this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
921 points (97.2% liked)

Comics

5826 readers
39 users here now

This is a community for everything comics related! A place for all comics fans.

Rules:

1- Do not violate lemmy.ml site-wide rules

2- Be civil.

3- If you are going to post NSFW content that doesn't violate the lemmy.ml site-wide rules, please mark it as NSFW and add a content warning (CW). This includes content that shows the killing of people and or animals, gore, content that talks about suicide or shows suicide, content that talks about sexual assault, etc. Please use your best judgement. We want to keep this space safe for all our comic lovers.

4- No Zionism or Hasbara apologia of any kind. We stand with Palestine πŸ‡΅πŸ‡Έ . Zionists will be banned on sight.

5- The moderation team reserves the right to remove any post or comments that it deems a necessary for the well-being and safety of the members of this community, and same goes with temporarily or permanently banning any user.

Guidelines:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 124 points 5 months ago (8 children)

Does killing the billionaire solve anything though? The system will just put some other stooge in his position instead. Systemic change is the only way to solve this.

[–] thejoker954 81 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Gotta play dominos with them. Everytime one pops up- knock em dead. I mean down. Wink wink.

[–] BambiDiego 76 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

1st. That's not dominoes, that's whack-a-mole

2nd. Hell yeah, let me grab me mallet

[–] [email protected] 44 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I mean yeah if every CEO or VP or whatever who doesn't agree to immediately addressing climate change gets dead, then you'll probably be left with a leadership that is willing to address climate change. In the comics, too.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod 15 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's the third rule of Anarchy Camp: If you see someone taking charge you're expected to beat them.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago

Making rules, huh? I see you.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

If I had a button that when pressed would kill the richest person in the world, I'd press it until I physically couldn't any more. Hopefully the remaining millionaires would have the sense to see what's happening and spread their wealth more evenly amongst people, and every now and again, I'd press the button a few more times just to keep things from reverting.

Killing a billionaire does nothing but presenting the idea that being among the richest people would result in some regular, omnipotent death would do a lot.

[–] Bye 46 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

Poison ivy would argue we don’t have time for systemic change. She’s doing what is in her power to do. She’d probably say that if your potted fern is droopy, it needs to be in the sun. But if you can’t afford a place with sun, maybe you need to do what you can now, and get a grow light.

[–] Ledivin 19 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

She’s doing what is in her power to do.

...but her actions don't actually achieve anything other than fulfilling some sort of revenge/punishment fantasy.

The billionaire isn't personally responsible for the emissions, and the companies will continue to operate without him. If we're not talking systemic change (i.e. government-mandated, I guess?), then she needs to either target the businesses/facilities/supply chains directly, or convince the billionaire (or someone else with power in the companies) to change things.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] grue 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The Incredibles movies are even better examples, IMO.

Edit: by the way, this part of that video seems like a nice rebuttal to link in threads where pearl-clutchers bitch and moan about "disruptive" protests.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago

Well if they can't convince the billionaire, maybe she can convince whoever inherits the billionaire's ownership. If not, there's always the next in line.

Historically this has had mixed results

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How is the guy emitting a shit ton of emissions and being in charge of so many companies that emit even more emissions not responsible?

[–] Ledivin 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

He's not directly responsible - removing him from the equation doesn't change anything. It's not like he's a machine and turning him off stops the emission. The companies will still run and nothing will have actually improved.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Habe you looked into the lifestyle billionaires live and how mich emission they produce compared to a normal guy?

[–] Ledivin 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Yes, and compared to the companies they run, even their emissions are completely negligible. Individual action will not fix our climate crisis, regardless of who does it. Systemic change is the only option that has the possibility of a statistically-useful effect.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

Couldn't be the one directly responsible for it, but he for sure is the one ripping all the benefits and paying none of its costs.

[–] VindictiveJudge 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

She’d probably say that if your potted fern is droopy, it needs to be in the sun. But if you can’t afford a place with sun, maybe you need to do what you can now, and get a grow light.

Reminder that Ivy cares more about plants than people. She would consider tearing down part of your wall so the fern can get natural light even if it means you will die of exposure to be a perfectly sane solution.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

Eh, depends on continuity and the writer. This is clearly a more moderate version

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

So murder people for checks notes no benefit? That's just an idiot.

[–] Iheartcheese 24 points 5 months ago

after the 15th or so killed in a 6 month period things might start changing. Maybe.

One way to find out.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

This is what we are taught.
But what we want is to change the system. And those specific people of that specific class are what stands in the way of many/all.

Tl;dr: Ivy is a hero, the hero we need.

[–] TheMinions 17 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Have you ever heard of Death Note? I think you might like it.

[–] xantoxis 15 points 5 months ago (2 children)

In that condition she could probably have convinced him to "legally" deed all his properties to her. (She would need to be able to enthrall everyone in the room when it happens, otherwise witnesses will testify he wasn't of sound mind, but that seems like something she could solve.)

It gets complicated after that, though, lots of shareholder suits if she does anything too drastic. Maybe she converts all those assets into investments in renewable energy, which would keep shareholders off her back.

Then she only has to deal with assassin squads sent by the rest of the oil stakeholders but, again, that seems like a problem she could solve.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Give me that story as gory anime! πŸ˜‚

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

If he "owns a third of them" doesn't that mean he's the shareholder? At the very least a significant minority shareholder.

[–] darthsid 13 points 5 months ago

We can sure start with that

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

The emphasis in her word bubble is "And doesn't care." The next stooge might have more of a reason to care, since as far as Poison Ivy here is concerned: systemic change isn't coming fast enough, if at all.