Political Cartoons, Memes & Amusing Videos

[NotHardUp1]

It is all about GUTS and feelings, not brains and MORALS: people do not care about reason and truth or lie, only about what makes them feel better... actually, you keep sticking to that notion that politics and democracy (which actually deals with masses who only want to feel good in whatever way they are born to feel so) is all about truth, decency and honesty not because it is reasonable, but because it makes you feel better: that is what morality is about, what people will accept as necessary or pleasureble, and then they try to justify it by calling it "right"... which may end up being the contrary of what they will find right "later", or of what their ancestors found "right"... and to whose of us who will point out THEIR OWN crooked moral relativism, they will have the nerve to call crooked "moral relativists".
If you can not accept the ugly in the people, you will never get what politics and social life in general is about: it is not a belief, it is daily lessons being taught... for whoever is willing to learn them.

Your reductionist view is simply a nihilistic convenience to justify the unethical.

The question isn't whether I can "accept" the ugly. The issue is whether we call black white, and use moral relativism to justify our own base instincts.

When fighting politically, in Democracy, the standards of war are not the measure. In war, one may have to bomb civilians, destroy dams that cause famine and death, and even deply nuclear bombs to end a war. But elections are not war, only figuratively, and "anything goes" is simply a recipe to empower the depraved, like Mr. Trump, to normalize his barbarism.

And the end will be the end of the political system. This country will not continue under the chaos that both parties are encouraging, no matter whether champions for it it in Spain, in Canada, in Russia, or elsewhere, lean in and opine that it is normal.

Americans have a different interest in our politics than others have and we have to live with the results. I'll not apologize for championing honesty and truth, nor will I concede it is naivete.

 

[TX-Beau]

Your reductionist view is simply a nihilistic convenience to justify the unethical.

The question isn't whether I can "accept" the ugly. The issue is whether we call black white, and use moral relativism to justify our own base instincts.

When fighting politically, in Democracy, the standards of war are not the measure. In war, one may have to bomb civilians, destroy dams that cause famine and death, and even deply nuclear bombs to end a war. But elections are not war, only figuratively, and "anything goes" is simply a recipe to empower the depraved, like Mr. Trump, to normalize his barbarism.

And the end will be the end of the political system. This country will not continue under the chaos that both parties are encouraging, no matter whether champions for it it in Spain, in Canada, in Russia, or elsewhere, lean in and opine that it is normal.

Americans have a different interest in our politics than others have and we have to live with the results. I'll not apologize for championing honesty and truth, nor will I concede it is naivete.

This makes no sense.

 

[belamyi]

I'd add that people will actually condemn truth, ethics, and facts a lies ifin they contradict how someone feels. Telling the truth to a voter does not mean that anyone will believe it.

For people life is NOW and the future is NOW FOREVER: that is what keeps "life" going, a secure place, and politics and religion are there to provide that security for the vast majority of people who would get lost in "real life" outside what they take as the "real life" of family and work, or of mere daily routine.
If anything is wrong now, they must be provided with a fantasy promising a rosier future or afterlife and, eventually, some sort of "retribution and world-fixing" in their own mind, to either keep things peaceful in the real world, or to use it as an excuse and "reason" to change the state of things when that social order and state of things is not considered useful anymore.

Politics and religion offer an easy, cheap world-view to those who can afford the stress or trouble of thinking about it by themselves: run ahead of their lives and they will destroy your life... they do not even need to be bad, evil, ignorant... it is just reasonable that it is so.

Stale ones (the one above is funny no matter what).

I like cartoons that make no sense with reality, but would be funny in a parallel universe... like in a bipartisan one.

 

[cityboy-stl]

The problem is, there are a whole lot of MAGATS who will actually believe this.

 

[TX-Beau]

The problem is, there are a whole lot of MAGATS who will actually believe this.

They believe anything evil about Harris anyway. Not the issue. They are a lost cause.

 

[belamyi]

Your reductionist view is simply a nihilistic convenience to justify the unethical.

The question isn't whether I can "accept" the ugly. The issue is whether we call black white, and use moral relativism to justify our own base instincts.

When fighting politically, in Democracy, the standards of war are not the measure. In war, one may have to bomb civilians, destroy dams that cause famine and death, and even deply nuclear bombs to end a war. But elections are not war, only figuratively, and "anything goes" is simply a recipe to empower the depraved, like Mr. Trump, to normalize his barbarism.

And the end will be the end of the political system. This country will not continue under the chaos that both parties are encouraging, no matter whether champions for it it in Spain, in Canada, in Russia, or elsewhere, lean in and opine that it is normal.

Americans have a different interest in our politics than others have and we have to live with the results. I'll not apologize for championing honesty and truth, nor will I concede it is naivete.

Your reductionist view is a voluntaristic convenience to justify helplessness... for fear of your own falling into nihilism.

If politics and elections are not war, then mere social bickering is not politics either, even if the excuse is a political race.

The issue is whether forcing people to call shades of grey either "black" or "white" is not the true relativism, justifying base instincts of superiority under the guise of moral principles.

What you pretend is the end of society because of Vance's couch is what has alwas been presented as the end of society when "the unethical" has been justified in the name of making a living or "building a country", thereby justifying one's own base instincts for prevalence and superiority, relativistically and hypocritically presented as "progress" and "advancement" and "pillars of society and guide of the honest, hard-working people".

The end is the same end that history shows us: when people are forced to think and dicuss beyond the political and social illusions (lies) that build our lives from daily business and family life up to national governments and wars, the confusion even among those who pretend to have a sure and certain "moral compass" will lead to the finding of a new illusion (lie) away from all that intellectual confusion among people made only for sentimental certainties with pseudointellectual and sham moral justifications.

 

[belamyi]

The problem is, there are a whole lot of MAGATS who will actually believe this.

They won't, they already do: they are just waiting for someone to say it from a socially sanctioned status... like that of a presidential candidate.

It's like when someone says that people do not know yet what they want to buy: Trump is there to give a definite shape to their vague instincts of hate, their will to buy a criminal accusation or a mere joke.

 

[johaninsc]

 

[NotHardUp1]

Your reductionist view is a voluntaristic convenience to justify helplessness... for fear of your own falling into nihilism.

If politics and elections are not war, then mere social bickering is not politics either, even if the excuse is a political race.

The issue is whether forcing people to call shades of grey either "black" or "white" is not the true relativism, justifying base instincts of superiority under the guise of moral principles.

What you pretend is the end of society because of Vance's couch is what has alwas been presented as the end of society when "the unethical" has been justified in the name of making a living or "building a country", thereby justifying one's own base instincts for prevalence and superiority, relativistically and hypocritically presented as "progress" and "advancement" and "pillars of society and guide of the honest, hard-working people".

The end is the same end that history shows us: when people are forced to think and dicuss beyond the political and social illusions (lies) that build our lives from daily business and family life up to national governments and wars, the confusion even among those who pretend to have a sure and certain "moral compass" will lead to the finding of a new illusion (lie) away from all that intellectual confusion among people made only for sentimental certainties with pseudointellectual and sham moral justifications.

[Text: Removed]

I fear no nihilism overcoming me, erupting from within, or seeping from without. There is no shadow of doubt without my psyche that there is a moral right, and there is truth, even though we may never learn it fully or find it in history.

"Everyone is doing it" is the repair of the depraved. Everyone isn't lying. Everyone isn't hating. It's just cover for those who want to believe all society is without morals or right actions. There are right actions.

On another not, I guess we've guaranteed now that either our posts will get deleted as off-topic or summarily moved to the election thread, and I'm OK with that. It was inevitable due to the nature of the election and the cartoons, just as Johaninsc's cartoons in the election thread got forcibly bussed over here.

 

[NotHardUp1]

The problem is, there are a whole lot of MAGATS who will actually believe this.

If we could just get them to say they want to kill the mothers who kill the babies.

 

[TX-Beau]

[Text: Removed]

I fear no nihilism overcoming me, erupting from within, or seeping from without. There is no shadow of doubt without my psyche that there is a moral right, and there is truth, even though we may never learn it fully or find it in history.

"Everyone is doing it" is the repair of the depraved. Everyone isn't lying. Everyone isn't hating. It's just cover for those who want to believe all society is without morals or right actions. There are right actions.

On another not, I guess we've guaranteed now that either our posts will get deleted as off-topic or summarily moved to the election thread, and I'm OK with that. It was inevitable due to the nature of the election and the cartoons, just as Johaninsc's cartoons in the election thread got forcibly bussed over here.

This is not what he said.

 

[TX-Beau]

If we could just get them to say they want to kill the mothers who kill the babies.

Yeah, that already happened.

 

[belamyi]

As ever, you find all morality and ethics to be hypocrisy and the refuge of the weak or fearful.

I fear no nihilism overcoming me, erupting from within, or seeping from without. There is no shadow of doubt without my psyche that there is a moral right, and there is truth, even though we may never learn it fully or find it in history.

"Everyone is doing it" is the repair of the depraved. Everyone isn't lying. Everyone isn't hating. It's just cover for those who want to believe all society is without morals or right actions. There are right actions.

On another not, I guess we've guaranteed now that either our posts will get deleted as off-topic or summarily moved to the election thread, and I'm OK with that. It was inevitable due to the nature of the election and the cartoons, just as Johaninsc's cartoons in the election thread got forcibly bussed over here.

No, you are not reading me, and keep mistaking pretensions of ethics and morality for actual ethics and morals.
[Text: Removed] Having no shadow of a doubt is the surest way to back the sort of trumpism of "coachism" you [Text: Removed] denounce, and to run away from sound moral stances.
You keep mistaking your understanding of what I say from what I say: I am not talking about what everybody does, but about what prevails among those movers and shakers who firmly believe, "without the shadow of a doubt", what is the moral right according to their own justification, and then shape with it everybody else's life, through action or allowance.

Isn't it ironic that what you [Text: Removed] renounce is what you are actually doing by opposing my own defense of "moral right and ethics" away and above any daily practice and, most importantly, any pretended "shadeless" tables of moral commandments?

 

[belamyi]

So funny they pretend

because there was no

 

[belamyi]

 

[belamyi]

This is not what he said.

What I said is not that there are no "right actions", but that "right actions" are taken as either those that socially prevail, or those that prevail in one's own mind. That is, any moral judgement is NOT relative, but MAKES ITSELF relative: morals are not based in what they defend, but in what they oppose; it is not what they say, not about the action itself, but the PRETENSION, the CALLING it "right" and "moral". Same goes for truth, it is not that something is not "true", but that considering it "true" is already straying away from the supposedly "substantial base" of that being true.

In short, truth or morals are not "something", is the CALLING something true or moral...

reason why people unable to separate the label "truth" or "moral" from the actual thing believe you are defending moral relativism or negating actual facts.

 

[belamyi]

 

[belamyi]

Lokk it this way, it's not negating kindness or the ability of people to be kind... its acknowledging that people hold nastiness behind/below their niceness, and that it does not remain dormant more often than the contrary... that is not "relativizing" anything.

 

[belamyi]

Lying is wrong, are "white lies" really more white than just plain wrong lies?
Killing is worng, without the doubt of a doubt: are armies criminal, and "self-defence" a "wrong" concept and a "moral trick" to defend exactly what, to evade one's self out of nihilism?

Relativism only makes sense against absolutism... all the rest is "nuancing" and reality... "truth" included.

For the Kamala cartoon above... one that has laready been posted, but never often enough...

 

[belamyi]

The Hards BELIEVE in "truth" and "moral" as an atomic essence... I merely point to them as the corpuscular relationships and CHOICEs that everybody acknowledges they are when they talk of them in a different way, from different trite angles and set phrases: that is why people talk of greater goods, self-defence, and keep arms and armies at the same time they "wholeheartedly" pay lip service to the absolute, shadowless "shall not kill" commandment... and they call others "moral relativists" from the almighty highness of their own very moral relativism.