I think it’s the difference between the call ending suddenly (hang up) and the call not responding for several seconds before dropping (lost connection).
Yes, and he originally was gonna make it obvious but he had to fight tooth and nail with Disney to even get the scene at the end where they look longingly into each other’s face while talking about love (iirc) and then shoot a cannon together (which is meant to represent that they are indeed a “canon” couple).
I need to rewatch it soon. One of the best animated series of the modern times, right next to Adventure Time, Gravity Falls, Dead End, Close Enough, Amphibia, BoJack, Infinity Train, Kipo, Vox Machina, Smiling Friends and YOLO.
What a time to be alive… When I was a kiddo, the best stuff came from Japan, and now the Americans are really nailing it.
Considering what the device on the left is capable of compared to the device on the right, the cable management on the left suddenly looks very elegant and efficient.
For a second I thought you looked up their birthdays and this was literally about the fact that Tobey Maguire was 23-years-old playing a college kid and only one year younger than this actor playing a middle-aged dad and it was a funny haha moment about Hollywood casting and age discrepancy between actors and the characters they play.
Then I did some more thinking and remembered that Spider-Man 2 came out in 2004 and I am an idiot.
BTW Tobey Maguire was born in 1975 and the other actor’s name is Peter Allas and I couldn’t find his birthday.
100-com otherwise you’re getting double exploited. That shit sucks. Although its sometimes fun to watch shitty small business tyrants get yelled at by a shitty large scale capitalist
North Korea’s GDP is on the order of 20 billion per year. Tiny for a country that size, but considering they don’t have to spend any of it on their population, that gives them a lot of bribe money.
They have quite a lot of money, particularly in foreign currency slush funds (see Room 39 for example). However the Kim family has the final say in what is government money and what never makes it onto the books.
They could probably afford a FIFA championship. It’s admitting they have that kind of money, that would be a huge problem.
I think it depends what you mean by “afford”, they might have enough money stashed away to host one time but it’s going to seriously take away from their future
NK has never chosen their future or basic needs over useless megaprojects though
So the caption would need to be: “When you’re on coke and H at your maximum wage chair sitting job and you see Gordon Ramsay walk in with a camera crew”
At least in the US series there are basically zero success stories in 6 seasons of the show. Even the best ones end up out of business a few years later.
Running a restaurant is a paradox. It’s sort of easy to get into because the turnover is so high, but even if you end up having success it’s extremely hard to sustain that over decades.
Some might, but yeah as you said the success rate was pretty darn low. Even in the show when he visits back it’s usually gone back to shit as soon as he leaves.
They want both the queer dollars and the conservative family values dollars. They produce what they believe will be the most marketable to the most people.
I don’t think you understand what makes for good entertainment. Hint: you tend to need a conflict in a story. I wonder if “controversial shit” might be a place to find interesting conflict for your stories?
Also inclusion is not the same thing as pushing an agenda. Gay people are just people. They’re allowed to exist in a story without it necessarily having to mean something.
I don’t remember any of their prior movies needing to push agendas for anything in particular.
Then you aren’t paying attention.
Gender-normative, male dominant relationships were the agenda. Since then, we’ve had an era of strong and independant - or at least stronger and more independant - female characters. Now we’re entering an era of deconstructing heteronormativity.
Things have been one way for so long that you perceive it as normal, and anything else as a divergenance meant to push an agenda. Every piece of media you’ve ever consumed has had an agenda and actively, consciously played to the stereotypes that would bring in the greatest viewership and reinforce the most commonly held stereotypes and opinions. This is no different; you just got used to one agenda in particular.
So what you're saying is good content is good because it appeals to the audience and we are now purposefully not appealing to the vast, overwhelming majority of human beings which is why Disney and other companies that chase that temporary trend are failing in droves.
Got it.
So only one specific agenda is correct. All the rest must be silenced.
People aren't watching what they put out. Their sustainment is heavily reliant on their parks. They destroyed Marvel and Star Wars chasing something other than what the respective core demographic wanted. This is clearly majorly impacting them or else:
Okay, but you’re grossly missing the point. There was and will always be an agenda. Being upset that it isn’t your agenda and presenting this opinion under the guise of wanting it depoliticized is at best ignorant and misinformed, at worst dishonest, and regardless attempts to reinforce and legitimize hate for those who do not conform to historical norms.
I’d propose that your argument about the “woke agenda” failing Disney’s pocket book is in itself a cherry picked argument which ignores the massive technological and cultural shifts in the way we consume and monitize media. But it doesn’t matter, because that has nothing to do with what we’re talking about. Disney has always sold a lifestyle and pandered to an agenda. There is a reason Disneyland was such a prominent point of Baudrillard’s work; Disney’s ability to conjure and sell an imaginative reality has been historically unparalleled. Now that it’s selling a fantasy that makes the privledged uncomfortable, ignorant, invalid commentary, such as your original comment, shows up perpetuating false premisis’ about media suddenly pushing an agenda, as though this is new. It is not.
You can choose to try and understand that, you can dig in and veil your choice of ignorance and hate, or you can simply accept that you won’t understand everything and bow out. Just don’t be surprised when you face the consequences of your choices.
While the phenomenon he explains does exist, it is an incorrect explanation for the feeling described in your title. This video is amazing, and I suggest watching all of it or just jumping to 10:50 to see your explanation:
P.S.: I was born in 2000, but ffs what’s up with these short format videos of people talking really fast and shoving incorrect info down your throat? I just can’t watch these, nor can I understand what they are saying.
During the campaign, conventional weapons such as explosives, incendiary bombs, and napalm destroyed nearly all of the country’s cities and towns, including an estimated 85% of its buildings.
A total of 635,000 tons of bombs, including 32,557 tons of napalm, were dropped on Korea. By comparison, the U.S. dropped 1.6 million tons in the European theater and 500,000 tons in the Pacific theater during all of World War II (including 160,000 on Japan). North Korea ranks alongside Cambodia (500,000 tons), Laos (2 million tons), and South Vietnam (4 million tons) as among the most heavily-bombed countries in history.
In an interview with U.S. Air Force historians in 1988, USAF General Curtis LeMay, who was also head of the U.S. Strategic Air Command, commented on efforts to win the war as a whole, including the strategic bombing campaign, saying “Right at the start of the war, unofficially, I slipped a message in “under the carpet” in the Pentagon that we ought to turn SAC lose with some incendiaries on some North Korean towns. The answer came back, under the carpet again, that there would be too many civilian casualties; we couldn’t do anything like that. We went over there and fought the war and eventually burned down every town in North Korea anyway, some way or another, and some in South Korea, too…Over a period of three years or so we killed off, what, 20 percent of the population of Korea, as direct casualties of war or from starvation and exposure? Over a period of three years, this seemed to be acceptable to everybody, but to kill a few people at the start right away, no, we can’t seem to stomach that.”
Sahr-Conway Lanz, who holds a Ph.D. in the history of American foreign relations, has written extensively about the legacy and impact on American discourse on the international norm of noncombatant immunity. He states:
“During the war, American military and civilian officials stretched the term “military target” to include virtually all human-made structures, capitalizing on the vague distinction between the military and civilian segments of an enemy society. They came to apply the logic of total war to the destruction of the civil infrastructure in North Korea. Because almost any building could serve a military purpose, even if a minor one, nearly the entire physical infrastructure behind enemy lines was deemed a military target and open to attack. This expansive definition, along with the optimism about sparing civilians that is reinforced, worked to obscure in American awareness the suffering of Korean civilians in which U.S. firebombing was contributing.”
The song was inspired by Korean war veteran that John McCrea met in a bar.
It’s a war, what do you expect to happen? Regardless, considering how North Korea turned out, defending South Korea, was without a doubt, the right decision.
Are you brain dead? Well, you’re a Marxist who defends North Korea, of course you are. After the Japanese Empire fell, Soviet Union and the US occupied the Korean peninsula. The Soviets took the North, and the Americans controlled the South. The idea was that after stability is restored, the two parts can unify and Korea can become an independent state. However, that never happened because of Soviet imperialism. Instead of pushing towards reunification like planned, they decided to keep provoking the South by funding a crazy dictator with a fuck ton of weapons. Then with the green light from Marxists in Moscow, Kim Il Sung, launched a surprise invasion of the south slaughtering tens of thousands of innocents. The North ravaged the South and almost took it over. The South Koreans were literally waiting for the Americans to arrive and assist the South Korean army, which was huddled around Busan, and help them liberate their lands from the Northern invaders. When the US came, they restored the status quo and helped South Korea get back on its feet.
Over time, the South turned into of the best countries in the world while the North became one of the worst. Especially after Marxism failed (yet again) and the Soviet Union collapsed. North Korea ended suffering through major famines (due to failed policies) and became even more authoritarian and closed off. The Korean war ended claiming the lives of up to 3 million civilians. While it’s sad what happened to the innocents, the alternative would’ve been much worse. The North Korean famine by itself killed 3.5 million North Koreans. The South had just as many people as the North back then. If they were under the control of the Marxist North, the same famine could’ve killed up to 7 million people. North Korea is still struggling with feeding its people while South Korea now has twice the population and a food surplus despite having worse geography. So fuck you, defending South Korea from Marxist imperialism was the right decision. You and your tankie vermin friends can cry your eyes out.
I’m sorry, but you’re deeply misinformed. I’m saying this not to start a fight, but in the hope that seeing it from someone outside hexbear (I’m banned from that instance!) will be received better.
What you’re saying is the us propaganda during and about the war after it ended. The consensus among even american historians stands in stark contrast to what youve posted.
I’m on mobile at the moment, so I can’t make the biggest post, but if you wanna know something in particular lmk and I’ll get to it as soon as I can.
What I said isn’t propaganda, it’s the reality. If you want to make the case that the war was brutal then I would agree. If you want to make the case that South Korea was ran by dictators until recently then I would also agree. These are also facts, but they’re irrelevant to the point that I was trying to make. The idiot I was replying to really pretended that Korean war was started by the US and not the Soviet backed invasion of the North which is simply not true. Whether you think the war was justified or not is subjective. Just like the nukes on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, everybody has their moral opinions on it. In my view, the US involvement in Korea to help the South was the right decision. Even if South Korea didn’t democratize in the 1990s, they still would’ve been better off being sovereign then under the control of the North. The North after the war went through an economic collapse, a famine, and chronic food and supplies shortages that are still plaguing the country today. It wasn’t all sunshine and rainbows, but the it was ultimately the right call.
there’s a lot youre leaving out. I don’t think it’s on purpose, but one of the only ways that the korean war can be made to look like a soviet invasion is by conveniently leaving out everything that happened before the norths army crossed the 38th parallel.
korea was one nation and people before it was divided roughly along a line of latitude by two american officers with no input from those knowledgeable about korea or its history. one of those officers, dean rusk, has said that he would have done things differently if he knew that forty years before, the tsarist russians and japanese had discussed dividing korea along a very similar line.
They divided the peninsula because the idea among the allies was to reunify it five years or so after china’s civil war ended and it was clear weather koreas only land border would be with the communists or the koumintang.
as the japanese retreated south, the korean people formed their own governing committees. the soviet forces integrated those committees into the provisional government, the american side integrated the collaborators from the japanese occupation into theirs. the north had a democratic election, the south became a military dictatorship.
both sides claim to have held elections, but while a majority of the north wanted to vote for kim il sung, the fighter who was an ally of the liberators that empowered koreans to kick out collaborators and do land reform, the souths election that would put syngman rhee in power were boycotted by the souths political parties and accompanied by what was reported on in even western papers as brutal repression. it’s worth noting that one of the leaders of a prominent political party would be assassinated a little later.
there’s plenty i’m glossing over, but the north didn’t cross the 38th parallel out of the blue for no reason but to impose their evil communist brainwashing on the kindly people of the south. in the south, the repression of jeju island, the military uprising against the government in response to that repression and the bodo league massacre are the backdrop for the norths invasion.
now think about those circumstances and history for a second.
the americans divide your country along the same line the russians and occupiers wanted to use before. lets say youre in the north: maybe you don’t trust these soviets, but they respect the peoples committees and theyre doing that land reform youve been wanting for decades. they’re supportive of you expelling the japanese collaborators and things feel like they’re getting better. how about if youre in the south? the americans put the collaborators back in charge, broke up the peoples committees and are putting the ever growing number of collaborators to work beating everyone into shape for the election.
when 30,000 koreans die on jeju island, there’s a failed military uprising and a massacre of south korean communists, what would any right minded person do? of course the north crossed the made up line keeping them away from their countrymen in peril!
since i’ve written enough already i’ll just address what you said about the state of the north being so bad: when and why was it so bad? why did it take a carpet bombing campaign and international blockade to make it so bad?
@Hyggyldy that feeling gnawing at the back of your awareness is the realization that you’ve been duped by the most prolificly evil entity to ever exist on the planet
Won’t realize anything. When I showed this article to my liberal friend he doubled down and said that while civilian deaths were unfortunate, it was a proportional response to Kim invading the South and compared it to Hitler invading Poland. Its veryt rare that shit like this gets through.
Hey I too know a lib I can’t get through to; this guy however doesn’t know nearly enough about history to try and sound informed; he instead spouts whatever comes to mind, for example: when I told him about what had been going on in Donbas until the war, and that Ukraine wanted the land but not the people, he argued for ethnic cleansing in the form of forcing all the Russians there to leave, and it was enough that the Ukrainian government wanted them gone for him to say that. When I brought up that the US is causing major issues with Taiwan, his response was “Do you believe that China does bad things?”, and then wanted to start talking about the Uyghurs even though…it has literally no relation to the situation with Taiwan. He pretends that countries not being democracies is the reason he supports the US intervening or invading many nations, and when I point out that Ukraine has shut down many left wing parties, he then pivots and says Putin does it too with a face as though he’s said something really clever.
I’ve spent hours trying to educate him about what’s going on in many countries the US intervenes in but the truth is this guy just inherently supports US empire.
Your friend may be different, but I suspect he’s using what little historical info he has to try and lend legitimacy to his claims but the truth is he already knows who he supports (just not why).
“During the war, American military and civilian officials stretched the term “military target” to include virtually all human-made structures, capitalizing on the vague distinction between the military and civilian segments of an enemy society. They came to apply the logic of total war to the destruction of the civil infrastructure in North Korea. Because almost any building could serve a military purpose, even if a minor one, nearly the entire physical infrastructure behind enemy lines was deemed a military target and open to attack. This expansive definition, along with the optimism about sparing civilians that is reinforced, worked to obscure in American awareness the suffering of Korean civilians in which U.S. firebombing was contributing.”
One of the things I never understood is why Western countries (as we’re not the only ones who do this) bother coming up with these laws and rules of engagement and such if they’re just going to basically be interpreted in the most liberal sense to allow one to do whatever they want. Take that adviser to Trump who suggested sending out a drone to ‘deal’ with migrants before they crossed the US border or entered American waters because they wouldn’t be protected by the US constitution at that point. What even is the point of these laws if the intent is ignored and people simply find a way to play the system?
the mask of civility is the thin veneer that liberals use to hide their agenda
it’s related to the difference between materialist and idealist perspectives
if you claim to uphold lofty ideals, then you can just claim the material failure to live up to those ideals is an oversight, mistake, accident, victim-blame etc
this is also why plausible deniability is a critical aspect of many operations, it was those few bad people that caused the bad things, not the institutional structure that is dedicated to lofty ideals
North Korea isn’t Marxist. It stopped being Marxist after the Soviet Union fell. They officially adopted a new ideology, that’s more or less in line with what is traditionally considered Fascist. The North Korean regime is similar in function and ideology to other Fascist regimes like Belarus, Azerbaijan, or Turkmenistan.
Fascism doesn’t emphasize economics, it’s a minor point in the ideology. Most Fascist governments allowed a private sector to run, but they also nationalized any industry they wanted on a whim. There were also a lot of nonsensical regulations, but as long corporations didn’t question the state then they were fine. North Korea doesn’t really have a private sector or an economy, but again the focus of Fascism is mostly political and social. North Korea functions similarly to other Fascist regimes. North Korea is authoritarian, ultranationalist, ultra militaristic, it’s run by a dictatorial leader, it is centralized autocracy, the government does forcibly suppress opposition, the government does pump out propaganda telling its citizens that subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation is a must, and so on. It’s a Fascist state.
Fascism doesn’t emphasize economics, it’s a minor point in the ideology.
Their rhetoric maybe. I’ve studied fascism, in depth. Fascism absolutely is primarily class warfare waged by the petite bourgeoisie and precarious haut bourgeoisie and has common economic characteristics. A good primer on this would be “Economy and Class structure of German Fascism” It is a quick read, <200 pages.
North Korea is authoritarian, ultranationalist, ultra militaristic, it’s run by a dictatorial leader, it is centralized autocracy, the government does forcibly suppress opposition, the government does pump out propaganda telling its citizens that subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation is a must, and so on.
Are we just uncritically repeating the talking points of a country that killed 20 percent of Koreans in order to protect the puppet dictatorship riddled with former colonial Japanese oppressors they installed in the South? That claims the North invaded while their puppet dictatorship was busy slaughtering 10s of thousands of pro democracy protestors?
The DPRK literally has had workplace management elected by the workers since 1961 and you’re accusing them of being undemocratic. Imagine how different your life would be if you chose your own management, and there was no owner to leech off of you.
Fascism absolutely is primarily class warfare waged by the petite bourgeoisie and precarious haut bourgeoisie and has common economic characteristics
I think you’re missing the point. Fascism is neither capitalist or socialist. They just use whatever policies is convenient for the state at the time. If they deem a private sector is useful, they will allow a private sector. If they deem an industry is of national security, they will nationalize it. If they want to add or remove regulations on a whim, they will do so. There’s no economic vision, there’s no ideal economy that they work for. Class warfare is also used as a tool for power, it’s not a defining part of the ideology. Fascism believes in social hierarchies, and this was just another way to enforce this idea. While Fascism’s cousin ideology, Marxism, has class warfare as a definitive ideological enemy, this isn’t the case for Fascism. When we look at North Korea, the country used to be mostly Marxist while the Soviet Union was still around, but they switched over to Fascism quickly afterwards. It doesn’t seem like a lot changed because both ideologies are authoritarian, but Fascism is the more accurate term to describe how the country runs now.
Are we just uncritically repeating the talking points of a country that killed 20 percent of Koreans in order to protect the puppet dictatorship riddled with former colonial Japanese oppressors they installed in the South? That claims the North invaded while their puppet dictatorship was busy slaughtering 10s of thousands of pro democracy protestors?
And this is when you stop being a reasonable critic and start becoming a coping tankie clown. Just a few points here:
Everything that I said about how North Korea is unequivocally true and this is does not disprove or take away from that in any way, shape, or form.
America did not start the Korean war. The Korean war was officially started when the Soviet backed Marxist North launched a surprise invasion on the South on the 25th of June, 1950. This is basic history. Before that, most of the conflict was just political and there were a few minor clashes around the 39th parallel.
US helping the South defend itself from the North is beyond justified. It was the right call. On top of the North invading and slaughtering civilians in the South, the North also had other problems. After the war, both countries were relatively equal in population, size, and economy. However, there was one stark difference, North Korea was heavily dependent on the Soviet Union for its existence. They barely developed a plan B for when the Soviet Union cuts support. When that finally happened in the 1990s with the failure of Marxism in Europe and the collapse of the Soviet Union, North Korea was left with nothing and ended having a famine that killed 3.5 million North Koreans. The entire Korean war killed an estimated 2-3 million civilians on both sides just to put things in perspective. Even if South Korea didn’t democratize in the 90s and remained under a dictatorship, they were still better off sovereign as that led them to escape the fate of the North. If the famine was spread to the South, the death toll could’ve been as high as 7 million. From that point on North Korea became a chronically malnourished, despite having the better geography.
North Korea was not and is not pro democracy, that’s some low tier propaganda which even the most ignorant of people don’t fall for. North Korea was a puppet propped by the Soviet Union, and the Soviets were very explicitly critical of democracy and saw it as a threat to their power, therefore North Korea was built with the same mindset.
The DPRK literally has had workplace management elected by the workers since 1961 and you’re accusing them of being undemocratic. Imagine how different your life would be if you chose your own management, and there was no owner to leech off of you.
What’s next, you’re going to tell me that Kim Jung Un, his father, and grandfather all got 100% of the vote 100% of the time in free and fair elections? Listen, I understand you’re a tankie and I commend your efforts to try and defend North Korea of all places, but this is not an argument you can win. North Korea is one of the world’s most authoritarian and undemocratic countries in the world, and anybody can tell that this is objectively the case based on the information that North Korea itself publishes. North Korea isn’t a communist utopia, it’s the polar opposite.
Please, share with me one nonfiction book or academic text you’ve read seriously analyzing fascism.
While Fascism’s cousin ideology, Marxism, has class warfare as a definitive ideological enemy, this isn’t the case for Fascism.
Bwahaha. If they’re cousins then fascism and bourgeois democracy are inbred twins. Facism exists to defend capitalism.
Everything that I said about how North Korea is unequivocally true and this is does not disprove or take away from that in any way, shape, or form.
Claiming your claims are true doesn’t make your claims true.
America did not start the Korean war. The Korean war was officially started when the Soviet backed Marxist North launched a surprise invasion on the South on the 25th of June, 1950. This is basic history. Before that, most of the conflict was just political and there were a few minor clashes around the 39th parallel.
To liberate the south, where the US had installed a far right puppet government which was slaughtering 10s of thousands of pro democracy protestors and generally repressing the population. Thats a war to liberate their country. Next you’ll tell me that the US Civil War was an unprovoked invasion by the North.
US helping the South defend itself from the North is beyond justified. It was the right call. On top of the North invading and slaughtering civilians in the South, the North also had other problems. After the war, both countries were relatively equal in population, size, and economy. However, there was one stark difference, North Korea was heavily dependent on the Soviet Union for its existence. They barely developed a plan B for when the Soviet Union cuts support. When that finally happened in the 1990s with the failure of Marxism in Europe and the collapse of the Soviet Union, North Korea was left with nothing and ended having a famine that killed 3.5 million North Koreans. The entire Korean war killed an estimated 2-3 million civilians on both sides just to put things in perspective. Even if South Korea didn’t democratize in the 90s and remained under a dictatorship, they were still better off sovereign as that led them to escape the fate of the North. If the famine was spread to the South, the death toll could’ve been as high as 7 million. From that point on North Korea became a chronically malnourished, despite having the better geography.
The US literally mass murdered civilians and indiscriminately bombed civilian infrastructure. MacArthur had to have his nuclear command secretly taken away because the president thought he would nuke Korea.
The DPRK was literally doing better economically until the US massively subsidized the south in the 80s. You are right to criticize their uneven economic development though, though to be fair the sudden undemocratic dissolution of the USSR is only obvious in hindsight.
What’s next, you’re going to tell me that Kim Jung Un, his father, and grandfather all got 100% of the vote 100% of the time in free and fair elections?
You do understand that it isnt 100 percent, is is like 99 percent right? Which is reasonable in a country with process democracy where the final vote is confirmation that concensus has been reached.
Has it occurred to you that you’re uneducated on alternate forms of democracy, and you’ve been shown something that is more democratic outside of its context within other democratic mechanisms and told that it is proof theyre a dictatorship?
Also, each Kim has had less and less positions within the executive branch, and Kim jung Un wouldn’t have been elected if the guy before him didn’t try to do a coup to take the country in a far right direction.
What’s next, you’re going to tell me that Kim Jung Un, his father, and grandfather all got 100% of the vote 100% of the time in free and fair elections?
You’re literally claiming a campaign of genocide was justified because after the 80s the country it was in defense of stopped being an overt dictatorship, why should anyone value your analysis?
Fascism is when media tells me the country is evil bad country. What? Fascism has a definition and the DPRK doesn’t come even close to fitting it? Bah, impossible. Trustworthy Sources (social media echo chambers) told me that Kim is an evil bad dictator man.
Let’s see a statistics list of countries where America wasn’t able to reach via propaganda, or lost its status and most population thinks negatively of americans and their media:
Funny how the countries that are supposedly the ones who know the real truth about the world are the same ones that routinely lock up journalists for trying to report about the world.
The Mitchells vs the machines did it best. It was a great and entertaining story and I loved all the characters. Perhaps Disney should just make a story that’s worth telling?
startrek.website
Active