D&D General Dark Sun as a Hopepunk Setting

[Steampunkette]

It's also satire an no one's forcing you to watch it.

Blazing Saddles is also satire. Yes satire can be offensive.

The joke of Blazing Saddles is "Racists are fools". The characters, who are fools, say racist stuff and are entirely wrong. That's the satire.

The joke of Idiocracy is "Stupid people have stupid kids". That's just eugenics. It's "Satirical" of nothing.

It's a comedy. And the joke is Eugenics. It's not a satire.

 

[Charlaquin]

It's also satire an no one's forcing you to watch it.

Blazing Saddles is also satire. Yes satire can be offensive.

The problem with Idiocracy isn’t that it’s offensive. It’s that its message is misguided at best. Its central thesis is “society is bad because stupid people have more kids than smart people do,” and the way it portrays stupidity vs intelligence is deeply tied to class stereotypes. Poor people dumb, rich people smart. Just because it’s satyrical doesn’t mean that isn’t fundamentally what it’s saying.

 

[Charlaquin]

There’s a difference between satire of eugenics and eugenicist satire. Idiocracy falls into the latter category. For an example of the former category, look at something like Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

 

[Zardnaar]

The problem with Idiocracy isn’t that it’s offensive. It’s that its message is misguided at best. Its central thesis is “society is bad because stupid people have more kids than smart people do,” and the way it portrays stupidity vs intelligence is deeply tied to class stereotypes. Poor people dumb, rich people smart. Just because it’s satyrical doesn’t mean that isn’t fundamentally what it’s saying.

I think the premise is flawed. In any event I don't think the movies a big problem.

And in any event it's not illegal or actively harmful and it's within the bounds if acceptable behavior morally and legally. Society has also agreed on age restrictions for movies.

It's basic premise is flawed as I said. If you want a RL comparison go look at population pyramids of the OECD.

NZ and USA are at the top it's all downhill from there.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think the premise is flawed. In any event I don't think the movies a big problem.

And in any event it's not illegal or actively harmful and it's within the bounds if acceptable behavior morally and legally. Society has also agreed on age restrictions for movies.

Has anyone claimed it’s a big problem or should be illegal or otherwise unacceptable? I just think it’s not a very good movie, certainly not something I would imply had any actual predictive power by calling it “a documentary.”

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think the premise is flawed. In any event I don't think the movies a big problem.

And in any event it's not illegal or actively harmful and it's within the bounds if acceptable behavior morally and legally. Society has also agreed on age restrictions for movies.

It's basic premise is flawed as I said. If you want a RL comparison go look at population pyramids of the OECD.

NZ and USA are at the top it's all downhill from there.

This is part of my issue with how media criticism is done. No one saw idiocracy and thought eugenics was a good idea. The creator has said that wasn't the point. Yes, I can see why people are drawing those connections (they aren't pulling it out of the sky). But it just doesn't seem like the actual aim of the film is to promote eugenics or promote classism. And that is a case where the media criticism is at least grounded in something solid (they are at least pulling it from the initial premise, where it stumbles into that stuff). But a lot of media criticism feels kind of like we have a priest class deciding what movies are okay and what aren't based on a highly academic lens of wholesomeness

 

[Zardnaar]

Has anyone claimed it’s a big problem or should be illegal or otherwise unacceptable? I just think it’s not a very good movie, certainly not something I would imply had any actual predictive power by calling it “a documentary.”

It's just been getting referenced a lot lately. I think it's main point is brilliant it's set up/premise is flawed.

There's some hard decisions various countries will have to make and I think some of them are in a catch 22 situation was more the main point.

Our countries have options others don't.

 

[Gradine]

Look, I love dunking on Idiocracy as much as the next eugenics-hater, but we're getting a bit off track here.

 

[Bedrockgames]

The problem with Idiocracy isn’t that it’s offensive. It’s that its message is misguided at best. Its central thesis is “society is bad because stupid people have more kids than smart people do,” and the way it portrays stupidity vs intelligence is deeply tied to class stereotypes. Poor people dumb, rich people smart. Just because it’s satyrical doesn’t mean that isn’t fundamentally what it’s saying.

I thought the movie was funny. I don't think satires like it solve any actual problems in society, but I think the main thing it was making fun of was the culture of the mid-2000s (our obsession with celebrities, our pop culture, our politicians, etc). I agree that in the premise of it, there is some stereotyping, and the veers into eugenics (I think that last bit is quite unintentional though). But I don't think the point of the movie is it thinks lower class people are stupid though. They were making fun of things like dudebro culture, the rise of UFC, the way music was emphasizing material wealth, etc

 

[Bedrockgames]

It's just been getting referenced a lot lately. I think it's main point is brilliant it's set up/premise is flawed.

Yeah, it is the go to reference when people feel like 'times are currently pretty stupid'