Was he right?

Was he right?

Other urls found in this thread:

snopes.com/theodore-roosevelt-on-criticizing-the-president/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Damn right he was.

No. America is the best and ypu need to keep non christians/whites out to keep it like that

Die you idiot racist nazi pig. Die.

Thats why we won

Of course. Only filthy commies and nazis disagree.

Depends.

Timely comics cap thought America was already great.

Stan lees Marvel always been more socially liberal.

The responses in this thread are why I'm happy Trump is in office. Fuck off libtards

I see a new claim for why "he won" almost every thread. "It's the SJWs!" "It's the political correctness!" "It's the economy!" "It's the brown people!" "It's memes!"

Well which fucking is it, Sup Forums?

Yeah.

This speech, on the other hand, is one that could be used for evil just as much as for good.

A mix of those + wanting jobs that aren't ever going to come back

...

...

Ultimate cap, timely cap, hydra cap are closer to the first cap.

...

Who even wrote this? How did they not look at it at any point in the writing and notice that it could literally be used about anything?
Think being gay is wrong, but everyone else say's it okay? "No you move."
Think the jews are a scourge upon your country, but the rest of the world think they're okay, and that you need to be stopped? "No you move."

Morals are subjective.

T. Classical liberalist.

I'm not saying they aren't. Just that it can so obviously be used for something that Cap would absolutely not agree with, that it's completely out of his character to say something like that.

Not to me.

He said something similar in the older comics about it.

What do you mean not to me? It can be used to justify any action, simply by saying you're right, and they're wrong. It can be used to justify the fucking Nazi regime.

your unending childish butthurt. And the ACA being a shitfest.

The point isn't that "No, you move" makes you automatically right. The point is that you shouldn't change your belief because of mob rule, which is true. What is popular is not automatically right. What wins an election or a war is not automatically right. If you know something is right, you have to stand up for it.

>If you know something is right, you have to stand up for it.
That is what the Nazi regime did when everyone told them to stop. They knew they where right, so they tried to force everyone else to join them.
I know the intention of it, but it can still be used to justify anything, because anything can be seen as right or wrong by anyone.

yeah it's not a great speech

it's been scrutinized since the comic was published almost a decade ago.

I mean, none of you in the thread remember that because you were 5 but it was a pretty big discussion amongst the fandom about how it was a pretty ham-handed speech since you could switch it and make it about any ideology

It's not out of character. The context is that Spider-Man asks him how he, a man who embodies the country, can continue fighting when the country itself seems like it's against him. Cap quotes Whitman, clarifying to Spidey that the country is not the laws or the press or the courts, it's everyone. So basically, Spidey asks "How do you keep fighting when everyone tells you you're wrong?" and he's replying "Because I'm not."

>America is nothing without it's ideals.
>So let's mass import millions of people who don't share those ideals.

Here.

>country is everyone
>everyone tells cap he's wrong
>but he's not cause...

that's some no-logic user

What? The Nazis battered and killed those who opposed them. The problem was that everyone else was passive about the Nazi takeover. Countless people just let it happen.

Also, did you not even read the first sentence of my post?

>The point isn't that "No, you move" makes you automatically right.

It's not a justification. It's saying that you shouldn't change your mind just because people are telling you to stop. Cap isn't saying you should never change your mind - but that popularity or emotion or violence doesn't make something right.

Everyone as an individual, not everyone as a mob.

I think the base idea of not giving in to mob rule is fine. But the way it's worded: "I'm right no matter what anyone else thinks". It's eschewing reasoning and compromise

That's not how it's worded, though. You can't say it's worded that way when it's not.

when does everyone go from a group of individuals to a mob

serious question, is it when they do something that you don't like? Is it when they break the law? Is it when they do something you agree with?

Everyone is still an individual in a mob, they just have a shared goal.

I don't see how the Cap speech promotes the individual when it in and of itself is a blanket statement about "morality".

So popularity makes something right to you, then?

no, of course not

but neither does something "unpopular" makes it right because it's against the norm

I think you have to look at each situation individual and look for a specific solution instead of blanketing it as "if I don't like it, and stand up for it, then that automatically makes it right and the moral choice".

>but neither does something "unpopular" makes it right because it's against the norm

Cap never asserts this, though.

>I think you have to look at each situation individual and look for a specific solution instead of blanketing it as "if I don't like it, and stand up for it, then that automatically makes it right and the moral choice".

Cap never asserts this either.

"Stand up for what we believe in, no matter the consequences"

His speech assumes he's right. Which is fine when he is. But there are plenty of people who are wrong that would argue the same way.

That really un american to say user

>he's replying "Because I'm not."
Still feels like a weird thing for Cap to say, since anyone can say that about any action.

He's talking about opinions here. The other quote can be used to justify actions. "No I won't stop killing people. I think I'm doing the right thing, so fuck off."

>The Nazis battered and killed those who opposed them.
And they did that because they saw themselves as being in the right, and everyone else where wrong. It was them saying "No, you move."

>It's saying that you shouldn't change your mind just because people are telling you to stop. Cap isn't saying you should never change your mind - but that popularity or emotion or violence doesn't make something right.
I agree, but it's worded in such a way, that anyone can look at the quote, and use it to justify anything.
It can be "Yeah, people say I shouldn't be gay, but fuck them, I'm going to do what I think is right."
But it can also be "Yeah, people say I shouldn't kill 'Insert group of people here', but fuck them, I'm going to do what I think is right."

>His speech assumes he's right

No, the condition of the argument is that he's right. He's not saying "I'm always right," he's saying "If I'm right, I'm going to stand up for what I believe and not cower just because it's unpopular or makes me a target."

I never said cap said those things, I was answering your previous statement based on the dialogue of what we were discussing.

Molymeme, I know you just want to say "not an argument" and put me in can't cuck the tuck vol. 69 but it's an argument over the use of force in relation to morality and when it should be implemented. There's not really a right or wrong answer so I mean, we can discuss this for hours or we can agree to disagree and just take different interpretations from the text.

>Still feels like a weird thing for Cap to say, since anyone can say that about any action.

Yeah, almost like people can disagree and have the freedom to do so or something! Wild, right?

>But it can also be "Yeah, people say I shouldn't kill 'Insert group of people here', but fuck them, I'm going to do what I think is right."

And that's why we have discourse and arguments, not popularity contests, to determine as a society what rightness is. By your logic, "Oh, well, everyone thinks being gay is wrong, so I shouldn't be" or "Oh well all those Nazis are saying genocide is cool, so it must be" is a legitimate statement. It's not. That's what Cap is saying. You can't just predicate rightness on popularity or social cost.

>I never said cap said those things, I was answering your previous statement based on the dialogue of what we were discussing.

If you're not implying that Cap said them, why are those statements relevant? Are you conceding that Cap is right, here?

I'm not saying that popularity makes right. But the way what he says is worded, makes it so that people should stop doing things, simply because people tell them to. Why should I obey the laws if I don't agree with them? Just because a bigger group of people does? Fuck you and your shitty laws, I don't believe in them, so I won't follow them.

I agree with what he's thing to say, but not the way he said it. It's a good argument, worded in a dumb way.

makes it so that people shouldn't stop doing things*

>Why should I obey the laws if I don't agree with them?

Ask anyone who smokes weed outside of the few places where it's legal. Or a woman who gets an abortion even though it's illegal. Or gay folks who have sex in places with sodomy laws. Or slaves who ran away before the emancipation proclamation. If you think a law being a law makes it just, you seriously need to reevaluate your ethical thinking.

those statements were relevant because you asked my opinion on if "popularity means that a decision is always right" which I answer truthfully.

Cap was never a part of that specific dialogue since you asked me about MY personal beliefs not my interpretation of Caps.

I'm not even arguing Cap is wrong in this situation, I'm simply saying an individual can't assume his morality is justification for opposition.

Like in this dialogue we are having, You are right in your mind, I am right in my mind. We have both planted by the stream of truth and will not move. Who's right? Who decides what's right? If it is the individual that we are both equally right then we both will not move, if it is a higher power we have to wait on Him to give us a sign and let the one who is wrong "move"

>I'm not even arguing Cap is wrong in this situation, I'm simply saying an individual can't assume his morality is justification for opposition.

If a moral reason is not a justification for opposition, what is? What reason have you to oppose genocide if not morality?

Nope. He is saying stand there. Peaceful protest and never giving up.

then why are liberals still screaming about popular vote. checkm8 libcuck.

Because the electoral college isn't a measure of rightness either.

Or the people who kill someone because they cheated on them. Or the husband that beats up his wife. Or the gangs that collects money from local stores so that they don't trash them.

That might be what he meant, but that is not what that quote is saying. It's never sated that you have to fight for your beliefs in a peaceful way, and it doesn't account for beliefs that are about something harmful being right. He's simply saying that no matter how many people say you're wrong, as long as you think you're right, you shouldn't change your mind, simply because people say you're wrong.

>Or the people who kill someone because they cheated on them. Or the husband that beats up his wife. Or the gangs that collects money from local stores so that they don't trash them.

So you agree, then, that the legality or lack thereof is independent of the rightness of an action?

>So you agree, then, that the legality or lack thereof is independent of the rightness of an action?
Well, yeah. Never said it did. I'm saying that Just because a bunch of people say that I shouldn't kill people, it doesn't make it wrong either. And according to caps quote, if I thought it was right to kill people, I should stand up for that belief, no matter how many people said it was wrong.

That is an interesting argument and I commend you for it.

I dare say that an individuals morality is a product of their surrounding community. Humans intrinsically have a concept called "empathy" which allows us to connect with another person who is outside our family and offspring. With empathy, others in our community have value and they value us. With this mutual value, we contribute to each other out of "empathy". This lead towards, marriage, community, cities, countries etc. Now, we as individuals have needs that have to be met, and desires that we wish to be met.

All other people have these two criteria and luckily all humans have the same basic needs ie. Food, Water, Shelter, and Sleep. Since we all have these basic needs we all work together to fulfill these needs more easily than we could if we did them individually for ourselves. Outside of needs, we have "desires" which is things like Companionship, Love, Entertainment, Expression, etc.

>And according to caps quote, if I thought it was right to kill people, I should stand up for that belief, no matter how many people said it was wrong.

If you genuinely thought something was morally right, why WOULDN'T you stand up for it? Because a lot of people said no?

The president decides what America stands for, and you either fall in line or you fall into a grave.

Now fuck off. This kind of libshit propaganda isn't going to be tolerated in this country for much longer.

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”

― Theodore Roosevelt

Fake saying

Nope.

snopes.com/theodore-roosevelt-on-criticizing-the-president/

who cares what some faggot literally who thinks, trump would have destroyed him

>*won the electoral votes with margins in the thousands and lost the popular votes by over 3 million

Wow what a significant win.

Babyhands would've gotten BTFO by Teddy.

-1/10

shut up

Right? That's why the quote is weird, because it can be used so that anyone should stand up for anything they believe in, be it helping others, or committing genocide. He's literally saying that if you believe that if you believe in something, it's your job to stand up for it, and this includes beliefs like genocide.

>gets proven wrong
>tells the person with the facts to shut up
all are trump supporters like this

You say butthurt, but it seems to be the trumpfags that are whining nonstop. Nothing your glorious leader does it ever good enough, huh?

how can someone who is nicknamed after a teddy bear be a threat to our god emporer

"Classical Liberal" means "Retarded Conservative" fyi

Again, you are saying the quote is a justification for any action when it's not. It's not a justification for an action at all. It's saying that you can't just back down because of popularity. Do you think popularity is the be all, end all of rightness? If not, then you agree with Cap. You're being willfully obtuse here.

These "desires" are what separate us from the community and strain "empathy". Like, imagine how I might like baseball while you like swimming. we might not "understand" each other's entertainment but we can support both while still fulfilling our individual desires.

Now, I had to explain all of this so I could fully tackle your question. In the idea of "genocide" something specifically happens, one's "needs" can only happen at the expense of another's "needs"

Now, also with genocide, the act conflicts with our basic "empathy" and that's what causes mental conflict that we could say is "moral conflict". But, we are not the ones committing the genocide. If the individual is the one committing genocide and he believes he's right to do so, whether it is to protect his children, property, business etc. against another group of people who endanger that, that is being "right" if his goal is to protect those things BUT

Either you're retarded, or this is bait, which would also make you retarded. Good job putting yourself in a lose/lose situation.

Retarded conservative is redundant.

He was joking you fuckhead. Everybody's making fun of conservaniggers itt

...

It was all of those and more. It was the memes.

But it is. It can be used by anyone to say that they should fight for what they believe is right, no matter how many people say they're wrong. If you think you're right, it's your job to stand for what you believe in. It doesn't matter what Cap meant when he said it, the way he said it means that anyone can stand up for anything they believe in, and that includes anyone that thinks genocides justified.

this desu

They won because normal people are far more sick of your shit then their's.

>this again

The idea is that you need to believe in yourself despite what everyone says. That's really what it is. Of course you can take a simple speech such as "believe in yourself" and apply it to something irrational like shooting up a mall or destroying the world.

There's nothing wrong with the speech but just like anything else it can be used for the wrong purposes. Like religion.

to the ones being genocided who want to live and propagate, integrate etc. the act of killing them is morally wrong which I, personally, agree with because of what my "community" agrees with and my personal morality.

BUT, if I was the one killing an entire race and all those around me AND my personal morality said that this was right and morally sound along with not conflicting with my empathy for others (easier said than done with personally conditioning or insular thought) how would I know that I am wrong? If you came to me and tried to stop me, and all of this that I said above is true to my upbringing and community than it is YOU that is wrong by Cap's reasoning process proposed by this statement BECAUSE I am right to ME and MY MORALS which is, unfortunately, the most important

Now, I do not believe that genocide is ever the answer BUT I can see how an individual could if his scenario and morals and needs were all endangered/ just the right way.

> It can be used by anyone to say that they should fight for what they believe is right, no matter how many people say they're wrong. If you think you're right, it's your job to stand for what you believe in.

Why is this wrong? Would you really not stand up for what you believe in, if you truly believed it was right?

>anyone can stand up for anything they believe in, and that includes anyone that thinks genocides justified.

They CAN. You bring up genocide because you and I think genocide is wrong. But that's the entire fucking premise, there. It's their right to believe that and stand up for or it and our right - -and as cap says, our DUTY - to stand against it because we know it's wrong. If we didn't think it was wrong, we wouldn't think twice about it. That's how ideas work, from the most righteous to the most horrible.

>Superman and Cap have adventures fighting the evils of modern society and bro it up while talking about ideals

Give it to the right writer and it could be fun. Thanks for the idea, Satan.

Seriously, you are straight up saying that genocide would be okay if everyone said it was.

I disagree. What it comes down to, is, where does morality come from? And that there is NO objective arbiter of morality. No authority, media, popularity, government that is the final word on morality.

>I know the intention of it, but it can still be used to justify anything, because anything can be seen as right or wrong by anyone.
That's the way cap's idea of morality works.

Precisely, cap is willing to stand up for the rights of even fucking nazis to express themselves.

No. Everyone telling him means nothing to whether cap is right or wrong.

so I guess in the grand scheme of things, of course, the whole world could be wrong, we've seen it before and hindsight is 20/20 when we look back at the decisions of our forefathers but what Caps speech doesn't bring up is that the INDIVIDUAL could also be in the wrong while the rest of the world is correct.

Being unable to put your beliefs under scrutiny is a dangerous thing since if we never allow them to be tested in a philosophical sense, in the real world we could cause real damage that can never be taken back or healed.

So, just because a moral is tested doesn't mean it's wrong but better to test it than to make a mistake.

That's not saying much. There's 2 presidents maximum that could toe that line.


Interestingly enough ,the ending of civil war is exactly that. A bunch of police and firefighter run up to steve and tell him he's wrong, and he stops. And then he gets shot in the head.

Of course the ending is also completely fucking retarded, but that's a separate point.

>what Caps speech doesn't bring up is that the INDIVIDUAL could also be in the wrong while the rest of the world is correct.

It doesn't need to bring it up, it's implicit. The whole point is it doesn't matter how many people - zero or all - say it's wrong. That doesn't affect the rightness.

>I disagree. What it comes down to, is, where does morality come from? And that there is NO objective arbiter of morality. No authority, media, popularity, government that is the final word on morality.
>
>>I know the intention of it, but it can still be used to justify anything, because anything can be seen as right or wrong by anyone.
>That's the way cap's idea of morality works.

I agree with you fully, my argument is a morality has to be challenged. Not even the individual has the final say on morality since morality is in a CONSTANT state of change as we learn more about the world around us and the people in it. That's the dangerous aspect that's not brought up by Cap since the train of thought is
>my morality is right because I find it to be my morality
it's circular logic

He doesn't get shot in the head, you fucking casual. He gets jailed, rants at Tony about what an Iron Fascist he's being, gets shot in the shoulder by Crossbones on the way to the courthouse, and then hypnotized Sharon Carter shoots him into the past with time bullets.

I get where you're coming from, and I get the meaning of the quote. I just think it's worded in a weird way, and that it feels so ambiguous that it's a weird thing for Cap to say. You might disagree, but so be it.

Point for me, to where I did, because I didn't.

That's not the train of thought, though.

>It doesn't need to bring it up, it's implicit

if it is implicit than why are we having this argument? Why is this whole thread having this argument?

If it was implicit we would have mutually understood the exact meaning of Cap's speech and not even have this discussion.

You said

> the way he said it means that anyone can stand up for anything they believe in, and that includes anyone that thinks genocides justified.

Which means you think that if everyone said genocide is okay, as opposed to currently, where everyone says it's wrong, it would be okay, which is the fucking opposite of the meaning of Cap's quote.

Would you please tell me what the train of thought is then since I would like to see where you are coming from

>if it is implicit than why are we having this argument? Why is this whole thread having this argument?

Because people take the conclusion to a large, multi-page speech out of context and think they're oh-so smart to shit on the ideal of "stand up for what you think is right."

>If it was implicit we would have mutually understood the exact meaning of Cap's speech and not even have this discussion.

The existence of an implication is not dependent on the perceptive ability of the audience.

The train of thought is

>Right and wrong don't come down to popularity and they shouldn't

No it means that if one person think genocide is right, it's their job to stand up too the people who thinks they're wrong, no matter how many people that might be, which is exactly what cap said. I never said that the more people think something is right or wrong, then it is right or wrong. Nothing is inherently right or wrong, so anything can be right to the right people. Standing up for what you believe is right means standing up for what you believe is right, and that can include genocide.

>Standing up for what you believe is right means standing up for what you believe is right, and that can include genocide.

That is what it means, yes. That is, in fact, why we judge right and wrong based on argument and discussion, not simple popularity. You think that people thinking genocide is wrong is what makes it wrong. That is not the case.

>You think that people thinking genocide is wrong is what makes it wrong
I have never said that either.