This comic is confusing. Why does the woman look frustrated as she asks the question? Why does he only think his answer? How do the first two panels and the last two relate in time? Are 3 and 4 a flashback explaining his thoughts or a later event meant to demonstrate something? What if so? The shift in angle from 3 to 4 makes it unclear how far the package was actually carried. I have no idea what I was meant to take away from this.
Because its AI generated slop
Or maybe 3 & 4 are juxtaposed? In 4 the other man is a delivery worker but in 3 just a guy lending a hand under communism? That would support the point of the title but it isn’t very clear
hmnawwww the comic implies communists are absolute cutiepatooties and softies willing to help each other?
that is - such an awesome thought.
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.
imean, yea, obviously. communism is the better system no question… theres no convincing needed.
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.
… Huh?
(Also, whoever, ahem, drew this needs to learn about tangents)
Someone drew this?
Some really weird choices here for sure. But it seems to be made by Auckland artist Toby Morris: https://www.lambiek.net/artists/m/morris_toby.htm
What leads you to that conclusion?
Google reverse image search
I couldn’t find it. Care to share the source?
It wasn’t Google, it was this one: https://www.labnol.org/reverse
I didn’t find the direct image, but it did link more to the artist
You didn’t find the exact image, you found an artist whose work looks vaguely similar to this one. So that must mean Studio Ghibli has lately been in the employ of the US propaganda department, yes?
Ahem. Surely. Someone. Suggesting anything else risks marking you as a technophobe, don’t you know?
I don’t get it.
