I just want things to end. It's okay for things to be over. Star wars wasn't served by it's sequels, but here we are with a new WHATEVER every year. And marvel is worse, with a new show every month or two. Realistically, how long is anyone supposed to care?
Everything is political, buddy. Maybe stop plugging your ears every time you see a drop of political discourse that you disagree with and start listening.
Start listening to a post made by an obvious talkie that has the depth of your mom? The only “argument” in this post is “hahahahahahaha communism good hahahahaha”.
If you want a political discourse I’m open to that. But to start with such a closed minded view is not the right ground to start a discussion. I even agree with this one, but the way this is presented should not be on a meme sub.
Tf? Politics are currently pretty difficult and I am spending way to much of my time discussing it. Excuse me for just wanting to see a few bad memes on a meme sub and not slide into the next discussion. I don’t even know what to answer to bullshit like this. You know what also was “literal nazi talking point”? Food. Sex. Drugs. After all they are still human and a human is defined by more than just their ideology.
Cocaine withdrawal isn’t that bad. It’s all mental. You might get anxious or depressed and cocaine will be the only thing you think about for a while, but that’s it.
Benzo or alcohol withdrawals will actually kill you. Those need to be handled with medical assistance.
Opioid withdrawal isn’t quite that dangerous, but it certainly will make you want to die.
This man speaks truth. Take it from someone who used to work at local Crisis Intervention center.
That’s beside my entire native side of the family being a bunch of scummy abusive addicts who admittedly knew how to party.
Watching people die yearly in your twenties while the others who made it through slowly wither away on random Facebook updates people share with me gets sad/old quick.
This is another occasion where I really hope the lesson isn’t “Female leads don’t sell”. Probably an obvious observation, but Captain Marvel always struck me as a boring, flawless, invincible hero without much personality.
this is so interesting, we were just talking marvel today with my best friend and she pointed out captain marvel as one of her favorite mcu characters. and it’s specifically because she’s a strong female character who’s allowed to be strong without being hyper-competent or incredibly cerebral or anything like that. she’s just a woman who stands up for things and punches shit occasionally and is allowed to win through sheer brute force.
and yes, she’s way too powerful in many of the same way as superman, which is a narrative defect, but i find it extremely hypocritical how much more scrutiny people point toward captain marvel on that, while superman continues to be one of dc’s most popular heroes, despite marvel using her better than dc uses superman.
It’s new to me that Superman evades that criticism. There’s a reason Batman gets so much more media than him lately, in large part because of the “What if Batman is actually bad for Gotham” philosophical junk.
Even the Zack Snyder films, for all their flaws, examine the two-toned mistakes of the hero more than the power, eg “Maybe a god X-raying us at every occasion and destroying buildings to fight his rival is perhaps too oppressive” versus “Maybe he should’ve used his X-ray vision to see the bomb in that guy’s wheelchair before he set it off.”
he doesn’t evade that criticism, but there aren’t constant “scandals” around him regarding that. half the time you hear about captain marvel, it’s someone criticizing her for being too powerful (sometimes with accusations of “wokeism” thrown in, but not always). nearly all the time you hear about superman, he’s just there, it’s a regular positive-ish portrayal you’d normally see around any character, with a bit of critique thrown in of course. that’s the difference in scrutiny i’m talking about, the internet doesn’t tend to blow up every time they make a superman movie the same way it blew up for captain marvel because god forbid we see a woman in the same position as supes.
(also, i suppose many of her critics were the same people who criticize stuff like female thor or black captain america by saying go make original heroes – this is the treatment you get when you comply. underprivileged groups always get higher scrutiny, and it easily propagates to otherwise well-meaning people too.)
yeah, an important clarification on that is i base my superhero stuff entirely on movies. i made a genuine effort to get into the comics but i just couldn’t – it might just be my luck but i’ve literally only read either canon or good stories from marvel and dc, nothing i tried managed to hit both. but for what it’s worth, i presume the majority of people are the same way, comics just don’t have the same degree of mainstream cultural penetration that movies enjoy.
i do agree with you though, clark is far more interesting than superman. i used to be an ardent superman hater specifically because the movie portrayals sucked and most online fans i interacted with were like “my fictional character could totally beat your fictional character” but i do really enjoy very human stories about the dude. and hell, sometimes his powered stuff can also be kinda cool – but the same applies to captain marvel as well and that’s usually the part that people don’t like to accept.
Yep! I’m not a big fan of any of the modern Superman films, I think there’s way too much punching and not enough super-human feats. And by that I mean rescuing people, or performing “miracles” that only he can in order to help the greater good.
Clark will let a monster punch him in the face dozens of times if he thinks he can save both the people and the creature’s life. That’s what creates dilemmas for me when I enjoy a decent Superman story, an ethical dilemma that can’t be solved by hitting something as hard as possible.
The cool thing about Superman isn’t that he has these fantastic powers, but that the person who wields them will always try to do the right thing, because they know nobody else can.
The original Superman movie nailed that aspect. Clark was confident and maybe even a little cocky because of his abilities… but when his father suffered a heart attack, all the super strength in the universe couldn’t save him.
You are 100% correct in that a lot of superhero discourse online seems to aaaaaaaalways come down to “who would win in a fight”, which has always baffled me, because comic books are LOADED with ethical and moral plays which are suppose to make us question whether violence is even a good answer for anything in the first place.
It’s about using your own strengths to help facilitate the weakness of those who can’t help themselves.
The Superman problem. Main sources of conflict tend to involve depowering, fighting another godlike, or threatening people they care about. Over and over again.
The problem is that even Superman deconstructions get shat on. Snyder tried to do something different but everyone wanted a hokey silver age comic supes
Snyder's films were crap tho, and he didn't understand the characters - you can't deconstruct Superman and Batman if you don't understand Superman and Batman. Plus the lighting and pacing were awful. That's why they got shat on
Actually makes me appreciate so much more that one set of writers managed to make a semi-compelling show that focuses on Lois, including her personal growth, all while discovering that her plucky goodboy intern is in fact the man of steel. (Referring to My Adventures with Superman in case it’s not obvious)
One of the things a reviewer highlighted as very important to that show was that it didn’t praise Lois’ rebelliousness and spunk as having no consequences. I basically just didn’t see any of that journey in the first Captain Marvel movie.
Hey OP, comunistm is great on paper because it doesn’t take into consideration the human nature. Humans are corruptible, no matter who, and even the best of us would be corrupted when it comes to someone they love. This alone breaks the comunist stance because you can’t have fairness when one human is responsable for managing/governing. Comunism would work if there was no hierarchy between humans, no one more powerful. Maybe if some aliens come or if some AI evolve enough to govern, but that’s is not today’s world
Edit: I do think the US level of captalism is horrible. Maybe begin with just SOME socialist policies, like free healthcare and univesities, that would already improve so much the lifes of americans
Hey Commenter, it sounds like you only have a surface level understanding of Communism, i suggest you read some theory. Communism very much takes human greed into account, its kind of its whole point.
You are right I really don’t, but not all theory translates well into reality. How would a country of milions manage all that without hierarchy? I’m not going against you I’m just trying to understand how would this work without a dictatorship and considering that humans are not trustworthy
You seem to be at least a little bit interested, I suggest you watch some videos on youtube so you understand it better, the channel Second Thought would be a good place to start.
I’ll try to answer your concerns below:
The current ideology of society is the ideology of its rulling class.
Human nature, if anything is much more about collaboration and collective effort than greed, that’s how it has been for most of human history.
That is to say, we precisely see so much greed everywhere because we live in a system that heavily incentivizes individuality and greed. From the way we are taught to the media we consume, it’s literally everywhere. We are heavily influenced to think and see things in this particular individualistic way.
A society that puts human needs and collective effort above profits have a different way of viewing and interacting with the world than the way we do in capitalist societies. Besides that, if your concern is people abusing power, there should be mechanisms in place to account for that.
My knowledge on this whole topic is not deep, but I guess something you could look up is democratic centralism to understand how hierarchy works in a marxist-leninist socialist state.
Also, my understanding is that marxist theory is only dogmatic in relation to it’s method, as everything else about it adapts to the reality and the material conditions of the time and place it is to be put into practice.
you can’t have fairness when one human is responsable for managing/governing.
I would say that you have left your society and government open to the inevitably of corruption when you place the power in one person’s hands. I’ve been advocating for elected councils to run the system. It’s not impossible to corrupt an elected council, one needs look no further than the US Congress, or whatever they call the CCP massive room of people. I would propose that just having a council is not enough, one also needs to have a more robust voting system such as Ranked Choice Voting, or another runoff system so that you don’t end up with a choice between two shit sandwiches. We also need to abolish policing, as it is currently done, as a career. I’m not certain how to fix this one, and perhaps we can’t without actual incorruptible androids and AI.
The real issue is that we the people have tried to implement these changes only for the rich old fossils to refuse the will of the people. Just look at what is happening with Measure 1&2 in Ohio.
I don’t think there is an imediate solution. Humams can not be trusted with power, it’s human nature. I see only 2 ways, either someone/thing else does it or, a more realistic one, technology becomes so powerful that we can manage the managers, monitoring their actions/choices (and voting?! maybe?!) Idk, but remember that tech is a sword and not a knife, if it monitors them.they would also monitor us.
Anyway there is no simple solution. Captalism as is today and comunism as is today are both bad options.
memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.