this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
59 points (98.4% liked)

Comic Strips

12953 readers
2060 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LibreHans@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago (2 children)

What do you mean? Communists didn't mine minerals and didn't exploit indigenous people? Lol..

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 0 points 4 days ago (12 children)

That's right. For example, Australian communists lived in balance with nature for 60,000 years. Then capitalists came and started breaking stuff.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] AVengefulAxolotl@lemmy.world -1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I dont get it either. This is not about capitalism, this is about human nature of mindless expansion and exploitation...

[–] MBM@lemmings.world 0 points 4 days ago

The word you're looking for is imperialism, and that's definitely not unavoidable human nature

[–] optissima@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 days ago

"It's human nature," okay bud and what about all the groups in history that prove otherwise? You're just washing history with capitalist mindsets.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

So... We manage to master space travel. We manage to master interstellar travel. We eventually find a planet with suitable environment for sustaining our species. And we just overlook it.

Can someone explain me the reasoning behind this?

Sci-fi to the side, there are more minerals available - readily - on asteroids and barren planets than anywhere else. Why go hopping around looking for habitable planets, to the reason of 1 out of who knows how many, to then strip mine it?

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The resource being extracted on the avatar planet was unobtanium.

It was only available on that planet, precisely so intelligent people like you can’t say “why not mine barren rocks instead”?

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

This annoyed me also.

If the Avatar universe has physics like ours, which it looks like it does from the way things move etc..

The protoplanetry disk that the planet formed from, must have had the unobtanium, since it is so evenly spread around the later formed planet.

Yes, there are higher concentrations in various places, which could have come from impact events in the past; if this is the case the impactors are likely from the local asteroid belt or equivalent.

The unobtanium must be available, in a much easier to extract form, in asteroids in the soloar system or the moons of Pandora.

Either way, a mineral is a terrible maguffin for a space faring civilization.

In the second movie, the whale brain juice is a much better maguffin, but still kinda stupid for a technologically advanced species.

Assume that to get interstellar travel, with the suspended animation and brain beaming tech we are shown, humans are a good 200 years ahead of where we are now....given that they can also make fully functional alien bodies from scratch, that can breed and pass on genetic material to what look like viable offspring. The level of synthetic biology expertise must be insane, and they can't make this brain juice....it is just stupid.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 0 points 4 days ago (3 children)

There are exactly zero minerals available inside planets that are unavailable on asteroids.

Sci-fi will be sci-fi but can we go back to the time it was at least well thought? Can't hurt. If the objective of the movie was to make social criticism, it didn't need to go to such lenghts.

And it was a boring movie; failed to captivate me.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You're intelligent. Or at least, well read/educated.

I didn't say it was a good plot-device. The entire movie was hamfisted from the world building through the dialog, the character development, and those hamfists evolved into bulldozers to bring the moral home.

The only thing it had going for it was the CGI... which was obsequious.

Regardless, it's their fictional world. They designed it to be stupid and boring so they could make some sort of moral superiority bullshit statement about capitalism while grossing 2+ billion.

Also, I'm just gonna say it. It wasn't even sci fi. sure, sure. it had ships and stuff. but that's not what makes sci fi sci fi.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Aliens, Mech suits and remotely controlled vat-grown body doubles aren't enough to make it sci Fi?

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Nope.

Science fiction is an exploration of how science or technology changes society, or how society might respond to stuff, or how a society with a given tech might exist; it’s a form of speculative fiction.

Avatar isn’t that. It’s supposed to be an indictment of capitalist greed.

Just because it has technology doesn’t make it “sci-fi” and the elements that might are just a maghuffin to explain what they’re doing there. It could have just as easily been gold. Or diamonds or alien art.

Take Marry Shelly’s Frankenstein and compare it to say, avengers.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Sorry, no. Genre doesn't require a specific theme. This is some literature vs pulp gatekeeping.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

There are exactly zero minerals available inside planets that are unavailable on asteroids.

Crystallised urea

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Nice to cross paths with you again!

I'll grant that but what use for crystalized urea is there? Urea I know a few. And if we already know how to cultivate diamonds and other artificial gems, why bother mining for that?

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Drag was making an allegorical point. Perhaps Unobtanium results from an organic process. In the second movie, the capitalists are killing whales for a substance in their brains that makes people immortal. Can't find that on an asteroid.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

We can save mental effort and just go for the Dune series at this point. What is the point in that? In considering the advances in modern chemistry, there are ever few organic compounds that can not be synthesized.

I fall back to my original thought: is well thought sci-fi so hard to achieve nowadays? If seems there is a fixation about misery and destruction nowadays.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Avatar does have some good science fiction like the idea of a planetary hivemind being worshipped as a god. The Na'vi religion is literally true, it just seems false to humans who don't know anything. That's very different to Dune, where the Fremen religion is true because people like Paul's mum make it true.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'll grant that waffer thin idea as a good attempt of putting something akin to good sci-fi into an otherwise solely for visuals work, although I disagree with the notion of deifying something that is tangible, as in the setting put forward in the movie.

And I mentioned Dune because of the immortality mention. The spice is also irreplaceable and unique, produced only in a single planet, through a rather complex organic process, harvested at great risk and cost, then to be synthesized by the tons.

That was good sci-fi, with sound social and religious criticism in it.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -1 points 4 days ago

If you'll allow drag to play devil's advocate, Eywa isn't tangible. Ewya is a mind, and minds are made of electrical signal patterns. You can't touch electricity. And you definitely can't touch a pattern of information, which is essentially made out of maths. That's what a mind is, a bunch of incredibly complex maths.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago (5 children)

Does this imply communism wouldn't extract resources?

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›