Addendum to culture war, part 1

What will happen when I die?
(Nothing -> loss of existence -> existentialism)

The other components are left as an exercise for the reader.

This has to be an exercise in intuition because these components aren’t logically defined here. Here are my answers to this exercise.


What will happen when I die? “Nothing” -> loss of existence -> existentialism

Existentialism is pretty well defined so I won’t comment further.


What’s the meaning of life? “Nothing” -> loss of essence -> edenism

Here I’m using lowercase-‘e’ edenism to refer to a deep pessimism toward increasing abstraction. This manifests in the compulsion to lead a more “meaningful” life, which tends to be simpler and cut out all details that are not understood or purposeful.

In contrast, the civilizing instinct could be regarded as an optimism about increasing abstraction and multiplying details.


How should I conduct myself? “Doesn’t matter” -> loss of conscience -> solipsism

I believe the shit-tier SJWs are the best possible example of this phenomenon, particularly because we can trace their solipsism back to their amygdala-deadening degeneracy (sexual, drugs, doublethink, and otherwise). Though Vox traces the intellectual foundations of their totalitarian religion back to John Stuart Mill, it’s pretty clear that SJWs do not pursue social justice convergence in response to broad reading and clear thinking. Rather, their crusade is (to them) pure, unadulterated expression of instinct. This can be seen from their entire unconcern with the results of their actions, except insofar as these results affect their ability to engage in continued emotional expression.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. ”

C. S. Lewis
God in the Dock


Am I loved? “No” -> loss of beneficence -> pragmatism

This is what psychopathy is.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Addendum to culture war, part 1

  1. Koanic says:


  2. iceini says:

    how can u think FMA is better than FMAB its just insanity is what it is!

  3. Kingboss says:

    FMAB is the original story. Personally, I think FMA was a bit too cliched in most spots where it was reworked. Too many obvious tropes; good example being the second episode with the cell scene and the dumb bird-man hybrid part. FMA had a plot being like sticky glue with no real end, whereas FMAB is much more direct and detailed as a result of being the same as its manga. To me, it seemed like the rewriting for FMA was intended to be as different as possible without really fixing any of the logical errors.
    The ending in FMA was the absolute worst. Nothing there, and a sketchy movie with illogical plot devices. The part with Hohenheim’s dying was so forcibly added-on that I could not buy it. Even more forced and less believable is the alternate universe being THIS one of all choices during WW2. FMAB had an actual ending and one that was without plot dragging of pseudo-sadness and to-and-fro non-tear jerking boredom that ran rampant in FMA.
    Also, the first opening in FMA sucked.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      I agree with all of the criticism of the writing. But the fight scenes in FMAB are terrible, the animation is overwrought, and the schmaltz is dialed up beyond my tolerance level. Also the pacing is no bueno. Those are the things that turned me off on it.

  4. Boneflour says:

    TL;DR – FMA was tighter, and did better at telling the core story.
    FMAB had too much weeaboo shit, too many characters, too much clutter… and not enough time to spend on its plot. (The Youswell episode, THE BEST EPISODE, was just a short reference in FMAB)

    P.S. May Chang was garbage. Pandas suck.

    Fullmetal Alchemist was about love and loss, choices and consequences. Realizing that some things can’t be undone, and that all things must end. How each character chose to face these themes are what drove the plot. FMA was About Something, and it changed entire characters and plot lines to better focus on the Something that it was About.

    Almost every character in the original FMA revolved around this theme. Ed and Al trying to get their mother back. Izumi trying to get her son back. The Homunculi’s jealous yearning for true humanity. Rose’s misplaced belief that the fake priest could bring her lover back. Yoki from Youswell grasping for his former position in the government. Winry’s loss of her parents to the war.

    Major and minor characters alike had to deal with the choices in their lives. What they sacrificed, what they lost, what they would do now:

    Marcoh commits an atrocity, realizes his horrible actions, and goes into hiding. He spends the anime in hiding, trying to heal others to offset his guilt for what he had done.

    Shou Tucker commits an atrocity, realizes his horrible actions, and sinks into denial and obsession, sacrificing more and more in an effort to get back what he lost.

    There are more examples, but those two characters were changed heavily from the manga, I’d argue specifically to develop those dramatic themes.

    So FMA was about love and loss, choice and consequences, and how the characters in the show handled those things.

    What was Brotherhood about? I agree with Aeoli that Brotherhood was about central banking and fiat currency:

    Such a premise is abstract and soulless. And while I wouldn’t call Brotherhood abstract or soulless, the narrative is worse off for it. Jaws had a giant shark and special effects, but the emotional core was a father’s love for his son.

    Brotherhood has some of this with Ed and Al, but there are so many characters, and so much plot to speed through, that it can’t quite generate the same emotional resonance that FMA did. There was just too much stuff. State Alchemists and The Ishvalan War was enough stuff for an anime. Adding in Alkahestry, Xerxes and Ancient Egypt stuff, East vs. West philosophies, all the added family members…

    Maybe it’s about two brothers trying to fix their mistakes. Maybe it’s about fiat currency. Maybe it’s about war or something. If something is about a lot of things, that just means it’s about nothing in particular.

    The FMA movie did kinda suck though. I respect what it did (bittersweet grown up ending instead of Hollywood ending), but meh.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      Better reasons than mine. You’re right, it’s harder to care about all those people and all their bizarre inner conflicts at once.

      Despite enjoying her kung fu scenes, I agree May Chang’s character was disgracefully bad. There’s also a strong whiff of pedophilia.

      • Boneflour says:

        May Chang is what I mean by weeaboo shit:

        The main strength of Anime is taking a theme or epic moment and putting it into ALLCAPS. Ed’s mistake literally cost him an arm and a leg. CONSEQUENCES.

        Many people, including some anime writers, think Anime is about giant robots, catgirls, boobie girls, kawaii, etc. etc. It’s not.

        Good Anime uses these tropes as tools for a specific purpose, in service of an emotional/thematic core. (see: Gurren Lagann)

        Bad Anime has some combination of glasses girl, shy girl, genki girl, loli girl, boob girl, big sword, giant robot, Super Ultra Final Form, Fake Historical Europe, Traditional Japan, etc. not because the story requires it, but because it’s on the Anime Checklist.

        This is why May Chang sucks. There’s no reason for Kawaii Loli Panda Girl Kunai-Chan to be in this story except that the writer wanted to stuff in more Cool Stuff into the story.

        It’s like stuffing a car chase shootout into Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Yes, explosions are cool. No, they don’t work in that story.

        • what says:

          Continuing my trend of replying to old content:
          You don’t know what anime is about. Not the entire concept, at least. It’s magnifications of otaku’s desires and degeneracies, it’s the raw expression of someone’s will written, drawn, and animated into things that can be sold. Otaku like cool things, they like being part of the story, they like cute things and they’re horny. To expand on the self-insert aspect as everything else is self-evident, the part about being part of the story, in some sense it can be as abstract as including oriental cultures or characters into stories just to flex and the retarded gaijin. In Rance the dumb brute, western main character was beaten by a culturally inspired Japanese man simply because the Jap knew how to deflect a sword’s momentum, and the brutish gaijin only knew how to use his barbaric strength to his advantage. The MC never fought someone so skillful! it’s positively ethnocentric. Another example, I’ve read an isekai once that included a segment about how intelligent quadrupedal animals are clearly inferior to the traditions and culture of the exalted Japanese because their paws are dirty. The animal was in a forest, it doesn’t build houses, it’s just a wolf. They’ll use every opportunity they can do try to establish themselves as dominant and superior, regardless if it makes sense or not.

          In an anime like Gosick, which centered around a Japanese man and a European girl and her near magical ability to solve crimes with the power of her deductive reasoning, the anime centered around cultural shifts (the shift between pre-WWI Europe into the Europe of WWI and WWII), specifically hammering in that true magic was purely based off of deception and lies, and that true magicians are those in power. The story is better if you understand the real life analogies that it tries to paint, both philosophical and historical, it’s not a story purely designed to expand on closed, personal, introverted feelings, it’s one meant to give a perspective on what were the forces that set the stage we play in now. Victorique represented old European, dialecitc styles of thinking and Kazuya Japanese traditions, but truthfully I’ve not figured out every reference both esoteric and exoteric the show throws out. I got give a full analysis.

          >emotional core was a father’s love for his son
          The emotional core is no one can capture history in his head, and must try to fill in whatever he can, or tell an incomplete and inferior version of the story. Which is, in itself, very Japanese.

          Even the opening portrays a very romantic, very Japanese, view of Europe. It’s not apologetic about it. It’s not a Christian perspective. The heart of it centers around a culture in pain over experiencing something that wishes to completely negate its existence.

          Even the opening means story of fate.

          I should probably rewatch both FMA and FMAB but I’m already stretching my time thin. I could cut a compromise and read the manga instead. I very most likely won’t.

  5. Extreme feminists want us dead, extreme vegans want us dead, extreme BLM activists want us dead, Russia’s unveiling new nukes…

    Why do I have to be surrounded by loons?

  6. Pingback: Sexual degeneracy and Overwatch Theory | Aeoli Pera

  7. Pingback: Culture war, part 1 | Aeoli Pera

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s