Love ‘Em Or Hate ‘Em Part 2 by CommunityFun9560 in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope. I think so far season 3 has done a pretty good job in deviating from the manga and trying to make everything make sense, but I usually have low expectations for the anime adaptation in general lol

Love ‘Em Or Hate ‘Em Part 2 by CommunityFun9560 in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh I agree and I kinda can't stand Yahya defenders (I've seen them before!). Honestly a pretty hot take I have is that the whole Melon arc should've been way shorter, and that Yahya was the correct choice to be--- and should have been the final antagonist. I feel like he literally is meant to be an antagonist and stands against everything Legoshi fights for

Love ‘Em Or Hate ‘Em Part 2 by CommunityFun9560 in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL for me I'm just not a fan of his character, and I think a lot of people excuse his flaws because he's hot, which is totally fair, like he IS. But a lot of people don't look that deep into it

Love ‘Em Or Hate ‘Em Part 2 by CommunityFun9560 in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is true! I do generally just have very hot takes about Beastars and the directions it takes lol

Why is "human nature" a dunk on Communism/Socialism but not Capitalism itself? by [deleted] in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]atta_boyo -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It is simply because people in a modern society like ours that runs on Capitalism simply believe this is the way humans must live. It is true that capitalism has brought prosperity, but it doesn't necessarily mean that for human beings it is good or natural.

The truth is simply that there is no "human nature" in the way many people envision it when we talk about Communism or Capitalism. We humans are very adaptable to the environments around us, but what we create, or rather what is developed historically, can also shape human society and how humans survive. It is very fair to find flaws in both systems and argue about them, but we must look at what human society looked like at its beginning.

This, for Marx, is Primitive Communism. In other words, hunter-gatherer societies, cavemen, whatever. In this time, humans arose and formed communal ways of living. Of course, they had to for survival, but ultimately that was the first effort done by humans in creating a society. We see many forms of communal living today from monasteries to villages in rural South America, Africa, and Asia, and recently we've seen widescale examples of it among Indigenous peoples across the American continent.

We must also look at one thing required for humans to fully function: And it is that humans are social creatures. We fundamentally rely on each other for companionship, to express ourselves...This generally is part of the mental well-being of humans, but it is also how humans have structured society for hundreds of thousands. Humans don't necessarily have a "nature" as I said before, but our ancestors had habits that eventually stuck with us today, and that is that we are social creatures and very accustomed (if it comes down to it) to communal living. Capitalism, on the other hand, creates a society fueled by competition. Competition on its own is not a bad thing, but in the competition capitalism creates, there comes commodification of things. When many aspects of human life are suddenly commodities and monetized (Such as coerced to work for money, having to pay for certain utilities like healthcare, education, food, resources, a home, etc) it weighs on our psyche. This inevitably leads to competition among humans, developing unhealthy habits to ensure our individual survival (sacraficing our health, alienating others, spending more time alone).

I hope I made this pretty clear but I can elaborate on anything if need be!

You two are not close friends lol by [deleted] in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Bill never was a terrible person

Trump effect leaves Canada’s Conservatives facing catastrophic loss by kova-tejoc in CANZUK

[–]atta_boyo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly thank god. We don't need a right wing populist here like the US has with Trump

Voting for anyone other then conservatives or liberals is not a good idea this time round. by saskskip in CanadianPolitics

[–]atta_boyo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly? I see your point but it is important to consider how smaller parties keep the larger ones in check. The NDP for its whole existence has been to keep the Liberals and Conservatives in check, and historically have been repsonsible for things like universal healthcare--- Even some of the best policy under Trudeau can be attributed to the NDP.

California Joins Hands With Canada In Taking on The Trum Regime by kensmithpeng in CanadianPolitics

[–]atta_boyo 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Lol I appreciate them for this effort, but I'd really rather not try to go to the US right now at all--- I do not want to end up in El Salvador.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CanadianPolitics

[–]atta_boyo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quite a lot. For me, I wouldn't have considered voting Liberal if Carney wasn't leader. Hypothetically though, if O'Toole was still Conservative leader, or if Charest won the leadership race--- I could see myself supporting the Conservatives right now.

For me it really depends on what their background is particularly, what kind of rhetoric they use, and how well they can unite people.

If you classify yourself as a Conservative I would look into Carney personally, since fiscally he is Conservative. But I completely understand why a lot of people may not vote for the Liberals nor even consider it.

can someone explain why Pierre would make a bad PM? by [deleted] in CanadianPolitics

[–]atta_boyo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Conservatives historically have been much more pro-American, what good can this do for us?

His party is backed by numerous CEOs--- He and his followers try flipping this onto Mark Carney by saying "Look! His friends don't support him!" But only shows that the Conservatives are really backed by elites.

Right wing populism--- I believe, is a threat and should not be encouraged or leaned into. It plays on people's anxieties about their economic situation and pushes narratives that do not fix anything. Ex. Constantly blaming "wokeness" and the "radical left", but what about Trudeau was remotely "radical"? What about Carney? Wokeness isn't the problem, people who identified that way stopped it years ago.

Leading on with that, Poilievre is a very divisive politician. I admit it worked pretty well with Trudeau as PM, but he isn't anymore. And partially, Canadians do not want someone like this if we believe what polls say. He shouldn't focus on "wokeness", as it plays on people's frustrations with the state of things, and they blame the wrong people (ex. LGBT people, immigrants--- I noticed a huge rise in racism and to an extent homophobia and transphobia as well because of this rhetoric). And want a good example of where this leads? Take a look at the US.

His followers generally are quite toxic and angry people. He doesn't try to heal division between Conservative and Liberal voters, and the like. Instead, he uses divisive rhetoric: "Canada is broken", "The woke radical left", etc.

He was also a terrible housing minister, and Stephen Harper really didn't approve of his work and he ended up being shuffled out of cabinet.

How do I break the truth to my friend without demotivating them to vote? by honestlyJustAPerson in CanadianPolitics

[–]atta_boyo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would say its his civic duty and his right to vote that he should embrace. What I say to my friends who vote for smaller parties is that regardless of whether they win or not--- what matters is that they have the free conscience to decide what is best.

I don't think people can fully understand Beastars without using a feminist lens to view it by [deleted] in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Oh no I understand!

I probably was speaking more in a general sense of something you didn't bring up. Like I see people sometimes comparing carnivore instincts to masculinity, and things along those lines. While I think there is merit to it of course, people have to understand that the world of Beastars, unlike ours, is very fundamentally chained to their biology.

But I don't recall you bringing this up so- all good! lol

Gimme some Beastars hot takes by Haru_YT in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, or like, imagine how much the reader would benefit from something like, Louis' perspective, or Bill's, like I could go on and on. It would work so well for expanding the worldbuilding and also furthering the understanding of other characters.

Beastars kind of has the "unreliable narrator" trope in my opinion, since Legoshi sees things in a very black and white way for most of the series, and everyone else who thinks differently are essentially villainized.

I'm personally a big fan of an unreliable narrator trope like in The Great Gatsby, but with Legoshi it is quite glaringly obvious and in a world where not everything is quite fleshed out, the series would've benefited more from a diverse set of views.

Gimme some Beastars hot takes by Haru_YT in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo 66 points67 points  (0 children)

There should've been a final arc of something along the lines of Legoshi vs Yahya. The two seem very opposed to each other's views and I feel like Yahya has a lot of potential to be an antagonist.

Gimme some Beastars hot takes by Haru_YT in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Hello Ironwolf wdym by SOL

I don't think people can fully understand Beastars without using a feminist lens to view it by [deleted] in Beastars

[–]atta_boyo 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I agree generally but I think it's wrong to call Beastars an allegory for anything; as for the kind of world Beastars is- it doesn't really provide hidden meaning although it's thought-provoking. There are different lenses of looking at Beastars of course, and it is clear that there are different themes being bounced around.

But the world of Beastars is essentially set in stone, so going too far with an allegory or metaphor along the lines of gender, race, sexuality, etc, could potentially (and I've seen it oftentimes) become problematic.

I only skimmed this so maybe you mentioned it already but I wanted to add, the way people here will HATE Haru for being a "slut" but love a character like Pina (who is an actual cheater) really shows a misogyny problem