Thanks again! I’m always grateful to be told what I’m supposed to be doing by a holocaust denier! If it’s alright with you, I’d like you to make all of my decisions from now on!
Here’s a good example of my holocaust denial, oops I mean the exact opposite of that, with citations and arguing extensively against denial of Israel’s crimes in Gaza
Here’s me calling out some Israeli propaganda being posted on Lemmy
More broadly, I am extremely in favor of humanity in the US’s Israel policy. In fact, that’s exactly why I don’t want dishonesty creeping into the discourse about it, whether it’s applied to any public figure or directly to me.
If it’s alright with you, I’d like you to make all of my decisions from now on!
Will do. Here ya go:
Pick a lane. Either be funny and carefree, or else make a serious political point. I have to live here, so I care about dishonest propaganda that’s designed to dishearten people from giving resistance to fascism, because it still could easily fuckin win, which would be a catastrophe here, and in Gaza, and in a bunch of other places. So stop doing that second thing, and then disingenuously hiding behind a facade of it being just the first thing and obviously harmless, whenever people treat it with the alarm and disagreement that it deserves.
I’ve come to the conclusion that we’ll never fully understand the artist’s true political and moral feelings, as I do believe there’s a high level of absurdism present in their art.
Absurdists typically involve irony in their observations about the world. Telling them to pick a lane isn’t constructive, because all lanes are absurd.
I personally enjoy these. Not because I necessarily agree with the reactionary surface of the message, but because I agree that it’s all so tiresome.
If Monty Python was airing propaganda against Margaret Thatcher’s opponents I would have said the same about them.
There is absurdism, and there is real dishonest politics with real impact. You can’t do the second and then act like it doesn’t count because X Y Z… well I mean, you can, you can do whatever you want, but it stops being absurdism when you get explicitly real with it, regardless of how funny a hat you’re trying to wear along with it.
You were supposed to bring fun to the internet hole
Not crap it up even more than it already is, which is already significant
Thanks again! I’m always grateful to be told what I’m supposed to be doing by a holocaust denier! If it’s alright with you, I’d like you to make all of my decisions from now on!
Here’s a good example of my holocaust denial, oops I mean the exact opposite of that, with citations and arguing extensively against denial of Israel’s crimes in Gaza
Here’s me calling out some Israeli propaganda being posted on Lemmy
More broadly, I am extremely in favor of humanity in the US’s Israel policy. In fact, that’s exactly why I don’t want dishonesty creeping into the discourse about it, whether it’s applied to any public figure or directly to me.
Will do. Here ya go:
Pick a lane. Either be funny and carefree, or else make a serious political point. I have to live here, so I care about dishonest propaganda that’s designed to dishearten people from giving resistance to fascism, because it still could easily fuckin win, which would be a catastrophe here, and in Gaza, and in a bunch of other places. So stop doing that second thing, and then disingenuously hiding behind a facade of it being just the first thing and obviously harmless, whenever people treat it with the alarm and disagreement that it deserves.
I’ve come to the conclusion that we’ll never fully understand the artist’s true political and moral feelings, as I do believe there’s a high level of absurdism present in their art.
Absurdists typically involve irony in their observations about the world. Telling them to pick a lane isn’t constructive, because all lanes are absurd.
I personally enjoy these. Not because I necessarily agree with the reactionary surface of the message, but because I agree that it’s all so tiresome.
If Monty Python was airing propaganda against Margaret Thatcher’s opponents I would have said the same about them.
There is absurdism, and there is real dishonest politics with real impact. You can’t do the second and then act like it doesn’t count because X Y Z… well I mean, you can, you can do whatever you want, but it stops being absurdism when you get explicitly real with it, regardless of how funny a hat you’re trying to wear along with it.
I mean… believe it just happened. So apparently you can?
Okay! Thanks again!
Happy to help