Proof! Liberals Suck at Life Too
I could go on for days about my issues with “conservatives” – namely, those of a Republican, Christian, and homophobic variety (see “Congress”). However, I came across one (of many of course, let’s be real – fanatics are usually assholes) example of a liberal being a complete shithead.
Yeah – shithead. That’s the technical term for the person I’m about to describe.
Actually, I don’t even know who I’m talking about. Why is that? Because all I know is that this asshat drives a crappy silver Saturn wagon with the bumper sticker reading… wait for it…
“The Germans Supported Their Troops Too”
Yeah. Get out your boxing gloves.
To drive the point home, the bumper sticker also had a yellow ribbon in a red circle with slash through it. This eyesore was surrounded by other innocuous, if left leaning, homages to liberal politicians and philosophies. However, the “Germans” sticker was over-the-top wrong. Seriously. It was incorrect in its implication.
- Not all Germans believed in Hitler’s philosophy of the “Final Solution.” Many belonged to the Nazi party, which was the ruling government party in Germany. In dictatorships, many people don’t have choices on what they need to “follow.” As terrible as it seems, we’re survivalists and people saved their asses by pledging to a political party with abhorrent leaders.
- Support for a person or group of people does not imply support of a philosophy. Obviously, this dick has the luxury of not fighting in the war at the moment, because if his/her ass got shipped off, byebye, over to Iraq, I bet they’d sure as hell want the support of the American people – namely in the form of Kevlar and bullets. To many, the military is the key to a more prosperous future – an education, job security, a way out of poverty to see the world. Not everyone has the luxury of driving to work everyday at Suburban Square in their crappy billboard of liberal ideas. Some people join the military, regardless of their personal political philosophies. Unfortunately, war involves actions of questionable ethical character, but then you should brandish a bumper sticker about the wrongs of WAR, not of the PEOPLE involved in it.
Seriously, though… just go fuck yourself. No matter what erudite and articulate arguments I could present for why that bumper sticker is so fucking wrong will just come full circle to… fuck yourself. And then maybe you should donate some money to the VA and the aging troops from WWII you don’t support who fought so you could have that lameass bumper sticker on your American-made car. Otherwise, it would probably be in German. The irony of your idiocy hurts.
Similar articles that might also interest you:
- Help Place A Pet Foundation and get a cool sticker!
- My Smartphone is Smarter Than I Am
- America’s Compass is Broken!
- Iraq Pullout Bill Was A P.R. Stunt
- Road rage etiquette
Comments
Justin
So, someone stops worshiping a flag and reasonable “moderates” (read: intellectually incoherent and ethically wanting) such as yourself freak out. Opposition to the “support our troops” jingoistic idiocy is perfectly justified for anyone who does not support vacuous cliches that serve simply to stifle criticism of an imperialistic government. You understand “supporting” troops to be… what? Providing better armor and means to slaughter an indigenous population that did nothing to earn the genocide that this government has forced upon them? If supporting the troops amounts to simple complicity in a terrible atrocity, then it is only the “shitheads” who have seem through this kind of stupidity. Even those of us who hate the government, its armed lapdogs in the police and military, and the mindless functionaries (such as yourself) who help keep it running, still want those soldiers who have been injured as a result of this government (and the above parties) policies to receive care. Even better, they shouldn’t be off murdering people in the name of stupidity at all. That is “support” for them, as human beings, not hired mercenaries. If this country tried to provide jobs worth having, it easily could. However, as its history suggests, the government running this war wagon does not give a fuck about people with they are obstacles to whichever goal of the moment seems most necessary to maintaining U.S. hegemony.
Please don’t be a dumb ass and act as if all this government does is fight for “freedom” or some such abstractions. We have overthrown more democracies, installed more dictators, led more paramilitary death squads intentionally against democratic and independence movements, and generally acted as a right drain upon the global wellbeing more than any other nation on this planet. WWII was not the only war ever fought by the U.S. government. Even then, it is hardly without both its pointless atrocities and the complicity of the U.S. government (along with the UK and France) in allowing Hitler, Franco and Mussolini to establish themselves as fascist powers in order to combat the horror of workers threatening the profits of capital. Again, familiarize yourself with the non-whitewashed reality of American foreign policy and history, and stop whining and bitching when someone threatens the sanctity of your blind acceptance of nationalistic charlatanism.
…And to save you the trouble, no, I am not a “liberal”. They don’t usually have enough of a spine or intellectual integrity to oppose the U.S.Govt’s military industrial complex and ‘patriotic’ mythologies.
Adrienne Saia
Oh Justin… a very-well articulated comment, but you’ve completely missed my point.
I majored in history and have traveled the world, including thrid-world dictatoriships. I’m not endorsing that government, or actually espousing any political theory in this article. My point is that you can be a liberal (as wellas conservative) to a point where it becomes destructive.
My boyfriend spent over a year in Iraq, so I’m also not indifferent to the bloodshed there. In fact, I’ve heard some fucked-up shit that would make you vomit, and I think this war is crap (if you read any former articles of mine, you’d know, but since you think I’m an idiot, you wouldn’t have bothered to skim them). But that’s beside the point – my whole issue is that I still supported him. You can think that’s also wrong in itself, but that’s your opinion.
Thanks for the input, but next time, I wouldn’t make inferences that aren’t there. This isn’t a pro-war article, nor one that in any way assumes that I “blindly accept” anything our government tells us. It’s an article speaking out against a moral and ethical value of not supporting PEOPLE as opposed to not supporting an IDEA that really got me heated.
Justin
I had a partner in the middle east as well, before things went sour from time apart, and I understand that neither of us wants them dead. However, whenever I have heard “support our troops,” it is almost exclusively coming from someone who takes criticism of militarism and the military as an offense to their senses. I do support people, in the sense that I don’t want them dead or maimed. As to how that support is defined for the people wearing yellow ribbons on their cars, I can’t seem to find out. I support people, generally, and in that sense, support the Iraqis as well as the U.S. soldiers as human beings who should not have to die in this militaristic venture. By that same token, however, I think this venture is morally wrong, and Iraqis are entirely justified in defending their homes from occupation, and so I do not support the presence of U.S. soldiers in the Middle east. Whether or not that qualifies as “supporting the troops,” I really am unconcerned. However, since the term is continuously thrown around without being defined, I feel it justified to lambaste its usage for political jingoism (which is the primary use as I see it).
No, I have not read your other articles, as I wandered onto your blog from a google search-fest. I apologize if I mis-characterize your position, but I would still appreciate you clarifying what it means to “support” a soldier. Does that “support” mean approving of increased military expenditures to help those soldiers kill innocent people more efficiently? If that is the case, then I would much rather 10,000 U.S. soldiers die so that people call for a more rapid withdrawal than have occupying forces stay and kill another few hundred thousands Iraqis. Does it mean bringing them home? Does it mean not criticizing the military, the administration, or anything else during war time (irrespective of the nature or injustice of the war) so as to avoid “demoralization”?
Any clarification would be nice. If you take down the level of verbal acidity that was in your initial post, I will do the same.