/anime/ - Anime

>>29461
Its not bad, not really much propaganda or anything

>>1269
Katyusha is best girl.

>>29461
Anchovy did for me ngl

367010
188464
295857

>>21968
>>24125
>>21982
>>21955
>>21963
Files restored

>>29737
Vtubing has been reactionary leading all the way back to Kizuna AI bro. It got its start and evolved from Japanese imageboard culture which is already right wing as FUARK, which further spread to western imageboards for obvious reasons.

>>29738
>source: thirdfourth-hand info from randos online
Sure bud.

>>29739
I was there nig-nog, it was pompous "NOT LIKE OTHER NORMALFAG YOUTUBERS LIKE MARKIPLIER AND PEWDIEPIE!!!!" dogshit from the very start in the west. And Vtubing is so heavily intertwined in 2ch culture that its impossible to deny, before that Yukkuri PNG channels were already the precursor to this shit.

two days after i tried getting back into this a vtuber corp received mass backlash for issuing an apology after one of the people they manage called the civil rights movement "stupid political garbage" like ok lol im hanging it up again i think. its actually insane how much the vtuber audience has devolved since i stopped watching a few years ago, shit like this definitely existed back then but it was mostly avoidable and compartmentalized, now its just the norm lmao

>>29797
it's still avoidable if you stay away from anything related to phase connect

>>29916
She's really pretty.

>Be Berserk Thread
>Be there in Catalog
>Every fucking year a new Berserk thread is made and then drifts to the bottom of the catalog
Tiresome

>>29864
this thread is from 2020, what?

>>29908
I was commenting on there being at least 2 other Berserk threads in Catalog. I know this thread is from 2020, I was there when it was made.

>>29215
Schierke is cute and I like her crush on Gutts.

>>29215
Shierke hard carries the party bro

>>16760
>>20917
>>21011
>>21770
>>21772
Restoring files that I can

>>29846
I unironically believe in the aeromorph conspiracy. There are furries(or someother sub community of it) that are in the army and atttacted to the weapons systems that they operate on a sexual level. Sexualization of war and weaponry by warmongers and warhawks is a known fact that has even been researched, there is atleast 1 book written about it(I don’t remember the name though).

>>25362
What kills me is the combination you'll see in hentai/ecchi art where the model will have these super detailed figures with anatomical shading etc and then they'll have that flat d': face.

>>29846
Musui's Story is a great book

>>29917
Oh it's real alright. I remember back on 4/trash/ and /k/ there being at least a dozen anons who admitted to basically getting psyoped by it.

OP your example both has the villain die in the first movie and get resurrected on the condition that he cooperate lol. Like there's a scene where he gets explicitly threatened with his resurrection being revoked if he gets any ideas. He's functionally a slave.

>>29901
>We need more stories where the villain is never redeemed (at least, not explicitly), but does not die either
One piece between the start of the series to the dressrosa arc is already like this, there’s like dozens of capeshit comics with characters like doom or lex luthor where this is a thing, transformers has a ton of this stuff with megatron and star scream, I’m not expanding this list. No, it’s objectively shitty writing to leave a lot of obviously harmful villains alive or present in the story for redemption usually because it insults the agency of the villain to live in a defeated state instead of being allowed to die off with a shred of dignity against the protagonists and because redemption arcs usually can look more like moral policing on behalf of the authors than organic growths on behalf of the characters themselves.

A group of comrades jump in the air

>>29905
Then there's a drum fill and bad 00s pop punk with Engrish lyrics kicks in. The chorus goes "never your fight, never you lose, yeah!"

Muscle girl harem anime with bishonen protagonist.

dystopian sitcom in the middle of "The Revolution" where different factions learn to live w each other while being bombarded

it's mid but it makes me laugh.

>>26599
coming back to this, he only follows 30 people on twitter and 4 of them are literally far-right sanseito anti globalist guys

>>29899
It's a pretty safe assumption these days that the average mangaka is some flavor of far-right. Also funny to see people here defending this strand of Japanese politics as just anti-American anti-imperialism as if Japan were not a former empire itself and as if every notable "anti-globalist" politician in Japan wasn't anti-Korean, Sinophobic and still dreaming of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.
You can just say you enjoy the manga anyway but holy shit, stop deluding yourselves.

>>29902
>the JPC is outright bankrolling Spy x Family
Whatchu talkin about

>>29893
>Despite most likely being a backwards peasant economy, Mistral still imports most of these products.
>It is heavily implied Atlas and Vale both produce 21st century level tech
I think it's implied that ALL the kingdoms produce their own tech, which is why Valean, Mistrali and Atlesian bullheads differ significantly in design. Atlas is the highest in technological advancement and production, but is also the most limited in easily available resources.
I don't think we see anything about Mistral or any of the other countries being peasant economies, it's fairly obviously implied that they're all varying levels of capitalist market economies.
>they have a literal Atlesian settler colony.
Sakai is glowie-shit, get his brainworms out of your head. This is called a military outpost not a colony.
>ultimately the requirements for a landlord to "profit" from his manor were a lot looser than those of a modern family farm
In the past yes, because loose requirements were a benefit and because social progress hadn't reached that level yet.

>they wouldn't strictly need to profit, only "break even", before the land has been sufficiently developed.
No, they wouldn't. Any farmer or rancher can tell you that you don't go for 'break even' in farming for a multitude of reasons; reserves in case of hard times, surplus to sell or use out of necessity to acquire something, basic human wants that turn life from 'surviving' into 'living'. Your essay that you posted literally talks about this.
>Historical necessity doesn't care for urban life or individual living standards.
Key word here, HISTORICAL NECESSITY. Societies regressed because of Rome's social collapse and were forced to reorganize into the feudal system we get in the Medieval Age. This wasn't a conscious choice and is not the same as a modern capitalist society reverting to feudalism; see post-apocalyptic dystopias.
>ignoring the examples of semi-feudalism under despotic states.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>29894
>Any farmer or rancher can tell you that you don't go for 'break even' in farming for a multitude of reasons
I was speaking in terms of monetary profit, as a reason for why feudalism offers stronger incentives than capitalism for developing the land. If you would consult the third book of Capital (i think), profit is something that explicitly needs to be realized. Land in itself and by extension manors under feudalism don't yield profit, they yield rent in the form of natural produce. This output is subject to the fluctuations and "crises" of the natural world, but by a far FAR lesser extent than the price of commodities in a capitalist economy. While market dynamics remain within feudalism, they need not apply to its productive base.
>Societies regressed because of Rome's social collapse.
Rome's social collapse followed from the slow-motion collapse of its political economy. The reason i kept coming back to the slave economy wasn't a moral objection, it was to stress the inevitable trajectory towards collapse, that had been set up by it. The Roman slave economy produced a societal surplus, affording free Romans to pursue labor previously unfeasible within their predominantly agrarian productive base. When the supply of cheap slaves dried up, so did this surplus, and it became progressively harder and ultimately impossible to sustain Roman infrastructure, industry and armies. Feudalist economy not only picked up the pieces after this century-long adventure, it also became the productive motor (mill?), developing previously inarable land and making literal leaps in the development of new farming techniques, that made something like the Renaissance possible in the first place.

>Finally the bandit-feudalism you spoke of with Raven is not the same as Byzantium or any other state arising from/after the decay of Rome.
You think they could not lay hold of the ready-made political machinery of the capital and divide up their fiefdoms from there?
>You are incorrect. We know of 200+ acqueducts constructed by Romans across the Mediterranean in Italy, Spain, France, The Middle East, North Africa
My point is the Roman population was a lot more clustered around urban centers. The Carolingian Empire is estimated to have hPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>29895
>I was speaking in terms of monetary profit
Same thing at the end of the day money or grain 'breaking even' is never the goal, because that can only be viable in a ideal closed system without external factors from stuff like wheat rust other harvest damage, to the need to live through winter and the ability to buy things that you cannot make or grow.
>Land in itself and by extension manors under feudalism don't yield profit, they yield rent in the form of natural produce.
Obviously, but you make profit by gaining enough money or natural produce to not only break even but exceed the investiture placed into a property. That's why even medieval kingdoms had taxes.
>While market dynamics remain within feudalism, they need not apply to its productive base.
Again this requires people to be working together on an equal level in a community, not peasants serving lords.
>Rome's social collapse followed from the slow-motion collapse of its political economy.
That is why I referred to it as socio-economics.
>stress the inevitable trajectory towards collapse, that had been set up by it
Of course it was inevitable, but that doesn't mean societies didn't regress from a dialectical-materialism standpoint.
>affording free Romans to pursue labor previously unfeasible within their predominantly agrarian productive base.
And Feudalism made it that even fewer could afford to pursue non-base labour that allowed for advancement or maintenance or advancement of culture.
>developing previously inarable land and making literal leaps in the development of new farming techniques
It didn't so much as leap with farming techniques so much as broaden in scale utilizing the untapped resources of the North. True agricultural revolution that helped fund the renaissance only came about in the Late Middle Ages as societies regained cultural advancement.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>29896
>That's why even medieval kingdoms had taxes.
We're talking about early-medieval feudalism, where any monetary systems had collapsed, and the economic and social stability afforded by feudalism actually mattered.
>Of course it was inevitable, but that doesn't mean societies didn't regress from a dialectical-materialism standpoint.
Despite initially lower surpluses (due to aforementioned external factors), feudalism objectively advanced the relations of production. It emerged precisely because it most effectively utilized societal resources at the time of its inception. In fact any lasting societal progress lags behind the development of the agricultural base; advancing without such a firm foundation would be blatant adventurism.
>It didn't so much as leap with farming techniques
Medieval ploughs and crop rotation especially were objectively leaps. The consensus is, despite the primacy of agriculture, some hunter-gatherer activity continued being necesssary until their advent.
>Medieval ones in Northern Europe only had less urban centralization because of much lower social development by comparison.
The centres were far larger in number, therefore they had more capacity in growth when the pace of the productive forces picked up again. They were smallpoxing in civ terms.
>the formatting is clearly something based in the Renaissance era and was the final touch of the 12-13th century construction
I don't get why you're so insistent of dating back the Renaissance far before any time i've seen it outlined before. Far from social fetters, the fidelity of high-medieval art in comparison of that from the early medieval period, can be directly traced back to the emergence of large-scale, high-volume trade and the wealth concentrated in the many urban centres as a result. Frescos were also largely a fad north of the Alps and i don't know of any mosaics outside of Orthodox churches either.

>Byzantium was a natural progression from an existing imperial infrastructure
We know canonically most parts of Remnant are already controlled or heavily greased by crime syndicates. Presumably they would extract profit from protection rackets, hijaking tradPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>29897
>We're talking about early-medieval feudalism, where any monetary systems had collapsed, and the economic and social stability afforded by feudalism actually mattered.
Taxes are not necessarily paid in money, in fact most peasants could never afford to pay it with money in the Medieval age outright. It was paid to the Church and State with agricultural and livestock produce. In essence it was a racket like with the Mafia… or modern capitalist states today; you live on our land so you pay for your 'protection' and for residing here or you get hurt. Why do you think Robin Hood was created and became a popular folk character? Honestly with how hard you argue for feudalism in this context, you sound like an ancap.
>any lasting societal progress lags behind the development of the agricultural base; advancing without such a firm foundation would be blatant adventurism.
Rome didn't advance without firm foundation, if it did then it wouldn't have lasted for the greater part of a millenia.
>crop rotation
FFS that's not an early medieval thing, that happened in Rome too since at least ~200BC The Medieval system simply solidified the 3 field system that late-Rome did. The 4 field system was part of the Agricultural Revolution, during the Enlightenment and after The Renaissance.
>plough
Ploughs have been around since mankind first began to work the earth in earnest. Medieval plows were developments of existing Roman plows. These are not significant by any leap of the imagination.
>some hunter-gatherer activity continued being necessary until their advent.
HAHAHA Hunter-gatherer activity continued throughout the early and middle Medieval Age, but slowly stopped being relevant later. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJnIZiH5fyM
>why you're so insistent of dating back the Renaissance far before any time i've seen it outlined before.
I'm not dating it back further. The Renaissance is widely acknowledged to have begun officially in 1350 as defined by Italian historians during the 15th century, however the ProtoRenaissance began earliPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>25361
You're moving goalposts neither you nor I even set up.

>>25367
How am I moving goalposts?

>>25361
Restoring some Nagatoro pics ITT

Nagatoro was only good when she was actually abusive like in the web comics. The manga and anime are just generic romcom harem trash.

>>29888
I can give you Tonari no Idol-san if you want to read abuse
or "Ueno-kun Has Been Developed",but that's sexual bullying turn into relationship drama
the others I can think of all have a twist or are pure nonsense/yandere comedy.