129
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 13 Mar 2024
129 points (99.2% liked)
chapotraphouse
13538 readers
789 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It's a shame the premise is basically just accepting ecofash assumptions in order to be provocative, but the style and acting is great.
I do not recall any real moment that the premise of the villains is challenged though, the challenge is "you cant be ecofash for moral reasons" and the head ecofash is constantly portrayed as a uniquely troubled genius.
Is there a potential future where a third season would reveal it to be all bullshit? Sure, but then it becomes bad television instead, since the ecofash narrative is one of the things that was innovative and challenging about it.
From what I remember, the ecofash are the villains. The villians has some ecofascist beliefs and are motivated by those beliefs, but I don't think that the show itself accepts ecofascism. To me it was pretty clear that the show was saying ecofascism is bad.
It does say that but at the same time as it accepts the core premises and "question" of ecofascism, but it attempts to suggest a different answer for moral reasons.
Like if there was a show about IQ or something and the message was that you shouldnt oppress people for having lower IQ collectively.
There are some parts that are legitimate issues to be concerned with, but the show places a huge emphasis on overpopulation specifically and not very much focus by comparison on matters such as resource allocation, economic systems, shit like that.
So you get a cabal of rich capitalists that get to essentially unchallenged* present the issue as one of all of humanity at once, and not one that they are directly and constantly perpetrators of. As with the other comment, is there a world where season 3 would critique this? Maybe, but that doesnt seem likely given that the provocative nature of the show is the supposed moral dilemma of population culling vs humanity facing extinction.
*Unchallenged in that the claims they present are not challenged on a factual basis, nor are the protagonists able to present any opposition in terms of what can be done about the issues but only on matters of morality, and the only protagonist who even has proper knowledge of the same issues is entirely convinced of the antagonists worldview and plan, while those that continue opposing the antagonists legitimately do not have knowledge of the issues.