If they can elect a felon to the white house, so could we.
Edit: Better image, thanks to @PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
How many examples of public political rapes can you find?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiaUusr7YdY
How does this answer my question? I'm not following.
How many public political rapes in history can you mention?
I can list you pages and pages and pages of political murders.
How does naming all of that answer my question?
My friend. I absolutely did not say what you said that I said. Again, I said: people championing a rapist on one side, and the other championing a murderer—what's the difference?
My apologies my friend didn't mean to offend in anyway, no need to be so angry about it and insult.
My question has yet to be rebuked by saying what exactly makes one's rape or murder any different from anothers. It's still rape or murder either way you look at it; no matter how justified you think it is.
I understand you're feeling defensive and scared, but I can reassure you that it is not within your capability to cause a change in my emotions in context whatsoever.
Like imagine a game you haven't really cared about for a long time. Now remember you have a maxed out character. Then remember the pathetic level one monsters. That's what I "feel" towards you.
I whack my sword out of habit more than concern.
I've answered it several times now, but you refuse to accept the answer. You're refusing to acknowledge any sort of nuance while yelling, screaming, crying "why oh why is there no difference between these two things which I pretend aren't totally different"?
What do you want? Me to copypaste my earlier responses? What on Earth is your point? You're not saying anything, you're not making a single point. You're just like those dipshit Russian disinfo bots; just wasting people's time. But luckily for you, I've some time to waste for a few weeks yet.
Trump is a serial felon. He cheats lies rapes, doesn't respect anyone. Ever. Rapes children.
Luigi is a standup citizen who murdered a person who's abusing the system to legally rob and kill people.
There's the difference, plain and simple.
One is honourable, one is not.
One is a dirtbag selfish autocrat rapist, one is a guy who got fed up and did what others wouldn't.
This doesn't mean murder is now okay. It just means that we don't really mind that one murder. It's still murder though, so luigi will face consequences. But as far as murders go, it's a good one.
Because at the core of all this isn't the way we organize ourselves in anyway and how many CEO's we kill but knowledge, transferring our knowledge of the value of virtue, learning about and teaching it, because it's a knowledge that needs to be gained. We can't convince people of the woes of privatizing Healthcare when we're literally murdering them, and threatening them with the same weapon they use themselves.
Check this out, Tolstoy's Personal, Social, and Divine Conceptions to life:
"The whole historic existence of mankind is nothing else than the gradual transition from the personal, animal conception of life (the savage recognizes life only in himself alone; the highest happiness for him is the fullest satisfaction of his desires), to the social conception of life (recognizing life not in himself alone, but in societies of men—in the tribe, the clan, the family, the kingdom, the government—and sacrifices his personal good for these societies), and from the social conception of life to the divine conception of life (recognizing life not in his own individuality, and not in societies of individualities, but in the eternal undying source of life—in God; and to fulfill the will of God he is ready to sacrifice his own individuality and family and social welfare). The whole history of the ancient peoples, lasting through thousands of years and ending with the history of Rome, is the history of the transition from the animal, personal view of life to the social view of life. The whole history from the time of the Roman Empire and the appearance of Christianity is the history of the transition, through which we are still passing now, from the social view to life to the divine view of life." - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God Is Within You
"Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherent the Earth." - Jesus, Matt 5:5
Not the traditional Christianity; Revelation, Corinthians this or supernatural, spiritual that. One that consists of a more philosophical interpretation of The Gospels that's hiding underneath all the dogma ever since Paul. One that emphasizes The Sermon On the Mount, debately, the most publicized point of his time spent suffering to teach the value of selflessness and virtue, thus, the most accurate in my opinion. Tolstoy learned ancient Greek and translated The Gospels himself as: The Gospel In Brief, if you're interested. This translation I've found to be the best:
https://www.amazon.com/Gospel-Brief-Harper-Perennial-Thought/dp/006199345X/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=3D3DFNAHJZ0HW&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.PDu_uq6qxVnvpJz0KIG-b3A_2LHIOiMZVR0RKKtF83S6AFUEgh9WpJkMXm4L9m8wgaDpLwiy9wO3DcM6mWe8437xrZ3VoRRh78Xrvbtsok_AvOSV4XHBkbDXhJLt0i0oZki2XoDQ4FrSTXKpK29x_EJzw2574ecE-w-WAqvm_uxLyQkWJQl2nN__-z-W8ndodRZXs0hMU2WgkkyncC7pSg.f9O0rDg6mxe0FRxZXY5PIdYhSUieBDWJ45gCAINx75k&dib_tag=se&keywords=the+gospel+in+brief&qid=1734199112&sprefix=the+gospel+in+brief%2Caps%2C158&sr=8-1
Well at least you're acknowledging it's bad at the end there that's great, but i still wouldn't consider any murder necessarily good; necessary in extreme circumstances of course, i've talked about that with either you or other commenters, but something to avoid at all costs, and never to be seen as a good thing in any case whatsoever—never worth championing. I cant help but to think that killing some CEO wasn't necessary even a little bit, and doesn't fit those more extreme circumstances mentioned. I can't say it enough, hate only ever leads to more hate, until someone is willing to react differently.