zlacker

You know, like a Che T-shirt doesn't mean you're endorsing the killing of political prisoners and stuff. Or that a George Washington statue endorses slavery. It's like a "you came at me but I'm going to beat you" lyric, not literally as Tupac meant it.

Whatever, it's not intended to mean killing someone. But you have to be a colossal dumbfuck to say it like that to a bunch of people wise in the ways of the street political machine.

>>renewi+(OP)
Most people who see a Che t-shirt don't know who he was, only that his face shows up a lot.

The problem isn't referencing something or someone, but doing so expecting those on the receiving end to know the reference and not take it at face value.

>>vidarh+lt
Yeah, I think there's a big difference between wearing Che's face, and posting a quote of Che where he ordered people to kill someone.

One, without context, is just a face. The other, without context, promotes murder. Context matters of course, but so does the actual quote itself without the context.

>>renewi+(OP)
>You know, like a Che T-shirt doesn't mean you're endorsing the killing of political prisoners and stuff. Or that a George Washington statue endorses slavery.

What a load of bullshit. He put names of specific people in his tweet who have subsequently received threatening letters in paper mail.

The intended audience heard the message loud and clear.

I wonder if you took that message the same way if Tran said "Die slow, Rene Wiltord" and you received personal paper mail afterwards that said "Tran was right. Die, Rene."

>>renewi+(OP)
These discussions here wouldn't exist if he'd just posted Tupac's portrait on Twitter. But he specifically quoted a sentence with a very clear and unambiguous meaning.

>>alpaca+SN
Not just that, he modified the sentence by replacing most of it with the names of SF politicians.

Pretty much the only part left intact was "die slowly".

This isn't a quote, this is an allusion.