Again, I'm not arguing about Krauthammer specifically, I'm talking about the idea that negative discussion about a person shouldn't happen right before / right after their death.
Fox News’ Charles Krauthammer says he is losing his cancer battle [UP: Passed Away]
- Thread starter Thisman
- Start date
Again, I'm not arguing about Krauthammer specifically, I'm talking about the idea that negative discussion about a person shouldn't happen right before / right after their death.
I don't wish cancer on anyone, even shitheads, but if the only opinion allowed in these threads is "Cancer Sucks" I'm not sure why we have them. That isn't a discussion. It's an excuse for self-righteous posters to backseat moderate, mostly.
In a thread about how they are dying of cancer, no. Jesus, this isn't that hard. If this was a thread about his life work, by all means, you do you bro.
So when Bowie died and people were posting like "oh my god I loved Ziggy Stardust" that was also inappropriate? Or is it only not cool to talk about someone's life's work when that work was something people have issues with?
We wouldn't know or care about him if it wasn't for his lifes work. He'd just be another guy cursed with cancer. When you live a public, outspoken life, people are going to share their opinion of you, good or bad.
So in a thread about Richard Spencer dying no one should talk about how much of a piece of shit he is?
Do w/e man, all this is doing is derailing a thread, so I'll just say I'm wrong and leave.
I don't know much about the person being discussed in this thread, but in that Bowie thread, I'd imagine "I hated Ziggy Stardust" would probably get some backlash.
Cancer is a terrible thing that I've seen firsthand, and it happens to those we love and those we hate. It definitely happens to those we oppose.
However, I think that in fair opposition to ideals, we hope to win on the basis of merits because we are in the right. Cancer is a cheater and so I never hope it's allowed in the game.
No, answer the question. You said it was inappropriate to bring up the terrible things a person has said or done if they are dying so I want to know if you include people like Richard Spencer.
I don't want these people harming our democracy and progress either but I don't want anyone to suffer from cancer, I've seen too many times in my family what it does to people. My mother is fading right in front of my eyes. I hate these people too but knowing what he's going through I can't celebrate that process, and at the same time won't celebrate him. Those things are not mutually exclusive.
Last edited:
I wouldn't wish ill health on anyone.
That said, part of his life's work involved the undermining of healthcare for people without his means as well as convincing others to do so.
In an ideal world he would become a better person but I don't think it's outrageous to say the world may be a net positive with him gone.
RIP though.
That said, part of his life's work involved the undermining of healthcare for people without his means as well as convincing others to do so.
In an ideal world he would become a better person but I don't think it's outrageous to say the world may be a net positive with him gone.
RIP though.
I do think that there is something to be said about being "too light" on a person who dies of cancer or what have you, but at the same time, people celebrating the death isn't exactly great.
Krauthammer in 1989:
The inner-city crack epidemic is now giving birth to the newest horror: a bio-underclass, a generation of physically damaged cocaine babies whose biological inferiority is stamped at birth...[This is] a race of (sub)human drones ... [whose] future is closed to them from day one. Theirs will be a life of certain suffering, of probable deviance, of permanent inferiority. At best, a menial life of severe deprivation ... [T]he dead babies may be the lucky ones.
The inner-city crack epidemic is now giving birth to the newest horror: a bio-underclass, a generation of physically damaged cocaine babies whose biological inferiority is stamped at birth...[This is] a race of (sub)human drones ... [whose] future is closed to them from day one. Theirs will be a life of certain suffering, of probable deviance, of permanent inferiority. At best, a menial life of severe deprivation ... [T]he dead babies may be the lucky ones.
RIP george W bush i may not have agreed with your policies or approved of the million people you murdered but by god i'll be a respectful lib now that you're dead o7
If you're happy about a death, nothing is going to change that. I'm sure you will still feel the same way regardless of what you post, and I'm sure others probably know how you felt because of how you posted when the person was alive.
Letting people know that you're happy someone is dead doesn't change anything either. It lets people know that you still feel the same way, and you're not really concerned about appearing respectful.
While you may find this liberating, this kind of discourse actually produces the opposite result than what you may have anticipated. For example, a person from Fox News browsing these kinds of comments on social media would have another story with which to feed their hungry viewership about the hateful left.
I can't really think of anything good that was accomplished on someone else's tombstone except maybe a sense of relief in the case of the tyrants and murderers. Certainly nothing to be gained concerning this guy.
Letting people know that you're happy someone is dead doesn't change anything either. It lets people know that you still feel the same way, and you're not really concerned about appearing respectful.
While you may find this liberating, this kind of discourse actually produces the opposite result than what you may have anticipated. For example, a person from Fox News browsing these kinds of comments on social media would have another story with which to feed their hungry viewership about the hateful left.
I can't really think of anything good that was accomplished on someone else's tombstone except maybe a sense of relief in the case of the tyrants and murderers. Certainly nothing to be gained concerning this guy.
Because Fox News would certainly run out of fodder to get their viewers to hate liberals if we would just stop giving them ammo
Not to both sides this, but I do understand. This guy was an unempathetic shithead. But he's also dying. It's one of those things where I think of his family more than him while disavowing his shitty things.
Although I admit when Scalia died I didn't have a 'mourning' period.
Although I admit when Scalia died I didn't have a 'mourning' period.
Celebrating death is one thing, but I see an awful lot of crocodile tears in here.
There really was a crack epidemic though, have you heard?
Also did you add in the (sub) when he said human?
No, Charles added the (sub)
Also, there was certainly a huge problem with crack cocaine, although the idea of "crack babies" being subhuman monsters is total bullshit junk science that was from the very beginning a racist lie.
Here's a good podcast episode about it, they talk about this (fucking reprehensible) statement of Krauthammer's directly
https://soundcloud.com/citationsnee...-the-media-stacks-the-deck-against-defendants
Fair enough, the quote written out with a bunch of parentheses and brackets seemed like it had a lot that was... Interpreted. If it's more or less direct, he was wrong
come for the Krauthammer racism, stay for the Dershowitz misogyny
Since everyone else is going to jump on you, I just want to say, I agree with you.
EDIT: After rereading this, I guess your post was sarcasm to the other guy, sorry about that.
Last edited:
Krauthammer never missed an opportunity to use his platform to push for the murder of brown people. There was never enough to satisfy his bloodlust.
I'll quote Glenn Greenwald, who has written quite often on the oppressiveness of those who try to silence dissent when a public figure dies:
Policing the conversation to only allow praise is no different than the politicians who say we shouldn't bring up gun control so soon after a school shooting. It's exactly at times like this that we need to shame these violent bigots and bring to light all the damage, harm, and suffering they brought upon the world while they were alive.
Oh, and fuck John McCain too.
I'll quote Glenn Greenwald, who has written quite often on the oppressiveness of those who try to silence dissent when a public figure dies:
Policing the conversation to only allow praise is no different than the politicians who say we shouldn't bring up gun control so soon after a school shooting. It's exactly at times like this that we need to shame these violent bigots and bring to light all the damage, harm, and suffering they brought upon the world while they were alive.
Oh, and fuck John McCain too.
There's some nuance that's being lost here.
I'm not "mourning" Krauthammer. I don't know him, and most of his op-eds were absolute trash.
Yet I also, simultaneously, do not wish him to suffer. There are very few people on this planet that I wish suffering for, and they do much worse things than have idiotic opinions.
It's possible to not like someone, but also not want them to suffer. Krauthammer suffering doesn't create a better world. I hope he and his family find solace in his final weeks.
I'm not "mourning" Krauthammer. I don't know him, and most of his op-eds were absolute trash.
Yet I also, simultaneously, do not wish him to suffer. There are very few people on this planet that I wish suffering for, and they do much worse things than have idiotic opinions.
It's possible to not like someone, but also not want them to suffer. Krauthammer suffering doesn't create a better world. I hope he and his family find solace in his final weeks.
So no matter what vile shit a person has done in their life, we should never bring it up when they're dead or dying?
Death and disease erases one's past?
Personally, I think it's fine to bring up the awful things one has said or done. It's fair game.
I do not think it's okay, however, to wish death / suffering on someone or celebrate it.**
**Very rare exceptions made in my mind for, like, Bashar Al-Assad or people of that magnitude.
The idea that a person who has spread hate, abuse, or danger to others should somehow be immune to criticism of their behavior by their victims after they die is insidious on many levels. They have died yet their abusive control of the people they hurt is perpetuated by people who insist their personal affection for the deceased must be shared by everyone else.
That's a strange suggestion for a discussion forum. If this is a non-discussable issue, then all of these threads should be locked. Otherwise, people are going to continue to express their opinions, good and bad, of the subject. If people feel the need to say positive things about bad people because they're dying, it's going to draw people that feel the need to rebut those things.
I envision most of the posts being about how wonderful of a eulogy Hillary Clinton gives.
Will it ever be possible to be rid of cancer in the near future? Or is that a dream that is far from being achieved?
Agreed. What a strange thread.
"Remember that reprehensible person who said vile things? He's dying."
"That poor, sweet man."
Cancer is horrible
Conservatives who rail against Public Healthcare who then get cancer need to realize that it can happen to them too and they should be more empathetic towards the average person who would benefit from a public form of Universal Healthcare or Single Payer.
Conservatives who rail against Public Healthcare who then get cancer need to realize that it can happen to them too and they should be more empathetic towards the average person who would benefit from a public form of Universal Healthcare or Single Payer.
People are remembered for the good or bad things they say or do. That's normal. One evil thing also ruins a lifetime of good in the eyes of the people. However, people are still going to mourn the death of someone who did something really evil - like GWB murdering a million Iraqis. Not everyone has the same standards, some people do not give a shit about the bad stuff as long as it does not affect them.
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
I don't really have an opinion on Charles since I don't know much about him but Cancer sucks.
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
I don't really have an opinion on Charles since I don't know much about him but Cancer sucks.
It'll be great to be tone-policed to death when Cheeto-lini kicks the bucket.
I think you might need a dictionary my friend. "Atrocities"? Really? That is how you would describe Krauthammer's actions in his life?
Just report and move on I suppose.
I think finding a cure for social rot is probably a more pressing matter than finding one for cancer, judging by some of the garbage pail person responses in here.
I wonder how a lot of Americans would react if they saw how people were openly celebrating Margaret Thatcher dying in Scotland
My post is geared more about the president. That's why I mentioned him. I can admit that looking back it is off topic but I'm responding to the idea that we even when his time comes, we have to hold back criticism of his actions. Actions have always mattered and words should be used to bring light to them. When someone comes to an end of life cycle we all find a genuine empathy level relating to the final moments. I think that's a basic understanding, but it doesn't mean you deserve sympathy especially if you were someone who lacked it.
Ahhh, ok my bad. Trump definitely is more deserving of the "atrocity" descriptor. Let it be known that in general I do agree with you. I understand when someone dies it forces people to rethink their views and opinions on that person because....well they are gone. However I don't think we should completely wash away the actions taken during their life. That is no different than putting blinders on.
Society can't move forward without picking apart and dissecting what people have done right or wrong throughout their lives.