Hell yeah I'd sign that shit
Critical support to the danes backing US balkanization
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 237
- Joined
- 9 mo. ago
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 237
- Joined
- 9 mo. ago
I really like your analysis of Bob's character but I think I frame it differently.
I'll have to rewatch it to confidently make this point, but I'm not certain Bob's character arc was about overcoming paranoia so much as overcoming the trauma that caused his paranoia, and a key part of that journey was the deaths of the people directly searching for him. External change leading to internal change, more than the other way around.
When Bob's paranoia is portrayed as over the top, I see it more as "this is what the system actually does to the people we'd otherwise see as heroes" than "look at this silly man being paranoid". He's one of the only ones of his original crew to survive, after all, and iirc his daughter having a phone leads to the capture of dozens of revolutionaries. So if anything, we're supposed to get the impression he's paranoid, but realize he's at least partially correct, given the circumstances in which he finds himself after working with the French 75.
The contrast with del Toro is then more about the circumstances that allow him or encourage him to be nonchalant. The wider, integrated community support and (most importantly, I think) dual power structures give his movement much more stability and staying power. They operate under the spectacle rather than trying to break into it.
While I think we can make favorable comparisons with del Toro's tactics versus the French 75, I don't think we can say the former is inherently superior in every way. In some ways they both represent necessary aspects of revolution, the active militarized vanguard and the logistics network necessary to support it. And I got the impression that they did support each other to some degree in the movie, although since all of this is more of a backdrop to the characters we aren't really shown the whole picture. It somewhat resembles the dual-structure model that George Jackson laid out in Blood in My Eye iirc. Actually I think his model was more like an above-board, legal org that secretly funded and funneled members to an underground active vanguard. In any case this is tangential to what you're saying. But I like to see it as, at least in part, a portrayal of two different aspects of revolution.
But I'm gonna walk that back a bit lol, because you're definitely right about the fatal flaws of the French 75. I remember now that my first impression when watching the movie was a comparison between western revolutionary spectacle versus third-world revolutionary pragmatism. That might be the proper reading actually. But I still got the impression that we're supposed to have a critically positive opinion of the French 75, similar to how we might think of well-meaning but failed revolutionary movements. Because they had some success before being decimated, and their failures were due to specific tactical choices, bad luck, and personal flaws rather than their choice of violent praxis. As such I don't think a lib critique like "active resistance is futile, only passive integration works" actually sticks. Maybe a contrast between being image-driven versus outcome-driven. Idk.
I can see the infosec/opsec is for losers reading, but since we're shown multiple times the repercussions of bad opsec, I don't fully buy it. There's certainly a conflict, but I think the opsec/paranoia itself is downstream of larger conflicts (trying to be safe versus trying to live a normal life versus trying to be a revolutionary) and the way people interact with those conflicts is used to color their characters. In Bob's case it's symbolic for his relationship with the world as well as his internal outlook or progress in processing trauma. He's hyper-obsessed with spectacle (fireworks, revolutionary movies), so a lot of his motivations are about his image and (in)visibility. I'm repeating myself lol, but del Toro's approach to spectacle is almost opposite: maintain a neutral, care-free image while actively running a massive underground network. So maybe I'd argue that part of Bob's internal arc was his relationship to spectacle rather than his approach to opsec? He flip-flops between extreme attraction to spectacle to extreme avoidance of it, then learns to value something material at the end. I dunno I'll have to rewatch. In any case, Bob loosening up on it wouldn't be feasible if some of the key villains were still alive and searching for him.
To try to more directly respond to what you're saying, I mostly agree with how you characterize Bob, but see these conflicts and developments more as descriptive results of his circumstances and motivations, rather than a prescriptive critique of his outlook and choices. None of his choices make a large impact on the plot, he's just a human trying to navigate and survive in a world he doesn't understand.
Of course since PTA isn't an ML revolutionary, we can't and shouldn't try to actually learn correct tactics directly from the movie lol. And I don't think we're meant to. The worldbuilding and characterization of both reactionary and revolutionary people/forces just happens to be nuanced enough to provide ample ground to draw comparisons to various aspects of real-life struggles. More than most movies with quasi anticapitalist aspects at least, like Mayhem or El Hoyo. And the fact that every single revolutionary is portrayed as good (even if flawed) and every single oppressor is betrayed as evil (even if banal/nice/incompetent/ridiculous) puts it above 99% of movies for me.
Maybe kind of that trope of an unideological auteur accidentally creating agitprop just by writing realistic or well-rounded characters navigating a complex world lol.
Spoilers below (formatting doesn't work in my app sorry)
I don't think the movie says it so much as illustrates it, if that makes sense? Compare it to Joker and V for Vendetta, which are a couple of the many examples of the western individualist spontaneity fetish.
For one thing, I didn't get the impression OBAA was trying to prescribe or condemn specific revolutionary tactics. PTA movies aren't really vehicles for strong critiques like that, in my opinion. Rather they're studies of how different forces and personalities and interests interact with each other, leaving the audience to come to whatever conclusions. Like, The Master isn't about either of the main characters being good/correct, but about the fascinating attraction and contradiction between Hoffman and Phoenix and what they represent philosophically.
Similarly, the various revolutionary strategies/groups portrayed in OBAA are complex, sort of laid out with all their conflicting boons and banes. The first we see of the French 75 is a successful raid on a concentration camp. We then see them brutally hit by the infiltration and betrayal that crushed so many similar movements in real life. Then we see their struggles surviving afterwards, with the heightened paranoia and bureaucracy. It's exaggerated for entertainment value, but otherwise a fairly measured portrayal-- maybe even optimistic, compared to reality.
del Toro's movement is an interesting contrast to the loud and flashy tactics of the French 75. Less focused on spectacle, more on long-term survival. Perhaps lessons learned from the experiences of the French 75. Despite the latter's failures, there still seemed to be high respect for them within del Toro's movement, despite the tactical differences.
The newer movement functions well but isn't able to confront capital. I don't think that necessarily makes it non-revolutionary, though. Trying to overthrow capital without the strength to do so and support of the masses is adventurism, so survival/protection and building dual power structures is revolutionary until the time is right. Either way, I don't think we're supposed to view it as the "correct" strategy to replace the French 75's "incorrect" strategy. Both of them have strengths and weaknesses, both have had some successes, but neither have been able to overthrow capital yet. Both can be learned from.
Ultimately my strongest argument in favor of the movie is tone. In any other movie, the revolutionary failures we see would be depicted as tragedy. And for good reason-- most of the revolutionaries end up dead or imprisoned. The system remains unchanged, fascists and capitalists maintain their power. Just like real life.
But here I think del Toro's revolutionary optimism wins out. We've been fighting for centuries and will continue fighting for as long as it takes. It isn't some Tarantino cathartic violent victory fantasy, but it also isn't a capitalist-realist grayscale dystopia set to heart-wrenching music.
It's one of the few movies that's captured a concept I've never been able to effectively put into words. We can't ignore the brutality of the world, but we also can't just accept it or succumb to it without a fight. Some sort of revolutionary zen or something, finding happiness or meaning in the struggle despite how much of a struggle it is. Pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will. Abandoning the expectation that things have ever been good or easy, but retaining the ideal that they should be and can be someday.
I dunno. Brain fog is killing me right now so I'm having a hard time with language.
I thought it was really good. Shows different types of revolutionary action in a positive light, doesn't do stupid both-sides shit like every other westoid movie. Also highlights how effective revolutionary action is about organizing, not individual adventurism (another pitfall of western revolutionary media).
Shows both the ridiculousness and dangerousness of different types of fascists. Draws a poignant comparison between ego-driven rage kind of evil verses the banal, functionary evil that work hand-in-hand.
Also just flows really well, doesn't feel nearly as long as it is.
This is more of a vaguepost than responding to your comment, but I feel like too much of online media criticism nowadays is CinemaSins-level discourse on whether something is good or bad, rather than like, critical analysis.
Like I'll finish watching a movie and go online to discuss shit like themes and meanings and politics or whatever, and all I find is people arguing whether it's okay to like something or not. I don't get it.
FD Signifier's vids seem solid on that front, though, from the couple I've seen. I remember liking his ones on Sinners and Inside
God I wish being gay was free
Don't we all?
Phones home, masks up
That's the way we like to protest
Expensive?? Lol whoever the seller is is straight up drop shipping these, you can get them for like 0.99 on temu or Aliexpress
Coins and cash are supposed to be wadded and jangling in various pockets
The photo of your cat is supposed to be tattooed on your chest
And they hold like 20 cards, idk
Trade-ins like this are probably guns the pigs have seized from evidence or gotten from buy-back schemes. I've seen everything from a mud-encased hi point to a hundred year old break barrel shotgun with no serial number.
Semi auto shotguns aren't usually great guns to buy cheap fyi. Prone to jam. Maybe there are fine models I'm not aware of. But at 200 you're usually looking for a decent pump action, like a maverick 88.
The guns reddit for your state will be full of fash but also information on state laws. At the very least you usually have to get it shipped to an FFL, who will charge &15-50 to fill out a form. They'll do the federal background check where you'll answer honestly that you've never smoked weed or been institutionalized or whatever else. The FFL calls the feds to submit the info and, in a more permissive state, you walk out with your new gun.
More restrictive states might have waiting periods, fees, restrictions on gun type and mag capacity, license requirements, etc that you'll have to research
Grok, alter this picture to show Elon Musk wearing a bikini with the US nuclear launch codes written on his bare chest
Customers masking while shopping is like the easiest cost-benefit decision though. Wear a mask for 15 minutes to protect the workers who are forced to be there for 12 hours.
Well, you can start the process of buying a gun now. In some states it's a long process, as is learning to use one.
But yeah doing so isn't a revolutionary act. Joining an org is.
I don't remember to be honest, but there's an article or podcast interview somewhere in which the translators give their reasoning. All I remember is at the time I listened to or read it, it was convincing enough for me to buy it.
And after having read the translation itself, it's the version I recommend because of the modernized language. Older versions I had to quasi-translate nonstandard wording to understand, like rereading paragraphs and sentences a few times to actually absorb anything. Whereas this translation just flows.
Yep! If it's not on audiobookbay or somewhere else let me know and I can probably upload a file
Absolutely wild
Machine learning is well-suited for diagnostics and treatment, there's already tools for this, there is no fucking reason to use a language model of all things. 12+ years of school, making 400k+ a year, but is too lazy to use UpToDate or any of the hundreds of other options. Rather than a glorified Markov chain. Walking past millions of hours of human study and knowledge to pick up a fuckin magic 8 ball.
Absolutely the Reitter translation. Also has a professionally-produced audiobook.
Co-ops aren't some magical solution, but neither is bank robbing or unionizing or even revolution.
If leftists think robbing a bank might sometimes be a viable way to fund an org, then carving out niches and enclaves of productive forces shouldn't be off the table.
A lot of us delivery drivers were considering an open-source or co-op model a few years back. I got out of that job so idk if it's gone anywhere. But if the current delivery apps are even viable (which is a big if during an oncoming depression) then it stands to reason that eliminating the corporate/marketing/engineering bloat as well as the parasitic shareholders should make a co-op model actually competitive.
Also it reads to me as a joke, people "sign" online petitions like this the same way they retweet shit they like