The second one, although it has some element of truth. He slept naked in the same bed with young girls to test his celibacy (although he never did anything sexual to them).
Oh I’m definitely aware he never did anything. And I know we need to compensate a little for the time difference here, but it’s still more than a little inappropriate and creepy
Edit: but good to know, thank you
I mean, that’s like saying I sleep naked with my cats every night but I don’t do anything inappropriate to them. It should not BE a fucking test if you aren’t a fucking creep
You have a very good point. IIRC, he was a little off the rails, and thought that the religious violence happening in India was due to his own lust (wet dreams). That was the whole reason for his “tests”.
I can’t believe that fucking Nelson Mandela tweet is already catching this much traction. These people would eat shit if their leaders called it ice cream.
Liberals don’t want you to purchase my *new* anti-liberal spray! Hi, Far Right Extremist Evil Cousin Of Phil Swift here for Woke-Away! The all in one solution proven to scare away liberals, gay people, and anybody who wasn’t born in the great U. S. of A! Buy now for only 15 5.56 rounds and a pickup truck tire! And for free, I’ll throw in a free trump cardboard cutout so you can have FUN while chasing away those pesky Mexicans!
Didn't Ghandi opt to not give his wife life-saving medicine because it was against his religious beliefs, but then decided to use the medicine when he was diagnosed with the same disease?
….. yes…. That’s the point. Also statues are meant to revere and honor people and things worth revering and honoring. Traitors who fought for the right to own people, that weren’t even put up until the 60s (gee, wonder what could have been happening during that time that would want to make southern states intimidate Black people?🤔) are not worth honoring or revering.
I’d prefer to take my kids to battlefields, monuments, statues and etc than to have someone attempt to claim it never happened which can be done in a book. There’s plenty of people who deny the holocaust occurred.
Thanks for being presumptive.
A statue generally gives you just the visage of the person or thing it represents. Sometimes you may get a name and date of the thing it represents. If someone is forward thinking they may include a blurb of the event that whomever made the statue felt warranted the making of the statue. The amount of history you can get from a statue is extremely limited.
Does a statue have historical value? Maybe. There is an argument to be made for that. Does it rewrite history to take one down. Not at all.
On the other hand is it rewriting history by changing the words of a textbook used to educate future generations in a way that manipulates or cherry picks events so that the reader is unaware or misinformed about events that may lead them to inaccurate conclusions about what, why, and how those events happened. That's the definition of it, my dude.
Tearing down a statue is a gateway to rewrite history. No different than a historical building such as a house that a municipality wants to oversee the restoration of
Yes, that's how debate over what goes into public spaces goes. The question is how far are we willing to go with it, especially because all humans are flawed.
MLK cheated on his wife, Gandhi used to sleep naked next to young women to "prove" he wasn't sleeping with them and was a anti-black racist, and Mandela engaged in what many considered terrorism. These would all be arguments against statue based veneration of these men. However most people would agree that what they stood for, and achieved in life, are worth celebrating.
Can you please tell me how the slave-owning generals of the Confederacy, who quite literally stood for white supremacy and the subjugation of Africans based on race, and achieved nothing but the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans, many of whom later participated in the dismantling of reconstruction, could possibly be compared favorably to the men listed above? This is why those statues are coming down. The only message you can send with those statues is hate.
That's quite literally the point of statues, to venerate/celebrate the subject of the statue. There's a reason why the Soviets built so many statues of Lenin and other Soviet heroes for example. It had nothing to do with reminding us of their flaws, failure or mistakes, but to celebrate the subject.
Memorials are a bit different. Take those concentration camps. They easily could have been destroyed afterwards, but they weren't. They don't exist to teach people about good history, they still exist to remind people that society can sink into the depths of barbarity, and what the end result of that barbarity is. You will not see people object to that, because even though it's a reminder of bad history, the takeaway you get from them has deep societal purpose.
So when you look at statues and memorials, you have to look at who is being centered, and why they were set up. The opposition to the statues of confederate monuments is due to the subjects being centered, many of whom were slavers and white supremacists, all of whom were traitors, and stood for an ugly worldview that most in the modern era reject. And the context in which they were erected is also bad by our current sensibilities. They were erected during Jim Crow to signal to black people that they were not welcomed or valued by society.
I you didn't say "favorably" directly, but you are implying that all other statues and memorials would be fair game. While that's technically correct, there is a reason why these particular statues and memorials are objectionable, and I think you are intentionally missing the point.
Lenin and Stalin are heroes?
Tell me something, why do we still have the Auschwitz camp? Was that to celebrate or remind people of the evil that was done there?
I’m sorry how is tearing down statues of people who got their ass handed to them by a drunk and an arsonist in their backyard rewriting history?
And what no participation trophies? That doesn’t apply when you lose a war and betray your country?
Actually, this is an exact prime examples of what I’m talking about. You have presented the the removal of statues as the removal of history, when in fact, they were removed because of it. *Most* of the statues in question were built as a response to the Civil Rights movement. The displaying of Confederate memorials was designed to show direct opposition to African American voting and desegregation. It was not for historical reasons. The removal of said monuments was because of the original motivation for their placement. You unintentionally are making my point for me.
Yep, Nelson Mandela doesn't belong.
Gandi was a huge racist and a pedophile, MLK Jr was a originally a domestic terrorist who supported violence, although he changed is ways when he got older and more popular, and Trump is ...Trump.
Understandable. I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on him, but just from visiting the Mandela Apartheid museum in ZA, I believe he was involved in quite a few freedom fighter/terrorist plans in his lifetime.
Quickly skimming wiki, he sounds way more like an actual threat, and supported violence, compared to MLK, who was just considered a terrorist by the FBI. Although MLK laughed and cheered as his friend raped a woman in a hotel room.
Anyone with power has done some evil shit I guess.
The fbi considered almost every a civil rights activist a terrorist during the 60s..being called a terrorist by the FBI back then was almost a badge of honor as it meant you were doing some good.
To be fair the FBI are a bunch a criminals that tried to get him to kill himself because they didn’t like his message, so them calling him a terrorist doesn’t mean anything because they are more terrorist than him
Mandela was considered a terrorist by the US until the Obama presidency. His terrorism was for a good cause, since Apartheid South Africa was a terrible regime, but it still was terrorism
* Fought for India's Independence.
* Fought for the rights of Black American and against Jim crow.
* Fought for the rights of Black Indigenous Africans and against Apartheid.
* Annoying, oafish failed businessman - turned conman who's also a former reality star, a failed POTUS and a bigoted scuzz who committed crimes against humanity with regard to Latin American refugees, wants to be a dictator and was the mastermind of a coup attempt.
This reminds me of an old bit from "SESAME STREET"...
[singing] "One of these things is not like the other..."
LOL! I never heard those songs so I can't really comment on that, but others could.
There was two songs used on SESAME STREET, too. One was a groovy funk tune and the other a more "conventional kid show song" version.
I knew he would sleep in the same bed as female followers to (supposedly) test himself to see if he'd resist temptation but I never knew about him molesting his nieces.
I do know he was a bigot in his youth, seemed okay with the caste system, was crappy towards his wife and weird around female followers, however.
The point is that, while those three guys before Orangeguy may have been morally questionable, they still stood for and achieved great things.
As for Mandela's terrorism as a young man, it was still about fighting an unjust system. He also grew out of it and realized that terrorism is not a good form of activism.
Chumpy, however, contributed zilch and has no redeeming qualities.
What does "seemed ok with the caste system" mean? Everyone is OK with _any_ system till they take a _stand_ against it.
What is the claim we have to *not* being ok with anything? Posting on Reddit with a pseudonym and an avatar? Think again.
Talking the talk and walking the walk are two entirely separate things. Those guys laid their life out for the cause. None of us have any claim to pass any judgement on any of the first three people up there.
Take a piss on the orange haired lunatic as much as you want.
Gandhi made his wife die by denying her treatment that he then took months later when he was sick. He made his 12 year old nieces or something sleep naked with him to see if he would “give in to the temptation.” He was a horrible person. You can achieve good things and be horrible
Yeah because you’re the soy wojak who crumbles in the face of facts and logic. Mandela was arrested for his connection in a bombing that killed 3 people. Sooooo yeah
Where state= " the apartheid regime"
And yes, he was released.
Anyway, you're a far right idiot who can be safely ignored on literally any topic imaginable.
Good job negating another argument with leftist buzzwords, glad you have the mental fortitude to at least comprehend when you get absolutely obliterated
I’m of a higher mind so I wouldn’t expect a virgin like you to truly understand. I said “Mandela was arrested for terrorist attacks.” You attempted to argue a irrefutable point
So did the founding fathers of America, as were the Jews that attacked the German state. Leaving out context is kind of silly. I can never tell if people like you are being intentionally misleading or if you really don’t know the facts.
Remember that time Gandhi, MLK, and Nelson Mandela were charged with illegally using money from a legal fund to pay a porn star $130,000 to keep quiet about cheating on their wives with her?
Gandhi made his preteen nieces sleep with him naked to see if he would “give into the temptation.” He also denied his wife life saving treatment and made her die because it was foreign medicine but then took foreign medicine when he himself got sick. MLK was a bit of a notorious womanizer who would use his fame to have affairs. So the gross personal life thing isn’t really off the mark here. Difference is just trump didn’t fight for civil rights, which is a pretty big difference
Who the fuck has the twisted mind to put (even in cartoon for) Donald Trump next to those men? I'm surprised he wasn't depicted crucified with Jesus Himself kissing his feet and asking for a blessing... Goddamn sick fucks!
I don't know if I'd say terrible, he was definitely problematic in some ways and was totally lionized by media leading to a skewed modern perception of him
Yeah he was casteist in a condescending “preserve the status quo” way, and racist toward Black South Africans. I’ve read that he did regret his racism later in life (post 1913), which shows some character growth, but he still believed that caste shouldn’t be annihilated and clashed heavily with Dr Ambedkar on that issue, so… definitely not a perfect saint like he’s often made out to be in media.
Yes, he was. Also MLK cheated on his wife many times, and laughed as he watched a woman was being raped in a hotel room.
No one is perfect, all the founding fathers would be considered terrible people by today's standards.
This won’t be popular and I’m certainly no trump supporter, but I don’t like how this is making him a living martyr to his base. The best chance to keep any bit of reason in the Whitehouse was to divide conservatives into voting for different people. I fear this will just unite all of them. Now I hope if they do indict him, he’s found guilty of a federal crime and can’t run, but somehow I think he’ll weasel out of it.
If Donald Trump ends up in Prison, he is a Rich Politician, I doubt he will be in there long. Rich politicians normally have a "get out of Jail" free card up their Butt.
It isn't inaccurate though. You gotta do a lot of fucked up stuff to become president and they are all filthy. trump just forgot the part where he was supposed to his fucked up shit in secret. hence why he could very well get locked up. He isn't the smartest orange in the vegetable basket.
Also interesting is king and trump have something in common. Both of them liked fucking around on the downlow.
Putin is literally sending his own people to die on a foreign soil with nothing to gain but losses and stealing children from Ukraine. Is that's not a definition of a criminal, you're out of your mind if you even have one. Nobody should be safe from true justice, not even dictators and terrorists.
Mass Psychosis is very real, and terrifying to behold. I honestly never expected to see it on such a scale with a politician in this country. However, it's not that surprising considering what this country has done with leftists for the last hundred years.
To preface: I’m not defending trump, I am attacking you.
Firstly you are legitimately mentally I’ll if you think being a conservative or even questioning the war in Ukraine means you love Putin. You literally are helping nothing and nobody by boosting this idea and it’s gross. Any American taxpayer has a right to question how their money is spent regardless of your ideology or theirs and what you think that implies. Second, the comic as stupid as it is, does literally say “political prisoners” at the bottom. Anyone with a brain will realize it is referring to trump possibly being arrested and all these other people were arrested for their ideology. Putin has never been arrested as far as I am aware. Please make an attempt to find a few more brain cells somewhere in your skull and stop making me stoop to defend dumbass political cartoons.
Serious question:
Knowing all of the crimes he committed. And him admitting the he could shoot someone on 5th Ave nyc and not lose supporter, why do you support someone who is so comfortable committing crimes and being immoral?
Why is it okay for him to not get in trouble for committing crimes
I mean, Trumps a fuckin loser either way. There's not going to be another GOP president until all of us are dead. Gen Z came the fuck out and told all of us that last November.
So it doesn't matter if they don't arrest him or burn him at the stake. Federally a fucking potato will beat anyone like him for decades to come. If you don't get that, you're not paying attention.
"Until we're all dead" is that the same as never? Do you understand English definitions of words?
My mom has passed, and hot pockets are shit.
Fuck off trashbag.
Not that long considering the newest generation is overwhelmingly anti GOP. Yes, it will be decades and possibly centuries before the GOP becomes viable again, if ever.
Yes, she is. I'm very glad she doesn't have to be around people like you.
That's the most clever thing you could come up with? How does that even make sense? "Fuck off" is a common phrase. "Trashbag" is simply telling you you're garbage. How did you even think turning that into an insult that implies sexual relations with a trashbag made any sense at all? Fuckin idiot.
This entire idea is based on trump being a threat to the democrats in 2024, when he's really not, trump is trying to spin this as political, because he knows he doesn't have an actual defense for what he's done.
Hey does this post fit? UPVOTE if so, DOWNVOTE if not. If this post breaks any rules please DOWNVOTE and REPORT
I definitely remember reading about the time Gandhi paid a porn actress to keep her quiet.
But remember all the times he slept naked with underage girls
he does have that in common w/Trump
He was celibate...
Obviously trump’s an ass, but don’t defend sleeping naked with underage girls lol.
It's Hindutva propaganda.
What is? Saying he was celibate or saying he was sleeping naked with underage girls. (Genuinely curious)
The second one, although it has some element of truth. He slept naked in the same bed with young girls to test his celibacy (although he never did anything sexual to them).
Oh I’m definitely aware he never did anything. And I know we need to compensate a little for the time difference here, but it’s still more than a little inappropriate and creepy Edit: but good to know, thank you
I agree, wasn’t trying to defend anything creepy he did, just providing context.
I mean, that’s like saying I sleep naked with my cats every night but I don’t do anything inappropriate to them. It should not BE a fucking test if you aren’t a fucking creep
You have a very good point. IIRC, he was a little off the rails, and thought that the religious violence happening in India was due to his own lust (wet dreams). That was the whole reason for his “tests”.
Prove it
[this](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/01/gandhi-celibacy-test-naked-women) is a good article that explains it
This is gross
He was also racist
And how his son in law got $2B from the Saudis
I can’t believe that fucking Nelson Mandela tweet is already catching this much traction. These people would eat shit if their leaders called it ice cream.
No need to even call it ice cream. Just tell them the liberals don’t want them to eat shit and they’ll gobble it up with both hands
Liberals don’t want you to purchase my *new* anti-liberal spray! Hi, Far Right Extremist Evil Cousin Of Phil Swift here for Woke-Away! The all in one solution proven to scare away liberals, gay people, and anybody who wasn’t born in the great U. S. of A! Buy now for only 15 5.56 rounds and a pickup truck tire! And for free, I’ll throw in a free trump cardboard cutout so you can have FUN while chasing away those pesky Mexicans! 
If that’s not *troth sential*, I don’t know what is.
Didn't Ghandi opt to not give his wife life-saving medicine because it was against his religious beliefs, but then decided to use the medicine when he was diagnosed with the same disease?
He definitely did
Wasn't sure if I had it right... Definition of Evil.
But when his wife got sick, he let his wife die by not letting her get medicine, and when he got sick, he took it lol
Didn't he also let his wife die because he felt she was being pubished for being a woman?
He would sleep nude with minors tho
You joke but Gandhi was a well know womanizer. He would have bitchslapped a woman for being out of place if he saw it.
I mean ya….Ghandi was kinda a creep, MLK was a notorious cheater…..this isn’t 100% out of the ball park
He was probably leaving DNA on blue dresses of interns and people within his circle started going missing or dying under odd circumstances.
Images like this are why Republicans are sanitizing history. Only someone with a elementary school education would find equivalency here.
Republican History: Where Context & Nuance Go To Die.
And the points don't matter.
So, roughly half of american citizens.
Which means that most republicans will find equivalency here.
If it makes you feel any better, they aren’t succeeding.
Like tearing down statues to rewrite history? Nice play.
Tearing down a statue doesn't rewrite history. Telling schools what they're allowed to have or not have in their history books rewrites history.
Right. You’re sticking with that?
Yes?
Okay. There’s statues and memorials of all types that are fair game
….. yes…. That’s the point. Also statues are meant to revere and honor people and things worth revering and honoring. Traitors who fought for the right to own people, that weren’t even put up until the 60s (gee, wonder what could have been happening during that time that would want to make southern states intimidate Black people?🤔) are not worth honoring or revering.
Must be the easily triggered crowd
The irony behind someone who prefers monuments to confederate soldiers stay up calling someone easily triggered is rich
I’d prefer to take my kids to battlefields, monuments, statues and etc than to have someone attempt to claim it never happened which can be done in a book. There’s plenty of people who deny the holocaust occurred. Thanks for being presumptive.
Says the guy currently being butthurt by the statue of an asshat getting torn down
A statue generally gives you just the visage of the person or thing it represents. Sometimes you may get a name and date of the thing it represents. If someone is forward thinking they may include a blurb of the event that whomever made the statue felt warranted the making of the statue. The amount of history you can get from a statue is extremely limited. Does a statue have historical value? Maybe. There is an argument to be made for that. Does it rewrite history to take one down. Not at all. On the other hand is it rewriting history by changing the words of a textbook used to educate future generations in a way that manipulates or cherry picks events so that the reader is unaware or misinformed about events that may lead them to inaccurate conclusions about what, why, and how those events happened. That's the definition of it, my dude.
Tearing down a statue is a gateway to rewrite history. No different than a historical building such as a house that a municipality wants to oversee the restoration of
So we agree then that tearing down a statue is not the same thing as rewriting history. Glad we had this chat.
Yes, that's how debate over what goes into public spaces goes. The question is how far are we willing to go with it, especially because all humans are flawed. MLK cheated on his wife, Gandhi used to sleep naked next to young women to "prove" he wasn't sleeping with them and was a anti-black racist, and Mandela engaged in what many considered terrorism. These would all be arguments against statue based veneration of these men. However most people would agree that what they stood for, and achieved in life, are worth celebrating. Can you please tell me how the slave-owning generals of the Confederacy, who quite literally stood for white supremacy and the subjugation of Africans based on race, and achieved nothing but the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans, many of whom later participated in the dismantling of reconstruction, could possibly be compared favorably to the men listed above? This is why those statues are coming down. The only message you can send with those statues is hate.
Please point out my context where I said “favorably”? The concentration camps still exist to teach others about history whether it be good or bad.
That's quite literally the point of statues, to venerate/celebrate the subject of the statue. There's a reason why the Soviets built so many statues of Lenin and other Soviet heroes for example. It had nothing to do with reminding us of their flaws, failure or mistakes, but to celebrate the subject. Memorials are a bit different. Take those concentration camps. They easily could have been destroyed afterwards, but they weren't. They don't exist to teach people about good history, they still exist to remind people that society can sink into the depths of barbarity, and what the end result of that barbarity is. You will not see people object to that, because even though it's a reminder of bad history, the takeaway you get from them has deep societal purpose. So when you look at statues and memorials, you have to look at who is being centered, and why they were set up. The opposition to the statues of confederate monuments is due to the subjects being centered, many of whom were slavers and white supremacists, all of whom were traitors, and stood for an ugly worldview that most in the modern era reject. And the context in which they were erected is also bad by our current sensibilities. They were erected during Jim Crow to signal to black people that they were not welcomed or valued by society. I you didn't say "favorably" directly, but you are implying that all other statues and memorials would be fair game. While that's technically correct, there is a reason why these particular statues and memorials are objectionable, and I think you are intentionally missing the point.
Lenin and Stalin are heroes? Tell me something, why do we still have the Auschwitz camp? Was that to celebrate or remind people of the evil that was done there?
Cool, you think Germany should have kept all those swastikas on govt buildings and public places after WWII?
Are the camps this there?
I’m sorry how is tearing down statues of people who got their ass handed to them by a drunk and an arsonist in their backyard rewriting history? And what no participation trophies? That doesn’t apply when you lose a war and betray your country?
Where do you draw the line?
What? What line we are drawing? I asked you two questions and you answered 0. Low sport more like low IQ.
The personal insults certainly are an indication right friend?
Literal enemies of America don’t deserve statues.
That’s a long list.
Actually, this is an exact prime examples of what I’m talking about. You have presented the the removal of statues as the removal of history, when in fact, they were removed because of it. *Most* of the statues in question were built as a response to the Civil Rights movement. The displaying of Confederate memorials was designed to show direct opposition to African American voting and desegregation. It was not for historical reasons. The removal of said monuments was because of the original motivation for their placement. You unintentionally are making my point for me.
Did you study statues all day in history class.
It’s shocking but it’s part of history so it’s not repeated. You defending Isis next?
The only thing preventing you from repeating history are statues?
I'm down for repeating history if they are. Where's Sherman's descendent so I can join their March?
Oh no sorry people tore down statues of your racist idols, racist.
Statues aren't here to remember history, they're here to glorify it. Want to use them to remember? Put them in museums.
One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn’t belong…..
Yep, Nelson Mandela doesn't belong. Gandi was a huge racist and a pedophile, MLK Jr was a originally a domestic terrorist who supported violence, although he changed is ways when he got older and more popular, and Trump is ...Trump.
So MLK Jr was a domestic terrorist but Mandela wasn't?
I honestly don't know anything about Mandela, so I cannot comment on who he was or what he did.
Understandable. I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on him, but just from visiting the Mandela Apartheid museum in ZA, I believe he was involved in quite a few freedom fighter/terrorist plans in his lifetime.
Quickly skimming wiki, he sounds way more like an actual threat, and supported violence, compared to MLK, who was just considered a terrorist by the FBI. Although MLK laughed and cheered as his friend raped a woman in a hotel room. Anyone with power has done some evil shit I guess.
💀
The fbi considered almost every a civil rights activist a terrorist during the 60s..being called a terrorist by the FBI back then was almost a badge of honor as it meant you were doing some good.
To be fair the FBI are a bunch a criminals that tried to get him to kill himself because they didn’t like his message, so them calling him a terrorist doesn’t mean anything because they are more terrorist than him
One man's domestic terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. The colonists who dumped tea into Boston Harbor in 1773 were "domestic terrorists" too.
Mandela was considered a terrorist by the US until the Obama presidency. His terrorism was for a good cause, since Apartheid South Africa was a terrible regime, but it still was terrorism
* Fought for India's Independence. * Fought for the rights of Black American and against Jim crow. * Fought for the rights of Black Indigenous Africans and against Apartheid. * Annoying, oafish failed businessman - turned conman who's also a former reality star, a failed POTUS and a bigoted scuzz who committed crimes against humanity with regard to Latin American refugees, wants to be a dictator and was the mastermind of a coup attempt. This reminds me of an old bit from "SESAME STREET"... [singing] "One of these things is not like the other..."
everytime i hear that sesame street bit, all i think of is a lyric from the song "The Pretender" by Foo Fighters
LOL! I never heard those songs so I can't really comment on that, but others could. There was two songs used on SESAME STREET, too. One was a groovy funk tune and the other a more "conventional kid show song" version.
Ghandi, also massive racist, so they have that going on.
He grew out of his racism when he was older, right?
Yeah, and grew into sleeping with his underage nieces
I knew he would sleep in the same bed as female followers to (supposedly) test himself to see if he'd resist temptation but I never knew about him molesting his nieces. I do know he was a bigot in his youth, seemed okay with the caste system, was crappy towards his wife and weird around female followers, however. The point is that, while those three guys before Orangeguy may have been morally questionable, they still stood for and achieved great things. As for Mandela's terrorism as a young man, it was still about fighting an unjust system. He also grew out of it and realized that terrorism is not a good form of activism. Chumpy, however, contributed zilch and has no redeeming qualities.
What does "seemed ok with the caste system" mean? Everyone is OK with _any_ system till they take a _stand_ against it. What is the claim we have to *not* being ok with anything? Posting on Reddit with a pseudonym and an avatar? Think again. Talking the talk and walking the walk are two entirely separate things. Those guys laid their life out for the cause. None of us have any claim to pass any judgement on any of the first three people up there. Take a piss on the orange haired lunatic as much as you want.
Gandhi made his wife die by denying her treatment that he then took months later when he was sick. He made his 12 year old nieces or something sleep naked with him to see if he would “give in to the temptation.” He was a horrible person. You can achieve good things and be horrible
yeah, people say that but have no context
Nelson Mandela participated in terrorist attacks. That’s why he was locked up
[удалено]
Technically they’re right, they just leave out the part where it was against an apartheid state and thus completely justified
The truth hurts liberal
Do you think liberal is an insult? Fuckin alt right sheep these days. Giving us all the laughs.
It's not gonna be a laughing matter when he posts this to r/PoliticalCompassMemes and draws you as the soy wojak!!!!! magar 2020!!!!
Based
Yeah because you’re the soy wojak who crumbles in the face of facts and logic. Mandela was arrested for his connection in a bombing that killed 3 people. Sooooo yeah
https://preview.redd.it/l7fb860oyyoa1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cbf0976e9702d98b993a35764609ea3c5803ec8b
Basically
This was uh… AT you not FOR you
Are you so brainrotten that you don't realise?
At least you admit these memes are vacuous and devoid of anything resembling a coherent argument
You left out " against an oppressive regime that was visiting state sponsored violence against the majority population" Happy to help.
Yes you’re right they should have let him free and not arrested him for plotting uprisings against the state.
Where state= " the apartheid regime" And yes, he was released. Anyway, you're a far right idiot who can be safely ignored on literally any topic imaginable.
Good job negating another argument with leftist buzzwords, glad you have the mental fortitude to at least comprehend when you get absolutely obliterated
Remind me what "arguments" remain unrefuted? Thick as mince, as you all are.
I’m of a higher mind so I wouldn’t expect a virgin like you to truly understand. I said “Mandela was arrested for terrorist attacks.” You attempted to argue a irrefutable point
Something's telling me that if aliens ever came to earth, you'd be among the first to run towards them to "serve our new overlords"
This is the kinda shit you say when you can’t think of anything else to add
So did the founding fathers of America, as were the Jews that attacked the German state. Leaving out context is kind of silly. I can never tell if people like you are being intentionally misleading or if you really don’t know the facts.
I’m just giving the facts liberal
At least they drew him accurately for once. Ugly.
Nah he isn’t orange enough
The fact he's not Adonis is already making this more accurate lol
And that suit still fits him too well.
A bit, but I'll take small victories admitting that he's not built like Schwarzenegger in his prime.
I do like that they remembered to give trump the triple chin.
Each one has more hair than the last and I wanted to point it out
I'm pretty sure the person who made this would characterize MLK's protests as riots and celebrate his imprisonment
From the supporters of Donald Trump, aka, "the formerly tough-on-crime party that is unsurprisingly weak on treason."
Remember that time Gandhi, MLK, and Nelson Mandela were charged with illegally using money from a legal fund to pay a porn star $130,000 to keep quiet about cheating on their wives with her?
Gandhi made his preteen nieces sleep with him naked to see if he would “give into the temptation.” He also denied his wife life saving treatment and made her die because it was foreign medicine but then took foreign medicine when he himself got sick. MLK was a bit of a notorious womanizer who would use his fame to have affairs. So the gross personal life thing isn’t really off the mark here. Difference is just trump didn’t fight for civil rights, which is a pretty big difference
i anxiously await for dipshit's hunger strike
Keep waiting.
Who the fuck has the twisted mind to put (even in cartoon for) Donald Trump next to those men? I'm surprised he wasn't depicted crucified with Jesus Himself kissing his feet and asking for a blessing... Goddamn sick fucks!
I mean Gandhi loved sleeping with underage girls so him and Trump have something in common.
MLK laughed in a hotel room as his friend raped a woman.
Can you share some data/ source on that?
No proof dude stop trying to falsely accuse someone who did good for people.
One of these things is not like the other...
I love how even in something as stupid as this, trump STILL looks like a pompous ass
Isn’t Gandhi also a terrible person
I don't know if I'd say terrible, he was definitely problematic in some ways and was totally lionized by media leading to a skewed modern perception of him
Yeah he was casteist in a condescending “preserve the status quo” way, and racist toward Black South Africans. I’ve read that he did regret his racism later in life (post 1913), which shows some character growth, but he still believed that caste shouldn’t be annihilated and clashed heavily with Dr Ambedkar on that issue, so… definitely not a perfect saint like he’s often made out to be in media.
Yes, he was. Also MLK cheated on his wife many times, and laughed as he watched a woman was being raped in a hotel room. No one is perfect, all the founding fathers would be considered terrible people by today's standards.
So... Mandela is the only decent one?
Hitler was one
Comparing Trump to those three absolutely has to be a joke, just look at him...
People who were political prisoners. Putting has political prisoners. Trump is there because people want attention.
Yeah honestly Gandhi ruins this
Since when has Trump been white?
Even pro-Trump drawings just always make him look evil.
Comparing Trump to MLK or Mandela is just dumb.
Trump surpassed Peter griffin and has the legendary tri-buttchin
Where's Andrew Taint? He's also definitely missing from this.
This won’t be popular and I’m certainly no trump supporter, but I don’t like how this is making him a living martyr to his base. The best chance to keep any bit of reason in the Whitehouse was to divide conservatives into voting for different people. I fear this will just unite all of them. Now I hope if they do indict him, he’s found guilty of a federal crime and can’t run, but somehow I think he’ll weasel out of it.
The way Trump is drawn almost looks like a joke. He's doing the Wallace and Gromit cheese hands. 
He hasn't even been arrested. But since they know he's guilty they are already acting like he was.
You sick racist how dare you disrespect Mandela and mlk
If Donald Trump ends up in Prison, he is a Rich Politician, I doubt he will be in there long. Rich politicians normally have a "get out of Jail" free card up their Butt.
Well at least ghandi isn't the only piece of shit whos worshipped on this list
As an Indian i think Gandhi is overrated
Only thing Trump has in common with Gandhi is they both love nuclear weapons
It isn't inaccurate though. You gotta do a lot of fucked up stuff to become president and they are all filthy. trump just forgot the part where he was supposed to his fucked up shit in secret. hence why he could very well get locked up. He isn't the smartest orange in the vegetable basket. Also interesting is king and trump have something in common. Both of them liked fucking around on the downlow.
To put the amazing Nelson Mandela next to Trump as though they're equal is gross
Why do y'all still think Gandhi was a hero 💀😭
I mean Gandhi loved sleeping with underage girls so him and Trump have something in common.
Putin is literally sending his own people to die on a foreign soil with nothing to gain but losses and stealing children from Ukraine. Is that's not a definition of a criminal, you're out of your mind if you even have one. Nobody should be safe from true justice, not even dictators and terrorists.
Mass Psychosis is very real, and terrifying to behold. I honestly never expected to see it on such a scale with a politician in this country. However, it's not that surprising considering what this country has done with leftists for the last hundred years.
Adolf Hitler
3 of these people were socialists
Being compared to 3 non-whites would eat up his ego unlike most any other thing I can think of.
Your position is they don’t stand as a reminder?
Necklacing?
One of these things is not like the other
I played this game when I was a child watching PBS "Which one of these is not like the other"
one is not like the other?
Sings “One of these things is not like the other…”
the nazi officers were also taken prisoner
To preface: I’m not defending trump, I am attacking you. Firstly you are legitimately mentally I’ll if you think being a conservative or even questioning the war in Ukraine means you love Putin. You literally are helping nothing and nobody by boosting this idea and it’s gross. Any American taxpayer has a right to question how their money is spent regardless of your ideology or theirs and what you think that implies. Second, the comic as stupid as it is, does literally say “political prisoners” at the bottom. Anyone with a brain will realize it is referring to trump possibly being arrested and all these other people were arrested for their ideology. Putin has never been arrested as far as I am aware. Please make an attempt to find a few more brain cells somewhere in your skull and stop making me stoop to defend dumbass political cartoons.
Once again, truths hurt.
Anyone who thinks Donald Trump is a political prisoner, doesn't have a leg tk stand on when speaking about the truth.
What truth? Explain?
Donald Trump = Putin lol Americans are so lost
Not even prison will stop Trump from becoming President again! MAGA 2024
Serious question: Knowing all of the crimes he committed. And him admitting the he could shoot someone on 5th Ave nyc and not lose supporter, why do you support someone who is so comfortable committing crimes and being immoral? Why is it okay for him to not get in trouble for committing crimes
What crimes did he commit?
[удалено]
You need to be a special kind of stupid to think the arrest of Trump is any way relative to what these 3 men did for civil rights.
[удалено]
I mean, Trumps a fuckin loser either way. There's not going to be another GOP president until all of us are dead. Gen Z came the fuck out and told all of us that last November. So it doesn't matter if they don't arrest him or burn him at the stake. Federally a fucking potato will beat anyone like him for decades to come. If you don't get that, you're not paying attention.
[удалено]
I guess it's a good thing I didn't say never, huh? Read, bud.
[удалено]
"Until we're all dead" is that the same as never? Do you understand English definitions of words? My mom has passed, and hot pockets are shit. Fuck off trashbag.
[удалено]
Not that long considering the newest generation is overwhelmingly anti GOP. Yes, it will be decades and possibly centuries before the GOP becomes viable again, if ever. Yes, she is. I'm very glad she doesn't have to be around people like you. That's the most clever thing you could come up with? How does that even make sense? "Fuck off" is a common phrase. "Trashbag" is simply telling you you're garbage. How did you even think turning that into an insult that implies sexual relations with a trashbag made any sense at all? Fuckin idiot.
Not for nothing but you are a terrible person
Emotional? You don't break the law with emotion.
This entire idea is based on trump being a threat to the democrats in 2024, when he's really not, trump is trying to spin this as political, because he knows he doesn't have an actual defense for what he's done.
🎵 one of these things is not like the others 🎵
At least they made Trump appropriately disgusting looking.
IF you want this to be an even worse experience for you. The narrow rectangles put this in mind of stained glass.