Fujimoto: "I know writers who use subtext and they're all cowards"
Definitely one of the most insane chapters in a while, you love to see it (and it makes sense too)
man fujimoto could have a character look at the reader and say "the usa's obsession with starting conflict and inflicting pain will end the world one day" and people would still say "it's just a story there's no underlying message"
What? No, Oda just accidentally made a heroic revolutionary figure themed after real revolutionaries and with an army of trans folk fighting beside them. It was all an accident.
People keep saying he made a whole arc about racism and I'm like, wdym? It's just funny fish people trying to punch the straw hats! How can it be about racism when they're funny fish people?
Oda literally makes fun of transgender all the time. The character you're referencing (Morley) is a big joke. Oda literally—literally—intends for you to laugh at him for thinking he's a cute girl, when he's a fat, giant, hairy man.
I think One Piece is broadly political, but I don't think it gets too specific in accusing real world countries or people of anything. The politics of One Piece are fairly unique to it.
thinks One Piece's politics so agrees with your politics that you're openly misgendering Yamato because you believe Oda can't write a trans character who isn't a gross caricature;
constantly throws slurs around;
is ALSO a zionist.
One Piece's politics aren't the most revolutionary thing because it's meant for kids, but one kind of politics it definitely isn't supporting is those of nazis. Which you are. Do the rest of us a favour and follow your leader.
and this is why i say subtext isn't enough for these kinds of people lol, there is nothing they can glean from stories like One Piece or CSM because they go "wow cool pictures" and don't actually read. if they did they'd understand core themes and political ideas in them. though it's moreso that they don't want to admit they're the kindof people these mangaka are actively mocking and caricaturing.
Honestly? Yeah, you're right. I've seen them trying to make the term "media literacy" the new boogeyman phrase to try and discredit people who actually want to use their brains.
i went on asmongold subreddit literally saw a post wit a thousand upvotes of a white people segregating themselves from black people and comments fully supporting it
Do you really think Jews were the only ones in those concentration camps? Fully Aryan, blonde hair, and blue eyes weren't Adolf's "things I look for in a guy", he really told people that's the ideal person in the eyes of God
The entire Israel colonialist project started because antisemites wanted to move Jewish people out of their country. This isn't a controversial take, there are letters from the people who started the Zionist political movement saying this. Zionists also conflate Israel with all Jews because, surprise, they're fucking fascists.
It's weird, right? But it happens. There's this whole cluster of people who just want Israel to exist because they think it will speed up the apocalypse, and that this will somehow work out well for them.
I really think that 6 years of conquering and genociding while being allied with another bunch of fascists who conquer and genocide sort of take away most of your moral high ground. Like sure, the nukes were harsh, but in the balance of things they didn't kill more people than some normal bombings did. WW2 was an insane waste of life on all fronts for an unconscionable amount of time all sacrificed on the altar of the ambition of some of the most evil bastards to ever live and I don't feel like judging too harshly those who made the utilitarian call to simply end it as soon as possible by any means necessary, especially given that nukes were still new and relatively poorly understood.
It's not the US' proudest moment but far from unjustified or even in the top ten worst things done during that war.
One, if we're being purely legalistic, in 1945 mass killing of civilians via strategic bombing wasn't classified as a war crime yet. It came about exactly because of WW2.
On the other hand, if we want to discuss it in light of modern rules, then the atomic bombs don't particularly stand out for number of casualties. The firebombing of Tokyo or the bombing of Dresden had similar impacts if I recall correctly. What made the atomic bombs impressive was that it was all done just with a single bomb whose strange effects were scary and unknown, and that was probably what pushed Japan to surrender (along with the fact that the USSR was beating them on the mainland, likely). So in that sense, at least the atomic bombs did accomplish the goal of demoralising the enemy that the other strategic bombings were nominally pursuing but never quite achieved.
If we decided its fine to destroy nations for past and current atrocities
It's a bit different when you're in a war right now. Also the Soviets doing that would have been ridiculous since the Soviets were at war with Japan too and if their actions on the Eastern front in Europe are anything to go by, I really doubt they had a lot of qualms against war crimes. And Japan... wasn't destroyed? If anything, as a nation, Japan was the only Axis power that came out of the war without even extensive regime change; it was allowed to keep its emperor. Both Italy and Germany changed way more dramatically (though in Italy's case that happened more organically during the war and then after without as much foreign intervention).
Again, it's hard to weigh and judge all these actions to me. They are, in isolation, atrocities. But they are atrocities lost in a sea of other atrocities and at that point I am at least willing to concede the utilitarian point that atrocities whose effect is to end all the other atrocities are a bit less evil. I do not expect people to have sound moral judgement and robust commitment to deontological rules no matter what after 6 years of the worst butchery in the history of mankind. And again, the worst of the worst of that butchery came from Germany and Japan, who started that war, and who were doggedly pursuing it to the bitter end. Japan even was explicitly preparing itself to be a fully militarised nation in view of the invasion, to have every civilian be effectively a combatant, and it already had a habit of having its combatants committing perfidy (fake surrender) so that they wouldn't be afforded any other options than victory or death... an invasion wouldn't have just cost more US lives, it would have cost more Japanese lives, now only technically not civilians any more.
It's kind of crazy how Japan started a massive war and then acts like we're the bad guys, and Japanese people just eat up the propaganda. It's like if people in the US still thought we were the good guys when we went to Vietnam
the idea that something as dangerous as nukes were "erased" by chainsaw man only for america to be so obsessed with hegemony over violence that they created them from scratch a second time is meant to be a representation of the modern USA. it is arguably the most powerful country, with an omnipresent gun culture and warmongering hawks constantly interfering in geopolitics they have forcefully injected themselves into.
yes, america ended the conflict in the 40s that they originally had no intention of joining until they were attacked. but in the post cold war era america has done more conflict starting, destabilizing of various countries across the world and causing turmoil as a result. america has been mucking up the middle east for basically half a century at this point, for example.
I'm trying to think of a conflict America started since the collapse of the Soviet Union besides Iraq (which wasn't great, but was also a regional conflict in comparison to Russian and Chinese expansionism). Who has it even destabilized? Assad?
America has actively funded multiple genocides in places like Bangladesh, Indonesia, and East Timor. America has destabilized pretty much every Latin American country at this point at least once. America dropped more bombs on Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos than any other country in human history combined. America directly caused the Vietnam War by throwing out the results of the reunification referendum. America propped up a dictatorship in South Korea similarly to prevent Korean reunification (this was prior to the Kims taking power). America propped up more dictatorships in South Korea after the Korean War. America helped assassinate the President of the Republic of Congo, destabilizing that country. America funded Wahhabi Islam across the Middle East to prevent Baathists from taking power. America interfered into all sorts of domestic politics across the globe during the 20th century, from Italy to Japan.
You’d have to be willfully ignorant to act the America’s been some kind of pacifistic saint since WW2.
Nope. The era of "American hegemony" as you put it is the most peaceful in human history, precisely because America is not the imperialist nation that literally every other major power throughout history was, including Japan. Sorry if that upsets you, but facts don't care about your feelings.
Factually, you aren't wrong, the post-war period has only become increasingly peaceful over time, relative to what came before it. But what you need to understand is that it feels wrong to believe that fact.
Funnily enough, it's less about America as the sole superpower and more about how nuclear weapons neutered major powers' ability to wage war against each other. The atomic bomb is one of the most hated inventions in human history, and it literally brought us world peace, or as close as we are ever going to get to it.
lol no. Europe literally begs America to police the world, so they don't have to spend a dime on their military. The idea that America inserts itself where it isn't wanted is a meme with no basis in reality.
I mean, look at the Ukraine conflict: we're somehow expected to shoulder the whole thing, because the entirety of the EU is too weak to take on Russia.
That's not the quiet part lol. Everyone expects this from us. Europe cries everytime we think of closing a base, and many countries beg us for one, especially those that border Russia and China
Hell Biden was constantly flamed for not sending the military to stabilize Haiti
It's funny how we keep catching American politicians taking Egyptian, Turkish, and Qatari money but somehow people keep insisting it's the Jews pulling the strings.
There is not a single poll showing even an appreciable percentage of Jews disapproving of Israel, and when people keep insisting that the only country in the region that hasn't been caught bribing politicians is the one controlling the world with shekels, it's pretty obviously just antisemitic stereotypes.
I mean maybe, but that is slightly shakier ground with how many war crimes everybody in WWII did to each other. The Geneva Conventions were established because of that war after all, so most war crimes weren't even well-defined at the time. Plus the fact that he had them bomb Soviet Russia in particular hearkens much more to the Cold War era.
"Warmongering." Gazans invaded and conducted genocide in the Negev and continue to fire rockets into Israel indiscriminately. The nuclear bombings on Japan were for tactical and strategic purposes and targets against an opponent who, in contrast to your "unilateral" claim, had attacked with no provocation.
And there is is. I knew if we scratched you deep enough a genocidal fascist would bleed. Tell me more about how starving kids in a concentration camp is okay when you're Isntreal.
You seem to be projecting quite a bit, probably due to your lack of general intelligence. Hamas invaded Israel. Hamas and the Palestinian people want to wipe out the jews. Israel is a real country and isn't going anywhere. Hamas is the much larger problem here. You are the one defending theocratic fascists
596
u/Arima_Kishou Jul 29 '25
Fujimoto: "I know writers who use subtext and they're all cowards" Definitely one of the most insane chapters in a while, you love to see it (and it makes sense too)