I think the message was there, you’re ignoring it. I did not see any people with guns speaking the Na’vi language. I didn’t see any corporate suits referring to them as an intelligent humanoid species, but blue monkeys.
And who’s to say they didn’t?
Why should the Na’vi budge? Because aliens found something on their planet that could make them rich, but destroy their environment? You don’t see anything wrong with that? How would you react if someone came into your home and did exactly the same thing? Would you think you were being unreasonable and stubborn to the invader, if you fought for and defended your home and possessions?
Damn skippy.
What movie were you watching because your denial of another culture being destroyed by greed and entitlement is amazing.
The main scientist along with the other avatar initiate are clearly fluent in Na’vi language and culture. A big deal was made about Jake not having years of training, so he ended up just being a gun mule.
Well, they clearly didn’t assault them on a scale like takes place in the movie, otherwise they would’ve found out about the planet’s defenses. So they clearly didn’t come in shooting - they may have had some skirmishes over misunderstandings at first, but after explaining how expensive the avatar program is, and how they’ve spent years attempting to communicate/negotiate, it’s clear that they tried a peaceful resolution extensively.
I didn’t say the humans were right. You made it sound like they came in immediately and started slaughtering the natives and trying to assimilate them. The movie doesn’t support that. They went through extensive efforts to find a mutually beneficial arrangement. It was only after offering everything they could to the Na’vi and being rebuffed that they felt that force was their only option. That doesn’t make them right, but it also doesn’t make them what you’re saying they are.
Ultimately the humans chose to attack rather than go home, and obviously that’s not noble - but it was the needs of a dying planet in crisis vs (at what the time appeared to be) a superstition of some natives. I suspect that if we found some magical substance on Earth that gave us plentiful clean energy (I mean besides uranium, you know, cause it’s like nuclear and stuff, ew!) and it turned out to be in some native’s holy ground in the Brazillian rainforest, I don’t think you’d be so noble as to suggest we should just give up on it.
Scientist does not equal “corporate suit” or “military person.” If the other two had been more in tune to the scientists’ way of thinking, the chances of some peaceful agreement would more than likely have improved dramatically.
Uh huh.
Nor did I say or imply that.
Yes, it does. If someone doesn’t yield what is theirs, you do not have a right to take it. It doesn’t matter what methods you used prior to aggression. The fact remains that it’s not yours and you are not entitled to it (whatever it is) because you need it.
A better analogy I think for what happened would be if some aliens came to Earth and said, "We found some rocks under New York that we want to dig up. So if you don’t mind getting the fuck out of New York, because we’re gonna raze it and dig up all the rocks.
How would a peaceful agreement be arranged? As you already conceded, the humans had nothing to offer the Na’vi. They weren’t going to move.
I didn’t say anyone had a “right” to it. Things are not that black and white. What I do dispute is your notion that the humans landed on the planet with their balls hanging out and demanded that the natives conform to their ways and give into their demands immediately or else.
I generally have anti-colonial leanings, but if there’s some magical valuable substance that will improve the whole of humanity that happens to exist on some place that’s only valuable due to the superstitions of the natives, and we also offer whatever we can in order to peacefully move the natives, I can’t say that ultimately removing them by force wouldn’t be justified. Really, from a utilitarian standpoint, it’s a no brainer.
In this particular case, it wasn’t just superstitious nonsense - there was actually something valuable there to the planet’s intelligence - but from the human perspective it was religious/superstitious nonsense.
Yes. I’m very pragmatic, I’m willing to toss aside sentimental and superstitious and religious value when it comes to things like substantially benefitting an entire planet. I don’t think your New York City comparison is apt - we’d be losing a lot of very important material things and infrastructure in this case. It’s more like that we found an extremely valuable substance underneath some sacred church or a sacred burial ground, and they wouldn’t let us dig their because of their religious beliefs.
How about if some futuristic aliens swoop in and say “We found some rocks under New York that we need. So if you don’t mind getting out of New York, because we’re going to raze it and dig up all the rocks; what do you want in exchange?”
Actually… where was the big deposit? I thought it was under the big tree where the N’avi lived (and which would certainly count as “infrastructure”). What was the point of that final battle, which seemed aimed at trashing the smaller tree of fiber-optic-life? Hadn’t the N’avi already been driven away from the site that most interested the humans?
You’re right, I remember the scene now when Jake is explaining to the Marine guy how the tree was hollowed out. It would be more like a city, then.
Anyway, my point wasn’t that it wasn’t a dick move to come in and try to steal it, just that they really did make an effort to come to an agreement nonviolently first.
The humans had detected a force of 2,000 warriors, with more arriving each day. They decided to attack them pre-emptively - hit their holy site and demoralize them, kill the leaders before they could gather an even bigger army.
