GarbageShoot

His whole fucking career as head honcho was just sabotaging the legacy of Stalin and doing revisionism. The good military moves were secondary.

CPUSA is controlled by feds and should not be joined, but let's not pretend aesthetic communism doesn't hold its capital in Russia (if someone says China istg), though simultaneously it is also more populated by real communists than many other states and this guy specifically seems pretty decent.

We've got like one prominent poster who is CPUSA and the rules unfortunately dictate being nice to them (I forget their preferred pronouns) for some reason, but don't mistake that for anyone else liking CPUSA. Most people here seem to dislike PCUSA and it's still distinctly more credible than its forebear.

Hey, this is the dude who said the farm collectivizing was good and Russia should have more collectivized farms, isn't he? Stalin that does not make him, but it's more substantially socialist than just worshiping mighty mustache man without appreciating the socialist parts at all.

Let's be fair here, dudes with Stalin and Nicholas II tattoos side-by-side are fair to seriously suspect of having an ideology that would boil down to NazBolism, since they are worshiping a guy falsely accused of doing anti-semitic pogroms and also a guy who actually did them.

Samsara is an elegant idea, turns out

Word problems in Utah:

Jesus died at age 33, there's thirty-three shots

From twin Glocks there's sixteen apiece, that's thirty-two

Which means, one of my guns was holdin' 17

Twenty-seven hit your crew, six went into you

Bram Stoker didn't invent vampires, and the creatures and mythology associated vastly pre-date the antisemitic culture surround his novels.

Don't bullshit me that you're talking about the Vrykolakas or whatever when you said "vampire". Beyond that, "vampires" represent a solved problem, even shitty books like Twilight deign to have the nuance to have vampires who refuse to harm people!

They're perfectly comparable. They are not ontologically malicious, but in the majority of their incarnations, they are completely divorced from human mortality or ways of thinking. Creatures that look like people, but do not think like us or share a remotely similar moral framework.

Then it's not comparable. The demons generally understand people pretty well and abuse that fact. There are mischievious "Fae" that tend to play tricks, but they are usually not evil, and certainly not justifying literal fucking genocide by saying that even an orphan begging for mercy is just another pest to be exterminated.

(Plenty of mythological fairies are ontologically evil on top of that).

Some are evil, but by the very nature of most of the folklore and the alien nature of the fairies, that they have been encountered as evil is not enough to establish that they are ontologically evil. We have no reason to believe that a Redcap, for instance, could not be reformed in just the same way as a sapient vampire could. Sometimes groups have a long history of being in violent conflict, that does not mean it could not be any other way and you usually do not find in folklore an insistance on such a conclusion (usually they stay more in the domain of pragmatic advice or the morality of a more immediate situation).

Even worse than a simple narrowness of thought, this need to make superficial tropes immovable pillars of the core of a creature's being is a manifestation of reaction, a measure literally only conceived of to oppose critical thought such as "What if we talked to the Redcap? What do they really think and feel?" because that'd be too pro-social to the fuckers in fantasy who just want everything to be a Crusader fantasy about cutting down hordes of subhumans.

Which incidentally might be connected to interesting fact that the more insidious a creature is portrayed as being, the more likely it is going to end up being a direct and deliberate racial allegory (see were-hyenas, for instance) rather than, well, a more deniable racial allegory.

The closest you can get in fairy folklore to the message in Frieren is with Changelings, which is incidentally reactionary as fuck and in some cases appears to be an articulation of the superstitious slaughtering of infants with birth defects and other abnormalities, such as an en caul birth.

Because the question is not "Is this person on the internet forbidding [something already written] from being written?" or "Have people written this before? Long enough ago that we can just call it culture with no further interrogation?" Socialism is the rutheless criticism of all that exists and the question is "Is this trope reactionary in nature?" To which the answer is "Yes!" and you have not done a thing to push the needle away from that conclusion.

Also he won't. It's more a condemnation of the Dems than anything to say "He could decriminalize a harmless and popular drug to gain overwhelming popularity in a race that he claims is of existential importance, but he fucking won't"

Not every fantasy enemy has to be morally nuanced

It's always the go-to refuge to take a conversation of "should" and change it to "can". The creator can do whatever they want, what I am saying is that they shouldn't.

and intractably evil groups aren't necessarily fascist or racist allegories.

Intractably evil races most definitely are racial and will always be perceived as such to racist societies like America and Japan.

Their world has an abundance of creatures that prey exclusively on humans, and a lot of them do so through mimicry.

I'm already rolling my eyes. Are you the sad apologist for reactionary treats? I thought it was someone else.

We've already played the game a thousand fucking times of "oh, but this species needs human blood" and Promised Neverland is a perfectly fine example of solving it even when it is posed in a very dire manner, though this fictional problem has also been solved in fiction for much longer without the answer being killing literal orphans begging for mercy. Fucking jackass.

The demons are predator animals that feed exclusively on people, with the ability to work together to some degree, and very rudimentary abilities to pretend to be human in pursuit of that main goal. Creatures like them are prominent parts of nearly every cultures mythology, and just like the Fae, or vampires or anything similar, they don't need moral agency to work as antagonists.

blah blah blaah it's just verbal diarhea because this conversation is old and you're just grasping at whatever you can.

Guess what? Vampires were based on bigoted views of Jews too! You actually aren't helping your case!

And "Fae" simply aren't comparable, they are intelligent life who can be interacted with and generally aren't ontologically malicious. You're 0 for 2 on examples of something in "nearly ever culture's mythology". Please, keep trying, and see if you can pick something that isn't The Poisonous Mushroom this time.

It makes no sense to consider anyone as born with any morality (let alone set with one), since morality isn't really part of the world as such. But the demons inexplicably have basically an ideology to kill humans stuck in their brain that can't be changed and that's reactionary as fuck to write, nothing good comes of it. They had a softball among softballs with the infant demon to demonstrate that it's like a cultural divide that devolved into racism, but nope, demon orphan killed the humans who raised her. The only way that it could possibly be redeemed is if later on this was shown to be some kind of elaborate trick by a party invested in keeping the conflict going.

It's got an extremely fascist attitude towards the demons. Like, arguably worse than Goblin Slayer. In the way that GS has "fantasy savages", Frieren basically has "fantasy Jews" who must be killed even when they are infants because they "only learn language so they can lie", etc.