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.
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.
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.
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.
…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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Didn’t the revolution spiral out of hand, allowing Napoleon to seize power and crown himself emperor, leading to a series of wars that killed millions of people?
Not since the Third Republic. But directly after Napoleon, power went back to the monarchy for like 50 years, so I’m not sure how much credit the guillotine deserves.
A 50 year relapse to eradicate an infection that lasted for 1300 years ain’t bad.
The reality is the French Revolution is why most of Europe is democratic now, it demonstrated more than anything else until the Russian Revolution that the “commoners” could not only win a war against the entrenched nobility, but that those nobles should be very, very fuckin scared of the idea and maybe get on board with the idea of a constitutional monarchy if nothing else.
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.
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.
Gotta play dominos with them. Everytime one pops up- knock em dead. I mean down. Wink wink.
1st. That’s not dominoes, that’s whack-a-mole
2nd. Hell yeah, let me grab me mallet
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.
Get dead is the best band
https://youtu.be/Yu8cn8OlUak?si=7YIbeim-gnG4DHNi
It’s the third rule of Anarchy Camp: If you see someone taking charge you’re expected to beat them.
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.
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.
…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.
superheroes aren’t here to solve problems, they’re here to maintain the status quo
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.
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
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?
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.
Habe you looked into the lifestyle billionaires live and how mich emission they produce compared to a normal guy?
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.
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.
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.
Eh, depends on continuity and the writer. This is clearly a more moderate version
So murder people for checks notes no benefit? That’s just an idiot.
after the 15th or so killed in a 6 month period things might start changing. Maybe.
One way to find out.
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.
I mean… if you play whack-a-mole long enough, eventually they’ll get the message.
Have you ever heard of Death Note? I think you might like it.
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.
If he “owns a third of them” doesn’t that mean he’s the shareholder? At the very least a significant minority shareholder.
Give me that story as gory anime! 😂
We can sure start with that
Ask France if it works.
Didn’t the revolution spiral out of hand, allowing Napoleon to seize power and crown himself emperor, leading to a series of wars that killed millions of people?
Look, it might have got a little out of hand but ask yourself:
Does the HRE or the French Monarchy still exist?
Not since the Third Republic. But directly after Napoleon, power went back to the monarchy for like 50 years, so I’m not sure how much credit the guillotine deserves.
A 50 year relapse to eradicate an infection that lasted for 1300 years ain’t bad.
The reality is the French Revolution is why most of Europe is democratic now, it demonstrated more than anything else until the Russian Revolution that the “commoners” could not only win a war against the entrenched nobility, but that those nobles should be very, very fuckin scared of the idea and maybe get on board with the idea of a constitutional monarchy if nothing else.
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.