Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 102 (click to see context) from:
** ''Literature/HarryPotterAndTheGobletOfFire'': Hermione starts a campaign to give House Elves freedom from servitude and human wages upon finding out that their ServantRace who work without payment. Unfortunately for Hermione, she refuses to accept that House Elves have a [[BlueAndOrangeMorality different view of the world]], actually like serving wizards, and don't see the difference between freedom and being sacked in disgrace. Despite claiming that she's the only one who respects House Elves and wants what's best for them, the fact that [[CondescendingCompassion Hermione patronizes them by calling "brainwashed and uneducated"]] and thinks they can be easily tricked into freeing themselves only proves that Hermione also looks down on them, just from the opposite direction.
to:
** ''Literature/HarryPotterAndTheGobletOfFire'': Hermione starts a campaign to give House Elves freedom from servitude and human wages upon finding out that their they're a ServantRace who work without payment. Unfortunately for Hermione, she refuses to accept that House Elves have a [[BlueAndOrangeMorality different view of the world]], actually like serving wizards, and don't see the difference between freedom and being sacked in disgrace. Despite claiming that she's the only one who respects House Elves and wants what's best for them, the fact that [[CondescendingCompassion Hermione patronizes them by calling "brainwashed and uneducated"]] and thinks they can be easily tricked into freeing themselves only proves that Hermione also looks down on them, just from the opposite direction.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* ''Franchise/HarryPotter'':
** ''Literature/HarryPotterAndTheGobletOfFire'': Hermione starts a campaign to give House Elves freedom from servitude and human wages upon finding out that their ServantRace who work without payment. Unfortunately for Hermione, she refuses to accept that House Elves have a [[BlueAndOrangeMorality different view of the world]], actually like serving wizards, and don't see the difference between freedom and being sacked in disgrace. Despite claiming that she's the only one who respects House Elves and wants what's best for them, the fact that [[CondescendingCompassion Hermione patronizes them by calling "brainwashed and uneducated"]] and thinks they can be easily tricked into freeing themselves only proves that Hermione also looks down on them, just from the opposite direction.
** ''Literature/HarryPotterAndTheOrderOfThePhoenix'': Umbridge pursues [[HangingJudge an insanely harsh and fundamentalist interpretation of law and order]]. [[KnightTemplar Despite her self-proclaimed virtue, she is]] ''[[KnightTemplar incredibly]]'' [[KnightTemplar guilty of numerous sins while trying to carry out "the Ministry's work", including pride.]] By the end of the novel [[spoiler:she goes so far as to attempt to use the [[AgonyBeam Cruciatus Curse]] on Harry, becoming the very "naughty person" she claimed to oppose, only not following through because Hermione interrupts her]].
** ''Literature/HarryPotterAndTheGobletOfFire'': Hermione starts a campaign to give House Elves freedom from servitude and human wages upon finding out that their ServantRace who work without payment. Unfortunately for Hermione, she refuses to accept that House Elves have a [[BlueAndOrangeMorality different view of the world]], actually like serving wizards, and don't see the difference between freedom and being sacked in disgrace. Despite claiming that she's the only one who respects House Elves and wants what's best for them, the fact that [[CondescendingCompassion Hermione patronizes them by calling "brainwashed and uneducated"]] and thinks they can be easily tricked into freeing themselves only proves that Hermione also looks down on them, just from the opposite direction.
** ''Literature/HarryPotterAndTheOrderOfThePhoenix'': Umbridge pursues [[HangingJudge an insanely harsh and fundamentalist interpretation of law and order]]. [[KnightTemplar Despite her self-proclaimed virtue, she is]] ''[[KnightTemplar incredibly]]'' [[KnightTemplar guilty of numerous sins while trying to carry out "the Ministry's work", including pride.]] By the end of the novel [[spoiler:she goes so far as to attempt to use the [[AgonyBeam Cruciatus Curse]] on Harry, becoming the very "naughty person" she claimed to oppose, only not following through because Hermione interrupts her]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 37 (click to see context) from:
* ''ComicBook/BuckDanny'': Occurs in the "nuclear alert" story arc. The main villains, the International Federation of Armed Revolutionary Groups, are a movement of extreme-left WesternTerrorists. They ally with a cabal of anticommunist [[TheGeneralissimo Central American generals]] in order to steal a pair of F-14s from the U.S. Navy. Slightly downplayed in that the generals have no idea who they're dealing with: the IFARG approach them by pretending to be a CorporateConspiracy interested in financing their rise to power as a bulwark against communism. When the collusion is discovered, the oddity of "fascists allied to leftists" is lampshaded.
to:
* ''ComicBook/BuckDanny'': Occurs in the "nuclear alert" story arc. The main villains, the International Federation of Armed Revolutionary Groups, are a movement of extreme-left WesternTerrorists. They ally with a cabal of anticommunist [[TheGeneralissimo Central American generals]] in order to steal a pair of F-14s from the U.S. Navy. Slightly downplayed in that the generals have no idea who they're dealing with: the IFARG approach them by pretending to be a CorporateConspiracy interested in financing their rise to power as a bulwark against communism. When the collusion is discovered, the oddity irony of "fascists allied to leftists" is lampshaded.
* ''Film/TheEmperorOfParis'': Eugene Vidocq's gang brings together people with monarchist, republican, and Bonapartist backgrounds who've all somehow ended up in the Paris underworld. It's understandable, since whatever their origins, all of them are now criminals with different priorities. However, Joseph Fouché, the secret police chief who comes to rely more and more on Vidocq, darkly suggests that Napoleon's whole French Empire runs on the same principle:
-->'''Fouché''': Napoleon's strength is his ability to make all these people work together: Bonapartists, monarchists, republicans. Without him, we would still be fighting a civil war. ... It's also what I like about you. You have a Vendean trying to recover his property, an old republican drunkard, a Bonapartist whore, and an old convict who desperately wants to buy back his place in society. I like your vision of France very much, Vidocq.
-->'''Fouché''': Napoleon's strength is his ability to make all these people work together: Bonapartists, monarchists, republicans. Without him, we would still be fighting a civil war. ... It's also what I like about you. You have a Vendean trying to recover his property, an old republican drunkard, a Bonapartist whore, and an old convict who desperately wants to buy back his place in society. I like your vision of France very much, Vidocq.
* ''Film/WildWildWest'': The "Loveless Alliance" consists of Arliss Loveless and the neo-Confederate remnant under his command, plus the governments of Britain, Spain, France, and Mexico (i.e. every foreign power that once had land in what is now the United States), plus one vaguely defined Native American faction. ... For context, Mexico by this point was a liberal republic, while France was a colonial empire which had very recently tried to impose a conservative monarchical puppet state on Mexico, with the brutal war between both sides only concluding three years before the time of the movie. The alliance also means that the Native American faction trying to recover some land for itself is working alongside three colonial empires who were still in the process of expanding their territory and subjugating various natives (Mexico's record on that front is also less than ideal, but it did have a Native chief of state at the time). All of this is justified by the fact the purpose of the alliance is to destroy and split up the United States amongst its members, an ''enormous'' prize with more than enough land and resources to satisfy everyone... at least for the moment. It also doesn't hurt that despite its name, the "alliance" largely leaves all the work to Loveless, his minions, and his mechanized inventions (even his Confederates get thrown away as soon as their usefulness to him ends). The other powers' involvement is limited to financing him, so it's not like the war requires ordinary French and Mexican soldiers to get along.
* ''Literature/JackRyan'': Tom Clancy's novels don't ''usually'' indulge in this, and he especially have no patience for this trope being invoked to equate the two sides of UsefulNotes/TheColdWar. There are times, however:
** ''Literature/PatriotGames'' is set against the backdrop of UsefulNotes/TheTroubles. While all of the villains featured are on the Catholic/Republican side, none of the CIA or FBI personnel in the book have anything nicer to say about their Protestant/Loyalist enemies, viewing both sides as equally repellent collections of bigots and fanatics. The icing on the cake is that even their British counterparts seem to feel this way; it's stated repeatedly that outside of Northern Ireland, even and especially in the British Army, the sentiment of "let's just leave and let the two crazies sort it out" is a very popular one.
** Communists are the most common villains in the series. However, similar to the James Bond example above, a lot of them are quite prone to behaving in exactly the ways they attribute to their right-wing enemies, a hypocrisy the author is happy to point out. The ruling classes of communist nations tend to be shot through with corrupt opportunists who constantly abuse their power to satisfy their own greed. Racism is also shown to be a problem endemic throughout communist regimes and movements, regardless of their ethnicity.
** Invoked and subverted in ''Literature/WithoutRemorse'':
--->'''Georgiy Glazov''': You have adverse political elements in your government. So do we - leftovers from the Stalin era. The key to negotiations such as those which may soon begin is that both sides must be reasonable. We need your help to control the unreasonable elements on our side.[[note]]Subverted because Glazov is a KGB recruiter, talking to a high-ranking American political aide that he's trying to recruit as a spy. He doesn't actually believe a word of this, he's just trying to portray treason in a way that the other man will find flattering.[[/note]]
** ''Literature/PatriotGames'' is set against the backdrop of UsefulNotes/TheTroubles. While all of the villains featured are on the Catholic/Republican side, none of the CIA or FBI personnel in the book have anything nicer to say about their Protestant/Loyalist enemies, viewing both sides as equally repellent collections of bigots and fanatics. The icing on the cake is that even their British counterparts seem to feel this way; it's stated repeatedly that outside of Northern Ireland, even and especially in the British Army, the sentiment of "let's just leave and let the two crazies sort it out" is a very popular one.
** Communists are the most common villains in the series. However, similar to the James Bond example above, a lot of them are quite prone to behaving in exactly the ways they attribute to their right-wing enemies, a hypocrisy the author is happy to point out. The ruling classes of communist nations tend to be shot through with corrupt opportunists who constantly abuse their power to satisfy their own greed. Racism is also shown to be a problem endemic throughout communist regimes and movements, regardless of their ethnicity.
** Invoked and subverted in ''Literature/WithoutRemorse'':
--->'''Georgiy Glazov''': You have adverse political elements in your government. So do we - leftovers from the Stalin era. The key to negotiations such as those which may soon begin is that both sides must be reasonable. We need your help to control the unreasonable elements on our side.[[note]]Subverted because Glazov is a KGB recruiter, talking to a high-ranking American political aide that he's trying to recruit as a spy. He doesn't actually believe a word of this, he's just trying to portray treason in a way that the other man will find flattering.[[/note]]
Changed line(s) 121 (click to see context) from:
* ''Series/MacGyver1985'': A recurring trope, appropriately for a show that was fairly patriotic and anticommunist, while nevertheless concerned about the various injustices of American society and abuses of the U.S. government.
to:
* ''Series/MacGyver1985'': A recurring trope, appropriately for a show that was fairly patriotic and anticommunist, while nevertheless concerned about but also maintained a liberal and activist spirit that often tried to shine a light on the various injustices of American society and abuses of the U.S. government. government and injustices of American society.
Changed line(s) 133 (click to see context) from:
** Even before the takeover, the rogue NID and their allies had a great deal in common with the Goa'uld. Both factions are extremely prejudiced and view other species with suspicion or indifference. Both are run by power-hungry sociopaths whose claims to represent higher ideals are a mask for their own greed. And both of them largely follow the same MO in their development, pillaging the technologies of living and dead civilizations alike rather than trying to negotiate or trade for them.
to:
** Even before the takeover, the rogue NID and their allies had a great deal in common with the Goa'uld. Both factions are extremely prejudiced ethnocentric and view treat other species with suspicion or indifference.depraved indifference at best and raging bigotry at worst. Both are run by power-hungry sociopaths whose claims to represent higher ideals are a mask for their own greed. And both of them largely follow grew to their present strength by following the same MO in their development, MO, pillaging the technologies of living and dead civilizations alike rather than trying to negotiate or trade for them. them.
** Implied with Senator Kinsey and his Russian contact, General Kiselev. Their connection goes back to the end of the UsefulNotes/ColdWar, when they were part of secret talks between their respective governments. Kinsey has previously been shown to be an American nationalist and Christian fundamentalist, while Kiselev is said to have been the same kind of hard-liner on the Soviet side. Given this, one might expect them to hate each other, but Kinsey instead remembers him fondly and says they developed "a mutual respect." (Of course, given what we know of him, it's an open question how much any of Kinsey's beliefs are sincere, and the same is likely true of Kiselev: O'Neill is anything but surprised when he finds that they're friends).
** Implied with Senator Kinsey and his Russian contact, General Kiselev. Their connection goes back to the end of the UsefulNotes/ColdWar, when they were part of secret talks between their respective governments. Kinsey has previously been shown to be an American nationalist and Christian fundamentalist, while Kiselev is said to have been the same kind of hard-liner on the Soviet side. Given this, one might expect them to hate each other, but Kinsey instead remembers him fondly and says they developed "a mutual respect." (Of course, given what we know of him, it's an open question how much any of Kinsey's beliefs are sincere, and the same is likely true of Kiselev: O'Neill is anything but surprised when he finds that they're friends).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Pretty sure a real-life study does not count as Web Original
Deleted line(s) 184,185 (click to see context) :
* An actual [[https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/doi/10.1093/poq/nfx023/4059546/Authoritarianism-and-Affective-PolarizationA-New?redirectedFrom=fulltext scientific study]] into the phenomenon. Key quote:
-->...strong Republicans and Democrats are psychologically similar, at least with respect to authoritarianism…these findings support a view of mass polarization as nonsubstantive and group-centric, not driven by competing ideological values or clashing psychological worldviews.
-->...strong Republicans and Democrats are psychologically similar, at least with respect to authoritarianism…these findings support a view of mass polarization as nonsubstantive and group-centric, not driven by competing ideological values or clashing psychological worldviews.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 14,15 (click to see context) from:
This theory was first observed in comparing far-right and far-left governments, but is also visible when comparing political groups or organisations on each end of the spectrum. Consider how some far-left radical feminists[[note]]In feminist circles, some refer to such people as "trans-excluding radical feminists" ([=TERFs=]) and "sex worker–excluding radical feminists" ([=SWERFs=]).[[/note]] tend to have remarkably similar attitudes towards prostitution, pornography and UsefulNotes/{{Transgender}} people as do conservative fundamentalists; or how [[ANaziByAnyOtherName far-right]] [[TheKlan white supremacist groups]] and [[PeoplesRepublicOfTyranny far-left]] [[MalcolmXerox black supremacist groups]] have in some cases been known to collaborate with one another in order to achieve common goals (segregation, for example).
to:
This theory was first observed in comparing far-right and far-left governments, but is also visible when comparing political groups or organisations on each end of the spectrum. Consider how some far-left radical feminists[[note]]In feminist circles, some refer to such people as "trans-excluding radical feminists" ([=TERFs=]) and "sex worker–excluding radical feminists" ([=SWERFs=]).[[/note]] tend to have remarkably similar attitudes towards prostitution, pornography and UsefulNotes/{{Transgender}} people as do conservative fundamentalists; or how some [[ANaziByAnyOtherName far-right]] [[TheKlan white supremacist groups]] and some [[PeoplesRepublicOfTyranny far-left]] [[MalcolmXerox black supremacist groups]] have in some cases been known to collaborate with one another in order to achieve common goals (segregation, for example).
example).[[note]] For example, the American Nazi Party, the Ku Klux Klan, and White Aryan Resistance have tried to establish a working relationship with the Nation of Islam (NOI) based on their shared antisemitism and opposition to the LGBTQ+ community and committment to racial separation. Malcolm X revealed one such attempted collaboration after renouncing and denouncing the NOI.[[/note]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* ''Literature/ThePoetAndTheLunatics'': In "The House of the Peacock", the antagonist is a man who has built his life around acting directly contrary to every superstition he can think of. Gabriel notes that this man is just as ruled by superstition as the rustic yokel who obeys every superstition he knows.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4,5 (click to see context) from:
This trope is when two groups who are ostensibly ideologically opposed to each other [[NotSoDifferentRemark actually have a lot of ideology in common]].
to:
This trope is when two groups who are ostensibly ideologically opposed to each other [[NotSoDifferentRemark [[YourTerroristsAreOurFreedomFighters actually have a lot of ideology in common]].
Changed line(s) 20,21 (click to see context) from:
Compare MirroringFactions, which is likely to use this trope.
to:
Compare MirroringFactions, which is likely to use this trope.
trope. If someone makes this realization in story, they may point it out with a NotSoDifferentRemark.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* ''VideoGame/TerraInvicta'': [[ChurchMilitant The Servants]] (idealistic and pro-alien) and [[ANaziByAnyOtherName Humanity First]] (cynical and anti-alien) employ similar tactics despite being polar opposites philosophically. These are the two factions most likely to engage in wars of aggression (including [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_first_use nuclear first-strike policy]]), both display {{Cult}}ish language and behaviour, both harshly punish dissent, and both are flagged as "extremist", giving them certain brutal event decisions and possible alliances with international terrorist organisations like Al Qaeda, [[EveryoneHasStandards which other factions do not get]]. [[WorldWarIII Woe to the world if both factions end up in control of countries with nuclear weapons stockpiles.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
edited to add detail to a point
Changed line(s) 18,19 (click to see context) from:
This trope can also lead people to misguidedly believe in the GoldenMeanFallacy, wherein the correct solution to a problem is assumed to be the middle of two extremes. Among political science circles, this trope can be criticised on the grounds that it presents centrist liberalism as the only option for society to take, which can end up being nothing more than calling for the status quo. Mentioning this trope is also something of a BerserkButton for individuals on either end of the political spectrum, who often resent the suggestion that they have anything ideologically in common with the individuals on the opposite end (as testament to this, [[SelfDemonstratingArticle look no further]] than the numerous Administrivia/{{Justifying Edit}}s this page has undergone since its launch). And also, radicals often have their own versions of the Horseshoe Effect where they claim [[UnwittingPawn that centrists serve to only bolster the side they oppose and are most prone to supporting and being swayed by them]] This is often [[https://www.theweek.co.uk/103810/what-is-fish-hook-theory called]] the [[https://psmag.com/social-justice/an-end-to-horseshoe-theory Fish Hook Effect]] (however, those who are against this idea claim that it's a reaction against Horseshoe Theory fueled by an "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality). Best practice is not to take the existence of this trope as hard-and-fast evidence that opposing political groups or governments ''always'' end up ideologically similar to each other; after all, it's the Horseshoe ''Effect'', not the Horseshoe ''Law''.
to:
This trope can also lead people to misguidedly believe in the GoldenMeanFallacy, wherein the correct solution to a problem is assumed to be the middle of two extremes. Among political science circles, this trope can be criticised on the grounds that it presents centrist liberalism as the only option for society to take, which can end up being nothing more than calling for the status quo. Mentioning this trope is also something of a BerserkButton for individuals on either end of the political spectrum, who often resent the suggestion that they have anything ideologically in common with the individuals on the opposite end (as testament to this, [[SelfDemonstratingArticle look no further]] than the numerous Administrivia/{{Justifying Edit}}s this page has undergone since its launch). And also, radicals often have their own versions of the Horseshoe Effect where they claim [[UnwittingPawn that centrists serve to only bolster the side they oppose and are most prone to supporting and being swayed by them]] This is often [[https://www.theweek.co.uk/103810/what-is-fish-hook-theory called]] the [[https://psmag.com/social-justice/an-end-to-horseshoe-theory Fish Hook Effect]] (however, those who are against this idea claim that it's a closed-minded reaction against Horseshoe Theory fueled by bad-faith assumptions & an "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality). Best practice is not to take the existence of this trope as hard-and-fast evidence that opposing political groups or governments ''always'' end up ideologically similar to each other; after all, it's the Horseshoe ''Effect'', not the Horseshoe ''Law''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Added to express another point of view about an idea
Changed line(s) 18,19 (click to see context) from:
This trope can also lead people to misguidedly believe in the GoldenMeanFallacy, wherein the correct solution to a problem is assumed to be the middle of two extremes. Among political science circles, this trope can be criticised on the grounds that it presents centrist liberalism as the only option for society to take, which can end up being nothing more than calling for the status quo. Mentioning this trope is also something of a BerserkButton for individuals on either end of the political spectrum, who often resent the suggestion that they have anything ideologically in common with the individuals on the opposite end (as testament to this, [[SelfDemonstratingArticle look no further]] than the numerous Administrivia/{{Justifying Edit}}s this page has undergone since its launch). And also, radicals often have their own versions of the Horseshoe Effect where they claim [[UnwittingPawn that centrists serve to only bolster the side they oppose and are most prone to supporting and being swayed by them]] (this is often [[https://www.theweek.co.uk/103810/what-is-fish-hook-theory called]] the [[https://psmag.com/social-justice/an-end-to-horseshoe-theory Fish Hook Effect]]). Best practice is not to take the existence of this trope as hard-and-fast evidence that opposing political groups or governments ''always'' end up ideologically similar to each other; after all, it's the Horseshoe ''Effect'', not the Horseshoe ''Law''.
to:
This trope can also lead people to misguidedly believe in the GoldenMeanFallacy, wherein the correct solution to a problem is assumed to be the middle of two extremes. Among political science circles, this trope can be criticised on the grounds that it presents centrist liberalism as the only option for society to take, which can end up being nothing more than calling for the status quo. Mentioning this trope is also something of a BerserkButton for individuals on either end of the political spectrum, who often resent the suggestion that they have anything ideologically in common with the individuals on the opposite end (as testament to this, [[SelfDemonstratingArticle look no further]] than the numerous Administrivia/{{Justifying Edit}}s this page has undergone since its launch). And also, radicals often have their own versions of the Horseshoe Effect where they claim [[UnwittingPawn that centrists serve to only bolster the side they oppose and are most prone to supporting and being swayed by them]] (this This is often [[https://www.theweek.co.uk/103810/what-is-fish-hook-theory called]] the [[https://psmag.com/social-justice/an-end-to-horseshoe-theory Fish Hook Effect]]).Effect]] (however, those who are against this idea claim that it's a reaction against Horseshoe Theory fueled by an "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality). Best practice is not to take the existence of this trope as hard-and-fast evidence that opposing political groups or governments ''always'' end up ideologically similar to each other; after all, it's the Horseshoe ''Effect'', not the Horseshoe ''Law''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* ''Film/{{The Net|2016}}'': The story involves Chul-woo, a humble North Korean fisherman who accidentally defects to the South when his fishing boat his caught by the current, only to be arrested as a spy. The security services of North and South Korea are indistinguishable from each other in behavior. They both arrest Chul-woo, handcuff him, and take him to little interrogation rooms where he is beaten. Both interrogators demand that Chul-woo write down his story, multiple times.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 58 (click to see context) from:
--->'''Colonel Moon''': I know all about the UN. I studied at Oxford and Harvard. Took a major in Western hypocrisy.
to:
--->'''Colonel Moon''': I know all about the UN. I studied at Oxford and Harvard. Took a [[MajoredInWesternHypocrisy major in Western hypocrisy.hypocrisy]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 165 (click to see context) from:
* ''WebAnimation/DarkMatter2525'': The ''"Christian VS Muslim"'' video argues that fundamentalist Christians exhibit many ideological similarities with Muslims.
to:
* ''WebAnimation/DarkMatter2525'': The ''"Christian VS Muslim"'' video argues that fundamentalist Christians exhibit many ideological similarities with fundamentalist Muslims.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 161 (click to see context) from:
* In full effect in ''VideoGame/NotForBroadcast''. The two major factions, [[PeoplesRepublicOfTyranny Advance]] and [[TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized Disrupt]] are on complete ends of the political spectrum, Advance being a left-wing authoritarian party that seeks to create equaltiy through totalitarianism and control of the media [[spoiler: and later expansionism and nuclear war]], and Disrupt is a resistance group headed by right-wing libertarian types that care less about Advance taking away civil freedom, and more about the ''economic'' freedoms they lost (which is why several celebrities and formerly rich people are pro-Disrupt). Often you're forced between choosing to support one or the other throughout the game, and while Disrupt might at first seem like the lesser of two evils, not only will they ask you to censor speech much like Advance, the endgame reveals that [[spoilers:Disrupt is secretly funded and directed by a council of oligarchs that are upset that Advance took away their power and forced them to live amongst the 'common people'. Not only are they also wannabe dictators that are arguably worse than the Advance leadership, they're willing to use any depraved methods to gain power and money; from trafficking drugs to sex slavery.]] Ultimately, the only way to get a positive ending is to [[spoiler: force Advance to reinstate democracy and then reveal both Advance and Disrupt's dirty laundry to the nation. This will cause the centrist party Accord to win the election in a crushing victory.]]
to:
* In full effect in ''VideoGame/NotForBroadcast''. The two major factions, [[PeoplesRepublicOfTyranny Advance]] and [[TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized Disrupt]] are on complete ends of the political spectrum, Advance being a left-wing authoritarian party that seeks to create equaltiy through totalitarianism and control of the media [[spoiler: and later expansionism and nuclear war]], and Disrupt is a resistance group headed by right-wing libertarian types that care less about Advance taking away civil freedom, and more about the ''economic'' freedoms they lost (which is why several celebrities and formerly rich people are pro-Disrupt). Often you're forced between choosing to support one or the other throughout the game, and while Disrupt might at first seem like the lesser of two evils, not only will they ask you to censor speech much like Advance, the endgame reveals that [[spoilers:Disrupt [[spoiler:Disrupt is secretly funded and directed by a council of oligarchs that are upset that Advance took away their power and forced them to live amongst the 'common people'. Not only are they also wannabe dictators that are arguably worse than the Advance leadership, they're willing to use any depraved methods to gain power and money; from trafficking drugs to sex slavery.]] Ultimately, the only way to get a positive ending is to [[spoiler: force Advance to reinstate democracy and then reveal both Advance and Disrupt's dirty laundry to the nation. This will cause the centrist party Accord to win the election in a crushing victory.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* In full effect in ''VideoGame/NotForBroadcast''. The two major factions, [[PeoplesRepublicOfTyranny Advance]] and [[TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized Disrupt]] are on complete ends of the political spectrum, Advance being a left-wing authoritarian party that seeks to create equaltiy through totalitarianism and control of the media [[spoiler: and later expansionism and nuclear war]], and Disrupt is a resistance group headed by right-wing libertarian types that care less about Advance taking away civil freedom, and more about the ''economic'' freedoms they lost (which is why several celebrities and formerly rich people are pro-Disrupt). Often you're forced between choosing to support one or the other throughout the game, and while Disrupt might at first seem like the lesser of two evils, not only will they ask you to censor speech much like Advance, the endgame reveals that [[spoilers:Disrupt is secretly funded and directed by a council of oligarchs that are upset that Advance took away their power and forced them to live amongst the 'common people'. Not only are they also wannabe dictators that are arguably worse than the Advance leadership, they're willing to use any depraved methods to gain power and money; from trafficking drugs to sex slavery.]] Ultimately, the only way to get a positive ending is to [[spoiler: force Advance to reinstate democracy and then reveal both Advance and Disrupt's dirty laundry to the nation. This will cause the centrist party Accord to win the election in a crushing victory.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 124 (click to see context) from:
* Parodied on the recurring "Black Jeopardy" sketch on ''Series/SaturdayNightLive''. Tom Hanks played a stereotypical southern redneck Trump supporter who did surprisingly well playing a game whose questions are intended for urban black stereotypes.
to:
* ''Series/SaturdayNightLive'':
** Parodied on the recurring "Black Jeopardy"sketch on ''Series/SaturdayNightLive''. sketch. Tom Hanks played a stereotypical southern redneck Trump supporter who did surprisingly well playing a game whose questions are intended for urban black stereotypes. stereotypes.
** Parodied again in the game show sketch "Republican or not", in which people would give a few vague statements describing their political beliefs and contestants would have to guess [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin if the person is a Republican]]. Without context, everything everyone says could indicate that they are conservative or liberal.
** Parodied on the recurring "Black Jeopardy"
** Parodied again in the game show sketch "Republican or not", in which people would give a few vague statements describing their political beliefs and contestants would have to guess [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin if the person is a Republican]]. Without context, everything everyone says could indicate that they are conservative or liberal.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 131 (click to see context) from:
** It's an open question whether the Tok'ra are the Good Counterpart of the Goa'uld, or the other end of the horseshoe. Like the rest of their species, they take human hosts. Unlike them, the process is voluntary, and they share the human's body in a symbiotic relationship. Many Earthers remain skeptical of them, Jack O'Neill in particular, believing (with some justification) that the Tok'ra still don't treat humans as full equals. In fact, when we first meet the Tok'ra leaders, they initially distrust the members of SG-1 because its human members aren't ''immediately'' volunteering to become a new host to a symbiote whose host is dying. It doesn't help that, in extreme circumstances, Tok'ra ''have'' been known to seize control of a human host without their consent in order to stay alive. For the longest time, they're also quite willing to send Jaffa and Human soldiers into battle without committing any of their number to the fight, and while they will get furious if a Tok'ra dies (SG-1 gets bawled out by the Tok'ra council because a Goa'uld battleship they destroyed a year ago that was ''invading earth'' at the time had Tok'ra agents aboard), they care little about the deaths of their allies.
to:
** It's an open question whether the Tok'ra are the Good Counterpart of the Goa'uld, or the other end of the horseshoe. Like the rest of their species, they take human hosts. Unlike them, the process is voluntary, and they share the human's body in a symbiotic relationship. Many Earthers remain skeptical of them, Jack O'Neill in particular, believing (with some justification) that the Tok'ra still don't treat humans as full equals. In fact, when we first meet the Tok'ra leaders, they initially distrust the members of SG-1 because its human members aren't ''immediately'' volunteering to become a new host to a symbiote whose host is dying. It doesn't help that, in extreme circumstances, Tok'ra ''have'' been known to seize control of a human host without their consent in order to stay alive. For the longest time, they're also quite willing to send Jaffa and Human soldiers into battle without committing any of their number to the fight, and while they will get furious if a Tok'ra dies (SG-1 gets bawled out by the Tok'ra council because a Goa'uld battleship they destroyed a year ago that was ''invading earth'' at the time had Tok'ra agents aboard), they care little about the deaths of their allies.allies, echoing the System Lord's casual regard for their warriors in favor of their own lives.
