Not that there’s anything wrong with having a non-WASPy nose, but man, fans of Adam Driver are the last people that ought to be criticizing anyone’s schnoz.
Given that Robin’s run in politics in the other webcomic is before the current political climate, can I say as a foreigner it’s scary how your current president reminds me of a fictional unpredictable sugar-rush speedster created by a self-admitted man-child?
The biggest difference between Robin and Trump, as evidenced by their slogans. Trump is actually the successor to Robin.
Proof:
Trump’s slogan, “Make America Great Again” presumes it was previously great. When was it great before? When Robin was in charge!
Robin’s slogan, “Be Great America”.
I’m not convinced Robin’s an actual politician. I think she just comes from a rich family and pays for people to follow her around and act like she’s important.
Not if she’s using her own money. A real politician uses your money to do the same thing.
vlademir1
Here’s the thing. Wealthy people become politicians by using enough of their own money (and other resources) to surround themselves with enough of the right people who will do that until nonassociated people are willing to give them money to keep doing that at which point they start using that money instead of their own.
Ross Perot is a good case study here with his history of not trusting the people he surrounded himself with to do their job of making him a more attractive investment to the people who actually fund political campaigns.
1. Panel One: Leslie is trying to talk to Robin like she’s a friend they just had a bender with who wants them to go drinking again or smoke some weed. This is not good. Robin is an intruder in your house and has already resisted being physically thrown out. Call the cops, call some friends, or go to the media yourself and tell them she’s INSANE.
2. I find it incongruous Ruth and Amber both have their mental illnesses dealt with seriously while Robin is speaking from a perspective that strikes me as a complete break with reality. Is she in a psychotic fugue state or just literally a psychopath? I’m actually amused by this in the comic way but this feels totally like Shortpacked rather than Dumbing of Age.
3. Leslie, why would you WANT her to go back to her campaign? The campaign which is about destroying gay rights? I mean, yes, it gets her out of your house but you know that’s a bad thing as well. I know love is blind but this is a crazy person in your house.
4. I wonder if Robin just repeats what she wants and assumes it will eventually work and people will do what she says. It’s like she’s got a Solar Exalted charm or is a Ventrue with Presence and Dominate. Why yes, I played a lot of White Wolf games in the past.
I do wonder what her staff are doing, though. Also, I point out Robin may actually not be in any danger because of her lesbian “scandal.” It’s not like they have any actual story to report so far and the public isn’t exactly going to vote Democrat because of it. They may not vote but that’s not a guarantee anyway.
5. I note Robin doesn’t look for anyone tweeting her beforehand and I can’t help but imagine she’s ignored all of her messages.
6. Kylo Ren dislikes her? Well, that increases my life of him except for the fact I’ve just discovered from the comments threat the Alt-Right likes the First Order and Kylo Ren. That makes me feel unclean by association. I’m also a fan of the Principality of Zeon and Imperium of Mankind but I’m aware I’m not SUPPOSED TO BE. Do I have to disassociate myself from the bad guys I love to hate because people actually love them?
I also think Robin’s polls will go up the more hate she spews on the net.
Dark
I always just figured that DoA was just an offshoot of Shortpacked. Galasso decided to clone everyone and send them to college as part of a plan to take over the education system.
My best guess is it died with LBJ. The two parties started becoming parodies of themselves in the 70s, and the Republicans really kicked it into high gear when Ronnie came to town.
(At least in this 90s kid’s opinion. Somebody who was actually there will probably disagree. I know this ignores the Vietnam protests; I’m referring to the politicians themselves.)
btoblake
The cross-party social scene in DC used to keep things civil, and make it possible for the work to get done. That’s only recently broken down. The parties did used to call each other names in public, but they didn’t actually hate or fear each other. The kids who’ve come in during the last decade often believe that hype. Pre-jerrymandering, most districts were very mixed, so most politicians expected to get cross party line votes if they did a good job. So, vilifying the other side was a game sometimes, but one that they might not play constantly.
As many house members stopped moving their wives to town, and stopped going to the picnics and parties that included both parties, the old ties of outside of work friendships that allowed negotiations to get done started to vanish.
As politicians pushed to gerrymander their districts, things also got worse. It seemed like a good way to avoid getting fired… but they didn’t have to appeal to cross party voters, and they started fearing party purists taking their seats instead. So, they started talking in more party purist styles.
You can see the volume of work that congress does dropping drastically as the people who did have across the aisle friends and allies retire, and their replacements fail to build the cross aisle ties, and make the reasonable deals.
The funny thing is that it’s all reversible at this point.
That balance could easily slide back the other way. Many of the older congresspeople still know how things used to get done.
Many of the younger ones do love to talk and build friendships, so they could make cross party friends again.
Ordinary citizens can also decide their single issue is gerrymandered districts, and just poke local public servants into fixing the silliest extremes. That would allow congress to stop the parody.
Well, there was the one congressman who beat another congressman in the middle of congress with his cane in like the 1830s.
Then there was the smear campaign that someone had fathered an illegitimate child with a slave, and that was like the 3rd or 4th presidential campaign to ever happen.
I’m just going off my vague memories of US History, but national discourse hasn’t always been Lincoln vs Douglas.
arosebyanyothername
But Thomas Jefferson did have children with (one of?) his slaves. Is not really a smear campaign of its truth, is it?
arosebyanyothername
Ugh. *It’s not really a smear campaign if it’s the truth, is it?
Bad Cinema
actually, that’s exactly how a Smear campaign works-blowing out of proportion some thing or act that really did happen. (Smear campaigns that rely on absolute fiction tend to be failures).
shewhosmilesatdeath
I mean TJ had a kid with someone who literally had no ability to consent since she had a lack of freedom (slavery), I don’t think that specifically counts has a smear campaign. That’s just like “look at this horribly unethical thing that happened” and then he got elected anyway. American politics is stupid.
just no more leftist riots please. Also before anyone says anything i’m a more political neutralist, I look at who has a good idea not which side there on.
I’m afraid I don’t actually have a source for that. But I’ve only heard of one or two protests recently were more than a handful of people were arrested out of thousands of protesters. Even going by numbers from police, the majority of protestors have been peaceful for the majority of recent protests.
Like, I literally can’t find any credible, hard data, or even articles that show both the number of people arrested at a recent protest and even an estimate of the total number of protesters. One person smashes a window and suddenly you stop hearing about any of the rest.
CrockedCop
Ofc you can’t, it’s a made up number to make the regressive left look better.
Solenoid
Or because the media suddenly stops caring about reporting the statistics once there’s a spectacle to report on, no matter how many are responsible.
Not that actual statistics would be likely to convince you of anything if you’re already someone who uses phrases like “regressive left”.
Solenoid
I suppose I should elaborate further. Depending on what views one already holds, one tends to focus on either the best or worst of the tactics of a movement, to the exclusion of things that are inconvenient for one’s preconceived views.
For example: all talk of representation aside, the American Revolution was fueled by chafing against British mercantilism and a desire to kick the native population off yet more land. But history remembers the people who burned down tax collectors’ houses fondly.
Your criticism of tactics is a feint for hating the aims.
And where are your numbers showing the opposite is true?
Sure, my 95% estimate is a guess. I don’t know the exact percentage. It’s common enough knowledge that nobody was arrested during the Women’s March, despite its historic size.
For other protests, the problem I ran into is that while I’ve seen plenty of live coverage showing peaceful protests, most articles only mention the number of arrests – if any – and fail to specify how many protesters were there, so it doesn’t give you that context.
There’s plenty where you can work that out for individual protests, such as the inauguration protests where police had prepared for 10,000+ protesters, and reported around 200 arrests.
But what I couldn’t find was a good source that lists total protesters vs total arrests which is the kind of thing you’d need to get an exact number either way. And make a claim about whether liberal or conservative protests are more likely to get violent, you’d need that data as well.
But it’s easy enough from a few minutes of googling that there have been a LOT of protests lately, and not a substantial amount of violence.
Unless you actually READ all the fox news and breitbart articles for some reason, even though they’ve repeatedly been caught trying to use pictures and video of past riots as though they were of the protest they were reporting on.
Smiling Cat
Take it from a guy forty miles north of portland. Not entirely.
The entire narrative is skewered, but the moral high ground is a lot sparser than one should hope for.
Bruceski
Would this be the one where some anarchists used the protest as an excuse to pull some shit, the protesters and the cops worked together to keep it contained, and then that weekend was full of volunteer groups helping clean up the damage?
Smiling Cat
“Some anarchists” is a simplistic, flawed explanation that serves only to emphasize the “us versus them” attitude that got us all into the mess in the first place by suggesting that one side is actually incapable of wrong. Also, you clearly haven’t heard much about how the loudest voices of the protests talk about the police activities during the protests if you think they were happily working together.
As a guy from england I wanna point out the tea you guys threw in the harbour cost 1.7 million dollars, adjusting for inflation. You wanna talk about violence against the state? How about when you overthrew the english? That was property damage and a half. Over what? Taxes?? We tend to blanket history, but you cant take the moral highground over fighting police activities when your police have nothing stopping them from using “reasonable and justified force” like ours do. Your bars way way higher than ours. Saying the BLM movement and stuff like that is milking it a bit when in london in like 2011 a black guy getting wrongly shot by police resulted in a week of violent riots, after a peaceful protest. I have police family and them and their friends agree the american police have normalised brutality
AndroidDreams
I meant that ours have to justify any amount of force used as rsasonable*** sorry if i got a bit ranty
not someone else
If you’re worried about simplistic, us vs. them narratives why are you insisting on simplifying a bunch of different events protesting multiple things by thousands of people, plus police in different cities, some joker with a talk show, his supporters, the federal government, possibly more depending on what events you’re referring vaguely to, into two groups?
a snow ʍousɐ
@AndroidDreams: over “taxation without representation,” which is not just about the taxation (resulting from the cost of the English Revolution) but also about the lack of representation in Parliament. Empires are cruel. It’s the same reason Gandhi rebelled with civil disobedience; of course, the fact that the European immigrants used to have rights certainly helped us feel like we had the right to revolt. Ironic that eurocentrism gave us the arrogance and outrage to actually stage war against the British Empire. I appreciate you taking the GOP nuts down a peg but let’s not impose that moral majority of the UK against the trigger-happy Yanks either.
Ecostarr
The people in masks self-identify as anarchists, so this is not some mere speculation. They call themselves the Black Bloc, and they tend toward violent protest wherever they show up. Personally, I think its just an excuse for these normally violence-prone people to have an excuse to break shit, but they’d disagree. What’s clear is that they are not part of the groups that peacefully protest.
Schol-R-LEA
In politics – regardless of the scope or the topics at hand – ‘moral high ground’ is a molehill at the bottom of a ravine deeper than Valles Marinieris.
TheAnonymousGuy
right but when you see people firing fireworks at building, attacking people with differing opinions, smashing windows and burning cars that’s not a riot?
Did I say “riots never happen”? One riot at Berkeley which was – according to the police – started by an outside group, not the students who organized the protest, does not make a trend
You can’t just point to one or two incidents involving a hundred people at most, and simply ignore literally millions of peaceful, law-abiding protesters like they don’t count.
Smiling Cat
Who’s ignoring the peaceful protesters? Pointing out Riots happened doesn’t diminish the activities of peaceful protesters.
TheAnonymousGuy’s comment made it clear which he thinks is more prevalent, despite 3 million people marching nationwide in the Women’s March, despite the many thousands who showed up at airports to oppose the immigration ban. Despite the many ongoing and peaceful protests and town halls that don’t get much attention because nothing terrible happened.
TheAnonymousGuy
I’m not saying it’s prevalent, I know it’s not the most prevalent thing. I’m just pointing out that it’s often done during protest. I’m not stupid, if your going to say set a car on fire your best chance of getting away with it is in a crowd where you can vanish quick.
You’re not saying, you just acted like that’s the case, like violence and looting are the main event. Your initial comment doesn’t makes sense otherwise.
You are feeding a skewed, biased narrative, focusing on the bad actions of a tiny minority.
JohnInCA
Nah, that’s just over-excited sports fans.
David M Willis
*lives in a world where personal liberty was won by literally murdering each other*
okay but nobody smash a window please
Clif
True enough, though the point of a representative democracy was to be able to have revolutions without murdering each other. I don’t know if avoiding smashing windows was in there or not.
388 thoughts on “Fort”
factorsofx
Someone took twitter tips from our president…
tim gueguen
Coming soon, a strip where “Robin” pulls off her disguise and reveals she is Donald Trump. What happened to the real Robin? Stay tuned.
TheTJ
Nah, that’s a clear statement of intent. You’re thinking of something along the lines of:
“I have the Greatest Nose. It’s fantastic. Other people attack it, someone should stop them. So sad!”
Beef
No no no, the “Trump Sad” is just 1 word and an exclamation point. It really drives home the point. Sad!
MrSpkr
This thread makes me so happy inside.
Furie
Is that what he’s doing? I thought he’d lost a bet and had to serve his first term as Sloth from the Goonies.
Furie
Either that or he’s an Elcor. *mournful addition*
Needfuldoer
“Lying Kylo wouldn’t know a great nose if he saw one. No wonder Star Wars is a failure. Sad!”
Lurker
That’s perfect!
Dave
Not that there’s anything wrong with having a non-WASPy nose, but man, fans of Adam Driver are the last people that ought to be criticizing anyone’s schnoz.
TheLurkerAbove
Given that Robin’s run in politics in the other webcomic is before the current political climate, can I say as a foreigner it’s scary how your current president reminds me of a fictional unpredictable sugar-rush speedster created by a self-admitted man-child?
Leorale
You can say it even if you’re not a foreigner. Most of us detest everything about him.
Arianod
Robin’s always been like that. For all we know, Trump might have taken twitter tips from her.
Reltzik
Now I’m imagining Trump publishing a book of Tweeting Tips.
…. while still president.
Seth
… On Twitter itself, one or two sentences at a time.
Thursday Violist
The biggest difference between Robin and Trump, as evidenced by their slogans. Trump is actually the successor to Robin.
Proof:
Trump’s slogan, “Make America Great Again” presumes it was previously great. When was it great before? When Robin was in charge!
Robin’s slogan, “Be Great America”.
AnvilPro
I’m not convinced Robin’s an actual politician. I think she just comes from a rich family and pays for people to follow her around and act like she’s important.
Fart Captor
Uhh…
John
Isn’t that what a politician is?
Clif
Not if she’s using her own money. A real politician uses your money to do the same thing.
vlademir1
Here’s the thing. Wealthy people become politicians by using enough of their own money (and other resources) to surround themselves with enough of the right people who will do that until nonassociated people are willing to give them money to keep doing that at which point they start using that money instead of their own.
Ross Perot is a good case study here with his history of not trusting the people he surrounded himself with to do their job of making him a more attractive investment to the people who actually fund political campaigns.
Dark
I mean, she’s not a politician. She works at a toy store, politics is a hobby.
Needfuldoer
In the old continuity.
Over here she’s a Representative up for re-election, so she won her seat 2 in-comic years ago.
C.T. Phipps
comic reactions.
1. Panel One: Leslie is trying to talk to Robin like she’s a friend they just had a bender with who wants them to go drinking again or smoke some weed. This is not good. Robin is an intruder in your house and has already resisted being physically thrown out. Call the cops, call some friends, or go to the media yourself and tell them she’s INSANE.
2. I find it incongruous Ruth and Amber both have their mental illnesses dealt with seriously while Robin is speaking from a perspective that strikes me as a complete break with reality. Is she in a psychotic fugue state or just literally a psychopath? I’m actually amused by this in the comic way but this feels totally like Shortpacked rather than Dumbing of Age.
3. Leslie, why would you WANT her to go back to her campaign? The campaign which is about destroying gay rights? I mean, yes, it gets her out of your house but you know that’s a bad thing as well. I know love is blind but this is a crazy person in your house.
4. I wonder if Robin just repeats what she wants and assumes it will eventually work and people will do what she says. It’s like she’s got a Solar Exalted charm or is a Ventrue with Presence and Dominate. Why yes, I played a lot of White Wolf games in the past.
I do wonder what her staff are doing, though. Also, I point out Robin may actually not be in any danger because of her lesbian “scandal.” It’s not like they have any actual story to report so far and the public isn’t exactly going to vote Democrat because of it. They may not vote but that’s not a guarantee anyway.
5. I note Robin doesn’t look for anyone tweeting her beforehand and I can’t help but imagine she’s ignored all of her messages.
6. Kylo Ren dislikes her? Well, that increases my life of him except for the fact I’ve just discovered from the comments threat the Alt-Right likes the First Order and Kylo Ren. That makes me feel unclean by association. I’m also a fan of the Principality of Zeon and Imperium of Mankind but I’m aware I’m not SUPPOSED TO BE. Do I have to disassociate myself from the bad guys I love to hate because people actually love them?
I also think Robin’s polls will go up the more hate she spews on the net.
Dark
I always just figured that DoA was just an offshoot of Shortpacked. Galasso decided to clone everyone and send them to college as part of a plan to take over the education system.
Mr. Mendo
National discourse was already dead!
John
Before this strip even went into the buffer.
Danni
new national discourse: jalapenos on pizza
buckybone
#jalapenogate
Reltzik
Jalepeno-and-pineapple pizza is awesome.
Danni
that is bad pizza!
Professor Detective
I don” even remember when it was properly alive.
Tacos
The 1800’s?
Needfuldoer
My best guess is it died with LBJ. The two parties started becoming parodies of themselves in the 70s, and the Republicans really kicked it into high gear when Ronnie came to town.
(At least in this 90s kid’s opinion. Somebody who was actually there will probably disagree. I know this ignores the Vietnam protests; I’m referring to the politicians themselves.)
btoblake
The cross-party social scene in DC used to keep things civil, and make it possible for the work to get done. That’s only recently broken down. The parties did used to call each other names in public, but they didn’t actually hate or fear each other. The kids who’ve come in during the last decade often believe that hype. Pre-jerrymandering, most districts were very mixed, so most politicians expected to get cross party line votes if they did a good job. So, vilifying the other side was a game sometimes, but one that they might not play constantly.
As many house members stopped moving their wives to town, and stopped going to the picnics and parties that included both parties, the old ties of outside of work friendships that allowed negotiations to get done started to vanish.
As politicians pushed to gerrymander their districts, things also got worse. It seemed like a good way to avoid getting fired… but they didn’t have to appeal to cross party voters, and they started fearing party purists taking their seats instead. So, they started talking in more party purist styles.
You can see the volume of work that congress does dropping drastically as the people who did have across the aisle friends and allies retire, and their replacements fail to build the cross aisle ties, and make the reasonable deals.
The funny thing is that it’s all reversible at this point.
That balance could easily slide back the other way. Many of the older congresspeople still know how things used to get done.
Many of the younger ones do love to talk and build friendships, so they could make cross party friends again.
Ordinary citizens can also decide their single issue is gerrymandered districts, and just poke local public servants into fixing the silliest extremes. That would allow congress to stop the parody.
Historyman68
Well, there was the one congressman who beat another congressman in the middle of congress with his cane in like the 1830s.
Then there was the smear campaign that someone had fathered an illegitimate child with a slave, and that was like the 3rd or 4th presidential campaign to ever happen.
I’m just going off my vague memories of US History, but national discourse hasn’t always been Lincoln vs Douglas.
arosebyanyothername
But Thomas Jefferson did have children with (one of?) his slaves. Is not really a smear campaign of its truth, is it?
arosebyanyothername
Ugh. *It’s not really a smear campaign if it’s the truth, is it?
Bad Cinema
actually, that’s exactly how a Smear campaign works-blowing out of proportion some thing or act that really did happen. (Smear campaigns that rely on absolute fiction tend to be failures).
shewhosmilesatdeath
I mean TJ had a kid with someone who literally had no ability to consent since she had a lack of freedom (slavery), I don’t think that specifically counts has a smear campaign. That’s just like “look at this horribly unethical thing that happened” and then he got elected anyway. American politics is stupid.
John
Well, it worked for the bloated Cheeto.
insomniac
The Adams camp said Jefferson was going to sell American women into French sex slavery. The Jefferson camp said Adams was a hermaphrodite.
This was literally the first Presidential election where the debate went past “so I’m George Washington.”
Reltzik
Teeeccchnically it is still a smear campaign if it’s the truth. But it’s not as skeezy of a smear campaign.
butts
FEEL the alt-right trolls
Let the hate flow through you
TheAnonymousGuy
just no more leftist riots please. Also before anyone says anything i’m a more political neutralist, I look at who has a good idea not which side there on.
MatthewTheLucky
And yet you’ve swallowed the riots narrative.
Fart Captor
Yeah, we’ve seen protests that are historic in size, scope and frequency, and 95% of those participating have been peaceful and law-abiding.
Acting like “riots” are what’s happening is utter bullshit.
BBCC
Oooh, can I get link to the 95% number?
Fart Captor
I’m afraid I don’t actually have a source for that. But I’ve only heard of one or two protests recently were more than a handful of people were arrested out of thousands of protesters. Even going by numbers from police, the majority of protestors have been peaceful for the majority of recent protests.
Fart Captor
Like, I literally can’t find any credible, hard data, or even articles that show both the number of people arrested at a recent protest and even an estimate of the total number of protesters. One person smashes a window and suddenly you stop hearing about any of the rest.
CrockedCop
Ofc you can’t, it’s a made up number to make the regressive left look better.
Solenoid
Or because the media suddenly stops caring about reporting the statistics once there’s a spectacle to report on, no matter how many are responsible.
Not that actual statistics would be likely to convince you of anything if you’re already someone who uses phrases like “regressive left”.
Solenoid
I suppose I should elaborate further. Depending on what views one already holds, one tends to focus on either the best or worst of the tactics of a movement, to the exclusion of things that are inconvenient for one’s preconceived views.
For example: all talk of representation aside, the American Revolution was fueled by chafing against British mercantilism and a desire to kick the native population off yet more land. But history remembers the people who burned down tax collectors’ houses fondly.
Your criticism of tactics is a feint for hating the aims.
BBCC
I didn’t ask you.
Fart Captor
And where are your numbers showing the opposite is true?
Sure, my 95% estimate is a guess. I don’t know the exact percentage. It’s common enough knowledge that nobody was arrested during the Women’s March, despite its historic size.
For other protests, the problem I ran into is that while I’ve seen plenty of live coverage showing peaceful protests, most articles only mention the number of arrests – if any – and fail to specify how many protesters were there, so it doesn’t give you that context.
There’s plenty where you can work that out for individual protests, such as the inauguration protests where police had prepared for 10,000+ protesters, and reported around 200 arrests.
But what I couldn’t find was a good source that lists total protesters vs total arrests which is the kind of thing you’d need to get an exact number either way. And make a claim about whether liberal or conservative protests are more likely to get violent, you’d need that data as well.
But it’s easy enough from a few minutes of googling that there have been a LOT of protests lately, and not a substantial amount of violence.
Unless you actually READ all the fox news and breitbart articles for some reason, even though they’ve repeatedly been caught trying to use pictures and video of past riots as though they were of the protest they were reporting on.
Smiling Cat
Take it from a guy forty miles north of portland. Not entirely.
The entire narrative is skewered, but the moral high ground is a lot sparser than one should hope for.
Bruceski
Would this be the one where some anarchists used the protest as an excuse to pull some shit, the protesters and the cops worked together to keep it contained, and then that weekend was full of volunteer groups helping clean up the damage?
Smiling Cat
“Some anarchists” is a simplistic, flawed explanation that serves only to emphasize the “us versus them” attitude that got us all into the mess in the first place by suggesting that one side is actually incapable of wrong. Also, you clearly haven’t heard much about how the loudest voices of the protests talk about the police activities during the protests if you think they were happily working together.
Fart Captor
Both the university and the police seem to think violence was instigated by a separate, outside group:
https://www.policeone.com/Crowd-Control/articles/289136006-FBI-investigating-identities-of-masked-rioters-at-UC-Berkeley-protest/
AndroidDreams
As a guy from england I wanna point out the tea you guys threw in the harbour cost 1.7 million dollars, adjusting for inflation. You wanna talk about violence against the state? How about when you overthrew the english? That was property damage and a half. Over what? Taxes?? We tend to blanket history, but you cant take the moral highground over fighting police activities when your police have nothing stopping them from using “reasonable and justified force” like ours do. Your bars way way higher than ours. Saying the BLM movement and stuff like that is milking it a bit when in london in like 2011 a black guy getting wrongly shot by police resulted in a week of violent riots, after a peaceful protest. I have police family and them and their friends agree the american police have normalised brutality
AndroidDreams
I meant that ours have to justify any amount of force used as rsasonable*** sorry if i got a bit ranty
not someone else
If you’re worried about simplistic, us vs. them narratives why are you insisting on simplifying a bunch of different events protesting multiple things by thousands of people, plus police in different cities, some joker with a talk show, his supporters, the federal government, possibly more depending on what events you’re referring vaguely to, into two groups?
a snow ʍousɐ
@AndroidDreams: over “taxation without representation,” which is not just about the taxation (resulting from the cost of the English Revolution) but also about the lack of representation in Parliament. Empires are cruel. It’s the same reason Gandhi rebelled with civil disobedience; of course, the fact that the European immigrants used to have rights certainly helped us feel like we had the right to revolt. Ironic that eurocentrism gave us the arrogance and outrage to actually stage war against the British Empire. I appreciate you taking the GOP nuts down a peg but let’s not impose that moral majority of the UK against the trigger-happy Yanks either.
Ecostarr
The people in masks self-identify as anarchists, so this is not some mere speculation. They call themselves the Black Bloc, and they tend toward violent protest wherever they show up. Personally, I think its just an excuse for these normally violence-prone people to have an excuse to break shit, but they’d disagree. What’s clear is that they are not part of the groups that peacefully protest.
Schol-R-LEA
In politics – regardless of the scope or the topics at hand – ‘moral high ground’ is a molehill at the bottom of a ravine deeper than Valles Marinieris.
TheAnonymousGuy
right but when you see people firing fireworks at building, attacking people with differing opinions, smashing windows and burning cars that’s not a riot?
Fart Captor
Did I say “riots never happen”? One riot at Berkeley which was – according to the police – started by an outside group, not the students who organized the protest, does not make a trend
You can’t just point to one or two incidents involving a hundred people at most, and simply ignore literally millions of peaceful, law-abiding protesters like they don’t count.
Smiling Cat
Who’s ignoring the peaceful protesters? Pointing out Riots happened doesn’t diminish the activities of peaceful protesters.
Fart Captor
TheAnonymousGuy’s comment made it clear which he thinks is more prevalent, despite 3 million people marching nationwide in the Women’s March, despite the many thousands who showed up at airports to oppose the immigration ban. Despite the many ongoing and peaceful protests and town halls that don’t get much attention because nothing terrible happened.
TheAnonymousGuy
I’m not saying it’s prevalent, I know it’s not the most prevalent thing. I’m just pointing out that it’s often done during protest. I’m not stupid, if your going to say set a car on fire your best chance of getting away with it is in a crowd where you can vanish quick.
Fart Captor
You’re not saying, you just acted like that’s the case, like violence and looting are the main event. Your initial comment doesn’t makes sense otherwise.
You are feeding a skewed, biased narrative, focusing on the bad actions of a tiny minority.
JohnInCA
Nah, that’s just over-excited sports fans.
David M Willis
*lives in a world where personal liberty was won by literally murdering each other*
okay but nobody smash a window please
Clif
True enough, though the point of a representative democracy was to be able to have revolutions without murdering each other. I don’t know if avoiding smashing windows was in there or not.