politics in comics

[ed2962]

And massive voter suppression.
And Russian propaganda.
And the "liberal" media giving Trump what amounted to billions in free advertising.

It's not the fault of liberals that conservatives voted for a candidate that didn't reflect their views, but who "shot from the hip" and was going to "shake things up."

[Abe]

I stand corrected.

I haven't read those books in a veeeeeeery long time.

To be fair it's never really political - but full of references and jokes, and of caricatures of known people of the time of publication. When I read them again as an adult I was amazed of how much I was missing as a kid of the 70s. So let's say that you need to know very well France between the late fifties to the early seventies to fully enjoy the books. French kids of today won't get the funniest stuffs : that's how some books get old I guess.

The more political thing with Asterix are probably the background and histories of Goscinny and Uderzo

Uderzo was born in*Fismes*(Marne, France), to parents, Silvio (of*Venetian*descent) and Iria Crestini (of*Tuscan*descent), who had recently immigrated from*La Spezia,*Italy.[2]His childhood ambitions were to become an aircraft mechanic, despite his talents in art becoming apparent at an early age.

Uderzo obtained French citizenship in 1934, and during*World War II, the teenaged Uderzo left Paris and spent a year in*Brittany, where he worked on a farm and helped with his father's furniture business

Goscinny was born in Paris in 1926, to a family of*Jewish*immigrants from*Poland.[1]His parents were Stanisław Simkha Gościnny (the surname means*hospitable*in Polish; Simkha is his Jewish name meaning*happiness), a chemical engineer from*Warsaw, Poland, and Anna (Hanna) Bereśniak-Gościnna from Chodorków, a small village near*Żytomierz*in the*Second Polish Republic*(now part of*Ukraine).[2]*Claude, René's older brother was born six years earlier, on 10 December 1920. Stanisław and Anna had met in Paris and married in 1919. The Gościnnys moved to*Buenos Aires,*Argentina, two years after René's birth, because of a chemical engineer post Stanisław had obtained there. He spent a happy childhood in Buenos Aires, and studied in the French schools there. He had a habit of being the "class clown", probably to compensate for a natural shyness. He started drawing very early on, inspired by the illustrated stories which he enjoyed reading.

In December 1943, the year after he graduated from school, 17-year-old Goscinny lost his father to a*cerebral hemorrhage, forcing him to find a job. The next year, he got his first job, as an assistant accountant in a tire recovery factory, and when he was laid off the following year, he became a junior illustrator in an advertising agency.[3]

Goscinny, along with his mother, left Argentina and went to New York in 1945, to join her brother Boris. To avoid service in the US military, he travelled to France to join the*French Army*in 1946. He served at*Aubagne, in the 141st Alpine Infantry Battalion. Promoted to senior*corporal, he became the appointed artist of the regiment and drew illustrations and posters for the army.

As you can see if both are perfect French citizens, there are no 'Gaulish roots' if such thing as a meaning. On the contrary!

...


Sorry for a long post that could seem really off-topic. In a way it's kinda related to some of the subjects discussed in the thread.

[Triniking1234]

Only if people don't get off their asses and vote against him or pull any Bernie or Bust bullshit. And let's be honest, the only reason we have Trump is due to the outdated electoral college.

Doesn't America still need the electoral college system to decide the composition for their House of Representatives, Senate, etc. ?

Or does it work differently in the USA?

[millernumber1]

It's not the fault of liberals that conservatives voted for a candidate that didn't reflect their views, but who "shot from the hip" and was going to "shake things up."

Well, I think Carabas would agree with you, which is why they put "liberal" in scarequotes.

I do think it's the liberal media's fault for giving Trump so much free airtime during the primaries that he crushed the other Republican candidates.

But given that at least one person in the thread has said that Cruz is just as bad as Trump, and Rubio not much better, I'm not convinced that if Cruz or Rubio had beaten Trump in the primary, they would feel any better about people who voted for them.

[Red Robe Jaldari]

It's not the fault of liberals that conservatives voted for a candidate that didn't reflect their views, but who "shot from the hip" and was going to "shake things up."

It is a counterreaction to them shooting the POW s of a culture war they already won.

[Prof. Warren]

Why do you insist that I'm saying the word "feminism" triggers people?

Because you asked me this about the word "feminism":

Do you think that the word "feminism" is polarizing, or do you think that everyone who objects to being a feminist is automatically an evil or ignorant misogynist?

I'm talking about whether you think that people of good will and character can opposes the concepts of feminism, or if you think that any opposition to feminism is default evil/ignorant.

There are specific manifestations of feminism that can be debated as being either good or bad by people on both sides who have good intentions.

But if someone is opposed to feminism - meaning equal rights for women - just on general principle, then that would be an inherently ignorant position to my mind. Not evil, just uneducated.

[millernumber1]

Because you asked me this about the word "feminism":

There are specific manifestations of feminism that can be debated as being either good or bad by people on both sides who have good intentions.

But if someone is opposed to feminism - meaning equal rights for women - just on general principle, then that would be an inherently ignorant position to my mind. Not evil, just uneducated.

That is the answer to the question I was asking. You kept answering about people who are "set off" or having reactions to the word, which was not what I was asking. I'm glad to hear you believe that people of good faith can disagree on at least specific manifestations of feminism.

[CentralPower]

I blame them for being weak minded xenophobes who ignored all of Trump's very visible failings of Donald Trump; mainly because he promised to look out for white people; to the exclusion of all others. that's why Steve Bannon supports him. he lied about draining the swamp. he lied about America not becoming militarily involved around the world. he lied about knowing his accusers. he lied about contact with the Russians. his base simply doesn't care. and that makes them unworthy of respect.

Many of Trump's supporters simply saw him as better than the other options. Yes, Trump lied. But, for many of his supporters, simply hearing a major candidate say those things was worth their vote.

Maybe if Trump's opponents did not have decades worth of self-inflicted baggage, or deliver on the worst elements of the narrative about them, then maybe I could see judging Trump's opponents. Maybe if Clinton actually campaigned harder, rather than assuming that several states were hers (like it was "her turn" to run), she could have won. (I did not support Trump. But, he earned those states.)

Maybe if the third parties ran better candidates and more competent campaigns, then maybe they would have been more competitive and forced the big two parties to run better candidates.

I am not disputing a single thing that you said about Trump. But, I cannot blame somebody for making a bad choice when all they had were bad options.

I'm not American but I feel one positive is parties like the Libertarian and Greens and others got exposure

They sucked. All either the Libertarians or Greens needed to do was get 5% to prove their viability. Combined, the two barely got that number. Most Greens have no interest in legitimate campaigning. They want to pitch fits and hold protests, often piggy-backing on events that more mature organizations have organized. They will spend hours tabling, holding signs, screaming at people and littering with their fliers. But, ask them to knock a few doors, especially the doors of known voters, and they will find every excuse to stay home. Offer to knock doors, and they will refuse to support the effort, and maybe even actively discourage.

There are a few good Greens, and they work hard. (I am friends with some of them.) But, the party as a whole is a joke that failed to break out of the margin of error on most polls.

(In case you are wondering, I worked for the Stein campaign. And, I am ashamed of 90% of the people I worked with. They have no place in the business.
And, Stein was a terrible candidate.)

Trump is a cartoon monster and he deserves the ridicule and scorn that the creators pour on him. Anyone that sees what kind of person he is and still defends him needs to drop the ignorance and open their eyes.

When comics mock the President by comparing him to MODOK or something comparably idiotic, they make the President look better by comparison.

It's obnoxious for all the readers who want a form of entertainment free of ideological preaching and it's frankly insulting to all of us in the international readership who want no part in your domestic politics.

Are you saying that there should be some kind of border between countries and their concerns? YOU MUST BE A RACIST! (Sorry. Had to go there.)

Yet I can't help but hear about your domestic politics anyway, when most international TV stations are subsidiaries of American networks or at least mostly receive American content, when English speaking social media platforms are also run and curated by American companies. So when you inevitably lose your **** over some domestic political issue the rest of the world always gets an earful.

Joking aside, I listen to the BBC on occasion. And, there is significant amount of US news there.

This isn't my mess and I'm frankly insulted you'd use comic books, a source of entertainment that I enjoy, to drag me into your insane domestic politics.

At least you can find a new form of entertainment. I am in politics (albeit at a lower level, state and municipal). You are insulted? You are insulted? How do you think that I feel.

I have always liked politics, even since I was a kid. I flirted with it in my youth, and life side-tracked me. I got back in a few years back, and have generally not regretted that decision. But, I get insulted when I see entertainers and artists who act like their product gives them real insight in to a business that they know nothing about. And, I am terrified when I see American voters who think that comics are a legitimate source of news an commentary, even if the creators are completely unqualified to offer than commentary.

If nothing else, if Trump is worth calling out, it is worth calling him out well.

If the best attacks that comics can offer are the Golden Skull or bashing on Trump's supporters (while ignoring the low quality of the other candidates), then no thinking voter (the only people who matters in this equation) should be moved by comics.

You see, this polarising attitude of yours is exactly why Trump is easily going to get a second turn.

I am not defending partisanship. But, I disagree that Trump is easily going to get a second term. As of right now, his approval ratings have been in the 30s for a while. Trump is as likely to have a primary opponent as he is to be re-elected.

Doesn't America still need the electoral college system to decide the composition for their House of Representatives, Senate, etc. ?

Or does it work differently in the USA?

The number of Elector votes that a state has is tied to the number of Congressional officials that said state has. Is that what you are asking about?

[AquaLantern]

It's not the fault of liberals that conservatives voted for a candidate that didn't reflect their views, but who "shot from the hip" and was going to "shake things up."

But we can blame conservatives for endorsing the most unqualified, unprofessional, man child with no filter as opposed to Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich.

[CentralPower]

Or, we could blame Kasich et al for not managing to beat the unqualified and unprofessional man-child.

(Put another way, the worse you say Trump is, the more you bury the people he beat.)

And, I will say again: Trump beat weak candidates who ran poor campaigns. The secret of his success was hardly secret, nor is the way to defeat him. Slurring people who saw him as the least-terrible option ain't part of a winning plan.

[millernumber1]

Or, we could blame Kasich et al for not managing to beat the unqualified and unprofessional man-child.

(Put another way, the worse you say Trump is, the more you bury the people he beat.)

And, I will say again: Trump beat weak candidates who ran poor campaigns. The secret of his success was hardly secret, nor is the way to defeat him. Slurring people who saw him as the least-terrible option ain't part of a winning plan.

I really appreciate your perspective. And not as someone who probably agrees with you - you say you worked on a Green candidacy, whereas I could never bring myself to do that, since I'm really hardcore conservative. But your advocacy of trying to understand each other, and avoiding demonization of huge groups of people through entertainment media, really impresses me.

I've been rereading a lot of posts by the guy I keep linking, and found this one: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/06/21/against-murderism/ a really helpful explanation of the phenomenon that I've been trying to articulate. Basically: if you truly think that 60 million people in America are absolutely evil, you are creating the conditions for another civil war. Because there's no living with people you think are absolutely evil.

And if you are excited by the idea of a civil war, you are making the world a worse place to live in.

[Michael Watkins]

The problem with your last paragraph is I have yet to see an articulation of "conservative" from the progressive point of view that doesn't equate them with being racist, sexist, and homophobic. The only ones who escape are people like Kasich, who are so far to the left that most conservative don't see a real difference between voting for them and voting for a Democrat. Basically, what I'm saying is that it seems that most progressives feel exactly the same about a Cruz supporter as a Trump supporter, and that means that for most progressives, there's no difference between "conservative" and "evil."

Which doesn't leave any room for dialogue.

That's true for Trump and Cruz, specifically. They are both loathsome. Then there are the religious extremists like Bachman, Santorum, and Huckabee. There really isn't any conversation to be had with a bible thumper. I'm fine with Kasich. I would have held my nose for Rubio.

[millernumber1]

That's true for Trump and Cruz, specifically. They are both loathsome. Then there are the religious extremists like Bachman, Santorum, and Huckabee. There really isn't any conversation to be had with a bible thumper. I'm fine with Kasich. I would have held my nose for Rubio.

Are Trump and Cruz loathsome for the same reason? (Also, Kasich is a slimy egomaniac.)

[ed2962]

Well, I think Carabas would agree with you, which is why they put "liberal" in scarequotes.

I do think it's the liberal media's fault for giving Trump so much free airtime during the primaries that he crushed the other Republican candidates.

But given that at least one person in the thread has said that Cruz is just as bad as Trump, and Rubio not much better, I'm not convinced that if Cruz or Rubio had beaten Trump in the primary, they would feel any better about people who voted for them.

But Trump got all that air time because he was a celebrity who kept saying outrageous things. Kim Kardashian or Sean Puffy Combs would have gotten similar coverage if they acted the same I believe.

[ed2962]

It is a counterreaction to them shooting the POW s of a culture war they already won.

The conservatives have won "The Culture Wars"? Or are you saying the liberals have?