You're viewing a single thread.
I have yet to meet a lib who understood To Kill A Mockingbird
You'd think they read a book where Atticus, backed by intellect and truth and a lifetime of working within the system, righteously proves a man's innocence despite all odds, and then the system worked and everyone lived happily ever after.
Edit: What are the downvotes for? The whole point of the book is that the system and all the justifications are just a pretense for those with power to wield it the way they want, and all the rightousness and superlative competence applied within the system could not stop the jury from convicting Tom or the prison guard from shooting him in the back.
Libs of course just see how great attacus is and don't understand why the trial didn't end with Tom getting declared innocent.
This doesn't even require reading subtext, there's a whole scene on the courthouse steps after the verdict where it's spelled out for Scout and the reader.
... pretty sure that's not the intended takeaway of 'To Kill A Mockingbird'.
Dude thinks it’s a fuckin documentary of an ideal court case
Yeah, but I'm pretty sure there's an easier way to kill a Mockingbird.
Tell me what it is then.
A lawyer who confronts the white people of the whole village with their racism. The way he makes them all see loud and clear that their choice is either to stand by their racism and let a child rapist who raped his own daughter (and does a lot of other bad things) go free because he has the same skin colour as them and drag themselves down to his level, or to admit that a white person could commit such a crime. On that day, no one in the courtroom could lie about what decision they made, that it was made solely out of racism, and what the price was. Tom paid the ultimate price, but everyone in the courtroom paid a price too. None of them got off scot-free.
Do you really think that hasn't changed something? That doing the right thing is only worth something if it changes the world immediately? Atticus may not have saved Tom, but he made a difference, because everyone understood that Tom was innocent. If more people made that kind of difference, we would live in a different and better world. People who are racist need to be confronted with the damage they are doing, why they are doing it, and the damage they are willing to do to themselves and others.
And of course the children needed an explanation. They were hoping for immediate change, a happy ending, and they understood the explanation better than you, it seems.
It's one thing to be angry at the system and feel helpless, it's another to give up and just shrug your shoulders because "there's nothing I can do about it" or to use what's there and do the best you can and make the change you can. If Atticus had not used everything the system gave him and not defended Tom, the result would have been the same for Tom, but the people in the courtroom would have been able to pretend that everything was fine, that Tom was guilty and cheer for Tom to be convicted. He took that away from them, they left the courtroom with their eyes down, because they put a proofen innocent man into jail. He won. Believe it or not, the far from perfect court system, even in a village like this, allowed him to force them to look in the mirror.
"If you're inhumanly competent, you might make the murderers feel bad before they choose to murder that man" is not an endorsement of working within the system, it's showing you that you must work outside it.
The Civil Rights Act wasn't passed because civil rights activists were victimized until the oppressors felt bad for them and saw their humanity, it was passed after MLK got shot and every city burned for a week.
And yet the whole world is still feeling bad for MLK getting murdered so many years later, he will stay in every American's mind forever, his death a stain on this country because people saw his humanity, his death made them feel ashamed. Even you needed to mention him. He was working within the system, he won. His words are still present and an inspiration. He changed more than burning cities did. Without his work and dedication the burning cities would just have been meaningless violence easily dismissed as Black people being bad by the racists. Even the people who ignored racism and pretended everything was fine understood through him that there was something wrong, that change had to happen. Violence and destruction alone will always only spread fear and change who is the next oppressor, good people can change the world into a place where we all hinder oppression to happen, where we don't need oppressors anymore.
And it was the system who brought the housing rights act. Boring, peaceful lawyers who were there waiting for their chance to make something good happen inside the system. Witout them the fires would have burned out and everything had stayed the same until the next violence.
He did not work within the system, nearly every march he had was declared illegal. He was despised by white moderates for a generation until his image could be recuperated to serve the very system he spent his life fighting.
The Civil Rights Act wasn’t passed because civil rights activists were victimized until the oppressors felt bad for them and saw their humanity, it was passed after MLK got shot and every city burned for a week.
The Civil Rights Act was passed 4 years before MLK died.
I confused the voting rights act with the housing rights act; the point still stands that it wasn't a recognition of the humanity of the oppressed by the oppressor that dictated progress, but the threat implied by millions of people mobilized.
I have yet to meet a lib who understood To Kill A Mockingbird
You must be one hardcore lib.
What are the downvotes for?
Probably because nothing intelligent has ever been said by someone who calls people "libs".
Let's look at an example.
"I've yet to meet a conservitard who doesn't have to suck their own dick every night to fall asleep."
Whether that's true or not it starts with grouping some people into a predjudicially named group, then saying they are have some negative quality, or at least worse than you, and then extrapolating your personal experience to imply it applies to the entire group.
Result... Downvotes.
Maybe if you hid it further down more people would have missed it, but you put it in the first line.
I understand that much, I forgot liberals don't consider themselves right, and wouldn't understand that OP includes them given how anti-capitalist Star Trek is.
Strange way to kill a Mockingbird, but if it works it works I guess.
It's funny that people are mad at your usage of "lib." It's obviously pejorative, and maybe they're reacting to that, but I doubt it would have gone better if you said "liberal."
OP here is obviously criticizing center-right liberal thinking from a leftist perspective.