The Political Satire/Meme Thread

[BobK]

I wasn't aware that Iraq was invaded by the seven people who died on the weekend, and only by those seven people. I challenge you to prove that those seven people still would have died if Britain hadn't gotten involved in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place.

That's silly. You know (or should know) that such a thing cannot be proved.

 

[Vegard]

@Danoff Suggesting that fighting the War on Terror against known extremist terrorist groups will bring blowback from extremists = blaming the victim?

From Merriam Webster:

Definition of sane...

... especially : able to anticipate and appraise the effect of one's actions...


Antonyms of sane...

...brainsick, crazed, crazy, demented, deranged, insane, lunatic, mad, maniacal (also maniac), mental, unbalanced, unsound

 

[Danoff]

I wasn't aware that Iraq was invaded by the seven people who died on the weekend, and only by those seven people. I challenge you to prove that those seven people still would have died if Britain hadn't gotten involved in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place.

Why would I try to prove that? It's not required to support my statement.

@Danoff Suggesting that fighting the War on Terror against known extremist terrorist groups will bring blowback from extremists = blaming the victim?

You're not understanding my post (and possibly the post I was responding to). The cartoon pretends that there will be no ISIS attacks if we isolate ourselves from interactions with the middle east. The cartoon very clearly is advocating that we stop "creating... terror in foreign lands". It says Britain is the terrorist, and Britain's terrorism is, at a minimum, partially responsible for the deaths of innocent people. Yes that's blaming the victim, and all the other stuff I said about it.

 

[Dennisch]

That's silly. You know (or should know) that such a thing cannot be proved.

Why would I try to prove that? It's not required to support my statement.

Don't you guys have an alternate universe machine? Tssk tssk.

 

[UKMikey]

I hope the partial nudity in this meme isn't in contravention of the AUP. I emailed @Touring Mars for advice but he was out, probably eating his lunch.

 

[Vegard]

You're not understanding my post

I understand your post very well.

The cartoon pretends that there will be no ISIS attacks if we isolate ourselves from interactions with the middle east.

Please explain how it does that.

It says Britain is the terrorist, and Britain's terrorism is, at a minimum, partially responsible for the deaths of innocent people. Yes that's blaming the victim, and all the other stuff I said about it.

No, it says that Britain is creating military terror in foreign lands. Don't try and spin that around to - Britain is the terrorist.

Also, do you think that every citizen of a society, by default, is guilty for the actions taken by the government of that country?

 

[Danoff]

Please explain how it does that.

The original meaning of Keep Calm Carry On was to boost morale among the people during a time of war. It means to maintain a stiff upper lip. The text of the cartoon "Keep calm and carry on creating the military terror in foreign lands that brings blowback to the streets of England" is an intentional criticism of any application of the original message to the current situation. It literally means that carrying on will continue to cause blowback. It is not a morale booster, it is a criticism of the notion that enduring terrorism is a solution. They did not choose the word "terror" at random, they chose it to reflect a perceived equivalent level of morality between the British government and the ISIS terrorists. The use of the term "terrorist" is synonymous today with a moral judgment. They chose to portray British Military (British government actions) as terrorism to nullify that moral judgment.

They directly state that these acts of terrorism are responsive to British "terror" and sarcastically suggest that we just maintain our current course of action - strongly implying that changing the course of action would prevent said "blowback".

Edit:

I should mention that even categorizing these acts as "blowback" frames the discussion in the way I describe above. Using the term "blowback" to describe terorrism literally means that if you stop the "cause" you stop the "blowback".

No, it says that Britain is creating military terror in foreign lands. Don't try and spin that around to - Britain is the terrorist.

That is what that means.

Also, do you think that every citizen of a society, by default, is guilty for the actions taken by the government of that country?

No, and if you understand my post as "very well" as you claim, I think you'd understand that.

Another edit:

The Keep Calm Carry On message was a message for the people, not for the government. The message in this cartoon is aimed squarely at the populace walking beneath the poster, just like the original message. It is using the context of the original message to directly blame the British people for the actions of "terror" of the British military which are responsible for "blowback".

 

[Vegard]

The original meaning of Keep Calm Carry On was to boost morale among the people during a time of war. It means to maintain a stiff upper lip. The text of the cartoon "Keep calm and carry on creating the military terror in foreign lands that brings blowback to the streets of England" is an intentional criticism of any application of the original message to the current situation. It literally means that carrying on will continue to cause blowback. It is not a morale booster, it is a criticism of the notion that enduring terrorism is a solution. They did not choose the word "terror" at random, they chose it to reflect a perceived equivalent level of morality between the British government and the ISIS terrorists. The use of the term "terrorist" is synonymous today with a moral judgment. They chose to portray British Military (British government actions) as terrorism to nullify that moral judgment.

They directly state that these acts of terrorism are responsive to British "terror" and sarcastically suggest that we just maintain our current course of action - strongly implying that changing the course of action would prevent said "blowback".

Edit:

I should mention that even categorizing these acts as "blowback" frames the discussion in the way I describe above. Using the term "blowback" to describe terorrism literally means that if you stop the "cause" you stop the "blowback".

I may not agree with your views on the conflict but than you for explaining your reasoning, it was helpful.

 

[UKMikey]

I'm trying to avoid spamming the Britain thread with this election-related frivolousness:

 

[Dennisch]

 

[Carbonox]

 

[eran0004]

Context is the key here.
When women are oppressed for wearing hijab it's a symbol of freedom and resistance to wear it.
When women are oppressed for not wearing hijab, it's a symbol of freedom and resistance to not wear it.

 

[Danoff]

Context is the key here.
When women are oppressed for wearing hijab it's a symbol of freedom and resistance to wear it.
When women are oppressed for not wearing hijab, it's a symbol of freedom and resistance to not wear it.

Show me the link between oppression for wearing a hijab and Trump (not saying you can't, I just don't know what it is).

 

[Touring Mars]

 

[eran0004]

Show me the link between oppression for wearing a hijab and Trump (not saying you can't, I just don't know what it is).

Sure. Trump is a symbol for islamophobia, because of his anti-islamic rethorics and policies and efforts to normalize these attitudes. Women who wear hijab are easily identified as muslims and as such they are easy targets for islamophobic acts and attacks.

 

[Danoff]

Sure. Trump is a symbol for islamophobia, because of his anti-islamic rethorics and policies and efforts to normalize these attitudes. Women who wear hijab are easily identified as muslims and as such they are easy targets for islamophobic acts and attacks.

So no actual oppression then.

 

[eran0004]

So no actual oppression then.

islamophobic acts and attacks

 

[Danoff]

@eran0004

Definition of oppression

1a : unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power the continuing oppression of the … underclasses — H. A. Daniel

1b : something that oppresses especially in being an unjust or excessive exercise of power unfair taxes and other oppressions

 

[eran0004]

@eran0004

I can play that game too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppression#Social_oppression

 

[Danoff]

I can play that game too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppression#Social_oppression

...and? You're construing "Islamophobic Acts" and "Attacks" as constituting social oppression? If you're going to cast the net that widely, everyone on Earth is socially oppressed - rendering the term meaningless. If it's going to mean something, it has to be pervasive within society, not just an instance or an act.

Besides which, you know that when you link the word "oppressed" to a political figure that, "context" being key here, it won't be interpreted as meaning some sort of nebulous social oppression.

Nice try.

 

[eran0004]

...and? You're construing "Islamophobic Acts" and "Attacks" as constituting social oppression? If you're going to cast the net that widely, everyone on Earth is socially oppressed - rendering the term meaningless. If it's going to mean something, it has to be pervasive within society, not just an instance or an act.

Besides which, you know that when you link the word "oppressed" to a political figure that, "context" being key here, it won't be interpreted as meaning some sort of nebulous social oppression.

Nice try.

...and you didn't read the article.

Social oppression is the socially supported mistreatment and exploitation of a group of individuals.[5] Social oppression is based on power dynamics and an individual's social location in society. Social location, as defined by Lynn Weber, is "an individual's or a group's social 'place' in the race, class, gender and sexuality hierarchies, as well as in other critical social hierarchies such as age, ethnicity, and nation."​

So no. Not everyone on Earth is socially oppressed. Not according to this theory anyway.

 

[Danoff]

...and you didn't read the article.

Social oppression is the socially supported mistreatment and exploitation of a group of individuals.[5] Social oppression is based on power dynamics and an individual's social location in society. Social location, as defined by Lynn Weber, is "an individual's or a group's social 'place' in the race, class, gender and sexuality hierarchies, as well as in other critical social hierarchies such as age, ethnicity, and nation."​

So no. Not everyone on Earth is socially oppressed. Not according to this theory anyway.

...and you didn't understand what I wrote (I'm rapidly running out of patience for this conversation). I didn't say the article was casting the net that widely, I said you were.

 

[Rage Racer]

 

[eran0004]

...and you didn't understand what I wrote (I'm rapidly running out of patience for this conversation). I didn't say the article was casting the net that widely, I said you were.

Nope, you said that everyone on Earth must be oppressed and I showed you that it's not the case. Unless you have some other theory about oppression that you want to present.

 

[Danoff]

Nope, you said that everyone on Earth must be oppressed and I showed you that it's not the case. Unless you have some other theory about oppression that you want to present.

...and now you're just flat-out ignoring what i wrote. There is nothing wrong with the article you posted, there is something wrong with you applying that term to a circumstance which is much narrower than what that article describes. Such an application (your particular interpretation) would result in everyone on Earth falling under the description of "social oppression". This is not a complicated set of reasoning, which leads me to believe that you may be intentionally misinterpreting it.

 

[CinnamonOD]

 

[Milouse]

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

That's why they didn't tell him.

 

[Northstar]

That's why they didn't tell him.

I don't see how that's possible considering one of the aliens lives on his head.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I don't see how that's possible considering one of the aliens lives on his head.

Nah bro, that was Hillary, she was a reptilian, a certain user taught me everything about the "dark government" that's how I know.

Trump is with the mole men