(1/2)
We have an epidemic of people who don't understand morality, and that's starting to show in our popular media in ways that old media understood to be wrong.
When Luke Skywalker blew up the Death Star and killed hundreds of thousands of people, he didn't do it because "those people are fascists and I don't like them". He did it because the Death Star posed an imminent threat not only to the Rebellion but to the Galaxy at large, so destroying it was not just the moral decision, but the only rational one if he was to save the lives of billions of people.
Also notice that Luke didn't just rush into Jabba's palace and start cutting people up with a lightsaber, and gave Jabba the chance to turn over Han Solo peacefully. He even gave him one last chance while standing on the plank above the Sarlacc pit, and this was after Jabba tried to feed him to the Rancor. He had R2-D2 conceal his lightsaber inside him because he knew Jabba might pull what he did, but gave him the benefit of the doubt and multiple chances before deciding violence was the only option.
The stated reason Jedi use lightsabers instead of blasters is they're "more civilized", but from a storytelling perspective, a lightsaber is limited as an offensive weapon by its short range. A Jedi can use a lightsaber to block blasters, or even deflect them back at someone who's shooting at him. But it would be very difficult to mass murder people who have the ability to run away. In the original trilogy (before the prequels ruined everything), Yoda is never shown using a lightsaber, and he even tells Luke "wars not make one great" to emphasize the point that the Jedi are supposed to be peacekeepers, not killers, and violence should be a last resort.
But when you look at more recent Star Wars media like The Last Jedi, morality is all over the place. When Finn and Rose go to Canto Bight, they free a bunch of animals called fathiers which proceed to stampede through the city, causing untold amounts of property damage and probably injuring or possibly even killing hundreds of people for no real reason other than to spite the rich. But they don't do anything to help the slaves who would be forced to clean up their mess.
We have an epidemic of people who don't understand morality, and that's starting to show in our popular media in ways that old media understood to be wrong.
When Luke Skywalker blew up the Death Star and killed hundreds of thousands of people, he didn't do it because "those people are fascists and I don't like them". He did it because the Death Star posed an imminent threat not only to the Rebellion but to the Galaxy at large, so destroying it was not just the moral decision, but the only rational one if he was to save the lives of billions of people.
Also notice that Luke didn't just rush into Jabba's palace and start cutting people up with a lightsaber, and gave Jabba the chance to turn over Han Solo peacefully. He even gave him one last chance while standing on the plank above the Sarlacc pit, and this was after Jabba tried to feed him to the Rancor. He had R2-D2 conceal his lightsaber inside him because he knew Jabba might pull what he did, but gave him the benefit of the doubt and multiple chances before deciding violence was the only option.
The stated reason Jedi use lightsabers instead of blasters is they're "more civilized", but from a storytelling perspective, a lightsaber is limited as an offensive weapon by its short range. A Jedi can use a lightsaber to block blasters, or even deflect them back at someone who's shooting at him. But it would be very difficult to mass murder people who have the ability to run away. In the original trilogy (before the prequels ruined everything), Yoda is never shown using a lightsaber, and he even tells Luke "wars not make one great" to emphasize the point that the Jedi are supposed to be peacekeepers, not killers, and violence should be a last resort.
But when you look at more recent Star Wars media like The Last Jedi, morality is all over the place. When Finn and Rose go to Canto Bight, they free a bunch of animals called fathiers which proceed to stampede through the city, causing untold amounts of property damage and probably injuring or possibly even killing hundreds of people for no real reason other than to spite the rich. But they don't do anything to help the slaves who would be forced to clean up their mess.
(2/2)
Then later, it's revealed that the First Order and the Resistance both get their equipment from the same suppliers, and the movie tries to have a theme about moral subjectivity, but then it does absolutely nothing with this concept and it never even gets mentioned again. One could argue that this barely explored lip service is meant to raise questions about the moral uncertainty that's inherent to war, but the same people who defend the sequel trilogy by saying "you just don't understand its complex themes" will then turn around and tell you they're "movies about space wizards made for children" the moment trying to rationalize bad storytelling decisions becomes inconvenient.
Now look at a character like Superman. He doesn't kill specifically because he has the power to kill anyone and no one could stop him. Doing so would give him the power to decide what's right or wrong with no accountability. He realizes his judgment is fallible and he doesn't have the right. This is why he calls himself Superman and not Supergod. Unlike Luke, who had no moral duty to spare people who were actively trying to kill him and his friends, Superman is invulnerable, so it wouldn't be justifiable for him to just go around ripping people's heads off if he has any other option.
This is what makes Superman a more interesting character than people often give him credit for. He could play god and just do whatever he wants, but he doesn't allow himself to. He won't even use the full extent of his power if he can help it because doing so would endanger the people around him, which is something Zack Snyder failed to understand in Man of Steel in favor of big, dumb spectacle.
C.S. Lewis once said bad people "know very little about badness". Good people don't lack the temptation to be bad. Bad people just lack the willpower to be good. It would be easy for Superman to simply kill his villains, just like it's easy to rationalize violence against the civilians of an enemy nation in war, or anyone you consider a political enemy. It requires no self reflection. It only requires giving into temptation, and that reflects weakness of will.
And weakness of will is exactly the problem our dopamine-poisoned society is suffering from. You have all of the entertainment you will ever need literally at your fingertips. You have easy access to all of the fatty and sugary foods your ancestors never could have dreamed of. You have social media algorithms feeding you back your own opinions and validating your worldview. These things facilitate laziness. Not just physical laziness, but mental laziness; the kind that enables you to tell yourself you're always right and never second guess your own moral judgment.
That's the source of evil.
Then later, it's revealed that the First Order and the Resistance both get their equipment from the same suppliers, and the movie tries to have a theme about moral subjectivity, but then it does absolutely nothing with this concept and it never even gets mentioned again. One could argue that this barely explored lip service is meant to raise questions about the moral uncertainty that's inherent to war, but the same people who defend the sequel trilogy by saying "you just don't understand its complex themes" will then turn around and tell you they're "movies about space wizards made for children" the moment trying to rationalize bad storytelling decisions becomes inconvenient.
Now look at a character like Superman. He doesn't kill specifically because he has the power to kill anyone and no one could stop him. Doing so would give him the power to decide what's right or wrong with no accountability. He realizes his judgment is fallible and he doesn't have the right. This is why he calls himself Superman and not Supergod. Unlike Luke, who had no moral duty to spare people who were actively trying to kill him and his friends, Superman is invulnerable, so it wouldn't be justifiable for him to just go around ripping people's heads off if he has any other option.
This is what makes Superman a more interesting character than people often give him credit for. He could play god and just do whatever he wants, but he doesn't allow himself to. He won't even use the full extent of his power if he can help it because doing so would endanger the people around him, which is something Zack Snyder failed to understand in Man of Steel in favor of big, dumb spectacle.
C.S. Lewis once said bad people "know very little about badness". Good people don't lack the temptation to be bad. Bad people just lack the willpower to be good. It would be easy for Superman to simply kill his villains, just like it's easy to rationalize violence against the civilians of an enemy nation in war, or anyone you consider a political enemy. It requires no self reflection. It only requires giving into temptation, and that reflects weakness of will.
And weakness of will is exactly the problem our dopamine-poisoned society is suffering from. You have all of the entertainment you will ever need literally at your fingertips. You have easy access to all of the fatty and sugary foods your ancestors never could have dreamed of. You have social media algorithms feeding you back your own opinions and validating your worldview. These things facilitate laziness. Not just physical laziness, but mental laziness; the kind that enables you to tell yourself you're always right and never second guess your own moral judgment.
That's the source of evil.
Follow
@cowanon
Jewish movie
Hero propaganda writers now a days trying to emulate or steal the success of Japanese Anime Hero Propaganda after the success of the Matrix,this is why the moral issues are not emphasized in a western way anymore the Jews get anime samurai code mixed up with trying to make visually cool and add woke nonsense fake and gay propaganda and it doesn't work right except with Deadpool chaos humor to conceal how fake and gay they are
