What if you discovered your favourite deck was painted by a Trump supporter?

DownUnderNZer

Goes back to what is below in quotes.

This is an very poor article.

No one on earth has a defense against a nuclear attack by ballistic missiles because such a defense is for a million reasons not feasible. It was called the Strategic Defense Initiative, SDI, "Star Wars" under President Reagan. The million reasons no one can make it work are "decoys" and "chaff" which you can look up (SDI + chaff, for example). There's another bunch of really good logical reasons it won't work completely apart from the technical. (For example, you can never test it fully, so you can't have complete confidence in it, so it's basically worthless as a part of national defense strategy.) So the answer to your question is, of course, and it has always been "mutually assured destruction" (MAD) that keeps everyone from launching nuclear missiles at one another. I have no idea why this is relevant to our discussion but here's your answer. :laugh:


This.....




"Analogy":

Let's bring China into the equation....

Also "Anti Trump" right now and they have a "missile" lined up called the "Dongfeng-41 missile" which can hit the the US to its north-eastern frontier. Lined up and ready to fire.

I really hope it is just a threat and not going to happen. Seriously.

But this is how they see it - instead of looking at just "Trump Supporters" they are going to look at ALL AMERICANS as those "Tarot Creators" and or "Artists" for just being American or in the same country as Trump.

Isn't fair, just, or right is it?

But it is exactly the same mentality as what some here have about not buying or supporting for whatever reason ONLY they are using a weapon to make a point and it will be ALL AMERICANS for being AMERICAN and in the same country as Trump.


DND :)

And this....

It is relevant as China will take out it's frustration on ALL AMERICANS for just being AMERICAN if they do go ahead with their threats and that is the same as Anti Trump supporters turning on Trump supporters just for voting Trump and this extends to Tarot Creators/Artists being "unsupported" and "rejected" just for voting and affiliating with Trump.

Only one is International and the other is National.

A fair analogy.

Maori's were not mistreated per say - the treaty was not honored and many died from the diseases that were brought not to mention the guns. But unlike some Colonialized countries, the Maori remained staunch.

DND :)







.......................................................................................................................................................Added extra.
.......................................................................................................................................................

\
 

gregory

Do we know the reasons why this particular artist supported Trump? That's really the important part.
No - the important part is whether an artist's support for Trump or other point of view we may object to is shown in their artwork. In ANY deck, not just the one the OP wants to highlight

I didn't want to post here again...but am I the only one who feels that the discussion is getting a little personal and uncomfortable 😯.
No. It is also all politics and no tarot, and that is beyond tedious for Talking Tarot. There are plenty of threads in News and Views to talk about whether Woody Allen did or didn't, and whether any country can defend them selves against being blown to bits.
 

Debra

@DownUnderNZer

I'm pretty sure I follow your reasoning, but I'm afraid I don't find it illuminating.

For simplicity's sake, call the decision to not buy or use a deck from an artist with political views one finds abhorrent "boycotting" the artist. (This is to use one word instead of a whole long phrase)

You are suggesting, I think, that "boycotting" a deck artist for political reasons is parallel to one nation attacking another nation for political reasons. You are suggesting that this parallel exists because the people of the nation are not all equally responsible for national policy; and similarly the deck artist is not equally (or completely, or at all) responsible for all aspects of his preferred candidate's policies and character and etc.

This strikes me as a terribly complex and misleading analogy. The purpose of using an analogy is to make it easier to understand something. This analogy fails in this regard, as the difference between an individual (the artist) and an entire society is profound. And "boycotting" is not analogous to "attacking with nuclear weapons." The whole bit about China and nuclear weapons just adds to the confusion--it's like chaff! I understand your intent but I don't think you're accomplishing your goal with the analogy.
 

Debra

A defense of the discussion

Tarot has been called "pictures from the heart" and the like.

To me it seems clear that some artists put more "heart" in their decks than others. Some talk about how much they care about their work. Judge this as you may, as sincere or as a form of "advertising"--still the whole topic of the heart and soul, mind and spirit of the artist seems to me a completely relevant and appropriate topic for discussion in TALKING TAROT.

AND it is relevant specifically in the PARTICULAR CASE OF DONALD TRUMP not because of the "mystery deck"* but because Donald Trump advocates and exemplifies an especially cruel, manipulative, shallow and dishonest way of treating people. So admiration for this cruel, manipulative, shallow and dishonest way of treating people, it seems to me, raises questions about the moral and intellectual integrity of his supporters, and etc.

I suppose folks who find this discussion unenlightening or annoying could ignore it. I'm finding it interesting, myself.
 

gregory

I never said it wasn't interesting AS SUCH - but there are so many threads about Trump and his minions elsewhere. This one isn't about Tarot any more, but has become more about the views and policies of a POTUS (and past colonial governments on the side) that a tarot artist happens to support, about whether or not a deck creator with views which are anathema to us makes their decks ones that we cannot bring ourselves to buy, should not (morally) buy, can or cannot read with if we have such a deck, and whether it makes a difference if the creator's POV can be SEEN in their work. (That is the only point at which I would actually recoil, incidentally).
 

Debra

Good point, gregory. The most prolific ten or fifteen posters on this thread (you above all, and me too) have contributed 2/3 - 3/4 of the posts and taken it quite a way from the original question. Maybe if we step back and others continue the discussion, they will be able to refocus it again on earthair's original concern.
 

DownUnderNZer

It is all about "A" being against "B" for being in support of or associated with "C".

And it can go across the board in all kinds of areas and it really is quite simple:

A) Southern USA (A) being anti Northern (B) and Lincoln (B) for fighting for the freedom of slaves (C). Although this could be mixed about with Lincoln being also "C" as in representing "freedom" and "rights".

B) Same with this thread in which there is the question of buying or not buying from an artist. And this has created some opposition to some "Tarot Card Makers/Artists" (B) for supporting Trump (C)

C) China (A) lashing out at the USA as a whole (B) because of Trump (C) and past leaders (C).


All fundamentally the same.


DND :)



@DownUnderNZer

I'm pretty sure I follow your reasoning, but I'm afraid I don't find it illuminating.

For simplicity's sake, call the decision to not buy or use a deck from an artist with political views one finds abhorrent "boycotting" the artist. (This is to use one word instead of a whole long phrase)

You are suggesting, I think, that "boycotting" a deck artist for political reasons is parallel to one nation attacking another nation for political reasons. You are suggesting that this parallel exists because the people of the nation are not all equally responsible for national policy; and similarly the deck artist is not equally (or completely, or at all) responsible for all aspects of his preferred candidate's policies and character and etc.

This strikes me as a terribly complex and misleading analogy. The purpose of using an analogy is to make it easier to understand something. This analogy fails in this regard, as the difference between an individual (the artist) and an entire society is profound. And "boycotting" is not analogous to "attacking with nuclear weapons." The whole bit about China and nuclear weapons just adds to the confusion--it's like chaff! I understand your intent but I don't think you're accomplishing your goal with the analogy.
 

gregory

Good point, gregory. The most prolific ten or fifteen posters on this thread (you above all, and me too) have contributed 2/3 - 3/4 of the posts and taken it quite a way from the original question. Maybe if we step back and others continue the discussion, they will be able to refocus it again on earthair's original concern.
To be fair to MOI :joke: I have repeatedly tried to bring it back to the actual question.... But yes - enough already !
 

Alta

Moderator note:

I have just read through 4 pages of overnight posts 90% of which discussed the election with a few nods thrown into the original topic.

Carla said:
I didn't want to post here again...but am I the only one who feels that the discussion is getting a little personal and uncomfortable ��.

It certainly seems to have jumped the shark.

Please take this discussion to this thread:

We the people

Alta