logo Sign In

Jeebus

User Group
Members
Join date
24-Mar-2016
Last activity
7-Sep-2021
Posts
2,199

Post History

Post
#1101548
Topic
Ranking the Star Wars films
Time

I actually feel the opposite. I think the barge sequence is decent, but it isn’t something that justifies watching the rest of the movie for me. I’m actually not a fan of the Rancor fight, so it ends up feeling like filler. The only reason I’d ever have to sit down and watch the whole movie, is just to see the throneroom scenes at the end. With Rogue One, there are scenes throughout that I enjoy. I enjoy pretty much the entirety of the Jedha sequence, for example.

Post
#1101530
Topic
General Star Wars <strong>Random Thoughts</strong> Thread
Time

SilverWook said:

Jeebus said:

Found some dude on Youtube uploading clips from Fan Edits on here and passing them off as his own. Not cool.

Link? Send in PM if you need to.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6N-J2U3GppRePZSJX_TN9Q/videos

It’s only 3 videos. The ROTS opening is from Aalenfae’s now defunct prequel edits, and I believe the ROTJ ending is from Ziggy’s edit. Not sure where the General Grievous battle is from, though.

Post
#1101387
Topic
Ranking the Star Wars films
Time

Lord Haseo said:

Jeebus said:

ROTJ is a disappointment so many levels that I have no problem putting R1 (and even TFA, in my opinion) above it. Not sure if I agree with ROTS though.

It has a multitude of problems but it also has some of the greater moments in the Saga. And I’m talking about character shit, not spectacles like Vader butchering Rebels with his lightsaber. In general ROTJ had more substance and for that reason alone I can deal with the Ewoks because I care about the Galaxy and the characters trying to liberate it.

The excruciating 40 minutes at Jabba’s palace alone is enough to make me want to watch something else. The Luke and Vader scenes are great, but they still can’t justify me wasting my time with the parts that I don’t enjoy.

Post
#1101187
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

TV’s Frink said:

I’m not saying he shouldn’t care about children starving because he’s not starving. I’m saying he shouldn’t bitch about black people being offended by something that they are offended by. There’s a difference.

I don’t think there is.

Well then there’s nothing further to discuss. If you consider that dismissive then so be it.

evidence of bad attitude.

Whatever sigh eyeroll clapping gif etcetera.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

FTFY

Post
#1101160
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.

I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.

And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.

Let’s say hypothetically that you could, though. There is a very large contingent of black people that are mad about Jack Black’s name. Would you still say that it’s silly?

Post
#1100896
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jeebus said:

http://www.theonion.com/article/soldier-excited-take-over-fathers-old-afghanistan--56731

Fun fact! We’ve been if Afghanistan for 16 years, and now Trump wants to stay! Old Trump was right, Afghanistan is a disaster.

Trump Settles on Afghan Strategy Expected to Raise Troop Levels

ALL THE TIMES DONALD TRUMP SAID THE U.S. SHOULD GET OUT OF AFGHANISTAN

Wow, that looks pretty bad. What does the #Resistance have to say about this?

Kaine: US Must Be ‘Invested’ In Afghanistan

Oh my! It’s almost like the Democrats, Trump and Neocons are all on the same page!

Post
#1100858
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

I feel like not everyone understands what makes something white privilege.

For example, whining about the possible connotations of “thug” has nothing to do with one’s accomplishments or how homeless one is.

I still don’t understand how thug has racial connotations.

Despite everyone’s desperate attempts to explain it to you.

I just don’t understand why it is wrong for me to call some violent criminal, no matter the person’s skin color, a thug.

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

I feel like not everyone understands what makes something white privilege.

For example, whining about the possible connotations of “thug” has nothing to do with one’s accomplishments or how homeless one is.

I still don’t understand how thug has racial connotations.

Despite everyone’s desperate attempts to explain it to you.

Post
#1100851
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

I feel like not everyone understands what makes something white privilege.

For example, whining about the possible connotations of “thug” has nothing to do with one’s accomplishments or how homeless one is.

I still don’t understand how thug has racial connotations.

Despite everyone’s desperate attempts to explain it to you.

Post
#1100831
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

I’m gonna do it anyway. Personally, I think the problem of ‘white privilege’ needs to be framed differently. It’s too easy for the concept of ‘white privilege’ to be taken personally, as I feel that Warbler has shown. In the eyes of some; ‘white privilege’ belittles their accomplishments by telling them “that’s great and all, but it wasn’t all you, you had it easier because you’re white.” I also think that the term lacks nuance. It’s been brought up here before; but it’s silly to say that a homeless white man has privilege, when he’s on the lowest level of society. He doesn’t have any special rights, or advantages, he’s the definition of disadvantaged. Perhaps he has it slightly better than a homeless black man, I don’t know, but it’s downright insulting to say that he’s privileged.

Post
#1100573
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

CatBus said:

Jeebus said:

CatBus said:

darth_ender said:

I’m going to probably really get it for this, but I’m going to say it anyway.

Not everyone that upholds Confederate leaders or their statues is in favor of slavery, white supremacy, or racism of any kind. I served my mission in Atlanta, GA, and there were many people who idolized the leadership of the Confederacy and minimizing the slavery aspect.

You see, I believe that a large part of people’s unwillingness to let go of that side of history is due to the very nature of the Civil War and its loss. Sociology is an interesting thing, and people often shape their self-image based on complex factors. After the loss of the Civil War, people had to reshape their thinking. It was a crushing blow to their self-image. As those states were restructuring their laws, economy, and moral outlook, people had to adopt different means of accepting the loss of the War. The South has a very distinct culture, and that loss was a threat to their own culture. Over time, many came to accept that slavery and racism were wrong, but adopted a view that the Civil War was about much bigger things than that, and that slavery was merely a secondary issue. As with any nation’s or culture’s history, a certain amount of apologetics and whitewashing go into it in order to avoid the psychological dissonance one feels of being part of something unethical. Remember, many Germans should have known that their own Third Reich was engaged in an unjust and evil war with accompanying horrors, but they turned a blind eye because they could not believe that they could engage in something so immoral.

My point to this is that there may be good qualities to many Confederate leaders. There are many good qualities of Southerners who uphold them as idols.

BUT

What they and we need to understand is that there really was an evil issue at the heart of the CSA. We need to be understanding of their cultural identity as it is so wrapped up in the good of that short-lived nation. We do need to remove those statues and flags from places of prominence. However, we must do so with respect and with accompanying education so that the people whose identities are threatened understand the true nature of the Confederate cause. This will avoid violent situations and will result in a better educated, and possibly less resentful and racist, nation. When you rip down a deeply ingrained cultural icon, sometimes all it does is validate certain misguided beliefs.

I blame the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan jump-started a period of enormous prosperity in Germany, but only in West Germany. Nazism thrives on the fabrication of a distant past golden age, and the West was simply too prosperous for many to look beyond the present. The East on the other hand jumped from hardship to hardship, and imagining that things were better in the past was an easier thing to swallow.

Why not blame the Communist regime that the East was stuck under that made it impossible for them to attain any level of prosperity?

Blame was the wrong word. But without the Marshall Plan, I feel both halves of Germany would have yearned for the past, so I feel the Communist regime was in many ways beside the point. The Marshall Plan actually solved the problem IMO, just not everywhere. That’s not really a “blame” thing, but I couldn’t think of a better word at the time.

Alright, I understand.

Post
#1100571
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

CatBus said:

darth_ender said:

I’m going to probably really get it for this, but I’m going to say it anyway.

Not everyone that upholds Confederate leaders or their statues is in favor of slavery, white supremacy, or racism of any kind. I served my mission in Atlanta, GA, and there were many people who idolized the leadership of the Confederacy and minimizing the slavery aspect.

You see, I believe that a large part of people’s unwillingness to let go of that side of history is due to the very nature of the Civil War and its loss. Sociology is an interesting thing, and people often shape their self-image based on complex factors. After the loss of the Civil War, people had to reshape their thinking. It was a crushing blow to their self-image. As those states were restructuring their laws, economy, and moral outlook, people had to adopt different means of accepting the loss of the War. The South has a very distinct culture, and that loss was a threat to their own culture. Over time, many came to accept that slavery and racism were wrong, but adopted a view that the Civil War was about much bigger things than that, and that slavery was merely a secondary issue. As with any nation’s or culture’s history, a certain amount of apologetics and whitewashing go into it in order to avoid the psychological dissonance one feels of being part of something unethical. Remember, many Germans should have known that their own Third Reich was engaged in an unjust and evil war with accompanying horrors, but they turned a blind eye because they could not believe that they could engage in something so immoral.

My point to this is that there may be good qualities to many Confederate leaders. There are many good qualities of Southerners who uphold them as idols.

BUT

What they and we need to understand is that there really was an evil issue at the heart of the CSA. We need to be understanding of their cultural identity as it is so wrapped up in the good of that short-lived nation. We do need to remove those statues and flags from places of prominence. However, we must do so with respect and with accompanying education so that the people whose identities are threatened understand the true nature of the Confederate cause. This will avoid violent situations and will result in a better educated, and possibly less resentful and racist, nation. When you rip down a deeply ingrained cultural icon, sometimes all it does is validate certain misguided beliefs.

I blame the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan jump-started a period of enormous prosperity in Germany, but only in West Germany. Nazism thrives on the fabrication of a distant past golden age, and the West was simply too prosperous for many to look beyond the present. The East on the other hand jumped from hardship to hardship, and imagining that things were better in the past was an easier thing to swallow.

Why not blame the Communist regime that the East was stuck under that made it impossible for them to attain any level of prosperity?