Sup Forums will defend this

>Sup Forums will defend this

>cucks
not even once

for fucks sake thats not punk

theres nothing punk about being a pandering, easily offended pussy

its quite the opposite actually

They're SJW's who have no talent at singing or their instruments.
Is this shocking?

Andrew Jackson did literally nothing wrong.

Trail of Tears was pretty wrong
Especially when he didn't have permission to do it

dueled guys and didn't afraid of anything

I thought this was a joke until I wiki the band

The Trail of Tears only resulted in deaths because of an extremely early winter that no-one could have predicted. The federal government actually wanted to support them all the way to the new reservations, but they got separated from the tribes by the Mississippi.

holy shit this is like the opposite of punk

>Andrew "I killed the bank" Jackson did nothing wrong

He didn't have permission.

i'm so glad i don't like their music knowing they're a bunch of pussies, liking a band and then find out that the people behind the music are a bunch of tools feels bad.

fuck the bank you jewish pig

>liking a band and then find out that the people behind the music are a bunch of tools feels bad.
this is how I feel right now

at least i have the consolation that i didnt pay for any of their albums

He did. The vast majority of chieftains sold their land to the government (for above market value), and were given free land out west, plus two years before they had to move, and help moving. The remainder was basically the equivalent of eminent domain, which is still practised today. Anyway, Jackson only wanted them to move because he was genuinely concerned for their welfare, as the southern states hated them and wanted to kill all of them. He was actually extremely kind, considering that natives killed his entire family.

>defending banks

NWO shills on Sup Forums is the last thing this board needs.

Worcester v Georgia

that's such a fucking lame post

Get the fuck out you slimy Jewish neo con.

>>>/bitcoin/

Nothing to do with it.

Calm down you satan serving lost child.

>He was actually extremely kind, considering that natives killed his entire family.
So racism and stereotypes are OK?
Tell me how "the natives" killing his family justifies the punishment of them all.

>that it can be interpreted in different ways

So can I interpret and call AJJ as Andrew Jackson Jihad?

I've repeatedly explained how they weren't actually punished.

its for the betterment of America so its justified

I would do it again

In the years following the Act, the Cherokee filed several lawsuits regarding conflicts with the state of Georgia. Some of these cases reached the Supreme Court, the most influential being Worcester v. Georgia. Samuel Worcester and other non-Native Americans were convicted by Georgia law for residing in Cherokee territory in the state of Georgia without a license. Worcester was sentenced to prison for four years, and appealed the ruling, arguing that this sentence violated treaties made between Indian Nations and the United States federal government by imposing state laws on Cherokee lands. The Court ruled in Worcester's favor, declaring that the Cherokee Nation was subject only to federal law and that the Supremacy Clause barred legislative interference by the state of Georgia. Chief Justice Marshall argued, "The Cherokee nation, then, is a distinct community occupying its own territory in which the laws of Georgia can have no force. The whole intercourse between the United States and this Nation, is, by our constitution and laws, vested in the government of the United States."[12][13]

Andrew Jackson did not, however, enforce the Supreme Court mandate barring Georgia from intruding on Cherokee lands. He feared that enforcement would lead to open warfare between federal troops and the Georgia militia, which would compound the ongoing crisis in South Carolina and lead to a broader civil war. Instead, he vigorously negotiated a land exchange treaty with the Cherokee.[14] Political opponents Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams, who supported the Worcester decision, were outraged by Jackson’s refusal to uphold Cherokee claims against the state of Georgia.[15] Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote an account of Cherokee assimilation into the American culture, declaring his support of the Worcester decision.[citation needed]

That's what they're trying to say, but they don't want to lose SJW album sales. I'm not a fan of Andrew Jackson Jihad, but this newsletter does sound a bit forced imo.

>its the AJJ defense force again

fuck off

its not up for interpretation, neither is their song about straight white men being lucky

they mean exactly what they say

Funny how when they were confronted by the actual historical fact the Jackson fans left.

>their song about straight white men being lucky
>they mean exactly what they say

Really? I was told that they were being sarcastic with that song.

I fail to see what your point is.

>I was told that they were being sarcastic with that song.
thats what everyone on Sup Forums was told, I'm assuming by some disillusioned and confused AJJ fan

in the context of their pussy leftist behavior it only makes sense that it was completely a sincere song

He ignored the Supreme Court

To avoid a civil war. And then he helped the Indians out. He did the best possible thing given the circumstances. I think you massively overestimate the power of the federal government, and the size of its army. If Jackson had tried to force Georgia to do what he wanted, then they probably would have just seceded, and the natives would have been trapped in a country full of people that want them all dead.

>straight white men being lucky

Its weird how on Sup Forums most people are all for saying white people are better than other races but when someone frames that same sentiment in a less appealing way they go ape shit

saying you like being white and would rather be white than another race for whatever reason =/= "lol all white people have it easy in life and all colored people are inherently disadvantaged"

>Band changes their name
>Sup Forums throws a hissy fit about it for MONTHS on end
But the SJWs are the ones who are easily offended right?

I've never understood how it can be interpreted that way. I've tried to but it's far too sincere sounding a song to be seen as sarcastic in any way

sjw are just the opposite side of the same spectrum that most of the Sup Forums Sup Forums and Sup Forums kids who have started posting here fall on.

what makes you think Im offended

I just think its pathetic that a punk band is so quick to pander, grovel, and apologize to a loud minority of their listeners

This

Coming from someone who actually enjoys AJJ, this shit is just fucking weak.

more like
>SJWs harass band for MONTHS on end
>band cracks under pressure and changes name
>Sup Forums laughs about it

this

AJJ will go down as the originators of Cuck Punk

The worst part about all this is that nobody gave a shit about their name, at least not to my knowledge. It wasn't like Viet Cong who where getting shows cancelled cause of it. I mean, Andrew Jackson Jihad have had that name for nearly 13 years now with no problems so I'm not sure why they felt the need to change it now

Because the name is offensive.

don't see anyone laughing about it bud. see little bitch boys crying about the big bad SJW

sucks desu (more like cucks amiright)

I really like the band, love knife man and people who can eat people, (or utensil person and cannibal abled person are equally as fortunate). They really shouldn't have changed it and now the sjws know they can influence the bands creative production, it just seems like a slippery slope..

>big bad SJW
>has effected change

Sure is big and bad.

punk is supposed to offensive, especially to the ruling class

when the ruling class shifts as it has, when leftism is the status quo, "punk" that conforms to it isnt really punk at all