|
Patter Song posted:Apparently the Alliance's favorite sport is flyball, which is basketball except at 0.15 Gs and the hoop moves around the stadium at high speed. Doesn't Kircheis straight-up murder some fools in a flyball arena in one of the Gaiden episodes?
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
Patter Song posted:Oh my... Yeah yo uknow, like uh, quantum entanglement... and, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
skasion posted:The moral of the show is literally spelled out for us and doesn't have anything to do with any trend towards political stability, it's "people are the same wherever, whenever". I thought the show spelled out that a constitutional monarchy was the way to go? It's like the best of both worlds until someone ambitious inevitably gets enough power to tip everything over again
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 06:32
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:I thought the show spelled out that a constitutional monarchy was the way to go? It's like the best of both worlds until someone ambitious inevitably gets enough power to tip everything over again Democracy is the way to go AS LONG AS everyone pays attention and participates in politics. Otherwise you get people like Rudolph or Trunicht. In other words: 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 06:55
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:I thought the show spelled out that a constitutional monarchy was the way to go? It's like the best of both worlds until someone ambitious inevitably gets enough power to tip everything over again No, that really wasn't the lesson at all. The show was never about appraising political systems.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 08:30
|
|
|
It wasn't but when a modern democracy can't even make the Like you get shots of Heinessen, and it's skyscrapers, industry, traffic lights, cars. You get shots of Odin, and it's all ball dances and pastoral hills and happy smiling peasant farmers dutifully tending fields for their lord.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
Happy smiling peasant farmers who gently caress off to Heinessen as soon as someone's dumb enough to give them a chance to board a non-military spaceship.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 09:04
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:It wasn't but when a modern democracy can't even make the Once upon a time, the democracy was innovative and filled with talented, motivated people, who probably rode well-maintained space trains. It's not about the system, it's about people, and people change the societies they live in. And please, the Empire obviously wasn't growing thousands and thousands of city-sized spaceships on apple trees. The scenes we are shown of Odin and Heinessen are meant to contrast with each other, I think we all assumed there were big cities and factories somewhere else on the planet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 10:03
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:No, that really wasn't the lesson at all. The show was never about appraising political systems. It kind of was, in the sense that all of them are bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 12:45
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:No, that really wasn't the lesson at all. The show was never about appraising political systems. What? The show literally has its characters discuss various political systems of government. (Ending spoilers) Given that is how humanity eventually end up, I'd say it's a fair compromise. Under a constitutional monarchy, you have the chance for a once in a lifetime genius like Reinhardt to shine while the constitution and a set of checks and balances, such as a democratically elected Parliament, counteract the excesses of Reinhardt's descendants. Full disclosure, I grew up in a constitutional monarchy so it's probably just my flavour of water 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 12:51
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:What? The show literally has its characters discuss various political systems of government. There's more than one model of a constitutional monarchy, and there's staggering differences between them. Some monarchs are explicitly barred from influencing policy, some lead policy. Some can only veto parliamentary decisions and do so occasionally, while others risk igniting a political crisis if they exercised that right. So I think you're missing some nuance? We don't know anything about the details of the constitutional reforms. Like, the series doesn't end with the constitution. Instead it's that devastating last scene with Mittermeyer and Felix. That alone should clue you in that it's not trying to say that Yang and Reinhard solved history in ~5 years . SHISHKABOB posted:It kind of was, in the sense that all of them are bad. Sure, but humanity's never going to escape them. In every time, and every place, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
Superstring posted:Democracy is the way to go AS LONG AS everyone pays attention and participates in politics. Otherwise you get people like Rudolph or Trunicht. In other words: I mean, this is maybe a bad example because Rudolph, while a democratic leader, was apparently really excellent. The people wanted him to take over and start his dictatorship after his term ended. It wasn't until some time later that he became corrupt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
Sarcophallus posted:I mean, this is maybe a bad example because Rudolph, while a democratic leader, was apparently really excellent. I mean, willingly handing power over to a dictator is the definition of not wanting to participate in politics, so the point still stands. e: Kegslayer posted:once in a lifetime genius Pardon me for getting ideological for a bit, but there is no such thing as a one-in-a-lifetime genius in reality, and this is where our analysis of real-life politics and LoGH politics must diverge by necessity. my dad fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Mar 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:What? The show literally has its characters discuss various political systems of government. In that case, how is your once-in-a-lifetime genius supposed to legally usurp the previous incompetent king? There is a fundamental contradiction here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
SHISHKABOB posted:Yeah yo uknow, like uh, quantum entanglement... and, yeah. At least they establish something like that early on, in the show (end of show chat) his brainwave-based deadman switch is kind of out of nowhere, I felt it was one of the more blatantly sci-fi aspects of an otherwise relatively realistic story.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:There's more than one model of a constitutional monarchy, and there's staggering differences between them. Some monarchs are explicitly barred from influencing policy, some lead policy. Some can only veto parliamentary decisions and do so occasionally, while others risk igniting a political crisis if they exercised that right. The last scene is more about humanity never changing but that doesn't mean the show didn't dedicate a fair amount of time appraising the various forms of government. I didn't see the last scene to suggest that history was solved, just that it's a process and humanity will inevitably change rulers and systems of government and for that you had Yang and Reinhardt presenting the virtues of the worst democracy and the best benevolent dictatorship respectively. I don't think the details of the constitution itself are that important. Just that a system of government, where you can have a undemocratically elected ruler with limited powers is a better alternative/compromise to a democracy or dictatorship. It's been years since I saw the show but doesn't Julian push for a constitution and a parliament, Reinhardt says no but then relents on his death bed? I took that as the show saying that a constitutional monarchy was the only solution left given that it was something that Yang/Julian and Reinhardt eventually agreed upon. my dad posted:Pardon me for getting ideological for a bit, but there is no such thing as a one-in-a-lifetime genius in reality, and this is where our analysis of real-life politics and LoGH politics must diverge by necessity. I'm not sure how else to better describe it but I'm talking about people like Turkey's Atatürk, Singapore's LKY or the Czech Republic's Havel? There are individuals in every generation who, through whatever means, do end up shaping the future for a large part of humanity. Phobophilia posted:In that case, how is your once-in-a-lifetime genius supposed to legally usurp the previous incompetent king? There is a fundamental contradiction here. Have/force the king to abdicate?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:Have/force the king to abdicate? No *has Kegslayer publicly executed*
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:The last scene is more about humanity never changing but that doesn't mean the show didn't dedicate a fair amount of time appraising the various forms of government. I didn't see the last scene to suggest that history was solved, just that it's a process and humanity will inevitably change rulers and systems of government and for that you had Yang and Reinhardt presenting the virtues of the worst democracy and the best benevolent dictatorship respectively. Ahh, the Imperial German model. Never went wrong. quote:It's been years since I saw the show but doesn't Julian push for a constitution and a parliament, Reinhardt says no but then relents on his death bed? I took that as the show saying that a constitutional monarchy was the only solution left given that it was something that Yang/Julian and Reinhardt eventually agreed upon. It was the only thing that Julian could convince Reinhardt to agree to. I don't see why you would take that as proof that a constitutional monarchy is humanity's final form of government. Reinhardt was never perfect, and Julian could never equal Yang. quote:I'm not sure how else to better describe it but I'm talking about people like Turkey's Atatürk, Singapore's LKY or the Czech Republic's Havel? There are individuals in every generation who, through whatever means, do end up shaping the future for a large part of humanity. That's the "great man" theory of history, which is pretty discredited now. At the most basic level, famous historical figures are supported by tens of thousands of other competent people that support them in some way. The "great men" aren't calling those people up from the ether, they rely on the society that existed before them. "Great men" too, are guided by their own societies in their goals and how they achieve them. Big, sweeping changes in society rely on the society wanting to change. Both Yang and Reinhardt say it themselves at some point . quote:Have/force the king to abdicate? This is a pretty absurd expectation to have of a stable political system. To get back to the point, the show doesn't appraise democracy or autocracy as "good" or "bad" on their own. The Republic was fine when it was founded, the Empire was a shitshow before Reinhardt took power. Slim Jim Pickens fucked around with this message at 09:32 on Mar 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
The story asserts that an inept democracy is preferable to an ideal dictatorship despite the difference in quality of governance, in my view. You should fix those spoiler tags.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Yang et al claim that, but i think its a mistake to conflate yangs views with the works overall message.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
DamnGlitch posted:Yang et al claim that, but i think its a mistake to conflate yangs views with the works overall message. are you saying that alcohol isn't humanity's friend?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
Raku posted:are you saying that alcohol isn't humanity's friend? I'm pretty sure that fits in with the work's overall message.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
The show presents both democracy and dictatorship but I think it does have a preference for democracy as the better choice. As for the ending. It's not really about whether Julian is as good as Yang(he is) or the faults of Reinhardt but what they represent. In a 100+ battle between a democracy and a dictatorship, it's the dictatorship, that Reinhardt embodies, that wins. The ideals of democracy only exists due to Reinhardt's benevolence and Julian's persistence. From a narrative perspective, the fact that these two people put aside their beliefs and seek a constitutional monarchy, something that is never mentioned except in the last episode, suggests that that is the answer to the Democracy v Dictatorship question. At the very least, it's the next part of the question. I don't think the actual details of the government are important. If it comes down to whether one unelected person makes all of the decisions or whether the everyone should, the show ends espousing a system where you have one unelected person making some of the decisions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 07:01
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:I don't think the actual details of the government are important. If it comes down to whether one unelected person makes all of the decisions or whether the everyone should, the show ends espousing a system where you have one unelected person making some of the decisions. If you're talking about the show, I disagree, mostly because I always had the impression that Yang serves as the author's other mouthpiece, and Yang clearly disagrees, but I can see where you're coming from. If you're talking about real life: HEEEEEELL NO. my dad fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Mar 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
To me, the show seems like it has several perspectives. Yang is the show's superego: it is what he rationally considers to be morally correct. The Empire is the show's id, with all its pomp and grandiosity and homoeroticism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Also, why the hell did I keep that in spoilers, it doesn't have any relevance to the details of the plot. Ugh. Fixed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:The show presents both democracy and dictatorship but I think it does have a preference for democracy as the better choice. There's no winning or losing in the story that LoGH is trying to tell. Who won and who lost the ancient Earth and colony battles, or the other various wars and conflicts that took place in the thousands of years before the events of the show?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 03:40
|
|
|
holy poo poo this book is homoerotic
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 09:06
|
|
|
We have the next episode of the podcast, finally. It covers eps 17-20. Here are the links. Audio Version YouTube Version Next week is the penultimate episode. It will cover 21-24. mikeycp fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Mar 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:holy poo poo this book is homoerotic No joke. If I were running a bookstore I wouldn't know whether to file it under Science Fiction or Gay Interest. The book grows on you after a while. I thoroughly liked it by the end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
Does anyone know if there are plans to bring the Tytania novels here?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Traveller posted:Does anyone know if there are plans to bring the Tytania novels here? None so far, but I would honestly be incredibly surprised if they were even remotely thinking about that. Not only are those books unfinished, the Tytania anime was forgettable at best even in the eyes of most LoGH fans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
To the podcasters: one reason you might already like Reuenthal is because he's voiced by the great Norio Wakamoto, who is basically ADTRW's patron saint.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
mikeycp posted:We have the next episode of the podcast, finally. It covers eps 17-20. Here are the links.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2016 12:45
|
|
|
Found a bit of a plot hole. In the first season when the Alliance-occupied Imperial worlds have food riots due to the Alliance fleet plundering them, why does Yang's fleet not have any rioting issues? Genius as he is, he lacks a magic jar from which gushes forth food, water, and spare parts. I guess the only option is that Yang didn't take supplies back from the Imperial planets, leaving his soldiers hungry... but Yang's fleet never shows any additional supply issues over other Alliance fleets in the battles against Lutz and Kircheis' fleets, and at Amlitzer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
KlavoHunter posted:Found a bit of a plot hole. In the first season when the Alliance-occupied Imperial worlds have food riots due to the Alliance fleet plundering them, why does Yang's fleet not have any rioting issues? Genius as he is, he lacks a magic jar from which gushes forth food, water, and spare parts. Yang anticipated the entire scenario, so of course he would have issued orders to be stockpiling rations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Yup. Presumably thats why the show took the rare look away from the central characters to a one off story about an unprepared fleet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
There's that - but additionally I don't believe every fleet was landing on imperial planets and "liberating" them. Many would have been maintaining their space presence.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:To the podcasters: one reason you might already like Reuenthal is because he's voiced by the great Norio Wakamoto, who is basically ADTRW's patron saint. I do not know who this man is, so that means nothing to me. I like him just because he seems like a serious guy so far. Nate RFB posted:To be blunt you guys are getting kind of insufferable whenever you talk about Yang. It's like watching someone watching The Wire for the first time and they wind up saying "That Stringer Bell, since he's always winning he must be the good guy!" British idiot here, just thought I'd chip in and interact. I like Yang, but I do not think he is the Good Guy. My view is that this show does not have a good guy, it has protagonists. I try to argue it every now and then, but end up giving up. Nobody in this show is really good. They still run a career based off of killing many hundred of thousands, or millions of men, either on the enemy side or on their own via what I see happening but which is not commented on, acceptable losses (we have so many men, we can't lose sorta poo poo, where their plan involves a human wave a la WW1 Russia). Even Yang, who of all seems to be the most conservative with his own base of men, protecting their lives over winning at all costs, is not clean of being in the business of legitimised violence as an arm of the state. His actions are not good, as he is actively murdering many thousands to see the ends of his (or those of others) goals, and he is not bad because he is not doing it illegitimately (some old Weberian state monopoly on use of violence thinking) nor is he doing it out of some unjust cause (or at least, the cause of the war is not his so that responsibility does not necessarily lie with him). From a moral sense, Yang is not a particularly good guy, but he is just in his actions. Anyway, that is just my read. Another Person fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Mar 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
Another Person posted:I do not know who this man is, so that means nothing to me. I like him just because he seems like a serious guy so far. He means that Reunthal being voiced by a god-tier actor goes a long way towards making you enjoy the character
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:19
|
|
