The System, Fathers, and Your Sasukes, Nagatos, Nejis, Hakus, etc.
# # # # # #
When people use five throwaway lines (in their manga "criticisms") to talk about the Shinobi System's "faults" in regard to its unrepentant endorsement of the viscously singular military-industrial-complex and then turn around and rag on Sasuke endlessly through their chuckle-worthy posts, you ask yourself: what's even the point of this contemptable nonsense?
I'm aware that many in this Fandom aren't that bright, but I'd try this regardless. If you truly look at the framework of Konoha, none of the fathers were truly horrible people. Hiashi pushed Hinata to put work into her training, because she's his heir. When he realized that she wasn't up to it, he decided that Hanabi was better suited for the heir-position. What was he supposed to do in this system, molly-coddle her? The entire future of his clan hinged upon a strong heir to carry forth the system that they'd created. He doesn't have the luxury of keeping Hinata as an heir when she truly isn't up to it. That's just the way it is. Applying your western parenting clichés at the expense of everything else to a military industrial complex is pitifully idiotic. The only thing that you can talk about is the Slavery System; however, within the Hyūga Clan's framework, that also makes sense as it's designed to safeguard the clan's future. "Lesser Evil", you know?
Minato? He was the Hokage. He shouldn't have killed himself, but his decision to put Kurama's other half into Naruto for the village makes sense. It's a nuke. A war deterrent. Without a Jinchūriki in the village, it's open to all sorts of attacks. The removal of the most powerful Bijū from the equation delivers a direct blow to Leaf's power, sovereignty, and security. (Why else do you think Hashirama kept the most powerful one for himself? It wasn't out of the "goodness" of his heart, I can assure you.) Within the framework, this, too, is a rational decision, whether you like it or not.
If you look at Rasa, then he was in a far worse position than all others combined: he had to weigh the future of the entire village against the life of one person, his son. (Keep that in mind that the attempts on Gaara's life began after Rasa had squandered all options, including the infamous uncle one.) Gaara went on routine mass-murder-rampages in the village and had probably killed half the village by the time Rasa decided to take his life. And, yes, that's canon. Gaara didn't try and kill people in retaliation to Rasa; it's the other way around. What do you want him to do, let Gaara keep murdering left, right, and center? Is that a good option for the village's Kazekage that's a nepotistic position to begin with? You can't be serious? Should he have been "nice" about the murder? If not that, then what?
Fugaku is practically saintly by comparison, and his unintentional neglect is a byproduct of his desire to save his people—basically, the entire clan. His decision to push Itachi into Anbu at an early age is no different from Sakumo's decision or the decision of the Sanin's fathers. The only difference between the them is that Fugaku wanted Itachi to lead the clan's charge and safeguard its future. The horrors! Think of the children! Won't someone think of poor children?! That's possibly his only crime—because you can never safeguard the Uchiha Clan's future, you know? That's just mean—to Sakura, probably, or some other pointless female character.
The problem arises when people attack Fugaku and leave others like Sakumo be, for some inexplicable reasons. When, within the framework of oppression, coup is a very measured response; otherwise, annihilation is the only other option. They also attack Rasa and Hiashi viscously while leaving Sakumo out of the equation. I mean, what's the difference? Sakumo, too, is sending his son out into a competition in which murder is not only legal but also an integral part of progression in the Chūnin Examinations competitive market. That's literally how the "undeserving" candidates are weeded out of the system. So to leave out people like Sakumo from the equation, because you happen to like Kakashi too much, makes no fucking sense from any angle, as Sakumo is doing literally nothing different: he, too, is sending his son to be potentially killed for the examination, investment, and military; he, too, is sending him out to war where his survival rate would be miniscule; he, too, is supporting the system, which you people rag on endlessly, that creates this whole circus-show. Then why leave him out and attack others? Is it that Sakumo was "nice" about the whole process and others were ... honest? Is that it?
This is where the attacks on Sasuke and his decision to exact Lex Talionis on Leaf and the Shinobi Systems make no fucking sense. If you're truly suggesting that Hiashi is wrong for mistreating Hinata (a negligible offense, but let's play this game, anyway) and creating the slavery system to safeguard his clan; that Minato is wrong for putting Kurama's half into his own son for the village; that Fugaku is wrong for pushing Itachi into the system and over-looking Sasuke; and that Rasa is wrong for not only putting Shukaku into his son but also attempting to murder him for putting an end to his genocidal rampages; then Sakumo and any other father is just as responsible. That, and the entire notion to keep beating the dead-horse of "this manga didn't fix the social problems, so it's so bad, yo!" makes little to no fucking sense.
The argument is simple: what are your solutions to these problems? Incremental? What would those be? Remove the marks from the Clan Members one by one while the rest suffer and are sent to die into wars in the place of the Main Branch, anyway? Splendid! Hiashi should be "nice" to Hinata, because "father of the year!" reasons? Minato shouldn't put Kurama into Naruto ... because reasons? "He's his son!" isn't good enough when he's got the charge of the entire system to manage. Rasa? He shouldn't put Shukaku into Gaara for some bizarre attempt at "he was a bad, bad, bad father!" argument while ignoring the simple fact that he has to so that his village, a very poor village at that, has a chance at survival in the world that'd outright crush them in the wake of any aggressive military adventure. He wasn't taking Gaara's life because he was a sunday-morning cartoon-villain who was twirling his mustache, because he woke up on the wrong side of bed one day. No, he was doing that so save the lives of everyone else at the expense of his son's.
What about Fugaku? Should he let his clan perish? Keep them isolated so that they brace for the inevitable annihilation? He should be "nice" about things? What is this nonsense? All of this is so fucking surface-level that it's baffling to me that any adult would even make these arguments, because if you're trying to remove something from a system that's integral to it, you require something to replace it for it to function; otherwise, it'd just collapse because in this world, Clan Secrets are everything as they ensure a Clan's continual survival in the harsh, cut-throat, and dog-eat-dog Shinobi world. It's a cliché, but by God, it's the truest cliché in this universe.
What are the laws that should replace any of this? Everyone should strive to be "father of year", otherwise, they're just meanies? This is so fucking childish! Slavery? All right, let's remove that, and then who would safeguard the Hyūga Dōjutsu? Some other clan? Why? Anbu? Again, why? What would the Hokage relegate an entire military branch to coddle the Hyūga? You people don't even try to make any sense! The whole reason why the the head of an innocent man was offered was so that a cold-war wouldn't escalate into a hot one between two Villages that both housed Jinchūrikis. A war like that would've been extremely deadly, especially since Kumo had a trained Jinchūriki in the shape of Bee and Naruto was soiling his baby-diapers. (And Bee was a Perfect Jinchūriki at that as he went into training immediately after the Third Raikage's, Ae's father's, death; and Ae never allowed him to leave; he'd fought Minato before all of that; and guess what, Minato couldn't even touch Ae and Bee save that one maneuver in which Bee allowed his partial-transformation tentacle to be hit; he was actually forced by a fucking teenaged Bee into a retreat.) Leaf had literally no choice but to offer Ae Hizashi's head to appease Kumo who'd lost face internationally. It was nothing more than a show of might. Leaf was in no political position to take Kumo on, not when their only deterrent was crying about swings in playgrounds every me, Naruto's world, considering the Shinobi System, and most decisions made by the people make a lot of sense if you rattle your brain just a tiny bit. Trust me, guys, it isn't hard. Do it sometimes.
And who should Minato have placed Kurama into? Some other kid because putting it into your own kid is sorta mean? What does that even change? It just removes the suffering from Naruto and makes it someone else's problem. How's that an ethical action? If he doesn't do that, then he should open the entire village to an aggressive military attack? I'm spit-balling here, and I've barely scratched the surface of this nonsense. You see how none of this makes sense, right? It's almost as if, here it comes, Sasuke was right! Horror of Horrors, I know!How was he right? It's almost as if, the system itself needs to be overhauled; it needs to be built from the ground up; it needs to be abolished altogether, because there's literally no solution in any way, shape, or form to dent this system.
The reasons are simple: all of the clans behave the way they do, because they're thrust into a system that functions the way it does; they're merely reacting to that. None of them is performing these actions out of spite. They all simply struggle to find their way into the system's dynamics; otherwise, they're crushed like the Uchihas, Hakus, Nagatos, or Kabutos of the world. There are no other options: either you become a part of the system, or you go against it as none of the "incremental laws" fix any of these problems; they simple lessen their immediate impact for another time. It's ineffectual policy making at best and the maintenance of status quo in a different form at worst. (And I've already highlight the "extreme individualism" of godhood in the previous chapter, so I won't repeat myself.)
That's literally the reason why I don't even understand the attacks on Sasuke. If you find faults with the system, then what are your reasons for attacking Sasuke's stance at all? There's no conceivable reason to stupidly keep going at a character who's literally the only one who ever offered a tangible solution to the problem: remove the system and keep the rest in check to stamp out any threats of future violence. Sakura's decision to open a hospital does what? All it does is that it "rights" the paths of the mentally traumatized people so that they can function like effective soldiers and never think of altering the status quo. There's nothing "good" about any of this. In fact, it's fucking vile!
All of this is just Euphemistic Propaganda, which has always been very popular with all imperialistic states, that brushes aside the actual issues in the system for surface-level "niceties": you murder, maim, and butcher people, but you see, you're nice about it! Making this about fatherhood solves nothing as all of them, every single one, had reasons of their own to take the actions that they took—just to survive! This is literally propaganda that over-shows the compartmentalization of the remorseless soldier from the good father, husband, brother. (CIA operatives, who've got the blood of millions of innocents on their hands, are quite notorious for this show-and-tell of "good family man" antics on their social-media profiles; in fact, their new recruitment campaigns are quite woke, I hear.) If Sasuke was a good husband, the system is suddenly ... fine? We should all be like the CIA operatives, guys: rape, maim, and butcher, but never forget to kiss your bastard brood and fuck your asshole wife on time, because that's what social moral-fabrics are all about! You people aren't even hiding this properly, are you? The very reason why the Danzōs, Tobiramas, Hanzos, Aes, etc., of the world exist is that people don't allow the system to change; and such a system has no alternative save to keep nurturing these people for its own preservation. It's the oldest law in the book: self-preservation!
Really, what's your reason for going against Sasuke? It better be more than "he was mean!" I mean, this is a typical case of "girl-boss war-criminals" neo-liberal-speak: we've got a problem with war-crimes because men were in-charge; we require "girl-bosses" to commit them, as well, for true equality! If it's not that, it's that the village should become the "social pariah's" playground, because he was socially neglected or something? It seems to me that the actual point of contention isn't the war-crimes, but who's in charge of the war-crimes, because status quo's restoration is the issue, not its abolition for the betterment of the isolated, oppressed, and subjugated; however, the restoration absolutely needs to be under the care of this character, not that character over there.
Do people actually believe that building hospices for the traumatized "future war-criminals" is some sort of grand "leftist" statement in the face of Leaf's hard-right fascism? What's even the point of bringing up the "faults" at all if the one character that "rages against the machine" is not only contemptable in your "moral booklet" but should also be put down by the purveyors of the very same system that you believe to be plagued by moral failings? You people are joking, right? Please, stop obfuscating your desire to see your validation-receiving manga-avatar at the helm of this status quo with "this system bad, so good female/social pariah make good" argument. It's not cute. It's very transparent; and you're not clever for making it that way.
And that's another one of the reasons why people don't "get" Sasuke and make up all sorts of nonsense. There are two main issues with Sasuke's interpretations among the readers who hate (let's face it, it's never just dislike) Sasuke or love him: "he was power hungry, so he didn't deserve power" and "his love for Itachi made no sense, so he's not completely well-written", and due to these two reasons, there's a "fault" in the characterization, apparently. Is there?
What is needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anaemic. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice. Where Do We Go From Here? (1967)
Why did I use that MLK quote? It's simple: power is an inherent requirement for the navigation in a world that's driven by brutal competition (Chūnin Examinations?), militarism, and state; basically, you can't fight power with ... "love". The notion's completely silly; therefore, when people get upset by Sasuke's drive for power or call him or his clan "power-hungry" (a very knee-jerk and comical complaint), it goes against the very nature of Shinobi, its mantra, its ethos, that's about the enactment of that power to champion your own banner. You must have not paid attention to a thing in the manga to deny one character power and claim it to be legitimate for others—if power is evil, then why's some power legitimate and not all power within the military context? You'd have to be very simple-minded to come up with this simple-minded solution when, the fact of the matter is, Shinobi as a philosophy—or rather, "Shinobi Philosophy" is inherently about power. Endurance? Sustenance of "personal power" in the face of oppressive power. Will of Fire? Sustenance of "collective power" in the face of "whatever's thrown at the collective". Would it be wrong to assume that the idea of Shinobi is about hunger for power, only sanctioned? No, that's actually the correct assumption.
Regardless of what you'd like to call this, it's still a system that grows from the seed of power, nurtures it, and disseminates it (among the Shinobi, its preachers, practitioners, and purveyors) for the express purpose of its expression in every facet. Villages run on military power—literally and metaphorically. What are Jutsus if not displays of power on an international scale? Powerful Clans? Bijū? Jinchūriki? Ninjutsu's evolution from Ninshū for its implementation in advanced Shinobi warfare? Is any of this not power? I'm bamboozled how anyone would deny this. Then why deny this particular character that particular power, basically the Sharingan or Uchiha power? "It's irresponsible," "criminal", or "unlawful" simply isn't a good enough response against the rationale of its acquisition. Besides, if you truly believe that all power and its acquisition is evil, you've simply given up on the ambition to acquire power, which guarantees your complete political irrelevance in a world that runs on power structures. As MLK said that you need some power to implement the demands of justice. You can't enact, transmit, and impart justice without power—in a system that works entirely on political power? You can't be this gullible. Come on!
Then we've got this issue with Itachi, and I don't think the Sasuke fanbase (the one that isn't plagued by the nightmares of the "correct" or "incorrect" pairings of his character) truly understand what Itachi means to Sasuke. The thing is, "love" can stand as an antithetical argument to "hatred", not neutrality. To want Sasuke to be "neutral" is sort of ... not the point of his character. Like the conventional haters, I do think the Sasuke fanbase doesn't quite "get" Sasuke, either.
Sasuke considers Itachi to be a symbol, not a man. Itachi's figure in Sasuke's life holds a symbolic value in that it personifies whatever he wants it to personify, and it's always black and white. He's not a person to Sasuke, but a very effective symbol of concepts. Once you understand that, you'd understand all of Sasuke's character and the extremes he swings to as the beauty of his character lies in the extremes, not inside neutral aspirations.
In that regard, Itachi's the personification of a foe on which vengeance has to be exacted; once Obito reveals everything, he becomes the personification of all that's left in the wake of injustices; and in the end, he personifies the spirit of revolution—an end and a new beginning. From this angle, Sasuke's character is very easy to understand. Once a man's existence is there simply as a pathway to another conflict, you'd have to think that Itachi's more symbolic to Sasuke than a person. I'm not sure what more you can make of the man in Sasuke's life.
# # # # # #