you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 60 points 8 months ago (67 children)

Jack Black the class traitor who cancelled his Tenacious D tour over a joke at Trump's expense? Fuck Jack Black.

  • source
  • hideshow 67 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 8 months ago

    No no you don’t understand, it’s not okay to be associated with someone who used their freedom of speech to say something controversial about stopping someone who is now currently destroying the world, who we knew would destroy the world, because you have a lucrative contract with Nintendo do a second Mario movie.

    If Jack Black was against Trump then how is he in any way fit to play Bowser? /s

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago (63 children)
  • [–] 44 points 8 months ago

    His musical partner made a joke about a Trump assassination on stage during a tour. There was backlash and they cancelled the remaining tour dates. Jack Black had said they will tour again in the future. His partner, Kyle, apologized. Looking to cancel Jack Black over that is, in my opinion, an overreaction.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (61 children)

    I think it's worse, he either normalizes Trump or places his career above opposing him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 61 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Putting his career above interacting with politics is not worse than actively supporting trump. Cowardly? Yeah probably.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    They made an album in 2019 where they killed Don Jr. and his KKK body guards in the White House and five years later they cancel their tour because KG made a comment about someone killing Don...

    Not to say they've always been political or anything but you can't really undip the toe...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    Made a joke about someone killing him, literally right after the assassination attempt. I think that context is pretty important. I think it was a rash decision that was likely more of an "oh shit I think this will really affect my career" more so than an endorsement of trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago (54 children)

    Had to look this up and there is a bit more to it, no? From what i understand Kyle Gass made a joke on stage about when Trump got shot (like only a few days later) saying something like "dont miss Trump next time" and Jack Black then canceled the remaining conserts. I understand it sucked for everyone that had bought tickets, but imo not unreasonable given the situation..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 54 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 8 months ago (51 children)

    It was Kyle Gass' birthday and they brought a cake on stage and he blew out the candles and for his wish he said "Don't Miss next time".

    I think cancelling the tour over that was completely unreasonable, I think Kyle Gass was not only correct but voicing the opinion of the majority.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 51 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago* (5 children)

    Tours involve a lot of people, ensuring the safety of all of those people is one of the responsibilities of the performers and other decision makers. That is hard to do against a rabid fan base of Trump supporters that Kyle Gass/Tenacious D pissed off.

    If Kyle Gass’ comments only affected him or Jack Black then I am sure they would have just ignored the backlash or made a simple apology. His comment didn’t just affect the two of them but everyone who worked on the tour, including the venue employees, promoters and anyone else in their proximity. Putting the livelihood and safety of the people you are responsible for is an entirely different situation than just acquiescing or giving into the MAGA crowd. It is about being responsible with the platform you have and protecting those who may be hurt by how you use that platform.

    It sucks it went down the way it did as they clearly aren’t Trump supports but taking responsibility to protect others they care about was an empathetic and responsible thing to do for the thousands of people they put at risk during their international tour as any future concert could have become a target.

    Jack Black is not a dumb guy and every thing I have seen or heard of him beforehand gave me the impression that he is a caring and warmhearted person. I can easily see a person like that would make a choice to take the reputational and financial hit to protect his fans safety and wellbeing.

    It wasn’t about whether Kyle Gass was right or the fans didn’t agree with it. Kyle Gass and Jack Black didn’t want to gamble the safety of their fans by stepping into a huge ongoing and developing international political quagmire.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Safety doesn’t only come from solidarity and numbers, danger comes in many forms and through many means.

    Kyle Gass’ comment threatened the safety and security of everyone involved with their international tour, employee, fan and etc at a time of heightened political tension.

    Cancelling the tour was to the benefit of others and should not be seen as Jack Black agreeing with Donald Trump or disagreeing with what Kyle Gass said, it was the responsible thing to do.

    The two things can be true.

    Are you honestly saying that Tenacious D cancelling their tour endangered everyone?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [+] 0 points 8 months ago (40 children)
  • [–] 19 points 8 months ago* (34 children)

    I'm a consequentialist and I adhere to the intolerance paradox. Trump has killed millions indirectly, perhaps even millions directly with his policies, and has called for violence against his opponents, even invaded US population centers with the national guard. He is running labor camps and forcing migrants into them with no due process to enrich himself and the private prison industry.

    I think Trump should be killed, Putin should be killed, Xi Jinping should be killed, etc. The social contract can never be one sided, that isn't how anything works.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 8 months ago (28 children)
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (21 children)

    The world has one fewer asshole in it.

    Taken to the extreme, the next asshole steps up, and gets his head blown off. This continues until the person who steps up isn't an asshole.

    Instead what happened was Trump didn't get his head blown off, and Alex Pretti did.


    P1 trump is an asshole

    P2 fewer assholes in the world is a better world than one with more assholes.

    C1 Had trump been removed from the world, there would be fewer assholes and as such been a better world.

    P3 trump would have probably been succeeded by another asshole.

    C2 had that asshole been removed from the world, the world would have fewer assholes still, and be better for it.

    Instead we have fewer nurses.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (20 children)

    Ah yes, the reign of terror — that worked out so well last time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (19 children)

    Ah yes, the reign of terror

    Typical privileged liberal response. For people target by ICE, they are already in the reign of terror. For women losing their rights, they are already in the reign of terror. For lgbt having their rights removed, they are already in the reign of terror. For those with families in Palestine, they are already in the reign of terror. I'm happy for you, you don't know any of these groups, you have no empathy for these groups.

    Those people being terrorised, no reign of terror. Alex pretti being shot, no reign of terror. A rich cishet white pedophile male being shot? Now you're terrorised.

    Wanna deal with my premises and conclusions now? Would you like to disagree with P1, P2, P3, C1 or C2? Or just tell me your terrorised by fascists having violence visited upon them?

    I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice [...] - MLk letter from Birmingham jail

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (18 children)

    So, let's examine the possibilities:

    1. You are a U.S. citizen and therefor a hypocrite for not having died on your sword already.

    2. You are a foreigner with no skin in the game who should be focusing on problems at home (because there are).

    Robespierre was killed by the end of the reign of terror. Maybe you should look at what happens when we indiscriminately kill people*.

    Edit: because I don't just disagree with them, fuck the conservatives — I just also recognize your suggestions are equally shit and reductive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [+] 2 points 8 months ago* (2 children)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Yes I ignore everything you're saying because you're obviously someone that loves to speak without doing much. Fall on your sword for the cause, or continue bloviating on a public forum. Your choice.

    Mods, you might want to sweep these up too.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

    Yeah I assumed you were associated with the other user in this thread — the essay and your snide comments about my word use more or less confirms this.

    By the way, don't comment on how another person writes and then proceed to fail at capitilizing I. You can keep your essay.

    Edit: By the way 2 electric boogaloo, my point to you is the same as the other user — go out and fall on your sword or continue bloviating on an online forum. Your choice, all I know is it smells like a couple of cowards to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (5 children)

    No lol, I'm not reading this — good luck trying somewhere else dude.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (3 children)

    I'll tell you when I stopped reading. It was the part where you tried to argue that the reign of terror wasn't indiscriminate. People of all classes were sent to the guillotines, most of them the ones I listed. Robespierre himself was eventually killed. It is described as indiscriminate anywhere you read about it.

    What was the eventual result of the reign of terror? Oh, yes — capitalism overtaking feudalism regarding who gets to hoard the wealth. Oh boy, look how well that turned out!

    I didn't read anything beyond this point — but you have earned the tag 'Bloviating Troglodyte' so.. congrats? I guess?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

    I’ll tell you when I stopped reading. It was the part where you tried to argue that the reign of terror wasn’t indiscriminate. People of all classes were sent to the guillotines, most of them the ones I listed. Robespierre himself was eventually killed. It is described as indiscriminate anywhere you read about it.

    i said you were using the word indiscriminate incorrectly, there was discrimination. I wasn't refuting that people of all classes were killed.

    As i said before, just because it doesn't meet the criteria they claimed ( or the criteria you think it should ) doesn't mean that there was no selection criteria.

    If you want to claim a large majority of random people were rounded up with no criteria whatsoever, feel free.

    I have no interest in trying to force you to use the correct application of a word, i was just pointing it out, the rest is on you.

    What was the eventual result of the reign of terror? Oh, yes — capitalism overtaking feudalism regarding who gets to hoard the wealth. Oh boy, look how well that turned out!

    I'm not sure how that's relevant but i don't have a formal opinion on it.

    I didn’t read anything beyond this point

    I know, i specifically put tags in to let you know where the big sentences were, i'm glad they helped.

    but you have earned the tag ‘Bloviating Troglodyte’ so… congrats? I guess?

    I appreciate you spending the time to look up some unique words, at least i know you've learnt something today.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    As i said before, just because it doesn't meet the criteria they claimed ( or the criteria you think it should ) doesn't mean that there was no selection criteria.

    They killed people from literally every class available, branding anyone that disagreed with them 'enemies of liberty'. I am not going to argue on this point.

    I'm not sure how that's relevant but i don't have a formal opinion on it.

    So the hoarding of wealth being transferred from noble families to merchant families doesn't seem unsuccessful to you in modern day? Replacing one group that hoards wealth with another doesn't seem relevant to the failings of the revolution?

    This is the reason I stop reading. You are an extremist and not worth speaking to. I use troglodyte regularly by the way, unless you're talking about bloviating at which point; stop projecting, this is a common word.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago*

    TL;DR;

    Looks like we aren't going to agree on the definition of indiscriminate, I'm good with that, you do you.

    I've put forth no opinion on anything other than word choice, as it relates to logical correctness.

    Somehow you've taken that single issue and tacked on a bunch of moral, ethical and political standpoints that don't exist in my responses and then seem to have taken these imaginary attacks personally, i can't help you with that.

    Being angry at imaginary positions other people haven't taken must be a hard way to live or at the very least, exhausting. It's certainly confusing from the outside.

    I can't work with that level of misunderstanding (intentional or otherwise) so let's just call it a day.


    They killed people from literally every class available, branding anyone that disagreed with them 'enemies of liberty'. I am not going to argue on this point.

    You don't need to argue, you just stated the selection criteria was "enemies of liberty". which i'm sure you'll agree is not "anybody for any reason", which is what it would need to be for it to be indiscriminate....because that's what indiscriminate means.

    As i said i've no interest in forcing you to use the actual current definition of a word. If, to you, indiscriminate means "some discrimination, but not like, a lot" then you do you.

    So the hoarding of wealth being transferred from noble families to merchant families doesn't seem unsuccessful to you in modern day? Replacing one group that hoards wealth with another doesn't seem relevant to the failings of the revolution?

    Again, my bad, what I meant to say is I'm not sure how it relates to any of the points already raised.

    None of the points raised by me (or my responses) have been about the connections, success or failure any systems or movements, nor have there been any stances taken on ethics or morality.

    The relative merits and drawbacks of political systems and ideologies is interesting, but as i said i don't know enough about them to put forth anything other than superficial opinions, If you want i can put down my opinions for you, but i can't guarantee they'll hold up to scrutiny.

    This is the reason I stop reading. You are an extremist and not worth speaking to.

    I'm not sure how you got extremist from me commenting on logical errors in your phrasing, there have been no other positions taken by me in any of the responses I've posted, but feel free to point them out if you see one.

    I use troglodyte regularly by the way

    Congratulations ? it's a good word, well..i like it at least.

    unless you’re talking about bloviating at which point; stop projecting, this is a common word.

    I suspect it's less common than you think.

    My comment was less projection than it was an inference based on your seeming inability to correctly use a (subjectively) more common word like indiscriminate. Seems like a reasonable leap to me but I'll take your word for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago* (2 children)

    Saw this after I sent my reply? Want me to delete it? I tried to stay level, for what it's worth, while being called stupid, an idiot, and being told to go fuck myself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    No, I've just deleted when it got bad. I realise the chain of affairs, but I thought it was just best to purge it all as I've been down this road before and more new chains kept popping up. I'm sure you realise you do have highly contentious views on this topic that will rile some people up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (4 children)

    No man. In that hypothetical, you would have had a civil war on your hands with Trump as a martyr.

    All of his devout cultists would have gone out to actually just murder every "lib". If you think his cult is a terrorist organisation now, you can't imagine how bad it would've been with him dead.

    Murdering the figurehead of a violent movement doesn't dissipate the impetus, it causes it to explode in every direction.

    Look up the murder of Jorge Eliecer Gaitán, or Inukai Tsuyoshi, hell even Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

    The death of an evil figurehead is not always the best path forward, because ideally we would want to avoid generalised death, destruction and bloodshed as much as possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] [S] 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    This is complete conjecture, you might have just ended up with President JD Vance and no civil war, but a deeply - if not-more authoritarian US administration driven by vengeance that is also more capable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] [S] 2 points 8 months ago

    The Presidential candidate being shot changes thing up quite a bit in this scenario. And I see nothing in how they behave to think they would rein anything in as a response to this beyond not appearing in public themselves personally.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    That's a demand.

    Him actually going to prison would be a consequence if it ever happened.

    Also two things can be true at once, wanting consequences and those consequences accelerating something can both be true.

    Speaking from a purely technical viewpoint I'm not sure how you get acceleration from this assassination. What would accelerate exactly?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    When the optimal solution failed, and it did fail, Trump avoided prison by becoming president, then the next best solution is NOT to surrender. That's just dumb. Trump becoming president is accelerationism, him becoming dead is a step towards return to normal democracy.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    IMO, I would have been more worried that a comment like that would invite some lunatic to try to shoot up the next concert as revenge for the insult to their orange god king. Can understand the idea of not wanting to invite the front line of democracy to their next venue. Cowardly, but understandable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)