Code Geass is just a gem imo, it’s so over the top and kinda bullshit at times, but the cast of characters are so fleshed out and fun. It’s a mecha but it’s not purely about mechas so your perception was on point imo. It’s one of the few series I’ve rewatched multiple times throughout my life and I’ve walked away with new interpretations and appreciations with each run through. The overarching military parts that happen behind the scenes didn’t even really make much sense for me originally until I had already seen it a few times.

For Muv-luv: Alternative specifically:

Knights of Sidonia probably is better as a manga, the art style wasn’t my favorite either but the story itself was solid.

Happy to help!

My favorites that hit on the more futuristic/fantasy military themes are:

• Code Geass
• Muv-Luv: Alternative
• Knights of Sidonia

Most of the other ones I saw recommended hit more closely to what you’re looking for, but I wanted to provide a few military adjacent series since they do still include battle tactics and planning.

I agree that a hybrid approach like that makes the most sense, since you need some capacity for trade and probably some level of exchange going on to be in good standings with the rest of the state/region.

For sure some communes pull off some level of this, but I’d be curious to see how one of these types of societies functions if it did scale to a town or city level. I believe enough tools are out there for people to make it happen, but it not something I see talked about more as an immediate alternative to the existing system.

I could see it being difficult, but selling people on the concept I feel almost requires a real world example of it working.

With the internet, I feel like people trying to organize it would have an easier time finding matching applicants/participants based on the type of labor/lifestyle that these people would be okay with doing. Organizers could curate who joins at least while something like that is still fledgling. I imagine food security would be a big part of limiting who else can join at certain points of time.

That quote in particular is an awful thing to hold dear if your brother loves you and the rest of your family. What good is this ‘freedom’ without the people most dear to you? You become a shell of yourself without the people that give meaning to your life, imo.

Be — The Boulder.

I know some organizations are run co-op style, where the workers are the owners, so it’s currently something viable.

I would believe that to see broader change like that at a wider level would require some protections though.

I feel that UBI would be an easier first sell, since it doesn’t directly shake up existing systems for organizations. If you’re interested in starting a co-op of your own though there are some helpful resources out there still.

I’m kinda surprised most coffee shops are not 100% co-ops tbh. If they were, it would help the workers get around the shady practices of big companies like Starbucks that shutdown shops attempting to unionize.

I would be more than happy to have those fruits of labor be redistributed, via Universal Basic Income. Then at least my basic needs getting met is not tied to working a specific job.

I’m in favor of other cool things too though like more public housing rental units and Universal Healthcare as well. Even having college be free for everyone would be a net gain for society as a whole.

They got what they wanted, but will they like it and will it stick? On a technical note things can improve and the three branches could flip back within 15 years at the most. For that to actually happen though people need to start feeling progressive wins now.

For that reason, the focus should be on trying to implement all the progressive programs we’ve been wanting federally, to be at the state level instead. States will likely need to be willing to go into debt to fund these programs, but if they do then the people living in those states will be much better off than they are now. Many people living in purple and red states will be much more likely to want those progressive programs when they actually are seeing how successful they are in Blue states as well.

I wouldn’t say it’s a fantasy, it’s just a currently different cultural perspective that is being taught to the next generation of business leaders.

Some people are bought into the idea, but unless the actual laws change it’s not so easy to legally be able to prioritize the needs of all stakeholders equally.

I personally don’t see stakeholder theory as the “fix”, but it’s a good start to get more ethical capitalism that’s not actively hurting the planet, workers, and communities.

I wouldn’t say those three things are inherently logically incompatible, but there would be a lot of grey areas.

The power structure of the federal government doesn’t make it any easier to actually exercise the federal government to accomplish helpful objectives, but making things worse is a relatively easy exercise.

The focus on state level politics seems much more meaningful to actually accomplish any goals, since at least there is not as big of a hurdle where land and money have more power/representation than real people.

In the US at least, I think it’s possible at the local and state levels, but land and money have most of the power. To me, it feels like many leaders pushed the goals back because we were relatively close to being able to implement the progressive changes federally, but it’s become clear that’s still a ways away.

Those progressive changes can still happen in blue states, and I feel the will is there to elect progressives. States just need to be willing to go into debt to bring forward those progressive programs now.

Idk, even still after all these years, I find there are still moments that make me happy to be alive and think that it’s awesome to be alive, to have experienced things that were dear to me. Living in a place with others that still care about positive progress gives me a reason to do a little better each day.

I do think about how much greater life could be if love was what guided policy rather than the accumulation of wealth that’s worth nothing to us when we die.

I see what you’re saying; I think it’s a terms changing thing. Equity wasn’t in my vocabulary when I first saw the original image. Equality was used by many people to mean ‘treated fairly’, and most reasonable people would have understood it to mean ‘treated fairly’ based on the individual rather than a flat ‘treated exactly the same’.

I believe the term equity started to be used more though because there were those trying to give the excuse that they were treating others ‘fairly’ - when really it was obvious the other person(s) needed more support for their needs (e.g., someone that’s pregnant/disabled needing different working standards compared to someone more able bodied).

Thank you! I’m going to practice deliberate projecting. I can better visualize how to do this with the classroom example you gave as well.

Adding on to everything you’ve said, the people most likely encountering these topics for the first time usually are adolescents. I feel it helps my patience trying to keep that in mind when talking with them, since it makes sense that they may not have encountered the topic before.

Severance goes so hard, every episode is like a movie level of quality