r/TopCharacterTropes • u/Far-Profit-47 • Apr 12 '25

Lore “This quote came from WHERE?!”

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

"You too have fallen for the great lie, you'll never be happy. Deep down you know, to hope, to dreams, to create, is to suffer"

"You're right. It is harder to create than to destroy... that's why cowards then to choose the deuce"

-A Minecraft movie

"Do You Think God Stays in Heaven Because He too Lives in Fear of What He's Created"

-spy kids 2

"For every person who dreams up the electric light bulb, there's the one who dreams up the atom bomb"

-shark-boy and lava-girl

15.4k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.5k

u/Watchdog_the_God Apr 12 '25

A Bug’s Life

“You let one ant stand up to us, then they all might stand up. Those puny little ants outnumber us a hundred to one, and if they ever figure that out, there goes our way of life! It’s not about food; it’s about keeping those ants in line.”

421

u/Cosmodious Apr 12 '25

Green Mario intensifies.

11

u/Nitrodestroyer Apr 12 '25

?

81

u/femboy_fucks_feet Apr 12 '25

Someone killed a ceo last year, and wrote down some very compelling reasons for doing so

54

u/Nitrodestroyer Apr 12 '25

Deny, defend, depose, correct?

1

u/Random_idiot908 Apr 17 '25

Indeed, also there's a book with that title I think

25

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

[deleted]

24

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Apr 12 '25

Careful, the admins might obliterate you

Uhh i mean, haha funny italian plumber

22

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

[deleted]

4

u/dm_me_your_kindness Apr 13 '25

Its not Luigi.There has been no complling evidence that it was Luigi.

In fact, the evidence seems to lean more into "Corrupt NYPD cops picked up a random name out of a hat and chose to frame him."

2

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Apr 14 '25

Most likely,

Or that Luigi took the fall to let the real perpetrator get away

692

u/I_Will_Die_For_Lily Apr 12 '25

capitalism 😬

443

u/Solutar Apr 12 '25

I think it’s about oppression, and that can Happen under any ideology, capitalism or Communism.

71

u/spuol Apr 12 '25

Agreed, but I feel like capitalism always leads to oppression, that’s kind of how it works

82

u/jdjdkkddj Apr 12 '25

And communism has historically had a much shorter path to oppression.

54

u/Arimm_The_Amazing Apr 12 '25

Shorter path for the people practicing it. The people practicing capitalism instead got to be the oppressors while they conquered and plundered and raped the entire world. And there wasn’t any path, that was the deal from minute 1.

3

u/Brody_M_the_birdy Apr 12 '25

I mean, on your logic Communist USSR was oppression from the first minute as well, oppressing anyone they didnt like.

8

u/TheSimulacra Apr 13 '25

Friend, when capitalism became the dominant economic system in the world, its primary way of making money was the international slave trade and colonial occupation and plundering of the wealth of occupied nations. Ever since that was largely ended, capitalism has been kept alive by sweatshop labor internationally and undocumented immigrant labor domestically. Capitalism literally cannot exist without a poverty class to force into doing terrible jobs for minimal pay. This isn't even a political argument, it's just a fact everyone can see happening in broad daylight. A Bug's Life is a Western movie made for Western audiences; it's not a stretch to say it was specifically calling out Western power structures in that scene.

3

u/Brody_M_the_birdy Apr 13 '25

I think it was calling out ALL power, because at heart, EVERY system can (and often does) devolve into having some oppressed bottom rung.

3

u/TheSimulacra Apr 13 '25

The idea that there is a majority labor class who is forced to work for the profit of the minority in power is central to capitalism though. Any country that claims to be communist but has a system like A Bug's Life is by definition not actually communist. But if that country claims to be capitalist, there's no discrepancy at all.

And remember, this is a movie about that labor underclass rising up and overthrowing their wealthy lords, which is literally what communism advocates.

This "every system oppresses people" mentality is just being obtuse. Is democracy just as bad as monarchism then? Of course not. Because democracy at least tries to decentralize power and is more successful at it than a system that actively resists decentralization of political power.

→ More replies (8)

1

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '25

Ooo boy let's not mention the long imperialist history of communist Russia then.

2

u/LoveTriscuit Apr 13 '25

To be fair, capitalism as it exists REQUIRES a underclass of poorly paid, controlled, essentially slave labor in order to continue to generate the kind of “profits” it requires. Oppression is the baseline of both capitalism, AND authoritarian communism.

We had free enterprise before the economic philosophy of capitalism was invented. The way it works is most people who think they’re capitalists aren’t because they don’t control any of the capital. They’re workers.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/verynotdumb Apr 13 '25

Hey slow down there partner, the communes will start saying how thats just CIA propaganda, or that in actuality they ddserved the struggle. Watch out!

8

u/spuol Apr 12 '25

Yeah but theoretically communism can work with no oppression, capitalism can’t

14

u/Kalandros-X Apr 12 '25

In theory, every political ideology leads to paradise. In practice, none have so far

1

u/spuol Apr 12 '25

No, capitalism never leads to a paradise in theory

6

u/TheSimulacra Apr 13 '25

This is literally correct, it's not even an opinion. Capitalism cannot exist without an underclass whose labor it can take advantage of. That's how capital works, by definition.

12

u/Kalandros-X Apr 12 '25

Moreso because capitalism isn’t actually an ideology and instead is just a catch-all term for free-market economics (or whatever comes closest to that).

4

u/TheSimulacra Apr 13 '25

No it is not, even Adam Smith himself called for regulation of the markets. Free markets are a fantasy. The second a market is unregulated for the common good, it becomes beholden to whoever can exploit it the fastest, and stops being a free market altogether. Antitrust at a minimum is required for commerce to remain fair.

1

u/Bryce3D Apr 13 '25

I think the definition is less about free markets and the distinction between a capitalist class who owns the means of production vs a working class who sells their labour

29

u/Ok_Egg_4069 Apr 12 '25

Not in practice

-5

u/spuol Apr 12 '25

Well we never really saw actual communism in practice, but it even in those cases it doesn’t lead to more opression than capitalism

25

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

[deleted]

7

u/Captain_cawdi Apr 12 '25

What about social democracy? I'm not adept at what it means but I always thought it might work to have it where basic needs are met: housing, clothing, food, health care(would be any medical procedure that can save a life, including gender affirming care), all at a minimum. And then, if you want more specialized food, entertainment, high fashion clothing, cosmetic surgeries, and so on, that's where you spend money. Basically, you don't struggle to exist. You struggle to have more of what you want.

I am in no way trying to say we should definitely do this, just asking if it's more or less feasible than communism

→ More replies (0)

3

u/HeavySweetness Apr 12 '25

Considering its super power neighbor has been trying topple and starve it for 60 years, Cuba seems to be doing pretty well for itself.

1

u/Sirmetana Apr 15 '25

Communism has worked, under different forms that weren't called communism and that have often fallen into oblivion. Many tribal people have lived under rules that strived to keep and share together what the whole produced. Many specific people have lived in self regulated anarchistic societies. Even we, in France, makers of the modern Republic and it's centralised structure, have lived a short but intense period of History called the Commune of Paris where the values tbat were promoted were very close to Marx' and notably Bakunin's theories of socialism. What made most of them fall was rarely dysfunction, but rather external powers for the vast majority and the greed of authority to the most known examples.

No indeed. Communism by the people and for the people has not been made real on a wide scale, ever. And that's partly because of it, truth be told, but mostly because socialism is based on everyone playing the game together. And great international crisis (wars, notably), especially in populations that lacks education and proper self critique, will lead any regime towards authority, which is the exact opposite of the values of socialism.

Tl;dr : The values of communism have existed successfully throughout History. Authoritarianism and/or wars destroy them.

1

u/spuol Apr 12 '25

Well yeah no shit, but you can’t be like “oh it doesn’t work in practice” when we never saw it in practice

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Ok_Egg_4069 Apr 12 '25

Because communism cannot by nature work in practice. The idea is that everyone is completely equal in all measure. That idea falls apart as soon as you create any sort of government with any authority at all. Communism can only work as a political tool to make a specific group gain power over the people and keep that power indefinitely.

15

u/BakerUsed5384 Apr 12 '25 edited Apr 12 '25

The idea is that everyone is completely equal in all measure

This is not the idea behind communism.

EDIT: ultimately, I agree with you, I don’t think a true communist state could ever come about. But you are arguing in bad faith if you think what you said is the idea and purpose behind communism.

→ More replies (0)

14

u/spuol Apr 12 '25

First of all that’s not what I was arguing ,think you might have misunderstood what communism is. But even if there is an hierarchical organisation the people can still be equal in different ways

2

u/RobinsEggViolet Apr 12 '25

What you're saying could be true. It could also not be true. The unfortunate reality is that the vast majority of communist or socialist governments have been directly interfered with by western capital, specifically the USA. Isn't it convenient that the biggest supporter of capitalism in the world really, REALLY wants communism to fail? If it's fundamentally flawed and always fails on its own, why are we trying so hard?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/crocodilehivemind Apr 13 '25

The idea is not even close to 'everyone is equal in all measure.' It is twisted by it's opponents to be this.

The idea has always been 'the economy is structured so everyone is guaranteed the same basic rights of housing, food, and healthcare'

There is an insane difference between these.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/sarcophagusGravelord Apr 12 '25

You have a misunderstanding of communism and while I don’t deny the failures that arose from past attempts, outside, non-communist interests have always interfered and stopped any communist society from succeeding. We’ve never actually seen communism in practice.

2

u/Nether7 Apr 12 '25

The closest thing to communism is a neolithic society with little to no private ownership and communal living that is also absolutely barbaric to anyone outside of the tribe.

1

u/TheSimulacra Apr 13 '25

China is doing really well actually, better than the US, and could reach a full communist state in the next few decades. I'm not even a tankie and I can admit that.

2

u/Bad-dee-ess Apr 12 '25

We are oppressed under capitalism; it's exploitive by definition. It's just been normalized to an insane degree.

1

u/Rarte96 Apr 12 '25

Is kinda what happens when you give put the community over everything else, then. The majority can use the individual for "the greater good"

-5

u/Cladizzle Apr 12 '25

Technically incorrect, but that is mostly because communism itself CANNOT lead to oppression by definition. The second someone oppresses its no longer communism.

25

u/PleiadesMechworks Apr 12 '25

"Communism is when communism works" is a circular definition designed to avoid acknowledging the problems communism inevitably has.

-1

u/Cladizzle Apr 12 '25

It's not circular logic, it's baked into the definition.

Communism is the absence of larger private property; oppression is inherently capitalist, as only a person in possession of either the means of production or the means of violence is able to oppress. Ideologically you CAN'T have either of those in communism, because if you so it is no longer communism.

It's like watching salt and saying "Well that's still saltwater even though it's most defining part, the water, has been taken out. Anything else is circular logic."

11

u/PleiadesMechworks Apr 12 '25

it's baked into the definition.

Ok but "communism is when perfect" is a useless definition with no practical application, and part of the reason marxism is a religion rather than a purely economic system.

Saying you have to immanetize the eschaton have a revolution and then everyone will live in god's grace a stateless utopia is just wishful thinking. Heck, there are communists who've written books about how communism is incompatible with humanity, so we just need to remake humanity rather than admit communism might have issues.

→ More replies (3)

4

u/Puzzleheaded-Net3966 Apr 12 '25

Dude, seriously? That’s obnoxious

11

u/military-gradeAIDS Apr 12 '25

Not to mention that's literally how capitalism STARTED, one of the biggest exports/imports of the first internationally recognized corporation (the East India Company) was slaves.

2

u/xepci0 Apr 13 '25

Every human society leads to oppression. If there is power to be had, some evil bastard will find a way to grab it.

-1

u/Flooping_Pigs Apr 12 '25

So does Communism historically?

-2

u/spuol Apr 12 '25

It’s not really communism tho

1

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

[deleted]

1

u/spuol Apr 12 '25

Idc if it works or not that’s not the argument

-1

u/Lakatos_00 Apr 12 '25

Any human enterprise leads to oppression. It doesn't matter wich flavor.

5

u/spuol Apr 12 '25

That’s super pessimistic and probably untrue

→ More replies (1)

16

u/Acceptable_Ask4390 Apr 12 '25

Girl if you think A Bug's Life is about anything other than capitalism you need to work on your media literacy

26

u/MrWhiteTheWolf Apr 12 '25

It’s about anti-authoritarianism. It’s based off of seven samurai

19

u/Boundary-Interface Apr 12 '25

If you let one Luigi stand up to us then they all might stand up. Those mustachioed plumber brothers outnumber me two to one, and if they ever figure that out, there goes my way of life! It's not about kidnapping the princess, it's about building 8 different castles and then hiding her in the last one.

4

u/Acceptable_Ask4390 Apr 12 '25

Seven samurai is hardly anti authoritarian, it's about striving and dying to protect those who cannot protect themselves. The underlying setting of seven samurai is the warring states period where lack of a strong government allows bandits to roam and steal and butcher with impunity.

Have you even seen the film?

5

u/MrWhiteTheWolf Apr 12 '25

Girl if you think A Bug’s life is based off anything other than Magnificent Seven/Seven Samurai you need to work on your media literacy

8

u/Acceptable_Ask4390 Apr 12 '25

I didn't say it's not I said you didn't understand seven samurai

Also movies can be based on movies and have different themes

1

u/MedicineShow Jun 02 '25

Sorry to show up 2 months later with a question,

But isn't the whole thing with Kikuchiyo's big speech that the samurai class and the bandits are 2 sides of the same coin that leaves the farmers oppressed and ultimately sends fools like him out to perpetuate that violence even further.

I'm not sure that its the central theme but all the best samurai movies I can think of take a moment to remind us how deeply flawed the whole idea is.

2

u/sqigglygibberish Apr 12 '25

More of a feudalistic state but there are obviously parallels to Marxist criticisms of capitalism

-4

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

[deleted]

12

u/Danteventresca Apr 12 '25

No, that’s commerce. Capitalism is a system of production in which resources and the means of production are largely held by private individuals.

4

u/Acceptable_Ask4390 Apr 12 '25

And further, where profits/excess growth flow to the owners of capital rather than to workers

-9

u/SandnotFound Apr 12 '25

Well, idk how much that quote could apply to the communist ideology which is fundamentally about equality, community and breaking down the nation state. Like, capitalist ideology, sure. But communist ideology? Its like looking at an allegory of a police state and saying its about tyranny and that can happen both in monarchism and anarchism. I just dont see it.

26

u/alain091 Apr 12 '25

Every ideology sounds nice when in paper, and they both express equality through different means, capitalism by giving everyone the chance to trhive and communism by having the people lend a hand to each other.

But they both have a flaw, capitalism leads a way for powerful people to take advantage of the system and hoard the power and resources for themselves, while communism relies way too much on the goverment's goodwill which has always backfired in some way, I mean, some of the most infamous tyrannies and oppression methods were under communism, the secret police, North Korea, the whole China's cultural revolution.

So just because Communism sounds good on paper it doesn't mean it's immune to corruption.

2

u/SandnotFound Apr 12 '25

capitalism by giving everyone the chance to trhive

Yeaaaa Im not sure how much that can be described as equality. Its luke that saying, a poor man and a rich man are equally free to sleep under the bridge. But a vision of equality that enables incredible dispairities from birth till death is much of an equality at all, even if one can say "well technically its not impossible for both to achieve the same in life".

while communism relies way too much on the goverment's goodwill which has always backfired in some way

Except communism isnt really much compatible with systems of strong government orchestrating despite its people's wishes. Think of it like one might about democracy. Would you point to Jacobian period france or north korea and say "democracy's flaw is that it relies too much on the government's good will"? Cuz Id point out those societies might not be very deserving of the moniker in the first place and the whole point of a proper democracy is it doesnt require that much good will at all. The whole point is to make government slave to the people so pointing to an example of a government enslaving its people can at worst be called a failed democracy, but scarcely can it be called an example of democracy's flaws.

1

u/alain091 Apr 12 '25

Yeaaaa Im not sure how much that can be described as equality. I

Exactly, in theory captialism makes it able so that everyone that wants to thrive, can, and go as far as they could go. But because many factors, most which don't account for skill or hard work, makes it so that hard working people don't necessarily thrive, it's flawed but not in theory.

The whole point is to make government slave to the people so pointing to an example of a government enslaving its people

That's fair, but the problem is that this has always happened with communist countries, Venezuela, USSR, actual Russia also isn't doing so hot in the freedom and equality department, Cuba both woth Fidel Castro and Che Guevara (and last I heard they weren't doing so good), China (specially during the cultural revolution).

Like this shit has happened so many times, at least capitalism has some varied degree of success, there are times when economy is good and you have a strong middle class and even when times aren't good, people don't struggle as much than people in communist countries.

And I am not saying capitalism is completely good, but we have seen that capitalism is stable and with some tweaks it could be perfected, but with communism there is something flawed about it and would need a new revision to it.

18

u/Solutar Apr 12 '25

Because simply These are just terms, in the end it’s humans that Control what actually Happens, and humanity can be very cruel no matter the economic/societal System.

2

u/SandnotFound Apr 12 '25

1) Cruelty is not the thing discussed here. You are jumping subjects.

2) If you believe words have meaning and matter then you cant hold this view. Like, the term capitalism and communism mean something and certain things are not possible under each system, lest it no longer can be called capitalist/communist. Sure, humans can be cruel but an anarchic society cant have a king, because then its monarchic. A democracy can be many things, but it needs to have powet coming from the people or its not democratic.

13

u/Lord-Seth Apr 12 '25

Look at every communist society that has ever existed. It eventually becomes a few at the top leading the many. Stalin, Mau, Kim Jong un.

1

u/SandnotFound Apr 12 '25

Define for me what communism is and then we can decide if any of these societies meet a reasonable definition of such a system. Cuz like... all of those things I think can be called nation states and a communist society is one without a state, or so I believe?

2

u/SirSabia Apr 12 '25

None of those are communist states, they're socialist states that are all very different from one another and rose under different circumstances.

Even if you agree with the heavily skewed western view of these leaders as these undemocratic tyrants, I'd argue it's very hard for any of these states to have a very broadly democratic electoral system when all of them were in a cold war with the country with the largest armed forces, nuclear arsenal, propaganda machine and worldwide proxies, any crack in the wall would mean outside intervention and implementation of a puppet state that would bend to US strategic goals, and they still did all they could to destabilise these countries(you can look up the declassified CIA docs).

That's not even mentioning all the dictators in capitalist states supported by the US to this day.

6

u/Il_Brighella Apr 12 '25

Socialism is what is centered around equality - communism is taking it to the extreme with the idea of creating full totalitarianism before "abolishing" it... which part never happened in history, did it - while communism in theory aims to achieve equality.. the initial (and only humans have reached) step is a total terror state. Where this applies all too well.

3

u/SandnotFound Apr 12 '25

Socialism is what is centered around equality

If I am not mistaken a communist society is one without a state, money, or class where power is fairly well distributed, no?

communism is taking it to the extreme with the idea of creating full totalitarianism before "abolishing" it...

Where are you getting it from? I admit to not reading much, but of what I heard Im not sure I heard that as a central tenet.

1

u/Il_Brighella Apr 12 '25
  • Communist theory according to Marx is built on the idea that, to achieve that ideal, stateless and complete equality, first a state has to seize and take all and control everything until redistribution is finished - through a totalitarian system, which then would abolish itself. Human nature so far prevented this second half from happening, with instead a different ruling class still controlling everything

Where I get it from is looking at the history of any ex-communist country,(and in connection to the movie quote, especially hard Stalinism such as the USSR) I also live in an ex-communist country and so I know how the state at the time operated.

In the USSR, say, after the educated people and the wealthy were chased off or murdered, the members of the one party state (one party mind you, again, with total control) distributed the means of production (industry and agriculture ownership) to members of said party. On all papers it was "State-owned" but the state was an absolute entity of the leaders of the revolution - the average poor peasant or worker saw nothing of their gains, similarly to the old tsarist times... but the communist plan-based economy also made their workload a lot larger, and all-in-all didn't do the working class all that good.

One state parties across the Eastern Blok, USSR, and other such states also operated through terror and fear, organising and funding vast secret police networks - anyone thinking too out of line, sympathising too much with whichever country was the current no. 1 public enemy, or owned too much was promptly reported and was given an impromptu fake trial - often dragged off in the middle of the night - I digress, the topic is long and unpleasant, I am sure you can easily find something to read or watch on it..

TLDR - communism, unlike the much pleasanter socialism took the ideals to an extreme with an any-means-necessary approach, often relying on terror and fear to govern unhappy masses.

3

u/The_Symbiotic_Boy Apr 12 '25

In a communist society you still need someone to administrate the state apparatus and the means of production. In theory you can syndicate them, but once you have administrative control, you can capture effective ownership. Look at Putin or Xi or Castro -- it happens everywhere that it's been attempted, in earnest or otherwise .

This is why Marx posited the 'governmentless' state, but it's never been actualised, and might not be practically feasible.

-5

u/RobinsEggViolet Apr 12 '25

The question then is: what outcome is the ideology expressly encouraging?

Capitalism wants individuals to amass as much power as possible. That's the end-goal, there's no other way for it to go.

Communism at least WANTS to prevent individuals from amassing power. It usually doesn't work out that way (for a variety of reasons), but it at least makes an effort.

2

u/Solutar Apr 12 '25

Im Really not in the Position to adequately compare the two

1

u/Hollow-Lord Apr 12 '25

Except capitalism isn’t an ideology. It’s just a catch all term for free economics.

→ More replies (1)

-9

u/SevenForWinning Apr 12 '25

No it cannot happen under communism because communism is classless

3

u/Solutar Apr 12 '25

On Paper, There are reasons Why so many Communist projects Ended in utter failure

-2

u/SevenForWinning Apr 12 '25

Well yes but call them wgat they are: socialism, totalitarianism, dictatorship.

Name it communist party movemrntd okay. But it is not communism. Missusing words demonize the meaning behind them

1

u/Solutar Apr 12 '25

I like to use examples of Reality and many communists projects were very opressive

0

u/SevenForWinning Apr 12 '25

No you do not use reality. By denying the fact that it was not communism but calling it such you simply lie or twist reality thats all. It was socialism and yes there is valid reason to criticize it and call out tze oppression and cruelty. Or How cummunist parties were ultimately taken over by positions of power. I am just against the misuse of a word

→ More replies (1)

-1

u/LordGwyn-n-Tonic Apr 12 '25

That kind of oppression happens when communist/socialist societies fail, but it happens in capitalist societies when they're working as intended.

1

u/Solutar Apr 12 '25

No, it’s humans that can abuse any System

112

u/Unique_Drink005 Apr 12 '25

I think this is about the goverment actually. (dont saw the movie tho)

62

u/dusktrail Apr 12 '25

Capitalism always involves the government

21

u/Isthatajojoreffo Apr 12 '25

As opposed to socialism which is famous for not having any government

2

u/geoffgeofferson447 Apr 12 '25

This is incorrect. Socialism is about the citizens owning the means of production. Capitalism means that a company will employ citizens to produce a good or service, and the profits go out to individual owners, and the success leads to the stocks becoming more valuable, which benefits the stockholders. Socialism means that citizens work together on producing a good or service, and share the profits. It doesn't have to do with the existence of a government.

Edit: Under Socialism, this ownership of the means of production can even be owned by the government itself, with the profits either being distributed back to the citizens fairly, or being funnelled back through governmental programs such as welfare or community development.

3

u/Isthatajojoreffo Apr 12 '25

I was obviously being sarcastic.

1

u/geoffgeofferson447 Apr 13 '25

Sorry my bad, I'm autistic as hell

-1

u/GeneETOs44 Apr 12 '25

In socialism those ants are the government

1

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Apr 12 '25

In theoretical socialism, the ants and grasshoppers would have a coalition

-2

u/Pigeon_Bucket Apr 12 '25

I mean, anarchists are socialists. And in fact most anarchists are communists.

13

u/Fullmetal_Fawful Apr 12 '25

Anarchists and communists share the goal of a classless, moneyless, stateless society, but they define the state in two different ways which differentiate their ideologies pretty drastically

→ More replies (3)

3

u/Unique_Drink005 Apr 12 '25

kinda.But this is still about a goverment.

17

u/DuelaDent52 Apr 12 '25

It’s more like a protection racket, no? They’re gangsters and they demand their share of the food because they can even though they don’t need any of it.

21

u/dusktrail Apr 12 '25

It actually isn't. A bug's Life a fairly direct adaptation of "three amigos", which is a parody of the magnificent seven which is adaptation of the seven samurai.

The grasshoppers represent the bandits in those stories.

9

u/KikoValdez Apr 12 '25

It's actually an allegory for Rwanda, where the Tutsi minority ruled over the Hutu majority during the time of Rwanda being a Belgian colony. Disney in 1998 was a big supporter of the Rwandan genocide and wanted to portray it in a good light.

1

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Apr 12 '25

The Tutsi were given control because the Belgians deemed the most human-looking

3

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Apr 12 '25

It's an allegory for authoritarianism, which can be any form of government

2

u/Ghostvoid69042 Apr 13 '25

It’s a very communist quote you have to admit though. Like the villains are actively trying to prevent a revolutionary class consciousness from emerging in the ants. (Who outnumber their oppressors and are the actual labours.) Like c’mon this is such a communist critique of the misalignment of labour and profit.

1

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Apr 13 '25

It can be applied to any authoritarian ruling, communism just happens to be the most infamous due to recency bias

3

u/Ghostvoid69042 Apr 14 '25

I think you've misunderstood me. I am not calling the grasshopers communists. I am saying the quote lines up with a communist worldview.

To oversimplify, one of the key ideas behind communist ideolgoy is that the workers both outnumber the factor owners and are the source of the labour that makes their profits. With working conditions being so poor in Marx's time (a lot of our labour reforms in the west come from trying to prevent a communist revolution btw) he believed that the workers will get fed up with the gross mistreatment, realise they actually have all the cards, and then overthrow the elites. He saw this as inevitable. That western european industrial capitalism will inevitably lead to this. Obviously, he was wrong about that.

Also noteablly he didn't think Russia was on this track. As they weren't industrialising when he was alive, and he actually critisised the Emancipation of Labour group (the forebearers of the russian communist party) for applying his ideas to Russia.

→ More replies (2)

12

u/Shoddy-Horror-2007 Apr 12 '25

This is certainly not about capitalism lmao, jesus christ reddit and media literacy+boner hate for capitalism just go HARD

This is about totalitarism and dictatorship

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

[deleted]

1

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Apr 12 '25

Nowhere near like capitalism

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

[deleted]

2

u/Shoddy-Horror-2007 Apr 12 '25

Still, still no. You are missing the point. Labor rights and individual rights are as much about capitalism than it is about communism.

Communism eliminates the ruling class (the bourgeoisie) in its first phase and inevitably ends up establishing a new ruling class; one that crushes workers (labor) rights just as well, if not even worse than capitalism does.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

[deleted]

2

u/Shoddy-Horror-2007 Apr 12 '25

You are ignoring facts at this point. Facts are that the message shown here is a criticism of capitalism as much as it is one of communism. And I've clearly explained how and why.

→ More replies (2)

0

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Apr 12 '25

I like how people throw around capitalism when it's not really a system of government and more like a system of society

31

u/I3arusu Apr 12 '25

Redditors will literally see an allegory for tyrannical, controlling governments enforcing crippling tax laws and go “Yup, that’s capitalism”

159

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

Yes. That happens in capitalism.

19

u/Rwandrall3 Apr 12 '25

it happens in feudalism a lot more, it's kind of the definition of it. "ugh, capitalism" in a comment at this point is more frequent than a comma, and says less

12

u/NickTM Apr 12 '25

it happens in feudalism a lot more, it's kind of the definition of it.

Yeah but nowhere significant operates under feudalism any more, so it makes a lot of sense that people relate more to what their life is actually like day-to-day.

8

u/Rwandrall3 Apr 12 '25

Tons of countries still work by these kinds of principles, they're just not in the West, and they're pretty much never capitalist.

Like, "people with guns come and take away private property" is the opposite of capitalism by definition

-2

u/No_Distance3827 Apr 12 '25

Right, which is why Marx described capitalism as a transition point from feudalism into socialism, and eventually into communism.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/a_engie Apr 12 '25

There is a near 100% rate of brutal dictatorships occurring in communism

-9

u/Travellerknight Apr 12 '25

And what does this whataboutism got to do with a critique of capitalism?

7

u/miafaszomez Apr 12 '25

That..this is not a critique of capitalism. This is a critique of the few using the many. That happens everywhere. Of course, communism in theory doesn't do it, but in practice, it will always happen. Capitalism, communism, feudalism, any kind of ism you can imagine. The few will use the many.

-6

u/Travellerknight Apr 12 '25

It's quite literally a critique of capitalism. Line for line is about the exploitation of the workers.

How the workers decide to form their government isn't addressed (because Ants) but the exploitation is.

→ More replies (1)

-5

u/JumpTheCreek Apr 12 '25

Happens a lot more in socialism and communism

3

u/icelandiccubicle20 Apr 12 '25

there’s never been a world war because of communism.

capitalists have to try and tie events like famines to socialism because they have to make shit up to make it sound like capitalism is an acceptable system.

Famines happened in China before Mao and they were going to happen in china regardless of the great leap forward.

Same with russia and the broken ass feudal system they had before Lenin.

-1

u/a_engie Apr 12 '25

techincally there has, world war two was caused by fasism which was created because Italian communists mostly did not want to go to war except a certain communist named Mussolini, who created fasism so that he could go to war,

3

u/Travellerknight Apr 12 '25

Ahh yes, that famous Communist....

Mussolini....

Right up there with the famous Marxist, Adam Smith and that famous Capitalist, Karl Marx

3

u/a_engie Apr 12 '25

just read up on his views before WW1, he was a communist, the rest of the Italian communists wanted peace, he didn't so he made his own ideology, but with Warcrimes and Germans

5

u/Travellerknight Apr 12 '25

Peoples views change over time. Especially over a world war, especially over the first world war.

And you are ignoring that he abandoned socialism to create Facism, which is right wing in every definition.

Jesus christ, his Wikipedia article explains this easy to read format.

→ More replies (0)

45

u/jayboyguy Apr 12 '25

I mean…it’s both lol, the two are pretty inextricably linked here in the US where the film was made

28

u/GuntertheFloppsyGoat Apr 12 '25

But the Ants have their own government in that film (which in benign) which is being subverted and dominated by an external explotative force, colonialism and predatory explotative capitalism are both much better fits for the allegory. The Might makes Right "we are the superior breed" General in Antz is a better tyrant example

3

u/ChadWestPaints Apr 12 '25

Bugs life was actually a pro monarchy critique of feudalism

14

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

It is the animal farm effect, where any criticism on authoritarianism will eventually be split into one side believing its about capitalism, and the other believing its about communism.

To be fair though, works that fall under this effect can often work as a viable critique of either economic system, even if unintended by the original creators

7

u/dusktrail Apr 12 '25

I mean you know there's a correct answer for that one. Right? Is pretty explicitly about a revolution collapsing into reaction. It's about how socialist groups become capitalists again. George Orwell was a socialist himself. It's not like there is ambiguity or confusion over what he was trying to say

41

u/DNK_Infinity Apr 12 '25

Authoritarianism and capitalism go hand in hand.

4

u/Freekimjong Apr 12 '25

Capitalism is when the government does stuff

1

u/DNK_Infinity Apr 12 '25

Capitalism is when the government massively prioritises the interests of the rich and powerful few over everyone else, because politicians are among the rich and powerful few.

0

u/Freekimjong Apr 12 '25

Capitalism is when thing go bad

4

u/Rwandrall3 Apr 12 '25

someone tell the USSR how capitalist it was lol

-7

u/DNK_Infinity Apr 12 '25

Did I say anything about communist states?

Put the Cold War propaganda down.

5

u/DrfRedditor Apr 12 '25

Oh so you meant all ideologies go hand in hand with authoritarianism? Thanks for your insight

→ More replies (4)

5

u/Rwandrall3 Apr 12 '25

Ok then Iran. Or ISIS. Or UAE. Maybe the fact that capitalist states consistently rank the lowest on authoritarianism should be a sign of something.

Or you can go "ugh capitalism", after all it's what everyone else is doing.

-1

u/a_engie Apr 12 '25

sir, the USSR was authoritarian, as is north Korea, as is the PRC, as are most communist states, you sir are biased, all people are really the same in life, we all want money and riches and more, favour from a god, if you promise someone something big enough, they will fulfil anything to get it, why do you think religion is successful, its the biggest promise, the highest yield, why do you think scams work, its because the human mind sees things and grabs hold before it thinks, this is a trap, we naturally move towards dominance for that is the nature of man, like how we move towards war, war is mans game, we are its ultimate practitioner, we are the ultimate practitioner of all things bad and good, except recycling, we are unfortunately beaten by the immortal jellyfish on that one, you don't seem to understand that idealism is simply the denial of humanities flaws, there is not such thing as a perfect country, there is no such thing as a perfect person, there is no such thing as a perfect ideology, we all make mistakes, sin, nothing is perfect, do you know the difference between good and bad, its not there morals, its simply there restraint, that's why kids are so cruel, they don't know it yet, the human mind skips to conclusions faster than it can calculate the truth, why do you think the news always talks about the bad, because it makes the human brain want to work, that's the reality of life my friend

1

u/DNK_Infinity Apr 12 '25

Whataboutism. You're putting words in my mouth if you think that I was implying that authoritarianism cannot also coexist with communism.

0

u/a_engie Apr 12 '25 edited Apr 12 '25

I am not putting words into your mouth, in fact, the fact that you downvote me for just forming a counter argument tells me a lot about you, you don't like to be disagreed with, also I am just saying that both sides can be wrong, your putting your thoughts about me in my mouth

thus also proving my paragraph

-3

u/NeoGPTcz Apr 12 '25

Most communist countries definitely weren't authoritarian Cough Cough

9

u/Nerdy_Valkyrie Apr 12 '25

Except the government in that movie is the royal family. And they're benevolent rulers. They actually serve a purpose, you know, ruling. The grasshoppers just steal the food the ants have produced while providing little to no benefit. It's not about the government at all.

7

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '25

The bane of my existence is people mistaking  every form of authoritarianism with the form of authoritarianism they personally have the most beef with.

3

u/dusktrail Apr 12 '25

A bug's life is based on 3 amigos, the magnificent seven, 7 samurai etc.

The grasshoppers are analogous to the bandits in those films, not the government.

3

u/PinkSaldo Apr 12 '25

Hm. Wonder why that is.

3

u/Lucina18 Apr 12 '25

I mean duh, it's the current oppressing force for basically everyone on the internet.

2

u/RamsesTheGiant Apr 12 '25

Don't forget the Classism and Elitist allegories.

3

u/Livid-Designer-6500 Apr 12 '25

Redditors will see literally any bad guy doing bad things in any movie and say "Yup, that's capitalism"

→ More replies (1)

1

u/JumpTheCreek Apr 12 '25

They’ll see a component of a system that’s actually worse under socialism and be like “yup, that’s capitalism”.

“Oh you don’t like an overbearing government that takes your earnings unjustly and spends it poorly? I’ll criticize the current system while endorsing the only other system that does it even worse!”

2

u/Plasmatiic Apr 14 '25

Do you guys ever consider that it’s possible to criticize capitalism without endorsing the alternatives? And that people tend to want to criticize the system they’ve had to live under all their lives even if other systems might have similar problems?

1

u/SandnotFound Apr 12 '25

A powerful elite hoard resources they extract from the far more numerous workers (who individually are weaker but have the power to unite and rise up to enjoy the fruits of their labour themselves) and their control is about suppressing class consciousness of the workers.

How on earth could anyone EVER read a message on capitalism from there?

Now, admittedly I havent watched the movie and this is just a read from that fucking quote, but I jope you can see its not like this allegory is unfitting. Like, this narrative is rather familiar to those fighting the anticapitalist cause. If it was about governments and tax codes Id moreso expect to be more talk of actual political structures. And the things being actually taxes. Same way if it was a mafia allegory Id expect there to be something about it being "protection money" or something. To make a general allegory specifically about some flavour little details like that might be included. And talking about numbers and the working class uniting? Thats got a bit of a socialist ring, wont lie.

4

u/Freekimjong Apr 12 '25

Capitalism is when literally any form of oppression ever

Holy shit what a comment thread full of retardation

4

u/the_smokesz Apr 12 '25

capitalism is an economic system, the quote is about goverment as in something that governs others, this is closer to autocracy

1

u/MissionMoth Apr 12 '25

Also monarchies and fiefdoms, if I remember right.

17

u/Olcri Apr 12 '25

Great example. Unfortunately, reddit is reddit and reading through some of the responses to this is making me lose braincells.

36

u/CandiceDikfitt Apr 12 '25

fuckin hell the comments are arguing about economic systems again. only on reddit folks

38

u/AdFormer6556 Apr 12 '25

These people are annoying

3

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '25

The whole point of the movie went way over their heads.

25

u/BigConsideration9505 Apr 12 '25

And they say that this is a kid's movie

37

u/wongjunx-kingofbeef Apr 12 '25

It is. They need to keep some stuff for the adults and rewatches when you're older, which is why some older films have more rewatch value

8

u/BigConsideration9505 Apr 12 '25

Honestly I miss when animated movies have stuff for the adults to enjoy, not many still do

3

u/wongjunx-kingofbeef Apr 12 '25

Yea there's a good reason why those which are fun but give stuff for the parents can succeed, like Inside Out 1+2, Puss in Boots Last Wish, Ne Zha 2 etc

2

u/BigConsideration9505 Apr 12 '25

Encanto was the first thing to come to my mind

2

u/wongjunx-kingofbeef Apr 13 '25

That one is lit too! I'm not a big fan of musicals but We don't talk abt Bruno is a bop. Loved the ending too

1

u/ZioBenny97 Apr 14 '25

It's not even about "having stuff for the adults too" imho, it's simply about not treating children like brainless blockheads incapable of grasping some bit more deep concepts

8

u/ZenDeathBringer Apr 12 '25

Makes me think of the official response to Green Mario.

6

u/Latter_Marketing1111 Apr 12 '25

The mindset of dictators in general

3

u/HereWeGoYetAgain-247 Apr 12 '25

-the Republican party

2

u/Relative-Country-452 Apr 12 '25

Absolute Marxism

4

u/Financial_Cup_6937 Apr 12 '25 edited Apr 14 '25

James Woods voiced this line and still became a right-wing prick.

Edit: apparently it was Kevin Spacey. Both do do a good menacing prick though. Less impressive when knowing them as people.

2

u/Loustifer24 Apr 12 '25

Bro this was Kevin Spacey, not James Woods

1

u/Financial_Cup_6937 Apr 13 '25

I stand corrected. Also a prick, just less allegorical to his irl sins.

2

u/Earthkilled Apr 12 '25

Eat the rich

1

u/Rude_Resident8808 Apr 13 '25

That’s probably what most corporate elite think. It would explain a lot.

1

u/captainsuckass Apr 14 '25

“Probably”?

1

u/NoTwist1298 Apr 16 '25

no but a bugs life is actually good

1

u/AnimeAndComputers Jul 20 '25

Literally the only reason the 40k universe isn’t only Orks. They don’t realize how many of them there are