I like how the child in the first panel grows up to be the protester in the second panel, and the child in the second panel grows up to be the protester in the third panel.
And the protester of one panel becomes the reactionary in the next panel. The person with red hair can be seen in every stage throughout the panels.
I think that’s what they mean that “you become conservative as you grow older”. To me, doing so means you succumbed to the system.
That’s what they mean and what they hope you do.
In reality, only a small amount of people make that transition, and usually it is because of brain rot combined with propaganda like Fox news.
Most people do get milder and more realistic as they age, but not necessarily more conservative.
You can still find a lot of leaft-leaning old hippies. I guess Bernie Sanders would be the most famous one.
On the contrary, this conflict has made me go from a liberal to a hardline leftist.
I don’t think it’s necessarily succumbing to it. Usually it’s more of the fact that you’re well established and have money and a house, so you feel that things don’t need to change anymore so you end up voting conservative. However since it’s seeming more and more likely home ownership and even retirement are too far away to ever be achievable for young people this shifting to conservative as you get older might not happen anymore.
My rule of thumb is that sidevolving is easier than improving or degrading.
If you became a dumb conservative, you are statistically more likely to have been a dumb liberal. The problem was with you in the first place and the value you came to represent in the society as a citizen of political sway.
What does that mean?
I might have grown more right-wing in certain topics. I don’t think I’ve succumbed to the system. But I’m not sure.
The protestors also become the parent in the next panel. The child in the first panel is in every panel.
Pacifism is always an unpopular stance, because always, always, always, THIS war is different! THIS war is justified!
The way pacifists are treated right now, when they criticize involvement in the Ukraine war, is pretty similar to how pacifists were treated before the first World War.
But also, we shake our heads at the war enthusiasm before WW1, and don’t realize our own today. Cause this war is different.
(For the record, I’m not personally against supporting Ukraine. But I also realize not everyone who is against involvement is a Putin-bot)
I don’t that’s what he meant. He meant that many Russian soldiers are brainwashed by propaganda as well.
With all due respect, you’re literally replying to a post saying that it’ll always be “This war is different, this war is justified” by emphasising how this war is different and this war is justified.
But that’s not what is happening.
What is happening is directly pointing out that this was is NOT different. That this war is ALSO unjustified.
In war, the aggressors are the problem. Period. And lending support to the aggressed is not the same as supporting war.
It would work, simply letting Russia finish a genocide against Ukraine or Israel finish a genocide against Palestine. The conflict would certainly be resolved that way. But if you think it is an acceptable outcome, you value peace too highly.
The war in Ukraine is not justified. Supporting Ukraine’s defense is.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking the opponents of any particular military action are pacifists.
Back when iraq was invaded, Saddam was the aggressor who bad WMD, it all turned out to be a lie.
How do you know that American government is telling it’s citizens complete facts about Ukraine war?
Yes I know Russia is the aggressor here and I am completely against the invasion. However, everyone knew that NATO expansion will trigger a war and US actively pushed for it. American governments hands are not clean when it comes to Ukraine war and American citizens don’t question it at all.
Which brings me to the cartoon here where if you say the above mentioned statements you will be called a tankie, Putin bootlicker etc.
that NATO expansion will trigger a war
It is none of Russia’s business which group Ukraine joins.
But we must also look at pacifism as a convenient shield at times. There were “pacifists” in the Second World War who clearly weren’t ideologically opposed to war but were opposed to fighting hitler. I see letting putin continue as utterly chamberlainian.
Ok that’s not really fair. Declassified docs have revealed that Chamberlain knew damn well what was going to work and intentionally played down causus belli because he was buying Britain time to rearm, the problem was that time is a resource you buy for both sides, and the axis used theirs a lot better.
Not really comparable. If in 2003 the US did nothing Iraq would still be doing what it was doing and there would have been no war. If Ukraine stops fighting for even a day the country no longer exists.
It isnt special pleading when you can point out major differences between cases.
Kraut IMO made a pretty good argument based on exactly that point that Iraq would have been doing what it had been doing already,
That being that what Iraq was doing was plenty horrible on its own, and that Bush and co could have made an argument for US involvement just on the merits of stopping a genocidal dictator. The question with no answer is if the public would have accepted that argument for going into Iraq at the same time as Afghanistan.
That’s funny because those are the kind of opinions I developed by going to school.
and that’s why you can see that once the person has gone to school they protest (in the next panel)
you then can see in the panel after they protest that they become the parent, telling their child to go to school. presumably because they forgot what they learned at school (or because they think school is the best way for children to learn about these things - which seems a little less likely)
It’s different now. Now Republicans don’t want people going to school. School just forces the lib’rul into kids brains.