site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   1173 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for November 15, 2024

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

To add to @SubstantialFrivolity's point, the message is that Trump's slightly less hawkish attitude towards the war in Ukraine will effectively lead to a massive defeat for Ukraine in the war. There's also the implication that Trump is less hawkish on Ukraine because he's literally in bed with dictators (a phrase you'll often see in American media), meaning that he actually loves and supports Putin, Xi Jinping, and Kim Jong-Un. The idea is that Trump will align himself with Russia and China and North Korea, and maybe even take actual steps towards allowing Russia to conquer Ukraine, China to conquer Taiwan, and North Korea to conquer South Korea. Hence why those are the flags on the small balls being attacked by Russia, China, and North Korea joined by the United States.

It's not a good meme, and its message is ludicrous, but it's a memetic distillation of what warhawk Americans in the media think Donald Trump believes. Or perhaps more accurately, what their propaganda is intended to communicate.

The people making this meme don’t think he’s “slightly less hawkish.” They think he’s outright sympathetic to Putin and will explicitly, not just effectively, lead to Ukrainian defeat. Hence side-switching and not, I dunno, kicked for griefing.

Also, I don’t think anyone says he’s “literally in bed with dictators.”

The people making this meme don’t think he’s “slightly less hawkish.”

That was an injection of my own thoughts, I can see how it could be confusing. I was simply trying to gesture at Trump's differences of opinion on foreign policy from the mainstream.

Also, I don’t think anyone says he’s “literally in bed with dictators.”

Sigh. Here we go again.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2024-11-06/trump-is-back-and-out-for-blood-his-opponents-need-to-build-a-structure-to-defend-america

On national security, he’ll sell out Ukraine and get in bed with dictators, most prominently Russian President Vladimir Putin. A liaison with Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán isn't out of the question either.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/trump-military-generals-hitler/680327/

The Republican nominee’s preoccupation with dictators, and his disdain for the American military, is deepening.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/14/opinions/trump-dictators-putin-xi-erdogan-ben-ghiat/index.html

Trump continually praises dictators and who he is trying to reach with this kind of talk. Some of it is no doubt Trump airing his fantasies of the kind of authority he could exert as president. He praises Hitler, Chinese leader Xi, Russian President Putin and others because of their absolute power, not in spite of it. He repeats these leaders’ cult of personality propaganda in presenting them as so strong and feared that it is useless to resist them.

From the Kamala Harris compaign:

https://www.facebook.com/KamalaHarris/videos/harris-vs-trump-harris-walz-2024/1092590845847573/

Donald Trump admires dictators—and he wants to be one on day one if given the chance.

Also, from the first Trump administration, who could forget SNL making a joke about Putin fucking Trump:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/snls-homophobic-trump-putin-jokes-need-to-stop/

"Honey, why you still up?” Bennett’s Putin says, emerging from a hotel room door bare-chested with a randy, horny smirk. He seductively pats the small of Baldwin’s Trump’s back. “Come back to bed, babe!"

Maybe "admires dictators" is different, but at least one of those pieces expliclitly said "in bed with dictators," and the implication was all over the past year of the campaign -- let alone the first Trump presidency.

Perhaps I made some mistakes in my presentation, but I was simply trying to provide my best understanding of the meme in terms that people who disagree with it might be able to understand. I would not have posted, particularly in the friday fun thread, if I thought I were going to create a debate over all this. It's a silly polandball meme.

I saw no warhawk ever saying Trump would attack South Korea and Taiwan on behalf of China and North Korea. This is literally something nobody believes in. That's what makes it such a bad meme - instead of being based in reality, it just goes "what's the worst thing I can say about person I hate"? That's not how good meme is done, you can't just say maximum vile shit, it should be based on something recognisable and draw from the truth even in exaggeration.

it should be based on something recognisable and draw from the truth even in exaggeration.

The "recognizable" thing is all the media pieces talking about Trump "being in bed with dictators." And the point for people who believe in that is they believe Trump will allow the dictators to attack, and the idea that the US will actually attack is the humorous exaggeration that "draws from the truth" as the people who like the meme understand it.

I agree it's not a good meme, I'm not saying it is, this is not an apologetic. But it doesn't make literally 0% sense to me, I have enough understanding of the point of view behind it that I get what they're saying and why they're saying it, despite disagreeing with great intensity.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats