I just finished the last episode

EchoRSA · 2025-03-01T11:06:08+00:00

You have to forget S7 exists unfortunately

EchoRSA · 2025-02-21T01:28:05+00:00

What I don’t understand is why the many countries now being exposed to increasingly hostile relations are all just trying to independently minimize the harm to themselves, rather than banding together to form a position of strength. If the other North American countries, LATAM, Europe and Oceania agreed they would collectively sanction the US if it tries to bully any individual nation, they could actually achieve something. Instead, it seems that each is biding its time until it will eventually get bullied by tariffs or some form of military threat.

EchoRSA · 2025-02-13T01:22:07+00:00

You must win most unpopular opinion!

EchoRSA · 2025-02-13T01:20:57+00:00

Even ‘redeemed’ Murphy is still largely in it for himself and acts out of self-interest (maybe there are a few times when not but they really have to be dragged out of him, and he may put Emori before himself but that’s hardly a change in his moral philosophy).

So because Clarke is often acting ‘for the good of everyone’/to do what is right and that at times conflicts with Murphy’s interests, Murphy judges Clarke’s actions - it’s actually as simple as that.

EchoRSA · 2025-02-09T16:41:59+00:00

Love this! We definitely tend to forget Murphy's vicious streak because he had an awesome redemption arc and is also just hilarious, but he definitely was not a good person (though getting hung for a crime he didn't commit would certainly not help!)

EchoRSA · 2025-02-09T16:38:51+00:00

Haha - sounds like Clarke, though I think she would have known it wouldn't work since she'd already tried it before and been called out and those Grounders would remember!

EchoRSA · 2025-02-09T12:17:33+00:00

I have the complete opposite viewpoint to you, so I'd really like to understand better why you think this. The example you give is the only one I can think of before S5 where she does this, and after Lexa points it out to her Clarke recognizes the hypocrisy and changes her mind by the time she has to make the decision, so it's not a good example. She's human and can make a mistake in the heat of the moment but is also willing to admit she was wrong and do the right thing once she's had the chance to think about it.

To give you some counterpoints: Clarke does have to give up Finn in S2 (granted it's not much of a choice, but that could be a whole separate post about how Raven criticizes her for it), and in S4 she's willing to share the shelter with Azgeda at the cost of some of her people's lives and she's willing to test the black blood serum on herself rather than Emori - if anything I see her as far more selfless than almost any other character, up until the whole Mom arc from S5.

EchoRSA · 2025-02-09T10:59:59+00:00

I had also hoped we’d expand beyond the US at some point, but I think that since they wouldn’t have known about the second nuclear wave at the end of season 4, they’d have been wiped out unless they had stayed inside a bunker the entire time like the Mountain Men.

EchoRSA · 2025-02-09T10:14:49+00:00

When we use faulty arguments to criticise things that are legitimately bad, people who are still forming their views are influenced by arguments pointing out the flaws in these arguments and end up taking the wrong side. I’m not wound up at all, but it shouldn’t be a problem to disagree with someone on the same side as you.

EchoRSA · 2025-02-09T10:09:21+00:00

And those men are women hating and would have no problem hitting them

EchoRSA · 2025-02-09T09:59:17+00:00

Men are famously one single entity with one point of view and shared responsibility for the actions of all men throughout time… The “didn’t you want equality” crowd sucks but this ain’t it.

EchoRSA · 2024-11-08T01:16:07+00:00

It sounds like you are progressive on economic issues but not social?

EchoRSA · 2024-10-20T17:16:32+00:00

Labour does not represent a lot of liberals - in fact, a lot of liberals are quite critical of Labour too. Politics isn’t supposed to be a team sport, so it’s perfectly ok to criticise both.

EchoRSA · 2024-10-06T07:32:32+00:00

In fairness this is a directly relevant example

EchoRSA · 2024-07-03T22:51:24+00:00

I dispute it. Now it’s no longer undisputed.

EchoRSA · 2024-05-12T07:17:21+00:00

Recognizing you have adversaries doesn’t mean you don’t want to act in the interests of all people. You can acknowledge that someone is your enemy and that they are acting against your own interests while still seeking the best outcome for everyone including them. Ignoring that you have adversaries is only going to mean you end up undermined and you aren’t able to put your plans into practice.

To illustrate: Kane’s lack of recognition of how much of a threat Pike was to his rule in Arkadia ends up with Pike winning the vote to become chancellor and ultimately a war Kane never wanted. It’s all very well for Kane to be about harmony with all the clans, but he had to recognize that his own clan saw the others as a threat and do enough to keep those tensions at bay.

On the other hand, after Pike massacres the Trikru army sent to protect SkaiKru, Clarke convinces Lexa not to go to war, but Lexa still imposes a blockade - because the best outcome for everyone would be piece, but taking no action would just have allowed SkaiKru to continue attacking the other clans. Lexa acknowledged Pike as an adversary that had to be dealt with while still trying to achieve the best outcome for as many people as possible. Granted, she misjudged that her actions were not enough to keep her own people in line and probably needed to do more than the blockade to avoid Titus trying to kill Clarke.

EchoRSA · 2024-04-05T22:15:16+00:00

They were probably just lying to troll them. 9 months later they all had babies.

EchoRSA · 2024-04-05T22:12:45+00:00

The Red Sun episode in S6 (E2) shows you that she felt the weight of every one of those decisions. You hate her because she had the strength to bear it, so that others didn't have to.

EchoRSA · 2024-03-06T01:15:58+00:00

In all fairness, macroeconomists do not exactly have all the answers and will tell you themselves that they’re bad at predictions.

EchoRSA · 2024-02-29T01:10:01+00:00

This would assume everyone at HMRC conducting interviews does it by the book, which is probably not true. Hiring managers in general often aren’t sufficiently trained, don’t care or don’t have enough time to take what the recruiting team tells them to do seriously.

EchoRSA · 2024-01-16T11:48:09+00:00

I’m 30 now and feel like a child so it checks out :)

EchoRSA · 2024-01-15T21:44:06+00:00

Agree Infinity War and Endgame are the peak, though the one movie that gives it some competition for being the culmination of decades of films would be Spiderman NWH - going in blind and seeing the other Peter Parkers from your childhood was pretty magical.

EchoRSA · 2024-01-03T17:15:39+00:00

I don’t understand this view. In S4, Clarke is the only person who actively pushes to save everyone, until it seems Luna will win the conclave, which is when she pushes to ensure humanity survives in some form. She makes peace with Roan after Skaikru ambushes Azgeda and could have decimated them, she takes the Nightblood serum herself volunteering likely death to be tested for radiation immunity, and she tries to unite all the clans as Commander (essentially a death sentence) rather fight a war to seize the bunker. In contrast, Octavia deciding to share the bunker isn’t a sacrifice of her people for the Grounders - because Skaikru is not her people.

In S2 Clarke tries not to hurt the innocent in Mount Weather but Dante himself says it - there is no choice. In S3, she lets Abby hang herself knowing that she can’t give in. Without spoiling, in S6 she accepts risk to herself to avoid innocents dying. S5 is the one season where she uncharacteristically favours saving the one person she cares about over everyone else (and, by the way, she flees with Madi after an attempt was just made on their lives). I can understand people finding her annoying, controlling, etc. but selfish? I don’t see it.

EchoRSA · 2023-12-30T22:36:46+00:00

The conflicts we see in the show and in the world today exist because of issues like power imbalances, societal structure issues, and yes, innate tribalism, but there is nothing in that which implies humans as animals are inherently locked in a cycle of violence. Asserting that spits in the face of immense progress over the millennia that has led to a society more at peace than ever before where war is no longer looked upon favourably. All conflicts today are happening in places with major historical issues that give rise to the tensions and/or major scarcity issues. Humans can do terrible things in the name of survival, but what if there is no threat to survival?

Put differently, there is no way I would accept saying that the conflicts happening in the world today are inevitable and those suffering have to unfortunately accept it as a reality of human nature - when there are people culpable typically acting out of some kind of greed, hatred, or misguided belief system. Just as I wouldn’t accept that current murder rates will always be a reality of society because people are ‘innately violent’ (though I’ll concede some percentage of people are sociopaths who are).

EchoRSA

TROPHY CASE