Another common W from The Good Place. God I love this show.
this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
277 points (94.0% liked)
196
16503 readers
2666 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Drag has a new friend who hasn't seen the good place yet, and that means rewatch time!
We just got to the end of season 1. And actually, she guessed the twist! She said they were in the bad place after Michael said flying was banned due to injuries. She pointed out that there are no injuries in the Good Place, so Michael must be lying. That's like episode 2!
Oh, I love the vicarious enjoyment from introducing a friend to something I love. It feels like the closest I can get to re-experiencing something afresh without losing my memory. I am envious of Drag for this opportunity.
They don't want some, they want all.
Which is why insisting on negotiating with them is a bad idea.
The reason "not negotiating with terrorists" worked was because most of those groups were fascists.
You mind explaining this thought? Among other things, it's a Reaganism and he absolutely negotiated with terrorists, as did the Bush administration.
I was more talking about never assuming good faith when dealing with. Obviously Reagan and Bush were inconsistent, but it is possible to negotiate with terms that they will choose to follow. These negotiations wouldn't be built on trust, but accurate assessments of self interest. No trust is needed in that sort of deal.
Fascists can be easier to predict if you ignore their words and look at their actions. They don't behave consistently with words, but they do behave consistently in strategy.
Eventually enough people will suffer and enough people will die that we'll be angry, and when that happens, a pretty woman will get killed unjustly on camera, and we'll decide that this is the hour in which violence is necessary.
Until that moment, violence will be unthinkable, including consideration of violence sometime in the future.
This isn't to say violence is principled, or the right thing to do. It's to say this is how violent uprising has manifested historically. And since Trump and his administration isn't going to respect non-violent language, and will [send his agents to] respond violently, the only way the circumstances will change is when the people rise up violently, and rise up with enough support to overthrow the current government.
Four notes:
1. Once government is overthrown by coup d'etat, it's really easy for a dictator to take over. If you want something other than a dictator taking over, you might want to have some bylaws at the ready.
2. Ideally get law enforcement to kill or brutalize attractive people on camera. That will make sympathizers of onlookers and activists of sympathizers.
3. If you're going to warm up to raising an army from the people, start with a humiliation campaign or a sabotage campaign if you can do so without dropping tells the massive surveillance state can pick up. Funny is good and draws onlookers towards becoming sympathists. In the end, law enforcement will use live bullets and won't bother with arrests except to torture you and break your spirit for the enjoyment of their masters. Make their victories Pyrrhic.
4. The front lines of resistance and rebellion groups suffer from terrible attrition rates like German submariners. They will capture you, or if you're lucky, kill you in the middle of combat. And you'll be known in history. That is, as all those countless songs observe, the price that is paid for liberation. (Thanks, lots!)
Drag already thinks violence against the minions of a fascist dictatorship is morally correct.
Incredibly on point. A bit bone chilling actually
you've already given up shit. you lose either way, but this current way you lose faster