635
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
635 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19240 readers
1968 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It’s just an odd one to mention because, obviously.
but its not. a lot if criminals ive met were good people. none of the politicians ive met (mostly house and state level) didn't immediately trip every single alarm in my head.
Yakuza is fiction. The characters are not realistic. No I don’t think criminals are constant evil or some other binary view of a human being. Though unlike the games I don’t know each of them individually like I do the yakuza protagonists.
well, as someone who's met a good handful of politicians and lots of criminals? the criminals are usually better people, never, so far, worse ones. yes I'm including meth head Nazis, in and out if congress, in this.
I'm not really sure what this conversation is. I just thought saying you would rather an Yakuza protagonist was just an obvious better choice since the way they are written. I wasn't trying to start a conversation about "criminals" in real life.
I think what you're assessing to be an obvious better choice isn't. What would the Yakuza protagonist' view on capital punishment be? That they're written to have a heart of gold doesn't define their morals outside the scope of being Yakuza. To prefer that is to accept that their morals are more likely to transcend the power structure they exist in vs politicians. Fictional or not, I think it's interesting someone would consider this to be the case. It's not as though the games romanticise Yakuza as moralistic. The pretense for pretty much all the drama in the series is violent disagreement with other Yakuza, behaviour I'd doubt is what the commenter is generally looking for in a political leader.
They responded after the comments were talking about the real mafia. So when someone says hell I rather the Yakuza game series protagonist after real people it does seems way more obvious. If the comment existed in a bubble and was only directly comparing them to the candidates then yah you would be correct.
I mean Kiryu spends most of the games NOT being one. He is brought back In like a retired cop every game. Does he commit crimes? He defends himself quite a bit, in doing so he causes property damage. What big crimes does he commit in the series? I’m trying to think. I mean he uses knifes and guns but people all end the same way regardless if you used a bicycle or hand gun. If anything the game don’t romanticize it barely says anything about the real Yakuza at all.
That's fair enough, I'm literally just playing through the games now and felt compelled to comment. Kiryu's fundamental value system is presented to us at face value right from his first interaction with Majima in the opening of the first game. He's prepared and unconflicted about fighting Majima, just not for no reason like Majima wants. Kiryu has to have "a reason" to engage in actions typical of Yakuza, though the specific parameters of his reasoning aren't quantified. It's just whatever makes innate sense to him in the moment, which I'm interpreting as a rejection of conventional moral barriers to action. He'll do whatever it takes to achieve the end he seeks, and the only difference between him and other Yakuza (or indeed Yakuza in real life) in this respect is that the ends he's seeking are noble/just. i.e. "chaotic good", with Majima the protagonist being his "chaotic neutral" counterpart. TBH I can't really speak for Tak or Ichi because I haven't finished those games, but the gist I got of what the commenter is saying is that they think although the base case for most people would be to prefer lawful-aligned governance, the outcomes secured by being chaos-aligned would justify their chaos.