# CBR Community  > Comics Should Be Good >  Lost a lot of respect for Brian and few of his artists today

## Mark Trail

You don't have to like the President.  You don't have to like what a president does.   But you don't encourage people to physically assault him or his staff and call them Nazis.

And once you decide it's okay to punch people whose views you find personally abhorrent or evil it can quickly become an excuse to punch anybody.

On another note, where can I go to support Dan Hogan's work because apparently he's the only person left here that understands free speech?

----------


## dancj

I don't think anyone was being encouraged to assault anyone in that column.  

Yeah, Trump was being called a Nazi - and maybe that was a little bit strong - but it was one of the artists in the column, not Brian. And Trump does seem to be pushing in that direction.

----------


## Mark Trail

> I don't think anyone was being encouraged to assault anyone in that column.  
> 
> Yeah, Trump was being called a Nazi - and maybe that was a little bit strong - but it was one of the artists in the column, not Brian. And Trump does seem to be pushing in that direction.


Brian is the ostensible editor (for lack of a better term) of that column.    He should have quashed that kind of entry (ie, assaulting real live people in US government) or probably not run with the idea in the first place.

----------


## dancj

I don't see the problem.  It's a picture of someone assaulting Trump, not a call to actually do it.

And it's clear that some people need to be reminded again and again that Trump is a dangerous unstable nasty man.

----------


## Mark Trail

> I don't see the problem.  It's a picture of someone assaulting Trump, not a call to actually do it.
> 
> And it's clear that some people need to be reminded again and again that Trump is a dangerous unstable nasty man.


Every single president is considered dangerous, unstable or nasty by someone.

In fact, this evinced by today's "Foggy Ruins of Time" ("DID DADDY WARBUCKS CHOOSE DEATH OVER LIVING THROUGH ANOTHER FDR TERM?"), which details that Harold Grey so detested FDR that he killed off Daddy Warbucks when FDR was renominated for another term.     A plotline that Brian considered "twisted."

So, to recap:  When a cartoonist "kills off" a character in response to a president that cartoonist doesn't like (but Brian apparently admires), Brian thinks that twisted.  But when a cartoonist "assaults" a president that cartoonist doesn't like (and whom Brian apparently dislikes as well), Brian thinks that's A-OK.

It's completely hypocritical.

----------


## dancj

> Every single president is considered dangerous, unstable or nasty by someone.


I can't comment on that article that I haven't read, but Trump is considered those things by most people right now as far as I can tell.  He's far more reviled than any president since Nixon.

----------


## BushidoBlade2

> On another note, where can I go to support Dan Hogan's work because apparently he's the only person left here that understands *free speech*?





> Brian is the ostensible editor (for lack of a better term) of that column.   * He should have quashed that kind of entry*





> It's completely hypocritical.


Pot meet kettle.

----------


## BigLbo

> You don't have to like the President.  You don't have to like what a president does.   But *you don't encourage people to physically assault him or his staff* and call them Nazis.
> 
> And *once you decide it's okay to punch people whose views you find personally abhorrent or evil it can quickly become an excuse to punch anybody*.
> 
> On another note, where can I go to support Dan Hogan's work because apparently he's the only person left here that understands free speech?


true,  though it's hard to feel sorry for him considering he's encouraged people to punch those who disagree with him.

i see no problem calling them nazis,  free speech and all.

----------


## TakoM

Then I hope nobody saw the german carnival pictures O.o

----------


## Mark Trail

> Pot meet kettle.


There's a clear difference between choosing not to publish something on a private website and encouraging physical violence against people with whom you disagree.

----------


## dancj

> There's a clear difference between choosing not to publish something on a private website and *encouraging physical violence against people with whom you disagree.*


That didn't happen though.

----------


## Adam Allen

> Every single president is considered dangerous, unstable or nasty by someone.


The US military has like 1.5 million people a yearly budget of about 500 billion. Being commander in chief of that does make you kind of dangerous, I think.

----------


## Malachi

> Every single president is considered dangerous, unstable or nasty by someone.
> .


You cannot make that comparasion. Just look at what people in other countries in the western world is saying about Trump. There is a very real and palpable fear over what kind of damage he will cause. Not only to the USA but to other countries both direct and indirect. Bannon just in himself is a huge concern for worry. I'm not talking from political biases here, everyone but the pro/borderline nazi political parties are scared of the kind of change Trump is bringing. In my own home country the countries we worry the most for is: russia, USA and China. In that order with ISIS a third if you would count it.

----------


## MichaelC

Can someone link me to whatever all this is in reference to?

----------


## dancj

> Can someone link me to whatever all this is in reference to?


http://www.cbr.com/superheroes-nazis...rby-wolverine/

----------


## Cyke

> There's a clear difference between choosing not to publish something on a private website and encouraging physical violence against people with whom you disagree.


I've said it before and I'll say it again: people can disagree about comics or movies or coffee flavors. That's a matter of opinion. But once one side starts writing about/advocating for/cheering on the extermination and genocide of an entire minority, it's not a simple difference of opinion anymore. Bannon did it repeatedly. Spencer did academic-level research to justify white supremacy. The side that's being targeted has every right to defend itself. Calling out the other side is therefore self defense. "Listening to the other side" becomes pointless because then it's a validation of genocide.

----------


## thwhtGuardian

> You don't have to like the President.  You don't have to like what a president does.   But you don't encourage people to physically assault him or his staff and call them Nazis.
> 
> And once you decide it's okay to punch people whose views you find personally abhorrent or evil it can quickly become an excuse to punch anybody.
> 
> On another note, where can I go to support Dan Hogan's work because apparently he's the only person left here that understands free speech?


Oh come on, not a single one of those artists was encouraging people to go out and punch the President, his staff or supporters. It was political satire, and if you seriously can't see a more nuanced message than," This artist drew Squirrel Girl punching the President, so he endorses violence against him!" then I've lost a lot of respect for the people who educated you.

The whole point of that piece was to recreate a famous comic cover using fan suggested heroes, and the cover in question was Cap punching out Hitler from Captain America #1 which itself was a piece of political art and the message wasn't "Go punch Nazis!" it was "stand up to fascism"  and that's the parallel that the artists presented on The Line is Drawn were creating.

----------


## Mark Trail

Welp, it's starting.   A Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer started shooting republican members of congress. 

A little surprised it took this long.

You can't run around saying violence is justified against people with whom you disagree politically, especially coupled with calling them "Nazis," and then get surprised when someone decides its okay to start shooting the "Nazis."   And, to make matters worse, when it comes to Trump, rather than the random facebooker or redneck in a local parade doing it, you have all sorts of celebrities (and comic book artists) who have been joking and fantasizing about violent acts toward Republicans for at least the last six months.

The chickens are coming home to roost.  Congratulations guys.

----------


## dancj

But no-one was saying "violence is justified against people with whom you disagree politically" - as has been pointed out already.

----------


## Mark Trail

NYT editorial after Giffords shooting: It's legitimate to hold GOP responsible for rhetoric that incited threats.

So was the NY Times wrong in 2011 or is the CBR "republicans are Nazis...punch a Nazi" crowd wrong now?

----------


## dancj

> NYT editorial after Giffords shooting: It's legitimate to hold GOP responsible for rhetoric that incited threats.
> 
> So was the NY Times wrong in 2011 or is the CBR "republicans are Nazis...punch a Nazi" crowd wrong now?


Are you deliberately talking crap?

The "It's okay to punch a Nazi" crowd were always wrong.  The "republicans are Nazis" crown are wrong if they really believe it, but I suspect people mostly say that when using satire or exaggerating for dramatic effect.

The main point though (which you seem to continually ignore) is that the CBR "The line is drawn" did not at any point condone punching republicans - or anyone.

----------


## Mark Trail

> The main point though (which you seem to continually ignore) is that the CBR "The line is drawn" did not at any point condone punching republicans - or anyone.



Of course it did.   You had certain artists in the feature literally depicting republicans as Nazis getting punched by comic book characters and the editor of the feature saying good job.

----------


## thwhtGuardian

> Of course it did.   You had certain artists in the feature literally depicting republicans as Nazis getting punched by comic book characters and the editor of the feature saying good job.


As I said, it was satire and the message wasn't "it's okay to punch people who are different than you!" it was "Stand up to fascism." and in the case of the parody images from the Line is Drawn, the image was a tongue and cheek way of saying"The President is a Fascist!" as it  used the imagery of the original, well known message and substituted the President for Hitler and you have to take a very sophomoric, cursory look at the pieces to read anything other than that.

----------


## dancj

> Of course it did.   You had certain artists in the feature literally depicting republicans as Nazis getting punched by comic book characters and the editor of the feature saying good job.


1 - As far as I can tell, the editor put the pictures without comment - not "saying good job".

2 - If he actually did and I missed it, it's a safe bet he'd have been talking about the picture, not the punch.

3 - The vast majority of the pictures have actual nazis being punched, not republicans.

4 - (and this is the biggy) Depicting something in a picture does not equal condoning it.

----------


## JackDaw

> As I said, it was satire and the message wasn't "it's okay to punch people who are different than you!" it was "Stand up to fascism." and in the case of the parody images from the Line is Drawn, the image was a tongue and cheek way of saying"The President is a Fascist!" as it  used the imagery of the original, well known message and substituted the President for Hitler and you have to take a very sophomoric, cursory look at the pieces to read anything other than that.


I agree. 

But I'm sort of amazed that anybody thinks that Trump..admittedly with a powerful array of faults...can be fairly compared to a fascist.

I certainly find it interesting that Marvel allow one of their characters to be depicted punching out the President. I suspect it shows Marvel believe that committed Marvel readers are predominantly democrats. 

I don't think for a second they would have countenanced the same treatment for Obama.

----------


## madave

As a Brit, can I just say that some of you really need to get some perspective. No one encouraged violence. And it specifically says its not an actual person. 

Trump got elected in your country by using every trick he learnt from the Nazi's rise to power. Its close enough to justify the analogy drawn.

----------


## Iron Maiden

Has it ever happened that so many prominent members of a political party are leaving it over the beliefs and actions of their party's elected President?

Left the GOP:

Prominent conservative and Pulitzer Prize winning columnist George Will
Former congressman and TV host Joe Scarborough
Steven Schmidt, who helped run  President G.W. Bush's election campaign
James Comey, former head of the FBI says he's an independant now

A number of them are not running for re-election, most notably Speaker of the House Paul Ryan are among the 44 who are choosing not to run this year.

----------


## GhostPirate

> As a Brit, can I just say that some of you really need to get some perspective. No one encouraged violence. And it specifically says its not an actual person. 
> 
> Trump got elected in your country by using every trick he learnt from the Nazi's rise to power. Its close enough to justify the analogy drawn.


Except he didn't and it's not. 

Frankly, it's embarrassing rhetoric that shows a complete lack of understanding and respect for a tragic time in the world's history to even make such a ridiculous comparison, and both the "artist" and this site should be ashamed. The simple fact is if it was the other way around so-called "liberals" would be calling it offensive, and that's really the crux of it: for people who absolutely bristle at generalizations, stereotypes and when anything that they can twist around to remotely consider a slur they sure use engage in similar behavior a lot. 

Ironically, for all the hate President Trump gets, these tactics were learned from Obama, who was actually closer to a perfect melding of Hitler and Big Brother than anyone: he was someone who dehumanized anyone who disagreed with his policies by calling them out as racists, fascists, Islamophobes (the clown literally coined the term), and any other name he could call to mind, his terms in office gave rise to hate groups like the BLM and the really tragically/ironically named Antifa, AND has the overwhelming majority of the mainstream media, as well as a very outspoken segment of social media, shilling for him shamelessly (to the point we don't really have journalism anymore, we have an endless assortment of opinion/tabloid editorials instead), as well as carrying on his thought police methodology (race, color, religion, gender, etc are all accepted... but don't you dare disagree with my beliefs!). Hell, even our schools have become less about education and more about indoctrinating the next generation to the liberal belief systems. Even something as simple as this site, which is a good example of my point: I've had negative/critical commentary about Obama and liberals disappear a few times, but yet "freedom of speech" allows for someone to put up Nazi-themed "artwork" of a sitting POTUS. It IS a scary time... but not for the reasons you believe it to be...

----------


## ed2962

> Except he didn't and it's not. 
> 
> Frankly, it's embarrassing rhetoric that shows a complete lack of understanding and respect for a tragic time in the world's history to even make such a ridiculous comparison, and both the "artist" and this site should be ashamed. The simple fact is if it was the other way around so-called "liberals" would be calling it offensive, and that's really the crux of it: for people who absolutely bristle at generalizations, stereotypes and when anything that they can twist around to remotely consider a slur they sure use engage in similar behavior a lot. 
> 
> Ironically, for all the hate President Trump gets, these tactics were learned from Obama, who was actually closer to a perfect melding of Hitler and Big Brother than anyone: he was someone who dehumanized anyone who disagreed with his policies by calling them out as racists, fascists, Islamophobes (the clown literally coined the term), and any other name he could call to mind, his terms in office gave rise to hate groups like the BLM and the really tragically/ironically named Antifa, AND has the overwhelming majority of the mainstream media, as well as a very outspoken segment of social media, shilling for him shamelessly (to the point we don't really have journalism anymore, we have an endless assortment of opinion/tabloid editorials instead), as well as carrying on his thought police methodology (race, color, religion, gender, etc are all accepted... but don't you dare disagree with my beliefs!). Hell, even our schools have become less about education and more about indoctrinating the next generation to the liberal belief systems. Even something as simple as this site, which is a good example of my point: I've had negative/critical commentary about Obama and liberals disappear a few times, but yet "freedom of speech" allows for someone to put up Nazi-themed "artwork" of a sitting POTUS. It IS a scary time... but not for the reasons you believe it to be...


This isn't accurate at all. Obama didn't go around calling people racist for disagreeing with him, the "liberal media" accusations started like almost 40yrs ago, said with the "liberal universities" stuff.

There's lots things to criticize the last president for, but none of the things you mentioned are it.

----------

