Either way is time to sharpen your pitchforks

The pictures are an angel and a demon from the Amazon Prime series "Good Omens", if you were wondering.

Is it worth watching? I'm not sure what kind of show it is....I watched about 10mins of the first episode and couldn't get into it. Couldn't figure out if it was fantasy, comedy, comedy-horror, or something else. It felt weird. An angel and demon meet up and chat about the apocalypse?
Does it get better?
- The first season is incredible. Tennant and Sheen have an amazing chemistry together and they're both phenomenal actors. The story is very Pratchetty if you're familiar with his work. Second season is a bit so-so but still good, mostly because I didn't really like the ending.
- It's based on a book by Sir Terry Pratchett (GNU Terry Pratchett, you shall be missed) and Neil Gaiman. If you know Pratchett then you know it's mostly going to be an absurdist comedy.
  Other works I recommend from Pratchett are Going Postal, Equal Rites, and Guards! Guards!
- I definitely enjoyed watching the first two seasons, and will wait eagerly for the next. I'm sure it would be disturbing for someone with fundamentalist Christian views, but the story and humor were right up my alley.
- It's comedy, mostly. Not horror at all.
  And it's more that an angel and demon who are friends (because they've spent so much time on Earth they felt they ended up having more in common with each other than their own side), and upon finding out about the approaching apocalypse, decide to try to avert it (without actually going against their own side) because they don't want Earth to end, as regardless who wins The Final Battle, it will suck.
- Not really, tbh.
  Watch Stardust if you want a good Gaiman film.
- The book is better. Good TV and good acting. But the book is so good.
- I think it gets better, but it is a bit of a slow burn. It's just a comedy that's a satire on religion and systemic oppression, that uses an angel and a devil being friends to convey that.
  I enjoyed it, but I wasn't glued to the screen. I think it's absolutey worth the watch, but it did take an episode or two to gain my interest.
I don't know but pirate it because Amazon

We are going to need a whole lot more than pitchforks...

We collect those from fallen enemies. We were taught in the US military that if you are facing an unarmed hostile force that outnumbers you 5:1, you need to retreat and withdraw, as your position will be overrun, and you just armed the hostile force.
- Didn't work out so well in tianamen square
- does that in turn mean I can hold my own against 4 and a half men?
But big daddy govt says we would never ever need an AR-15 or body armour, just the Police (and sometimes military) that patrol the same streets

This is bullshit. It suggests that the system is intended by someone or some group and that getting ird of that group would get rid of the system. This is not the case. The system is so strong and prevalent precisely because it is not intended and reproduces itself.

It suggests that the system is intended by someone or some group and that getting ird of that group would get rid of the system.
No, it doesn't... It literally says to dismantle the system itself. Idk how you got "attack a specific group of people and hope that works" out of that.
- Idk how you got "attack a specific group of people and hope that works" out of that.
  It's because they're just here to be inflammatory. No surprises there.
contemplating other possibilities is almost humourous when you consider the pervasiveness and magnitude of incompetence that is our collective baseline
The system is so strong and prevalent precisely because it is not intended
Oh really? I'll just leave this here, then.
- casually drops a 16 minute opinion piece by leftists

Sometimes the only way something can be fixed is by dismantling it first.

You want just the right amount of dismantling to accomplish your goal. Too much, and we create extra unnecessary work for ourselves.
The "Turn it off and back on again" method, which has been in my house nicknamed the "Take out the trash and put it back in." method

One thing y'all gotta understand: the strongest proponents of 'the system' who are not an active controller of that system do not belive there even IS a system.

Every fault, every tragedy, every bit of corruption? They hold it as the fault of an individual who failed only themselves. It's why they took 'bad apple' and 'bootstraps' idioms and misinterpreted them as individual successes and failures, not systemic ones

And neither can agree on what “the system” once it’s fixed/dismanted should be so the rest of us suffer while the world burns.

The real debacle is between the people who agree that in our nation with such vast resources and technology, everyone should get their basic needs met, and the people who want to live larger than others, and insist some people deserve to die in the streets for not being hard enough workers, or making mistakes, or whatever other bullshit irrational false narrative they come up with to revel in the suffering of others.
The saddest bit to me are all the non-wealthy at all Americans who will fight you to the death for the second one. They refuse to live without an economic class of people to look down on as they drink in the dopamine hit of schadenfreude, watching those suffering human beings, and declaring "good, that's what you deserve for your bad decisions or something, suffer more!"
That's why I agree with you that the world will burn, but why I don't find it that sad in the US with our near univeral punch down attitude. We tell our most victimized citizens to fuck off and die on the sidewalk, we throw them away like the defective capital batteries our owners consider them, so unlike the increasingly rare societies that care for one another rather than worshipping capitalist economic growth/metastasis at all costs, we won't get, nor do we deserve a future.
- It amazes me you explain a problem so clearly and coherently, and some still don’t understand it. Hope you’re doing well.
- I think it’s because us non-wealthy people would rather not have more taken from the remaining 50% of our income after taxes as more taxes to cover something we may not agree with thereby leaving us with even less to get by. Why should I go out and bust by ass every day just to pay for someone else’s lifestyle?

Title says "Either way is time to sharpen your pitchforks" but depending on where you live the more obvious choice for the Top Picture would be political activism. If you were to live in like China or North Korea, then yeah, Pitchfork Time. If you live in Israel then Pitchfork Time was 3 years ago when you lost your chance to remove Netanyahu peacefully.

The systems not broken. It was built this way.

I even wrote a song about it !

https://youtu.be/b3mYyPtYPMU?si=qS-WbARGvC4THTM4

I get The Matrix vibe out of this

I always feel bad for revolutionaries who never organized anything in the real world.

Man you're gonna be pissed when you find out most of the things that are broken are broken because of just average people. Housing market, for instance, is fucked because people want their houses to be "nest eggs."

Who you coming after with those pitchforks, specifically?

Housing market is broken because banks and enormous corporations treat housing as investment and commodity, and using enormous resources they have as a leverage to increase the price of housing to enormous levels. Retired middle class families buying second home have nothing to do with it and make no difference at all
- This is up there with MAGAs blaming poor people for not wanting to work.
If only people had government backed retiree funda so people didn't need to worry about money when they're old
- If only people had government backed retiree funds
  Social security? Hard part's done. Let's crank the value and means-test it. You don't hear this much, for obvious reasons, but social security is totally solvent if means-tested. Same should apply with student loans.
  But also, I'd argue people will always chase free money, so the best thing to do is disincentivize owning a home specifically because it's an investment. This is very doable by simply changing zoning laws, and this change can be effected locally (but is very challenging because homeowners love their free money)

Ah yes, the horseshoe theory

It only has traction because it's a gross oversimplification that appeals to those that seek simple answers to complex realities.
"The answer" isn't somewhere in between white nationalism and Universal Basic Income, for example. Centrism is a ridiculous ideology. It's honestly more of a lack of any coherent ideology at all.
- The centrist ideology is "I'm above a consistent ideology - things are too complex, so I'll smugly dismiss everyone as wrong while I stand for nothing, have no discernible values, and no solutions to anything."
  The alternative (and usual practical outcome), is that they're just hiding strong right-wing tendencies behind the flimsiest of veneers. I'm looking at you, Tim Pool.
Horseshoe theory: a bunch of bullshit invented by ideologically deficient people to make themselves look good while lumping in leftist reform advocates with fascists.
- Sorry to hear that you won’t admit that Stalin was trying to be in the same league as Hitler.
Do tell me more about this mythical horseshoe that can somehow align anarchism (a complete lack of a state) with fascism (an all-powerful state).
- You see, it makes a lot more sense if you look at it as a 47-dimensional hypercube