#like my grandparents lived under nazi occupation and my father grew up under a military dictatorship

[rawliverandgoronspice]

for no fucking reason: real life dictatorships in the 20th and 21th centuries are almost always allowed to thrive because of some empire's interests. If not, they get heavily demonized then dismantled by said empire over a relatively short period of time (unless exceptional circumstances, tho it's almost always applicable). the examples are countless; please read declassified reports and interviews from the CIA/KGB/other intelligence agencies across the world to lose your mind about it, especially those involving what happened during the Cold War and what happened in the Middle East (and still does).

characters like ganondorf are the epitomy of the fantasy that colonized/"exotic" countries naturally spawn evil incarnate and must be controlled/stumped/imprisoned/destroyed by the "responsible ones" while the perfect good place is perfect and utterly blameless about what went down and how the local population suffered (which, in real life, the empires of the world are most definitively not that --the amount of dictators that were ushered into power by western interests is staggering and we fucking love to see it don't we). And also, a blameless victim to whichever retribution eventually comes back their way.

It is a rethoric that denies interconnectivity and historical responsibility.

this is what I criticize about the narrative choices of a fictional conflict that *does not exist in real life* and has been entirely made up by human beings: the cowardice of blamelessness, and what little this kind of narrative brings to the table --especially today when we should be looking at the root cause of broken systems of violence instead of endlessly scapegoating minorities.

and well, especially given how effective this narrative apparently seems to be.