I'm not sure I see why you think there wouldn't be such forces at play in Scandinavia. Quisling allowed the Nazis into Norway (a decision that may have saved a lot of Norwegian lives, but fuggit), Sweden is Norway's nearest neighbour.
I'm not sure I see why you think there wouldn't be such forces at play in Scandinavia. Quisling allowed the Nazis into Norway (a decision that may have saved a lot of Norwegian lives, but fuggit), Sweden is Norway's nearest neighbour.
Given the rise of anti-Semitic violence, which I highly doubt is being committed by the Pewdie Pie fanbase, I find it remarkable that this is what we're talking about.
No?
Nice try, but I'm not about to resent someone for making money honestly, which is what he's done. And I'm not going to let people who've been accusing him of normalising Nazism pretend that what they were REALLY upset about is the inequities of the gig economy, because that would be bullshit.
"If the joke is not in fact anti-semitic, couldn't it be considered classist?
"Unwise" is probably the most honest word for it, given the facts. But most people wouldn't accept that people should actually be punished for being unwise.
My feelings tell me that I should stick with wanking myself raw over hunky Markiplier and only let Pewds in when I want to imagine us having a houseboy.
"Or maybe this guy has gotten away with fucked up stuff for a long time and is finally being called out."
People will fervently deny this, but they actually do get their sense of what's appropriate, what's inappropriate, and what's naughty in an acceptable way, from TV and from what politicians say. No one wants to admit it, but when you see an idea being expressed by a politician on TV, rather than just by your dickhead…
"countless novella length replies "
It's just quicker to type.
It's funny because I guarantee some of the same hacks jumping on the anti-PewdiePie bandwagon for the money will have penned fawning "now the election is over we must learn to love Trump" columns, for the exact same money.
Criticism doesn't work that way. I could accept someone being far more critical than the WSJ has been if the criticism had been valid. Whereas even the mildest criticism is wrong and worth taking to task if it's intellectually dishonest, which theirs is.
Personally going to add Doctor Who's "Vincent and the Doctor" to this. I don't remember it being brilliant, but it is one that I just don't watch when there's a repeat because… Jesus.
Not as cruel as the shlocky retcon we got in Bender's Big Score. It's one thing to rip my heart out of my chest, but to act like it's all fine because you put it back in again is just… ugh.
Plus, the music during the face-peeling scene is fucking hysterical, worth rewatching it for that alone.
Meh, Old Media has its own quirks and eccentricities. But being old, it assumes that everyone who has been putting up with them for years actually just really likes them.
"Non-critically imitating a bigot isn't particularly good satire"
"Scandinavian Quislings"
It is strange how many comments here seem to be along the lines of "I don't like him/YouTubers in general, so I'm not going to look at anything that suggests he/any of them might not be guilty of everything".