[DreadBringer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mesnick

Also, since the Cold War, two approaches to such propaganda have emerged. Communist in the form of praising one's own current and future successes. And capitalist, focused on the negative portrayal of one's ideological opponents. The latter turned out to be more successful because it is easier to believe that others are terrible than to believe that everything is fine with us when reality convinces us otherwise. But this does not change the fact that this is also a lie or, at least, an exaggeration.

"History is written by the winners". Yeah, this is also something you need to understand, as someone who thinks a bad reputation for heroes is "deserved". Reputation and politics are also something that can be weaponized by bad guys, not just raw power or weapons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mesnick

And here comes a similar portrayal of extremists in popular culture. For no matter the motive, the radical always threatens the status quo. But, if you try to approach the issue with a cool head, it turns out that without extremists, humanity would not have progressed further than the invention of fire. Any progress (or, more correctly, change, because it is also wrong to deny negative consequences) in history, science and art happened thanks to the extremists of their time. And the fact that the current situation is clearly better than the Stone Age proves that in most cases their contribution is still positive.

There can be some positive outcomes coming out from horrific situations (from anything, really), but doesn't mean that it's the only way to reach that progression or it should be encouraged/normalized to 'reach progress', like allowing people to open fire towards civilians in hopes to 'reach progress'. And that if someone involved in a progression happened to have done terrible things, doesn't mean that said terrible things need to be emulated, particularly if unrelated to said progression. Don't blindly emulate everything in something that produces something good. Like convenience, harmless things (such as wanting to take less time to reach something) can be a drive to want progression too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mesnick

Returning from the general to the specific, Kota is essentially also an extremist, because:
a) His approach involves a risk in which no one would survive;
b) Because of his actions (not only, but also) those who most likely would have survived Takatora's plan, like Ryoma, died.

While one failing would possibly have no one surviving, I don't understand the thinking that the extremist's plan will always guarantee better results or fulfill their or the fanbase's expectations. If Takatora actually gave a billion Driver to a billion humans and exterminated the rest to prevent them becoming Inves, what's the guarantee of the surviving billion to live normally or prosper? Like them failing to adjust to the world's changes (reminder Helheim would still took over), turning into warring species until last man standing (like Roshuo's case in Femushinmu), or still getting blindsided/foiled by other worse villains' plans.