You must log in or # to comment.
I read “brutish” as “british” on first glance
More often than not that has been the case :)
Much less often than not, by a colossal margin. They did have a good run, though.
Which surprisingly does not change the meaning, as one would think it would.
Same, and I was like well if the shoe fits…
If you ever need to check, this site has up to date information. https://arethebritsatitagain.org
Are the brits a tit again
This feels dangerously close to some EnlightenedCentrism nonse
Yeah i’ve learned not to trust this kind of simmetrical worldview, even when it makes me feel smart for being above it.
I’m not sure whether the version of this I saw previously was the original and this post was cropped, or if this post is the original and the other text was added later. But I much prefer the context here:
Ahh see this I can get behind, reminds me of the Soviet anti alcohol poster that’s become a meme too
Good original intent, less good modern applications
The dawn of nationalism was definitely the mistake of the previous age I think. Peoples should be able to self govern autonomously, but not under a guise of “the nation” which inherently forms an out group to be excluded.
I like the Arabic/American way to do it, “You wanna be one of us? Well then you’re already half way there!”
I speak very little Arabic but my teacher has told me that I already know enough to get the long list cousin’s welcome among most L1 speakers lol.
What do you mean?
It is quite literally implying “both sides actually same!”
It’s addressing the concept of demonization, a la Israel and Palestine. It’s via these mechanisms that other people are dehumanized.
Not Karen v Karen at the pta meeting.
“Glorious leader” sure sounds like a pretty direct reference to the Kim dynasty.
Aww yes enlightened centralism
Miss.
Again it’s about any group demonizing another.
The process of generating the “subhuman” other based on misinformation.
It’s not about holding people to their honest record.
Playing the middle and saying “both sides” is completely different than what this image is displaying.
Miss.
Again it is about exactly what I said. “Our glorious leader” is not about other people it is both sideism.
It’s about playing both sideism.
What side are you on in Russia-Ukraine? No question dodging “enlightened centralist”.
Can you talk without using buzzwords and pop-quizzes on irrelevant shit?
Hmmm it’s almost as if politics and ethics are very nuanced and one answer is never correct in every situation…
One side thinks the answer is “do fascism”, so I think it may be fair to conclude that one of the proposed answers is at least wrong in every situation.
Yes, every right-wing politician is pushing for ‘do fascism’
Probably like they did your mom last night. BOOM GOTCHA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025?wprov=sfla1
Not as hard as right wing simps get did by reality.
Until the third paragraph, it sounded like something you might think was reasonable for lefties to do. Then I got to the bits about cutting regulations to promote fossil fuels and, according to an “anonymous source” (which I frankly don’t trust because it’s from a biased newspaper,) weaponizing the DOJ and national guard against critics.
I think about this whenever I see legislative efforts to “prevent disinformation” XD
I hate disinformation as much as the next guy, but we gotta be careful who we give charte blanche to censor information XD
What I get from this image is that one side will call the other side evil while the other side will do the same
It’s best to look at the actions of a person or group rather than what they state they are doing
PURPLE GOOD YELLOW BAD 😤😤
Typical sense of entitlement from a purple, they’re all the same, that primitive purple brain can’t comprehend other light waves exist.
Nation-states were a bad idea
Alternatives?
I see 2:
-
full hegemonic domination of one nation state where everyone gets their basics met. Star trek style.
-
intense local tribalism where you’re doing a whole lot more defending your land than you are now
Or maybe there’s a dozen alternatives that could work better and both of us are staring at this from the bottom of a pro-hierarchy well that we’ve been stuck in ever since one guy convinced another one he should be in charge.
I don’t have a full solution, I just want us to be flexible enough to figure one (or more) out.
“The international ideal unites the human race”
One guy will always convince another of that. If the other guy disagrees, well, time for sticks and stones.
My point is you either go small, and groups self assemble however you want, but you’ll have many neighbors who might not see it your way.
Or you go big, and everyone’s efforts go to one shared goal, and everyone is a equal “citizen”. Ideally with collective shared goals folks are doing ok.
Or you go medium, which is what we have now. Some groups are positioned and prepared to do good stuff, and others are fighting with and nail just to hold it together. There’s gonna be friction with neighbors, like with “small” but the problem is “mediums” got some real big sticks and stones.
There’s no right answer and I obviously didn’t cover everything. But without groups of some kind, people will get picked off. There’s no period of human history that disagrees with me.
People like you make me sad.
Realists?
Provide a single example of anything aside from what I described, in any period of human history that both:
-
did not maintain power through economic or just militaristic dominance of their local region
-
did not experience conflict with their neighbors.
They either had cohesive, hegemonic domination within their borders and geographic separation from rivals, or had challenges with bordering nation states.
I personally hope for a star trek future
-
-
Rule of the world. The most violent ape gets to continue his lineage. To continue to pretend that we’re more than violent apes is naive.
We’re stuck in the uncontrolled greed model without a good direction out. With greed being a basic instinct, I’d agree with you. Not everyone is like this, but power lies elsewhere in the arms of billionaires.
“Shogun” tackles this really well.
This and the rabbit/duck flag.
I feel like the artist originally wanted to make this primarily medieval themed. But then realisied “Oh yeah, news and stuff are a thing.” And then just added laptops and antennas.
It’s been added on to. The original didn’t have the radio towers or “time out” area
I mean I would rather be caught dead than be purple
It’s worth pointing out that the two opposing countries / nations / city states in this cartoon would have to have similar governments with similar charters, and similar selection processes for their representatives.
It is lunacy to say things like “Obummer was a dictator!” when he was selected twice by people voting, and then peaceably left the office after his two terms completely in line with the Constitution.
Now can you say the same thing about, for instance, Putin?
It’s important to follow the laws of the land, otherwise there is damage to the system. Legal framework, electoral framework, political framework. So when answering your question about Putin, the electoral rules and legalities of Russia’s system must be examined. Were they violated?
That is also a question on the US national agenda for Trump. It is important to consider his case in context of the system. And to compare his real estate dealings to others who deal in real estate. What was the severity and nature of the alleged crime? Are these kinds of behaviors common in the American political class?
Except that,
-
Our objective news - is really just a mess of different slants, some being propaganda, that are not censured even when their content approaches slander due to heavy political bias.
-
Our combating disinformation - is largely unexisting to the point that several large social media providers have abolished or acted against the control they had for doing so and that their CEOs shamelessly meet with presidential candidates with ties to them.
-
Our glorious leader - is hardly accepted as a glorious leader and the portion of the society that does also tend to have absolutely no qualms about becoming more authoritarian by their own admission.
-
Our great religion - is criticized within the country and an increasing number of people are becoming atheists.
-
Our noble populace - Our heroic adventures - Ok, who is writing this meme? Who thinks their society thinks this way? Half the other populace disagrees with the other half, even going so far as to be described as hate, and any mythos of heroic is easily dismissed the moment it becomes convenient to do so not to mention the amount of criticism armed forces get.
This is whataboutism 101. Not all sides are completely black and white, but not all sides are equally grey.
I don’t think this comic was about you or your country. It’s about how nationalists frame things in their own vs. other countries.
Except that at least nationalists can be criticized in mine, creating such a mess in a first place. In theirs, if not explicit social censorship, there’s clear persecution of the barest opposition.
The whole point is that the two nations are the same, but some of the population doesn’t see it that way. Of course our news is filled with propaganda, that’s what this meme is saying. Of course our troops are carrying out the whims of a despot. But blind nationalism paints these as the right and true path.
Funny thing, at least we get to criticize it. They don’t.
nice job writing an essay on completely missing the point
Nice job joining the block list
-
