Chuck Norris has died(variety.com) |
Chuck Norris has died(variety.com) |
Also, the grim reaper hasn't yet gathered the courage to tell him.
He made it that far in life, that even if you might disagree with him on all and everything, you would still like him.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/mar/18/val-kilmer-resu...
RIP both...
For others, those who've read something, or know more, or think they know more, that symbol, that myth, has been ruined. The illusion pierced, the ugly reality revealed. They then look with pity, disdain and contempt at those who still admire the person. Or worse, they make the bad faith argument that to admire him is in fact to embrace those ruinous facts of which most are still ignorant.
Frankly, I think what you're doing is a farce. You're showing the world how smart you are and how dumb everyone else is. Ultimately you're trying to prove how dumb it is to believe in anyone or anything. If you look closely enough you'll find dirt on anyone. There is a contradiction: you claim a moral stance, but your "moral" position degrades the very idea of role models, heroism, and admiration itself. With enough scrutiny, admiration tends to zero.
The reality of the person is irrelevant. What matters is what they mean, what they symbolize, and the kind of archetype they represent. This is of course not true universally; some mythological people are alive, powerful, and dangerous and we cannot afford such kayfabe. But some are harmless and imply no endorsement of their misdeeds. Especially for actors, storytellers, artists, scientists and perhaps a few others we not only CAN afford it, we SHOULD do it, because these role models (or symbols of role models) are what make up the beating heart of a coherent culture.
I choose to admire Chuck Norris, Michael Jackson, George Washington, Ben Franklin, Gahndi, Isaac Asimov, even if some deeds of theirs were wicked. I prefer to go through life admiring symbols of people even knowing that these are constructs. To do otherwise is to recognize the futility of admiration, and I choose not to live that way.
Of course they both had a change of heart- was it true change or they saw the direction of the political winds? Who knows?
I don’t know Chuck Norris’s views on LGBT. But if he was a self proclaimed “born again Christian” and a rabid Trump supporter, I can only guess. But I no more expect people who were insulted by what he said (which I personally don’t know) to give him more grace or reverence than I do is a Black man who couldn’t give two shits about a dead racist podcaster.
Other people no more need to “contextualize” homophobia than I feel a need to “contextualize” the racism of a dead podcaster.
https://www.andrewhay.ca/archives/661
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1057708-bruce-schneier-kn...
CN might be the only favourite person in HN that has protected his IP by lawyers. THAT is an achievement.
RIP
Chuck Norris facts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris_facts
Death finally worked up the nerve.
> #1: "Chuck Norris was bitten by a cobra, and after five days of excruciating pain ... the cobra died."
Films like Missing in Action ,or delta force where the motorbike fires a rocket were just great at the time
I get he had some funny views later in life - but the films were a laugh at the time
I enjoyed reading the comments here. RIP.
"Chuck Norris didn't die. Death had a near-Chuck Norris experience."
RIP
― Chuck Norris
Which are similar in plot and character arc to
"Man of Tai Chi"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Tai_Chi
Which Chuck Norris films are also similar?
> Forest Warrior, A Force of One, The Octagon, Forced Vengeance, Sidekicks,
Which "hacker films" are also similar?
Yeah, really tough guy.
Yes, but now I’m like, super suspicious.
(Ok, ok, technically it was Gandalf the Gray and White, and Monty Python and the Holy Grail's Black Knight)
The section on his Wikipedia page is helpfully succinct if you want to understand the basis of my not joining in the japes and jokes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris#Political_views
And in spite of his flaws, it's possible that he had some good qualities as well, or at least aspired to them. So maybe those other qualities were what he looked for in the characters he played.
The Chuck Norris you admire is a figment of your imagination. He was a product created by capitalism. He never actually fought Bruce Lee. He was never really a Texas Ranger. He was never in the real Delta Force. Putting him on the same cultural level as actual leaders who at least fought for something in the real world is risible. Holding such deep admiration for the things he pretended to do that you feel compelled to insult someone's character and intelligence for judging him as a human being is a far less than admirable moral stance.
The reality of the person is not irrelevant, the reality of the person is all that matters at the end of the day.
The only good thing out of this mess is that the universe felt cosmically aligned to have his death occur on the same day as Mr. Rogers birthday, someone who genuinely did fight for a better world.
DADT was a significant improvement over the status quo of "we ask, you tell, and then you get dishonorably discharged". Considering it evidence of homophobia is revisionism. Did it go far enough? No. Was it a good step towards where we wanted to go? Yes.
Sure doesn't seem like a Clinton issue?
I do believe that Obama was 100% cool with gay marriage, but believed it was politically foolhardy to admit that publicly and in policy positions, but was able to advocate for his true feelings once the political climate changed. Still not awesome, but understandable from an electoral perspective.
I'm not really sure about Clinton. I would guess he's personally in favor of gay marriage and gays in the military today, but hard to say what his views might have been in the 90s (as I was a teenager at the time who wasn't all that interested in politics).
Also on supposedly-liberal people doing homophobic things: let's also not forget that California voters banned gay marriage statewide in 2008. 2008! And this was a ballot measure where all voters got a say, not something passed by the legislature.
I'd reckon you'd be hard pressed to find a single person that matches every quality/belief you imagined them to have.
I have friends and family who I never thought had a hateful, cruel, or belligerent bone in their bodies, suddenly start acting like totally different people, in the span of a few years. This isn’t me holding them to some purity checklist!
But some of those failings are forgivable, others are not.
Getting genuinely confused about pronouns sometimes: forgivable.
Being a loud, public MAGA homophobe transphobe: not forgivable.
This goes double when your heroes are actors, i.e. people who lie for a living.
Him liking Trump was a symptom of his regressive, homophobic, and racist beliefs.
Some of them taught me how to behave!? Did they just not believe any of those things?
MAGA is a horrifying movement.
And the monkey's paw curls…
nit: I wouldn't call it "mask off" though, as if it's been there the whole time. I'd say it's more like there is tiny a kernel of that (and let's be honest, who doesn't have this in some form or another?), combined with a lack of willpower and critical thinking, that causes them into give in to the siren song of easy answers from mass-personalized propaganda.
[0] ancap and religious fundamentalism are the only frameworks I've been able to find that fit the maggot movement, and they're not particularly constructive.
It was gonna be law either way; signing it removed a political weapon from the folks pushing its passage. Arguing this is something Clinton did to gay people is counterfactual.
Would you think it was okay if Tim Scott signed such a law just so his fellow Republicans couldn’t hold it against him in the primary? Well actually I wouldn’t be surprised if he did…
It's a pragmatic excuse.
Not signing changes nothing; clear statements that it's bad law; avoid giving the assholes pushing it more likelihood of winning the next election.
Am I suppose to be okay if he signed a law overturning “Brown vs Board of Education” because it would become law anyway?
Was the fact that he signed off on executing a mentally retarded man because it would show he was “tough on crime” just him being “pragmatic”?
https://jacobin.com/2016/11/bill-clinton-rickey-rector-death...
Getting back on topic, I don’t get to praise Chuck Norris because of his anti-racism stances but then dismiss his stances against non straight people.
Sure, but I think it's fair to praise people when they do good things, and criticize them for the bad that they do. That's true fir Chuck Norris, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama... anyone.
Totally agree, though, that it's bullshit to think that having positive views on some issues wipes away the bad.
Jokes like “Chuck Norris is able to slam a revolving door.”
Anyway, I “built” this stupid app when I was like 13, copy-pasted like 300 jokes in there and a random one would show every time you tapped the screen.
Chuck Norris’s estate blocked the app from going live. I wish I had printed that rejection out and framed it.
For the first time in over a decade he was suddenly relevant in a way. People remembered he existed, and they were playing off his tough guy image.
And what did he do? Try and shut it down and start suing people. Stupid.
It took him a couple of years to come around to it. If it wasn’t for those jokes would he be remembered anywhere as well? Or would he be a much more obscure celebrity by now?
You underestimate how popular Walker, Texas Ranger was. It wasn't pulling ratings like Seinfeld, ER, or Friends, but it was a solid primetime staple for almost a decade.
I never watched it myself, but the 50+ demo loved it.
Isn't that an obligation when you own a trademark? That you sue people, or else you may lose the trademark?
His round kick, Walker Texas Ranger and his fight with Bruce Lee. In Africa, to this day, some TV channels still play his stuff.
You’re assuming the jokes make people dive deeper. In reality I know the jokes and didn’t have a clue who he was and never cared enough to find out. The reality is the probably didn’t make much of a difference to how well he or his work was actually known.
https://github.com/faker-ruby/faker/blob/main/lib/locales/en...
I'm curious on what grounds they blocked the app.
The app probably used his pictures or his name, which are easy candidates for copyright or trademark-claims.
Seeing the youthful spirit run headfirst into the corprocracy of locked down devices and app stores is depressing. Twenty years ago you would have made a webapp or flash animation, most likely avoided scrutiny and not even been shaken down. Thirty years ago you would have made a QBasic program and floppy/email/dcc it to your friends, completely illegible to the corprocracy. But these days simply trying to publish through the common channels, and you're immediately subject to restrictions made for businesses.
Seeing my dad, who grew up on these actors' action flicks, laugh himself to tears when Chuck Norris appears is one of my favourite memories.
I remember reading 'The Vinci Code' in college which was very popular those days and getting a SMS from a friend almost the same day, "Rajnikanth gave Monalisa that smile!".
I bet Vin wouldn't have blocked your app.
The only one I remember offhand:
"Chuck Norris doesn't do pushups, he pushes the world down."
This was like 2005-2006
I will have to steal this one for my upcoming valedictorian speech.
The crowd is going to love it.
https://markloveshistory.com/2018/01/06/death-had-to-take-ro...
I don’t age. I level up.
I’m 86 today! Nothing like some playful action on a sunny day to make you feel young. I’m grateful for another year, good health and the chance to keep doing what I love. Thank you all for being the best fans in the world. Your support through the years has meant more to me than you’ll ever know.
God Bless,
Chuck NorrisRIP dude, we’d continue the jokes, may your soul laughs as hard as we do.
Chuck Norris once bet 42 is a prime. He won.
They were obviously a bit more niche, but that made them funnier to my mind.
> For Bruce Schneier, all zeros of the Riemann zeta function are trivial.
It's been a long time since I read it, but didn't the current Death decide to retire and pass the role on?
Case in point: https://theonion.com/hijackers-surprised-to-find-selves-in-h...
And, as you say, in Chuck Norris' case, it's virtually obligatory.
?
EDIT: acknowledged. fake.
https://htmhell.dev/adventcalendar/2024/20/ (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42468318)
Not a fan of him in real life (based on how he portrayed himself publicly), but I do find his level of physical fitness even more impressive back in the 1990s (and even up until his death), given his age.
One of my favorites.
Chuck Norris jumped into a lake. Chuck Norris didn't get wet. The lake got Chucked.
It's funny for a while, in measured amounts, and then it becomes tiresome.
Why do I feel like an era has ended...
Rest in peace.
Not that they actually know about him past the tough guy persona of the jokes.
Looking at the video, if it was legitimate, it would be 585lbs (6 45lb plates on each side plus a 45lb bar), which is even less believable.
The world (at least as of a few years ago), was about half that weight.
https://old.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/pdklnx/le...
On a personal level, I couldn't agree more. I do hope that culturally we get to that point at some time :-)
Most of the original funny Chuck Norris facts were from the original Vin Diesel ones.
Facts and copyright is an interesting one, because I'm surprised a fact can be copyrighted, unless it's the wording specifically.
As far as copywriting facts, are you really under the impression that Chuck Norris is the only man who can factually slam a revolving door? :)
Face palm I hadn't realised we weren't talking about _actual_ facts about him, this makes a lot more sense now.
It's not quite as cut and dry as you suggest. Besides, in which way was a trademark being violated? Last I knew merely talking about and referencing a celebrity by name was not a trademark violation.
Historian, sheriff, war hero, governor, explorer, and a successful President who reshaped America largely for the better. While Roosevelt was human, he led a life that very few have ever matched.
That said, the line does fit them both.
It is funny because you usually think of Death as something inevitable and people just accept it but then ... some of these guys put up a fight. Mega-LMAO!
Not overly popular, but many people already knew him from the Bruce Lee era, so it had a following by default.
Same with Dallas and The Dukes of Hazzard.
Exported media is weird. Like the huge proportion of British/BBC output (usually period, but also often detective in a way redolent of Christie) that is made primarily for export to foreign consumers who think of British upper-class culture as aspirational.
It was big internationally. But the jokes made Norris known to a whole different generation than the one watching WTR.
Also, he fought Bruce Lee! One of my favorite face-offs ever filmed, esp in the martial arts movie genre. Not many actors who could say that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlTyJhbTxxo&pp=ygUZY2h1Y2sgb...
"Friday night is action night with Walker Texas Ranger"
Would the people who grew up in the early 2000s, or especially 2010s, know much of anything about him?
I mean how much do younger people know about Scott Baio or the Corys or Candice Bergen these days?
His career lasted far longer. He had big movie appearances for 30 years, none of those people accomplished that.
Norris' first movie role was in 1968, first big credited appearance was 1972, Walker Texas Ranger finished in 2001.
I think that's a hard argument to make.
Candace Bergen's career was just as long. Her first movie role was 1966, she was nominated for an Oscar in 1979, and she was on a popular sitcom from 1988 to 1998 that won her five Emmies and attracted national commentary after criticism from the Vice President.
I was a kid in the 80s and 90s and to me even then Chuck Norris was a B-movie self-parody joke character. He was not an A-list "action star" in the sense that Schwarzenegger, Stallone, or even Van Damme were.
Those who cared would/will know him regardless. But obviously those people would be relatively few and far apart.
It would be more impressive to say that when Chuck Norris does pushups, he violates conservation of momentum and the Earth does not move.
The rights to air these sorts of shows are dirt cheap compared to Friends or Seinfeld, so it makes sense that cheap syndicated garbage like Walker, Texas Ranger and Baywatch were popular internationally, the rights were cheap.
Thinking WTR, Dallas, or TDoH are representative of American culture is... hilarious.
But I guess shows that hit the big American cultural stereotypes hard are maybe the ones that do better abroad?
Oh and Married with Children, but it was always very late night and I was not allowed to watch it.
And our teacher always played us ET on VHS. (and that dog playing basketball.)
that's america for me when I was a kid
Knight Rider.
> that dog playing basketball
Air Bud.
It was just a fun show. Magnum PI, Different Strokes, McGiver.. were just as popular.
I’m not aware of a single person who thinks that, and neither was that the claim of your parent comment.
People understand TV shows are fiction.
(I didn't watch it; my parents believed soap operas were unsuitable for kids)