Türkiye (5 Viewers)

Hængebøffer

Senior Member
Jun 4, 2009
25,184
Even if it's cartoons, it gives an idea to the people who don't know a thing about the situation.
It's a critique of the rulers. It usually depicts the power struggle. Clearly non of you understand. In that way you're like the Catholic Church who usually cries, when they're made fun of. But somehow the common people here knows that it's not about them.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Mohad

The Ocean Star
May 20, 2009
5,712
It's a critique of the rulers. It usually depicts the power struggle. Clearly non of you understand. In that way you're like the Catholic Church who usually cries, when they're made fun of. But somehow the common people here knows that it's not about them.
You never met me to be so sure like that, and you keep bringing up the religion card to make it an example.

And for the bolded part, if it wasn't about them then what's the point of showing it?
 

Maddy

Oracle of Copenhagen
Jul 10, 2009
16,531
It's a critique of the rulers. It usually depicts the power struggle. Clearly non of you understand. In that way you're like the Catholic Church who usually cries, when they're made fun of. But somehow the common people here knows that it's not about them.
When I see Rebel, Mohad etc. argue when is comes to something liek satire; I instantly see why it's so hard to integrate a big part of the immigrants into our society.

There's a clear lack of understanding of something so crucial. It's quite saddening. How can one not the difference in a ruler of a country heading down an authoritarian slope and an attack on civilians. As if it's a zero-sum game. Those killed in the attacks weren't a power unlike Erdogan, which is exactly the purpose of satire. To challenge hose in power in a humorous way and make the public reflect.

These dude's even got a fucking definition. Yet choose to either ignore or simply do not have the means to understand it.

Come on, they are becoming emotional on the behalf of Erdogan. Eenie meenie mini cock Erdogan.

There was a young fellow from Ankara
Who was a terrific wankerer
Till he sowed his wild oats
With the help of a goat
But he didn’t even stop to thankera.
- - - Updated - - -

This is a great example of critique of how we are handling the refugee crisis

Yet, someone liek rebel could problably become offended, just 'cause...


14423559324558_700.jpg


- - - Updated - - -

1453908457_czrpmwaweaayfgv.jpg&server=www.dr.jpg

@ReBeL @Mohad

This is a cartoon of the Danish Prime Minister. You don't see me bitch about the UK (why would I? It''s one newspaper) despite him being depicted as a Nazi; everyone knows he is not one, but it's satirical criticism of the danish refugee laws.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh fuck it!

In short: YOU GUYS ARE NOT THE VICTIMS OF EVERYTHING FUCKING LITTLE THING AROUND THE WORLD!

 

king Ale

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2004
21,689
@Maddy - Good satire is good. Most are cheap these days, which is particularly distasteful in the middle of some of the ugliest tragedies and human crises we've experienced in our lifetime. It's just me of course but my prerequisites for a good satire is "no ridicule of religion, nationality, and others' physical shortcomings". Then if you can send a powerful message without having to resort to those cheap means you have my respect :D Of course this is all assuming that satire has to have a corrective objective (i.e., my personal opinion, i don't value any other form of satire).
 

Maddy

Oracle of Copenhagen
Jul 10, 2009
16,531
@Maddy - Good satire is good. Most are cheap these days, which is particularly distasteful in the middle of some of the ugliest tragedies and human crises we've experienced in our lifetime. It's just me of course but my prerequisites for a good satire is "no ridicule of religion, nationality, and others' physical shortcomings". Then if you can send a powerful message without having to resort to those cheap means you have my respect :D Of course this is all assuming that satire has to have a corrective objective (i.e., my personal opinion, i don't value any other form of satire).
When religion or nationality becomes a tool of power it must be the target of satire.

To withhold religion or nationality will mean there's no reason to be satirical anymore. And honestly the reaction of big parts of the Islamic world towards the muhammed cartoons proved to me, why we must challenge those who oppose me and my countries liberties, human rights and basic democratic values.
We are talking about Islamist telling a non-muslim what I can or cannot do simply based on emotions and religion; some even wants to kill us. They must be ridiculed. Their medieval mindset and totalitarian dreams must be challenged.
It would be dangerous to give in to such ideas since freedom of speech (which is already threatened) would no longer have any meaning.
 

ZoSo

TSUUUUUUU
Jul 11, 2011
41,646
I did not see anything from this claimed satire thing about Nice or Orlando for example.

This is also today from the same cartoonist. I'm not Turkish but that is really annoying. This cartoonist and similar ones will not dare make the same rubbish about the French flag for example...
boohoo a cartoon offended me :cry:

are you crybaby muslims really that easily offended? what a joke :lol:
 

Seven

In bocca al lupo, Fabio.
Jun 25, 2003
36,775
I notice you are still mad for the past month, which is okay, just dont be a fucking female and direct it all at me, but there is no need to keep on trying to be a, asshole like you have been behaving like.



When i'm ganged up upon, doesnt happen as frequently as it used to, in the past i tended to react strongly. One can indeed argue Turk does a similar thing.



I have no bullshit view of the world that is completely out of line like he does. So you can shove your dig right back in the still bleeding hole it came from




Man the fuck op Seven. Season is a month away and it would be nice if you were posting like before belgium and france for their arse raped during the euro's
This is why I said you are similar. It wasn't an insult, dude.
 

king Ale

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2004
21,689
When religion or nationality becomes a tool of power it must be the target of satire.

To withhold religion or nationality will mean there's no reason to be satirical anymore. And honestly the reaction of big parts of the Islamic world towards the muhammed cartoons proved to me, why we must challenge those who oppose me and my countries liberties, human rights and basic democratic values.
We are talking about Islamist telling a non-muslim what I can or cannot do simply based on emotions and religion; some even wants to kill us. They must be ridiculed. Their medieval mindset and totalitarian dreams must be challenged.
It would be dangerous to give in to such ideas since freedom of speech (which is already threatened) would no longer have any meaning.
I'm in no way justifying any violent reaction to any form of satire, as cheap as i may find them to be. But like i said i see no corrective purpose in ridiculing religion or nationality, i just don't see it. Insensitivity to the situation, to the timing of our actions, and to the feelings of others is not fearlessness in my book, it's head&heartlessness. Imagine you are against this xyz policy and you want people to understand what's wrong with it, you make jokes about it, chances are people get it more easily, so you can educate them through satire. Now how exactly do you educate an extremist by making fun of what he deems holy? You are not challenging anything. Your audience is first and foremost people who share your opinion, and your purpose is first and foremost to provoke. I honestly see no use/value in that. In the grand scheme of things in fact, i'd say it does more harm than good. I'm not saying this type of satire should be banned (since you referred to freedom of speech), but i believe refraining from resorting to those means is a sign of a responsible artist.

Btw, i think you are also wrongly equating making fun of Islam with making fun of islamists.

EDIT - again, what i said above is just my definition of a good satire. I know that for many people satire can maintain its artistic value without having to have any particular purpose.
 

Juliano13

Senior Member
May 6, 2012
5,014
Said by whom? It is people's demand from 7 to 77. Refusing it would be un-democratic. And it is not Erdogan reinstates the death penalty, it is parliament.

This is what was going on in parliament that night.
Said by everyone. Democracy is not just about elections, its about rule of law. The death penalty is not undemocratic in itself, there is a death in America. But you cannot sentence people to death for crimes that were not punishable by death when they were committed. It's the backward introduction that is undemocratic. I don't think Erdogan will be stupid enough to do it, but you never know. He is crazy.
 
Jul 2, 2006
17,052
Said by everyone. Democracy is not just about elections, its about rule of law. The death penalty is not undemocratic in itself, there is a death in America. But you cannot sentence people to death for crimes that were not punishable by death when they were committed. It's the backward introduction that is undemocratic. I don't think Erdogan will be stupid enough to do it, but you never know. He is crazy.
what are you talking about?

 

Juliano13

Senior Member
May 6, 2012
5,014
I'm in no way justifying any violent reaction to any form of satire, as cheap as i may find them to be. But like i said i see no corrective purpose in ridiculing religion or nationality, i just don't see it. Insensitivity to the situation, to the timing of our actions, and to the feelings of others is not fearlessness in my book, it's head&heartlessness. Imagine you are against this xyz policy and you want people to understand what's wrong with it, you make jokes about it, chances are people get it more easily, so you can educate them through satire. Now how exactly do you educate an extremist by making fun of what he deems holy? You are not challenging anything. Your audience is first and foremost people who share your opinion, and your purpose is first and foremost to provoke. I honestly see no use/value in that. In the grand scheme of things in fact, i'd say it does more harm than good. I'm not saying this type of satire should be banned (since you referred to freedom of speech), but i believe refraining from resorting to those means is a sign of a responsible artist.

Btw, i think you are also wrongly equating making fun of Islam with making fun of islamists.
It could also be a sign of self-censorship. Artists refraining from satirising Islam because they are afraid (quite rightly so) they might get killed is the end of free speech. In this situation, when liberty is at stake, printing cartoons like that simply as a protest is commendable, even if the cartoons have little artistic value. And btw, a lot of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons were excellent.

- - - Updated - - -

what are you talking about?
Seriously? You really don't understand what I said?

Take a guess. What do you think I was referring to?
 

king Ale

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2004
21,689
It could also be a sign of self-censorship. Artists refraining from satirising Islam because they are afraid (quite rightly so) they might get killed is the end of free speech. In this situation, when liberty is at stake, printing cartoons like that simply as a protest is commendable, even if the cartoons have little artistic value. And btw, a lot of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons were excellent.
That doesn't negate what I said about a sign of a responsible artist. Which cartoons did you like in particular? Sine's maybe? ;) wasn't liberty at stake when he was fired?
 

Juliano13

Senior Member
May 6, 2012
5,014
That doesn't negate what I said about a sign of a responsible artist. Which cartoons did you like in particular? Sine's maybe? ;) wasn't liberty at stake when he was fired?
And this doesn't negate what I said.

Was liberty at stake when Sine was fired? It could be interpreted that way, but not for the reason you think.

- - - Updated - - -

I believe in justice. Where there is no justice, there is no life. laws can be changed if they fail to ensure justice. they are soldiers, they know, more than anyone else, there is only one punishment for treachery. if people's demand of justice goes unanswered, it will only cause bigger trouble in future.
And in Turkey it's not death. Now, Erdogan wants to introduce death penalty for treason and execute people who have committed treason at a time when it was not punishable by death. Do you understand that?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)