People are products of their material conditions, if you have a society built on communal principles rather than capitalist competition then people will necessarily have a different outlook on life.
So, let’s break the comic down. Two people are talking about whether a communist would have different perspective on relationships. Later on, one of the characters gets help without any expectation of compensation, and finds it fascinating. It was pretty easy for me to follow. 🤷
Let’s start here: the person with the black hair seems to be convinced of communist principles from the beginning, thinking “absolutely”. They then apparently go on to be surprised at someone helping them without compensation. That’s nonsensical.
Not to mention there is next to no cohesion between panels and I have to infer what happens between them.
The person says they absolutely think a communist would absolutely have a different perspective based on the first panel. They don’t know what that perspective would be. I’m also not sure how there’s no cohesion between panels. First two panels are a discussion people are having, and second two panels are an event proving the point of the discussion. Seems like you just want to argue for the sake of arguing here.
They agree (but don’t say so out loud) that communists would have a different perspective but they’re not sure what? How does that make sense? And how do they then connect that vague agreement with what the third person does? The conversation wasn’t about specifically “doing things without compensation” but about some nebulous “different perspective” that isn’t in any way specified and, as you explain it, Black Hair Person doesn’t even have an opinion on what that different perspective might be.
I’m flabbergasted at how amateurish this comic is, that’s why I argue.
They raise a question that communists would have a different perspective. They don’t know what that perspective would be. Like if I said aliens would be different from us, I’m not saying I know how aliens think. So the second scene is the illustration of what it looks like in practice. An act of kindness is what shows that people can act in different ways. I’m flabbergasted how some people really need things chewed up and spoon fed to them.
So the comic is saying “different people are different and some do indeed do kind things” and does so in a way that is in no way at all clear. Brilliant.
If people can’t follow a simple 4 panel comic, then the problem exists firmly between the chair and the keyboard. Also, pretty clear from the upvotes that anybody with even a minimally functional brain got what the comic was saying.
People are products of their material conditions, if you have a society built on communal principles rather than capitalist competition then people will necessarily have a different outlook on life.
And that’s what the comic is meant to express?
So, let’s break the comic down. Two people are talking about whether a communist would have different perspective on relationships. Later on, one of the characters gets help without any expectation of compensation, and finds it fascinating. It was pretty easy for me to follow. 🤷
Where to start.
Let’s start here: the person with the black hair seems to be convinced of communist principles from the beginning, thinking “absolutely”. They then apparently go on to be surprised at someone helping them without compensation. That’s nonsensical.
Not to mention there is next to no cohesion between panels and I have to infer what happens between them.
The person says they absolutely think a communist would absolutely have a different perspective based on the first panel. They don’t know what that perspective would be. I’m also not sure how there’s no cohesion between panels. First two panels are a discussion people are having, and second two panels are an event proving the point of the discussion. Seems like you just want to argue for the sake of arguing here.
They agree (but don’t say so out loud) that communists would have a different perspective but they’re not sure what? How does that make sense? And how do they then connect that vague agreement with what the third person does? The conversation wasn’t about specifically “doing things without compensation” but about some nebulous “different perspective” that isn’t in any way specified and, as you explain it, Black Hair Person doesn’t even have an opinion on what that different perspective might be.
I’m flabbergasted at how amateurish this comic is, that’s why I argue.
They raise a question that communists would have a different perspective. They don’t know what that perspective would be. Like if I said aliens would be different from us, I’m not saying I know how aliens think. So the second scene is the illustration of what it looks like in practice. An act of kindness is what shows that people can act in different ways. I’m flabbergasted how some people really need things chewed up and spoon fed to them.
So the comic is saying “different people are different and some do indeed do kind things” and does so in a way that is in no way at all clear. Brilliant.
🙄
people in this thread are getting tripped up because it’s AI slop that can’t keep its own narrative straight and visually makes no sense
stop posting this kind of stupid shit and you won’t confuse as many people.
If people can’t follow a simple 4 panel comic, then the problem exists firmly between the chair and the keyboard. Also, pretty clear from the upvotes that anybody with even a minimally functional brain got what the comic was saying.
imean, yea, obviously. communism is the better system no question… theres no convincing needed.