Feminists Used Trump Jr.'s Skittles Meme in 2014; Ergo Trump Jr. "Ripped It Off" (But It Was Cool Before)
Right, see, it was cool when feminists used it about men (warning: TownHall link...you. have. been. warned...)...but IT IS TOTALLY NOT COOL TO USE IT ABOUT SYRIAN REFUGEES.
AND: Trump is evil because Trump Jr. "tweeted" (ugh...seriously?) it and white supremacists use it too which means he's like white supremacists and feminists use it too but it TOTALLY DOES NOT mean that he's like feminists in fact just the OPPOSITE and what he did was RIP IT OFF FROM THEM WHICH IS TYPICAL OF MEN AAAARGH
Ok, to be fair, the author of that one piece does kind of blur the point about whether or not the meme is bad. Also to be fair, some people objected to it when it was used about men but seem ok with it being used about refugees.
Double-standards: the heart and soul of our political discourse.
Anyway, I'm inclined to count this as another lefty imaginary outrage. The recipe for that is, basically: begin with the assumption that everyone to the right of you is racist. Take something they say and, operating under that guiding assumption, cast about for some interpretation according to which it's TEH RACIST. (Note: employ denigrated/elevated standards according to which basically everything and everyone is racist.) Find an interpretation. Declare it racist. Declare the person who said it racist. Tweet it! Go have a gluten-free microbrew.
Ok, what I might say about this nonsense if I could think clearly about it anymore would probably be something like: look man. This is a serious problem. This is about people's lives. About their lives being destroyed, in point of fact. And, of course, it's about terrorism--also serious. I take the point, but the candy thing doesn't really have the kind of prima facie gravitas that I'd prefer. It might be ok for John Q. Public to post on Facebook or whatever. But you're a candidate's son, and part of his campaign, so different, higher standards are applicable. Also, get off goddamn twitter it's a factory for stupid. It makes blogs look serious.
posted by Winston Smith at
8:22 AM
3 Comments:
It bums me out that no one has made the following important point:
There are genuine risks involved with taking in Syrian refugees. We cannot deny that a higher-than-average fraction of them, when compared to other potential refugee groups, will likely harbor ill will against the US.
But that's what a strong country does; it assumes such risks for the inestimable good of saving the lives of those genuinely in need.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
It is a cowardly abandonment of the spirit of America to turn away thousands of those people out of the fear that some of them may betray us. We need not deny the risks involved, we need only brave them.
Damn, it's a good point.
I basically concluded that we had to give up the spirit of that long ago, because, though that was our position before, now that everybody wants to come here was just can't...
But we still can *sometimes,* of course...
And incidentally that's one reason I want to stem the flow of illegals--I'd like to be able to take in more refugees and asylum-seekers...but without mindlessly inflating the population.
Anyway--it's a great point.
I'm with Mystic. There are risks, they are obviously more than if we were taking in, say, a gaggle of grandmothers from Madrid, and yet providing sanctuary and help to those people is still the right thing to do. It takes no guts, no courage to do things that are absolutely safe, but to accept risk, and deal with it as it comes, that's part of what bravery actually is.
I made a similar post on facebook a while back, and many people agreed with me. Then I had a few on the right whining about terrorists being mixed in, and a few on the left loudly disclaiming that any terrorists could EVER be in with the refugees. Both are equally deluded. You look at the situation, decide what is morally correct to do, and then evaluate and deal with the downsides. There's a reason why all the major religions agree that extending hospitality those in trouble is the right thing to do.
And maybe, just maybe, extending a helping hand will bear more dividends than bombing the shit out of people.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home