Jump to content

52-80

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    16308
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

16485 Surly 1%

1 Follower

Titles

  • Title
    code duello

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Bring receipts or keep coping.
  2. Its extra sweet because you know its true — because you were in those discussions— but are too hardheaded to admit it.
  3. This statement is hilarious. Because for the past decade plus, it was considered “right wing coded”. The suggestion that “everything is fine, actually. things are better than ever. nobody is oppressing you that you need a safe space” sent most of you in a fucking tizzy.
  4. 52-80

    Shogun

    That could be the nuance thats covered in the books, which I have not read, but is not shown in the TV series. My surface interpretation of the relative power as it's presented is this: -Taiko has the ultimate authority, but because he's underage, he and his mom sit idle with their executive powers. -The 5 regents are next in hierarchy. In theory equals as they abide by contracts and consensus, but obviously have soft power ie influence. -Their army/fiefdom backs their power only if push comes to shove. Meanwhile, in the political sphere, there is ample room to jostle for lead. Ishido sat at the literal head of the room during the meetings. Mariko did try to press her noble lineage ("Im the daughter or Akechai!")... but that family was dishonored, she was almost run out of the empire, and shes married to a samurai, not a Lord. The presentation of her importance just didnt seem consistent throughout the show.
  5. This is not a court of law. Nobody is debating the legal merits of any one group shutting down the other. This is a discussion thread. I am discussing the humor in one group, just months before, wanting a shut down, and later getting shut down, just in the unintended way. You are not the thread police. You are not an appointed judge. You are a little activist LARPer. Stay mad.
  6. Which people do I like, and which people did I ask to be censored? Didn't you suggest that I gave no shits to either the Israelis or Palestinians? I know exactly what happened after the palestinian group begged and "demanded" for another group to be shutdown: something that made you cry. Pissant.
  7. 52-80

    Shogun

    Does the political importance of Mariko just seems quite overstated relative to her actual position? Ishido is the de facto lead Regent for the entire country. Basically the prime minister or chairman of the board. Mariko is "merely" the daughter of a subordinate to a lord/daimyo... a **disgraced** one at that. So at best like a child of a George Santos or assistant to the regional vice president or something. Given that Toranaga can simply command Lord Yabushige to kill himself, or that Fuji's husband committed infanticide on his own goddamn son for offending a Regent, there's such an insane disparity in the power structure that its hard to believe 1 single Mariko was the lynchpin to Ishido's future and to the Kingdom itself. For example, when she was being really mouthy in episode 9, wouldnt it have been acceptable within the construct of the show/culture for Ishido to punish her just for being rude.
  8. Oh boy! Imagine if people on this website use associative fallacy - painting individuals with a group brush - when anything mildly political comes up. Good thing that never happens.
  9. First they came for the students. And I did not speak out, for I was not in a far left circle jerk.
  10. Is trolling anything and everything you deem to hurt your feelings? Feel free to move on big boy ✊🏾
  11. If you wish other people get shutdown, and you end up getting shut down, thats karmically related. Has nothing to do with the legal aspect. Thats why the first post that brought it up mentioned only irony. Why are you pretending ive said anything else. Or is your comprehension truly that poor? given ive been explicit, 5x by now, i neither agree with the police action nor believe it has legal standing.
  12. Which post number suggested that the PSC has no right to protest other parties speech, or that that invalidates their own future right to speech, or that their suppression this week was legal/constitutional? Why are we litigating a non argument? Just dont feign as if theres zero moral/logical/karmic (but not legal) relevance to these incidences though.
  13. The summit they wanted to shut down was a private event merely hosted in the city of Austin. The single speaker (Yaron Brooks) whose UT lecture they wanted to cancel was a separate event. I dont know Yaron Brooks. But the relevance to this thread is obvious: a major matter of speech (and funny minor matter of hypocrisy) well…ditto.
  14. You missed a big difference: their call to action against the IAC had no element of sponsorship, and nothing to do with UT. (Which is separately from their cancellation request on a speaker). They demanded, verbatim, for that IAC event to be “shut down”. Meaning they wanted, if they had their way, that that event could not exist. And the nature of the IAC Summit is far from anti-anything. And yes, man, i already agree with you: that all this shit must be *allowed*, no matter how abhorrent and anti-whomever. Although people in this thread dont demonstrate the same beliefs. Im pointing how ironic the turns tabled in this instance.
  15. Do I need to be sympathetic to either party to notice hypocrisy? You should cry into your keffiyeh over it.
×
×
  • Create New...