this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
1122 points (100.0% liked)

196

17716 readers
742 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ertebolle@kbin.social 87 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Batman oppresses crime and everybody thinks he’s cool, I don’t see why oppressing fascists should be any different

[–] somethingsnappy@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Batman is a billionaire vigilante that destroys half of Gotham every few days. What are you talking about. He would be the first to go full fascist.

[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

He would be the first to go full fascist.

If I recall correctly, he pretty much did in the Christopher Nolan Batman films.

[–] toasteecup@lemmynsfw.com 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Full surveillance state, not sure if facist fully applies but definitely crossed some significant lines in those movies

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

He knew he did, which is why he built in the "destroy it Lucious" safeguard and gave him the "do it" button.

Man knew he was out of line, still did it for the greater good, but then striped himself of that power immediately and permanently.

Ethically grey, landing somewhere around neutral good. In the range of "keep an eye on his squirrelly ass."

[–] VubDapple@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Can someone explain batman's appeal? Is it just that he's so angry and traumatized all the time?

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Part of the appeal I think is he's "relatable" because he doesn't have real super powers. In my opinion, he's less relatable because he has enough money to functionally have superpowers anyway. The normal people who end up with super powers almost certainly share more in common with us "normal" people.

[–] Moosemouse@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 2 years ago

The thing I take away from Batman is that if you think a problem though, you can prepare for what might happen and have a response ready, making you look like a super hero for those without the foresight. It’s a power anyone can have, so it’s very relatable and actually a valuable lesson.

Also, in many of the stories he is a terribly broken and traumatized man, and those sorts of characters are usually more interesting. Batman has just been around for so long he was brooding and sullen before brooding and sullen were cool which gives him additional cred. As the “flipside” to the Boy Scout Superman (at least at times) but the two have the same goals is where I really enjoy the character, I think the Justice League show did a very good job there in playing the two against each other.

One thing is, like others have said, he has had very different personalities depending on writing so you may really only like certain versions of him and that’s valid.

[–] Ser_Salty@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago

He's voiced by Kevin Conroy

[–] b3nsn0w@pricefield.org 2 points 2 years ago

it's a power fantasy. to be honest, he's very close to the punisher but without saying the quiet part out loud

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Stoneykins@lemmy.one 16 points 2 years ago

No, you don't understand, batman is rich so he is allowed to use violence.

[–] bl_r@beehaw.org 70 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Being tolerant to intolerance leads to more intolerance. Being intolerant to intolerance does not lead to more intolerance.

It is not just OK, but necessary to be intolerant towards fascist ideologies.

[–] Xariphon@kbin.social 40 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Punch every Nazi. Every single one.

[–] Cube6392@beehaw.org 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Also punch people who tell you not to punch Nazis. Those are Nazis

[–] Space_Jamke@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

"If you punch a Nazi, the number of Nazis in the world remains the same!"

"Punch two."

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

If you see someone punch a nazi, no you didn't. That nazi fell.

[–] Vodik_VDK@lemmy.fmhy.ml 4 points 2 years ago

I believe Nazis should be black-bagged instead of punched; punching them will humiliate the individual, but may also unite the group or serve as propagnda for accelerating their agenda.

There's some 48 Laws of Power (it's okay, you can cringe.) such-and-such about only attacking an enemy if you can utterly crush them, being careful to avoid leaving them wounded or humiliated , and retaining your initiative by maintaining the secrecy of your position. Bagging does all of this, and improves your odds of retaining your right to bear arms in the eyes of the law.

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago

I read this to the tune of climb every mountain and now i need the rest of the lyrics pls.

[–] Sonny@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 years ago

I could not agree more!

[–] raltoid@lemmy.world 53 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So like how doctors are oppressing death and disease?

[–] rustyfish@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If the pandemic showed us one thing, then that there are people who will side with death and disease just to own the libs.

[–] Cabrio@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

At this rate owning the libs will become the greatest cause of death amongst conservatives. They finally got the message and are trying to do us a favour.

[–] ventrix@lemm.ee 50 points 2 years ago (1 children)

For those interested on further reading, the paradox of tolerance: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

[–] AnarchoYeasty@beehaw.org 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I see this answer given a lot on reddit when this paradox is brought up so I'll post it here too. There is no paradox of tolerance because tolerance is not a rule but a social contract. When someone is intolerant they have violated said social contract and thus are no longer covered by it and are not granted tolerance. We tolerate those who tolerate others.

[–] los_wochos@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago

It's basically the copyleft of society.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] raspberry_confetti@lemmy.ml 41 points 2 years ago

Come on, old man, you and i used to punch Nazis, and now you're defending them?

[–] StarlightRose@lemmy.blahaj.zone 30 points 2 years ago (2 children)

"Sorry, I just dont believe your fascist ideologyjshould be exposed to kids, why do you want to groom them?"

Would using their arguments against them make them angry? I hope so

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 17 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It probably would not because they don't believe in the argument anyway most of the time. They don't argue in good faith. They use that argument because it's something we would disagree with, but it's something they want to do.

[–] ThatsTheTicket@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Yeah it's almost never actually about the kids, they're used as an excuse to spread hate

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ThatsTheTicket@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Yeah it's almost never actually about the kids, they're used as an excuse to spread hate

[–] FuckFashMods@kbin.social 22 points 2 years ago

I smile the same way anytime a Trumper complains about oppression too

[–] LastoftheDinosaurs@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago
[–] Freez@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It’s a hard life being a democrat. (I don’t mean the party.)

[–] metaStatic@kbin.social 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

imagine being a republican (not the party)

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

You mean someone opposed to monarchy? Yeah, it can be difficult at times.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SuddenDownpour@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Who has been a bad fascist? Who needs a good spanking? 😈

[–] Holzkohlen@feddit.de 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

"bad fascist" implies the existence of a good fascist, no? Ahhh, because of the old saying "The only good fascist is a dead fascist.

[–] SuddenDownpour@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

The good fascist is the roleplayer who gets in all fours in my bed to perform the fall of Nazi Germany /jk

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] Cyzaine@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago

Sisko punched Q.

That's a metaphor but also what happened.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sisko punches Nazis every time.

Which is why Sisko is the best captain and DS9 is the best Trek.

Also Garak is the best <3

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] homo_ignotus@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago

This is Dax slander! It's outrageous!

[–] Foresight@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Marxism-leninism isn't fascist though

[–] asphaltkooky@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago (1 children)

OP didn't mention it, yet you felt the need to defend it.

[–] Foresight@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah a lot of libs call Marxist-Leninist fascists

[–] DeanFogg@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

Welllll Marx did say you had to have a charismatic fascist leader to lead the revolution. Then once the means are seized he gives power back to the people. The caveats between point A and B and probably all of point A is what a liberal would take issue with

[–] b3nsn0w@pricefield.org 4 points 2 years ago (3 children)

it's the same bullshit under a different flag. the shit that happened in the eastern bloc was just as oppressive and authoritarian, the simple fact that it's politically considered "left" and not "right" doesn't make it any better.

and the worst part about this world view is that it tends to divide the world into two groups of authies that are the same group that larp against each other, and a bunch of indecisive schmucks in the middle who are weak for not "fully embracing" their "side" and joining one of the two groups. while what's really happening is that those schmucks are just capable of empathy unlike the tankies or nazis who insist they don't totally do the same shit as each other.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Electric_Druid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Unfathomably based.

[–] darkseer@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Fascism has little to do with ideology. It's a refusal to allow any views other than your own to be voiced in your presence.

[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago

This meme format has to die. How dare you to put such words on Dax

load more comments
view more: next ›