▲ 145 ▼ But according to the libs round here, ChInA BaDDDDddd (lemmy.ml) submitted 1 year ago by jankforlife@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml 185 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (2 children) Sorry how so? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago (1 child) nor is OP saying their meme answers every argument. OP inadvertently does so with the title. Imagine if i made a similar meme, comparing the poverty rates in the US (which is like anywhere from 10-15% living below the poverty line) to the poverty rates in Cuba (which is like 40-80% depending on what sources or definitions we're using) and i said, "But apparently, tHe uS BaDDDDD". For time's sake, let's not get into the nitty gritty of why this may be the case. Wouldn't you say something like, "that's not why we criticise the US though", or "that's not what the 'US bad' discourse is about"? Wouldn't it feel disingenuous that I've reduced the whole discussion on whether the US/Capitalism is bad to poverty rates? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago So if you saw a post similar to the example i gave, it would not seem disingenuous to reduce the whole US argument to one talking point which may or may not even be a popular one? You have to realize that what this OP did can also be done in favour of pro-US/pro-capitalism rhetoric. You just have to permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (2 children) Sorry how so? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago (1 child) nor is OP saying their meme answers every argument. OP inadvertently does so with the title. Imagine if i made a similar meme, comparing the poverty rates in the US (which is like anywhere from 10-15% living below the poverty line) to the poverty rates in Cuba (which is like 40-80% depending on what sources or definitions we're using) and i said, "But apparently, tHe uS BaDDDDD". For time's sake, let's not get into the nitty gritty of why this may be the case. Wouldn't you say something like, "that's not why we criticise the US though", or "that's not what the 'US bad' discourse is about"? Wouldn't it feel disingenuous that I've reduced the whole discussion on whether the US/Capitalism is bad to poverty rates? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago So if you saw a post similar to the example i gave, it would not seem disingenuous to reduce the whole US argument to one talking point which may or may not even be a popular one? You have to realize that what this OP did can also be done in favour of pro-US/pro-capitalism rhetoric. You just have to permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago (1 child) nor is OP saying their meme answers every argument. OP inadvertently does so with the title. Imagine if i made a similar meme, comparing the poverty rates in the US (which is like anywhere from 10-15% living below the poverty line) to the poverty rates in Cuba (which is like 40-80% depending on what sources or definitions we're using) and i said, "But apparently, tHe uS BaDDDDD". For time's sake, let's not get into the nitty gritty of why this may be the case. Wouldn't you say something like, "that's not why we criticise the US though", or "that's not what the 'US bad' discourse is about"? Wouldn't it feel disingenuous that I've reduced the whole discussion on whether the US/Capitalism is bad to poverty rates? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago So if you saw a post similar to the example i gave, it would not seem disingenuous to reduce the whole US argument to one talking point which may or may not even be a popular one? You have to realize that what this OP did can also be done in favour of pro-US/pro-capitalism rhetoric. You just have to permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago (1 child) nor is OP saying their meme answers every argument. OP inadvertently does so with the title. Imagine if i made a similar meme, comparing the poverty rates in the US (which is like anywhere from 10-15% living below the poverty line) to the poverty rates in Cuba (which is like 40-80% depending on what sources or definitions we're using) and i said, "But apparently, tHe uS BaDDDDD". For time's sake, let's not get into the nitty gritty of why this may be the case. Wouldn't you say something like, "that's not why we criticise the US though", or "that's not what the 'US bad' discourse is about"? Wouldn't it feel disingenuous that I've reduced the whole discussion on whether the US/Capitalism is bad to poverty rates? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago So if you saw a post similar to the example i gave, it would not seem disingenuous to reduce the whole US argument to one talking point which may or may not even be a popular one? You have to realize that what this OP did can also be done in favour of pro-US/pro-capitalism rhetoric. You just have to permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago So if you saw a post similar to the example i gave, it would not seem disingenuous to reduce the whole US argument to one talking point which may or may not even be a popular one? You have to realize that what this OP did can also be done in favour of pro-US/pro-capitalism rhetoric. You just have to permalink fedilink source parent
[+] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -6 points 1 year ago So if you saw a post similar to the example i gave, it would not seem disingenuous to reduce the whole US argument to one talking point which may or may not even be a popular one? You have to realize that what this OP did can also be done in favour of pro-US/pro-capitalism rhetoric. You just have to permalink fedilink source parent