Maybe Disney forced him to do it, maybe he was deadset on the Holdo struggle/deconstruction of what made Poe and fighter pilots cool. (idk, the Rose thing about protecting what you love versus destroying what you hate was pretty lib) I'm convinced that the writers are simply not allowed to do based things like having sand people invade urban centers (cough Algeria/Iraq, Afghanistan) or have Admiral Ackbar (allahu) suicide bomb the british sounding people.
How is Rose's line lib? Its the same sentiment as Che had.
“At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality.”
He also was fine with destroying the old regime and would have gladly rammed his ship into the enemy if it meant saving his comrades. Seriously think about it: if two space wizards didn't show up, then at best they would have ended up in a labor/concentration camp.
Yeah but ramming your ship into an enemy when it will do nothing at all is not defiance in that situation, it is indulgence. Those two space wizards showing up was what they hoped for, they had to buy time for someone to answer their call and they did. Finn was not saving his comrades by dying needlessly. And oh look that whole protecting what you love thing resulted in said space wizards coming to save them. It was not some ancillary event, it literally had to do with them protecting what they love. Rey trying to find Finn and co is the only reason the space wizards manage to save them, cause she follows the beacon.
Plus in what way is Rose's line advocating for protecting the old regime? I dislike how lib the resistance is, but there is nothing lib about the sentiment there. Again its the same as what Che said. Simplistically referencing things that happen or could have happened in universe, has no bearing on if the line is liberal or not. Imagining Che in star wars is not what determines the value of the line
edit: Oh and to that end, here is Che from his work "Guerrilla Warfare"
This is the guerrilla's heroism. For this it is said that walking is a form of fighting and that avoiding combat at a given moment is another. Facing the general superiority of the enemy at a given place, one must find the tactics with which to gain relative superiority at that moment, either by being capable of concentrating more troops than the enemy or by using the terrain fully and well in order to secure advantages that unbalance the correlation of forces. In these conditions tactical victory is assured; if relative superiority is not clear, it is better not to act. As long as the guerrilla army is in the position of deciding the “how” and the “when,” no combat should be fought that will not end in victory.
So I would assume he would follow his advice or intend for others to do so if regrouping and fighting on is possible. Allende said something similar. But regardless this has nothing to do with whether love is a liberal concept or not
Yeah that was really weird. Seemed like the perfect opportunity to kill her off and then she opens her eyes and floats away lolol
Maybe Disney forced him to do it, maybe he was deadset on the Holdo struggle/deconstruction of what made Poe and fighter pilots cool. (idk, the Rose thing about protecting what you love versus destroying what you hate was pretty lib) I'm convinced that the writers are simply not allowed to do based things like having sand people invade urban centers (cough Algeria/Iraq, Afghanistan) or have Admiral Ackbar (allahu) suicide bomb the british sounding people.
How is Rose's line lib? Its the same sentiment as Che had.
He also was fine with destroying the old regime and would have gladly rammed his ship into the enemy if it meant saving his comrades. Seriously think about it: if two space wizards didn't show up, then at best they would have ended up in a labor/concentration camp.
Yeah but ramming your ship into an enemy when it will do nothing at all is not defiance in that situation, it is indulgence. Those two space wizards showing up was what they hoped for, they had to buy time for someone to answer their call and they did. Finn was not saving his comrades by dying needlessly. And oh look that whole protecting what you love thing resulted in said space wizards coming to save them. It was not some ancillary event, it literally had to do with them protecting what they love. Rey trying to find Finn and co is the only reason the space wizards manage to save them, cause she follows the beacon.
Plus in what way is Rose's line advocating for protecting the old regime? I dislike how lib the resistance is, but there is nothing lib about the sentiment there. Again its the same as what Che said. Simplistically referencing things that happen or could have happened in universe, has no bearing on if the line is liberal or not. Imagining Che in star wars is not what determines the value of the line
edit: Oh and to that end, here is Che from his work "Guerrilla Warfare"
So I would assume he would follow his advice or intend for others to do so if regrouping and fighting on is possible. Allende said something similar. But regardless this has nothing to do with whether love is a liberal concept or not
They were cornered and you are the one complaining about miracles.
There is a difference between fighting hoping that someone will save you, and dying needlessly.
Now that would’ve been cool. Return Star Wars to its anti-imperialist roots! The good things never happen