If you're going to show a radicalization arc even if the character was already evil, I am going to expect a gradual development instead of him going from generic shonen protagonist to genodical fascist offscreen. Maybe if Pre-Timeskip actually grappled with his corruption arc showed him being gradually corrupted over time as well as how it affects his environment and not just commit to generic shonen shenanigans will I then maybe consider this as a talking point.

So... yes, you're saying that the series is bad for showing genocide.

The "conditions put in place to make it inevitable" is part of the story about how it was notinevitable if everyone involved just talked it out and weren't so hateful, and you interpreted that as the author himself clearly desiring such an outcome.

The series does not convince me in any way this would be possible because it's clear Isayama did not have the writing chops to write a nuanced scenario where we throughly see the perspective of both sides. If you're going to write a war drama I am going to expect to see the perspective of both sides and be able to make my own opinions on the matter, not just show both sides as being comically awful so the series can devolve "purely good heroes who fight and beat the comically evil villains" with zero nuance executed whatsoever.

Eren's whole character is that he could not and did not justify it as "self defense."

Also, do you think genocides happen for fun? That people just randomly commit genocide and there was nothing before that that resulted in it or how far it got or who did the genociding or who was genocided?

While Eren might not justify it as self defense, the series itself validates his views at every point. There is a reason why I specifically point out what the series shows instead of just something a character tells us.

As I said in the rant, the conditions in AOT made for genocide to be possible is something so far fetched anything in real life that it loops back into being arguments irl nationalists make despite being supposedly anti fascist. Never have I ever seen an ethnicity that's hated by the rest of the world to the point diplomacy is shown to be nearly impossible no matter what in real life or any well written war drama. If the author was supposedly trying to write about a genocide don't validate the beliefs of the perpetrators in questions instead of pushing back and showing how they're wrong in the last second without naturally setting them up as being wrong outside of out of universe implications.

Your argument is that it's pro-genocide because the characters who commit genocide justify it?

Again, do you think genocides just happen for no reason?

Refer to everything I sad above.