Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
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.
Watery tart
Both Barbie movies are way more based than they had any right to be.
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
Mattel made a movie based on their toy line and it had an agenda?? I'm aghast!
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.
That's from Toy Story 3, though.
Oh, forgive my ignorance. I just assumed there was a Barbie movie that I didn't see.
There are 52 barbie movies.
All both of them!
Whole Lee chet! I had no idea!
“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.
What movie is this?
Toy Story 3
Oh shit, I still haven't seen that. T. Hanks
What about him?
Yes, he voices Woody.
It's the one where Woody and Buzz Lightyear finally fuck.
Nice
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.
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.
Yeah should've stopped at 3.
4 was better than 2
I haven't seen 4 but 2 was my favorite lol
No system can achieve consensus consent of the governed. All governments maintain authority through a monopoly on violence.
No systems that rely on and encourage centralization and concentration. Systems exist. They don't educate us about them purposefully.
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.
Too easy. Any anarchistic structure.
What "anarchistic structure" has derived authority exclusively through consent, and done so without allowing other violent power structures to form?
Unless you can tell me of any structure that has succeeded in that. That is an irrelevant question
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.