Empire and Imperialism in Children's Cartoons-a super light topic
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- I recorded this before the protests, JKR, and a bunch of other things and while this video isn't perfect, I'm really proud of how it came out.
Footage used from:
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story property of Disney/Lucasfilm
Avatar: The Last Airbender property Nick/Viacom
Star vs the Forces of Evil property of Disney
Steven Universe property of Cartoon Network
She-Ra and the Princesses of Power property of Dreamworks Animation and Netflix
Hustlers property of Annapurna Pictures
Reading material
Culture and Imperialism by Edward W. Said
Discourse on Colonialism by Aimé Césaire
The Wretched of the Earth by Frantz Fanon
King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa by Adam Hochschild and Barbara Kingsolver
Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto by Jr. Vine Deloria
Patreon: / princessweekes
Twitter @WeekesPrincess
I was a board artist and director on Star vs. the Forces of Evil, and I just want to say thank you for seriously engaging with the racism plotline of the show. I am curious about fan reactions, especially to season 4, but it's been frustrating to see SO much focus placed on the shipping drama. The first ever review I saw of the finale was "It was SO GREAT! I mean, the whole racism plot was stupid but STARCO IS CANON! A+!" It...... gutted me lol. I've had a feeling for a while that the racism plotline was flawed in its execution, but it's been so hard to find any reaction beyond, "Queen Moon is DUMB, the racism plotline is BORING, I don't care about it." I found your critiques to be very insightful and I'm definitely going to be bringing that thought process to future projects.
Ngl it sounds like the "didnt care about the racism plotline" people sure sound like the same people screaming "all lives matter".
@@JohnaldV That is very possible! There are a lot of animation fans/reviewers who are really not interested in thinking deeply about racism or other societal problems. With that said.... I'm sure many of those same fans engaged with the main plot of Avatar, with its strong anti-imperialist message, and wouldn't have said, "The main plot is stupid but KATAANG IS CANON A+!" (Granted, Avatar didn't lean as strongly into shipping as Star did.) Going forward, I would like to look for ways to tell stories that actively work to bring in audiences who might not have cared about those kinds of societal issues before.
@@arytheloser Do it! I'd love to see more of it! Even if they didnt get the message, the idea is there in they're minds and maybe someday they'll correlate it to real life struggles other people might have. It's good to have these ideas being a part of media and part of the overall conversation.
Maybe they found the racism plot line boring because they didn't feel it had stakes or perhaps because it wasn't handled consistently.
I mean, it didn't help that the show seemed to be way more focused on shipping with whole episodes dedicated to it while the racism plotline took a backseat and the whole, "it's magic that's bad!" (I get that it was supposed to be a metaphor for privilege/power) came almost out of nowhere in the last three episodes and killed a whole host of magical creatures in the process with a bunch of other catastrophic results (the portals are gone, for instance) but the show paints this as the "good" ending because STARCO HAPPENED. Starco was literally all there was to celebrate for a lot of people.
My biggest advice would be to not put shipping NEARLY as high on the list of priorities as the main story, and don't jerk the audience around with love triangles when it's clearly obvious where it's going.
33:20 that was a great Entrapta impression haha
ive been thinking a lot abt these particular properties and how they employ imperialism/colonism in their world building and it was so exciting to hear someone actually talking abt it!!! this vid is awesome.
You're my favorite. So perfect bringing Harry Potter into this. Thank you. I still havent finished steve universe. But I am glad to watch it with this new perspective.
Your points on the Diamonds were inspired! Honestly gave me a whole new perspective on that aspect of the show. I still have big issues with how the Diamonds are handled in general (mostly White Diamond because she's built up as this huge big bad threat and then it's basically resolved because she gets embarrassed once) but I think the points you made about how they are representative of an unaccepting family, not a literal one-to-one representation of fascists, is a great point.
I think the more interesting colonialism narrative in She-ra was the First Ones storyline. **SPOILERS** That even after the occupying empire is long gone there are still significant scars that need healed. I especially like how neat the magic metaphor is from this perspective. The people of Etherea thought that what made them so powerful (their magic) was given to them by a foreign empire, but they learn that they always had that power and the First Ones established a system that repressed that power in order to control and capitalize it.
yea! also I saw so many people talking about a spin off where they "travel and bring the magic back to the universe" and idk, it just sounds off to me in the context of the First Ones' actions. I know that Adora's a good bean but still "go on a space road trip and help out when they can and are asked to" sounds a lil bit better ??
@@katlab4692 I feel like that was kind of Adora being a First One and making "reparations" to the other First One's colonies that were robbed of their magic, like melogs planet. I didn't feel like it was a "let's bring OUR magic into other planets" thing and more like "let's dismantle the sistems that the First Ones left in all of their colonies in order to take their magic away"
Yesss.
yes yes yes!!!!
As someone who is Korean and grew up in a country that was heavily impacted by Japanese Imperialism, atla has always hit closer in terms of content, especially in the way that the fire nation was represented as an East Asian race. The way that the fire nation was able to get away with minimal reparations actually rings closer to the way that Japan has still yet to give proper reparations of their war crimes to Korea and many other countries and the fact that the WHITE creators allowed this sort of apologist narrative to exist also rings like a meta for how the US helped the Japanese government cover up their wrongdoings in exchange for money. Not sure if this made any sense but I wanted to share a bit of how I saw the situation
"the fact that the WHITE creators allowed this sort of apologist narrative to exist also rings like a meta for how the US helped the Japanese government cover up their wrongdoings in exchange for money"
Wow! I just wrote out a very similar comment but this part in particular really articulates my feelings in ways I couldn't myself.
I was listening to an overall really great, in-depth podcast review of alta, but had to stop because I got so annoyed at how the American hosts kept making comparisons between the fire nation and nazis in a very western-centric manner. It's frustrating how Japan has successfully censored their history to the point that people can't even connect the dots when it's this obvious and on-the-nose. Even so much of the imagery, clothing, culture and ideology draws from imperial Japan (while the earth kingdom in particular seems like an amalgamation of countries they colonized, including Korea)
We have a very Eurocentric view of WW2 and it’s frustrating as hell. I often feel like a fucking crazy person and a lot of my friends think I’m anti-Japanese while I’m like “no, mother fuckers, we need to hold all Imperial niggas to the same standard!”. Like, I’ll say that Japan was just as bad as the Nazis and the first thing people will say is “but the bomb!”. No I absolutely do not approve of the bombings of Japan at all, but the discussion of WW2 in the west has so little to do with Japan that only focusing on the bombings victimizes Imperial Japan and erases the countless amount of suffering they caused a myriad of East Asian peoples. Plus, contemporarily, a lot of Japanese conservative groups use the bombings as a deflection to discussions of Japan’s wrong doings. Plus, so many westerners, even well meaning people who rightfully critique Americas actions in WW2 (a discussion that should also be expanded upon) who I’ve talked say that they don’t condone Japan’s actions in WW2, but don’t actually know what they did, and once they learn they kind of change their tune. That was also me, which is why I feel the need to say this. I also am sure to spread the word to my Western friends to be sensitive since we as a culture tend to evangelize Japan for shallow orientalist reasons. I say none of these ramblings to demonise Japan of course, nor to talk for Asian peoples who take issue with Japan’s legacy since I’m not Asian myself in any capacity (mixed black), I just wanted to spread the word.
I agree with the fact that Japan should have been held accountable the same way Germany was, but I would want to add something to maybe better understand the European (and maybe American) perspective on reparative justice, and how it might have influenced the showrunners. Please keep in mind that although I do my best to put myself in other cultures' shoes whenever I can, this is a purely European perspective and is in no way a universal statement on my behalf, everyone is entitled to their own reflexion on the matter and I love getting new perspectives as that of MelinaPendulum and you guys.
It will be a very long comment so if you don't want to hear about a Jewish European perspective on the matter, feel free not to read.
It may also contain some slight inaccuracies, for which I am sorry.
I think one of the reasons why the Fire Nation gets away with so little to pay for is because of how Germany was treated after both world wars.
After WW1, Germany was put in a state of absolute misery by a the Treaty of Versailles by which the German government forcefully agreed to pay all reparation costs to France and other Allies, and to give up on all military budget and equipment. My home region, Lorraine, which had been invaded and occupied by german troops for years, and had changed hands several other times throughout it's history (it used to be an independent state), was reintegrated back into France and most german occupiers were expropriated and sent back to Germany, despite the fact that some of them had lived there peacefully for years. The treaty and economic and military demise were perceived as a great humiliation and scarred the Germans for decades, leading to WW2.
After WW2, in which Germany was arguably waaaay guiltier of colonization and general massacre, the Allies treated the losing party very differently. They helped Germany get back on it's feet, treated the country like the victim of a faulty government instead of having them pay thousands to those they had harmed.
It had nuanced results.
The first one was that Germany was allowed the time to heal and reconstruct, and given the respect and financial support they needed to change their political system willingly, as the state had no money after costly war efforts.
The less optimal (to say the least) results were as such (briefly and non exhaustively) : everyone was tired of war, so everyone set aside their traumas and dismissed the traumas of others.
Jewish and Gypsy (Tziganes) voices went unheard for decades after the war was won, as no one wanted to hear about WW2 anymore.
People simply wanted to move on.
This means that not only did the victims wait for literal decades before receiving an apology and a semblance of reparation, they also had to live with the knowledge that most of the culprits were alive and well, as presumption of innocence was the rule in order to move on.
This also allowed nazi collaborators to roam free pretending they were resistants too, sometimes even becoming important political characters in countries such as France (Maurice Papon notably).
It also had everyone forget and forgive everything the Allies themselves did wrong, as no one could ever face all powerful USA and USSR for their misbehaviours. "It was war, bad things happen during wars". German and French women raped by Russian or US soldiers ? "Get over it, it's war" would have been the silent answer most of the time. It was taboo.
The key words in any analysis of war, and of any historical event really, are nuance and context.
We can and must condemn ideologies, persons, actions, but we can't erase the nuances, it would be just as bad as dismissing trauma.
Now I think what the creators of Avatar went for was a positive "treat our former ennemies with respect and understand the hardships they went through too" because of their cultural background. This is how we, Europeans, are taught at school, or at least were when I was in highschool, with all the double standards it implied (my country has many of these little hypocrisies on how they treat history in school, as many teachers will tell you way more about the Résistance than about the Collaboration, or will spend half a year explaining every nuance in WW2, and never, ever teach about how France colonized half of Africa and many Asian countries, despite the feel good message of "we must learn from our mistakes" that comes with every acknowledgment of the collaboration. Many teachers would like to talk about it, but history programs are state mandatory.).
However Avatar's take has some true in it : with Germany being treated with respect and considered a victim too, Europe was at peace and has been ever since, at least within itself. It had downsides. It lead to countless injustices. But in the political context of the time, it made sense. And I do think the show acknowledges the nuances, at least in the original series. We might disagree with the solutions they settle for and the message it sends, but Avatar is one of the few children shows to actually dive into nuances and consequences of war.
Katara's arc ringed in my little jewish girl's conscience as a jewish girl finding the nazi soldier who killed her mother and learning not to be as bad as him, by sparing his life although he probably doesn't deserve it.
Now I am not saying that we should dismiss our traumas and abandon our claims to justice in order to get peace, it would be incredibly unempathetic and hypocrite of my jewish butt to say something like that. My point is, to the showrunners, their way of treating war aftermath probably made cultural sense and had good intentions, teaching kids that forgiveness is key.
They might not even have made the connexion to Japan's war aftermath, as until very recently everyting about the Dodge and Marshall Plan was treated as unequivocally good by the majority (these were the economic plans the US used to rebuild Japan and Europe, and also to ensure submissive behaviour and reliability on their part. The US invested massively in Japan and other countries, not the other way around, as Japan was way too deep in debt to afford a bribe, the counterpart to that was political alignment and cultural and economical submission) and people in Europe just went with "WW2 bad, after good" without ever learning about Japan's actions in Korea or Manchuria.
I do want to add that, and this part will be more personal, had I been Zuko in charge of the Fire Nation, I would have transformed a substantial part of the immense military budget of the Fire Nation in a financial aid to global reconstruction and healthcare in the formerly occupied regions, and help in preserving the culture such as returning stolen cultural artifacts and such. To that amount, I would add the belongings of all war criminals (with the fairest trial possible), as a form of symbolic justice although it would probably be a small amount compared to a state's budget. And, for Gods' sake, a public apology and acknowledgment of the wrongdoings (Did he do that ? I don't remember), like France should have held one for YEARS now regarding their former colonies. It's the state's job to uphold it's responsabilities, it's arguably not the people's fault, I respectfully disagree with the idea of having settlers pay more taxes than natives but I think the state should take part in preserving the harmed culture, as Germany did with jewish memorials.
It's not shameful to acknowledge that your country did wrong things, all countries do, to their own people and others. It shouldn't be perceived and treated as a disgrace, it shouldn't be a humiliation like it was for the Weimar Republic after WW1... It should be seen as an act of good will (bonne volonté in french, I'm not sure if this is a false friend or not...), accountability and an opportunity to change.
It is however normal and necessary for a country with financial difficulties after a war to prioritize their own economic health over that of others, as you can't afford to become 1920's Germany. It wouldn't be until the Fire Nation's budget had returned to a state of stability that Fire Lord Me would start repaying the war victims. It would probably be seen as the Fire Nation being unreliable and greedy, there would probably be countless political problems that I would love to develop and hypothesize, but I feel like I've already ranted for far too long on TH-cam...
@@chayes788 I see. Thank you for sharing your perspective!
this comment was spot on. I would like to add also how the continuation of Imperialist rule over Korea by the US only about a decade after he second world war is glossed over in the world right now as well. The US took over Korea and decimated its population during the Korean War, and blocked the south from having the same elections that in the north saw the masses vote in Kim Il Sung, and instead installed a dictatorship whos political legacy is modern day Republic of Korea. All the while threatening nuclear aggression on, spreading propaganda on, and placing sanctions on the Democratic People's Republic of Korea that have in the past resulted in famine conditions, which the DPRK is then blamed for. America really needs to answer for its crimes
yo "the diamonds represent a conservative family" is the take of the YEAR
This kind puts "The Tale of Steven" book they put out (which is not so subtly about being trans) in a new light
That doesn't change the bigger political picture. While they weren't nazi's, they were still fascists that had done a lot of wrongs, too many wrongs, to be forgiven/allowed redemption, especially if that forgiveness comes at the expense of what is, essentially, a child solider forced by her society to drink the koolaid in order to survive/keep it together. Not sure why she gotta do Jasper dirty like that, she deserved so much better than what she got and is much more worthy of sympathy.
@@NoirRaven I don't read the show as forgiving or redeeming them, personally? It seems at best like Steven and co just tolerate them, which again, like. They didn't get punished, but they're putting in work to rebuild, which while not a perfect solution to their arcs, I think is enough for the story they're telling. It's not really their story, it's Steven's, so their arcs not being done in just a narrative sense is OK for me? Obv your mileage may vary, and it still has some imagery that isn't always deployed perfectly, but I think overall the show does much more good than harm. Just my two cents, at any rate!
I know! It made me look at things a whole new way
I also never saw it like this but I have not watched SU Future cuz I didnt know where it would go after the SU ending. Like when White called someone inferior and Steven was hey hey now dont say that it felt really weird and I didnt want to go on. But I feel with this new perspective I will watch it.
Fire Lord Sozin: "I've been thinking, we should share this prosperity with the rest of the world."
Rest of the world: **nervous sweating**
I think people forget that “problematic” means “there are problems with this we should discuss and learn from” instead of “the creator of this is a fascist creep and you’re bad for liking it”. You should think carefully about anything you watch or any opinion you hear, but that doesn’t mean you can’t glean something important from flawed media. No story is 100% fact, bias is everywhere and we need to realize this to form our own opinions
I grew up with that mindset on fucking tumblr and my OCD has latched on to the latter definition. So hard to fight that ToT
Crystal Kanashii they said no story is 100% fact, like as in all art is gonna be opinionated in some way
@Crystal Kanashii saying that something is problematic is still useful if the others you talk to are not aware of the problem or are not convinced that stories, however great, are flawed. I feel like this comment was more about the fact that we should all begin to realise that there are issues with all our favs and that rather than getting angry that somebody attacks a 100% good thing we should try to learn from the imperfection in the work that somebody is willing to point out to us and do better. In an ideal world it would not be necessary to say that a story is problematic, but it would still be a useful descriptor to show where the imperfections lie. Currently, as we are not in an ideal world, it is also useful as a suggestion that there are imperfections because not all agree.
👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿
And to address the comments, and maybe expand on how I saw your original comment:
Bias is everywhere, but there are different types of bias and at different magnitudes. So saying something is problematic is useful as a means to "call-in" and enable viewers to be aware and thus resist being enticed by said biases
The flip side of that coin is people who will go 'no no no no not listening' when they hear that something they like is problematic, and for that reason learn nothing. There are of course people who won't tolerate any criticism of their favourite things - whatever it is, quality, plotholes - but this is still I think this a problematic understanding of 'problematic.'
I'd honestly argue that the Fire Nation committed a form of genocide against the Southern Water Tribe. Like I think that bending is such a genuinely vital part of the Avatar world, that the destruction of bending and bending culture in the Southern Water qualifies at least cultural genocide.
Heres the double sides issue with the talk of restoration and the nations culture; in advocating for this, you are advocating also for ethnostates, intentionally racially dominant seperated societies. This is exactly what the fire nation wanted, only they were the aggressor;
When you ask for justifications then for why certain areas, lands or cultures "belong" to people fairly, rather than unfairly (like in the case of conquest), you get things along the lines of "individually motivated" changes, eg. one culture evolved based on people doing what they considered "natural" and did so "consentually", however this ignores the relations of power in their own societies that produced their culture. At which point it simply becomes internal vs external, the fire nation are imposing upon us; but this "imposition", the fire nations "externality", is itself a subjective position produced *by* the other nations culture;
We can easily imagine a situation where the earth kingdom citizens feel their culture is being imposed on by "externals" who come from *within* and are produced *by* their own culture; for example, the Dai Li existed to enforce cultural standards from earth kingdom citizens who would oppose them; their own culture being protected from themselves.
The point as I see it of the "sharing" approach done in the avatar comics was an attempt to move out of this idea of ethnostates and cultural subjection. The reason why it didnt give a good solution is because we dont have one in real life either.
genocide was kind of their main tactic, genocide all airbenders to destroy the Avatar, genocide waterbenders to destroy effective resistance from the Water Tribe, when you think about it like this its not surprising that Ozai's solution for the continued rebellion of the conquered Earth Kingdom was the genocide of the Earth Kingdom. Genocide was considered a proven and effective tactic of their military. It also shows an interesting slippery slope where Sozin committed genocide for a specific goal/reason, an extreme means killing a whole culture, although the figure in percent of the world pop is unclear, to try and kill a god. Ozai 100 years later is prepared to kill much more people, based on maps it seems reasonable to assume the Earth Kingdom is 70% maybe even more of the total population, its certainly most of the land, and with far less clear reasons or goals. So we see how an extreme measure applied for a specific purpose, ends up as a casual measure applied vastly without consideration to the consequences.
Cultural genocide to the earth kingdom as well in haru’s village
@@OsirusHandle >intentionally racially dominated separate societies.
If thats what they wanted, then why did they commit genocide???
They wanted to rule over everyone
Besides, is a false equivalency to equate robbing someone of their property to re-appropriating stolen property to the descendants of victims.
>The question became internal vs external.
Exactly. If you're a apart a society, you get to have say over what happens, if not you're an invader.
Hypothetical: You're the lone survivor after someone kills your entire family, and does some shady shit to steal your uncle's property.
If you took legal action, you'd be rightfully fucking pissed if the judge said "You should just share it, cause if I give it to you that'd be ignoring the hierarchy within your household."
Its doesn't fucking matter, whatever order there was before, it was completely disrupted by this person's violence. They shouldn't keep it and you're the only person who has any kind of claim left.
Get out of here with your middling BS.
@@Khrene The issue with repatriation is precisely one on the origins of property. Why did that land belong to those people, later conquered, in the first place? Because they were there first? They probably werent; I dont think any nation on earth was "the first" to get there. Amerindians for example were just as brutal and warlike as the rest of the world was.
And why do the descendants get it? Because we guess their ancestors might have wanted it? So what, why does that mean anything? All these are, are your own cultural standards from today on modern earth.
This certainly isnt how property worked in real life feudal states either. The Roman empire for example would mass confiscate and redistribute land if such a situation required it, completely irrespective of "ancestors" desires: such was their culture.
Ancient Egypt was even more centralized; all property, from the sand to the water in the nile, belonged to the pharoah; a god on earth. Talk of land "descendants" would be nonsensical, and only existed by mediation of the state.
Regarding your comment on inclusion; the entire point I made was that the people of the earth kingdom DONT have a say in anything; the earth kingdom is a FEUDAL KINGDOM; Officially the monarchy owns literally everything. Unofficially? The various generals and provincial viceroys, along with the Dai Li in Ba Sing Se, control all affairs; the sers, peasants and citydwellers have no say in anything beyond that which they perpetuate themselves.
This distinction between internal and external exists ONLY INTERNALLY; it has NO bareing outside the culture that presents this. It is thus a false dichotomy; the fire nation and earth kingdoms culture are not anymore distant to each other than an earth peasant and the esrth king.
It really hit close to me with Steven Universe when the Diamonds start trying to use the right words, but are still super clumsy. "She likes to be called Steven!"
by season five, i thought it was supposed to be taken as obvious that horde prime was a cult leader, and hordak was less a fascist dictator and more a missionary, and that he was very explicitly a victim of severe conditioning even before this reveal? she-ra is so very explicitly about abuse and breaking the cycle and it relies on that message to work as a narrative that it lampshades this with hordak at the end.
i mean, it's an excellent take in that i didn't think it had to be said but i'm glad someone said it
@KikiLovesCartoons Personally I didn't get that intention at first because, despite being obviously She Ra in name only, I assumed Hordak was Hordak.
I don’t think he started that way. It wasn’t until Entrappeta talked (?) with him that I saw him as anything other than a stranded conqueror conquering away.
It's funny- I actually didn't pick up on this at all and I am an atheist who grew up in a Christian home! It's incredibly obvious in hindsight, and I don't think it's too much for young audiences to understand, but I think in times of social unrest (and with the massive amount of film and TV shows that do use the facism allegory for villainous factions) it's something some audiences are just programmed to see by default. Additionally, as I get older, I find that I have a more difficult time than most making connections or retaining information because of certain conditions I have. There are folks out there who don't make connections easily, and sometimes things do "have to be said" so that they can make those connections and join the conversation!
it very much annoys me how 80% of the she-ra fandom hasn't picked up on this (even tho it's really obvious)
@@jabby6709 hmm I find that lots of people picked up on that
as a queer neurodivergent person who grew up in a cult (jehovas witnesses), the introduction of Horde Prime and everything thereafter regarding his cult hit so hard the first time (and every other time) watching this show. Hordaks ark and Wrong Hordaks ark reminded me so much of the trauma of growing up in a cult and the lasting effects of the brainwashing and abuse on your sense of self and worth, and how you navigate the world. i appreciate your dissection of hordaks character bc up till now i was holding a lot of resentment for him bc of his own abusive attitude and how he reminded me of my family growing up. but him, shadow weaver, and catra reflect how the cycles are generational and it can take time and a lot of work to break out of that, and how necessary outside help is for getting you out of that cycle. im glad that this was represented in such a good show cuz i feel like theres never enough focus on how cults affect the victims who were trapped and abused by their systems. thank you for this analysis!
Regarding the question about “woke monarchs,” there was a period of time during the Enlightenment in which “Enlightened despots,” or absolutists who utilized Enlightenment ideals to justify their rule as opposed to divine right, enacted a series of reforms to quell public opposition. An amazing example is Catherine the Great of Russia. She adopted certain Enlightenment ideals of equality using more symbolic changes without actually abolishing serfdom and refusing to do so. Serfs were eventually emancipated by later Russian monarchs, but at that point there was a LOT of civil unrest due to it not happening sooner. Basically, yes, some monarchs did enact positive reforms, but the end goal of such reforms was usually just an excuse for that monarch to remain in power. It’s like today’s performative activism. Some things never change.
The end goal of emphasizing abstraction was just an excuse to preserve the snob appeal of academic art, the masses saw a pictorial painting and wanted to get it because they liked seeing an obvious subject, so the academy was to teach artists to obfuscate the subject and make the masses not even want to get academic paintings. They did this to fight technology for copying portraits with high accuracy, but in one of history’s many ironies, everybody knows about all the ultra-modernist art because of the technology the academy did this to fight.
Yes, or Friedrich "the Great" of Prussia, who implemented a public school system and abolished torture (and was an accomplished flute player and composer), who was also a terrible warmonger and such a raging mysoginist (especially to his wife) that many think he was gay without there being evidence of him having relationships with men.
Also, isn't this how democracy in Spain was established after Franco died? The king, who was supposed to continue the fascist regime, decided it? But that's probably also the reason why the old fascists haven't been held accountable for there crimes.
beethovenjunkie Wikipedia says he did have affairs with men as the Crown Prince, and later King, of Prussia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_the_Great#Sexual_orientation
Gah, Catherine basically removed serf's connection to the land, allowing them to be sold without it, just the human. Basically making them slaves. Pugachev's uprising also happened during her rule, he took over all of the sibir and then some. Most documents recording the uprising are lost to history - probably destroyed by Catherine or her descendants. Personally, I really hate Ekaterina II. My history teacher loved her though (I'm from Russia).
Regarding the serfs finally getting their freedom in 1861: they were free only nominally, because they had to buy out their land from their previous landlords. So they were still slaving away for the same people, just under different conditions. Russian government earned, iirc almost 150-200% of the original land cost because of extra interest. Basically mortgages.
So yeah, considering all this, I'm really thankful for October revolution.
@@missterry2540 they were slaves by the fact long before that though. It's just that land became easier to buy and sell. Before they were basically controlled by the landowners.
I'm so annoyed by English Wiki being like "and then Peter I came and slavery dissappeared" like excuse me??
(I fully support what you said, just wanted to add in. Also some people, myself included, like Catherine not for her general deeds, but by how exceptional she was. It's rare for those times to have a queen on a throne for THAT long, let alone empress. Basically, being a woman, she gets another standards)
The one thing I liked about how the Diamonds were handled in Future was that Steven didn't really look comfortable with them. Yes, I know that sounds weird, but in the movie he avoided them as much as he could, and I liked that. What I took away from it was that, as nice as they were trying to change now, Steven is still entitled to be hurt, and feel uncomfortable by what they've done to him and his loved ones.
Thats such a good insight! Steven's discomfort reframes his empathy to the diamons as political manouvering instead of appologism. His empathy is a tool for change, which he applies on his terms.
It also at least applies some realism to the Diamonds’ sudden change: the Diamonds, as much as they are genocidal speciesists and caste-forming, want their family back, and that is the only reason why their empire is only officially dismantled. Steven may also realize this but the first and strongest association of the Diamonds is everything else. Because the Diamonds wanting a family and Steven want to help everyone align, the instant dismantling and sustaining of said dismantling are allowed to happen, and it is very clearly luck that this happens and it is still conditional as shown by how Steven does not interact with the Diamonds after Season 5. I enjoy that the unreality is played up if only because while the politics are not accurate, the emotional aftermath is.
In Steven Universe: The Movie, I loved how they included White Diamond saying "lower lifeforms" to Steven just to indicate that they, in fact, aren't completely changed and they're still working on improving both themselves and the damage they've done. Even including a scene later in the series where Yellow makes it a hobby, and personal mission, to physically repair the fragments of shattered gems.
When you said Hordack Prime could be read as a metaphor for RELIGION, I screamed. AMAZING. As a latino who has been recently struggling with the ties of colonization and religion with problematic family members, I can see now why SHE RA affected me as much as it did.
Amazing. Girl, I got chills!
I'm pretty sure Noelle based the story on her growing up in a super conservative and religious environment, so I'm not very surprised
yessss. the whole time watching his scenes in season 5 the way he talked ab himself and his brainwashed clones did i was grossed out by the resemblance... glad others recognized that / it stuck out
Maybe I'm just Trans (I am) but the whole "Change Your Mind" arc of Steven Universe read SO HARD like being a Trans person forced to spend time with family that won't accept you. It's hard for me to see it as anything else. I *wish* I could share with Cis fans just how soul-healing lines like "I've always been me" and "she's G O N E" were.
Also, I'd be really interested in more discussion about how the "First Ones" in She-Ra were colonizers themselves, and just as eager to destroy cultures and worlds if it would help them win their "righteous" war.
As someone who hasn’t necessarily come out but is still struggling to get my parents to use my chosen name and pronouns as I slyly transition socially, I completely get you.
I believe that the "First Ones" in She-ra had something to do with Scorpia's family being ostracized by the other houses
@@vikkidc3859 I recently rewatched the series and I wondered about this element too. Because it seems like Scorpia's family took the Horde's side and then Hordak killed their king and removed them from power (or their king was killed in battle, and then Hordak took the opportunity to remove the family from power).
In any case, I think Scorpia's family's desertion was necessary because it stopped the First Ones from using the Heart of Etheria to get rid of Hordak. I don't think the First Ones would have deliberately pushed Scorpia's family out for that reason. But then, the time line feels wonky. Didn't Mara sacrifice herself, killing the Heart of Etheria project, long before Hordak showed up? Meaning the First Ones never really interacted with Hordak?
This aspect of the show does feel a bit underbaked, maybe. We're shown this picture of Scorpia's moms too, but they never show up again. Maybe we are we to assume they died fighting for the Horde?
I thought I was the only one who caught the trans theme in Change Your Mind!! And I'm fucking cis!!
I’m not trans myself but I have a few friends who are and who I was around/living with during their coming out processes. I always sob my way through Change Your Mind because imagine how different the world would be if people were able to “prove” their identities in the way Steven is. The beats of white Diamond’s dialogue (patronising, gaslighting) are so exactly what a lot of trans people face from their parents as well, especially nonbinary people.
In regards to Steven Universe I think we can all do some more learning up on restorative justice and it’s importance
And I think we all should also keep in mind not everyone is willing to or able to change and once Steven dies the diamonds will go back to their authoritarian genocidal ways because they don’t see the error of their past decisions nor do they feel regret for all their crimes against both their own people and the countless species they’ve made extinct
Dictator of the universe. Turned to the light by a clap back.
@@williammckenzie6865 That was the point of Steven leaving them. They grew without him, and they genuinely like the restorative work they've achieved on Homeworld.
JEEVES yes, because Rebecca Sugar can’t write believable characters but bad character writing doesn’t change the reality of the matter
@@williammckenzie6865 "I was proven wrong about them not seeing the errors of their ways, but I'll just say it's bad writing that they did "
I just finished She-Ra and I just think there’s so much interesting, complex stuff about harm and abuse. Catra reminds me of the phrase “harmed people harm people” with regards to her harmful behavior stemming from her experiences with abuse.
Unrelated note I think Scorpia’s disconnection from her indigenous heritage is pretty interesting too.
Wow! I think this video might just be one of the best, most comprehensive ones you’ve ever made. Which is saying a lot!
First of all, I think I’ve mentioned it in the DMs before, but I love your point about how we ALL, including POC, need to interrogate the lens with which we view text. So true because this obsession with “redemption” arcs is so thoroughly rooted in western Christianity which of course is distilled into Western media in general giving us these kinds of tropes. We should probably do a lot of work to figure out what the hell “redemption” even means, especially because it seems to generally mean “absolution from responsibility” or “make up for harm” in these contexts.
Anyway, I’ve been watching Avatar with my friends lately and this is the first time I’ve seen it all in one comprehensive timeframe since I was a kid. I gotta say personally that it really throws me how fondly Mike and Bryan are regarded for their narrative choices in this show when people like Rebecca and Noelle (but especially poor Rebecca) are dragged for filth. Some people (like you, me, and Kay) rag on them for their very shallow understanding of politics in Korra but even then, they aren’t really ever called out for it much on the same magnitude. It’s weird. I like Zuko but I don’t really think personal fondness has much to do with the fact that the monarchy should have been dissolved. I mean as much as we all love Iroh, he should have been in the Avatar equivalent of the International Criminal Court. It also says something that this is what ends up happening to the Earth Kingdom (all done by ‘one good royal’ and not the people, either) monarchy but not the Fire Nation’s at the end of Korra.
I watched Star Vs. for a while but dipped years before. People really started promoting it as “better than” Steven Universe and “not problematic” like it apparently was around that 2016-2017 time when people really turned “SU critical”. I didn’t find it to be anywhere near equivalent to even be compared, they’re different shows and I liked both but I feel SU was more focused on truly saying anything about that kind of stuff.
We definitely do need to have a reckoning with the idea that fascist must mean third reich. There are plenty of different kinds of fascism and there are fascists of all backgrounds. I do hope we get a show that’s explicitly about colonialism itself and not just as a metaphor that also deals with the many of the issues addressed in SU and She-ra and is handled in a careful, nuanced way. Hopefully that isn’t too much to ask considering the trajectory of cartoons seems to be on the up and up right now.
Noelle’s use of Christian conservatism and its cloying oppressiveness really hit me like a train. I knew what was up the instant we got hints. Rebecca using people unable to separate him from Rose as a metaphor for coming out as trans also really hits. I think these are both themes and ideas that should be explored more, especially in the nuanced and empathetic ways they were handled on their respective shows. The idea of oppressors listening and working to ease harm and the idea of people who want to do better who were raised in a toxic environment being allowed to grow are important.
omg i could cry, because i'm so scared no one will watch/like this video but i'm super proud of it so thank you so much xx
Have you concidered that maybe the atla comics are just garbage? The same story arc showed Zuko stressed, sleep-deprived and paranoid (and at the end borderline suicidal) after going through 6 ASSASSINATION ATTEMPTS and being so desperate for some guidance, that he went to his abusive, manipulative father for advise, because everyone else just abandoned him. Non of his friends cared about his well-being or his reasons until he fell into a days long coma. The fact that Aang, who stubbornly refused to kill the most dangerous and evil man in the world even though everyone told him to do it, would agree to kill one of his best friends if he slipped up just a bit should have been the BIGGEST red flag about the writing quality!
Sorry, but Aang choosing to respect his dead culture’s pacifist ideals is something I stand with. He already did his job by depowering Ozai and made him an illegitimate leader. If you want Ozai dead, it’s really up to the world leaders, including Zuko.
@@trishahernz7809 This wasn't me bitching about Aang sparing Ozai. This was me bitching about Aang sparing Ozai and being ready to kill Zuko when he was very visibly not in his right mind
To go from defending two shows who used imperialism as metaphor from “fascist-sympathizer” hot takes, to in the conclusion essentially saying “it’s totally understandable why people would think you’re sympathizing with fascists, maybe be more careful if you’re going to use imagery from a very painful history to tell your personal emotional story”, amazing. We stan a nuanced critique. This is the first video I’ve seen of yours, and I just subscribed! Thank you for the hard work and careful thought you put into this.
Why I always found weird is that they were speaking about systemic racism and imperialism in Star vs, and Marco's Family never is brought in to parallel what going on in the story. Maybe it was case of it being too real or too close to home but a family born from immigrants seems like an ideal vector for those stories.
For all its problems, SVTFOE did have the balls to pull "a conservative leader helps a genocidal maniac into power because their general goals align and then loses control over said maniac because of course she does", something which very few (if any) media did in my memory, plus "oh no our glorified heroes used to do genocides and now our people are on top of an unjust hierarchy", which also isn't a common take because very few media featuring empires have the protagonist spend a lot of time on the empire's side.
Hmmm
This analysis makes me understand much better why so many white people madly love Zuko's narrative. Everyone wants to see themselves as the imperialist son who disagrees with the empire, redeems himself individually and yet maintains all his privileges.
Same reason why you don't see as many of them defending Hama
It's always struck me as kinda weird that Zuko is praised and allowed to be redeemed with (relatively) minimal sacrifice when a character like Jet- a child freedom fighter who lost his home- was killed off and had no chance at that redemption. I love the show but it's always bothered me, especially with everything Zuko does in the comics
@@Kat-qe1vk Oh the politics in the comics at large are so, so bad, it's like, not even remotly funny, just deeply depressing.
@@shockingheaven
because what is their to defend of her , she is monster bent on revenge and harming the innocent
@@chongwillson972 She was a bender taken prisoner who had to do morally questionable things to survive
I'm sorta shocked how people are now just realizing the Diamonds are an allegory of a conservative family. This is heavily cemented with Greg's family life was made parallel to Pink's/Rose's in SU Future.
That being said I understand the intent of this allegory but your conclusion sums up everything I feel about how the Diamonds were handled.
yeah, when the diamond history was told and told again, it's made to see that they are bad
It’s almost as if it’s because the writers of SU rush these important plot points with long stretches of nothing happening i.e. slice of life that was for the most part unrelated to the main plot.
Avatar was successful in its depiction of family drama mixed with political strife because it was always a focus and they took their time with fleshing that out.
@@jacobodom8401 I mean, the slice of life stuff is just as important as the big plotty stuff. Just because they don't have magical people punching each other doesn't make them unimportant. Like, Together Breakfast is an entire episode about how Steven is left alone a lot and is desperate for more attention from his parents, and Beach Party demonstrates how little interest the gems initially have in the human side of Steven's life. Both of these things play incredibly important role's in Steven's hero complex and eventual breakdown in Future.
Steven Universe as a show has always dealt heavily with the interplay between the supernatural and the mundane, and they spend a lot of time on Steven's ordinary everyday life because that part of his life is important. He's a half human alien prince, but he's also a kid, and the slice of life episodes are absolutely crucial to exploring that side of him. We need to be given the chance to get to know these characters before they're thrown into mortal peril. And Avatar did the exact same thing, they had a ton of slice of life filler. It's just that their filler involved more action scenes.
I get that you personally don't find the slice of life stuff compelling, and that's fine, but there are a lot of people who would disagree with you.
Bees McBee it's not a problem that it had both slice of life and a more serious overarching plot, but the pacing and sense of priorities was absolutely terrible. this was partly due to the network which forced excessive "steven bomb" events to drive up hype, with long dry spells between, leading to arcs that were stretched out over months or years concluding in a matter of minutes after random months-long hiatuses. but also the conclusions often just didn't feel earned at all. slice of life character development was prioritized at the expense of plot development - which is fine if the stakes had been slightly lower on the overarching plot?? like the diamonds werent some distant threat that wouldn't show up again for a long time - they just willfully ignored them with no in-show justification, for the sake of goofy slice of life episodes that tonally made no sense.
Theyre not... They literally have the genetic purity and regimentation of society aspects of fascism. Thay couples with their militarism and outright fucking genocide means they arent just an allegory for "conservative parents uwu"
As an Irish person, thank you for mentioning Ireland!! The UK has never paid reparations for their abuses here, but we're expected to get along as the best of friends because we are neighbors, even though the discourse around Brexit shows that the common man in the UK think that Ireland was better off when we were colonised in our entirety.
When Princess Weekes is talking about the Fire Nation settlers in the Earth Kingdom, I was just looking at Northern Ireland like 👀👀 then looking at myself as a white person in Australia like 😬😱
Actually opposite for me I wish as an English person I honestly wish UK government would just let people and country's be free do as they wish sick of government sticking there nose in
And I loath Brexit
Why should modern UK residents have to pay reparations? Why should they suffer? They weren't there, they didn't do anything. They are not responsible; they should not have to take responsibility.
@@danielhughes4451 Reparations aren't about putting the burden directly on individual citizens who had no part in colonisation, it's about the government, which profited from that colonisation (and spent years reaping the benefits while continuing violence against colonised people) taking responsibility for that history and absorbing the cost into their budget. The point is all of us, as a whole country together (not necessarily as individuals), have had more than was rightly ours over the course of generations, as well as causing damage which needs resources to be mended, so we need to pay that back. Personally I see it as an issue of honour and integrity.
Someone actually gets that Steven Universe's core narrative is about familial strife rather than political struggle? Consider me SUBSCRIBED
It's definitely both they just stopped treating the civil war as if had actual consequences after Reunited
It's both. The setting is a war like Avatar.
📣 Just because the core narrative is about familial strife, doesn't mean the Diamond's should get away with eons of colonizing, murder of both their people and aliens and using their own citizens as batteries, literal objects and living statues.
@@NoirRaven but they didnt. The epilogue showcased the diamonds fixing those they have hurt by offering rehabilitation services and therapy.
And also the fact that Steven *barely* tolerates the diamonds; he didn't accept their apology.
@@bisectro Uh, they did. They didn't suffer any consequences, and basically get rewarded at the end of the movie when Steven gave them Spinel. I'm with Bismuth, they should have been shattered for all they've done.
I love your take on Steven Universe. As a survivor of child abuse, to me, it always read as a metaphor for abusive families and the cycle of abuse. White was the mother figure who abused all of her children with expectations of being perfect and then they themselves abused their little sister figure and their nephew. It's about toxic family dynamics as a societal structure. Everyone has to adhere to strict roles, the diamonds as much as anyone. No one is free, everyone is hurt because no one can be who they are they have to meet expectations and play roles. It's real, and to me, the if your change your mind song about not needing approval was powerful. Because whether or not survivors of abuse should 'forgive' their abusers, it's hard not to love your parent/want their love/to want their approval and move past that need. It takes family drama and makes it a SciFi adventure metaphor instead of "very special episode". I wish people could just take it for what it is and not lament that it's not a kid's show about killin' Nazi. Because while we can definitely have shows about fighting evil empires, there aren't a lot of shows for children that deal with things like abuse and rejection from parents/family.
Very late to this but it’s kinda clear this is what they were going for. A toxic family metaphor who will not accept you as you are. Can definitely relate as someone who suffered under that. The problem with that perspective however is that the diamonds still shows them to be imperialist and it’s not handled well. At the end they get a 10 minute “redemption” arc and the Steven universe has one episode focused on them. I won’t be mean to the SU team and it was the company who rushed. The toxic family metaphor is right but the part of the diamonds which connected to imperialism was portrayed underdeveloped.
@@busyg67 I think it was never there intention to have the Diamonds be imperial. Most planets don’t have life let alone intelligent life so when they destroyed planets with life they mostly destroyed the environment and caused extinctions of planets. Earth was an exception because you had humans who were forming culture, becoming intelligent when they arrived and the diamonds assumed organic life was beneath them. But I think the inference that they had colonized and destroyed other alien cultures is incorrect. But they should have made that clear.
@CameoCosplay Even if it wasn't their intention, the evidence is still there. Earth is one of many planets with sapient life that the Diamonds decided to colonize. Pink/Rose Quartz even went so far as to turn humans into pets. The human zoo. Even if unintended, keeping humans as pets is 100% A Bad Thing To Do.
@@coffin1316 is it one of many? I thought they said life is rare and intelligent life is rarer. Could humans have been the only sentient species they met? I also thought Yellow set up the zoo for pink as a gift because she said she didn’t want humans wiped out so Yellow got her a breeding population as pets because the diamonds didn’t understand they were sapient.
I think it's also worth taking into consideration with SU the fact that the last season of the main show had to be rushed and condensed because of executive meddling. So the finished product is only a fraction of the story Rebecca Sugar *actually* wanted to tell
Spot on Steven Universe break down. So many folks get stuck on the idea that "justice" in response colonialism is about colonizers being punished rather than the oppressed being uplifted. Not that you can't have both, but maybe not centering colonizer suffering as the pay off.
thank you????
I agree, and I think this is what underlies the reflexively defensive, panicky response so many pale people have to the word "reparations" - "why should _I_ be punished for ... ?" etc. When it's not about "punishing" at all - it's about, as someone else put it, "fixing the door." The whole point is to _stop_ the suffering by eliminating its causes, not to spread the suffering around and play gotcha-back. That doesn't mean it's not going to sting a little, for those who have become accustomed to a certain "way of life" to have that change, but that's how it goes.
Shit man when you rid countless solar systems of life, run an authoritarian dictatorship that performs experimentation on living subjects creating unholy monsters that live in constant hell while killing any of your citizens that don’t fit your preconceived ideals and don’t show any remorse maybe, just maybe you deserve to face some consequences for all of your heinous actions ya?
@@williammckenzie6865 No one's arguing about what's deserved.
Agreed. Sometimes it's nice to have a radical imagination of what the best case scenario for change is, not just about what it takes to get there. We aren't attacking people for their politics when we say their politics are unacceptable, and SU's ending is a show of that goodwill towards people who are willing to change. Were they to be punished for their actions, it would say at once "this is what you deserve for your crimes" and "this is what you deserve for letting Steven win". It's like Cersei's wisdom in A Game of Thrones, "When you play the game of thrones, you win or you die." It's not just the love of power, it's the fear of retaliation that keeps people oppressing others. Punishment can't effectively deter oppression unless it can reach the most oppressive people at the height of their power at least as much as it can reach them when they give it up. That said, it still sucks to have to appeal to the oppressors with more friendship than we need to show our allies.
Hordak, to me, isn't redeemed. To me, he is redeemable, but not yet redeemed
I don't remember where I saw this, but I recall seeing that it's canon that Hordak has to clean beast island for what he did to Etheria
@@thegrumple5862
It would be interesting to find out where you heard it :)
Spoiler
I personally can‘t remember this was on the show sonehow; I mean it ended with everyone being happy, Entrapta being happy to see Hordak again and only Mermista commenting „Are we just okay with this“. After that there‘s the best friend‘s squat‘s new mission and it ends.
@@Alina_Schmidt I did find the ending not as satisfying as it could have been. They defeated HP but there is still much o be done.
I understand why they chose to end it just after their victory with everyone happy. But it was a bit too... Naive?
Mermista's comment saved it for me because at least it acknowledge that some discussions and decisions have to be done when they're done rejoicing.
That's a good thing too, I prefer endings that allow for hope over ones where the producer demands every loose yarn be tied up or snipped.
It seems he is on the right path though, but we’ll never know since the show ended. We can only speculate
0:50 "Humans want to blame all the world's problems on some single enemy they can fight, instead of a complex network of interrelated forces beyond anyone's control." -Pearl
I wouldn't agree its 'beyond anyone's control' but still definitely complex and difficult to address since it's difficult to identify all the forces and those people/things responsible...
Theres like, a dozen people who could put a stop to all of it. But those with power will never give it up willingly.
As such, it must be taken from them.
pearl is such a gooey liberal
@Veronica Reid I think you misinterpreted it and pearl means it’s beyond any single individuals control.
@@McCbobbish The problem of history is that those that take the power of the few most frequently keep it for some new few.
My thing about the Avatar issues you brought up is that I don't think the solution they proposed was sharing per se; I think the solution proposed was to make the colonies independent of the four nations. And I think there's grounds to argue that this is the best possible solution to the issue of colonization that has lasted for more than one generation. (By which I mean: if you only have one generation of colonizers, you can pick them up and put them back where they came from pretty easily, but once you have multiple generations that have integrated families with native people and don't know anywhere else...)
The person to bring up the issue with the proposed decolonization issue was the mixed race child of a colonizer and a native person. She didn't want the Earth King to be in charge of her because she didn't believe the Earth King was her ruler and she didn't want to have her family torn apart and re-traumatized by an ill-thought out decolonization process, and she wasn't alone in her feelings. What the Earth King wanted to do, which was to take the land by force, also felt somewhat like imperialism to me. The Earth King is an emperor of a vast swathe of land with varied cultures, and just because he comes from the same continent as the earthbenders in these colonies did and his ancestors ruled the land doesn't necessarily mean he's the rightful ruler of that land, especially when a sizable portion of the non-colonizer residents didn't want him as a ruler.
I agree that the narrative is simplified due to the authors. I imagine that there would be a lot more complicated feelings about who the rightful ruler should be if this were a real situation, and I imagine that there would be a more pronounced split of opinion between earthbenders and firebenders. That said, making the colonies entirely independent from either the Fire Nation or the Earth Kingdom and then letting them decide their fate from there seems like the closest to a fair solution one could get. (That, and the Fire Nation should pay reparations to the Earth Kingdom. And the Water Tribes. And to any Air Temples Aang creates.)
To be fair, my perspective is biased. I live in a country created by colonizers and I'm descended from immigrants who come from so many different countries that it'd be impossible for me to say where I should 'go back to' should my country suddenly be completely decolonized. But I think that colonization by its nature becomes impossible to find a 'neat' or 'fair' solution for the longer it's allowed to entrench itself, and I appreciated that the Avatar comics tried to acknowledge that even if they fell short.
Something that I've always kind of wished took place between ATLA and Legend of Korra was a civil war within the Fire Nation. There's no way Ozai doesn't have hundreds of thousands of loyalists, especially within the military and its leadership, that would take up arms to defend/reinstate him. Yes, the show does show that there is a clear class divide within the nation, but the people as a whole have been on a steady diet of state sanctioned propaganda for over a century. As we see here in the US, obvious inequality hasn't stopped large swaths of the citizenry from fighting against their own self interests.
Also, with something a bit more on topic, I feel that the show being written by two white American men would explain why the ending to the episode *The Puppetmaster* never fully sat right with me. Hama is treated as just a straight up villain despite having one of the saddest backstories in the entire series. She fails to defend her tribe from invasion, spends years in torturous imprisonment watching her brothers and sisters die around her, escapes by having to invent a horrifying new form of waterbending, and suffers terrible trauma from the experience leading her to lash out at anyone she deems a representative of her captors.
Katara and Sokka should have nothing but sympathy for her as fellow members of her tribe, but instead they end the episode handing her back over to the very people that broke her mind in the first place! How fucked up is that?
yeah, while the comics do show Zuko dealing with internal problems, I feel like the creators didn't fully consider the consequences of such a dramatic shift in leadership, with an imperialist military coming under the control of a pacifist leader. there would have to be a massive purge of military leadership, dismantling of military equipment, etc., which would go over...poorly. you see this in miniature with big city police departments in the US, whenever there's any attempt at accountability and demilitarization, they act out violently, undermine authority, threaten the fucking family of authority figures (NYPD literally did this with deBlasio), and fund electoral campaigns to install sympathetic leaders (Lori Lightfoot lol).
She wasn't taking it out on the people that did that to her though. Those were townspeople that just happened to be Fire Nation and had nothing to do with what happened to the Southern Water Tribe. Would you also consider Katara's stunt as 'The Painted Lady' to be helping evil people that killed her mother?
@@WolframiteWraith I never said Hama was taking out the people responsible for her capture. I said she lashed out at anyone she *deemed representative of her captors,* which is literally any Fire Nation citizen in her vicinity. Her mind was broken by years of imprisonment and torture by the Fire Nation military apparatus.
To Hama, all Fire Nation citizens were evil even though they weren't, a mindset brought on by her trauma. She needed to be stopped, sure, but handing her back over to the same people that turned her into a monster in the first place was a pretty fucked up decision by heroes that you'd think would be a bit more sympathetic.
Also, again as I never said all Fire Nation people were evil -- just that Hama saw them that way -- I don't have an issue with Katara posing as the Painted Lady. Thinking on that though, it is kind of fucked up that she'd show more compassion for citizens of the nation whose military killed her mother than the literal escaped POW from her own tribe.
The Dashboard Hama had just traumatized her though, to be fair.
@@thedashboard9562 It's not fucked up, because those people, wherever they came from, were suffering and harming nobody. You think a monarchy represents it's citizens? It doesn't, wealth from colonization to the royal family doesn't mean wealth to everybody in the nation. Hama was traumatized, and definitely needed psychiatric help, but that's no excuse for doing all the horrible things she did. I think EVERYONE, even Azula can become a better person and I believe that we're all born good and then corrupted but at the same time to explore something like that properly would take A LOT MORE than a single episode, they just didn't have time for it and that's fine, I think it was pretty clear that Hama was a demonstration of the effects and consecuences of colonialism, they don't have to spoon-feed everything to you to get that, I thought it was pretty obvious.
SU legit shows the diamonds stepping down from power, others taking their place, and them using what power that cant be given up (for them its their gem powers, which is similar to a skill someone has, or knowledge they've learnt) in order to help those they hurt *and specifically following their lead*. I don't think I've ever seen a show capture what restorative justice really is quite so well, and I think it's extremely hopeful and a worthy lesson to teach that bad people in power don't have to be locked away or killed in order for things to get better, and that (if they are willing) can help to undo the harm they caused.
genuinely it's the kind of messaging I think more children should see and understand
I'd note in particular that the thing each Diamond has to do, is the deliberate reversal of what they can inherently do before. Yellow especially -- going from denying bodily autonomy in terms of form, to restoring and reinforcing it in others. She especially going the extra mile of unshattering Gems to undo her damage. I get annoyed when they get characterized as "getting off easy"
another thing I feel like people miss is that it was probably the best possible result. it's likely that if Steven etc tried to defeat + kill all the Diamonds and their supporters in a full-scale war, they'd probably lose, and even if they won, they'd be left with no way to undo the damage already done. instead, they essentially had a targeted coup d'état where Steven is able to hold White sort of hostage as neither of them can really damage each other. then steven attacks one of the only things White values: her perceived perfection and adulation of her subjects. after she's publicly embarrassed by steven, the only real way for her to get back that praise she wants so desperately is to go along with the crystal gem's demands and undo the damage she's caused.
I get what you are saying about SU, and I love the conservative family metaphor. I think the problem with the Diamonds’ change of heart is that it doesn’t fit the scale of what they are responsible for. It works perfectly as a family metaphor, because misguided parents realizing they hurt their child, apologizing, and trying to do better is an appropriate response. But they didn’t just hurt Steven, they are at least responsible for the shattering, desecration, and imprisonment of the gem shard ball inside earth, and that was shown to be normal behavior for them.
A parent realizing they mistreated their kid and apologizing while trying to understand them is good character development. I love that shit.
A dictatorial family apologizing for oppressing and massacring millions, then trying to understand those they oppressed just reads as too little too late. Like no, you can’t just apologize and move on, you killed people.
The overlying problem with SU isn’t nazi apologizing, it’s the fact that RS wanted to write a low stakes show about family and finding out where you belong, ended up writing a space opera, and didn’t switch the message of the show to fit the new themes.
Either way, love the video! You’re doing some quality work!
Thank you
That was my feeling as well. The metaphor didn't work to me because in the end of the day, they were still an empire doing empire stuff. And that is hard to gloss over.
Part of the problem is that while the Diamonds themselves were handled more like a family metaphor, the rest of their empire was absolutely not. Maybe if their worse deeds were implied rather than shown, but we got to directly see how their oppression effects people in a very personal way. We see that people died, we see that minorities were persecuted (Garnet, the off-colors), we see that world are genocided. These all invoke the idea of an imperialistic nation. I don't think it is meant as apologia, but I do think it was a terribly handled metaphor, which resulted in a bad series finale.
To be fair: what would fit the scale? Stuff like empathy or emotional understanding doesn't really come easy to gems, let alone the Diamonds. It's a wonder the truth got through to them.
yeah, there's the whole "the diamonds have done too much damage, there is no forgiveness" thing
Like I recall the IDW Transformers comics doing a redemption arc for Megatron (I know that the Diamonds weren't *redeemed* , but they were still on the same path), and the way *that* ended was with Megatron getting executed for his crimes, for all that he became a better person
I can't help but think that the same thing would happen for the Diamonds as well
also the Jasper thing was a bit off, I feel. Jasper's fashyness was explicitly an offshoot of Homeworld's societal fashyness, which the Diamonds have been responsible for; so I don't get calling Jasper fashy but not also calling the *Diamonds* the same
I know this video is old by now but I absolutely love your take on steven universe. I'm all for discussing flaws in a piece of media, but it always made me deeply uncomfortable to see people calling Rebecca Sugar -- a jewish person -- a nazi sympathizer, all around an excellent video, consider me subscribed!
My main issue with Steven Universe is that the theme changed rather radically between season 3 to 4. so the conservative family angle works... but it ask us to forget the conflicts in the first 3 seasons.. the gem war was an overtly imperialist.. like yellow says the word colony more than an bitter englishman.
I think had the pre-show went differently, like rose admitting to her last friends that she was, in fact, pink diamond, or at least not stretch out the reveal for so long, there would be less whiplash.
this is my probem too.
for the first three seasons had the Diamonds as an world destroying army imperialists that had no regard for anything outside their idea of perfect. then suddenly that a lot of hand waving later all that went away.
Human zoos. Human zoos. Human zoos. Why, if the theme was supposed to be conservative family, did we go into british imperialism territory?
Amen
I disagree. The show is just asking you to see them for what they're intended to represent through these tyrannical, bigoted rulers, not forget what they've done. Future would go on to remind you of everything they've done.
the problem of your argument in the case of the Fire Nation colonies is: You can't go back after Empire. That's the message of the comic. Even if the intention was truly awful, things in those colonies, and in real-life colonies, changes a LOT during the period, to the point where simply trying to re-create how the world used to be before isn't feasible. Like, it's not just about Fire Nation settlers. The "Earth people" didn't to be part of the Fire Nation, but they also did not WANT to go back to the Earth Kingdom. Because the EK sucked.
Just think about real-life colonies. Like, it's easier for places like Nigeria and India to go back to what they used to be, because the colonial ties there were always primarily economic. But think about a place like Mexico, or Hong-Kong. These places don't want to simply "restore" how things were. They want a new system.
Nigeria and India didn't even go back to how they "used to be"either. Neither of those nations were ever a unified state like they are now; the Indian subcontinent had been unified or almost unified a few times under imperialist rule (whether it was the Maurya, Gupta, Mughals, or British) but as soon as these empires fell the various smaller kingdoms took back over. Nigeria, as a concept, was entirely a creation of the British empire, the Igbos, Yorubas, and many smaller groups who lived in that region never would've considered themselves a unified nation until the British colonized them.
So yeah, you're kinda even more right then you thought you were.
Exactly. Some act as if Mexico was 100% indigenous and Spanish, Catholicism and other Spanish heritage was imposed and foreign. But in actuality the great majority of Mexicans are mestizos partly Spanish in ancestry and Mexicans have been practicing Catholicism and speaking Spanish for centuries. Mexico is not an indigenous nation that needs to throw off the Spanish yoke, neither is it an Hispanic nation with some indigenous influence. Mexico is it's own thing, with its own identity.
Thinking about this a bit from a Canadian perspective, could you imagine if people told the Metis they had to "go back to France"? The Indigenous and French culture are so integrated together in their ethnicity you could never divorce them. Things can't go back to the way they were, because the world those things existed in were gone. We can still do so, so much in terms of reparations, but setting things back to the way they were isn't an option. The world and the people in it are different now. I think it could be said that in some ways that IS the tragedy; the languages, stories, and culture that were lost can never be recovered. Like the air nomads can't be brought back, not the same way as before.
I think though what she's trying to say that the situation is a lot more complicated than just "you can all share". Obviously, the problems of decolonization are presented well, it's just that there's probably a better solution or one that could've benefited their anti-imperialist message than the one portrayed in the comic.
It reminds me of when the colonial powers left... a lot of places. The places they left kept the same borders even if it didn’t make sense when they were originally divided.
In regards to the inclusion of a royal member who is portrayed as "woke" and being the only change needed to redeem an imperialist empire, it often harkens back to the trope of the rightful ruler and mixing in with the symbolism of the king archetype. The entire idea is that a king, in his fullest capacity, is a man of strength, humility, justice, and all that other good stuff. The king also has a divine right to rule. The disruption of that right to rule leads to either the kingdom dying or it becoming an imperialist empire set on conquering the world. Many writers often include a royal member with the revolutionary crowd because of its tradition in stories but neglect how the roots of the story thread have shaped its message. Also the idea of being able to fix a problem by getting rid of the bad guy and replacing them with a good guy who stands for all the good stuff you'd want in a ruler is considered more narratively satisfyingly to audience. I don't actually like the trope, but I understand why it is used.
TBF they did a pretty good job of showing the downfalls of monarchies and why they're bad, it also wouldn't be super realistic for him to just dismantle the monarchy overnight (or even in one generation) especially given how he came to power and everything else he tries to do as firelord, that sort of change needs a lot of time and effort to happen, we do see some changes in Korra though, mainly he's not entirely unacceptable like firelords before him, with something of a global council he has to work with.
Rightful Heir stories bug me, because the problem isn't really that there's a bad person in a seat of power, but that there is that seat of power. The Good King is going to die eventually, and after so many generations, even the "proper" line of succession can lead to a tyrant. It sort of makes an effigy of the issue, and if, if we just burn this one representation of it, it's like it goes away.
More broadly, the trope also comes up in stuff like Good Millionaire vs Bad Millionaire, or Good Commander vs Bad Commander, where it's just a matter of putting somebody else in the position who will hopefully (and of course, since it's fiction, definitely will) use it correctly. Unlike the monarch version, though, this position of power isn't exclusive to just one person, so it ignores the fact that even if this idealized billionaire really does do all the good kind things, there are many others, and the issues surrounding them are bigger than just that one person; even if they completely stepped down, the system they were part of keeps running.
Similar deal, though, a monarch or rightful heir simply going "nope no more monarchy" wouldn't really fix things systemically (a significant bit maybe, just not entirely), and a lot more work would need to be done, but the idea of monarchy being even a question rarely if ever comes up.
I love your idea of redemption as an opportunity for the damager to do good not merely to “redeem” themselves but as an act of kindness to the damaged. Sometimes characters will do irreparable damage in a story but that doesn’t mean they can’t transition into helping mend said damage even if it won’t even out in the end. At that point “too little too late” becomes meaningful aid to those with the potential to enact great good.
I dunno if I'd agree with the Avatar section, in particular. I believe the term used was it simplified the narrative? But, I always read the point as, at that point, it had been 150 years, and figuring out how these mostly mixed-race people (allegorically) fit into the "fire nation go, earth kingdom stay" line was too complex to unweave at the late juncture. Like, it's really EASY to extricate the fire nation from Omashu or Ba Sing Se. They have records and their bending genes...or whatever...give them away pretty easily. But an Earthbender who identifies Zuko as HER leader is a weird matter of trying to fit that rigid 4 nations framework onto.
And there's of course supplemental stuff that isn't covered that we can infer, but the fact there is this large group of earthbenders who are regarded, by the fire nation, as citizens would suggest it's a *little* more lax about bloodlines than say, the Spanish were in regards to mixed race people. It could also be like Jamaica where, on the colony mixed race people WERE citizens but back in the isles were not. Putting it under the rule of Ba Sing Se wouldn't be restorative, it would be "Okay, English, we're pulling out of Virginia, and we're gonna let the Navajo rule it. What do you mean it's not your tribe? You're both natives, right?" Like, that too is a really reductive way of looking at the situation.
I don't think in that instance, much like Steven Universe, the idea of the empire was the focus, exactly. So much as it was a vehicle to get the non-violent approach to the foreground again. The colony area is GONE at this point. The question is how many people have to die to change the status quo, and the goal of the narrative is to find a power sharing mechanism where the answer is "no one", like I felt that anti-war narrative was the goal, the vehicle was just, like SU, a little sloppy. And it didn't get solved by a fucking turtle xD
I'd similarly defend the comics. The particular story is based in a settlement that evolves a unique identity in no small part because of the extent of integration over a century and the economic benefits thereof. I think there are definite references to Hong Kong being made, where this particular colony did have highly ignoble origins, but also that rather than being a prominent existing settlement taken over by economic colonialism (say Busan in the Japanese empire) it was really built up because of the integration with the real boom coming from combining different sorts of bending after the Fire Nation withdrawals.
I think the Harmony Restoration movement is portrayed as the right answer writ large, but that things are different in a community that has developed a unique political identity. (I forget how the comics handled outright reparations, but historically, the reparations you mention on a national basis would have been entirely appropriate and massive Japanese economic aid to China would be a straightforward historical analog).
I do love the comics, but your piece did make me realize a more subtle limitation that gets to why individual reparations may appropriate. Namely, even when integrated communities build up prosperous trading hubs that are mutually beneficial despite imperial origins, there do tend to be highly unequal economic laws that allow those with citizenship or racial ties to the colonizer's large economic advantages that let them exploit the original inhabitants. That is a good part of what makes colonization so profitable for the empire in question, even when resource extraction isn't the key issue, as it ensures that a larger share of the wealth flows back to the colonizing country.
Thus, I think it's a fair critique that setting aside the citizens with Fire Nation heritage's culpability in the larger imperial project, they would probably individual benefit from structural economic colonialism. The comparative strength of the Earth Kingdom for most of the century and the way bending changes the balance of power by emphasizing skilled labor on both sides does change the equation some, but your critique made me realize that in my memory, that part was probably skipped over. For it to be more plausible historically, there'd have had to have been a civil rights or land reform movement or the like that took place after the end of the war but before the avatar intervenes.
Thanks for a thought-provoking video!
There is also the fact that, even in places where the Spanish colonized, and the majority of people were of native descent, that does not mean they suddently wanted to "go back" to whichever native empire was ruling before the spanish came. Because hundreds of years of cultural and economic do that. They chose to create new systems, just like Republic city. Like, there are things that can't just be restored to the way they were before.
I completely agree! I think there's some discussion to be had about how the comics could have prioritized restorative justice in some of their approaches, I think that sharing has a complicated history, and I also think that they were intentionally trying to draw some Israel-Palestine parallels here. Obviously there are a lot of differences, but it comes to the question of what do you do when it's the same spot? I also think it's important to analyze that the Earth Kingdom functions drastically different than the Fire Nation. Sure it has a "capital," but ultimately the cities are more like city states and are self-run. Omashu has its own king, and people in small villages don't really have any Earth Kingdom millitary presence and are only loosely defined as Earth Kingdom. What would returning these powers to the control of an Earth Monarch really mean, here? I've got lots of thoughts about how ATLA handles these topics lol. I"m also curious if MelindaPendulum has read any of the later comics as well, I'd be curious to see her thoughts!
I'm a little surprised by the criticism of the comics, because in Korra it's clear that the former colonies are independent from the Fire Nation, but instead of going back to Earth Kingdom control became its own sovereign nation, full of semi-autonomous regions. It's referenced explicitly by the Earth queen in season 3 that this has had ripple effects, and Kuvira's whole project season 4 is to reconquer and reunite the Earth Kingdom. It's explored poorly, but LOK can be boiled down to another case of "capitalist realism strikes again"
Interestingly, I can think of at least one historical precedent (that I am familiar with) where the problem of unweaving mixed ethnic heritages in a post-imperial setting became a legislative issue.
When Roman emperor Romulus Augustus was deposed by Odoacer in 476, it is important to understand that the Roman Empire didn't simply vanish in a single day. In fact, it remained very much intact through language, fiscality, and administrative circumscriptions, within which high offices remained in the hands of what were essentially Roman officials. By the end of the Migration Period, the Germanic settlers and their kings - who would fill the power vacuum left by the deposition of the emperor - had entered into a legal contract (fœdus) with the Roman empire, in such terms that when Odoacer returned Romulus Augustus' imperial insignias to emperor Anastasius in Byzantium, local kings continued to view themselves as representatives of the Eastern Roman imperial authority, and would sometimes be acknowledged as such by the emperor and Roman Senate (Frankish king Childeric was famously buried wearing Roman regalia, as a sign of his status of Roman Consul, by the appointment of Byzantine emperor Zeno).
While Germanic kings filled the power vacuum throughout the remains of the Western Empire, a large portion of their subjects and administration was comprised of people who had previously been subjugated by the Roman Empire, had intermingled with Romans for generations and held Roman citizenship. Which brings us to the fact that Early medieval Germanic laws were based on ethnicity. If you were a Frank, traditional Frankish law would apply to you, while Roman law would apply to your Gallo-roman neighbor. This explains why Early written Germanic law codes were mostly interested in regulating relationships between Germanic tribesmen and Roman citizens, and how to apply the law where parties of both ethnicity/citizenship were involved. After a few generations of Germans intermingling with the local romanized populations, however, it would become impossible to distinguish who was a Frank and who was a Gallo-roman. This problem would ultimately culminate in the elaboration of a common law code, based on principles of compromise between previous Germanic and Roman laws (such as the famous Frankish Salic Law, forged around 511, under the rule of Clovis).
another thing that I like about frozen two is that the colonizers (mainly Anna) break the dam under the assumption that it will without a doubt destroy Arendel, her home and the colonized settlement. There was no promise of magic fixing it. Since it is a Disney film, it was saved by magic. However, Anna did not destroy the dam with that knowledge. She understood the price of her Grandfather’s actions, and she was willing to pay it.
Totally valid points on the Avatar comics, but just a small correction. Yu Dao, the colony you're talking about in the video, isn't the town the eventually becomes Republic City. Cranefish Town is the actual settlement that becomes that, being settled as a joint business venture between Fire Nation and Earth Kingdom businessmen while employing citizens of all three nations. Yu Dao does become part of the overall "neutral" nation that is established by Aang and Zuko to cater towards people that share the same sentiments, of which Republic City is the capital of. I like the idea of people from all three nations wanting to live together harmoniously (even though that shit goes RIGHT out the window through most of Korra) but I agree that its establishment was handled in a really messy way.
Another thing about the criticism of Steven universe, keep in mind that the show was constantly at risk of cancellation and was probably cut short because of the LGBT representation. There was probably a much longer and more nuanced storyark planned for the diamonds which they had to sacrifice to give us the representation present in the show.
Huge assumption
While the first Frozen resonated more with me due to the character focus and the music, I was very happy with where the sequel went with the story.
I'm Swedish and disgusted by our country's treatment of the Sámi people, so the way the movie (including its production) handled the Northuldra was very important to me, although... that name sure was something.
CHRIST Thank you for that "Conservative Diamond Family" take!! I've personally always read the story that way but for some reason have never been able to concisely say it like that. I've always felt that an all-human version of Steven Universe would make the diamonds something way less extreme than an evil empire. Like, the CEO's of a big company at _worst_
I wonder if Star backing off the themes it raises in the earlier seasons had something to do with the show moving from XD to Disney Channel proper. Shows on XD seemed to have a little more freedom with what they got to do
@James Allen McCune’s Butthole Wait really??????
I think the conflict of the Diamonds "redemption" was the fandom wanted them to have punitive justice for their crimes but Sugar gave them transformative justice
On the other hand, the Diamonds are very literally a genocidal empire with castes. As much as the Diamonds are parental abuse metaphors, they are also literally rulers of a horrible empire; there is no way that they would be able to get a chance to better themselves given all they have done and all the problems they have caused and the only handwaving other than “Steven’s wants to help everyone and the Diamonds wants of having a family align” are that since the Diamonds are eternal, it is mentally healthy for them to otherwise let them become better Gem creatures in their Gem society. That last point is also reliant on the theories of transformative justice and that does not apply to rulers who ruled as they did.
I don’t blame the fandom
I think that overall the failure came in lack of time: it felt like on one episode we got Steven merging with all of the major gems in a hyper sequence, Bonnie and her development were boxed in a corner and had no relevance. I felt like racist uncle got more development in two episodes than the big bads got. There was a lot of drama behind the scenes and is the reason we got what we got but I am still disappointed. I guess, less in Sugar bit more in the circumstance that had given the fandom this ending. Failure of the system. I hope Sugar was able to work out her own stuff through this piece and was a point a growth.
The end of SU left such a bad feeling for me that I didn’t care about the show for years. I finally got HBO Max for a month and decided to finish with the movie and SUF. I see the merits of Blue and Yellow being redeemed as Weekes says and see them starting to fix their mistakes. White I still don’t see the reasons for redeeming narratively but I understand that it provides allegorical closure for the family analogy. Something I absolutely cannot get is the vilification of Rose Quartz who did all she could in and ultimately gave up her former station in order to help preserve humanity. The Diamonds start bad and developed while Rose was introduced good and revealed to have come from the same place so the differences in treatment of them all hits me as undeserved
@@ramsey6864 At the end of the Day Rose went about it in a way that you would expect a well meaning person of privilege to go about her reasonings though good were inherently selfish in nature as they caused the gems, Steven, and Greg to deal with the fall out of her actions and she as she is not here to answer for her actions it makes understandable resentment from her closest allies plus forcing pearl to not say anything and it literally causing her pain and trauma because of it
Fantastic video! I was actually talking offhand to my brother abt Atla’s portrayal of colonization the other day. Bc I think it’s effective at portraying imperialist tactics and their effects on colonized people and how they can differ culture to culture, how these people react in turn-the genocide of the air nomads, the slow eradication of the southern water tribe over time, the northern water tribe rooting itself in tradition, the disparate treatment of people all across the earth kingdoms from the takeover of small impoverished towns to outright denial from their largest state. With the knowledge that atla’s creators are white ive always been uncomfortable with the portrayal of Jet (I guess for his extremism stemming from his trauma), but the contrast of how every other nation brings child soldiers whereas the fire nation children are afforded actual childhoods, Albeit rigid ones filled with propaganda was striking on rewatch. Even filler episodes like the painted lady paint a portrait of the world, displaying that impoverished people of imperialist nations can also be harmed/don’t always reap the benefits of their nation’s “glory”. The show gets a lot of things right. But we did have a convo abt ozai bc I think while getting into zuko’s family history does make the issue more nuanced and deep rooted than “its just one bad guy” I’ve always had issue stories that boil down “well, if we replace this bad monarch with a good monarch then everything will be ok”. Love Zuko, and I understand sometimes these beats are made for the sake of compelling stories (idk, maybe instilling a democracy isn’t that exciting from a storytelling perspective?), but it’s kind of reductive, these ideas of the royal who “gets it”, as you say. It’s a show by white creators, our discussions of imperialism in western media are enriched by atla’s existence but we need to stop acting like it’s the end all be all on the topic.
Also, as a poc I think criticisms of SU and Spop are valid and deserve to be heard but keeping in mind the intent of the creator can also give people important perspective. I didn’t know the inspiration you were describing from Rebecca sugar and Noelle Stevenson previous to this video, and it definitely enriched my appreciation of both shows-which I liked (and loved on the part of She-ra) but definitely know have problems. I definitely have a new appreciation. Sometimes intent doesn’t matter because an audience member isn’t going to come in with all that previous context, so what we take away at face value is important and a valid way to read the show. And sans context, I think marginalized people can read the messaging in the show as hurtful when the antagonists are afforded charity and second chances, and they aren’t necessarily wrong? I dunno. But I think our singular view of what a fascism looks like in media and irl harms the way we critique media portraying imperialist or fascist regimes. I’ve been trying to come to terms w spop s5 bc till then I’d been very impressed by the show’s handling of serious topics. While I enjoyed the final season, I definitely viewed it as a stumble in terms of messaging. I think a show should be more than messaging tho, otherwise it’s just propaganda, it should be abt narrative satisfaction and compelling storytelling-but she ra has never disappointed on that front. But now that I’ve been given another lens to view the show, I def have a new appreciation
(sadly, I’ve never seen Star v. nor Frozen 2, so I can’t comment. Perhaps I should give them a watch? Your video in particular compelled me on Frozen 2 bc otherwise I would not have given it a second look)
I don’t want to slam other critics of these shows or imply they’re not being charitable, but I also appreciate your fairness I guess? I can’t think of a better word for it- toward the creators and ability to sympathize and elaborate on their perspective and intent behind the show without being reduced to apologia. Too many arguments in response to the real criticism and hurt people feel from these shows tend to double down on getting really defensive because “it’s for kids and we can’t discuss serious topics!” Kids from marginalized backgrounds are forced to confront these topics at an early age regardless. It’s nice to see these shows treated with the nuance and respect they deserve. You’re doing great work!
I think you are right and that's why I wanted to say at the end that regardless of everything when you choose to discuss fascism in media and imperialism images you are bringing up things that are still in living memory for a lot of POC (and white people who live under colonization like the Irish and Romani)
To the point of people not wanting to confront children with serious topics, I feel this might lead to adults who don't want to have to confront them either if they can somehow make them go away. It might explain the nostalgia of a time certain issues apparently didn't exist, because the media they received as kids went out of it's way to pretend like it didn't, or obfuscate it until I could comfortably be ignored or forgotten. Just some thoughts I had when reading the last bit of your comment and thought I would share.
@Hans Hanzo Even if the last season is as awful as the negative response would indicate, whenever I get around to trying it, I can at least take comfort in this: at least it isn't Arc-V!
On Steven Universe: I think the story of The Diamonds and Homeworld work as a pretty great tale of how one's own shame and repression can lead to so many terrible things. White was ashamed of everything she felt, so she thought that by creating Yellow, Blue, Pink (and by extension, the entire gem race), she could transfer her imperfections onto them and emotionally wall herself off to focus on controlling a perfect empire, and stomping out anything deemed an imperfection in her eyes.
Hordak is one of my favorite She-Ra characters. He deserved a major arc in Season 5.
the original she-ra
So i'm really curious what would be the better outcome for the colonies in ATLA in your opinion? I feel like its really tricky due the the length of the war and it has normalized this colonization of earth territory due to the length of occupation. That trying to fix things by separating them or removing them leads to more harm or new harm that would just perpetuate the cycle. I think it could have been written stronger and given us more time inside of the major town to better understand the issues rather than how briefly we are thrown into the conflict. Along with a really forced battle scene with the earth king and zuko along with aang. To me I feel like no matter what you do its going to hurt people destroy lives and hurt families. Really hope you see this and reply as I thought you were going to dig into it a bit more and want to hear your opinion! Also this is the first video of yours I've found consider me subscribed.
In the end, I can't really I say I disagree with how it played out in the end - the colonies became their own sovereignty rather than a part of the Fire Nation.
I’ve had mixed feelings on the diamonds for a long time and your video really helped clear up my opinions on them and their presence on the show. While I now definitely agree with you that in the context of Steven himself they represent a conservative family, for me the problem is that they represent something else for those not in his immediate family. For example, Bismuth ( who can be seen to be coded as a black character) suffered their colonial and totalitarian regime and when they were fighting them off earth, she wanted to take the fight to them to free everyone who was suffering, not just the ones on earth. However Pink ( who was going as Rose Quartz, ) bubbled her and kept her bubbled even after the war, and when couple that with the fact that Pink is arguably coded to be white and had the privilege of the Diamond family makes it feel all the more frustrating when Steven ( again, arguably white coded) bubbles Bismuth for wanting to fight against their regime and shatter them. I understand that the point is that Steven doesn’t solve his conflicts with murder and I like that about him and the show but to treat Bismuth as some crazed aggressor for wanting to end the Gems who also shattered many of her friends, feels kinda tone deaf especially after Steven gets to befriend them all without any bubbling like how he bubbled Bismuth. It’s complicated and there’s a lot of ways of viewing it but just leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth even I honestly think the show is fantastic. Your video has given me a lot to think about and I’ll definitely subscribe to see more! Great work!
I disagree about Bismuth. It wasn't that she was treated as crazy for wanting to shatter the diamonds. Even Garnet says later on that PD being shattered was necessary. It was moreso that she was betrayed by Rose and this made her paranoid to the point of renouncing Rose and trying to kill Steven.
I’ve been listening to the ATLA podcast “ Braving the Elements” and in the interview with the shows creators, they admit to making mistakes with the show, but don’t really elaborate on what they are, short of criticizing plot issues with the most disliked episode where Aang tells lies to stop two feuding clans. They acknowledge that they were writing outside their culture and it wasn’t executed perfectly (not a quote), but it would have been nice to hear them be more specific. Just to quiet speculation.
I mean Zuko was probably the prince because there needed to be more narrative ties to the main bad and provide an insider perspective from the fire nation side that Zuko and Iroh provided to the story
Steven Universe is one of my favorite shows, let’s get that straight. But it is a thematic mess. There was a war ending in attempted genocide and brutal biological experiments. The Diamonds were built up as horrifying dictators who enslaved and traumatized other characters. But at the end, they’re all good now because they had a good cry over it?? The show just kinda neared the finish line and then tripped down a cliff.
This is such a late response to you, but they're explicitly shown to not be good in the Movie and final season "SU Future". Even years later, the Diamonds' altruism is clearly performative to get into the good graces of their nephew (Steven). The conservative family analogy is super on point. Melina is right that they are on the long "path" to redemption, they are not at all shown to be fully 'redeemed'.
Should there have been more episodes (and not just a single scene) centered on Diamonds being forced to partake in restorative justice? Absolutely, but that's not really the point of the show. You always experience the show through Steven's lens, so the unpacking of Steven's flawed ideology and PTSD took precedence for the final season.
@@KoopaOviasu I agree, it's not complete altruism, but the show uses this fact as a joke. For all intensive purposes, the show treats these characters as the good guys after they *start* their redemption arc. They never have to face the repercussions of their actions from the characters they've hurt and they've never had to struggle to overcome their ideology. Every other character in the show gets a satisfying arc except for the characters who most desperately needed them. For a show about change and passivism, it doesn't do the leg work to justify its message when it most matters. The family analogy even falls flat on this point because no viewer actually believes in their redemption.
@@thecheck968 That's totally fair. I guess like you said, since there's such a gulf in quality in the Diamond's arc vs everyone else on the show (in a show that's famous for really emotionally resonant character arcs), it can seem really jarring and undercooked, comparatively. I like that there's nods to the reality of their nature, and the show doesn't ignore it, but yea the show doesn't give enough weight to it.
I think in the end, while I'm personally fine with just the nods, there's definitely an argument for "if you don't have enough run-time to fully complete that arc, don't make it so central"
The rushed arc of the Diamonds was outside of Crewniverse's control - it would have been able to be resolved if the show weren't cancelled by the network because of Ruby and Sapphires marriage.
The comment about SU as a wish fulfillment of "what if your Trump-supporting parents could change" reminds me of the episode with Andy DeMayo and Steven trying to reconcile with his human family...that came out right after the 2016 election. At the time some of us watching and commenting on it thought "Oh, this had to have been written with the expectation Hillary was gonna win" cause, like, you literally got comments about "aliens" and sitting down at this big family gathering (ala Thanksgiving) and making some progress in getting a clearly conservative family member to respect and reach some understanding about your non-traditional family (which consists in part of literal aliens).
Basically, in retrospect, that episode seems like a foreshadowing of how Steven was going to deal with the Diamonds, and is also a reason why despite what some might think the human characters are an important part of the narrative *cough cough*.
On a somewhat related note, that episode and Steven's later outburst being angry at Greg not telling him his paternal grandparents were literally a car ride away also feels particularly interesting if you want to read Steven as being multiracial and struggling with a lot of lies and actions taken by others to keep him from getting a full picture of his heritage on both sides.
My issue with SU is that the intended allegory does/can not override the explicit events shown in the plot. The fact that the Diamonds are intended to be read as family does not erase, for example, the Cluster: the torture, murder, and mutilation of millions of “defective” Gems. If she wanted to write about a family, she could’ve Just written about a family, like, a normal conservative one, not one that committed genocide.
Steven Universe has really confused metaphors (or allegories idfk I'm not a scholar) sometimes. There's the diamonds, there's also what fusion is supposed to be. I could just never really get behind this weird vibe where sometimes it's kind of like sex but sometimes it's not and the show asks you to make your own decisions about when that's the case. Usually there's nothing wrong with room for interpretation but when our child main characters are concerned I think it's important to be clear here. Something that comes up less often but always feels heavy handed and strange is the gems being aliens, in the literal sense but also in the political sense. The show never really says anything about that, it just brings it up from time to time and you're like, "...okay." I love SU so much but man is it confused.
Shadow Bunny Yeah, if you make assign something an allegorical meaning, you gotta bear that meaning in mind *whenever* you use that thing or you’re gonna trip over yourself. SU has some good stuff, but it always had that kinda disorganised feel to it, which was mostly harmless, until they began trying to deal with really heavy subject matter
If you think about how many families still send their children to 'correction camps' when they find out they're LGBTQ+ to try to 'educate' or 'christianize' the gay out of them, and then find out what kind of things happen to kids there... It doesn't seem quite as much of an allegorical stretch.
NotInOrder the issue isn’t that the allegory is a stretch. We get the allegory. The problem is when people act like that allegory overrides the explicit events of the text. They’re using genocide as an allegory for parental abuse, but then acting like it’s not genocide just bc it’s used in conjunction with other themes
Nah it's more like like your verbally abusive dad moonlights as a serial killer on the weekends. Sure he loves you but as a to a total stranger you're just another victim.
This is really comprehensive and soo good! and I think you touched on a lot of interesting ideas that I've not really seen before- I think the point about being able to tell the difference between imperialism =imperialism and imperialism as metaphore for a conservative/ abusive family, or for cults. Not getting this difference has been the source of some of the worst hot takes I think Ive seen in the respective fandoms. But Ive not seen abyone articulate this as well as you have.
To build on what you've just said... Ive recently been (re)watching alta (again) and what strikes me is how much of the core thematic relavance of Aangs arc is left for the watcher to infer. At it's core, its profoundly anti-colonial, centering the importance of his religeon and culture as being the only right and just way to end the war. With more reading it reminds me alot of the rejecting the 'masters tools' elements of anti-colonialism- refusing the colonial framing of native beliefs and values as unrelistic and backwards. Not only that but his arc itself follows a more buddhist structure, with him journeying to find truth, and has a very buddhist solution (seperation is an illusion-> the seperation between bending styles is an ilusions bc chi -> direct chi bending/energy bending is possible). At a lot of levels his story is about rejecting the way his people have been devalued and demonstrating that their solutions and perspectives are important and nessersary.
However this is increadibly easy to miss (hell I missed it multiple times before it was explained to me by a brown buddhist) because most of the audience does not have the background knowledge to pick up on and interpret these signals. And it's not discussed that frequently or explicitly in deapth. This leves the most anti-imperialist messaging frustratingly subtextual.
This is particularly notable when comparing it to Zukos arcs of rejecting abuse and the war- which is very explicit and explored in deapth. Now I love Zukos arc, but I do think it's notable that it gets this treatment where's Aangs loss and dilemas don't. And I wonder how much of that was not knowing how to make it clear (which reflects a lack of understanding), or to make oportunities in the narrative for that- and how much of it is not realising that it needs prioritising and explaining to the majority of the (assumed western audience). Certainly when I started lurking in fandom around 10 (ish) years ago- and even today, it's strking how much of the fandom don't get that element of the story or admit they struggle to understand Aangs decisions and behaviours. And I think that points to me to some broader failing of communication or understanding on the part of the writing staff that really limited their ability to adress imperialism in the story.
I think it's also worth noting that Zukos anti-imperial realisation- that conquoring people is wrong and damaging- is respected as important, but it doesn't acknowledge that this is the FIRST step. And that really limits the degree of imperialism atla can address- because however you slice it, respecting that others have a right to life is a foundation...but you have to build on it if you want to undo harm and reach true equality. Partially this is a scope thing, atla ends at the end of the war, and undoing racism/colonialism is a lifelong process. But with reflection I can see where this also reflects underlying limitations in the story to articulate a more fully anti-imperial narrative.
Anyway it strikes me that the stories we learn and the way we learn to tell stories actively seems to limit our ability to recognise and engage with stories that attempt to reject that framing. As you say we learn how to opress- to ignore, dismiss and devalue other approaches- far more often than we learn how to dismantle opression. In fact the HOW of dismantling imperialism in ourselves and others is often left vague and incomplete in these stories- much as I love them.
Anyway sorry to ramble. This video essay really is one of the most articulate and well reasearched of all the ones Ive seen tackle this topic. This is truly a fantastic video essay.
Honestly, while SvtFoE had potential in it's narrative, I think it was always doomed to go downhill. Not because it was a Disney show, or didn't have the time to explore the subject matter, but because of the Lobster Claw episode. That episode was super weird tonally, and while you could argue it's pre-Mewninependence Day, I think it's an early indication that the creators didn't have as quite a strong handle on the subject matter as they were going for. It's clear Lobster Claw is just dude, but it also reinforces Star's, and therefore the audience's, view that monsters are evil. If his final scene hadn't had him punching Marco for no reason, or if the episode hadn't shown "evil" as his default nature, the message might feel a bit different, but it's our first intro to a personal relationship with a monster, and the takeaway is that monsters are evil even if they try not to be. Lobster Claw never has a substantial appearance outside this episode either, and the next sympathetic monster we're introduced to is Buff Frog. We never go back and see what became of Lobster Claw or any of Ludo's gang really.
I agree and disagree on your point about the island in the Earth Kingdom that became a Fire Nation colony, and the solution it came up with, because I think of all the settler-colonial projects in history - pretty much all of them still exist, and all of them have not come close to finding an effective resolution to repay the indigenous peoples that have suffered, although there have been instances where some sort of justice is given to the peoples affected. Even so, none of the settlers or their descendants were told to clear off - since, well since thery're in power, there would be no incentive to, nor would it actually resolve the systematic abuses that the colonised peoples have experienced.
My issue is that arc shouldn't have been Zuko's to carry since he represents the imperialists even if he himself isn't one (anymore). He is part of the establishment that led the conquest. Anywhere close to a real solution to that Fire Nation colony that was part of Earth Kingdom territory would be a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, an education program on Fire Nation colonisation, campaigns to restore the original culture, a campaign for reparations towards the communities of that island, etc. But that stuff is too boring for a cartoon or a comic book, and to be honest, I don't think that the creators thought too much of it either.
Afriboy10
It’s a possibility the creators could have taken that route if the show would have continued.But in my opinion the way ATLA ended wasn’t bad even though other argued that it ended quite quickly which I agree and the reason for that if you watch the documentary for Avatar the Last Airbender, you can clearly see the creators was so done with the show because of how stressful the project was, which leads others to believe this being the reason why the show wasn’t renew.
But I believe the reason they wrote that ending about the Fire Nation has much to do with history. People forget the one of the creators is very passionate about Asian History and culture. Which you clearly can see throughout the show. And At this point everyone agrees that the Fire Nation and their story is taken from Japan History, which is Japan imperialism during World War 2 and how it colonize countries in Asia. And if you read up on What happen to Japan after World War 2. They basically erase their horrible past which couldn’t have been done without the help of USA. So if you think about it the way they ended it with Zuko becoming a prince and everything being rainbow after that is not that far fetch if you read up Postwar Japan and how they tried to shape the narrative of their country.
I know it being a kid show we would like that they take the route of the Fire Nation making amends for their past and all but I think they taking the route they took instead for the ending for Avatar the Last Airbender and scene you mention in LOK is realistic for the fact it’s rooted in Japan History.
@@yvetterocksyeah I'm not sure if I agree. I think that the ATLA creators just wanted to write a story and used the Asian history to draw from to make the show more enjoyable, rather than outright reproduce the culture and history in a fantasy setting. I mean, if they were really interested in making sure that Fire Nation was really Japan - and it does draw a lot from the history of Japan, then the Fire Lord should've neen reduced to a purely ceremonial title. But such an alteration would not sufficiently satisfy Zuko's character arc for fans, and would violate the boundaries of the fantasy setting. TLOK had an opportunity to do that by introducing modern politics, but they missed the opportunity until the very end.
I'm surprised you didn't bring up the First One Empire in the She-Ra section, it didn't directly link in but I think it's interesting how the show actually eventually brings up that like "Oh, the First Ones weren't 'Good' either just because they were in conflict with the Horde Empire, they were still awful and exploited many lands for their own benefit".
Re: The destruction of magic in Star Vs
To me "Magic" in this show was the stand in for the entrenched power of the establishment. Magic is what let the mewmans colonize, it's what sustained the monarchy, and it's what perpetuated the belief that monsters were inferior. I see the destruction of magic as sort of an "abolish the police" moment. It doesn't fix the underlying problems, but it's a big step towards undermining the legitimacy of those attitudes and removes the people most responsible for enforcing them.
Show could have done with waaay less shipping for sure though and agree Marco never weighing in on it was weird.
Thank you I feel crazy that no one ever talks about magic being a metaphor for power.
Whenever you excessively point out that you stan She-Ra in your videos I literally nod. That's it that's the tweet
I wished Zuko had abolished the monarchy or sth like that I also hate seeing him be the firelord I think it would only make him miserable and not really in line with his character
Well, I would imagine Sokka(since he went on to be a councillor for the united republic in the canon future) and Zuko would have a long political chat, and Zuko would attempt to make the fire kingdom more egalitarian. The existing advisors would be there, but then Zuko would add representative advisors, and slowly become more of a judge/tie-breaker figure, before phasing out the monarchy entirely, and possibly adding a different chief executive/head of government office, while the royal bloodline could be the heads of state. Constitutional monarchy.
It's an issue I have with a lot of fantasy, especially fantasy about defeating the evil tyrant. The alternative to the tyrant is often a milquetoast constitutional monarchy at best, and return of the true, legitimate heir at worst, implying that just having the right ruler, and mild reform at the margins, is enough. as a result, their is often an assumption that a character that has proven heroic on the battlefield is going to be a good leader.
Their is very little I would change about ATLA, and I get why those choices were made. The issue remains that to allow for for a neat, shortish epilogue, zuko, a guy who kinda sucked at his only legit experience as a leader of men, is presented as the best choice to tackle the thorny issue of reversing the damage of a hundred years of war and colonization.
The comic covers this pretty well.
To be fair in Legend of Korra it's clear he abdicated at some point, which he probably prefered.
@@merrittanimation7721 He abdicated but his daughter is the one in charge.
a good faith critical analysis of steven universe? how youtube did not showed me this before?
Loved the video! You gave me quite a bit to digest. And I now have to finish She-Ra.
I agree with you on all of these narratives being imperfect when it comes to colonization as a theme and a plot point. Out of the four, I think Steven Universe handled it the best partly for the same reasons that Frozen handled it fairly well. The Diamonds that are the ones being held responsible for the damage that they've inflicted on the galaxy and Steven is half Diamond and human (much like Elsa and Anna are half-Sami), therefore he is the perfect person to take the lead on the restoration. However, I also like how the show is empathetic to damage that the colonization has had on his mental health and his emotions. His feelings are complicated and the show was smart enough to show what it means to be a recovering child soldier and a victim of systemic violence. Damn, I miss that show.
Also unrelated sidenote: I don't know if you'll ever see this but, since you love Catra and female redemption arcs, I wonder how you feel about Faith Lehane from Buffy.
ohhh that would be a fun episode to do! I love faith and I'll put it on the list!
I think the fire nation being based on imperial Japan is partly why they never fully resolved the more deeply ingrained issues of colonization at the end of atla; because that never happened in real life either.
Unlike the nazis, Japanese war criminals were never executed. They were instead granted immunity by the US, and their children and grandchildren grew up to become powerful politicians, without ever having to confront the nature of their politics. Take the current president Abe, for example. His grandfather was a Class A war criminal, but instead of distancing himself from the heinous crimes his family committed, Abe has publicly stated his admiration for the man and visited shrines dedicated to other high ranking war criminals.
This lack of repentance is only exacerbated by censorship. Not only does Japan censor their own history books, but also the history books in other countries. Only recently have they begun to show remorse for the sexual slavery they enacted against hundreds of thousands of little girls during the war. The families who owned and used slaves for things like mining and construction also got filthy rich from said slave labor and never had to pay reparations towards the victims.
There is so much pain in very recent Asian history that just goes unacknowledged for various reasons, one of them being how westerners view POC as inherently less threatening than white Europeans, which is disingenuous when you look at the intergenerational trauma Japan unleashed upon so many Asian countries in such a short time span. I think it's very important to look at atla through this lens rather than a European one for it to make sense.
Great video! I think the tumble re SU is that because it was about the world stakes and not the family stakes (since they waited till near the end to drop that he was Pink, their family member) that the fandom misses the conservative family metaphor. I agree they haven't been redeemed at the end of SU or honestly SU Future but they are working on it! But I also think for people in the fandom who have that family and have cut them off it's too triggering and optimistic to think their shitty family will change, when many of them have left that toxic environment as a survival tactic. Re Avatar, all your analysis is on point. They dropped the ball because it was never about repairing the imperialism or colonialism and we see that in the Legend of Korra, where they kept giving her interesting systemic issues (that perhaps a single individual cannot reasonably be expected to fix!) to deal with and then making the villain bringing it up hypocrites or bad intentioned extremists to deal with the fact that they, the writers, didn't have a plan or imagination to deal with the systemic issues and wanted to move on after using them as window dressing. The reason Michael and Bryan don't get half the criticism is it was a different time. People were criticizing LoK (I was one of them who quit part way through season 2 because it was clear they were garbage at writing about this stuff and didn't think beyond we want a character who's a girl who wants to punch things to problem solve because that's the "opposite" of our previous protagonist Aang, who was all about talking and being intentional), people hated what they did, but did twitter catch fire as a point of conversation (or like YT for that matter) when Korra was airing? I don't recall that being the case, so of course the criticism is easily amplified now and that's why Noelle and Rebecca get the shit they get (in addition to yes being women and not straight). I mean people stan the Dragon Prince, but that's got issues that people were talking about before Aaron Erahz's issues came out and we may have collectively cancelled him and his show. Bryke hasn't done anything since Korra, which ended like in 2014? I mean we also gave DeSantos and Montgomery shit properly for Voltron, but again that's more of a recent fandom phenomenon. I think moving forward we'll see the creators getting more taken to task (for better or for worse) as we move forward, so honestly most creators in the early Aughts should count their fortune for being able to miss this. I agree that creators need to be better about using symbols and the kinds they do for the heuristic shorthands in their narratives and also be better about not allowing bad faith hot takes to take off. ALSO SLYTHERIN BLACK PRIDE! As one slytherin to another, like idk how people didn't consider that maybe there would be more marginalized slytherins considering wanting power is not bad in and of itself if you consider who has never had it to begin with.
With Steven Universe I understand that they were going for the conservative family vibe. And it does work with that. Especially future dealing with CPTSD. But as a POC (Jewish Asian American specifically) myself I can't also not see the Diamonds as Nazi stand ins. The salute, the strict social castes, the supremacy, the ablism, the anti mixed relationships, the genocide of a species they see as "lesser", and the way they broke down horrible acts into parts so they could systematically and almost mechanically perpetuate them. I just can't unsee it. And while I do think it mostly works on both aspects at once. And I don't hold it against the creators. Seeing the abusive parents who literally just tried to whitewash and cleanse you of your inferior half (ah the mixed race experience) who I see as coded as Nazis be on the path of redemption just like that honestly made me angry. Not that I could have done any better.
your analysis of ATLA was spot on! you made me think about so many things i never thought of - especially about Zuko. after reading the comics some years ago i was like "huh that's a good ending." but now it's like, is it though? youre right. the fire nation pays NO consequences for all of their crimes. like tf???
I think that Fire Nation compensates the things it has done to the other lands. That's the least Zuko can do as the new king. There are some comic stories after the end of the series. I haven't read them yet because my list is very big, but you can find them on readcomicsonline.
@@Hel7100 No, wrong, no! _Don't_ recommend piracy if there's a legal option to obtain, which there IS! They can be found in _standard_ book stores in addition to comics, and many public libraries, and there might be a digital one in your area. Do NOT resort to piracy when you have options. Ugh.
something always felt off about the ending from the first time i watched it. With the benefit of hindsight- was a payoff, but it wasn't really the appropriate payoff.
Well who is the Fire Nation in this scenario? Ozai is depowered and imprisoned, Azula's in the nuthouse, the government has been changed and the military defeated. The Fire Nation as a nation has lost it's power base. There comes a point were you are talking about the citizenry and they had not say in what was going on, agree or not.
@@azamonra You have to remember the complicity of a nation's citizenry in colonialism/imperialism, if unwitting. In the US, the damage wrought to imported Black people and to native Indigenous people is absolutely mythic in how profound and horrifying it is. There is no shortage of white people today that never _directly_ did anything to perpetuate these horrors, but they have all _technically_ profited from it, ranging from living in places less likely to suffer from corporate damage to the environment, to the creation of wealth, to simply being able to walk down the street without an assumption of wrongdoing from both fellow citizens and from authorities. Colonialism/imperialism absolutely built the foundation for this, and without even reparations being systemically performed, let alone the system being reformed/destroyed, that suffering will always be a part of the oppressed peoples' culture and character, regardless of any other good things that might happen and bad things that DON'T happen. White people in the real world absolutely must make the effort to make up for all of the bullshit wrought by their ancestors (and still happens now, in the name of imperialism), and I hope whatever happened post-AtLA, the Fire Nation made substantive efforts to make up for what they wrought, down to an individual level.
My big problem with "Steven Universe is an allegory for an abusive and/or unaccepting family" as a defense of it is that you didn't have to use Nazis as an allegory for an unaccepting family? You could've just depicted an abusive or unaccepting family. You don't actually need to do an allegory for that, you can just depict the thing. By making the group of characters that was supposed to stand in for an abusive family a group of fascist imperialists that run their own colonialist power, you're kind of distracting from the actual message.
More than that, I think. The Diamonds were shown *first* as an imperialistic colonial power, thus that was the image that was formed in the mind of the viewers. To *then* go and show it was a family drama all along is jarring.
Well "this odesn't need to be an allegory" could be used for anything here. I think it's especially true in say SVTFOE-- why use monsters as an allegory which makes the real humans who deal with colonization monsters? Kinda not a good look. I think there's some value in using nazi stuff-- specifically because through media language we recognize things commonly associated with Nazis/nazism as bad. But I agree with the other commentor-- imo the whole abusive family narrative would be stronger if the text had been built on that instead of that they're bad imperialists.
Phi Blue I definitely agree with both of you. SVTFOE already *had* character they could explore racism and colonization with: the Diaz’s, a Hispanic family living in the US
But then the sort of people who most needed to hear this story wouldn't watch it.
yeah, that's it right there
if they wanted to show an abusive family, just *make them that*
maybe they *live* under the Diamond regime and grew up believing it and treated Rose badly as a result, instead of *being* the Diamond regime; in that way you can get the space opera stuff *and* get the unaccepting family stuff while avoiding the whole "sympathizing with literal monstrous dictators who've killed people" part
i was bracing myself for the steven universe section but im so thankful that u recognized it as a metaphor for a conservative family 😖 the number of people coming out of the woodworks to be angry at steven for showing his pain in future was ... upsetting, coming from a fandom of which its series's message was all about empathy and healing. there's so much more to be mad at than the fact that it focuses on his battle wounds like ... jus give him a break lol. awesome, awesome video, with so many amazing points!!
Tbh, as many problems as I have with SU, the movie, and Future, I get where you're coming from to some degree, but I also really didn't like how dirty it did the characters. I particularly didn't like the narrative and the characters alike affirming that because Steven believes he's a monster, he is one. That just felt so particularly soured the ending for me. Growing Pains was such a careful and sensitive episode that the road the series proceeded to take really threw me off! It really felt like Future did all the characters dirty.
@@everythingilikerules The characters weren't affirming this, and especially not the narrative. It wasn't to say that Steven is an awful person, but how the scars of his trauma have led him to believe he is. This episode (and the one before) is Steven's mental breakdown, and in such a situation, those negative feelings about one's self are going to project outward. Steven sees himself as a monster and that's how he's presenting himself. Garnet was merely speaking of his form and his state of mind.
wow, i've never heard someone compare the diamonds to a conservative family before and that makes so much sense! idk if that's a popular interpretation but you analysed it very well and eloquently, thank you for the new and enlightening point of view💕
Someone shared this on twitter. I think you have interesting points. Gives me stuff to think on. Great video.
idk if this makes any sense but I feel like what you've said and pointed out about steven universe could be easily connected to Jack Saint's video on anthropomorphic animal metaphors in story telling. In that, stories that use them get muddled up because there's this question of like "when is this about animals, and when is this about people?"
It never connected for me it was a conservative family metaphor, but now that you've said it all clicks and lines up perfectly in my head. All the tumblr discourse about like "is this about nazis being forgiven" defo like parallels the "when is this about ~~animals~~ gems, and when is this about people" issue
Jack ends the vid talking about how some 'predator vs prey' stories end with "and yeah maybe the meat eating dino can't live with the vegetarian ones, and thats more healthy for them both" (which is true in thinking just Plainly about meat eaters vs plant eaters, and how cats or some dinos literally Can't survive on just veggies) but since the metaphor goes back and forth between prioritizing animal realism vs prioritizing the human struggle, the message can be viewed as "race segregation is good." Which that's a big issue if that was the opposite message the story is actually trying to come across (usually the "no one is inherently bad based on differences in race").
Ultimately, the more successful stories that use the animal metaphors, are the ones that stick to "its about people" even when it doesn't make sense in nature, prioritizing the message and human struggle and making allowances on animal realism to avoid the wire crossing between the two.
The Diamonds being a metaphor for a conservative family pushes steven universe into that "its about people" realm like 100% of the time for me; seeing them as a nazi metaphor I feel brings up that wire crossing a huge amount. Like you said, it's about "what if your parents could change," not "forgiveness of the leaders of a fascist government." Which yeah inherently feels disingenuous to Sugar as a person in her identity.
But yeah connects not in the like, how Sugar presented it caused the wire crossing, but in how popular opinion of what is being misunderstood pushes it to there? It feels like this vid and Jack's vid talk about two sides of that same coin.
((Anyways, love the vid, defo subscribed now, and so glad I got recommended to u!!!)
I can actually think of one example of a "woke" monarch. The previous king of Spain, Juan Carlos, ascended the thrown during Franco's regime and was made the acting head of state shortly before Franco died. Contrary to his previous public support of Franco, he actively worked to dismantle the fascist dictatorship and played a key role in Spain's transition to liberal democracy. Even still however Francoists were allowed to have positions in key insitutions of society like the military, and Franco's legacy is still upheld by many elements of the Spanish right. (I'm not Spanish and this is just my cursory knowledge of Spanish history and politics, so please add or correct info if you are)
omg thank you, as soon as she mentioned woke monarch I was like "wasn't there that one monarch that disabled their own monarchy" but couldn't remember anything else, you've made googling this guy a lot easier for me
This is actually a common tactics used by monarchs
They tend to renounce to their own ""right"" everytime something bad happened so they could get a free
and keeping some form of power (be it formal power or just money)
Basically it's the way they bail out and keeping the riches before shit hit the fan
Before the french revolution usually monarchs simply gave more power to another body and then slowlt tried to get back the lost powers
The reverse is also true, if everything go right monarchs and their dynasty get stronger and stronger
You can see this in the 100 years war, england lost and it was proceeded with the first step of the constitutional monarchy, france won and started to becoming an absolute monarchy
Does the exception get added to the norm?
to be fair, most "woke" monarchs get over thrown, there was an Austrian Emperor, the 2nd to last one, who started work to end serfdom allow more autonomous rules in ethic minority areas and such and the aristocracy kicked him out and put up some heavily brainwashed 18 year old instead. Juan Carlos also had to resist a coup against him when it became clear he was attempting to dismantle the Franco government for a democracy but had enough internal and popular support to survive, but generally speaking most monarchs who attempt reforms more radical than the rest of the upper class like get the boot one way or another.
He wasn't woke. He was a fascist like Franco because Franco raised him. He didn't dismantle fascism, he just concealed it under the disguise of "democracy" so the republicans (Spaniard communists) wouldn't take control and demand war reparations. In fact after Franco died and his dictatorship ended Antonio Tejero, a former civil guard (civil guards are a police force that was created by Franco) attempted a government coup in order to establish another far-right dictatorship but it didn't work. Later it was found out that Juan Carlos sided with Tejero and wanted the coup to be successful. To sum up the former king and his whole family are corrupted and they don't care about us
The problem with the Diamonds being a metaphor for a broken family or whatever is that whole they may not hit all the points for fascism, they still started a war, committed war crimes and literal genocide. It just felt really weird to me when in Reunited Steven was like "we shouldn't fight, we're family" after all they had done to him and his friends. Like, it wasn't just a disagreement or even "just" (I'm not downplaying abuse here, just in comparison to intergalactic genocide) hurt Pink, they actively corrupted their own people, used them in torture-like experiments and were extremely casual with shattering them, shattering thousands of them.
I'm not saying Rebecca is a Nazi apologist or anything like that, I'm just saying that it felt problematic and not well thought out to "redeem" (I know they weren't redeemed or forgiven but they were still treated like good guys in the aftermath) the antagonists who have been portrayed as tyrants and colonists throughout the 4 seasons the preceded the finale.
"We grow up in societies that are oppressive, and those systems teach us how to be oppressors, first."
Wow. Beautifully said. I feel like it is commonly taught in kids shows that individual bullies are that way because they were bullied. But your analysis here is about how oppressive systems affect EVERYBODY. That is a complicated and ambitious idea for a kids show.
Rebecca's husband is also black and he has been involved with the story of Steven Universe from the beginning so it's odd that people would think that the diamonds are "redeemed fascists." This video had an interesting take on how Steven Universe was wrapped up. I'm not sure if ATLA, SVTFOE and She-ra being cancelled played a part in executing certain themes or if would make any difference but overall this video was great.
Thank you for yr Steven opinion 💯💯 I thought it was p clear that Steven was still uncomfortable and dealing with trauma that the diamonds did and thus they aren't redeemed they are just on a different emotional level. As a trans person who grew up under a religious fam, i definitely saw it thru that lens and I never seen a show that spoke so well to growing up trans as a child and standing for urself despite constantly yr fam, and even yrself telling u yr not
Super interesting video, I loved it! Thank you especially for your take on Steven Universe. Yes, I was underwhelmed by the finaly, too. Yes, the mixing of metaphores (totalitarian empire x abusive family) ends up being kind of messy. But calling Rebecca Sugar a n@$! sympathizer for it, as some people love to do, is just weird and totally misses the mark.
Your points near the end were also great. This focus on a Big Bad always struck me as a way to self-distance for the sake of protecting the self-image, which can lead to bad ideas. I obviously see the narrative utility of those characters and the fact that they are just a very well-established trope. My personal pet peeve with it is how it seeps into how we talk about historical figures. No, killing baby Hitler would not have dissolved the political tensions and underlying supremacy narratives and group-based hate that he eventually utilized to get into power.
And JKR really seems to have no idea about any form of oppression and bigottry.
On the subject of Korra, I hated the way in season 2 the writers seemed to ignore the colonization of the Southern Water Tribe by the Northern. I thought it was a terrible example of "for your own good" imperialism.
Do you mean how Unalaq brought in his Northern soldiers to take over essentially? Because due to the amount of time that it takes place over, it was more an occupation then a colonization.
@@writer_man5318 They might be referring to the backstory of how the Northern Water Tribe's help to the Southern Water Tribe after the war also came with the reestablishment of the authority of the NWT's chieftain over both tribes and a huge cultural influence on how the tribe was rebuilt. And when the south went through a massive prosperity boom later on, the north asked to share into that prosperity because of the help they provided in rebuilding, but the south didn't like that idea and thus big tensions were born. It's never really brought up in the show itself because the writers weren't really interested.
In retrospect, it feels weird that the South still managed to keep a distinct waterbending style from the North... if Pakku & Co were the ones responsible for training most of the new waterbenders in the South, you would think that northern influence would be more visible.
The cult/religion aspect of Horde Prime makes a lot of sense and is super interesting. I think it's definitely lacking something NOT to incorporate that into your understanding of the character. However, there is something pretty...eugenics-y about Horde Prime's obsession with uniformity/purity. Of course, that being said, eugenics is (are?) much more widespread as an ideology than Fascism. If anything, referring to Horde Prime as Space Hitler is missing the opportunity to compare him to, for instance the architects of Canadian colonization. Australia would work too, but I live in Canada so it's the first thing that comes to mind. You know, that whole stealing children and indoctrinating them thing sounds...familiar.
A lot of eugenics has religious roots. Especially Abrahamic religions.
I think the thing with me that makes Steven Universe feels cheap as hell, is the fact that Steven Universe the movie and Future do so much to be like "Damn sure does suck That Rose Quartz/Pink Diamond isn't here to face and answer to the people she's hurt and Steven is left holding the bag."Specifically Spinel and Pink "Volleyball" Pearl, but we never get to see anyone run up on the alive diamonds in the same way.
Like I feel that Steven being angry and Traumatized by the Diamonds and the stuff he's been through was brilliant amazing wonderful great. But its very flat that he's the only one who still feels that way about the Diamonds since they have an empire of gems that they mistreated no one they did experiments on, none of the gems who were wrongfully imprisoned like the actual rose quarts , or the off color gems that were still being hunted until Steven stepped up.
I thought it would be so much more impactful if it was someone who wasn't "Family" confronted them because they made this bigger than a family issue. This hits different in the sense for certain marginalized people who don't see community or family in the faces of the people who uphold the systems that oppress them.
I think the biggest problem with Steven Universe is that they dragged this so much further than it needed to be if they wanted it to be about family. I think about the episodes where Steven helps Sour Cream with his Deadbeat dad, and Kiki the pizza girl set boundaries with her sister, and how that is specifically about dealing with family and interpersonal issues which is when I think the show was at its best.
Why did it need to be the galactic empire that's done war crimes in order to be like this is a dysfunctional family.
I also want to point out while its not you and you have never done this, people are so defensive of this show to the point where if you criticized it online its just assumed to be in bad faith, like people who had problems with the ending of the diamonds just hugging it out Steven and thought it was lame, were like OH SO YOU WANTED STEVEN TO KILL THE DIAMONDS, and I'm just like I wanted someone who was not related to the diamonds to confront them and air out their grievances like Pink pearl got to and see them have to atone in that way and realize the everlasting emotional and psychological harm they dealt and the growth from there.
Also the fact that their evil Empire was for no reason, like in all these other shows there was a reason the Empire existed in Avatar the fire nation thought they were superior, and thought they should rule over everyone, Same with Horde Prime, And Mewmans wanted Resources and land. The Diamonds were invading planets killing organic lifeforms for the sake of shits and giggles and we don't see the actual work or the reasons they did the colonialism, which is important to tell kids.
The reasons that colonialism is so defended is because it left a system of hierarchy in which the people at the top benefit and that's why its so hard to fight against the after effects of colonialism.
This was a really good video and I agree a lot with your conclusions.
Also no more Royal family being the main enforcer of change society has moved past the need for that.
When I first heard about SU (never sat down to it) I read someone being excited about a story about a child coping with having a dead parent, trying to bond and understand them through the eyes of others, and how it was meaningful to them to have empathy in that emotional burden. With Dramatic Stuff coming in later, it feels like that interesting but simple core of a kid and his non-standard family got lost.
@@pinkwings8036 honestly yea I liked when it was just about them doing silly things and learning about each other.
wingslovedvalkria “a kid, his dad, and his three alien moms” has such sitcom energy that they could run on that alone. Not every story needs to be Fight The Biggest Bad, and Cartoon Network has already had success on plenty of shows that were grounded and small-scale. Why not stay small? It would keep stakes low and allow time for the characters to develop.
"I'm just like I wanted someone who was not related to the diamonds to confront them and air out their grievances like Pink pearl got to and see them have to atone in that way and realize the everlasting emotional and psychological harm they dealt and the growth from there." this is an excellent point and I totally agree. I also agree with the whole evil empire point and that's why I tried to address that in the end cause like I get it ... but you need to acknowledge it.
@@Princess_Weekes yea this was a great video
In the movie, Steven even shows he doesn’t consider the diamonds his true family. He says his home is earth and he misses his chosen family. He can spend time with them and it is pleasant but he hasn’t chosen them to be his true family because they still don’t understand him even if they now accept him. And the diamonds don’t truly want him, they still just want to be reminded of pink even if they accept Steven isn’t pink.
(just quietly want to mention that yes Avatar is based on East Asian cultures but like. Those countries have done imperialism too. Notably, Japan did a Big Imperialism with genocides and everything which is kind of why they were involved in WW2)
Anyway I love this video and I really love the approach of "trying to ask better questions" about the way art approaches complex topics and histories, I think it's something we all need to practice and learn to do better.
The TH-cam algorithm hit it out of the park in recommending this video to me. I have only seen Steven Universe but you got the analysis that the Diamonds are written first as bigoted aunts first and as the spreaders of empire second. Being gay, I got that vibe before a lot of others who were focused on the literal text of them running an empire rather than their relation to Steven. I will say that in the seasons where we don't know they're related to Steven, they are very much presented as the evil fictional empire we expect to see toppled. I think that first impression stuck and the real point of the diamonds wasn't picked up by fans because of that.
This video cleared my skin and watered my crops. Theres so many bad faith arguments and discourse out there and its refreshing to hear someone talk about these things with understanding and nuance.
Excellent video--the settler question Avatar works with has sat heavily on me, and seems to have a lot of importance for the future of our world. It seems like it ultimately comes down to whether everyone's identity is inextricably linked with their nation and ethnic origins, or not.
If this is the case, then it is absolutely correct that all fire-nation-originating peoples be removed immediately from Earth Kingdom land. Being born on a land and growing up in one does not change the heritage and crimes that come with that heritage; one is an alien living on soil that does not belong to them, having stolen it from its rightful owners. The Fire Nation must be punished for its crimes, and all Fire Nation nationals bear the weight of that punishment.
If this is not the case, the moral question is much murkier. Those who benefited and benefit from imperial oppression should rescind and return those benefits to those they were stolen from, but what is to be done with people who are both Fire and Earth? The answer is easy if they are a living cog in their nations' machine; such a thing is a hostile element that cannot remain. If they are deported to their true nation of origin, harmony will return to the land they have invaded.
But this strikes me as nationalistic, buying into imperial ideas of what people are. The second and third Fire Nation colonists aren't just Fire Nation anymore; the colony influences the metropole just as much as the metropole influences the colony, and the heart of that is the people living there. What is a Fire Nation national who has never seen the Fire Nation, only ever living in the Earth Kingdom? Does a third-generation child of a Fire Nation colonizer bear the weight of the crimes of their grandfather, and of their Nation as a whole, because of their background? They certainly bear the guilt of benefitting from such crimes, as well as present oppression, but can that be met by reparations, or is it impossible to make reparations that are meaningful? Is it ethical to return someone to a land they've never known? Are people defined by their ancestry?
Do not mistake me, imperial structures must necessarily be abolished; the hierarchies that keep folk disempowered and enslaved deserve only annihilation. Injustice must be corrected, and folk guaranteed peace and prosperity, or at least survival. But if the existence of settler colonists is inherently an aberrance that must be corrected, I am an aberrance, and I do not know what to do with that information. I'm a mongrel by national standards--I have no ancestral homeland. In a just world, I suppose I would not exist. I don't believe in national, racial, or otherwise ethnic purity, and I'd like to think that there is a way for me to live that is not inherently evil and detrimental to the common good, but that may just be wishful thinking.
It's crazy that your SU perspective could ever be considered a "hot take." It's literally, explicitly the plot of the show.
The complaints people have about "plot holes" and redemption is because SU was never trying to be the show they think it was. It was exactly what you said-- a show about family dynamics with the veneer of a revolution against the oppressor. The oppressor is your mom. Your siblings. And it's about what it would be like to approach resolution with them without burning everything to the ground. About them actively TRYING but still being able to sit in the in between where people still mess up, have to deal with the consequences of past choices, and have to constantly work to do better and be better.
The real hot take is that people are not really interested in seeing people get better. They want to be like Spinel and allow their pain to justify violence they think everyone else deserves for what's been inflicted upon them. And that's fine, just be honest about it.
I guess the shift to an intergalactic setting with an empire meant that the stakes “had to be grander” given the threat is literally a genocidal empire with castes. That was enough to confuse many that Steven Universe was about to become space fantasy rather than explorations of familial dynamics.
I'm happy to see somebody else addressing the politically-charged themes in these cartoons, and not calling an sjw propaganda which is great.
that's a remember when Steven Universe future with airing in people flipped when they saw the diamonds just chilling on home world and using their powers for good. it's like everyone forgot there was a time skip in that they had two years to get better. Are they redeemed? Nope,but they're cleaning up the mess they made and using their powers for better purposes now. It's at the very least a good start, mainly because name one country that willingly paid reparations for their past? The u.s. still like to insist that slavery either never happened or to tell us to get over it.
Wasa on the topic of imperial themes and empires, have you watched Craig of the Creek lately?
My problem is how they redeemed them it was SO Rushed imo
@@solidhutyr1815 but they weren't reddened though. The show not Steven truly ever forgave them. Hell the last time Steven saw white, he almost tried to kill her before he came to his senses.
Honestly though, you can blame them having to rush it on the Execs at cartoon network for pulling the shows plug early because if homophobia. The crew working on it just had to do their best with what little time they had left.
@@TubezThe1 i mean yuh the way the diamonds in changed in the corse of 1 episode isn't something people should blame rebbeca sugar for
Do you recommend Craig of the Creek? I keep hearing about it and I have no idea what it’s about
@@historiansayori2089 just pure, universal childhood fun... That slowly ramps up into anime absurdity that somehow you by because it's justified from the view of a child's imagination.
Honestly, of you ever want just a chill show, the first season is perfect. If you want to get more into the lore, 2&3 are gonna hit hard.
I really appreciate your take on Steven Universe. It seems like hating it became super popular around the time of the pink diamond reveal. It's definitely not a perfect depiction of colonialism and racism but people started focusing only on 1 or 2 imperfect aspects to talk shit without looking at context.
When it comes to the fire nation the reason they got off is because despite ending the war the fire nation military is still the major power in the world and keep going if Zuko and aang don't appease them a bit.
As for Steven yiu seem to forget that despite getting the diamonds to end their empire the diamonds have no actual peer powers. Unless Steven humors them they will just go back to empire building.
When you talked about the simplistic way empires are handled in media, I was reminded of the webcomic *Vattu* which is set in a fantasy world where a small indigenous tribe encounters a colonizing empire, how that encounter destroys their way of life and their identities with very little overt violence, and the long uphill battle Vattu and her people have of regaining that identity. I think it's one of the most faithful and honest depictions of traditional imperialism out there (at least so far, it's not finished). The way it tackles othering, cultural erasure, assimilation, division, the double-standards of rigid social structure, and the way religion can be used both to oppress others or as a tool by the oppressed to maintain identity, is uniquely deep. I highly recommend it!
That initial definition is missing the economic component of modern imperialism. The difference between a colony as we understand it today, and, say, Viking and Roman settlements, is the initial capitalist investment in settlement resources, by investors expecting to double, triple, or more their money, with no interest in actually running a territory like a lord. Vikings could intermingle with their Irish conquests. Romans would incorporate their conquered peoples into their armies. Sure, there was a power differential and conquest, but in the Viking case, it wasn't set up to be eternal and ever increasing divide, with all mixing producing only "other," no matter how singular that "other" ancestor is. The US, for instance, legally had a one-drop rule, and even more permissive Latin American cultures never let someone get back to white, regardless of how much white was mixed in. In contrast to, say, Irish thralls who had some (if minimal) rights and whose children by Viking masters could inherit.
Western imperialism had the goal of entirely stripping its colonies of all profitable resources. They didn't succeed, but it's relevant that this was the goal, not cultural assimilation or holding territory. For instance, the company behind Canada explicitly stated their goal was to kill every beaver living in their territory and acquire all their pelts. They (and others) put out bounties for the skins of First Nation peoples in order to eliminate any competition whatsoever for beaver and other pelts. First Nation peoples were wiped out to make way for _exclusive_ access to resources. They didn't want to share one tiny bit of water, land, or food with the people living in the areas they "colonized." If they left a desert behind, they didn't care. The investors were still back in Europe. Today the US produces the most waste per capita, and has a core culture valuing progress through production and consumption, with little to no thought to the waste it leaves behind that we have to live with. That's not incidental to our nation's origins as the investment of various British companies and corporations, as opposed to any of the First Nation empires that preceded it.
*is ready to debate you on Steven Universe in comments*
*listens to your point*
...GIRL! I'm not fighting you! I wanna have drinks and talk about pop culture with someone who gets it!
I disagree about the svtfoe analysis that eclipsa was incompetent for caring about monsters and also therefore coded as a bad person. More like she wasn’t politically savvy enough. I think that the act of eclipsa fixing the monster subjugation problem by getting rid of oppressive laws and redistributing land back to the monsters was an unequivocally good thing to do. The problem was that she didn’t pay any attention to the ramifications of her actions. Obviously, the mewmans were going to be pissed. Mewni was already not doing great, and then they get a surprise monarch that no one knows much about except that her husband ate people and she strips them of their privilege and doesn’t acknowledge their problems. They weren’t “right”. Weeding out oppression shouldn’t be compromised for the comfort of the oppressors, but she shouldn’t’ve abandoned them.
It’s actually a little bit perfect. The poor (mewmans) reject the (monarch) who’s platform is to correct oppressive systems while they embrace a (monarch) that doesn’t particularly care about them, but maintained their social privileges. They blame the (monsters) for their misfortune. In reaction to feeling abandoned, they embrace the rhetoric of a racist extremist who promises to put them first again. Hm
The thing is that the show treated Eclipsa as incompetent. Eclipsa's incompetence isn't the conclusion of the analysis, it being the lens is the conclusion.
@@hydratorthealmighty5687 Both Moon AND Eclipsa were shown to be incompetent. They were just on the opposite side of the spectrum. It was Star who was shown to be the most competent when they properly focused on that part of the story - she wasn't biased towards either side. She didn't allow the monster treatment but she also wouldn't let the reverse happen either. She cared about both sides.