Earlier I saw him tweet against rapefugees and had to double check that was his actual account.
Better late than never, I guess. But is it too late?
Better late than never, I guess. But is it too late?
Timeline
Post
Remote status
Context
6WAIT, HE ACTUALLY DID SEE THE 4CHAN POST 
@Rasterman jesus is only portrayed one time in the movie and it is respectfully, the rest of the movie generally mocks religion which is basically okay
@sun
They mocked religion when most of the west was still at least nominally Christian. They knew exactly what they were doing and they REFUSE to do it to islam or judaism.
@Rasterman
They mocked religion when most of the west was still at least nominally Christian. They knew exactly what they were doing and they REFUSE to do it to islam or judaism.
@Rasterman
@pepsi_man @sun @Rasterman Arguably things got worse, when people stopped mocking religion.
Today's elites treat Christianity with hate, Judaism and Islam with fear, all other religions with the fake "respect" we have for the "beautiful painting" of a 3-year-old.
No one actually benevolently mocks religion anymore.
Today's elites treat Christianity with hate, Judaism and Islam with fear, all other religions with the fake "respect" we have for the "beautiful painting" of a 3-year-old.
No one actually benevolently mocks religion anymore.
@quercus @pepsi_man @sun @Rasterman Countless Jewish comedians, actors, and screen writers have spent entire careers mocking Jews, Jewish culture, and the Jewish religion. But then again, revolution, subversion, mocking, and transgressivism is a key component of Jewish culture and how they interact with other cultures.
To me, when people make the argument that Python helped to undermine the thing Cleese now misses so badly, what they're referencing (without realizing it) is the way their comedy did the same thing we recognize as dangerous in Jewish entertainment. Were the skits and jokes funny? Yes. Did they often have a point in terms of cultural critique? Yes. Did Cleese and the rest of them make their stuff with malicious intent? No.
But looking back at it, looking at things as they are now, and on a gut level we recognize the subversion and transgressive poison that ate away at the culture's foundation. Seinfeld could be funny, in the moment you first saw it. Yet after a while, when you've had time to digest it, you come to deeply dislike the characters. They're awful, petty, stupid, supremely selfish people. Their actions don't just make their own lives worse, their stupidity and selfishness seeps out to harm everything else around them. It was a Jewish comedy being funny as Jewish comedy often is: mocking, denigrating, subversive, transgressive. In a word, corrosive.
Python was funny, is often still funny. But it too was corrosive in its own way. You can't mock a thing and not harm it, you can't mock a people and not degrade them. Instead of using their talents to help build up Anglo culture, they threw acid on its support beams. It wasn't intentional, it wasn't malicious, but it's what happened.
To me, when people make the argument that Python helped to undermine the thing Cleese now misses so badly, what they're referencing (without realizing it) is the way their comedy did the same thing we recognize as dangerous in Jewish entertainment. Were the skits and jokes funny? Yes. Did they often have a point in terms of cultural critique? Yes. Did Cleese and the rest of them make their stuff with malicious intent? No.
But looking back at it, looking at things as they are now, and on a gut level we recognize the subversion and transgressive poison that ate away at the culture's foundation. Seinfeld could be funny, in the moment you first saw it. Yet after a while, when you've had time to digest it, you come to deeply dislike the characters. They're awful, petty, stupid, supremely selfish people. Their actions don't just make their own lives worse, their stupidity and selfishness seeps out to harm everything else around them. It was a Jewish comedy being funny as Jewish comedy often is: mocking, denigrating, subversive, transgressive. In a word, corrosive.
Python was funny, is often still funny. But it too was corrosive in its own way. You can't mock a thing and not harm it, you can't mock a people and not degrade them. Instead of using their talents to help build up Anglo culture, they threw acid on its support beams. It wasn't intentional, it wasn't malicious, but it's what happened.
@Charles_in_Charge @pepsi_man @sun @Rasterman I don't disagree with you on that, but I believe the mocking was merely a symptom of the decline of the west, not it's cause. Just like the 1960s counterculture.
Today's conservatives (and also the "tradwife" movement as an example) often glorify the American 1950s, which were in fact an era of soulless consumerism - the 1960s probably were a mere reaction to this.
The seeds were sown much earlier and it no coincidence that Nietzsche claimed that "god was dead" in his day and age. He wouldn't have done it in the middle ages.
The roots of the rot probably lie in the industrial revolution which up-ended people's lives like no event since the neolithic revolution 10,000 years before.
Today's conservatives (and also the "tradwife" movement as an example) often glorify the American 1950s, which were in fact an era of soulless consumerism - the 1960s probably were a mere reaction to this.
The seeds were sown much earlier and it no coincidence that Nietzsche claimed that "god was dead" in his day and age. He wouldn't have done it in the middle ages.
The roots of the rot probably lie in the industrial revolution which up-ended people's lives like no event since the neolithic revolution 10,000 years before.
Replies
0
No replies yet.