posted on August 25, 2021 12:05 PM by
u/textlossarcade
267
u/JohnPaulJonesSoda136 pointsat 1629898683.000000
Forget the “trying to kill children” bit (which Eliezer doesn’t care
about anyway). Syndrome built an evil AI that he lost control of and it
tried to kill everyone! That’s exactly the kind of thing that
Yud has been claiming is the most dangerous threat to our species!
> Syndrome built an evil AI that he lost control of and it tried to kill everyone!
To be fair, if everyone had freeze-rays and jet-boots would an evil AI be that much of a problem? Makes you think!
Why am I not surprised that Yud would identify with the narcissistic
psychopath with delusions of grandeur and a low opinion of the value of
human life
Yes, that is what was happening, you are very smart and know what was going on. You are the only one who didn't miss the subtext of this post, or any of my other posts here.
It is fascinating to me that some people also dont read more context, like if you look here in this thread I explain how I meant this initial comment. Guess some people just instantly judge and cant be bothered to read further if something might be a bit ambiguous. Silly people see what they want to see, no further information gathering, no asking 'what did you mean' nope.
E; aww no more replies think this motter finally got it.
"The Incredibles" is hardly an objectivist movie. Sure, the beginning could be read as "normal folks interfering with extraordinary individuals = bad", but also as "sometimes you have to put aside your petty concerns for your property and stop bickering about your rights for the greater good", which is quite the opposite of Objectivism. Also, the whole "corporate life is soul crushing paper pushing and sticking it to your fellow man" is hardly what a fanboy of capitalism would represent, to say the least
Also, Syndrome is the quintessential randian hero, the genius inventor limited by conformism and (according to him) narrow minded moral concerns of the normies, and he is unequivocally represented as bad.
Ad that's exactly why Yud does not like the morality implicit in the movie: if it was Objectivist, he would love it. His beef with the movie is that propaganda for his rich donors doesn't "exist hard enough"
Have not watched this vid in a while, so no idea what specificly it said, but [Renegade Cut had something to say about the objectivist undertones](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPBOfW7ocK0)
I watched the video, and honestly I think it kinda misses his own warning. It retroactively tries to find something Objectivist in the movies, and has to stretch thing *a lot* to find it. And when it finds tons of stuff contradicting the idea, it plays the evergreen "hey it's a melange of different things" rather than finding a definition that better fits the whole movie.
First of all, the part where the state shutting down the supers is equivalent to state regulations is bogus. "Please don't exercise extralegal violence" is not a regulation, is the defining condition that makes a state a state, on which even Ayn Rand could agree. Also, the supers are practically a branch of the government: they a SHIELD-like organization supporting them, they collaborate with cops, and more importantly *they do exactly that cops do.* So rather than being "the government ties destroys individual initiative" is more like "narrow-minded and self centered common folks force the gov to fire its most effective workers because of petty concerns". The problem it has with middle class is not that they are "looter" (of what? Of services that were free to begin with?) but rather that they are too self absorbed to do what needs to be done.
And that's my beef with the Incredibles: that is a pro-cop, pro Deep State even, movie. It does not argue *against* the gov, but rather it argues too much in its favor. It basically says "hey look buddy, just let this honest public servant devoted to the public good do his things, the world would literally collapse without it. Any collateral damage they do was totally an accident, totally necessary, and you are a dick just for asking a bit more accountability and transparency". The movies deplores egoism not because it is a "melange of ideas", but because it perfectly fits the kind of conservative (almost fascistic) message it tries to convey. The fact that the petty bourgeoisie is too self absorbed to do what it needs to be done is not a libertarian, but a fascist critique of modern society (cfr. the nazi propaganda representing the English as "a people of shopkeepers").
I think that this video is a great missed opportunity not because the politics of The Incredibles are great, but because they are wrong in a completely different direction than Objectivism. Seeing anything non-leftist as libertarian does not help understand how we arrived to very non libertarian stuff like the war on terror, the mass surveillance state, blue lives matter, and so on. Analyzing movies like "The Incredibles" more cogently, instead, explains why.
Sorry that I cant really react in depth to your comment it has been too long since I watched both movies.
E: I only strongly recall that syndrome was performing his plan by building stronger and stronger robots and killing superheroes. Which is why I eyerolled, that is some context to ignore. (E: late edit for people who want to do some laughing at motters in this thread. This is what im talking about epimous, your reading of my first comment as agreeing with E is wrong, you could have seen this, if you had just ... dunno read other comments I made, read the thread. But the war on context continues :D).
A bit like praising Churchill for his innovative method to solve long term hunger problems in India. ;)
(As somebody else said, there are good ways to adress the weird ways Hollywood frames actual good ideas as flawed villian plots (at least marvel realized they fucked up with Thanos and mocks his plans in the 'what if' series, but too little too late (if I hear normally left wing people say 'Thanos had a point' one more time im gonna blow a fuse), but not sure this is one of them).
I did some minor research because I was curious, and he himself denies being one, even if he was interested in objectivism when younger. My source was [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brad_Bird#Personal_life) however (also shows the quality of my research ;) ). So im not sure. (E: if we continue this talking point about the writer/director we prob should come with evidence).
If rocket boots did hit the market, wouldn’t they probably end up
something like, I’unno, ski equipment or mountain bikes? Some people
would rent them for family vacations. Hobbyists would drop a lot of cash
into their kits. Some people would get sponsorships from energy drinks.
Life would go on. The rest of us would get entertaining Internet videos
of rocket-boot wipeouts where pine trees made contact with crotchular
regions.
I actually agree with him here, the fact he did all that other evil
shit isn’t all that relevant, given that the creators of the movie can
just make him do whatever evil stuff they want. What’s relevant here is
the fact that Syndrome’s plan to ruin everything by… Increasing equality
is presented as his evil master plan. It’s a plot point you could only
come up with in the worst state of neoliberal hyperindividualist
brainrot. Look a bit deeper into the subtext and you’ll realize that
this movie is about millionaire “entrepreneurs” vs the state, and this
movie takes the side of the millionaires.
Edit: The Incredibles is a good movie, one of my childhood
favourites. But it is also neoliberal anti-regulation propaganda.
It seems like yud’s claim appears to be that the means don’t matter; even the efficacy or rational chance they will promote your ends, as long as you *profess* the correct dream. I see why Yud is on board with that but it’s obviously a real bad outlook
See, the problem I have with what you say is that equality isn't a concern I have with superheroes. Actual hierarchies don't develop because a very small number of people inherently are stronger and use that to dominate others. They develop because a bunch of people with approximately the same capabilities as everyone else decide to rule over other people. Then, they cement their rule by either hoarding technology or resources, or by convincing large segments of the people they rule over that having them around is a good idea.
Actually, the conquerors may well be physically weaker; early agriculturalists were often shorter and in poorer physical condition than nearby hunter-gatherers (though this was due to poor diet and environmental conditions, not any inherent traits, and also wasn't always true). The hunter-gatherers still lost.
This is true in superhero settings, too. Even someone who can shoot lasers from their eyes and fly doesn't want to get into a dogfight with a squadron full of fighter aircraft.
In general, the things I have to worry about with regards to equality are:
1. The government, or other groups backed by the force of law and social custom
2. That someone will use the same capabilities that are theoretically able to be used to me to force an unequal relationship on me (by, say, mugging or kidnapping me).
Syndrome's plan doesn't help with *either* of those. With regards to the former, the government will try to make anything that could threaten it strictly regulated. Laser gloves will become sole providence of the government. If people fight them over this, and *everyone* has access to Syndrome's technology, the greater manpower and logistical capabilities of the government will still prevail.
In respect to the second item... people already manage to mug other people while being limited to the same tools the other person possesses--knives, guns, a pair of fists. But they get the drop on them, or they're better at using them, or their target just isn't carrying them, so they manage anyway.
More lethal weapons doesn't help with that. It just means that now I have to worry about someone casually ending my life with laser gloves.
Historically, even if the people with the biggest muscles/swords (e.g. knights, samurai, cossacks, etc.) aren’t themselves top dog, they almost always get more privileges and benefits when it’s time for the actual top dog to dish out the loot. That’s pretty much Feudalism 101.
As a major linchpin in the existing order, they become instrumental in maintaining it; and when it breaks down, they’re often the saddest to see it go (and the most eager to try and preserve/revive it - just look at the Satsuma Rebellion, for instance, or the Cossack White Guards in the Russian Civil War).
Knights, samauris, and cossacks did not have naturally stronger capabilities than the average person. They were not necessarily the strongest people around. However, they were the best *equipped* people around, on account of their wealth and (often inherited) rank.
Here I’m putting superpowers as a general analog/allegory for martial prowess/ability (including both skills and equipment). The origins of their place of privilege within the feudal hierarchy was often based on their martial prowess, which was of value to whoever they were carrying water for (the Shogun/Tsar/Sultan/etc.)
Now just imagine that superpowers/super status were inheritable, and put it in the context of feudalism, and imagine how history would have gone.
Wasn't his plan to *sell* his inventions, and only after he was old and couldn't benefit from them himself? I don't really see how "rich people can have laser gloves and rocket boots" is actually increasing equality here.
The happy ending of *The Incredibles* is Dash holding himself back to win second place in a race. When Dagny Taggart even joked about doing that, [Francisco D'Anconia slapped her so hard that she tasted blood](https://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/2013/08/atlas-shrugged-the-ubermensch/).
"When everyone is special, no one will be" is the *villain's* creed. The two heroes who echo it are a petulant child and a man going through a midlife crisis. Both of them learn to grow beyond it. It's like Belloq telling Indiana Jones "It would only take a nudge to make you like me" --- part of what makes Indy a hero is that when he's at his lowest, he might believe Belloq, but he still rises to prove the villain wrong. Meanwhile, the first thing that Mr. Incredible does in the film's "present day" is to help an elderly woman on a fixed income exploit the inner workings of an insurance company, because helping people is more important than shareholder value. The supers worked alongside a SHIELD-type government agency that still supports them under the table years after they were officially disavowed. The situation that the setup leads the viewer to want restored is one where government-sanctioned elite operatives can use their special set of skills to take down Elons Musk.
I can get why an "exceptional people should be above rules" kind of vibe would put people on edge. But there's also a counter-current of "exceptional people have responsibilities to match" going on. Looking for bright-line political Messages in a story that's a loving send-up of genre conventions requires a more deft analysis of that genre as a whole than can fit into a 2010-era hot take.
Neoliberal? Antiregulation? Are you kidding? It's neoconservativism/government propaganda at its finest. Like, it's an elegy of the Deep State, represented as extraordinary individuals who are moral, nice, eager to serve and protect, and who are ready to go back to the suburbian family life life they saved for anybody else as soon as their job is done.
By contrast, the private sector is represented as either soulless bureaucracies who foster mediocrity and bottom-feederness (the insurance company), either dangerous psychopaths ready to destroy everything for egotism and profit (Syndrome). Individual rights, including property rights, not only are not sacred at all, and people who sacralise them (like the people complaining of the done by the superheroes) are seen as petty idiots who can't see the bigger picture, or are too self absorbed to care.
The movie is not meant to glorify Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos. In fact, it is meant to villainize anybody like them. The movie is meant to glorify Simon Wiesenthal (if we want to be charitable) or Oliver North (if we want to be less charitable and maybe a bit more realistic). It might be equally bad, but it is still a wildly different beast than neoliberalism and business-worshiping.
Brad Bird himself is not an objectivist but he grew up in an objectivist household (apparently a thing). That's why there tends to be objectivism-adjacent stuff in his movies even though his personal philosophy doesn't seem to align with it completely, at least in being nowhere near as mean-spirited as the real article.
Find it hilarious that these comments turned into Incredibles discourse btw
Forget the “trying to kill children” bit (which Eliezer doesn’t care about anyway). Syndrome built an evil AI that he lost control of and it tried to kill everyone! That’s exactly the kind of thing that Yud has been claiming is the most dangerous threat to our species!
Why am I not surprised that Yud would identify with the narcissistic psychopath with delusions of grandeur and a low opinion of the value of human life
The war against context continues.
I mean there’s certainly an argument to be made how Hollywood perpetuates a bunch of harmful narratives, but … it’s not that, Eliezer.
Yes, but how many dust particles in the eyes of superhumans is that equivalent to? Think of the Ubermensch for once!
If the Rationalist high priest says Objectivist movie’s framing bad, nobody should disagree.
Would commit genocide for the acausal robot god.
I could have sworn the director was pretty libertarian but i guess Hollywood = must be the libs
Never mind the sneer, my head is spinning from all these different Incredibles takes.
If rocket boots did hit the market, wouldn’t they probably end up something like, I’unno, ski equipment or mountain bikes? Some people would rent them for family vacations. Hobbyists would drop a lot of cash into their kits. Some people would get sponsorships from energy drinks. Life would go on. The rest of us would get entertaining Internet videos of rocket-boot wipeouts where pine trees made contact with crotchular regions.
I actually agree with him here, the fact he did all that other evil shit isn’t all that relevant, given that the creators of the movie can just make him do whatever evil stuff they want. What’s relevant here is the fact that Syndrome’s plan to ruin everything by… Increasing equality is presented as his evil master plan. It’s a plot point you could only come up with in the worst state of neoliberal hyperindividualist brainrot. Look a bit deeper into the subtext and you’ll realize that this movie is about millionaire “entrepreneurs” vs the state, and this movie takes the side of the millionaires.
Edit: The Incredibles is a good movie, one of my childhood favourites. But it is also neoliberal anti-regulation propaganda.
[deleted]
I always point to the Plasmids in Bioshock for why Syndromes plan is a bad idea.
Zero ZZZ