My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic, ANARCHISTS?

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Who'd a thunk it!

My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic should actually be called Friendship is Rational because every episode is not simply a story about friendship, but quite an insightful analysis of the mutually—reinforcing benefits of interpersonal relationships. The characters do not simply learn virtue by unquestioned instruction or blind imitation; they learn precisely how consequences result from their actions and attitudes. They see how friendship gives them the opportunity to learn new tricks or to play to their strengths and to depend on others to support their weaknesses.
But what happens when the theory of friendship is applied to all of society rather than merely a small clique? This is what the season 2 episode “Hearth’s Warming Eve” attempts, and the result is absolutely the greatest dramatization of Libertarian class theory that I have ever seen. We see a society divided by a mistrust and hatred propagated by the upper class rulers of each group. We see how this division harms the lower classes, who all yearn for peace and cooperation. And finally we see how harmony is finally achieved by removing the rulers from their positions.

The Glorious Triumph of Anarchy in My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Hmmmmm. Sounds like a certain messianic group in Israel 2000 years ago.... But I may be reading too much into it although it sounds like I'm not the only one.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Hmmmmm. Sounds like a certain messianic group in Israel 2000 years ago.... But I may be reading too much into it although it sounds like I'm not the only one.

Matthew 10:34. "Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword.
35 "For I have come to 'set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law';
36 "and 'a man's enemies will be those of his own household.'

Looking at the fruit of the historical tree, Jesus was right and thus a direct contradiction to your assertion.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Looking at the fruit of the historical tree, Jesus was right and thus a direct contradiction to your assertion.
Incorrect. I was speaking very much about first century Christianity and the threat Jesus represented to both Rome and Jewish authority.
 

Upsmule

Well-Known Member
Looking at the fruit of the historical tree, Jesus was right and thus a direct contradiction to your assertion.
Incorrect. I was speaking very much about first century Christianity and the threat Jesus represented to both Rome and Jewish authority.

Barabbas was more of a threat than Jesus was. Yet they released him. When they arrested Jesus, Peter tried to take a swipe at a soldier's head but only got an ear. Jesus rebuked Peter and healed the mans ear and willingly went with them.

Quite a threat?
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Jesus was a threat because of what the masses wanted him to be in conjunction with who and what he was. Israel was looking for a leader to overthrow Roman rule. While Barabas would have cherished the role, Jesus seemingly did not. Crucifying messiahs did not begin or end with Jesus. There was something different about Jesus, though, or else there would not be a world religion devoted to him. Surprising? Not really. Although Jesus sought a revolution, it was not against Rome or even the Jewish elders. Who posed the threat to racism in America? The Black Panthers or MLK Jr.? Wasn't it Ghandi's peaceful revolution that turned India? Why didn't Mandela call for the heads of Apartheid leaders but instead sought reconciliation? Those in power can easily put down armed insurrection with brutality. The peaceful revolutionaries pose a more difficult problem. They are a larger threat than the Barabases of the world.
 
Top