Yinko
Well-known member
I'm pretty sure Mockingbird is already a banned book in some states.
Five minutes of hate news
- Thread starter PsihoKekec
- Start date
Blasterbot
Well-known member
yes is banned for wrong think and offending people with mean words.
What I find hilarious is that the typical Leftist response is "well, the other version is there for people to read, too! They have a choice!".
Yeah, but if the sanitized version is the only one constantly pushed in schools, university, and culture, the original would gradually fade into obscurity to the point where the next generations wouldn't know about it. All they'd know is the sanitized version and whatever content it has, a few outliers aside.
One character is a lover of steak and beer in the original work? The sanitized version has him changed to be a vegetarian that likes carrot juice. Three generations of kids down the line?
"Don't you know that [he] likes cauliflower steak and mushrooms?"
Christ, this is what the fucking Party in 1984 did!
I'm literally quoting CABAL here. Fucking CABAL! "Control the media, control the mind."
Altering history is a fucking dangerous precedent that I'd expect from monsters like the Nazi Party or the Party (1984). Those who attempt it should be viewed with suspicion, disdain, and even outright hostility.
Fucking vandals.
Yeah, but if the sanitized version is the only one constantly pushed in schools, university, and culture, the original would gradually fade into obscurity to the point where the next generations wouldn't know about it. All they'd know is the sanitized version and whatever content it has, a few outliers aside.
One character is a lover of steak and beer in the original work? The sanitized version has him changed to be a vegetarian that likes carrot juice. Three generations of kids down the line?
"Don't you know that [he] likes cauliflower steak and mushrooms?"
Christ, this is what the fucking Party in 1984 did!
I'm literally quoting CABAL here. Fucking CABAL! "Control the media, control the mind."
Altering history is a fucking dangerous precedent that I'd expect from monsters like the Nazi Party or the Party (1984). Those who attempt it should be viewed with suspicion, disdain, and even outright hostility.
Fucking vandals.
Zyobot
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Once had a history professor who espoused that same sort of Lefty line, if being quoted in my area's local newspaper is worth anything.
In fact, his rebuttal basically boiled down to history not being literally erased, because there'll still be plenty of books and other accounts available for interested readers. Of course, what he left out is that the masses usually don't bother with those — and since the institutions will be left to decide what the general population learns or feels inclined to learn (as you correctly note)... then yeah, that'll absolutely distort the prevailing narrative and people's perception of what actually happened. At best, I think my professor was projecting his own inclinations onto others that don't share them. At worst, he was being deliberately obtuse, as I could practically picture the smug glint in his eyes when being interviewed.
Yinko
Well-known member
Eh, worse really. The Nazi's pushed a version of history that glorified their past and demonized their enemies. The modern Left has pushed for an alteration that literally erases fascism from history. Apparently no one ever told them the parable about forgetting the past and being doomed to repeat it. 1984 is kind of clownworld-ish, in that society would break down before you got to the point described, North Korea and Twitter are two examples that reach about the furthest extreme towards 1984 you can reasonably get to before things just don't clunk along enough to go further.
I'm going to point out that by the standards of his day, Kipling was not only intensely political, but often entirely "woke" in terms of standing up for what he saw as correct principle, regardless of popularity or political benefit. For example, here's an absolutely scathing bit of poetry that Kipling sent to Lord Stanhope in protest of the ennoblement of Clifford Allen as Baron of Hurtwood:
Oh belted Sons of Treason
Press onward to the Lords,
Where six safe months in prison,
Can win such great rewards!
From Jutland to Judæa
Bob up, ye Dead, and sing!
He'll sit with wicked Beatty,
And Allenby and Byng!
Through toil and tribulation
And tumult of our war,
He sought the consummation
Of peace forever more.
A million fell beside him,
By land and air and sea,
In order to provide him
With breakfast, lunch and tea!
Yes, Kipling literally called a popular new Peer of the Realm a belted son of treason. And did so to the Prime Minister at the time, who despite not being in the same party was a political ally of said new Peer.
Oh belted Sons of Treason
Press onward to the Lords,
Where six safe months in prison,
Can win such great rewards!
From Jutland to Judæa
Bob up, ye Dead, and sing!
He'll sit with wicked Beatty,
And Allenby and Byng!
Through toil and tribulation
And tumult of our war,
He sought the consummation
Of peace forever more.
A million fell beside him,
By land and air and sea,
In order to provide him
With breakfast, lunch and tea!
Yes, Kipling literally called a popular new Peer of the Realm a belted son of treason. And did so to the Prime Minister at the time, who despite not being in the same party was a political ally of said new Peer.
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
Yeah, Kipling gets a lot of hate for "Glorifying Imperialism" when he did nothing of the sort, he was actually quite respectful of different races (How many people remember Mowgli was an Indian?)
Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,
Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God's great Judgment Seat;
But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
When two strong men stand face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth!
Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,
Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God's great Judgment Seat;
But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
When two strong men stand face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth!
The "never shall the twain shall meet" part was pretty accurate. People never heeded it, however.
One look at all the shit that's gone down and continues to go down between the West and Middle-East is perfect proof of that.
One look at all the shit that's gone down and continues to go down between the West and Middle-East is perfect proof of that.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
The problem isn't that the wokies are standing up for what they see as 'correct principle,' the problem is that their principles aren't just wrong, they're incredibly wrong, and the way that they're willing to lie, cheat, steal, and destroy, in order to push for them demonstrates that amply.
IIRC wasn't the "White Man's Burden" poem explicitly satirical? As in, he was actually against that attitude and was mocking it?
Yinko
Well-known member
Maybe he was just a dick? Making fun of anyone and everyone around him.
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
Spanish degenerates are really hurrying to make up for the time lost under Franco.
@LordSunhawk Could we please have that "vomit" Like, now?
"Oh, it's fine to fuck animals so long as they aren't physically hurt."
What the fuck is wrong with these freaks?
"Oh, it's fine to fuck animals so long as they aren't physically hurt."
What the fuck is wrong with these freaks?
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
Yeah, White Man's Burden has lines calling out anybody profiting from carrying the Burden, and demanding that they build infrastructure at their own expense for the benefit of the colonized.
In general, Kipling was a fan of the common man and didn't care for the elites. You'll find all manner of heroic beggars (Kim), woodcutters (Mowgli before being adopted by Raksha), Ghurkas, and soldiers with boots on the ground. A significant number of his heroes are orphans and the rest are poor, outcasts, and otherwise spat on by society. The villains he drew from the ranks of the elites, there are a great many incompetent officers, scheming rich folk, greedy avaricious kings, and brutal and arrogant chiefs. This is slightly confounded by the animal characters, who don't follow human social standards, but even then Raksha and Father wolf aren't the pack leaders. Characters like Baloo, Kaa, and Bagheera tend to be awesome due to their own accomplishments, and in Baloo* and Kaa's case the tremendous knowledge and wisdom they've acquired over the years rather than any kind of rank. Kipling heroes, human or animal, invariably earn their power rather than being born with it.
At the time that was pretty progressive but today the Overton window has shifted so far over it's become based.
*Disney really did Baloo dirty, turning the master of Jungle Law who teaches Mowgli hundreds of languages and the habits and territory of every single animal in the Jungle into a buffoon.
Blasterbot
Well-known member
the song however was super catchy. loved Bear Necessities.
mrttao
Well-known member
Actually, they are allowed to hurt the animal too. So long as it is not so hurt as to need a vet.
A lot of minor injuries do not require vet intervention
Yinko
Well-known member
You know, it's a really damn fine line between this and the dystopia from Three Worlds Collide where rape sans permanent injury is considered ok and any who oppose that view are just horribly prudish. The whole MAP acceptance thing is the exact same trend from a different angle. For an ideology all about consent and the avoidance of harm, they sure are diving head-first into their logical inversion.
It’s not entirely clear, to be honest.
Kipling’s poem was selectively quoted by the epically racist Senator Tillman as an argument against the Treaty of Paris, but Tillman was spinning it as, “See, civilizing the savages is expensive, we have no such duty and it is our entitlement as the superior race to simply take as we please.” Which was clearly opposed to what Kipling meant, but you can take Kipling’s meaning as either for or against “benevolent” colonialism.
Keep in mind, perhaps, that people are normally allowed to hurt animals quite a bit more than that before animal abuse laws actually kick in. Animals fall into the difficult legal category of being actual property, not persons, and moreover, a category of property where being bred, killed, and eaten is one of their primary purposes.