I’m not sure I agree with that interpretation, but that’s at least an explanation for why they might be at cross purposes. Can anyone else who’s upvoting the meme explain what this is about?
I’m not sure I agree with that interpretation, but that’s at least an explanation for why they might be at cross purposes. Can anyone else who’s upvoting the meme explain what this is about?
Okay fair enough, but if that’s the case, do you know what this meme is about?
I must be out of the loop. Are Linux apologists and tankies at cross purposes for some reason?
Where is Tank Man now? I bet he’s a celebrated civil rights icon who freely walks the streets, right? I did see some reporting suggesting he was executed by firing squad but that can’t be right.
Yeesh friend, kinda jumped down OP’s throat here, no? Seems pretty uncharitable to go from their posted meme to “this cartoonish fantasy world of yours”, and then take that even further.
Uhm, are we looking at the same comic? Because it most definitely is making an assessment of the impact of the shooter’s actions. What’s the thing being impacted? I would say world. Charitable interpretation seems to me to point in the opposite direction of what you’re saying.
It’s never going to be resolved.
I think it was resolved, but then Johnson got elected, pardoned the entire Confederate South including Jefferson Davis, and rolled back reconstruction. And the south benefited from electoral success by counting the slave population toward their number of representatives despite disenfranchising them.
I don’t have a real end point or pin to this thought but there’s solvable electoral process things that could change the outcomes. The upsetting thing right now is disenchantment in the power of procedures to affect outcome which (1) in some sense is just an unfortunate truth but (2) in another sense is a self fulfilling prophecy as we lose touch of how processes can control outcomes.
The Millitary isn’t bound by some electoral laws of the universe, they just as easily could have said the vote was illigetimate.
Well I mean they are bound by laws, to the extent that laws have meaning. And responding to legal instruction would seem to validate the force and efficacy of the legal system, right?
That was… honestly a great explanation. Thank you.
But goodness what a deep and context specific cut.