Jack Black axes tour over bandmate's Trump comment

Calls for order over justice is the hallmark of someone who never had to fight for their rights. It's a position of privilege.

Something something letter from Birmingham Jail

The founders believed in political violence. That’s the point of the 2nd amendment.

That’s the thing. Violence should never be the answer. The problem is that the worst of us count on other people not fighting. So, when it's actually time for violence, it’s too late.

What you've done is proposong a solution without clearly defining the problem. That makes your question sound appealing, it makes it sound rhetorical, but actually is meaningless without context.

Supposed the shooter had succeeded in his objective. One might imagine that Joe would win in November, maybe. But four years from now there would be a different candidate with just as bad views on those same issues, and the institutional problems that allowed Trump to gain power would still be in place.

Is gambling on 4 years of possible peace worth legitimatizing the policy of executing people whose political views you don't like? That's something you have to decide for yourself.

Many fundamental issues facing the country today go back decades. Pick your poison. Stacking the courts is an old strategy. Citizens United happened long ago. Redistricting and gerrymandering have been happening for decades if not centuries. All of those things matter, none of them were caused by Trump, and none of them would be fixed if Trump were gone. The systemic weaknesses can only be fixed by implementing systemic solutions, whatever those might be.

Ever since this incident when U.S. politicians collectively argued that political violence was not okay, I have thought 'I wonder how Fred Hampton would feel about these folks denouncing political violence?' -I admit I don't know the answer to this question, but when I consider the specific people going around vocally denouncing political violence, I'm not so convinced that those same people don't protest too much.

How many rights taken away is too much?

Choosing to travel through time to kill a historical figure is easy because we know exactly what will happen if nothing is changed.

Killing a modern day figure is different because we don't know what's going to happen in the future. We can guess, but that's it.

For example, at what point would it have been appropriate to assassinate Smedley Butler? 92 years ago today, it might have seemed like he was poised to become a dictator.

Is political violence truly never the answer?

Personally, no. But, I'm a "no-first-strikes" pacifist. Violence harms the victim, the perpetrator, and those who witness it directly or indirectly. It can also cause great harm to efforts to affect political and social change.

However, I think that history does show that it has an important role, supposing its adherents follow strict ethical constraints and do not attempt to install themselves as bosses (something that is not terribly common in history). For non-violence to be truly effective, it needs to be clear and plausible that violence is the alternative. The Labor Movement had the likes of The Molly Maguires. The suffragettes had the likes of the WSPU. And the non-violent anvil of Dr. King had the hammer of Malcom X.

I get a lot of downvotes whenever I ask this and very rarely responded to, but if violence is the solution, why have you not started the violence, or at least started gathering people together?

I would think that if Trump was going to remove his own term limits so he could be President for Life and then start murdering his political rivals, it would have been in his first term when he had the House, Senate, and Supreme Court locked down. As it stands, he's only going to be in power for another four years, worst-case scenario. It would take a constitutional amendment to change that (which is a big part of why he isn't President for Life). I'm not going to sit here and say when it's okay to start killing politicians, other than that we aren't there yet.

I'd like to ask you a question as well: if Trump died, what do you think would have happened? Do you think that 100% of the gun-toting pro-Trump militias throughout the country would have laid down their arms and admitted defeat? Do you think that the political faction that is, on average, more likely to own and use guns than the left, would have said "well that sucks I guess"? Do you think that Democrats across the country would be safe? Or do you think it would be a Shot Heard Cross the Coasts that would have started a free-for-all of political violence that the country hasn't seen in decades - perhaps centuries?

While I do think that the right of the people to govern themselves has certain implications I won't get into here, it also means we have legislative options on the table. You have freedom of speech, which is why we can ask questions like yours and mine. We have the right to assemble, form parties, and elect officials. Let's use those rights while the government hasn't decided to destroy them yet; and if they ever do, let's take the discussion to a more anonymous forum like on Tor or I2P.

Political violence cuts both ways. I don't think anyone thinks what happens to politicians go against the cartels in Mexico is good or healthy system. For democracy to work we can't have people constantly fear for their lives. Sure Trump is a terrible human being but I don't want my candidates living with the same fear. So our only choice is to condem it. Also when bad acting becomes the norm bad actors will thrive. If political assassinations becomes the norm do you think morally justified "good guys" assassin going after Hitlers are going to win/out pace organized crime like what we see in Mexico?

At the end of the day ends don't justify the means. Violence breeds Violence. In this modern age if we want to create a peaceful society we have to do it peacefully. Violence might be an appealing means to an end and while we might have the moral high ground but they use the same logic to justify their violence.

It never the answer to advocate for it in a non-political venue where you're part of a group that can associated with your comment without their consent. He torpedoed their careers as a band.

I hate Trump, but I don't want him to be made a martyr and I'd be pissed off if I was Jack Black and this guy fucked up our public performances without my knowing about it first.

When is it okay if it's against whichever politicians you like?

I don't understand why people tend to forget that opinions vary. There literally cannot be a moment where everyone agrees someone can only be stopped by violence. Don't worry though, sadly like 95% of Lemmy has been proud of this bloodlust the past few days. Your opinion is popular.

No, it's not okay. Two wrongs don't make a right. Criticizing the language Trump uses but then praising Kyle would be hypocrisy.

So you don't think it's ok for trump to make disrespectful comments about other people that almost die? Hmmmm

It's worth a super sarcastic apology.

The fact they cancelled the tour and that he split with his manager, makes me believe it wasn't that harmonic anymore and it was the final straw.

If not, I agree it was a massive overreaction.

Inciting violence is not appropriate, but he could've easily just said he should've kept it to himself and move on.

Maybe he feels he can't be a showman and be all fun when democracy is at stake.

It's noteworthy that it doesn't appear black canceled the tour just out of nowhere. I think they were getting pressure from the government based on what I've read.

Comedy group makes joke on stage, more at 11

And here we are with the unpredictable ridiculous shit happening purely because Trump is around again. I for one did not miss 2016-2020.

Agreed, kind of a dumb comment to make in front of a large crowd. But the reaction is way overblown.

Blindsided because he didn't think Kyle would say something that could legitimately hurt JB's image and thus the rest of his career, which is clearly the priority over Tenacious D.

"We are quitting because you appeared to mouth certain words"

Yeah, massive over reaction. Also explains why there's no footage/audio of the incident.

Watching Lewis Spears' (an Australian comedian) take on it, it's likely that the venues cancelled the events, and this is the PR reason.

Not really when guns are getting fired.

I so want this to be an epic version of that song.

Journalism has devolved into buzzword salad. Facts optional

Because everyone outside of the right thinks you have to uphold decorum while they burn shit down around our ears.

Because of mods. Most other communities on Lemmy will let you crack jokes like that. There are two specific mods who just perm ban anyone saying that about Trump, but not about Biden

The Ballad of the Rocker Who Rocks and Whiny Jack

Jack Black sure makes it sound one-sided.

https://www.instagram.com/p/C9e5msPpC3y/

Might also be because a senator for the local dumb dumb party wanted to kick them out. Australian officials kinda love doing that as publicity. Freaking out on American celebrities is a political game, ever since someone did it to Johnny Depp and Amber Herd... And their dogs... And private jet that didn't bother with docking at customs.

I do not condemn people who celebrate murderers and rapists getting the death penalty. And I even feel the same way myself, although I don't support the death penalty.

I refuse to condemn people who want him gone, even though I don't want a system that allows it.

Right??

They go low, we go high!!! (and then we die)

this comment needs to be higher. it's amazing how little self-awareness people have when they show astonishment that only Trump can act like Trump.

well, duh, that's why he's a dickhead. wishing him harm only makes one another bird of the same feather.