rwhitisissle

joined 5 months ago
[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago

That's very explicitly what the author of the manga was doing when they named it, by the way.

[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago

This isn’t any worse than manga misspelling words to show a character has an accent.

So, to provide some context, a couple of years ago, this specific manga got really, really popular on reddit's r/manga subreddit, and a bunch of fan translator groups picked it up. It was released on Twitter one page at a time, and at a certain point the number of translations got so out of hand that people eventually started making parody translations of it. This is one of those parody translations.

[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago

That article is straight dog shit. The author is basically saying that Ted Kaczynski is the stylistic precursor to a particular brand of white nationalist terrorism because he 1) killed people and 2) had a manifesto. That's it. The article even states:

Effectively, Tarrant followed Kaczynski’s eco-terrorism but reinterpreted it to employ white supremacy and Islamophobia.

Brenton Tarrant was the Christ Church Shooter. He hated non-whites and Muslims. Saying he "followed [Kaczynski's] eco-terrorism but reinterpreted it to employ white supremacy" is, at best, misleading, and at worst a bald-faced lie. Tarrant had virtually no ideological connection with Kaczynski. He described himself as an eco-facsist because he was a dimwitted 4chan kid who blamed overpopulation on Muslims. For all of his flaws, Kaczynski was an incredibly intelligent and well-educated anarchist and would have despised Tarrant. He didn't "reinterpret ecoterrorism as white nationalism." He just labeled himself something he thought sounded cool without understanding it.

[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

maybe the author is also a white supremacist.

What does white supremacism have to do with Ted Kaczynski?

[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I can't imagine being 20 years old and being anything close to enthusiastic about Hillary Clinton. I also have to wonder how many of them were caught up in the moment of "Oh, are we clapping now?! She said a thing about...pokemon? Weird, but everyone's cheering and since I'm a Hilldog stan and going with the flow is pretty much my entire personality I'll clap and cheer too!"

[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago

I think I initially read that on a Vox article, but I looked again today and it looks like I must have read that somewhere else. They're also saying that's not the case and that there were false reports going around about that. I guess the rumor mill got me this time. Which is good, because no one deserves to be fired for talking openly about sex.

[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

Maybe it's supposed to imply that boyfriend is an attribute of the particular girl. Like saying she isn't someone's boyfriend. It's probably a holdover from the original data architecture and nobody ever bothered to modify the table later on in case there's a select somewhere that expects that field to exist.

[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Sure, and they still managed to pass the alien and sedition acts. Saying they weren't a monolith is a way of dismissing the mountain of evidence that suggests that, for most of them, participation in the democratic process of an inchoate American republic was intended only for a small segment of the population - literate (i.e. wealthy) white men. I'd suggest A People's History of the United States if you want a better perspective on that.

[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

As much of a Berniebro that I was, I've come to realize that the Democratic party is horrifically balkanized. There's this expectation that the progressive wing of the party is supposed to hold its nose every year and vote for the neoliberal candidate. The problem is that this is not a two way street. Your hardliner party supporters that wanted a Clinton presidency wouldn't have voted for Bernie. I knew some of them in real life. The DNC actively and aggressively poisoned that particular well early on. Bernie wasn't a "potential candidate" - he was an enemy of Clinton. Plain and simple. They all said that if Bernie had gotten the nomination, they would have stayed home on election day.

[–] rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago (3 children)

a grand tradition of what to do with tyrants.

America as a nation was created by a subset of landed gentry who didn't like paying taxes. They wanted to make Washington king. The founding fathers were basically the Megamind meme where Tighten (yes, it's spelled Tighten, not "Titan") says to the Mayor of the city: "More like under new management."

view more: next ›