They started a three front war ,prioritize citizens differently based on a state defined class system, got the earth blown up on at least one occasion, use their soldiers as disposable cannon fodder, and send everyone who disagree with them to reeducation camps. Other than that its a swell place.
Its tiring how bad general media literacy is that I canât tell if the 4chan post above is a joke.
The whole point of Poeâs Law is that you canât get away from it even if you ham it to eleven, or even 38.7 gigahams/second. Unless you explicitly state âThis is satire. That stuff is bad,â there is little to no way to tell if itâs satire or extremism, and even if you do make it explicit, there are always the idiots who wonât notice that part and assume itâs sincere, (see naive interpretations of Starship Troopers) and those who willfully block out that part because they sincerely hold an opposing view. (See white nationalists opinions on American History X)
No one is saying itâs ânot allowedâ for people to make those things. Theyâre saying itâs literally impossible because of how the media work. The kind of people who are saying âyou canâtâ would love it to be possible. If we could movie our way to a utopia, itâd be awesome, but it seems we canât.
You seem to agree with my position in the first paragraph.
No one is saying itâs ânot allowedâ for people to make those things.
Itâs remarkable how you apparently listened in on my comment exchange with the aforementioned other person. Truly impressive capability. Could you please cite the exact argument they presented, since you know it so dearly?
Why are you talking as if their argument is completely nonsensical or novel? Itâs kind of a known thing that even if you portray something as âbadâ as possible, there will be a number of people that look past/ donât see the criticism of the subject and take the creation of work as a sign that the subject is to be praised. Look at the music industry with gang violence, misogyny and drug use; lots of more modern artists make music that shows how these things harm society, yet casual listeners will put on a song about alcohol abuse to get drunk at a party.
It isnât necessarily that the artist is advocating for it, so much as theyâve produced a work that can be misinterpreted (unintentionally or otherwise) to do so.
Why are you talking as if this argument doesnât generalize an interpretation on some section of the audience to general treatment of any and all such media wholesale? Did you miss the part where it says that the media in question romanticizes the depicted practices regardless of any intent of the author, or interpretation by the generally intelligent audience? Youâre saying that the stupidest possible understanding of the media is what all media should aim for, otherwise by that commenterâs argument it shouldnât exist. I donât think you seriously realize how deranged this take is. Itâs straight up advocating for the âIdiocracyâ society.
Good art doesnât pander to the common denominator, it lifts the audience above it.
Ah, so youâre saying that some portion, perhaps very minuscule, of the audience, would be enamoured with the bad guys as role models.
But, you see, thatâs quite different from what I quoted originally as: â[these artists] romanticize the mafia and army nonetheless, and in general media glorifies its subject matter regardless of the authorâs intentâ.
You seem to agree with me that a small share of especially stupid people would derive their own messaging from the art. This doesnât change the fact that this media, in general, does the critique quite alright, as opposed to what the above quote says.
đšEarly to RISA đ§
carpelbridgesyndrome