Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
I need somebody to explain this Israel-related thing to me
Fans of The Nostalgia Critic have probably seen his Superman IV review, which he did along with Linkara. In that one, they talk about the implausibility of Superman suggesting everybody get rid of their nuclear weapons and it being universally accepted as a great idea. Linkara says to Critic that if you're Israel, you probably want to hang onto your nukes in case you get attacked.
Afterwards, I read that there were two backlashes to that part. One was from people who didn't like Linkara seeming to endorse all of Israel's actions. (Which I'm not sure he was although, since he's conservative on a lot of issues, it wouldn't surprise me if he did.) The other was from people who "thought he was being disloyal".
Wait, what?
Apparently their logic went like this: "Lewis Lovhaug, you are Jewish, and as a Jew it is your DUTY to be 100% pro-Israel. No. Matter. WHAT! Shame on you!"
I'm aware that being Jewish does not mean that you are automatically raised to view Israel as a perfect nation incapable of doing wrong. Guys like Ezra Klein, Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky, and others have all called Israel on some of its questionable behaviour. But here's my question: if a guy is Jewish, how common is it for him to be expected to be 100% pro-Israel, no matter what? And how does it make sense to demand somebody take that position just because of their race? Isn't it better to encourage them to do some research on the situation, hear what both sides have to say about who's at fault, and finally make up their own mind?
Afterwards, I read that there were two backlashes to that part. One was from people who didn't like Linkara seeming to endorse all of Israel's actions. (Which I'm not sure he was although, since he's conservative on a lot of issues, it wouldn't surprise me if he did.) The other was from people who "thought he was being disloyal".
Wait, what?
Apparently their logic went like this: "Lewis Lovhaug, you are Jewish, and as a Jew it is your DUTY to be 100% pro-Israel. No. Matter. WHAT! Shame on you!"
I'm aware that being Jewish does not mean that you are automatically raised to view Israel as a perfect nation incapable of doing wrong. Guys like Ezra Klein, Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky, and others have all called Israel on some of its questionable behaviour. But here's my question: if a guy is Jewish, how common is it for him to be expected to be 100% pro-Israel, no matter what? And how does it make sense to demand somebody take that position just because of their race? Isn't it better to encourage them to do some research on the situation, hear what both sides have to say about who's at fault, and finally make up their own mind?
Comments
It's a stupid, unhealthy attitude.
Edit@Abyss_Worm: And that is why I stopped watching Linkara's videos, even though I think he's pretty funny.
In this case it was actually sort of justified, since they weren't so much talking about whether or not disarmament was a good idea as they were saying "This is so unrealistic and stupid. It takes more than a guy saying 'You know what? We should get rid of all the nukes!' to make everybody agree to get rid of all their nukes." But that's pretty much what happened in the movie. Superman said "Nuclear weapons are bad!" and literally everybody said "Hey, he's right!" And every single country in the world, without exception, disarmed.
Me too. Even though this is a little bit of a derail, as OP I'm fine with it. I literally had to stop watching his review of "The Dark Knight Strikes Again" because he kept on saying stuff I didn't agree with. I was ping-ponging between being amused and being irritated, and finally I decided that it wasn't worth watching the rest.
Also, he once reviewed a Batman story called "Fortunate Son", which was written with the following message: "Rock music is bad!" The story has this rock star lose his mind and go on a crime spree, with a group of fans following him around and just going along with everything he does because he's famous. Anyway, as I recall they go to the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame (or a stand-in for it), and the crazy rock star guy says "In Europe, they let people into places like this for free!" And that's when Linkara says something like "Right, and how are those European countries who raise taxes to pay for that doing right now?" as if he thought the writer (who's apparently even more conservative than Linkara) was telling us that Europe had the right idea...by having the villain say so! Either he completely misinterpreted what he was reading, or he'd been dying for an excuse to work a "high taxes are bad" statement into one of his reviews.
Also, Linkara doesn't understand objectivism.
>Make Lightbringer
AK AK AK
That said being a shitty comic writer doesn't make criticisms of other shitty comics invalid.