Facts You Didn't Want To Find Out About People

[Petey Pate]

Clint Eastwood, also on the list, isn't really that conservative either.  He's pretty anti-war, pro-abortion and environmentally conscious.  On his wikipedia page it states that he considers himself a moderate or a libertarian. However he did originally register as a republican in the '50s, but later switched.

[Jemble Fred]

Wait, what, Fred West used to eat an onion like an apple? That's just repellent.

[Zetetic]

A,N and HoD both dehumanise the Africans/Vietnamese, reducing them to mere cyphers

I'm never sure if I'm irritated by this point of view or not. It's largely accurate, in so far as the portrayal of the natives isn't deep or interesting, but it's neither out of its time or out of character so I find it hard to read anything into it. The authors are only interested in the natives as part of the setting (and this is apparent).

[yokel]

John Oliver's fiancée

Eh, couples can disagree with one another; look at James Carville and his wife.
And I like Apocalypse Now; it manages to show the horrifying inhumanity of war whether conservative or not; how can anyone see the scene with helicopters bombing to the tune of Rise of the Valkyries and say it's a positive portrayal?

[Retinend]

Was the latter point a commonly-held view on the left?  Genuine question?

The New Left were sincere and recognised the right of the Vietnamese to gain national independence, but I don't think the New Left (youthful, marxist-sympathising, intellectual), hippies (a fashion/lifestyle movement with political affectations, like all) and moderate left shared the same view of why the war was bad, even though they were all anti-war and saw it as a failure of government. The idea that groups wanting national independence for their countries wanted national independence was unthinkable - it was clearly a extension of Russian global dominance (easily proved by the source of their weaponary and financial support - but the same logic not applied to the source of the NVA's support).

To see the Vietnamese as innocent people (the standard left-historical opinion today) would be to ignore the fact of widespread collusion between 'Vietcong' and the general Vietnamese population. To understand that this cooperation wasn't down to an inexplicable hatred of noble US liberation, but the resistance to the US's incresaingly violent opposition to Vietnamese unification, would require one to see through a massive shitscreen of political propaganda and cultural racism against east-asians. This led people to hate the war and hate the Vietnamese, without contradiction. Especially since the moderate, older left had lived through WW2 and saw this cause was petty and convoluted compared with defeating fascism amongst the great civilised nations. Similar to the wars still being fought today, calling the war a 'quagmire' and a waste of life and resources is not the same as opposing it as morally wrong, from the perspective of the people whose country is being invaded.

So I think Apocalypse Now shares much of Heart of Darkness's pessimism, though it does so from a left-wing perspective. The 1960s were half a century ago now, and the films the war inspired were made by people who lived in the political presumptions of the age. Dealing in broad strokes, here. Full Metal Jacket is a film which provides a lot more interaction with the people of Vietnam than any other of the genre, and shows how the US Military mindset is driven into the soldiers in a light which is harshly critical. Apocalypse Now is more like HoD in that it paints the people, the invaders and the scenery as shared backdrop of spiritual abyss.

[Cohaagen]

Wait, what, Fred West used to eat an onion like an apple? That's just repellent.

Orde Wingate, the British WWII general and special forces pioneer, also liked the ol' raw-onion-as-an-apple snack.

In addition, he preferred to scrub himself with a rubber brush instead of showering, carried a huge alarm clock Flava Flav-style instead of wearing a watch, and often conducted briefings and press conferences completely naked while combing his body hair with a toothbrush.

[easytarget]

CEO for Gibson Guitars gave money to the Republicans (search 'JUSZKIEWICZ, HENRY' on opensecrets.org).

No more (new) Gibson guitars for me (and no more research for me either, in case someone who runs something else that I like turns out to be a hateful twat).

[SetToStun]

A man you don't know gave money to a party in a bipartate politocal system for reasons you also don't know and that makes him a hateful twat? Isn't that just a wee bit harsh?

[Famous Mortimer]

A man you don't know gave money to a party in a bipartate politocal system for reasons you also don't know and that makes him a hateful twat? Isn't that just a wee bit harsh?

I'd suggest there aren't many reasons for giving money to the Republicans that don't make you at least a bit of a twat.

[SetToStun]

Really? Isn't that a bit like saying anyone who differs from you politically is a bit of a twat? Around half of American voters seem to be Republicans - is it only the donating that indicates twattishness or does voting for the GOP count too?

[samadriel]

Next on CaB Bigotry Hour, a Verbwhore believes that a creationist might be a bit thick!

[Famous Mortimer]

Really? Isn't that a bit like saying anyone who differs from you politically is a bit of a twat? Around half of American voters seem to be Republicans - is it only the donating that indicates twattishness or does voting for the GOP count too?

No, it's not like saying that. Lots of countries have had a majority (of voters, at least) believe all sorts of crazy shit, down the years. Having a lot of people agree with something bad doesn't make it any less bad.

EDIT: your next question may be "isn't that dismissive of a large group of people etc.?" to which I'd reply I wouldn't use that phrase as a debating tool with them, and that the people at the top of those piles think a lot of worse of the people at the bottom (even their own supporters) than I do.

[George Oscar Bluth II]

I genuinely think the Republicans are straight up evil at the moment. Completely valid reason to stop buying a certain guy's products I'd say.

[SetToStun]

No, it's not like saying that. Lots of countries have had a majority (of voters, at least) believe all sorts of crazy shit, down the years. Having a lot of people agree with something bad doesn't make it any less bad.

EDIT: your next question may be "isn't that dismissive of a large group of people etc.?" to which I'd reply I wouldn't use that phrase as a debating tool with them, and that the people at the top of those piles think a lot of worse of the people at the bottom (even their own supporters) than I do.

I wasn't going down the "Aha! But that means you think..." path, I promise you; I hate that as much as anyone and I was just interested in whether you genuinely did think that being a Republican was a "badge-worthy" position[nb]I have no idea what the correct term for this is; I mean an opinion or belief that's fundamental enough to be used to stick a badge on someone, whether that badge be "a bit twatty", "pretty OK", "good guy" or "cunt"[/nb]. I have no problem with people believing that the "opposition" are by definition bad, but it's not something I can personally get alongside - I think I'm getting less and less entrenched as I get older, which is odd as I kind of expected the opposite to be true. I hope I haven't come across as all batey because that's not how it was meant.

[SetToStun]

I genuinely think the Republicans are straight up evil at the moment. Completely valid reason to stop buying a certain guy's products I'd say.

If that's an honest opinion and not a default setting then fair enough - but do you extend that to the people who vote that way or just the party itself? Genuine question - these things do interest me.

[George Oscar Bluth II]

I would suggest that lots of Republican voters are deluded in a way I'd never say Conservative Party voters are. The poorest of them vote for and support policies that make their lives worse.

Not evil though.

The ones at the top, the people contributing the campaign funds...'evil' is a word I use without reservation. Read about what Republican governors are doing in Wisconsin and elsewhere, watch them strip back workers rights, give tax cuts to the rich and cut public services.

Evil is about right.

[SetToStun]

I can't say I disagree about the top end of the Republican donors and representatives - I just wonder how many of them really believe what they're doing is for the good of all America and that the wealth really does trickle down to all levels of society. The only thing that really stops me using the word "evil" about them is that so many people seem to support them - about half the voters, it appears - and I just can't get my head around how they can be so popular if they really are that nasty. Not living there or having real experience of it just makes it too hard to get a handle on for me, I think. Rum fella, Johnny Yankee.

[easytarget]

For some context - I live in the US, and I'm a UK citizen (or "subject") so I can't vote, so little things like trying to avoid supporting companies that give money to a bunch of devious, anti-choice[nb]I mean anti-abortion, they're probably pro-choice as far as television channels and breakfast cereals are concerned.[/nb], anti-education, crooks is pretty much all I can do.

Needless to say this is almost impossible, almost every large corp gives money to the republicans – but I do get to decide whether or not to buy a new SG or not (mmm, first world problems) so that's how I make my feeble protest felt. Take that Gibson!

As to whether they're "evil" – yeah, they are, look at the Daily Show, read some of the non-right wing press over here, look at your favourite US indie band's twitter feed – then look at Fox News and feel your fucking blood boil – Republicans are the worst. Look at the candidates for 2012, they're (broadly) anti-choice, homophobic, racist, anti-environment,  "still waiting for the facts on global warming and evolution and gravity", bullying, dumb, anti-anything that doesn't make a quick buck twats. They're dragging the country down, look at that shit they pulled with the debt ceiling a couple of weeks ago.

"Half" the country supports them, more or less, but I think that speaks more to America's educational system which (like it's health care system) is totally fucking amazing at the top end of things (some *really* good colleges here), and shitty for the bottom 80% or so. Right wing messages are short and easy to understand – they're not overburdened with nuance: "They gonna raise your taxes and take your guns away."
Liberal messages are harder to get "It's a 2% tax increase on those earning half a million dollars a year or more and we want to bring in a mandatory 2 day waiting period for buying a handgun in Arizona considering you people just shot that senator in a Safeway parking lot a few months ago..."

[yokel]

I genuinely think the Republicans are straight up evil at the moment. Completely valid reason to stop buying a certain guy's products I'd say.

Fender's not that much better either:http://rebelfrequencies.blogspot.com/2011/09/two-good-reasons-to-boycott-fender.html

[Pepotamo1985]

Except for the fact his airline is called 'Aryanair', of course.

That is brilliant...