Korra

[Blackhawk748]

I liked the love triangle in Book One because it showed Korra was not Miss Perfect Mary Sue. Other aspects of the show in both seasons show she isn't Mary Sue either. That's a good thing. I can like her and root for her without being ordered to. She can make mistakes, fail, and have things be her fault. Her friends get to be the heroes too. They can save her and save the day sometimes. They can be right and she wrong.

I get what you're saying, but I firmly disagree. She faces no consequences for stealing Mako from Asami, except Asami being rightfully upset, and doesn't even really get called out for it. If anything it's something that would actually make her more Mary Sue-ish because she doesn't apologise nor face any issues from acting like a narcissistic jerk.

[Xihirli]

Well, she dates Mako for awhile. That's a pretty awful consequence.

[Blackhawk748]

Well, she dates Mako for awhile. That's a pretty awful consequence.

Considering that's what she wanted? No, no it isnt

[LibraryOgre]

I get what you're saying, but I firmly disagree. She faces no consequences for stealing Mako from Asami, except Asami being rightfully upset, and doesn't even really get called out for it. If anything it's something that would actually make her more Mary Sue-ish because she doesn't apologise nor face any issues from acting like a narcissistic jerk.

I don't know that she really stole Mako... Mako pretty much left Asami on his own. Every time Korra was remotely in trouble, Mako was front and center and trying to be her hero. When she's injured, he's insisting on carrying her. There was a very clear vibe, to me, of "Mako was with Asami, but decided that Korra was more important."

[Razade]

I don't know that she really stole Mako... Mako pretty much left Asami on his own. Every time Korra was remotely in trouble, Mako was front and center and trying to be her hero. When she's injured, he's insisting on carrying her. There was a very clear vibe, to me, of "Mako was with Asami, but decided that Korra was more important."

And then Korra and Asami decided they were more important to each other than Mako.

[Blackhawk748]

And then Korra and Asami decided they were more important to each other than Mako.

It's really sloppy writing all around. I'm convinced that they're just awful at anything resembling romance

[Ramza00]

Hated Book 3. Disagree with everyone that the villain was good in any way. I'm a very, very small minority there, so you probably won't feel that way.

Peele remind me? You watched the show the first time in the last year?

I ask for lots of people’s opinions changed based off recent events with some aspects of the show with Cops and Anarchy. The changes of technology and social media with cell phone camera videos, and the dominance of Facebook and Twitter (a computer selecting content to push to you, and it is curated specifically to what the computer thinks you are and thus there are thousands of different Facebooks) ... has made the beats of Cops and Anarchy aspects of the show feel different in 2012 to 2014 vs 2018 to 2020.

I am not trying to put words in your mouth, just curious about feedback, for I noticed this with people who are new to the show, or did a recent rewatch of the show due to it coming on Netflix and so on.

I get what you're saying, but I firmly disagree. She faces no consequences for stealing Mako from Asami, except Asami being rightfully upset, and doesn't even really get called out for it. If anything it's something that would actually make her more Mary Sue-ish because she doesn't apologise nor face any issues from acting like a narcissistic jerk.

Well, she dates Mako for awhile. That's a pretty awful consequence.

Considering that's what she wanted? No, no it isnt

So we all agree that dating Mako is a Monkey Paw. 🐒 🐾

What we are disagreeing about if the pain / pathos / experience of dating Mako is severe enough that we derive schadenfreude joy from the experience? Like Korra receiving consequences was only like a 3 out of 10 on the bad scale and some of us rather it be a 7 or 8 out of 10?

Drama that makes us feel things inside of ourselves instead of drama that feels like an annoying fly in the room who grates on our nerves but if we ignore it, the rest of the season is exactly the same?

[GloatingSwine]

And then Korra and Asami decided they were more important to each other than Mako.

Not an unreasonable decision. I have furniture with more personality and charisma than Mako.

[Peelee]

Peele remind me? You watched the show the first time in the last year?

I ask for lots of people’s opinions changed based off recent events with some aspects of the show with Cops and Anarchy. The changes of technology and social media with cell phone camera videos, and the dominance of Facebook and Twitter (a computer selecting content to push to you, and it is curated specifically to what the computer thinks you are and thus there are thousands of different Facebooks) ... has made the beats of Cops and Anarchy aspects of the show feel different in 2012 to 2014 vs 2018 to 2020.

I am not trying to put words in your mouth, just curious about feedback, for I noticed this with people who are new to the show, or did a recent rewatch of the show due to it coming on Netflix and so on.

I watched it for the first and only time in the last year.

Spoiler: My specific issues with Zaheer

Show

What other people call "spiritual" i call "espouses the philosophy of a teenager going through an edgy phase." He has nothing but pure idealism that ignores how reality would cope with his ideal world and refuses to even consider any other possible world, which wouldn't even be so bad if his idealism didn't resemble that of a child's.

[Blackhawk748]

So we all agree that dating Mako is a Monkey Paw. 🐒 🐾

What we are disagreeing about if the pain / pathos / experience of dating Mako is severe enough that we derive schadenfreude joy from the experience? Like Korra receiving consequences was only like a 3 out of 10 on the bad scale and some of us rather it be a 7 or 8 out of 10?

Drama that makes us feel things inside of ourselves instead of drama that feels like an annoying fly in the room who grates on our nerves but if we ignore it, the rest of the season is exactly the same?

I have no issue with Mako. He's a bit boring, but he's overall fine.

But it's really that last one, it was drama for the sake of drama that went nowhere, gave us no character growth and did pretty much nothing. You could have removed it and nothing would have changed except that Korra and Asami's relationship wouldn't have this weird thing sitting in the background like a malformed chair.

[Ramza00]

Answer Peelee comments

Spoiler: Season 3 stuff

Show

I watched it for the first and only time in the last year.

Spoiler: My specific issues with Zaheer

Show

What other people call "spiritual" i call "espouses the philosophy of a teenager going through an edgy phase." He has nothing but pure idealism that ignores how reality would cope with his ideal world and refuses to even consider any other possible world, which wouldn't even be so bad if his idealism didn't resemble that of a child's.

There is a good essay about Season 2 of The Good Place that I will let people google for it is spoilers of that show and is off topic.

The Other Secret Twist: On the Political Philosophy of The Good Place By Robin James.

In that essay she talks about two different strands of philosophy, ideal theory vs non-ideal theory, aka John Rawls vs Charles Mills. Ideal theory sees this world as a mess and too chaotic and thus tries to remove ourselves from the world entirely as an ideolog-i-cal exercise. It then tries to imagine an ideal society, a utopia, and then back ports that ideology into the real world answering normative questions of how the society operates and says each individual must be like an Angel. A perfect being, a don quixote, and people must do strict-compliance to the ideal for if we all cooperate the society will become The Good Place (known as eu-topia in Greek.)

Charles Mills says this is unworkable for you can not answer normative questions like who is on top of society like a king or queen like that. He points out the people who expertise ideal theory are often people of privilege already with society, or they are quixotic fools who have a personality temperament who practice disavow continuously to deal with realities contradictions (if the world stinks one must disavow our wicked urges and be more like a Boy Scout or Angel in order to rise up to a higher plane of existence.)

Non-ideal theory recognizes we are in a constant stage of flux / change and that transitions can be joyous but can also be disastrous. Transformation is possible but we must know what is currently as the world actually exists as it is now before we can reach for ideals separate from the now.

Thus non-ideal theory critiques ideal theory in 3 areas.
(i) full compliance vs. partial compliance theory; Aka we need a society that can work even if everyone does not follow the rules.
(ii) utopian vs. realistic theory; We need to start with the real as it is now, instead of thinking about the good place and working backwards.
(iii) end‐state vs. transitional theory. Aka do we look at the whole and then find the individual steps from A to Z with A to B in between, or do we start at A to B and then B to C to get to Z.

———

Uncle Iroh : [Draws Fire symbol in the dirt] Fire is the element of power. The people of the Fire Nation have desire and will and the energy and drive to achieve what they want.
Uncle Iroh : [Draws Earth symbol] Earth is the element of substance. The people of the Earth Kingdom are diverse and strong. They are persistent and enduring.
Uncle Iroh : [Draws Air symbol] Air is the element of freedom. The Air Nomads detached themselves from worldly concerns and found peace and freedom. Also, they apparently had pretty good senses of humor.
Uncle Iroh : [Draws Water symbol] Water is the element of change. The people of the Water Tribes are capable of adapting to many things. They have a sense of community and love that holds them together through anything.

Tenzin:Airbending is all about spiral movements. When you meet resistance, you must be able to switch direction at a moment's notice.

Has other people noticed how Zaheer is an air bender who operates like a fire bender? His spiral moments are about power, directing desire, and forcing will.

Air=>Fire=>Earth=>Water=>Air cycle, a reverse avatar cycle compared to Air=>Water=>Earth=>Fire cycle. A red lotus vs a white lotus.

Both direction of the cycle are important, the red lotus cycle critiques the present world, it needs to be taught, for it shows the limitations of the present and how the present can be oppressive and treat humans not like humans but like objects, cogs in a machine. But the red lotus taking to excess can lead to disaster, just like the white lotus is not enough, it is deficient, it is not excellent.

In another philosophical tradition the avatar cycle and the reverse avatar cycle is teaching about Syn-Flow and Contra-Flow. Are we trying to synchronize with the current flow of the world and shape it via synchronization like an air bender and water bender tries to harness existing energy? Or are we trying to provide counter energy, to operate in a contrary direction of the current flow and reform it via destabilizing uniting factors if those factors are being used for wicked ends?

Both energies are needed, but when you start untying Gordon Knots you may activate OOTS snarl energy

[Lord Raziere]

I watched it for the first and only time in the last year.

Spoiler: My specific issues with Zaheer

Show

What other people call "spiritual" i call "espouses the philosophy of a teenager going through an edgy phase." He has nothing but pure idealism that ignores how reality would cope with his ideal world and refuses to even consider any other possible world, which wouldn't even be so bad if his idealism didn't resemble that of a child's.

I don't know, what would the alternative kind of villainy be?

him taking over Earth Kingdom? not exactly within Air Nomad philosophy, which he is very fanatical about. way too Earth-like

I mean he could try not taking but then forcefully trying to convert people to his way of thinking....but thats very Earth-or Fire like. forcing people to do stuff again, is not his goal.

I mean I guess he could've tried to be a Joker or other corrupter type of character who tries to go around manipulating people with guile and set yup scenarios into accepting his philosophy as true by tearing down other peoples philosophies and trying to demonstrate why he thinks all governments are bad and such, but again where does that lead? might be Water-y, to.

thing is though, without Zaheer, the Air Nomads don't have anyone to demonstrate their dark side and they become mary sue pacifists that can do no wrong when everyone else has gotten a turn. So. what would you envision as the "dark side of Air"?

[dancrilis]

So. what would you envision as the "dark side of Air"?

You could go with an isolationist who seeks to claim the ancestoral lands of the air nomads and build up their forces to protect those lands after what happened last time - the only problem is that other people have moved in since Sozin started his campaign to spread civilisation ot the other nations.

This could then be a conflict of whether the nations should be seperate or joined and if historic grievances should be settled over a century after they were caused or should be forgotten and forgiven as history.

[Lord Raziere]

You could go with an isolationist who seeks to claim the ancestoral lands of the air nomads and build up their forces to protect those lands after what happened last time - the only problem is that other people have moved in since Sozin started his campaign to spread civilisation ot the other nations.

This could then be a conflict of whether the nations should be seperate or joined and if historic grievances should be settled over a century after they were caused or should be forgotten and forgiven as history.

I dunno, seems a very "Earth" motivation? Air Nomads never really cared about ancestry, since they're all monks. land, titles, family, wealth,.....these are all material things. transient in Air nomad philosophy and culture, not very important. what does a Air monk care that some people found a new use for that land? after all, everything ends someday, and clearly the old nomads time is done, why try to force them out? They're happy, its all good and its better to find somewhere else that won't cause trouble. that and they're....Nomads. they traveled on bison, they dwelled in whatever temple they ended up, Aang has memories of visiting the Earth and Fire nations before he got frozen. what do borders really mean to a people who are all about flying?

[dancrilis]

I dunno, seems a very "Earth" motivation? Air Nomads never really cared about ancestry, since they're all monks. land, titles, family, wealth,.....these are all material things. transient in Air nomad philosophy and culture, not very important. what does a Air monk care that some people found a new use for that land? after all, everything ends someday, and clearly the old nomads time is done, why try to force them out? They're happy, its all good and its better to find somewhere else that won't cause trouble. that and they're....Nomads. they traveled on bison, they dwelled in whatever temple they ended up, Aang has memories of visiting the Earth and Fire nations before he got frozen. what do borders really mean to a people who are all about flying?

Having 'your' society wiped from the face of the planet could easily have a new airbender not embrace all the old ways.

Essentially your comment 'Air Nomads never really cared ... ' and your comment '... the old nomads time is done' combine to have the new guys not really be like the old guys.

The new guys would be airbenders not air nomads.

[Lord Raziere]

Having 'your' society wiped from the face of the planet could easily have a new airbender not embrace all the old ways.

Essentially your comment 'Air Nomads never really cared ... ' and your comment '... the old nomads time is done' combine to have the new guys not really be like the old guys.

The new guys would be airbenders not air nomads.

Ah, but why would they care about a dead culture or its land then? Its a new age, new way of doing things, why care about whats gone? I'm an Airbender of the future dude! Like duuude, whats with borders anyways? why do have to fight over them? they seem more trouble than they're worth y'know? like man, maybe we shouldn't have them, then people wouldn't try to like declare war over them or anything! walls only keep us apart and make us like bad, dude, why have them? It'd be great.....we could all like, party or something, would have to ask them how to party all together, whichever way the wind blows y'know?!

[dancrilis]

Ah, but why would they care about a dead culture or its land then?

Because that is how historic grivances sometimes work - the living 'associate' with the long dead people and then seek to redress whatever injustice they feel the dead suffered (often with less connection with the dead then 'we have the same magic powers').

Its a new age, new way of doing things, why care about whats gone? I'm an Airbender of the future dude! Like duuude, whats with borders anyways? why do have to fight over them? they seem more trouble than they're worth y'know? like man, maybe we shouldn't have them, then people wouldn't try to like declare war over them or anything! walls only keep us apart and make us like bad, dude, why have them? It'd be great.....we could all like, party or something, would have to ask them how to party all together, whichever way the wind blows y'know?!

That could be another movement but it would likely be harder to make the leader of it a villain risking the balance of the world, and also the answer from the more militant isolationists would be 'they last time we lived in peace and harmony without real defences we were wiped out - so that is a no, first we establish ourselves and our independence then we integrate on our terms (or not if we can be properly self sufficent)'.

[Ramza00]

Because that is how historic grievances sometimes work - the living 'associate' with the long dead people and then seek to redress whatever injustice they feel the dead suffered (often with less connection with the dead then 'we have the same magic powers').

I am going to disagree. You can't merely associate with the past you also have to tell an individual story plus the association or the character will fill hollow, like a puppet, golem, robot, etc.

People who deal with historic grievances are like this.

1) They suffer a personal tragedy, something that should not have occured. Or someone close to them in their personal life, a friend, a family member, a sibling suffered a personal tragedy.
2) They are then radicalized by experiencing the past and they see that their personal suffering is connected to a longer list of personal sufferings that should not have occured.

2 does not happen unless 1 happens. We do not "tolerate injustice" on the first taste of the fruit, not it is several tastings that cause us to have a super-ego persona, a mental habit created by dozens of experiences

(both lived experiences in our own life, but also oral / social / history experiences that we experience via the mental game we call theory of mind, a subtype of empathy, where we experience in our mind mental play and we take on experiences not our own, or experiences from our past or future self which are different than our current experience in this moment. Theory of mind though is not just experiences but also beliefs, desires, intentions, and perspective, values, etc with this mental play.)

Thus from a storytelling perspective you need to do in median res. Start the story in the middle, introduce this new character, and then via narration, flashbacks, chats with other people we learn about what makes this character tick, how they are not just trying to deal with historical grievances they are also haunted by their own demons of the past where they suffered injustice in this beautiful yet ugly world.

[Lord Raziere]

Because that is how historic grivances sometimes work - the living 'associate' with the long dead people and then seek to redress whatever injustice they feel the dead suffered (often with less connection with the dead then 'we have the same magic powers').

That could be another movement but it would likely be harder to make the leader of it a villain risking the balance of the world, and also the answer from the more militant isolationists would be 'they last time we lived in peace and harmony without real defences we were wiped out - so that is a no, first we establish ourselves and our independence then we integrate on our terms (or not if we can be properly self sufficent)'.

1. which is real enduring and possessive for an element and an entire people taught to spiritually let go of attachments and accept what is unexpected. Again, that is a very Earth-like way of thinking.

2. and what about this would be Air exactly? congratulations you made Kuvira but with Airbending. Except making less sense. you've shown Airbenders adopting an Earth philosophy and how that doesn't work, sure, how is that the dark side of AIR?

[dancrilis]

1. which is real enduring and possessive for an element and an entire people taught to spiritually let go of attachments and accept what is unexpected. Again, that is a very Earth-like way of thinking.

2. and what about this would be Air exactly? congratulations you made Kuvira but with Airbending. Except making less sense. you've shown Airbenders adopting an Earth philosophy and how that doesn't work, sure, how is that the dark side of AIR?

Kuvira was to an extent an expansionist rather then an isolationist - you also seem to be somewhat thinking that Air, Water, Earth and Fire are vastly different I don't see them that way.
Amon, Unalaq, Hama and Katara were all waterbenders but they had little more in common with each other then they did with Iroh, Tenzin or Toph.

As such an 'evil' airbender for me would be one who takes from airbender society and twists it to their own purposes, now you can argue that Zaheer did that (and again I didn't mind him) - but he also just did what he intended to do initially air powers or not they had no real impact on who he was or how he saw things.

Spoiler: My specific issues with Zaheer

Show

What other people call "spiritual" i call "espouses the philosophy of a teenager going through an edgy phase." He has nothing but pure idealism that ignores how reality would cope with his ideal world and refuses to even consider any other possible world, which wouldn't even be so bad if his idealism didn't resemble that of a child's.

You might be expecting a bit much from a children's cartoon - your not wrong but I don't see the other seasons as any better with their villians really (although I kindof thought that Kuvira was a step up).

[Lord Raziere]

Kuvira was to an extent an expansionist rather then an isolationist - you also seem to be somewhat thinking that Air, Water, Earth and Fire are vastly different I don't see them that way.
Amon, Unalaq, Hama and Katara were all waterbenders but they had little more in common with each other then they did with Iroh, Tenzin or Toph.

As such an 'evil' airbender for me would be one who takes from airbender society and twists it to their own purposes, now you can argue that Zaheer did that (and again I didn't mind him) - but he also just did what he intended to do initially air powers or not they had no real impact on who he was or how he saw things.

Au contraire, Amon, Unalaq and Tarrlok were all deceptive, manipulative people hiding behind masks, some more literally than others. While Katara used "the lady of the lake" deception to hide her identity while she solved problems at a village the Gaang didn't have time for.

meanwhile Kuvira, Toph, and Lin are all forceful and stubborn people, and Kuvira isn't much different from any other of the Earth conquerors before her.

meanwhile the commonality between Zaheer, Tenzin and any other Airbender is not once did they care about bringing back the Airbender lands. their concern was about making something new and the one time Tenzin tried to "bring back" the culture, it was played as not working in the slightest for comedy. and both Tenzins and Zaheer's solutions involved no borders of any kind.

Zuko, Ozai and Azula were all driven by passion to achieve their goals.

and I don't think you understand the Airbender culture: what is there to twist to ones advantage? Money is only important because of what others value. Power is pointless to pursue for its own sake. Borders are irrelevant when you can fly. rules and attachments are artificial constructs that fade in time. Change is constant. Their entire culture is being happier jedi.

Zaheer is the way he is, because its one of the only ways you can write that sort of thing being villainous, greed? ambition? loved ones? Irrelevant next to spiritual enlightenment. you can't just write any old villain and slap air powers on them. it wouldn't resonate or feel right.

[Ramza00]

meanwhile the commonality between Zaheer, Tenzin and any other Airbender is not once did they care about bringing back the Airbender lands. their concern was about making something new and the one time Tenzin tried to "bring back" the culture, it was played as not working in the slightest for comedy. and both Tenzins and Zaheer's solutions involved no borders of any kind.

Agreed, but let me elaborate. Tenzin fell into his trap for he now had freedom and with freedom there is freedom to fail. He did not know what to do, thus he turns to the things he did know, instead of relaxing, breathing and listening to other voices in the cacophony of ideas.

Tenzin had an existential terror for he is "condemned to be free." Tenzin was thrown into this new normal with airbenders coming back and he thought it was his singular responsibility for everything these new airbenders do. While in reality his 2 siblings were taught everything he was taught and his brother is an airbender. Likewise his 3 kids are just as much airbenders and were taught by the various Air Acolytes that Aang himself taught.

But yeah I liked that episode even though part of it was not fun. It was so much better than ATLA's The Great Divide.

[dancrilis]

and I don't think you understand the Airbender culture

And I don't think you understand my point - I didn't use culture in my discussion I used society and that distinction was not an accident and I used it to refer to someone 'reclaiming' it rather then what it was about.

Effectively if I have you right you think 'those who got air powers are similiar to those who had air powers before them' my take is 'those who got air powers are products of the cultures they grew up in'.

As such we are approaching it from different angles - to me the Air Nomad culture is dead, the Air Nomads are dead, the new airbenders are something new and it is for them to determine but human nature being what it is some would likely decide to identify as the heirs to what went before and try to reclaim it even if they only have vague idea as to what it was about (and that can be a justification for villainy).

But yeah I liked that episode even though part of it was not fun. It was so much better than ATLA's The Great Divide.

Never understood the hatred for the great divide - wasn't great or all that memorable but it wasn't offensive, thought some of the early season 3 episodes were worst cause they seemed oddly paced with how the series had been building.

[Peelee]

Never understood the hatred for the great divide - wasn't great or all that memorable but it wasn't offensive

I understand people's issues with it but don't share that issues. It is the weakest episode of the series for me, but even that is such a high bar that it's not like I'd ever skip it when watching it again. Plus, I like how each side presents their issue, since things aren't always clear - cut, and I actually like Aang's solution.

[Ramza00]

Never understood the hatred for the great divide - wasn't great or all that memorable but it wasn't offensive, thought some of the early season 3 episodes were worst cause they seemed oddly paced with how the series had been building.

If I were to venture an opinion. It obviously felt like a filler episode from the start of it. The meta-plot will not move forward, and we do not get to learn more about our characters in a way that makes us related to them more. It felt like a side quest distraction.

There is a lot of filler in ATLA but when the filler advances something else with us resonating with the characters then it sustains peoples enjoyment of the episode.

-----

Now you can't know a filler episode is going to be good or bad prior to it occuring, yet if you telegraph it is filler at the start of things it is often going to cause people to be more critical for you "primed" them.

I understand people's issues with it but don't share that issues. It is the weakest episode of the series for me, but even that is such a high bar that it's not like I'd ever skip it when watching it again. Plus, I like how each side presents their issue, since things aren't always clear - cut, and I actually like Aang's solution.

Agreed but I bring up The Great Divide for this Tenzin episode and friends may have been a "weak" episode yet I think it performed better with hitting its key beats during the story. Thus it is stronger than the weakest ATLA episode.

(Yes some Season 3 ATLA episodes are true competition for The Great Divide, but peoples opinions will always be different as a matter of taste so what is the "literal" weakest is subjective.)

[Brother Oni]

Zaheer was one dead girlfriend away from achieving actual, full on zen void of self. Dude is one of the most spiritually connected people we've seen in the series, I feel like he kinda earned what he gets.

The Air Bender philosophy has a lot in common with a real world religion. Self realisation and subsequent enlightenment can be just an 'Eureka!' moment away and be blindingly obvious in hindsight.

I watched it for the first and only time in the last year.

Spoiler: My specific issues with Zaheer

Show

What other people call "spiritual" i call "espouses the philosophy of a teenager going through an edgy phase." He has nothing but pure idealism that ignores how reality would cope with his ideal world and refuses to even consider any other possible world, which wouldn't even be so bad if his idealism didn't resemble that of a child's.

Spoiler: Reply to Peelee

Show

I believe you're thinking of Zaheer as a normal rational person, so his motivation and end game seems unrealisitic to you. He's not though - he's a fanatic and faith in his ideology replaces much of what you and I would consider to be normal rational thought.

In the current climate, I don't really need to give examples of how faith in an ideology can otherwise turn a normal functioning person into little more than a propoganda bot.

It should be pointed out that Zaheer undergoes character growth during his time with Tenzin's Air benders - the Zaheer that steps off the cliff to fly is not the same Zaheer that was in prison for 13 years.

[crayzz]

Considering that's what she wanted? No, no it isnt

Getting what you want and having it work out badly for you is a classic karmic consequence.

The order for me goes Three>1st half of One>Four>2nd half of One>Two

Zaheer is an edgy teen philosopher, but that's normal for villain philosophy and for spirituality. AtLA and LoK metaphysics don't care about how sophisticated your philosophy is, so Edgy Teen Villain rising to the top of the food chain for a while makes perfect sense.

[Brother Oni]

Zaheer is an edgy teen philosopher...

I keep on seeing this phrase being used as criticism of Zaheer. Could someone please explain why exactly Zaheer's goal of destroying the ruling elite makes him an edgy teen philosopher?

There's plenty of real world philosophies that have pretty much the same goal, some followers of which have had some massively significant actions and repercussions.

[dancrilis]

I keep on seeing this phrase being used as criticism of Zaheer. Could someone please explain why exactly Zaheer's goal of destroying the ruling elite makes him an edgy teen philosopher?

He never really answers the question of 'how does your plan work' effectively.
Zaheer: I have a great idea - we kill everyone who is bad! it's genius! I can't believe that nobody else ever considered it I must be so smart.
Viewer: I don't think you have really thought this through.
Zaheer: Of course I have I am super smart - what is the problem with it!
Viewer: It will result in anarchy, likely impacting food production due to a raise in bandits which will likely be answered with a tyranny - or tyrannies - in order to impose control and provide safety for farmers who would otherwise be at the mercy of the bandits within an anarchy.
Zaheer: So? We then kill the new bad guys - duh.
Viewer: So you are trading a stable - if imperfect - government where most people are doing fine with for a cycle of anarchy giving way to tyranny needed to end said anarchy which is never allowed to move past that phase into stable government.
Zaheer: You just don't understand my brilliant plan.

If he was actually willing to claim power in order to manage a transition from what he regarded as a tyranny into his ideal form of government (whatever that was) then it would likely be fine - but he wasn't willing to do the work (and it seems that he never even considered the outcomes of his actions).


None of this is unreasonable for a cartoon but it isn't ideal either.

[Lord Raziere]

I mean you can make the same criticism of Ozai:

Ozai: we will kill the entire Earth kingdom with FIRE!
Adviser: But we already conquered Ba-Sing-Se
Ozai: So? they still need to die
Adviser: I don't think you through this through
Ozai: how haven't I?
Adviser: you could gain far more resources and power by beginning the process of overtaking their culture with your own through trade, you'd miss out on brainwashing young Earthbenders to your cause while shoving all the menial jobs onto Earth kingdom slaves or servants, plus burning that much land would cause irreparable damage to the environment and the atmosphere will which turn negatively impact your own empire and its lifespan. you basically shooting yourself in the foot when you've already won.
Ozai: you just don't understand my brilliant plan

or say Zhao....

Zhao: I decided to kill one of the moon spirits!
other Ghost: WHYYYY!?
Zhao: well it was a Waterbender thing so.....it was my enemy and had to die.
other ghost: but that would negatively impact the tides of the ENTIRE WORLD screwing up EVERYTHING!
Zhao: Well I succeeded didn't I?
other ghost: and look where that got you
Zhao: you just don't understand how brilliant my plan was.

Avatar villains, not exactly ones with a lot of foresight, kind of a short-sighted lot.