/anime/ - Anime

I think you're missing some of the deeper structural critiques of Naruto when you frame it as purely anti-war or anti-militaristic. Sure, on the surface, it advocates for peace and understanding, but the world it builds is one where military power is centralized, hierarchical, and glorified—and that’s not exactly anti-fascist. The shinobi system is built around village-states that demand absolute loyalty, where children are trained as soldiers from a young age, and where power is often concentrated in a few elite bloodlines or individuals. That sounds less like a critique of militarism and more like an endorsement of a militarized society, just with a hopeful coat of paint.

The idea of “peace” in Naruto often comes through overwhelming strength and the domination of a singular will—Naruto’s own ideology—rather than through dismantling oppressive systems. The villains like Pain or Madara are indeed idealists, but they’re portrayed as wrong not because their critiques are invalid (Pain’s speech about the cycle of hatred and suffering is pretty compelling), but because they challenge the status quo that the heroes are trying to preserve. The resolution isn’t structural change; it’s about individuals achieving understanding while leaving the militarized, clan-based hierarchy intact. That feels less like anti-fascism and more like a liberal fantasy where the system is fine as long as the right people are in charge.
And let’s not forget how the series handles the Uchiha clan—they’re massacred by their own government for fear of rebellion, and the story ultimately justifies it as a “necessary evil” for the stability of the village. That’s not anti-militarism; that’s authoritarianism dressed up as tragedy. So yeah, Naruto might preach unity, but it does so within a framework that normalizes and even romanticizes the very institutions that perpetuate conflict and control.

>>29231
Good point about the deeper problem with Naruto’s stance on facism being necessarily how it ignores the structural causes rather than advocacy against the wars going on themselves. I don’t think kishimoto intentionally ignored that problem given he was writing the world building since worldbuilding isn’t really the manga’s strongest point. Hell I read a bunch and even such a simple idea that you’re suggesting went in over my head. Hey, at least kishimoto does a lot with showing village leaders trying their hardest to establish diplomatic and cultural unity between each other.

>And let’s not forget how the series handles the Uchiha clan—they’re massacred by their own government for fear of rebellion, and the story ultimately justifies it as a “necessary evil” for the stability of the village. That’s not anti-militarism; that’s authoritarianism dressed up as tragedy.
This. Naruto's narrative objectively tilts towards a pro genocide view point. The main character praises Itachi straight up, after learning the truth.

>>29235
You’re not wrong—the Uchiha massacre is one of the most morally fraught parts of the series, and Naruto’s reverence for Itachi can definitely leave a bad taste. But I’d argue it’s less that the story is endorsing genocide and more that it’s wrestling with the brutal logic of a system where such “choices” are presented as inevitable.

Itachi isn’t celebrated because he killed his clan; he’s tragic because he was forced into an unwinnable situation by a corrupt and paranoid leadership. The story makes it clear that the Uchiha were pushed toward rebellion through years of marginalization and distrust—the real failure lies with the village’s structure and leadership, not with the Uchiha themselves.

When Naruto praises Itachi, it’s not the act of slaughter he’s honoring—it’s Itachi’s willingness to bear the weight of ultimate sacrifice for what he believed would prevent even greater bloodshed. The narrative doesn’t frame it as “good”; it frames it as heartbreaking. And importantly, it’s this very event that later fuels Sasuke’s anger and the story’s critique of systemic failure.

So while the story doesn’t outright condemn the village’s decision in a revolutionary way, it does use Itachi’s tragedy to expose the dark underbelly of “peace through power.” It’s less pro-genocide and more a grim acknowledgment that in a broken system, there are no clean answers—only cycles of pain. The real criticism is aimed at the world that makes an Itachi necessary, not at Itachi himself.

>>29232
That's a fair defense of Kishimoto's intentions, and I agree that he clearly values diplomacy and cultural unity. But I still don't think it's accurate to say Naruto’s stance on fascism is "necessarily" about ignoring structural causes—that implies a deliberate or inherent blindness, when I’d argue the story actually engages with those structures, just in a reformist rather than revolutionary way.

Take the Five Kage Summit: it’s literally a gathering where leaders confront systemic failings—distrust, historical grievances, and the very infrastructure of shinobi society that incentivizes conflict. They don’t dismantle the village system, but they do reshape its rules and alliances. That’s not ignoring structure; it’s attempting to change it from within. Even Naruto’s own role—breaking the cycle of hatred through understanding rather than force—is presented as a structural shift in how power is exercised. He doesn’t just defeat the enemy; he redefines the terms of engagement.

And while the story doesn’t advocate for abolishing villages or the shinobi system altogether, it does criticize their flaws—like the corruption in the feudal lords’ governance or the exploitation of jinchuriki. The fact that the system evolves (e.g., the Allied Shinobi Forces, Boruto-era tech and cooperation) shows that Kishimoto is interested in structural progress, even if it’s incremental. So it’s less that he ignores structure, and more that he believes in reforming it rather than tearing it down—which is a different political stance, but not a fascist one. Fascism glorifies the state, suppresses dissent, and seeks expansion through purity and force. Naruto’s world moves toward collaboration, forgiveness, and shared governance. That’s arguably the opposite.

Itachi genociding his clan for the village secret services was a great plot development. What sucks is that the author used this to display Itachi as a hero.
Kishimoto is a master at creating interesting characters in an interesting world, start great plot points, only to fuck it all up in royal fashion in the cringiest way possible.
Pain should have been the final villain, the whole but its actually Tobi, who's actually Obito, oh no its actually Madara, its actually white zetsu, Black zetsu BAAM its KAGUYA is the worst trainwreck in the history of fiction. I will never forgive kishimoto for ruining my favourite childhood cartoon. Fuck you Kishitmoto

>>29240
>Kishimoto is a master at creating interesting characters in an interesting world
As long as they're not female

>>29241
Tenten, Ino, Temari, Kurenai were all good character concepts. TOO bad Kishitmoto never did anything with them smh

>>29250
Konan <3 too