all 48 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 59 points 1 year ago (1 child)

ARTHUR: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king!

DENNIS: Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)
    [–] 13 points 1 year ago (11 children)
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (10 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Side note but my partner and I just recently watched Toy Story 4 for the first time and, wow, what a disappointment compared to the first 3.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    It's still really good. I loved it. I get why people wanted the story to stop with 3 because it was such a good ending though.

    I think if they want to make more they should make a new cast of toys so it's the same premise but different cast.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Oh shit, I still haven't seen that. T. Hanks

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Both Barbie movies are way more based than they had any right to be.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    That's from Toy Story 3, though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Oh, forgive my ignorance. I just assumed there was a Barbie movie that I didn't see.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    “Both”? Brother, there are way more than 2 Barbie movies. Waaaaaaay more.

    The Barbie: Life in the Dreamhouse show is way better than you would expect it to be. Like not “good” necessarily but fun.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Someone just told me there were 52! My only experience is using an old Barbie or Ken doll as the bbeg my gi joes fought against. But the Margot Robbie one was the first one I saw, or even knew about! I thought it was pretty good.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    2023 Barbie is nowhere near based, it feels like a half baked apology from Mattel, who happens to be the ones which forced unrealistic body types over women for a whole century

    Honestly, not a good movie either, can't recall rn but I feel like 25% of it was about mattel corpo propaganda.

    Some of it was fun though. I liked the flashy songs

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    I get where you're coming from, but the new Barbie film was pretty based if you take a step back and examine it as a whole. I mean the whole Ken takeover of the Barbie village is strangely prophetic, given the whole trump takeover (so happy my small town had the biggest protest I've ever seen from her yesterday!) and the snippet about Margot explaining what fascism means. And this is coming from a 6'6 270lbs. Cis het ally with a shaved head and fairly thick beard. I enjoyed it for what it was. Yeah it's no citizen Kane, but it definitely hit higher than it's weight class.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    No system can achieve consensus consent of the governed. All governments maintain authority through a monopoly on violence.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    No systems that rely on and encourage centralization and concentration. Systems exist. They don't educate us about them purposefully.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Show me literally one ever.

    Any government relies on a monopoly of violence, because some minority will not consent to rule. Lenient systems will settle towards "don't kill, cook, and eat your neighbors," some will settle towards total subjugation of their constituents.

    If not prevented with violence, new violent power structures will form spontaneously.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Too easy. Any anarchistic structure.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    What "anarchistic structure" has derived authority exclusively through consent, and done so without allowing other violent power structures to form?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Unless you can tell me of any structure that has succeeded in that. That is an irrelevant question

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    "allow" as in permit or not address... Obviously no structure is 100% successful at eliminating opposition, but without the monopoly of violence any government becomes usurped by another body that is willing to exert force.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    No one should have a monopoly of anything beyond their own person/labor/property. Much less violence. Jesus Christ, you're literally arguing for most of the issues with modern systems unironically.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Anarchism doesn't mean the absence of force.

    Just as tolerance cannot exist if those who are intolerant are tolerated. Those who violate the similar social agreement to consent. Forgo consent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    If you're going to motte and Bailey, try not to do it in one conversation. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

    So a bunch of mental gymnastics later, we have two groups: those who consent to authority, and those who comply with authority because of the threat or application of violence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I see. So you worked yourself into a corner and don't know where to go from here. So our claiming a fallacy. Gotcha. Honestly I didn't ever think you're really engaging in good faith anyhow.

  • source
  • parent
  • All of society runs on the underlying threat of violence/force... From staving off wars, to enforcing our laws. It all requires people to be cajoled into being good/better under the threat of punishment. Usually through isolation from the rest of society, or straight up violence.

    That threat of force is given to the government on behalf of the authority and consent of the governed. If they continue to abuse it, then it's only on the governed to establish that change themselves. Either through political violence, or by changing the politicians / laws.

  • source
  • [+] -9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

    This is quite literally fascist rhetoric. Mattel & Disney quite famously made their debuts making antifa propaganda, that it was intentionally written by Michael Arndt that Barbie would say this, instead of Ken.

    But again, the folks desiring to be governed in the first place do not comprehend the authoritarian exploitation Barbie enforced in the end of that movie.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    fascist rhetoric

    Did you actually read this link? All it says is some Roman philosopher coined the term. The rest is very shallow editorial from the author about Jesus or something. The modern understanding of the phrase derives from European enlightenment philosophy which was the principle which rejected monarchy and feudalism.

    Like my dude, it's ok to be critical of modernity without cynically rejecting all of its first principles.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Too bad The Disney was a well known Nazi sympathizer, but I saw the mattel logo everywhere one time visiting the PGA club(yes That PGA) and thought to myself "why would a toy company be holding a conference in possibly the most expensive club imaginable? It must be something else!" But no, it was that mattel. Now ask yourself who they are all voting for!

    I'll give you two guesses which major party the vast vast majority support. If you get it right the first time you win, if you get it right the second time then you're fucking delusional.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    I don't need to guess. Governing by the plurality is still governing by mob. And that is no tyranny I want to be part of.

    Woody chose correctly to find a home to be welcomed for who he is, not for who he is owned by.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I don't have a fancy way of saying "cool".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments