Am I a schizo for genuinely believing the dominant trend of preaching non-violent solutions in media for the last few decades is a conspiracy to make the populace compliant and non-threatening to the ruling class?
Cause it sounds schizo but also theres a lot of "If I kill you Ill be as bad as you" shit that seems to only benefit corrupt authorities.
No, because there's a ton of characters who kill in media.
so kill 2 or more killers
frick batman
what if you kill 6millions
I say six hundred, you say six million... the point is it was bad.
Killing 6 people is a tragedy.
Killing 6 million people is a statistic.
then you hang and your country is raped by commies
Stalin was just as bad...
>responsible for more than 100,000,000 deaths
>responsible for the pointless displacement of countless russian ethnicities
>just as
The amount of times I've heard "violence is never a solution" is obnoxiously high. I think you're right. I was defending capital punishment as justice while secularists were pushing the whole "you're not allowed to have justice in the world" shit. Frick off, an eye for an eye is fair.
>Violence is never the answer. It is a question. The answer to this question is yes.
Rape is not an excuse, it's a reason. And tonight, everything seems so reasonable.
>Am I a schizo for genuinely believing the dominant trend of preaching non-violent solutions in media for the last few decades is a conspiracy to make the populace compliant and non-threatening to the ruling class?
I unironically have also believed that for years now.
So I shouldn't kill Hitler because the number of killers would remain the same? What impeccable logic.
you should rape and sissify hitler
What if you kill Hitler and another nazi who killed someone? Wouldn't that be better since the world loses 2 killers and gained one?
You sound like the same kind of person who would complain about war movies brainwashing people to kill for the corrupt authorities.
He wouldn't be wrong either.
You know the army literally pays Hollywood to put propaganda in films? Its not like it's a secret either you can apply for propaganda money
The guys in war movies are cucks too. "Oh man. I have to kill. I wish I didn't. I will instead karate chop the gun out of the guys hand. I also have PTSD "
>brainwashing people to kill for the corrupt authorities
How is that not a good thing?
Thou shalt not kill
Then kill more killers
simple
This. Murder is less bad the more murderers you kill. Peak ethical killing is killing all other killers, then yourself
Batman taught me that you don't have to kill people. You can bring them a lot of pain instead
Batman didn't kill people because comic books are for children and parents didn't want their little boys reading about killing a bunch of people like they had been doing in pulp magazines. So yes you are a schizo.
Yeah, that was like 50 years ago. now the villains are all mass murderers.
And all the superheroes are depressed drug addicts with PTSD.
Killing bad unless killing russians or nazis.
But batman never killed russians and nazis
Oh yeah? Start questioning peace when you need people to storm the capital so you can kill babies eh?
>the dominant trend of preaching non-violent solutions in media
That's not a dominant trend. The Left have been preaching violence for political ends since at least 2016.
All I could think at the end of the Dark Knight was how much sense it would have made for Batman to kill the Joker right there. He had already escaped from custody once and there was no telling how many tricks he still had. No one in their right mind would have let him live. It's not even about getting revenge or justice, he was just too dangerous to live
Misc pot killed 2 million people, the chances are he killed at LEAST 2 people who were killers and their immediate families so no one would become a killer in revenge.
Yeah but he delegated his killing to tens of thousands of people, and the amount of killers they killed was almost certainly fewer killers than the killers doing the killing.
if you kill like 100 killers the amount of killers has reduced. is batman moronic?
Batman kills all the killers in the world
Only one killer remains
Kills self
No more killers.
God he's dumb
No, I believe this too.
It's in the state's interest to keep people dependent on them, so they support media that discourages vigilante justice.
You fricking Black folk still don't get it Batman does not want to kill because he feels after the first time he will become a psycho mass murderer if he crosses that line he will become a monster.
ITS SO FRICKING EASY TO UNDERSTAND HE'S MENTALLY ILL SO HE WILL GO WACKO CRAZY.
Which is still frankly a dumb reason, especially when you consider Batman actively has saved jokers life on multiple occasions. It would be better if they just said that watching his parents die led him to believe that all life is sacred or some bullshit like that
Yes. That's idiotic.
... then if you kill another it goes down by 1. So logically if you're going to kill one just kill as many as you can so the number goes down.
Deep.
...but Batman wears a fricking cowl. His mouth and nose are the one spots that aren't fricking covered. What a fricking moron, I hate this dumbass
That's... the joke. You were the bright one in school, weren't you? I always wondered, were autists put in special ed?
He wasn't joking dumbass, he was virtue signaling for likes.
No, read baghavada gita. Krishna encouraged killing your enemies and even said its wrong to let them alive. It was explained pretty well.
Jaya Sri Krishna
>unless they're Palestinians - israelite comic writers
No welcome to Redpill Level 1 fren
Batman's code of ethics was good. If he's going to be a vigilante, he cannot also be the executioner.
Nah. I think the same thing about the New Testament sometimes. Like maybe it was just a ploy to essentially try and castrate Christianity and neutralize it as a threat to “””” some other religion “””””
>Am I a schizo for genuinely believing the dominant trend of preaching non-violent solutions in media for the last few decades is a conspiracy to make the populace compliant and non-threatening to the ruling class?
That's exactly what it is. These movies also always teach us plebs to appeal to authority, because there are always good guys out there who ultimately save the day, so it's best for us to sit on our asses and do nothing.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
>Am I a schizo for genuinely believing the dominant trend of preaching non-violent solutions in media for the last few decades is a conspiracy to make the populace compliant and non-threatening to the ruling class
anon that is a tale as old as fricking time
No as popular as someone like Batman is he was mostly irrelevant without the movies while all the real action heroes were blowing shit up. Even comic characters wouldn't have no kill rules if it wasn't for the comics code authority, Batman used to carry a gun and one of Spider-Man's original designs had a gun. Even in these adaptations they can kill or are very violent
your enemies really want you to be a good liberal while they do the opposite
Batman never said this.
Batman said a lot of things
There's probably some truth to that. As an aside, I've always preferred the explanation of Batman's no-kill rule being that his obsessive personality + high intelligence probably won't allow him to stop killing once he's started making exceptions to the rule. It's not that killing for just reasons is necessarily bad, but Bats can't start doing it without going overboard.
I think violence is justifiable in certain cases (including revenge), but it's disgusting and scary how many people relish it if it's towards someone they hate.
is batman against cops killing criminals with guns shooting people? would he be against killing school shooters in the middle of a shooting? i dont get it.
>is batman against cops killing criminals with guns shooting people?
He's kinda schizophrenic about that, he doesn't care about cops using guns to kill people but he sometimes tries to hold other heroes to his standards.
>Am I a schizo for genuinely believing the dominant trend of preaching non-violent solutions in media for the last few decades is a conspiracy to make the populace compliant and non-threatening to the ruling class?
No, this is exactly what it is. It's the cultural equivalent of dumping tranquilizers on public water supply to keep people's animosity in check, thought obviously if the government tried to pull something like this, you'd see federal buildings blowing up all over America.
>not appreciating the difference between good killers and bad killers
if you rape a rapist the number of rapists in the world increases by 1.
not if you kill him afterwards
>billionaire puts murderous criminals in prison
>has clearly got stocks in the prison industrial complex
>literally doesnt kill these criminals because 'muh morality'
>is actually profit driven motive to keep his company and wealth intact.
Batman is a wealthy psychopath and being a masked vigilante to spread fear, violence and desperation amongst the lower class who constantly struggle in gotham so that people go insane and mad in their destitution and create more fodder for the prison he has obvious investments in and then receive govt rebates for 'public service' in the form of tax writeoffs and a big fat tax payer funded cheque.
He can pontificate of killings morality, but he would never stop to think twice about doubling his net worth at the cost of some poor sod, because if he did, he wouldnt be wealthy, he would have enough money to carry out his mission and that alone, the secret identity is just a crutch he uses to hide his psychopathic tendencies.
>Am I a schizo for genuinely believing the dominant trend of preaching non-violent solutions in media for the last few decades is a conspiracy to make the populace compliant and non-threatening to the ruling class?
No, it's pretty obvious.
In a world of darkness, you won't notice a new shadow
Gandhi did it tho
The whole point of non violence is a spiritual awakening. Life is an unending cycle of violence wherein everything is consumed unto death from the plants to the animals until the eventual death of the universe. To rise above this is a spiritual experience. That being said, non violence in real life only works when the oppressor has a moral compass. The Soviet Union would let Gandhi starve and move on with their lives.
No this is obviously true. "violence isn't the answer" is something the elites tell you because violence is the only thing that can harm them and the one thing they fear. Diplomacy and beaurocracry only benefit the powerful because it allows them to outright ignore the powerless. But if you're violent, they have no choice but to listen to your demands.
If you think that's wacky, OP, wait til it clicks that this glorification of women in the media and women's rights is all because women are more compliant workers and the biggest spenders aka consoomers.
What if I kill the Supreme Court thereby saving millions of children
Nope, you are right and pretty sharp actually.
Yes, Batman is just talking about killing there and it's a cope the writers made to justify the status quo
His entire character is beating the shit out of bad guys
Jesus taught the same thing
If you kill someone, they die
-The Jokah Baby, ca 1488
>dominant trend
name 5 examples
>Am I a schizo for genuinely believing the dominant trend of preaching non-violent solutions in media for the last few decades is a conspiracy to make the populace compliant and non-threatening to the ruling class?
not at all
I suspect even many normies can see this