@JackDRacKham5@stevemaeda You really have more faith in geberal audiences to not be so shallow.
Also, the idea that something not ridiculous in animation would become ridiculous if done in live action is silly. the validity of a story beat doesn't vary based on medium.
@WindingGems@prageru There are lots of them. murder acts out the idea that someone should die & I don't tolerate that. Another example would be a acting out ideas against democracy.
@TheLordofMelons@shoe0nhead I think a lot of that has to do with the fact that the education system doesn't really help them to spend time figuring it out.
@GilesCorey_13@AlexeiArora@shoe0nhead I think this just means that they are representing those democrats to be more left then you see them, rather than representing the left to be in line with how you see those democrats.
@vexwerewolf @dan_coff@TheEconomist except they're not? again they're fine with private charity. They're fine with the people earning the food for themselves. some of them are even okay with a little welfare in certain situations. A lot of them just have misunderstandings about how certain things work.
@vexwerewolf @dan_coff@TheEconomist Look, if they thought these people deserved to starve to death, they would want to make private charity illegal, yet I've never heard a single person suggest such a thing.
You're confusing a different idea of how one should act on their empathy with not having it at all.
@vexwerewolf @dan_coff@TheEconomist Well they probably wouldn't use the word privilege. Privileges are given, not earned.
But yes, they expect people to earn the things they get, & to varying degrees between individual right wingers that will include basic necessities. You can expect that & still have empathy.
@vexwerewolf @dan_coff@TheEconomist but this is why these 'abstractions" matter. You can have empathy for someone & also have expectations for that person. Again I think there are reasons to have a universal safety net despite the merit of this perspective, but it's not heartless to want people to earn things.
@vexwerewolf @dan_coff@TheEconomist In order to deserve a state there has be something about your essence or your choices that makes not having that state unjust. If neither the state of having food or the state of not having food are rendered unjust by your essence or your choices, then you deserve neither state.
@vexwerewolf @dan_coff@TheEconomist I didn't say there was one. but it doesn't have to be the case that everyone either deserves one or the other. You can deserve neither. The fact that you don't deserve one state doesn't auto imply you do deserve the other state.