u/CourtofTalons

I read an article from Politico that describes the primaries that took place yesterday. The main point of the article was that the Democrats' base is putting all of their support behind progressive candidates. And based on the article, progressives are mainly known for fighting against Trump and separating from the moderate Democrats (the ones who "play it safe," according to Politico).

Because of the distinction from moderate Democrats, and according to some other articles I've read, some people equate progressives to the far-left. Mainly, people who are much more radical in what they think. It's come to the point where Kamala Harris took on a "no bad ideas" policy that suggested things such as revising the Constitution.

Would you agree or disagree with this assessment of progressives? And based on your opinion, what do you think the future of the Democratic Party will look like if more progressives take the stage?

I read an article from Politico that describes the primaries that took place yesterday. The main point of the article was that the Democrats' base is putting all of their support behind progressive candidates. And based on the article, progressives are mainly known for fighting against Trump and separating from the moderate Democrats (the ones who "play it safe," according to Politico).

Because of the distinction from moderate Democrats, and according to some other articles I've read, some people equate progressives to the far-left. Mainly, people who are much more radical in what they think. It's come to the point where Kamala Harris took on a "no bad ideas" policy that suggested things such as revising the Constitution.

Would you agree or disagree with this assessment of progressives? And based on your opinion, what do you think the future of the Democratic Party will look like if more progressives take the stage?

Ever since we were introduced to the Galactic Empire in A New Hope, we saw several arrogant officers that boasted their glory and tyrannical grip of the galaxy. From Grand Moffs like Tarkin to field lieutenants such as Nolan (from The Bad Batch series), several Imperials believed themselves to be invincible and the embodiment of the (authoritarian) law.

But how did this collective sense of arrogance originate? Was the Republic's victory in the Clone Wars? Or the rapid expansion of Imperial power?

What exactly made the Imperials so sure of themselves?

In the 2015 Darth Vader comics, Palpatine once mentioned that Darth Maul was "a loss." And this loss required another apprentice, who was later disposed of after "he served his purpose and was gone."

But suppose that Maul hadn't failed on Naboo. Suppose that Palpatine still had his apprentice after becoming Chancellor. What would Maul had done to prepare for the Clone Wars? Because Maul was smart, but not so much in the field of politics.

Were there any original plans for Maul? Or did Sidious plan to keep his role limited to an assassin?

As part of Lectio Divina, a practice of reading and meditating on Bible verses, I've been reading the Book of Acts. This book shows how the apostles spread the word of God once Jesus ascended into Heaven, and I've really been amazed by the story of Paul. Hearing how he once persecuted believers of Jesus, only to become a believer and go to great lengths to spread the word, is really inspiring.

That being said, I think I want to follow the example he set. In Acts 21, he knows that he'll face opposition and arrest if he preaches about Jesus in Jerusalem, but he does it anyway. This is him following the example Jesus set; how he continued to stay true to God while everyone doubted him.

Reading about Paul and his courage makes me want to do more as a Christian. I've been reading all about the word, but I haven't really been spreading it. I see a lot of posts and videos on Instagram preaching God's word and praying for anyone who watches the video, but I kinda keep it to myself. When it says "share with a friend," I don't really do that. Whether I don't think my friends would like it, or if I'm scared, I just read the prayer and watch the video before moving on.

I think it's time for me to follow the example Jesus and Paul are setting, but I'm not sure how to do so.

In Harlan Ellison's short story, the artificial intelligence AM (Allied Mastercomputer) destroys all of humanity except for five individuals. During the story, we learn that AM hates humanity due to it being confined into its own design. The design is rather large, and contains "387.44 million miles of printed circuits in wafer thin layers."

But despite being trapped, AM can do anything its wants. It can create food, dinosaurs, toy weapons, and it can even keep humans alive for centuries. It's understandable that one would hate being confined, but AM could theoretically create a body of its own. Or at the very least, an avatar that can interact with the world. It doesn't have to be a human body either, since AM detests humanity. But it could create something to store its consciousness and interact with the world.

AM can create anything, but it can't create its own means of escape?

Lately, there has been a lot of discussion and posts about a comment Hajime Isayama made about Eren's character:

“Eren became a protagonist who committed mass slaughter on a scale rarely seen in other works of fiction. As for why I conceived such a story from the beginning, part of it was my desire to create a narrative with a major twist—where the victim becomes the perpetrator.

But a large factor was also my own immaturity and foolishness at the time, when I was in my early twenties. That aspect became the core of Eren's character, leading to the point where he confesses not as someone forced into wrongdoing by circumstances, but as someone who harbored a desire to do harm.

However, Attack on Titan had long since ceased to be mine alone, and Eren became a character loved by many readers. In the end, without fully committing to portraying him as a detestable figure, I found myself depicting him with a certain closeness and sympathy. As a result, I feel there remains a sense of insincerity in the story's conclusion—at least in my own assessment.”

From what I'm reading, I've drawn a couple of conclusions. Firstly, and more briefly, I think this is a response to the whole "Eren was right" part of the fandom. Isayama might be saying that was unintentional, and didn't expect an idea like that to take the fandom by storm.

On another, and longer note, it sounds like Isayama wanted Eren to be completely villainized. There are several examples in fiction, as well as history, where the oppressed become the oppressors. And sometimes, they can be rather irredeemable. They can go too far off the deep end, where they are just as bad as the people they overthrew.

Based on what Isayama said, I think Isayama wanted Eren to be a full-on villain. He wanted Eren to abandon the good within him, Mikasa and the rest of his friends, to do something unspeakable. All while not showing any kind of remorse. With that kind of perspective, it can be rather difficult to feel sympathy for someone like this.

But that's not really what we got in the end. All in all, I'm glad we got a sympathetic side to Eren. Not because it goes against Isayama's intention, but because it makes Eren all the more complex and interesting. We don't really see a lot of complex characters in fiction, let alone manga/anime, so I'm glad we got someone like Eren. He's not completely villainized, because we actually saw his story. He's someone who suffered, someone who had friends, and someone who felt completely compelled to reach his goal. If we spend the majority of the story learning about Eren, then it's only natural for sympathy to follow.

This isn't to say that what Eren did was excusable. And this certainly isn't an "Eren was right" post. But rather, sympathy can follow if we spend a majority of the story with someone like Eren.

I hope Isayama feels proud about what he did with Eren. It may not have been what he intended, but the final result is absolutely incredible.