Political Cartoons 2017: Gotta go fasc

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Political Cartoons 2017: Gotta go fasc

«‹›1054 »

Jonas Albrecht: Jun 7, 2012

Racists (KKK, BLM, Obama)

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 13, 2024 19:19

Ularg: Mar 2, 2010; Just tell me I'm exotic.

I guess "Irredeemable shitheel that uses religion to stomp on the rights of my fellow man" was too long to make it to the sign.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:19

Zanzibar Ham: Mar 17, 2009; You giving me the cold shoulder? How cruel.; Grimey Drawer

Ularg posted:

I guess "Irredeemable shitheel that uses religion to stomp on the rights of my fellow man" was too long to make it to the sign.

Maybe that's the 'So Called Christians'

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:19

Oxyclean: Sep 23, 2007

I can't decide what my favourite thing about that list is. The inability to write out "m-----bators" inexplicable shade thrown at children, "mama's boys" (really renown for disobeying jesus) or "female enablers" - because my brain just interprets it as this super literal "allowing people to be female." :v:

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:23

Help Im Alive: Nov 8, 2009

What's the problem with women MMA fighters

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:24

Cat Mattress: Jul 14, 2012; by Cyrano4747

"Dykes on Bikes" is the best though. I'll interpret this to mean they're okay with dykes using different means of transportation.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:25

loquacius: Oct 21, 2008

Hello DC!!! Are you ready to ROCK??? We are Occupational Whores, and we're here to get you ready for Obey Jesus Or Hellfire! 1-2-3-4!

(Rebellious Women, So Called Christians, and The Pope are all also v good band names)

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:29

MokBa: Jun 8, 2006; If you see something suspicious, bomb it!

Nenonen posted:

I think we just reached peak mr. internet toughguyism

Lmao this is the first time I have ever been accused of being an internet toughguy. Let alone the PEAK of it. You realize I said absolutely nothing about myself, right? I'm not going around punching nazis. I wouldn't even know how to go about doing that. I'm more of an internet cheerleader.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:29

oddium: Feb 21, 2006; end of the 4.5 tatami age

[frantically reading sign before all the good ones are taken] emos... as if !!

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:30

TheBigAristotle: Feb 8, 2007; I'm tired of hearing about money, money, money, money, money.
I just want to play the game, drink Pepsi, wear Reebok.; Grimey Drawer

Trogdos! posted:

* There is no evidence that Churchill ever said this

Looking forward to an extended meltdown by Red Panels guy about his fallen Nazi idol gettin got.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:31

420 Gank Mid: Dec 26, 2008; WARNING: This poster is a huge bitch!

Ularg posted:

Not all Trump voters are nazis, but all nazis voted for Trump.

Much like the Racist Tree, they are generic white-supremacists who dont ascribe to Adolf Hitler's fascist ideologies

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:34

Mister Beeg: Sep 7, 2012; A Certified Jerk

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:37

xthetenth: Dec 30, 2012; Mario wasn't sure if this Jeb guy was a good influence on Yoshi.

Space Cadet Omoly posted:

No, I believe it. That's the same kind of crap I've been hearing from the Trump supporters in my family. It's weird how they still won't shut up about how bad Hillary is. The election is over, she's gone, they've won, but they continue to act like she's this omnipotent force personally oppressing them.

Anyway, glad to hear you both made an effort to talk to your relations. If I'm stuck in the Hell of trying to reason with the irrational I want to make sure everyone else is there too.

I'm at a weird point where my dad straight out believes all the bullshit about Clinton up to and including that she had Vince Foster killed and him voting third party and paying lip service to hating Trump probably the best I'm going to get, but I still feel like I need to prod at him around the edges to see if I can't make a dent on the delusion.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:44

FreeKillB: May 13, 2009

Cat Mattress posted:

As for punching vs. not punching Nazis, the only real argument for not-punching is about not sinking to their level. They definitely deserve to be punched otherwise.

I would consider the argument that even Nazis have a right to not be punched in the face to be real. Like, it was funny and I'm not going to shed tears for the rear end in a top hat, but "it's okay to use violence to suppress the expression of political ideas I find abhorrent" is not a sentiment that I find compatible with the ideals of Western democracy.

VVVVV: I don't see how a convincing counter to "it's not okay to use violence to suppress political speech I find abhorrent" can be reasonably given as "but I find this speech REALLY REALLY abhorrent!!!!". Like, in the abstract the fact that even awful ideologies are given protections can be viewed as a defect in a society that cherishes free speech, but in practice once people start making judgements as to which political speech is protected and which political speech deserves to be punched in the face, I have 100% confidence that it won't just be Nazis who are punched.

FreeKillB fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Jan 23, 2017

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:51

Improbable Lobster: Jan 6, 2012; "From each according to his ability" said Ares. It sounded like a quotation.; Buglord

FreeKillB posted:

I would consider the argument that even Nazis have a right to not be punched in the face to be real. Like, it was funny and I'm not going to shed tears for the rear end in a top hat, but "it's okay to use violence to suppress the expression of political ideas I find abhorrent" is not a sentiment that I find compatible with the ideals of Western democracy.

"I understand there's been some confusion online as to whether it's ever right to punch a Nazi in the face. There is a compelling argument that all speech is equal and we should trust to the discourse to reveal these ideas for what they are and confidently expect them to be denounced and crushed out by the mechanisms of democracy and freedom.

All I can tell you is, from my perspective as an old English socialist and cultural liberal who is probably way to the woolly left from most of you and actually has a medal for services to free speech -- yes, it is always correct to punch Nazis. They lost the right to not be punched in the face when they started spouting genocidal ideologies that in living memory killed millions upon millions of people. And anyone who stands up and respectfully applauds their perfect right to say these things should probably also be punched, because they are clearly surplus to human requirements. Nazis do not need a hug. Nazis do not need to be indulged. Their world doesn't get better until you've been removed from it. Your false equivalences mean nothing. Their agenda is always, always, extermination. Nazis need a punch in the face.

(And the argument that such assaults allow Nazis to get more attention doesn't work so well when they were already going live on a national television network, because this is where we are now. This is how normalised their presence in our culture is.)

Glad we got that cleared up."

# ? Jan 23, 2017 16:53

Cat Mattress: Jul 14, 2012; by Cyrano4747

FreeKillB posted:

I would consider the argument that even Nazis have a right to not be punched in the face to be real. Like, it was funny and I'm not going to shed tears for the rear end in a top hat, but "it's okay to use violence to suppress the expression of political ideas I find abhorrent" is not a sentiment that I find compatible with the ideals of Western democracy.

VVVVV; I don't see how a convincing counter to "it's not okay to use violence to suppress political speech I find abhorrent" can be reasonably given as "but I find this speech REALLY REALLY abhorrent!!!!".

We use airpower to kill Islamists plotting to murder innocents in our cities (cue Rall drone toon); it's okay to punch Nazis plotting to enslave us. If anything, they should thank us for being so magnanimous.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:02

Abyssal Squid: Jul 24, 2003

FreeKillB posted:

I would consider the argument that even Nazis have a right to not be punched in the face to be real. Like, it was funny and I'm not going to shed tears for the rear end in a top hat, but "it's okay to use violence to suppress the expression of political ideas I find abhorrent" is not a sentiment that I find compatible with the ideals of Western democracy.

I agree, but I think it's an okay compromise to say that while there are good reasons for punching Nazis to be illegal, punching Nazis is still morally good.

That way the state doesn't condone violence against minorities, even ones you find abhorrent (the "sinking to their level" argument), but you still get to send a powerful message that America doesn't stand for Nazis.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:02

Improbable Lobster: Jan 6, 2012; "From each according to his ability" said Ares. It sounded like a quotation.; Buglord

FreeKillB posted:

I would consider the argument that even Nazis have a right to not be punched in the face to be real. Like, it was funny and I'm not going to shed tears for the rear end in a top hat, but "it's okay to use violence to suppress the expression of political ideas I find abhorrent" is not a sentiment that I find compatible with the ideals of Western democracy.

VVVVV: I don't see how a convincing counter to "it's not okay to use violence to suppress political speech I find abhorrent" can be reasonably given as "but I find this speech REALLY REALLY abhorrent!!!!". Like, in the abstract the fact that even awful ideologies are given protections can be viewed as a defect in a society that cherishes free speech, but in practice once people start making judgements as to which political speech is protected and which political speech deserves to be punched in the face, I have 100% confidence that it won't just be Nazis who are punched.

Nazis advocate the genocide of billions. The only reason why they aren't treated as domestic terrorists is because they're white.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:09

duz: Jul 11, 2005; Come on Ilhan, lets go bag us a shitpost

FreeKillB posted:

I would consider the argument that even Nazis have a right to not be punched in the face to be real. Like, it was funny and I'm not going to shed tears for the rear end in a top hat, but "it's okay to use violence to suppress the expression of political ideas I find abhorrent" is not a sentiment that I find compatible with the ideals of Western democracy.

VVVVV: I don't see how a convincing counter to "it's not okay to use violence to suppress political speech I find abhorrent" can be reasonably given as "but I find this speech REALLY REALLY abhorrent!!!!". Like, in the abstract the fact that even awful ideologies are given protections can be viewed as a defect in a society that cherishes free speech, but in practice once people start making judgements as to which political speech is protected and which political speech deserves to be punched in the face, I have 100% confidence that it won't just be Nazis who are punched.

We're not saying to suppress political speech with violence, we're saying punch a Nazi in the face. He can still speak all he wants.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:10

Oxyclean: Sep 23, 2007

FreeKillB posted:

I would consider the argument that even Nazis have a right to not be punched in the face to be real. Like, it was funny and I'm not going to shed tears for the rear end in a top hat, but "it's okay to use violence to suppress the expression of political ideas I find abhorrent" is not a sentiment that I find compatible with the ideals of Western democracy.

I see a lot of people framing the this as matter of free speech. I don't think anyone's arguing that they shouldn't be allowed to say abhorrent poo poo. They're just not free from the consequences of it. I wouldn't really call a piece of poo poo getting clocked in the head a "suppression of political ideas" either because that's not going to make the alt-right pack their poo poo up either.

A bit of an aside, but there's this weird perception from the alt-right that freedom of speech is the right to be able to blast their message wherever and whenever, and everyone should just put up with it. They'll twist, bitch and whine when a website says enough and tries to push them out ,but just as quickly spin around and cheer for the government and state to step in the second protesters inconveniences their daily commute or graffiti something.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:11

OldTennisCourt: Sep 11, 2011; by VideoGames

FreeKillB posted:

I would consider the argument that even Nazis have a right to not be punched in the face to be real. Like, it was funny and I'm not going to shed tears for the rear end in a top hat, but "it's okay to use violence to suppress the expression of political ideas I find abhorrent" is not a sentiment that I find compatible with the ideals of Western democracy.

VVVVV: I don't see how a convincing counter to "it's not okay to use violence to suppress political speech I find abhorrent" can be reasonably given as "but I find this speech REALLY REALLY abhorrent!!!!". Like, in the abstract the fact that even awful ideologies are given protections can be viewed as a defect in a society that cherishes free speech, but in practice once people start making judgements as to which political speech is protected and which political speech deserves to be punched in the face, I have 100% confidence that it won't just be Nazis who are punched.

Stop defending Nazis

V-----When given a choice between defending nazis and punching them why do choose to defend nazis

OldTennisCourt fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Jan 23, 2017

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:12

FreeKillB: May 13, 2009

I'm going to side with the ACLU on this one:

ACLU posted:

One of the most noted moments in the ACLU�s history occurred in 1978 when the ACLU defended a Nazi group that wanted to march through the Chicago suburb of Skokie, Illinois, where many Holocaust survivors lived. The ACLU persuaded a federal court to strike down three ordinances that placed significant restrictions on the Nazis� First Amendment right to march and express their views. The decision to take the case was a demonstration of the ACLU�s commitment to the principle that constitutional rights must apply to even the most unpopular groups if they�re going to be preserved for everyone. Many now consider this one of the ACLU�s finest hours.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:13

Oxyclean: Sep 23, 2007

FreeKillB posted:

I'm going to side with the ACLU on this one:

Noone's saying they shouldn't be allowed to demonstrate, they're saying that punching them is good.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:15

OldTennisCourt: Sep 11, 2011; by VideoGames

Look guys punching one nazi in the face will start us down a slippery slope where all Nazis get punched and furthermore ~faaaaaaaaaaaaaart~

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:17

Iron Crowned: May 6, 2003; by Hand Knit

OldTennisCourt posted:

Look guys punching one nazi in the face will start us down a slippery slope where all Nazis get punched and furthermore ~faaaaaaaaaaaaaart~

I'm ok with Nazis getting punched

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:18

Tei: Feb 19, 2011

The thing is...

...if you live in a democracy and tolerate nazis, you will not live in a democracy much longer, and you may end your own life, if you end being one of the groups used as scapegoats by the system.

So tolerance must not extend to cover nazis. Is where it ends, before supporting views that want the extermination of whole groups of people. If you are a sane person, you want nazi ideas to be seriously restricted.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:18

Oxyclean: Sep 23, 2007

We're not even talking about some joe who showed up to a rally because he thinks white lives matter too, isn't the guy that got punched the guy that pretty much started the alt-right and advocates actually killing people?

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:18

Lord Hydronium: Sep 25, 2007; Non, je ne regrette rien

Abyssal Squid posted:

I agree, but I think it's an okay compromise to say that while there are good reasons for punching Nazis to be illegal, punching Nazis is still morally good.

That way the state doesn't condone violence against minorities, even ones you find abhorrent (the "sinking to their level" argument), but you still get to send a powerful message that America doesn't stand for Nazis.

Punching Nazis is like speeding by 5 mph: technically illegal, but good if everyone is doing it.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:19

Jonas Albrecht: Jun 7, 2012

Hey could someone edit that red panels cartoon so that it references one of Churchill's lovely anti-India quotes?

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:21

Improbable Lobster: Jan 6, 2012; "From each according to his ability" said Ares. It sounded like a quotation.; Buglord

FreeKillB posted:

I'm going to side with the ACLU on this one:

Talk poo poo get hit

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:23

FreeKillB: May 13, 2009

Improbable Lobster posted:

Talk poo poo get hit

Hmm, yes what a well-considered and convincing position, I had never thought of this before. Surely if everyone adopted this reasoning only means that the right people (Nazis) would end up being punched. Other protestors (non-Nazis from across the political spectrum) would be fine!

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:27

420 Gank Mid: Dec 26, 2008; WARNING: This poster is a huge bitch!

Jonas Albrecht posted:

Hey could someone edit that red panels cartoon so that it references one of Churchill's lovely anti-India quotes?

quote:

I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.

quote:

I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes

quote:

I hate Indians, they are a beastly people with a beastly religion.

quote:

It may be that, unwittingly, they[Jewish people] are inviting persecution - that they have been partly responsible for the antagonism from which they suffer

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:29

OldTennisCourt: Sep 11, 2011; by VideoGames

FreeKillB posted:

Hmm, yes what a well-considered and convincing position, I had never thought of this before. Surely if everyone adopted this reasoning only means that the right people (Nazis) would end up being punched. Other protestors (non-Nazis from across the political spectrum) would be fine!

What's your opinion on the Holocaust?

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:29

Improbable Lobster: Jan 6, 2012; "From each according to his ability" said Ares. It sounded like a quotation.; Buglord

FreeKillB posted:

Hmm, yes what a well-considered and convincing position, I had never thought of this before. Surely if everyone adopted this reasoning only means that the right people (Nazis) would end up being punched. Other protestors (non-Nazis from across the political spectrum) would be fine!

No one equates non-nazis with nazis.

Reminder that you're defending the "hail Trump", "peaceful ethnic cleansing" and "we should really exterminate the blacks, jews and other non-whites" guy.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:29

Improbable Lobster: Jan 6, 2012; "From each according to his ability" said Ares. It sounded like a quotation.; Buglord

If you give a nazi a foot of rope he'll immediately turn it into a noose to lynch someone with

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:32

Renoistic: Jul 27, 2007; Everyone has a
guardian angel.

This photo from a Nazi march in Sweden, 1985, feels appropriate, even if the woman expressed regret afterwards.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:33

duz: Jul 11, 2005; Come on Ilhan, lets go bag us a shitpost

FreeKillB posted:

Hmm, yes what a well-considered and convincing position, I had never thought of this before. Surely if everyone adopted this reasoning only means that the right people (Nazis) would end up being punched. Other protestors (non-Nazis from across the political spectrum) would be fine!

The other protesters are already getting attacked, by the police.

# ? Jan 23, 2017 17:33