Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 103
  1. #31
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tuck View Post
    That's because of cell phone cameras. Police behavior hasn't changed so much as more incidents are being brought to the public's attention. The point, however, is that the idea that Spider-Man shouldn't help the cops because the cops are bad is a simplification of the problem. It also doesn't reflect what people want. People want the police to protect them. But they need the police to be trustworthy.
    There is nothing wrong with police becoming more trustworthy and if they do something wrong punish them. But if they get charged with a crime and either do get indicted or acquitted, then respect the process and move on. Getting rid of "Due Process" for the guilt or innocence of one policeman is not worth it.

  2. #32
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    You said "So Breitbart isn't a far-right outlet" when I've never said that Breitbart isn't a far-right outlet.
    Let's start over.

    "The criticism of social justice warriors isn't that they want to help people, but that they're not effective at it, and that there are serious tradeoffs to what they want to do."

    Do you think this is the way Breitbart uses the term? When Breitbart uses the term, are they in favour of the cause and merely criticizing the low effectiveness, or are they criticizing the cause itself?

  3. #33
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee View Post
    Let's start over.

    "The criticism of social justice warriors isn't that they want to help people, but that they're not effective at it, and that there are serious tradeoffs to what they want to do."

    Do you think this is the way Breitbart uses the term? When Breitbart uses the term, are they in favour of the cause and merely criticizing the low effectiveness, or are they criticizing the cause itself?
    The criticism of SJW's is not their lack of effectivness ( they sre very effective in winning the argument in the Court of Pubic Opinion). In fact, I believe that one day Ocasio-Cortez will be President.But it is the fact that if we disagree with them we are considered monsters like the Red Skull so our opinions do not matter.

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee View Post
    Let's start over.

    "The criticism of social justice warriors isn't that they want to help people, but that they're not effective at it, and that there are serious tradeoffs to what they want to do."

    Do you think this is the way Breitbart uses the term? When Breitbart uses the term, are they in favour of the cause and merely criticizing the low effectiveness, or are they criticizing the cause itself?
    I think they largely view the cause as the wrong way to reach the larger goal (maximum happiness and success.)

  5. #35
    Astonishing Member boots's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,546

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NC_Yankee View Post
    There is nothing wrong with police becoming more trustworthy and if they do something wrong punish them. But if they get charged with a crime and either do get indicted or acquitted, then respect the process and move on. Getting rid of "Due Process" for the guilt or innocence of one policeman is not worth it.
    i think it's the recorded incidents of US police not being held accountable for brutality and being suspended (sometimes with pay) and then (sometimes) reinstated that has people worried about the "trustworthy" aspect. it's where the whole "we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong" meme comes from.

    in australia, we're genuinely horrified and mystified by the news items on north american police brutality. it just isn't as common here (there are recorded cases in regional areas against the indigenous population). you know what i see a lot of in comments sections under these stories? "if you comply with the cops, don't talk back and do as instructed, you won't get beat up/and or shot. if you don't, then you bring it on yourself."

    wtf. when did that become a hot take?

    here, it's common for aussies to get lippy back and take their sweet time complying with the force. yeah, it's a pain in the ass and disrespectful for the police, but they aren't about to slap anyone for it.

    as for spidey and his relationship with the cops, like most superheroes and how their vigilantism works with the police force, it's kinda best hand-waved away rather than looked into too closely.
    Last edited by boots; 04-15-2019 at 06:29 PM.
    troo fan or death

  6. #36
    Astonishing Member boots's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,546

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NC_Yankee View Post
    The criticism of SJW's is not their lack of effectivness ( they sre very effective in winning the argument in the Court of Pubic Opinion). In fact, I believe that one day Ocasio-Cortez will be President.But it is the fact that if we disagree with them we are considered monsters like the Red Skull so our opinions do not matter.
    i'm not so sure, i actually think the right in the usa are much better at PR and use of language. i mean, "MAGA" sounds hilarious...but it works. it's pithy and catchy.

    and while i agree that peter parker would not be on message boards pushing an sjw agenda, i find it hard to believe that he would actively disagree with the issues on human and civil rights that they tend to embody.

    this makes me wonder...do we have any comics that explore the social media habits of superheroes? in either their private or costumed identities? beyond sharing a selfie or whatever. that could actually be an interesting and modern way to explore character.
    Last edited by boots; 04-15-2019 at 06:13 PM.
    troo fan or death

  7. #37
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    I think they largely view the cause as the wrong way to reach the larger goal (maximum happiness and success.)
    So Breitbart uses the term as a catch-all pejorative for people who champion progressive causes they disagree with, correct?

    The guy above you agrees - the criticism isn't about a lack of effectiveness.

  8. #38
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boots View Post
    i'm not so sure, i actually think the right in the usa are much better at PR and use of language. i mean, "MAGA" sounds hilarious...but it works. it's pithy and catchy.

    and while i agree that peter parker would not be on message boards pushing an sjw agenda, i find it hard to believe that he would actively disagree with the issues on human and civil rights that they tend to embody.

    this makes me wonder...do we have any comics that explore the social media habits of superheroes? in either their private or costumed identities? beyond sharing a selfie or whatever. that could actually be an interesting and modern way to explore character.
    1: Peter would not support mob rule, and.stricking down the First Amendment ( which.many but to be fair, not all SJW's advocate). 2: Peter also understands that you have bad guys ( and gals) out there, and there better be some means to stop them, otherwise the Victor Von Doom's and Norman Osborn's of the world will take over and enslave us all. On the other side, certain politicians and advocacy groups basically want to use the " 3 Monkeys" ( See no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil) approach to bad people. That is Beto O' Rourke on the death penalty. 3: MAGA may be effective but " Medicare For All" and even " Green New Deal" are even more effective catchphrases. Both ( especially "Medicare For All") is a mainstream Democratic Party Position. Another example is " Reproductive Rights" instead of the more harsh " Abortion" Why is the Left winning the battle of ideas? Because moderate Democrats, like most on the right ( President Trump love him or hate him is an exception) will surrender on issues. See the British Conservative Party on Brexit while the hard left Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn ( like Omar, Bernie Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez) do not back down one inch. In this country look at Omar referring to 9/11 as "An incident" Look at the level of support of Omar by mainstream Democrats. Taking this back to Spider-Man, I remember seeing Spider-Man after 9/11, he would have not considered the murder of over 3,000 Americans to be "An incident" like Omar did.
    Last edited by NC_Yankee; 04-15-2019 at 11:18 PM.

  9. #39
    Astonishing Member boots's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,546

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NC_Yankee View Post
    1: Peter would not support mob rule, and.stricking down the First Amendment ( which.many but to be fair, not all SJW's advocate).
    huh?

    Quote Originally Posted by NC_Yankee View Post
    2: Peter also understands that you have bad guys ( and gals) out there, and there better be some means to stop them, otherwise the Victor Von Doom's and Norman Osborn's of the world will take over and enslave us all. On the other side, certain politicians and advocacy groups basically want to use the " 3 Monkeys" ( See no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil) approach to bad people. That is Beto O' Rourke on the death penalty.
    double huh?

    in any case, where peter stands on killing is unambiguous.

    Quote Originally Posted by NC_Yankee View Post
    3: MAGA may be effective but " Medicare For All" and even " Green New Deal" are even more effective catchphrases. Both ( especially "Medicare For All") is a mainstream Democratic Party Position. Another example is " Reproductive Rights" instead of the more harsh " Abortion".
    i still think the right are excellent at repositioning the left's stance effectively in public, far moreso than the left is able to popularise their own (but in this case, i think you're discussing amercian liberals, who aren't really truly "left"). lofty things such as "medicare for all" becomes some sort of vaguely evil "obamacare".

    also "reproductive rights" don't equate to abortion. it includes it, but saying that it's a replacement label is simply inaccurate.

    the omar stuff is verifiable from listening to the full 20 mins of her remarks, but again, in my opinion, an excellent example of how opponents will run with an out of context line and reframe as a weapon. trump employed that tactic; it works and it spreads like wildfire.

    here's a quote worth...uh...quoting: “If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him".
    troo fan or death

  10. #40
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boots View Post
    huh?



    double huh?

    in any case, where peter stands on killing is unambiguous.



    i still think the right are excellent at repositioning the left's stance effectively in public, far moreso than the left is able to popularise their own (but in this case, i think you're discussing amercian liberals, who aren't really truly "left"). lofty things such as "medicare for all" becomes some sort of vaguely evil "obamacare".

    also "reproductive rights" don't equate to abortion. it includes it, but saying that it's a replacement label is simply inaccurate.

    the omar stuff is verifiable from listening to the full 20 mins of her remarks, but again, in my opinion, an excellent example of how opponents will run with an out of context line and reframe as a weapon. trump employed that tactic; it works and it spreads like wildfire.

    here's a quote worth...uh...quoting: If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him".
    Sanders himself said "Medicare For All" is no insurance ezcept cosmetic surgery. So it is not exactly Obamacare. What bothers me about the Left is I get tbe impression from too many of their leaders ( Louis Farrakhan, Michael Moore, Linda Sarsour and Al Sharpton to name a few) that because I am Christian, Hetro-Sexual, male, white and Conservative I am not only inferior but the enemy. So much for Dr King's quote of "judging people by the content of their character, rather then the color of their skin."

  11. #41
    Astonishing Member Kusanagi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NC_Yankee View Post
    Sanders himself said "Medicare For All" is no insurance ezcept cosmetic surgery. So it is not exactly Obamacare. What bothers me about the Left is I get tbe impression from too many of their leaders ( Louis Farrakhan, Michael Moore, Linda Sarsour and Al Sharpton to name a few)
    Holding these people up as leaders of the left is a bit like me saying Tucker Carlson, Bill Oreilly, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter are leaders of the right. Actually probably less so, since Farrakhan hasn't had much power to his voice since about the 90s early 2000s, and Sharpton's been little more than a pundit for the last decade.
    Current Pull: Amazing Spider-Man and Domino

    Bunn for Deadpool's Main Book!

  12. #42

    Default

    Fellas, this is Spider-Man and Social Justice, not "or" but "and", which means you need to discuss Spider-Man comics vis-a-vis soc.justice themes and vice versa. This is just becoming another political thread.

  13. #43
    Loony Scott Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Running Springs, California
    Posts
    4,944

    Default

    I think this just shows that political boundaries are tribal in nature and have nothing to do with absolute truth. In the end we all want muggers off the streets and wrong-doers to get justice. When we start to define bad guys in terms of their political stances is when tribalism comes into play and we start talking over each other about our own personal political sports team.

    Because most comic characters are purposefully apartisan, its easy to imagine they are on your side for all but a few idiot extremists on both ends of the spectrum who will get worked up over the tiniest things.
    Every day is a gift, not a given right.

  14. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee View Post
    So Breitbart uses the term as a catch-all pejorative for people who champion progressive causes they disagree with, correct?

    The guy above you agrees - the criticism isn't about a lack of effectiveness.
    The comments about effectiveness were in the context of the larger goal, to which the cause and everything else is subservient.

  15. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Taylor View Post
    Because most comic characters are purposefully apartisan, its easy to imagine they are on your side for all but a few idiot extremists on both ends of the spectrum who will get worked up over the tiniest things.
    Spider-Man in the Lee-Ditko era was quite apolitical. Ditko tended to show cops as competent, and capable and more on Spider-Man's side than Jameson. Then Lee-Romita (inconsistently I will add), made Spider-Man and his relations to cops less testy, which made him come across as more anti-authoritarian. The Sam Bullitt 2-Parter in ASM 91-92 is the height of that.

    Gerry Conway was an open lefty. And he made Spider-Man lean left but he also co-created in run, the Punisher, the Marvel character who is most popular among conservatives today and is often seen as Marvel's "red-state baiting" character. There's a perfect irony in Ditko co-creating characters like Spider-Man and Dr. Strange that were adopted as counter-cultural icons despite being a Randian while Conway who was a liberal co-created the Punisher. That's how art ends up happening most times. In Conway's run, the character Tarantula, who is a Delvadian fascist who oppresses immigrants and refugees is attacked and slammed by Spider-Man for being a traitor to "the Delvadian revolution" and giving the cause a bad name, something which bemuses The Punisher since he was teaming up with Spider-Man against him.

    Then after Conway, you had Wein and Wolfman and Stern and Defalco who I think are all liberal-leaning, as is Michelinie, JMS, Slott. Len Wein reinvented Aunt May as an elderly rights activist who also defends civil rights and helps African-Americans. That's one way writers infused politics, since while making Spider-Man take causes might rub people the wrong way, supporting cast who do so, and who Peter is close to, allow him to be liberal without actually becoming liberal.

    One weird wrinkle I brought up before. Spider-Man is consistently established as anti-totalitarian, he oppposed Tarantula, condemned Dr. Doom as a war criminal in JMS' run, and then in Slott's Worldwide run he's off making business deals in China. Unironically and so on. If Spider-Man is supposed to, in Slott's Worldwide, represent some kind of silicon valley type but transplanted to New York City, then that still doesn't work, since Google came into major conflict with the Chinese government's repression. Google shouldn't come across as the more principled brand than Spider-Man is what I'm saying.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •