Mr. Robot | Making Vigilantes
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 окт 2024
- Pattern Theory examines vigilantism in USA's Mr. Robot, why Elliot and Darlene started fsociety, and why revolution isn’t for everyone.
Twitter: @Apatterntheory
Email: apatterntheory@gmail.com
Thanks so much for the support. Can't wait for season 3 to begin, just like all of you. In the meantime, have a look at the latest installment in our Mr. Robot series. ruclips.net/video/ynWQ_MG9FRs/видео.html
Pattern Theory can you put the lists of movies from this video if you don't mind.... Thank again
Hackers
Scorpion trailer
The X-Files - "Killswitch"
Buffy the Vampire Slayer - "I Robot, You Jane"
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011)
Back to the Future: Part II
The Careful Massacre of the Bourgeoisie (Mr. Robot Season 2 Blu-ray extras)
Mr. Robot Seasons 1 and 2
Daredevil Seasons 1 and 2
The Punisher trailer
Fight Club
I think that's all the source material I used for this essay with the exception of interviews with Foucault and others.
Pattern Theory I'm gonna check out "Kill Switch from X Files"....Nice video(keep it up)
Its understanding of technology is limited by today's standards (this was the '90s) but it's a solid piece of cyberpunk TV. And it was written by William Gibson, so you can't really go wrong.
You should make another Mr. Robot video to catch up to the 4th season.
Liked the video btw.
Omg, this was so good, ty. It's nice to see analysis of Mr. Robot paired with fairly serious political economic and philosophical analysis. Really gets at what makes this show so compelling--the meat beneath the top-notch aesthetics and acting.
After a few more messages on this, it might be in everyone's interest to post research materials for every video. If it is something you're interested in it might be regular order going forward. With respect to this video, here's what I read:
- The Ethics of Government Whistleblowing by Candice Delmas
- Social Learning Theory by Albert Bandura
- The Elements of Moral Philosophy by James Rachels
- The Social Contract Jean-Jacques Rousseau
- Discipline and Punish, Panopticism by Michel Foucault
- Anti-Oedipus by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - J. Krishnamurti
Never noticed the looming tower recurring. Good stuff
holy shit man you were totally right about the back to the future part
This was so fucking great. Seriously this was so great!
No wonder I connect so much with this show. It’s me. O Eliot.
This was awesome. Please, please give us more of Mr. Robot
Well also, Elliot lives downtown in Manhattan, which I assure you from personal experience the Freedom Tower dominates the skyline downtown and is almost impossible to not be noticed while shooting in that area. Good video by the way, great analysis of the show. You really deserve a lot more subscribers, especially for the amount of work and research I know this requires. You should do a patreon, I know if you try to monetize USA/Universal will be up your ass right?
It would limit options to have to crop out a major skyscraper from every shot in front of Elliot's building, but Sam Esmail places a lot of focus on the tower from different shots in Manhattan, even before the big money bonfire at the start of season 2. There's even a few shots of it from Gideon's home in Brooklyn.
Patreon or monetization might come about later down the road. Right now the focus is putting together essays that are worth your time to watch.
Pattern Theory well as I said I love the videos, great insight into such a multilayered story with amazing characters. I subscribed, I will also mention your work on the reddit sub, in case you haven't already. Season 3 has been quite a ride thus far, I'm starting to put the pieces together, but there still much to be explained. Keep up the good work.
Pattern Theory but why would they crop it out when it IS a major feature of that neighborhood, as was the original WTC? Or am I missing something. Not sure why anyone would do that when bothering to film on location and not in a stand-in city as they usually do.
Wow, this is amazing. Great job, please keep videos like this coming.
you are seriously one of the most underrated youtube channels
How does this channel only have 200 subs?
Because of the audio!
Just subbed, and there's already a new video
I went into the IRC channel back in season 01 , the channel name was on screen for a few moments, and it was all i needed. I had the most surreal chat with Wh1t3r0s3 in there.
Great video man.
Please fix your mic it's murder when you're wearing headphones.
Good video still.
Sorry about that. Audio processing turned out to be the trickiest thing to learn while working on these essays. Since this was recorded I have invested in a new audio setup and (I think) the sound quality has improved. But I'm still working on making it better.
This is A+
Keep up the excellent work!
this deserves millions of views wtf
Views, yeah. Listenings, none.
Oh one more thing. Sorry to spam your comments. I was also thinking and wondering lately why we don’t have more vigilantes. I know many, many people who are very tired of the powerful preying on the poor or weak, preying on all of us, and tired of the corrupt politicians serving themselves. Even willing to stand up and do something about it. But aside from the relatively modern approach of leaking information, not much is ever done.
Why is that? Why do vigilantes only seem to exist in comic books and movies? It does seem like a fairly small group of determined, we’ll trained individuals could take out a lot of powerful, corrupt people. Yet that never seems to happen.
What would happen? Would a power vacuum get created, only to be filled with more of the same? If a society collapsed and we were forced to rebuild on our own (without those power structures), could we do it without killing ourselves in the process?
I do believe the internet has revolutionized revolution, and so many of these insidious things that have gone on as far back as recorded history are being revealed. They’re coming out. Modern atrocities are so often recorded and discussed worldwide shortly after they happen.
If anything can help revolutionize this world, it’s going to be the free flow of information and breaking free of the corrupt state-run medias that have given us their version of news for centuries. If the power structures cannot be brought down, it can be forced to a large extent by public outrage. It already is.
Most importantly if we can learn to love one another (cliché, I know), remember all we have in common and ignore the pointless differences, and not allow those in power to use wedge issues against us, we can do far more than many realize in remaking the world to _our_ specifications. Those in power _need_ us; we don’t need them. And therein lies our power.
Can't believe I've only just found this channel now
Excellent video 👌
Subscribed. Very good work.
Good, good, good! Subbed!
Great and interesting video!
Right On!
What happens to the audio?
Hey your video is great but your mic has too much bass. You need to equalize it a bit to bring out more treble.
This is brilliant
I also posit that far more people are acutely aware of how society works and actively try to live by more natural, humanistic means than I think many realize. Many, perhaps most, of us would rather be able to live a mostly self-sufficient life, where we grow our own food (yourself or your community) and barter for what you need, but can’t make yourself. More in line with how life was in the not too distant past. And many would live like this, if not for the fact that you cannot truly own land or be totally free anywhere in this world, as you’ll always need to pay for land, housing, and property taxes wherever you happen to be. Always need to be part of the system. But within this system, I know that a large number of us really don’t care about brand names or what others think of us beyond our own family and close friends. And many find a healthy balance wherein they can be authentic and not lose themselves to this society. I think groups like the Amish are close to the right track in many ways, though even they must participate in a limited way.
However I don’t think “capitalism” is the problem. It’s an oft-blamed boogeyman, but true capitalism has never really existed, at least not to any large degree. We have oligarchies and corporatism, which are quite different. This sick system we have now is a symptom of many things, not the actual cause of suffering. I don’t buy that there was one single thing that “went wrong” with society at some point in the past, especially in light of the discussion I made in my last post about many previous civilizations that went away, for one reason or another.
I think the bigger issue IS human behavior. You will always have a smaller group of people who are jockeying for power, control and/or wealth, and are willing to do most anything to get it. Many of these people are the so-called psychopaths, but certainly not all. They have always, and will always be there playing dirty, and trying to gain advantage at the expense of others. This is not evil, a term I don’t believe is even real. This is a fundamentally different way the mind functions for some people. To them, they usually see nothing wrong with what they’re doing.
Even without this small group of people who will always take advantage of others, even if we had a world of mostly good, mostly fairly “normal” people who are altruistic and want the basic things we all do, any built society will still have plenty of problems. No single form or structure of a society can be perfect, nor work in every given situation. I dislike when some always push one ideology over the others as some type of “magic solution” to all the world’s problems, as none exist. You did not make this claim, I know, but I hear it often from those who discuss these things.
I do think a world without this small group of troublemakers around would have a hell of a lot less crime and poverty, as people would work together a lot more and would be less likely to take advantage of each other. Perhaps a world with small communities who rely on each other for their daily needs and entertainment, who don’t need to rely on money as they barter, and who take care of their own when they get sick, too old to take care of themselves, or are disabled.
Indeed I think such societies have existed countless times throughout history. Perhaps a fairly free society built on fundamental social norms and community policing, but free of a proper government or banking system might perhaps be an ideal way to go. Perhaps without the influence of that small group, we _could_ handle things in our own, as individual communities, and deal with things as they come.
But what to do when someone’s child is discovered to be one of these types of people who don’t care for these norms, who hurt, manipulate and control others? And what to do if another group has become corrupted and comes in to take over your community? All interesting questions.
I do think today’s society is the result of far more complexity than we realize, and not the result of just a small group of “mistakes” or “bad systems”. More a combination over time of specific events. And as things “progress” (to use the term loosely), things necessarily change quickly, sometimes too quick for comfort.
One big problem I see today is a major skills gap. There are a few million jobs going unfilled at any given time that pay well, but have few takers. Many really good professions in the trades (such as plumbing and electrical). As so much changes and old ways of working change, much of society hadn’t kept up. Coupled with bad advice about college educations and predatory schools and student loan programs, we have an entire generation or two of people with expensive, useless degrees who cannot find work to even pay off those loans. Instead of seeking marketable skills (that may not require college at all), they get funneled into degrees with no market.
I think that may be the result of endless, unchecked greed (via loans and endlessly rising education costs), in addition to a more organic cause from changes happening so fast.
Within the system we all must live in, there will always be lots of jobs that require humans, if we can get enough of a trained workforce. Whether there are enough for all those who wish to work, I don’t know. But there are huge numbers now that are unfilled.
An oligarchical pseudo-capitalist society like ours (again, no true free market exists) and much of today’s world, despite its many problems, has collectively raised livability higher and faster than any system we know of before it. One can open a business or go into a profession or vocation in demand and have the freedom to find something that works for them. Though the current systems fail many, and many aren’t able to make it work for them.
The endless greed of the few indeed make it very difficult for many to even afford necessities. A free market-like system could work far better if power was spread out instead of collected by the very few. Some posit that a socialist democracy is a better way to go, but there too you depend on a small group of people to control everything, and inevitably corrupt, greedy individuals will always come into power and take advantage of everyone else.
In a modern society with billions of people, I have no idea if an ideal system is even possible. Could we survive without currency? Would a rare mineral like gold suffice? Can we self govern without a formal government? How do we handle those people who wish to hurt and enslave others, especially knowing they often hide behind masks of charming, kind individuals?
Many theories exist about sustainability of propulsion. Many have theorized that we have plenty of land for everyone to live in smaller communities more akin to how we used to live, making most things locally and bartering. Not building big cities at all.
I’m not sure how true that is. And even if we achieved a really ideal society, how long before it gets corrupt again? Two generations? Three? What happens (as it always does) when a few generations down, the young challenge the social norms of that society and remake things how _they_ want? It happens every few decades, and we’re in the middle of one right now.
I suppose, looking back at how many civilizations have risen and fallen, looking at how history repeats itself, and keeping in mind how long humans have existed and how old this earth is - I believe we’re destined to repeat ourselves over and over. When this society eventually falls (due to collapse, catastrophe, or whatever else), humans will once again restart. They may achieve ideal small communities where things work well. But the march of progress will continue, and systems will eventually get corrupted again. History will repeat itself. And even without this small group of goofballs who love to control everything, I think it’s our DNA that we’ll eventually lose whatever good society might develop. We’ll forget what worked in the past, and fight about what’s not.
Perhaps someday we can fully sequence DNA and “choose” ideal characteristics for our children, devoid of those nasty characteristics. But is that even ethical? And what if corrupt individuals run that system and use it against humanity? More likely they would use it to develop super soldiers who would go on to commit even more mass genocide than we’ve already had.
I don’t suppose there are any answers. Short of some sort of god or galactic overlord, neither of which there is any evidence of.
Though it has been said by many researchers that our DNA is so incredibly complex that it’s simply not possible that it got that way on its own, that somebody must have designed it. But neither they, nor anybody else, has any good answers on that. Nothing objectively verifiable, certainly.
Daniel Johnson thought the twisted E in Electra Records was Evil a Genius musican much like alot of characters in Mr Robot so did Sam take this and run with it for Evol Corp.
Very educational
Anyone know the name of the song at the end of the video, i can find it anywhere...
I got mindfucked @15:00
Biff 4 president!!! Oh wait. He's already president. DURP!!!
I don’t buy for a second that pre-civilization humans didn’t know the concept of competition. We know little about society before 6-10,000 years ago and there is a _lot_ of evidence that humans had many advanced civilizations more than 10,000 years ago that were wiped out in catastrophic events. Some evidence is showing we’ve had countless boom & bust cycles, that we achieved civilization a long, long time ago but for various reasons they get destroyed, reset to zero and start over. We only really know about this last incarnation. Humans have been in our exact current form for over 210,000 years as evidenced by pre-ancient human remains discovered in recent years, so we may well have had civilizations for at least half that time. We just don’t know. But we weren’t hunter-gatherers without society 12,000 years ago (the catastrophic events around 11,600 years ago changed all that).
Also - even if you assume we were hunter-gatherers, say, 12,000 years ago, competition would have been an integral part of human life. It is in animals, why wouldn’t it be for us? Competition for women, competition against other animals for prey to eat, competition between tribes who would at times fight. We also have evidence of extremely ancient artifacts like glazed pottery, pretty things made of gold and other shiny substances, and various fine items going back way before when we used to think civilization began. Which means we _did_ care about possessions in the distant, pre-ancient past. Though when you add in the concept of multiple advanced civilization periods, the entire concept gets muddled.
My point is that essay you referred to is very out of date, and uses assumptions and then-current understandings of humans from a time we never did know much about. Assumptions based on limited data that now shows to be untrue.
Fact is, civilized society or not, we _do not know_ how humans truly lived or believed during periods we don’t have recorded history for. Why would we think the instinctual behavior of humans would be all that different, even without a real society enveloping us? We always strived to do better, to develop and build, from what little data we have. And keeping in mind the rest of the animal kingdom, you see many similar traits.
I highly doubt humans were any more altruistic in a non-civilized society than we are now. It may be difficult to see in a society as sick and broken as ours is, but most average people have the same needs and wants, and given similar circumstances would rather help than harm.
Now you could well make the argument that very bad situations in childhood and life can cause most humans to end up doing pretty horrific things. And abusive parents, for example, would have existed without a society much like it does now, albeit perhaps less common, we don’t know. But we cannot assume people were somehow more pure, their social situations were much different but instinctually we were much the same.
Maybe we’re saying the same thing, maybe not. I don’t see humans themselves as all that different, based on my learning about all this. Society (and a sick one at that) _does_ change many aspects, but the innate desires won’t change. Competition isn’t a societal thing. Lack of altruism isn’t either, though a tough life can certainly drive an altruistic person to no longer care.
Though again, looking at all this through the lens of multiple periods of civilizations that have fallen and rebuilt, we don’t know how much time we _ever_ had without some form of society. How long between civilizational periods. Or if there was an initial “seeding” period where we first started out, innocent, naked and ignorant. We don’t know our true origins or when that all began, but I do think it’s fairly easy to see that many of our tendencies are more innate than people realize. Indeed humans are fairly predictable, in any type of civilization.
One area I didn’t hear you mention, however, that will change things is the small percentage of us who are anti-social, who lack normal human emotions like empathy and compassion - the so-called psychopaths and sociopaths. One could posit that sociopaths are more a product of their environment (civilized or not), but psychopaths seem to be born broken, with that part of the brain that processes emotions somehow not connected to the rest very well. These are often the people who do whatever it takes to get ahead, and are often our politicians, corporate heads and often, skilled surgeons. They are often (though not always) the ones who get us into these messes through their carelessness for the good of mankind, and there’s no reason to think they haven’t always existed among humankind. Even in a pre-civilized world, we very likely had a small percentage who would rape, mame, kill, steal, etc without a second thought. So a small group controlling and manipulating others would still have existed even then, and the rest of humankind would have had to develop ways of dealing with them. Including things like competition.
The State of Nature is a philosophical concept that was popular during Rousseau's time. In Discourse on Inequality and the Social Contract, Rousseau argues that the behavior of the powerful is out of step with the basic interests of humanity, and the main cause for this change is the erection of civilization. The State of Nature isn't a literal date but rather a state of being before formal society changes a person. This is covered in On Education, a discourse on child rearing. But the most important thing to take away from Rousseau's thoughts on the State of Nature is that it is a place man can never regress to. It is lost to us.
In this essay I wanted to focus on the Alderson siblings and what encouraged them to pursue the fight with Evil Corp, not so much the power structure that rules their world. That may be covered at a later date, but psychopathy and anomic leanings are a main focus in another essay on the channel, Mr. Robot | Modern Alienation.
More and more people seem to be interested in what reading materials go into these essays, so I pinned a list up at the top.
The Girl with the dragon Tattoo is a very violent story. Fincher's version manages to be quite disturbing because it shows less but implies more, and the Oplev version from Sweden (this is the same director who made the pilot for Mr. Robot) there's an abundance of violence that there's no escape from it. So you're reaction isn't an isolated one, despite which version we're talking about.
I love this debate! I LOVE IT!
Almost twenty minutes of problems in the world, and last few seconds of hopeful messages. Is there a balance in this? Where do we move from here now?
all I hear is bass lmao