this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
364 points (84.9% liked)

Memes

45581 readers
1 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Cano@lemm.ee 147 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Hate to be that guy, but it's "Should've" and not "Should of".

Good meme btw

[–] KnightontheSun@lemmy.world 53 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Which is "should have" when spelt out.

[–] EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Genuine question: is is spelt or spelled, or do both work?

[–] 56_@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I assumed "spelt" was wrong, but an internet search tells me both are correct.

[–] Mr_Blott@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

One is "vivacious English", the other "simplified English"

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Use speldt to make both sides angry

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 years ago
[–] KnightontheSun@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Both work, but using spelt is more fun.

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I don't know. I'm more of a barley sort of guy, myself.

[–] Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Yea crap you're right, I wish I could correct the title

[–] SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com 59 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You can edit titles on Lemmy

[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago (1 children)

it has been 6 hrs, should of do it by now

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Hate to be that guy, but it's "should of done" and not "should of do".

Good comment btw

[–] idunnololz@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Me too 😔. Well at least you will know for next time.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 0 points 2 years ago

You should of spelt it correctly

[–] Stumblinbear@pawb.social 5 points 2 years ago

I like the post but had to downvote it because the English is atrocious

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 28 points 2 years ago

slavery is too morally bankrupt to ever have a cool maintainer like the cURL dude

[–] Rhaedas@kbin.social 25 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The only issue with this adaptation of a great comic is that it infers the Confederacy was a well built structure that depended on that one small thing. The Confederacy didn't exist that long, it even didn't have a single flag version for longer than a year or so. Change it to the southern states' economy and it makes more sense.

[–] Genrawir@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

Then the slavery would be a much bigger piece though, so this meme really makes no sense at all

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's... blocks haphazardly balanced. Which is completely the point. Do you think that looks like a "well-built structure"?

[–] Rhaedas@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's certainly a chaotic mess, but perhaps knowing the original subject of the comic tarnishes my take on it being used for other things in the same way. Analogies are often tricky.

[–] CTDummy@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

I think it’s pretty ironic that this meme is trying to make a statement about the confederacy not acknowledging the work/contribution of slavery and having trouble doing so because it’s an uncredited “”adaption”” of someone else’s meme.

[–] explodicle@local106.com 24 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Slavery was more like the central block two positions upwards from the tiny block indicated. It was their whole reason for secession.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

And there should be an even bigger block under it called "Native land and resources that they didn't have gunpowder to defend".

[–] Skkorm@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

It was a the death of 90% of the population to small pox within one generation that allowed colonization. The Europeans were dirty and diseased, untrained peasants. Their firearms at that time were inaccurate single shot rifles, that took minutes to reload. Analysis of indigenous bow techniques showed the common capability to accurately shoot multiple arrows in rapid succession.

And it goes beyond war: Indigenous people didn't farm as Europeans did, we instead cultivated forests with eidble plant species that complimented each other to kept the soil healthy. The forests across the Americas were thousands of years into a cycle of land management that kept grown food naturally abundant and plentiful, without having to clear the land. Indigenous peoples were expert and managing the population of the animals of their areas as well. We understood which members of an animal population should be hunted, and which should be kept for the health of the species. We then knew how to fully utilize every part of the animals hunted. The core of most indigenous cultures rotated around ethical and efficient management of the land's resources. What did the Europeans do? Accidentally gave an entire continent a super virus, then stripped the forests clear to plant shitty crops not made for this climate, and hunted countless animal species to extinction. Europeans were not technologically advanced at all. They were just diseased. That's it.

Rest assured that without smallpox, the Americas would not have been colonized. Population density and technological differences would have made it too dangerous and expensive an undertaking.

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

ooof, lots of pent-up frustration here.

Europeans were not any more "dirty" or "clean" than any other group, also Native Americans adopted the use of fire arms from the Europeans and would generally trade foodstuffs for firearms, in the end you are only repeating the Noble Savage

[–] HenryWong327@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago

The main advantage of early guns wasn't that they were more powerful, it's that they were easy to use. You can train someone to fire a gun in a day, while it takes months of training just to get an archer strong enough to draw a bow.

Also the whole "the Europeans were dirty diseased peasants" thing isn't accurate, and I have to say that IMO the right response to racist depictions of indigenous people as unwashed savages isn't to just turn around and say "actually the stereotypes are correct it's just that it's about the Europeans this time".

And Indigenous people had more advanced technoglogy than many give them credit for but "The Europeans were technologically behind indigenous people in nearly every way. " is just blatantly wrong.

I do think you're right though that without smallpox and other diseases the Europeans wouldn't have colonised the Americas, though there were several other major factors in it.

P.S. I'm not a historian, grain of salt, etc.

[–] Cleverdawny@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago

The native tribes mostly did have gunpowder by that point, they were very motivated to trade for rifles and ammunition and the US government sold them rifles and ammunition through the Indian Agency.

[–] Zink@pawb.social 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You maybe would think about industrializing too before you split off..

[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

"Stupid northerners and their fancy trains."

"Hey, how TF they getting all these fuckloads of troops out here so fast?"

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 years ago

Stolen land with stolen people

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Something something... states rights