CSotD: What’s All This About?
Skip to comments
I’m somewhat surprised at the number of cartoons about the Pope still being done, but Schot has done a nice job of contrasting Leo XIV with Donald Trump.
It’s almost cheating to simply lay out the differences like this, but I’ve often said political cartoonists should be journalists, and there’s nothing wrong with reporting if you can couch it in amusing terms and he does.
Schot’s cartoon is funny, Alcaraz’s commentary is not, but they share a serious subtext and Alcaraz brings in a great deal more thought than the triumphant cartoons simply celebrating the elevation of an American with references to Chicago and suchlike.
Rah-rah has a short shelf life, but Alcaraz poses the hope that maybe Americans will listen to a spiritual leader from their own country.
I don’t dismiss it, because Leo has a history of speaking out on specific topics and in his first papal homily indicated a sense of mission, speaking of “a world that considers Jesus a completely insignificant person, at best someone with an unusual and striking way of speaking and acting. And so, once his presence becomes irksome because of his demands for honesty and his stern moral requirements, this world will not hesitate to reject and eliminate him.”
My hesitation is that the Catholics who most need to hear this message are the ones most likely to reject him, the conservatives who wanted a pope who would not be “woke” and might perhaps restore the Latin mass. It’s ironic that the people who claim to fervently believe the pope is divinely chosen as the leader of the Church are already questioning him.
But it’s been a while since the Pope’s authority could cause an emperor to stand barefoot outside his door in a blizzard, begging for mercy and forgiveness.
Teachings on virginity and birth control are rejected by the vast majority of Catholic women, while young Catholic men who wanted concientious objector status during Vietnam had to make their own argument, since the Church’s only guidance on the topic was to “pray for peace.”
Anyway, I welcome Leo’s voice in our time of crisis, but I really wish cartoonists would lay off the “Trump as Pope” gags because they only prove that Dear Leader is a master at launching trivial, irrelevant distractions.
Stop drawing motes and focus on beams.
Speaking of praying for peace, I note that cartoonists in Australia, New Zealand and the UK are far more willing to criticize the Israeli government without worrying that their political stance will be taken as antisemitic, though Le Lievre suggests a fair amount of deliberate non-judgment among Aussies.
Of course, they don’t have to worry about being kidnapped and shipped to El Salvador, but I think American commentators are simply “obeying in advance” to avoid furious public backlash, and if the cartoonists aren’t afraid to anger readers, the editors who select cartoons are.
There’s a lot more dialogue on the topic in those other countries, in large part because there’s almost none here except on college campuses (and that’s being dealt with).
Juxtaposition of His Own Self
Speaking of what editors may choose to purchase, Syrian cartoonist Yassin Alkhalil demonstrates either marketing savvy or cynicism, but I suppose an editor who wouldn’t run one of these might run the other.
Gotta make a living, which explains the number of cartoonists this past weekend who boldly declared that they love their mothers.
We all love our mothers, regardless of how many other people we hate.
Ramirez files a minority report on Dear Leader’s first trade agreement, “a new hope” which I guess he’s comparing to the victory over the Death Star, though most cartoonists in the UK take things more from the perspective of Alderaan.
Matt Pritchett agrees that the British government announced it as a triumph, but hints that it didn’t exactly spark joy in everyone.
Brookes notes that it seemed mostly to eliminate new large tariffs in favor of new not-so-large tariffs, making it less of a victory than advertised.
And Riddell dismissed it as more of a spanking than an agreement, though one saving detail is that the UK still won’t import chicken washed in chlorine or hormone-laden beef, so tariffs on those don’t much matter.
And they got some lovely tariff exceptions for British cars, which infuriated American carmakers whose Canadian- and Mexican-assembled vehicles will now be at a disadvantage.
And Jeremy Banx echoes Riddell’s lack of confidence in Trump’s word of honor, however good or bad the agreement itself may be.
The Brits aren’t the only people who seem to have a problem with the American president’s credibility, and I say that without naming him, because I suspect the world isn’t going to trust whoever comes next, either.
Breaking faith with the world isn’t something that can be instantly reversed, and even if a pure anti-Trump party sweeps the White House and both houses of Congress in 2028, our trading partners will still worry about 2032.
Fortunately, we’re not the only major nation losing faith around the world, and Turner’s marginal comment is striking: The Irish have worked hard in recent years to disprove the old Orangie notion that “Home Rule is Rome Rule,” but they may now hope that Leo’s reach exceeds Trump’s grasp.
Patrick Blower takes a long range view of the kerfuffle over US and USSR contributions in the part of the war that ended May 8, 1945.
China also contributed to that victory, not in Europe but in the part nobody told Dear Leader about and in which the Soviet Union barely participated. China has since changed hands, but both the Nationalist and Communist forces were deeply involved against Japan.
However, the Chinese have always taken a very long view of history and the future.
The next war may be fought in the marketplace rather than on the battlefield. Dear Leader has opened trade talks with China, or possibly just backed down, but while markets are rebounding this morning, Trump’s well-earned lack of trust will likely drive more trading partners to Beijing.
Meanwhile, small business will still take some tariff hits:
Comments 6
Comments are closed.