome hypothetical events without the burden of facts such as those that exist for events that actually transpired.
Trumpism, man.
Edit: Link above isn't working for some reason. Here's the comment and my own response to it...
The little blue arrows can be clicked and redirect to the post as it originally occurred.
Last edited:
- 4,019
- Derbyshire, UK
- DG Silva
Perhaps if this individual and those like her stopped promoting the capitalist bourgeoisie society, loving the symbology of the affluent without care such as iPhones, organic free-range food, designer clothes, and other unnecessary garbage, she could live a blameless life. The rich didn't get richer because they created the virus, it's because other people decided to buy the products that they sell. If the general public buy more stuff they don't need than they did before, then the rich do get richer.
Dumbass.
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
You're really going to use the "avocado toast" argument?
Smartphones are a necessity, not a luxury. And most people who struggle to get by don't consume organic free-range food nor wear designer clothing. You're misdirecting your anger if you're blaming individual choices instead of a system in which even the most basic goods are commodified. How rich people get doesn't have all to do with how much people buy. If you look at Amazon, for example, that's not even close to true.
- 4,019
- Derbyshire, UK
- DG Silva
To a certain degree, I agree with you. Smartphones are an essential part of life, however it has been shown in research that iPhone owners are likely to spend more per month than Android users. It is funny though that those who speak the most vociferously about the evils of major corporations don't realise that the money they spend tend to end up in those very same hands. I wasn't speaking about this who are just getting by, but to those who have the money to spend in alternative locations.
if you really don't want to support Amazon, you'd need to avoid anything technology-wise, and pretty much avoid the internet for shopping thanks to the number of providers running on AWS.
Amazon and Bezos has got richer because they have been able to offer a product (the selling of items, Amazon Prime, Echo products) which is greater and more complete than the competition, and this appeals to the such an individual. I work for Halfords in the UK, and we've been busier now than at Christmas, simply because we're selling products customers want rather than need, and the product is more complete than our competitors.
However, it was a loose generalisation and no offence was meant.
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
Like I said, that's only a half-truth. Amazon has also gotten richer by cutting wages and benefits for mostly low-wage workers, keeping wages stagnating in certain sectors, and dodging not just federal but state and local taxes too in some cases. They're also ending all hazard pay for workers effective June 1st, completely ignoring the fact that many areas of the country are still quarantined and COVID-19 is still a threat. The former (more and more people buying a product/service) is a totally fine way to get richer, while the latter most definitely is not.
You called me dumbass for doing nothing other than sharing a meme. Yeah, riiiight.
- 7,601
- Exorcet
- OE Exorcet
I'm just curious as to why people think this. I got my first smartphone 2 years ago because I thought it might be handed if I ever want to use it for more than call and text, but so far that's all I've used it for.
- 4,019
- Derbyshire, UK
- DG Silva
No different from the colleagues in the company I work for. While minimum wage has gone up in the UK in April 2020 by a significant amount, those who are earning above that have not had a wage rise, myself included. It's now making me seriously consider whether to go back to working in a local store, because I'll be more physically active, less stress, and have more money in my pocket after commuting costs are deducted.
We've positioned ourselves to become an essential service during lockdown, furloughed important teams to save money which they would be able to pay easily, considering that we've had a 20% in sales overall, increased workload on remaining people but not renumerated, outsourced departments to India which are customer-facing, and basically done everything they can to fill their pockets deeper.
When you have a capitalist society, there are always going to be people in better positions to be richer than others, and suspect methods will always will accelerate that wealth. Until the law-makers start employing the same kind of law-interpreters as Amazon, GSK, Pfizer, et al, loopholes are always going to be found. The simplest way to do it is 'if you ship an item to a country, whether directly or indirectly through an intermediary, you must pay the taxes of that country', although I'm sure there are some nuances in this which will need ironing out.
It would be nice to think that some individuals would be kind at any time, let alone during these difficult time, however it does require a change of attitude which is going to happen as long as the over-riding human instinct is greed. Granted, there are some individuals who are genuinely philanthropic, but if you know that someone like Bezos is running the company he is (unlikely he knows everything, he's just the figurehead for the decisions others take), then the best way of stopping the organisations from getting richer is to stop buying the items you don't need, and especially from organisations like Amazon - I've not bought anything from them in the last 4 years, despite them selling items I needed.
Sorry, that wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at the people I was referring to in my post, and the embodiment of that lady. I suppose I had no right to do that, I don't know her. I'm sorry if I made you feel that was directed at you, it wasn't I promise.
That is entirely your choice, but it's there if you ever need it. For a lot of people, it's the most efficient and cost-effective way of communicating, especially with things like WhatsApp, where files can be transferred easily. It's handy for finding information when you're out and about, and for me at least, it's been a life-saver, literally - I was on the verge of sepsis from an infection in an evening, and if my other half hadn't checked the symptoms (I was going to go to hospital in the morning), I probably wouldn't have woken up.
- 2,647
- 29,726
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
What kind of idiotic rationalization is this? To be clear, I'm calling the rationalization idiotic, not you, and I'm definitely not attempting to establish any connection between idiocy and skin color.
The difference between the meme and what happened here is that it depicts a direct, in-person exchange between two individuals. The closest this platform allows is the quote function which allows individuals to respond to that which other individuals say.
You quoted what I said directly, responded to what I said with "So you're saying [something that I definitely didn't say]," and then proffered a hypothetical in which Trump would be called racist for saying what I definitely didn't say.
This after I called you on your bull**** suggesting someone else is racist for saying something they definitely didn't say. Of course I get you being compelled to call that particular individual racist given their propensity to post "that's racist" garbage, it's just a pity that you had to misrepresent their remarks in order to do so. Referring to those remarks as they actually occurred would be irrational behavior, with no meaningful or statistically significant link between irrational behavior and skin color.
I'd also advise you refer to this site's Acceptable Use Policy; specifically the part that says "You will not knowingly post any material that is false, misleading or inaccurate." Inaccurately attributing remarks to individuals who didn't make remarks as you attributed them--deliberately and with apparent intent to deceive--surely suffices.
Trumpism, man. The mental gymnastics you people have to perform on a daily basis simply to *be*. ... The mind boggles.
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
Similar threads
- Poll
