Black Panther

“We were supposed to end the misery of the world, not profit off of it !”

“Of course, I love helping the world. I also want to be so rich I give communists aneurysms just by being in the same zip code, and I don’t see why those are incompatible.”

“Damn you T’Rump, why did I ever trust you ?!”

“I am exceptionally popular, with the, rural tribes who also make up a majority of the military and you needed me to secure their support.”

“Why are you so popular with then anyway ? You’re a Merchant tribesman who’s lived his entire life in the heart of the city in a frickin golden tower. You’re exactly the type of guy they say they hate.”

“ What can I say I’m a man of the people.”

“You’re drinking wine out of a gold covered skull!”

“Actually it’s diet Fanta.”

There's also Hunter trying to get Killmonger to eat the herb & T'Challa tells Killmonger that Hunter is trying to kill him.

Very amusing how he took all that stride.

edited 21st Mar '18 10:03:13 AM by slimcoder

"I am Alpharius. This is a lie."

He wasn't wrong.

Forever liveblogging the Avengers

Like T'Challa is just A-okay with Killmonger & Hunter wandering the grounds.

Situations where sworn enemies end up living together is always hilarious. [

"I am Alpharius. This is a lie."

I watch that movie. It had potential to be The Even Better Sequel

edited 21st Mar '18 10:14:56 AM by KazuyaProta

Watch me destroying my country

And yet Marvel entertainment refuses to hire me.

Personally I put it down to racism .

it depends, You are Asian?

...I would like be joking, but seriously. The asian treatment in the MCU is dreadful, albeit it seem limited to only East Asians

...

(I know it)

edited 21st Mar '18 10:27:54 AM by KazuyaProta

Watch me destroying my country

I’m Indian.

Also jokes aside the guy comics Killmonger is kind of a competent Trumpian figure and I’d love to see someone like him for the sequel.

edited 21st Mar '18 10:30:57 AM by thatindiantroper

Indian/South Asian rep in the MCU is... Bruce Banner’s intro in The Avengers, and that’s all I can recall.

That comparation makes no sense, Killmonger is a racialist that don't seem to respect the concept of nation

Watch me destroying my country

No I mean as sort of a hyper capitalist with a really gaudy pearsonal taste.

Killmonger is capitalist only in the sense as we are capitalists. He don't seem to be rich or anything, if anything, he was poor until he did get millitar training.

Watch me destroying my country

There’s some resemblance in terms of “outsider uses an outdated tradition to gain unexpected authority then proceeds to tear apart any other tradition that doesn’t benefit him”, but obviously they are not 1:1 analogues.

In short, Wakanda needs to abolish the Electoral College.

edited 21st Mar '18 10:50:26 AM by Tuckerscreator

In the comics though.

Forever liveblogging the Avengers

Comic Killmonger, I’m talking about comics Killmonger.

Hitler wanted war. It was the rest of the world that didn't. That's the point: Hitler crossed one line after another while the rest of the world sat around and did nothing, because they were afraid of another conflict like World War I. It was the appeasement policy, which consisted of, "If we allow Hitler to cross this line, maybe he'll be satisfied and he'll stop crossing lines."

Meanwhile, on the other side of the Atlantic, the Americans refused to get involved because of an explicitly isolationist foreign policy. American foreign policy was that you guys can all go get screwed because the United States looks out for itself first and foremost. Even after the war began in earnest because Europe realized Hitler wasn't going to stop, the United States held back under the grounds of, "Not my problem."

It was only with the bombing of Pearl Harbor that the U.S. realized that isolationism was bad because what happened in the rest of the world affected us too.

That's what I mean when I say that isolationism is one of the greatest philosophical villains in world history. The Holocaust happened because too many people were content to say, "Not my country, not my problem."

Other atrocities continue to occur to this day under the same logic, and it's this logic that Killmonger was so angry about in the first place: because while his people were suffering, Wakanda was content to sit back and say, "Those people are not my people, so the atrocities committed against them do not affect me." Colonial invasion of Africa and the slave trade occurred in their neighbors' backyards, while Wakandans sipped vibranium martinis and chatted about how good life is within their boundaries.

The film ends with the acknowledgement that he was right to see this as unjust. While he does have to be stopped because his proposed solution is as inhumane as the problem he sought to correct, he was absolutely right that Wakanda had a responsibility to the greater world, and it ends on that acknowledgement through T'Challa's more measured response.

Yes. It absolutely does mean that, and that is unquestionably what happened. Because that's what isolationist nations do. It's what we were trying to do before the Japanese attacked Hawaii.

That's not Fridge Logic. It's literally the point of condemning Wakanda's isolationism. It's just a different atrocity that Wakanda ignored being focused on, rather than Killmonger's emphasis on the slave trade. There are a great many things that Wakanda could have done something about and pointedly did not.

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

Comics Killmonger is a Libertarian Corrupt Corporate Executive who fights with his checkbook as much as with his fists. He's the mayor of a Rapture-style town within Wakanda where he is adored. Like, "we will commit group suicide to bring you back from the dead" levels of adored.

He's also a lecturer at MIT. So basically African Milton Friedman With Genetic Enhancements And Endless Capacity For Violence.

His endless hatred for T'Challa and bitter contempt towards everyone all the time are lampshaded constantly. Even Deadpool gave him life lessons. Deadpool.

edited 21st Mar '18 11:07:00 AM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

Because it's a super advanced nation not full of white people.

Like Wakanda has a problem with its reactionaries being superpowered, its xenophobia, and it's system of government always seem to be on the verge of collaspe.

Like it's not like it's Hoshido where nothing is their fault whatsoever. lol

edited 21st Mar '18 11:14:06 AM by NoName999

Because Reginald Hudlin got to write it.

But seriously I bought this up before, theres a lot of inherent shortcomings in the concept of the near utopia when it gets used for actual social criticism and it takes really good writers to avoid falling flat .

I should note that the idea that Wakanda's isolationist policy has no negative consequences for Wakanda itself is inaccurate. Killmonger is a negative consequence for Wakanda itself. One of the biggest risks to an isolationist nation is that your approach makes enemies and forges bitter enmity from the people you abandoned.

That is precisely what Killmonger represents: the bitterness and contempt of the people willingly left to suffer by the isolationists, turned back against a country that couldn't care less what happened years ago because Killmonger wasn't their problem.

edited 21st Mar '18 11:21:57 AM by TobiasDrake

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

Uh, no. Hitler had war as his endgoal. Hitler was crazy at the level that he wanted start race wars arround all Europe.

As someone whose country suffered because external intervention trying to "save us" several times. I kinda have more sympathy for Isolationists than you, dont get me wrong, Isolationism is BAD, but is hardly something extremely selfish and intolerable.

Properly done interevention is golden, but being fearful of it is hardly something that I would judge.

The villain is a Afro American guy instead of a wakandian. The "their system of goverment is always at the verge of collapse" is a product of Fridge Horror regarding their system.

I talk about the Wakanda of this movie.

So, then the biggest issue with isolationism is that some guy will get angry because we didnt help him.

You know, that is exactly what isolationists themselves think.

edited 21st Mar '18 11:36:53 AM by KazuyaProta

Watch me destroying my country

I think the movie is less a criticism of isolationist policy and more a criticism of hoarding resources all to one’s own nation. The isolationism is simply a story device to explain why they’ve gotten away with keeping Vibranium for so long.

If you want a story about how isolationism is bad and the fictional nation doesn’t have a super-resource to sustain itself, there’s Moana or The City of Ember.

"Appeasement" happened first because the other powers thought Germany was making valid points on its lack of defensive capabilities (a notable incident is when the French unilaterally occupied the Rhineland in 1925 and Germany could do nothing about it), and in the 30s because the other powers needed time to prepare in the event of possible German aggression (which was not thought to be a foregone conclusion until 1938 and likely wouldn't have been had literally anyone but Hitler been in charge). Germany's head start on rearmament by overclocking the economy left it by far the strongest military on Earth by the mid to late 30s, and if anyone had tried fighting them they'd lose, badly. Why would the Americans get involved? A general European war (and before 1941, it was almost purely a Germany vs. France/Britain conflict, equivalent to something like the Austro-Prussian or Russo-Turkish wars) happened every decade or two since 1700. Before Barbarossa this was just another one. Would you expect China to get involved with the War of the Austrian Succession?

This is also ignoring the fact that the USA was already rendering enormous material aid to Britain and public opinion in the USA was highly in favor of intervention in the event that Britain and Russia couldn't beat Germany alone.

"Survey #234-K Question #8b

If it appeared certain that there was no other way to defeat Germany and Italy except for the United States to go to war against them, would you be in favor of the United States going to war?

Yes................................ 68%

No................................ 24

No opinion......................... 8"

The Holocaust wasn't even being enacted before the war started, because there were almost no Jews in Germany (less than 200,000) by 1939 (the majority had emigrated in the previous six years). The race laws, while harsh, were really not remarkable by contemporary standards and thus were not considered worthy of attention. The problem is when they started invading other countries and killing their citizens (mostly Russians and other Slavs, but also Jews and others), which still didn't go beyond standard European war levels until 1941, by which time the USA was already an unofficial belligerent. But persecution of Jews had pretty much nothing to do with the decisions any belligerent state made except Germany.

The narrative that everyone watched the Germans kill millions because "not our problem" is just not what happened. Before Barbarossa nothing they did was particularly out of bounds by the standards of previous European conflicts, and thus there was no special reason for the USA to intervene this time and not the other two dozen times a European war happened. As for the other powers, not stopping Germany early was not because of lack of motivation, but lack of ability. French and British forces were in a ruinous state in the mid 30s, but by 1939 they were outproducing the Germans in everything. The USSR was in a worse state than France and Britain, and Stalin was terrified that the Germans would invade his country when Germany was in every way a much more powerful military machine, so he tried to delay that as long as possible while undergoing massive expansion of the Red Army. Hitler actually recognized this, saying that a war must be launched in 1939-1940 because past that point Germany will have lost its advantage vis a vis its rivals.

edited 21st Mar '18 3:24:33 PM by NogaiKhan

It was dumb because barely 20 years earlier there was another World War that the US tried to "stay out of," only to discover that they couldn't. So yeah, expecting that this time would be different, against an enemy that was even more power-hungry and expansionist, was ALWAYS doomed to be proven wrong. And FDR knew that earlier than most, which is why he did what he did.

The thing is, isolationism almost works out. Sooner or later, it's going to come back to haunt you. It's a question of "when" not "if."

US intervention in WW-1 was done for realpolitik reasons (they wanted their debts paid, and that couldn't happen if Germany won) and highly unpopular among the population by the time WW-2 was rolling around, who in hindsight saw it as Wilson scamming them. So if anything that would be a reason against intervening in the latest round of Europeans killing each other. Despite this by 1941, when Germany had proven extra-belligerent, material support for the Allies was ongoing and public opinion was very much for entering the war against Germany if (and only if) Britain and Russia couldn't stop them alone. "Isolationism" was not the majority position, "not wasting hundreds of thousands of lives needlessly" was the majority position. Except the USA of 1939 was not remotely isolationist, they had heavy trade ties to Western Europe (particularly Britain and France), a de facto empire in Central America and the Caribbean, enormous influence in Mexico and South America (Venezuela in particular), and a protectorate in the Philippines from which they operated their fleet and butted in on Japanese/Chinese affairs. They just weren't shipping millions of men and hundreds of thousands tanks and planes across thousands of miles of ocean in order to conquer half of Europe. Yet.

edited 21st Mar '18 2:12:51 PM by NogaiKhan