you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 113 points 4 months ago (30 children)

Yeah the guy is a huge piece of shit, so let's not try to rewrite history by spreading nice little stories made to make him look good.

  • source
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 4 months ago (13 children)

    Why are people allergic to the idea that bad people can say good and correct things too

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Hitler loved to play with kittens! He carried them around in his shirt pockets to keep them cozy and warm.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Hitler loved dogs. Now think about how Trump is the only US president to have no pets, and dislike animals. Trump has less empathy — is more sociopathic — than Hitler.

    Hitler also didn't rape kids.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Everyone says good stuff once in a while, so why focus on the pieces of shit exactly?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Why is quoting a good thing they said somehow interpreted as rewriting history, especially when it's actually true that they said it? That's almost by definition, not "rewriting" history

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

    It can be taken as an endorsement of his other views too and I'm sure there's plenty of people that aren't shit head bigots that have had a similar realization about the vulnerability of women.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    Look, to be properly just, you need to aknowledge the good too in some peoole, whatever little they may have.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    No I fucking don't, fuck Dave Chappelle, he's transphobic piece of bigot shit, his Clayton Bigsby ass brought a fucking nazi on stage, he doesn't deserve anything but fucking derision.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    There we go, that's the issue. People nowadays completely lost the plot, will downright make up crimes and get angry at them at this point.

    You can't see what this implies long-term.

    It won't take away from anything bad he did if you did talk about the good.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    I mean he literally had Elon Musk come on stage and mocked the crowd for booing him.

    I agree that he had good takes in the past and I don't think there's anything wrong with the OOP here, but the person you're replying to isn't inventing anything either. Old school Dave Chappelle was based and funny. Current Dave Chappelle is a piece of shit. I think both of those things are OK to acknowledge.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (13 children)

    What if it's just a good joke from early in his career which resonates with people, and reposting some of his better work doesn't actually mean you're writing history

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    It's advertising him, and why would you want to do that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Assume I didn't know who Chappel was. How am supposed to know I'm not allowed to like this tweet?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

    Liking his tweet is one thing, reposting it is endorsing it, and it's generally a god idea to check who someone is before endorsing them

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    It's still a good joke and it's still a poignant message. It doesn't become not those because Chapelle sucks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (6 children)

    The problem comes in that there's no clean way to promote a tainted subject. We aren't out here talking about the (VERY) minor positive qualities in Hitler's pre-politics paintings, or whether Ronald Reagan had decent acting chops.

    There are plenty of other, less-massively-problematic comedians, artists, politicians, actors, and other public figures to promote and laud the work of that we really can just set aside the possibly decent contributions of otherwise bad people. It just doesn't matter enough. Find someone cool who did a good thing and talk about that instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Is it promoting someone to laugh at an old joke? I don't think anyone is saying this makes Dave chappel good?

    I happen to be familiar with chappels work but let's say I wasn't. Am I supposed to get this random tweets sources before I laugh to check if I'm allowed to enjoy this artist?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Personally, I think ignoring that sort of complexity leaves you with a shallower understanding of the subject matter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments