It did, but then Grant Ward was always a douche.

I will make sure to mention the two together in all the upcoming comment threads.

Her name is Daisy!

The scene of Daisy leaving the base is one of the most visually wonderful things the show has done, and I loved that the music they used was a "corrupted" version of the Daisy score, the one we hear when she underwent terrigenesis.

But its not "obviously" false; hence my example of The Economist. Perhaps the poster is using the term liberal more in the British context (where the word is more about economic freedom like free trade) than in the American context, where it is conflated with things like socialism.

Marxism is a much more clearly defined and delineated set of philosophical beliefs than either "leftists" (a term whose origin would make anyone who isn't an aristocrat or a churchman such a thing) or "liberal", again, a term as vaguely defined, and which we should add in some parts of the world is certainly not the…

And? Rocketpilot admitted that intersectionality isn't a particularly important issue of concerns for Marxism, as orthodox Marxists generally view the economic sphere as primary and give little weight to the 'cultural' one.

No Marxist would speak like that. They are strict materialists, believing that social conditions are an outgrowth the power relationships. All this cultural stuff is relatively irrelevant for them.

Guns are noisy and barbaric.

Killing a great number of enemies is generally seen as damned 'Heroic' in war. All the great ancient Heroes were really good at killing their enemies. After all, he needed to kill all those "bad guys" to save the "good guys" (your fellow Americans), so, or so the argument goes, how could someone so willing to risk his…

So now being complete about one's arguments, since this discussion that has been ongoing now for several posts, is "aggressive"? That is another thing I don't get, specially in a discussion prompted by the very complaint about people not communicating completely - I am being complete with my points, to leave no…

So, providing documentation to support a statement of fact and then adding emphasis to dramatize the problems with an opposing argument = taking something personal?

"defense of the show"? I am the one who said in my own post about the episode that I had several problems with the episode. My defense is against silly complaints when it comes to TV writing, and this is one.

No, James says nothing other than the "piss off" to Lincoln and don't take another step line before Daisy steps on the mine. Its all shown in a clip widely available legally on Youtube - right here:

What intent to kill did he demonstrate?

The "scene" you describe makes no sense. So what you suggest would be 'better' would have been for Lincoln to start shouting at James and telling him everything….cause, that seems more natural than trying to go up to someone when you speak. Its normal to give long winded exposition from a distance, just to placate an…

Why yes, its narrative "convenience" for people to miscommunicate, cause we all know that in real life, everyone tells everyone everything openly and in a straightforward manner……I know that in the real life experiences I have had, everyone always communicates effectively and obviously this must also be the same for…

Since when has Daisy been someone to "de-escalate" with someone who forgot to tell them openly about a minefield? Cause that seems the bigger case of lack of communication between characters….

What makes you think he wouldn't have treated them as hostile even if he knew they weren't there because of Jiaying? The only thing that turned him non-hostile was the possibility of getting powers - and only Lincoln knew that part of the plan, and he wasn't even really planning to give the crystal to James.

They had one discussion, right after the mine scene, which lasted a few minutes. What exactly would have gone differently overall? Daisy wouldn't have stepped on a mine? They would have given James powers?